This is one of my guilty pleasure books. I have a, probably unhealthy, true crime fascination. It's one of those subjects that both interests and repeThis is one of my guilty pleasure books. I have a, probably unhealthy, true crime fascination. It's one of those subjects that both interests and repels me. I was looking for a book on this subject and this caught my fancy as I have long been interested in how DNA was being used to catch criminals. I was unfamiliar with how DNA genealogy was a key part of this effort, as I was naively assuming that DNA was basically limited to trying to match that found at a crime scene, with the criminal who carried out a particularly vile act. I hadn't thought about how it could be used to build a family tree to identify who might be a suspect. It was all very interesting.
However. I have never been interested in the whole genealogy thing. I am also adopted so I would be one of the wrenches that get's thrown into the family tree building exercise. We mess it up because we obviously don't share genetic material with our adoptive family. I think I might be unusual in the adoptive child community. I don't know anything about my birth parents from the 60s, and I don't feel anything is missing in my life as a result. I don't believe that "I don't know my true identity" because I lack this knowledge. I will, forever, be grateful to my birth mother in particular for not aborting me and I hope she had a happy life, but I feel no desire to look for her and she has never come knocking at my door either. The reason for writing this is that I can't relate to the assumption that is given some play here, that it is the human condition to know all this stuff. I don't buy it.
Well, you might well ask what all this has to do with the Golden State Killer (GSK). The title is perhaps somewhat misleading. Whilst the hunt for the GSK is certainly a central plank of this story, we are treated to a lengthy explanation of the general use of genetic genealogy as it applies both to finding long lost relatives, and more latterly, to the identification of unknown corpses and the hunt for cold case killers. Whilst I could feel somewhat aggrieved about this if I was solely interested in the specifics of the GSK case, it is actually quite interesting to understand how the field has developed over the past couple of decades, and its success in solving cold cases is admittedly impressive. Barbara R-V is genuinely an expert and her style of writing is refreshing an honest, so she teaches us how the techniques work and it is very informative.
However, as I say, this is not solely about the vile murderer of the title, and B R-V ventures into areas that, I think, are much more interesting. Specifically, the issue of privacy. Now, it is pretty clear where she sits on this issue and that is that all DNA profiles that are published on sites such as 23 and me etc. should be fair game for law enforcement because of the utility of the information and its demonstrable use in catching killers. However, to her credit, she also examines some of the arguments against, although, in my view, she comes very close to arguing that the end justifies the means. I can understand that but I don't share her world view! I don't trust the police to use DNA profiles for unadulterated good. I do see the dangers of people finding out the guilty secrets of others (unknown kids etc) and the attendant blackmail risk. I fear that when sensitive information is available widely, it is quickly used in ways that were not intended and may be harmful.
I realize I'm a bleeding heart but I can't dismiss the concerns in the way that this book does, although I understand the frustrations and passion behind the argument. It is to her immense credit that B R-V raises these issues and discusses them and the fact that she clearly does get that this is an ethical gray area. What I find a bit harder to accept is her appeals to what she calls, apparently with a straight face, her "Guardian Angel" who helps provide her with a breakthrough just when she needed it. At one point she relates an, admittedly unlikely, coincidence that made all the difference and essentially moves from scientific rigor into woo. "Coincidence is Gods way of remaining anonymous" she egregiously writes about these apparent chances that seem unimaginable to her.
As a skeptic and an atheist I hate this way of thinking. God wants to remain anonymous huh? Why? Where was God when these vile acts were being committed and why didn't it stop them? Why would it let these cases stay unsolved with all the untold misery they entail for 10, 20, 50 years and then intervene, not by giving you the suspect, but by giving you the most tenuous of coincidences that you have done nothing to justify aren't exactly that. Spare me. You have a guardian angel helping you rather than it being your skill, dedication, hard work and patience that won out? Fallacious thinking in my opinion and it detracts from the message.
Still, I enjoyed the book and I learned a lot and it had me thinking about complex and nuanced issues and making me question what I think and that's always a good thing I think. I am glad I read this, I am much more informed about an area of crime fighting I didn't really know existed and I'm grateful for that....more
Although I had long been aware of "Twelve Angry Men" it was only last year that I sat down and watched the gripping screenplay that was played out in Although I had long been aware of "Twelve Angry Men" it was only last year that I sat down and watched the gripping screenplay that was played out in the classic movie with Henry Fonda as the center of the story that is juror #8. The course this play takes is probably so well known as to be almost a cliche and, if you weren't aware of how it gets to its conclusion, you will certainly see where it is going pretty much from the opening scene, or else the play would be a short one indeed.
All the action takes place as the jury are deliberating on their murder verdict, one where a return of guilty will send the accused to the electric chair. It becomes clear as the narrative unfolds that said defendant is not in the same social, racial or ethnic group as those in the jury. Reading it in 2024 one suspects that the defendant is black, although this is never stated. However, we are treated to many displays of bigotry and "you know what they are like" from one juror in particular, and this becomes more overt as the discussion is moving away from him.
It is undoubtedly gripping, and minimalist in delivery - one scene (the jury room), atmospheric (stifling day, flared tempers, a storm etc.) and no names, merely Jurors 1 to 12. Obviously it translates very well to the screen and, I would imagine, to the stage although I have never seen it live. However, I think it is the themes that resonate, and should do so with those seeing or reading this play. I love the fact that we come into the narrative cold. The first lines are from the judge who dismisses the jury to consider their verdict. So we don't know the facts of the case and have to piece it together from said deliberations. It is a great technique.
One of my pet peeves is the lack of logical and critical thinking and this is able exposed by Juror 8 here. He doesn't advocate for a particular verdict, he just picks away at arguments. He asks others if they are sure, he introduces doubt, he challenges them when they try to shift the burden of proof. All of this is great, and much needed in society today, never mind the 50s when this is set. Most of us need to have things we think are "just obvious" and "common sense" questioned, because all too often such positions cannot really be defended. I guess we all hope we would have someone like juror 8 if we were facing a trial such as this.
I guess one of the questions here is, were the jury correct? Was he guilty? Of course we don't know and that's not really the point. We are shown here, powerfully, how prejudice and bigotry can cloud judgement and move one away from plain thinking, as well as not deeply questioning positions because they somehow match your own (confirmation bias), and how difficult, but important, it can be to stand up to a majority. It is done masterfully here. Everyone should read it....more
I've read a lot about Jack the Ripper over the years and this is an interesting, and important narrative on the subject and it is important to tell itI've read a lot about Jack the Ripper over the years and this is an interesting, and important narrative on the subject and it is important to tell it. At the risk of sounding pretentious and patronizing, I commend HR for taking on this subject which must have been a serious research challenge to say the least. So much "Ripperology" is, to my mind, misguided and is effectively a search for a likely suspect when I suspect that the true culprit was a woman-hating psychopath who was a deeply insignificant and frustrated man who took out his impotent rage on a very vulnerable population and was otherwise a complete non-entity. We see this with a lot of serial killers who seek some sort of notoriety and/or enjoyment from killing, but are never known unless they are caught.
As others have mentioned in these reviews, it is important that the victims are recognized. There is also the warped narrative that I confess I fell for as well, that the Ripper prayed on prostitutes and HR attempts a line of argument here, fairly persuasively, that the majority of the canonical five were not sex workers but as others have said, I am troubled by this line of argument as I will mention below.
Many of the accounts I have read of the murders themselves, as well as a search for the guilty man, are also prurient and titillating in their coverage of the crimes themselves. In other words there are lengthy descriptions of the injuries inflicted on these unfortunate victims, especially the mutilation of Mary Kelly. It is greatly to the credit of this book that it is all about the victims and not the murderer and it is poignant that each section devoted to a victim, ends with the last sighting of her, and then, perhaps, a short account of her relatives who were forced to identify her remains. We have heard enough of the nature of the crimes, and this is not what this book is about and it is done well.
Ultimately, the nature of the desperately poor sections of 1888 London means that a great deal of the lives of these women will remain forever unknown. I was actually very impressed that so much detail emerged about their, frankly, brutal and sordid lives. A number of them struggled with poverty early and whilst initially making it out of the slums, eventually made their way back there. The common theme amongst them all, is alcohol. This seems to draw them together much more than being sex workers. The book does a very good job of explaining the nature of late 19th Century Whitechapel with its poverty, depravation, slumlords, alcoholics and desperate battle for survival against an uncaring society in which a murderer such as the Ripper could flourish.
However, despite the obviously robust research that went into this, there is a great deal of conjecture, perhaps inevitably. There is a lot of "she must have" and "it is likely that" which is OK, but there is a lot of it. It goes to prove that these women obtained fame by coming across one of the most famous and callous murders ever to disgrace history but otherwise lived a sad but utterly unremarkable life shared by many.
Which brings us to the issue of prostitution. I think that HR's approach to this is actually an attempt to argue that these women have been unfairly so categorized so that the narrative of "prostitute killer" could be applied to the Ripper. There is a danger in this that was prevalent at the time, but which I also recall from the days of the Yorkshire Ripper, that the crimes were somehow less heinous as a result. Maybe the police were less robust in their search because the victims were "just whores". So it does make sense to challenge this narrative but that leads into another dangerous area.
In my opinion there is nothing wrong with sex workers and those who engage in such work shouldn't be judged as less than anyone else. This applies to history as much as to today. Of course, the nature of the business, covered briefly here, attracts highly undesirable people and practices such as forced prostitution, pimping, maltreatment etc and that should be condemned. However, as is argued in this book, although not strongly enough in my view, is that this should be irrelevant to them as victims. Even if they were prostitutes, they didn't deserve anything like the treatment they received on a day to day basis, never mind at the hands of a knife wielding psychopath. By trying to argue that, actually, most of the five were not engaged in prostitution, could be seen as an attempt to claim that, even more so, they didn't deserve it. I don't think this was the intention, but that narrative nags at the back of my mind.
Jack the Ripper will probably always hold a special place in the annals of crime, London history and in world notoriety. Any attempt to finally trace the culprit will only be conjecture at this stage, unless something comes to light that has failed to do so in 136 years since those ghastly events. HR is right in that we have tended to step over the victims in our attempts to gaze at the "main event" of how they met their end. There is an interesting hypothesis here that is mentioned in passing, that all these women were essentially either homeless, or bordering on it and when drink is added to the equation, it is entirely possible the Ripper crept up on them sleeping and murdered them in their sleep just because they were there. This would explain the lack of noise or witnesses to each murder. This is a line I hadn't heard before and whilst speculative, makes sense to me.
This is very useful way to recognize the lives of these unfortunate women and put them in the context of the times which are graphically explained. A most useful addition to the Ripper books, and a side not before told to my knowledge....more
What a horror story. I will probably write something further down that some people won't like but it was a minor element of this book and I will get tWhat a horror story. I will probably write something further down that some people won't like but it was a minor element of this book and I will get to that. First of all, this is a book, and indeed a path, that must have been extraordinarily difficult for RD to write/go down. If anyone is minded to minimize the trauma and damage caused by vile predators like Larry Nassar, read this book and it will give you a good insight into how horrific such abuse is, and how manipulation, grooming, abuse of trust, power dynamics etc. characterizes evil-doers such as Nassar. It is genuinely tough to read and even if one has followed the trials etc. at some level, the depth of his depravity and, equally important, the connivance of the authorities is awful. I am very glad RD was able to write this and show us, although we who haven't experience this can never truly understand, how bad this is.
I suspect this is a story that plays out every day, often with the result that the perpetrator actually escapes accountability. For those in the UK we know that the likes of Jimmy Savile are out there still. However, even for those of us who strive to educate ourselves on this topic, or who have loved ones who experienced sexual assault/abuse, seeing it laid out here is sobering.
Nassar exhibited many of the traits we are coming to learn about as typical. Accomplished in a particular field, personable, able to manipulate and put people at ease, having power/authority, able to brush aside people who complain because of his renown etc. We are also enlightened on the environment that allows such malice to thrive: powerful organizations behind him (USAG and Michigan State Univeristy in this case) often peopled by friends of the abuser, police departments not taking complaints seriously and only investigating in a cursory manner, members of the community not wanting to think this could happen on their watch/in their church/university/organization. We need to listen to victims/survivors and I am in awe of the courage it took RD to follow this through to Nassar's conviction.
I encourage everyone to read this so that, hopefully, we can be in a better position to prevent abusers such as this from gaining access to vulnerable people again. My only critique of the book is perhaps unfair and speaks to my secular world view. I understand how important religion is to many people but I do object to certain religious dogma being put down as if it is simply "truth". In this case, we are asked to accept that since there is evil in the world, there must be an entity that defines good and evil and to know evil, we must have a higher power that tells us what good is, and that is God. I flatly reject that assertion, and consider the God of the Bible, particularly the Old Testament, to be a poor arbiter of what constitutes good and evil, but this is not the place for such a debate I don't think, so I will leave that here.
I've seen reviews that critique the use of dialog quoted verbatim from many years ago and I, too, often find that troublesome as memories of these things tend to fade but that is minimized here since RD kept a journal for much of the time in question. As I say, I am not a fan of this is non-fiction accounts where there is no recording available, but I don't think it was incongruous in this narrative. At least not to me.
A harrowing read as all these sorts of important works are. To think that such individuals are loose in society and preying on kids especially is beyond appalling but the only way to fight it is to expose it, and call out the hypocrisy and cover ups that so often attend these grotesque acts. As RD powerfully quotes here, the words of William Wilberforce: "You can choose to look away, but you can never again say that you did not know". We do know. We must not look away....more
I followed a number of reviewers who raved about this book and it was certainly interesting and an amazing series of adventures covering 17th century I followed a number of reviewers who raved about this book and it was certainly interesting and an amazing series of adventures covering 17th century piracy on the Spanish Main, which is always going to be a fertile ground for such tales. I was very unfamiliar with this period, and location, of history so there was much to learn here. This story largely comes from chroniclers who travelled with the pirates (or buccaneers, or privateers as they preferred to be called) and they basically sailed around the Caribbean (and further afield) seeking treasure ships to raid and on-shore spanish settlements to plunder for booty.
There is quite the cast of characters here, and the book is very approachable in terms of the writing, although with so many characters it can be a challenge to keep them straight. It seems that pirate ships were surprisingly democratic. The captain/leader was essentially elected and although he could be deposed in what could be, and was herein, described as a mutiny, it was basically a leader being voted out of office. The crews were there for the rewards that could be gathered from their nefarious activities and so members of the crew tended to come and go (as well as being press-ganged) when their monetary needs were satisfied. It is very interesting. I had read about piracy on the high seas in other works and this is a common thread which is perhaps not what one would expect.
This is a swashbuckling tale for sure but for some reason I found it somewhat less engaging than I expected. I won't give too much away but I think the title is somewhat misleading. It is clear that the activities of pirates were a gray area as far as the English were concerned. If the "privateers" were attacking the Spanish they were all for it, at least until a peace treaty was concluded between England and Spain at which point the Spanish put a lot of pressure on Charles II to bring the piracy to an end. He seems to have been half hearted, at best, in obliging. Indeed, the English seemed more than happy to take intelligence from the pirates as it related to Spanish endeavors in building an empire.
This next remark is probably unfair but I must confess to finding the stories of the battles somewhat hard to fully believe as told from the journals. We are given countless stories of how a relatively small force of buccaneers was able to overpower a vastly superior force of spaniards, sometimes at sea, often times in fortified defenses on land and we keep hearing about the prowess of the english marksman and the obvious ineptitude of the Spanish opposition who seemed to be incapable of hitting water if they fell out of a boat. I don't doubt that the buccaneers were professional, battle hardened crews but there is a credibility stretch here for me.
However, it is an interesting and compelling tale of adventure on the high seas but one must remember these men were essentially outlaws, seeking to make a fortune in plundered gold and silver, and being quite successful. They doubtless went through significant hardship in this quest and this is brought home in the narrative. It is just that, to me, sometimes this sounds more like a boys own tale of swashbuckling yarns and I can't help wondering if, sometimes, the stories are exaggerated or embellished by those compiling the original sources from which this narrative is drawn....more
This is the first McCarthy novel I have read and I don't think it will be the last. However, I am not sure that it's a good idea to see a movie beforeThis is the first McCarthy novel I have read and I don't think it will be the last. However, I am not sure that it's a good idea to see a movie before reading a book. In this case, the screenplay and especially the dialogue comes pretty much directly from the novel. For example: "What business is it of yours, where I'm from, friendo?"
The problem with this is that, for this reader at least, it is impossible to read about Chigurh, without thinking about Javier Bardem's outstanding portrayal of him in the movie. This isn't necessarily a bad thing and I am a big fan of Bardem as an actor but it necessarily colors one's view either positively or negatively.
Having said that, this is a bleak novel indeed. I have seen it referred to as a book that includes humor but I, frankly, found it hard to find anything to laugh at here. The style of the narrative is minimalist and not a traditional development of plot, and we are left to figure out for ourselves what is going on and despite some pretty graphic descriptions of murder and mayhem, at times the scene jumps from a dialogue between two people who show up dead one page later (usually at the hands of Anton Chigurh) without a description of the act itself. I know this is a deliberate literary style, and it definitely keeps the reader off balance.
As the story moves along, it is inevitable that we think about the predicament that Moss finds himself in when he comes across a grisly scene of a drugs deal gone wrong, and finds himself in possession of many millions in cash which he takes, although immediately realizing that he is putting himself at grave risk as he accepts that there is no time when people losing that much money would give up the search for it, and by extension, him. He takes it anyway and that sets off the subsequent chain of events. We are left to consider: what would we do? Would we take the full amount, take some of it and leave the rest? Leave all of it? Turn it in to authorities? It's impossible to know, but I doubt many of us would do what Moss does to be honest.
I've seen questions about the characterization of Chigurh, who is the most well known antagonist to emerge from this book (and the film obviously) but it is chilling to read about such an evil character who has no conscience although does seem possessed of a warped sense of what is proper, even articulating that to victims he is about to kill. He tells Wells: "You should admit your situation. There would be more dignity in it". This is seriously terrifying to me and one is left to wonder if there are really such sociopathic hitmen/bounty hunters out there. I suspect that there are and hopefully we never get into a position where one of these guys is after us.
As I mentioned, this is bleak. There is no happy ending here and the loose ends are not tied off, the bad guys don't get caught and we are left wondering who was pulling the strings and how this situation all developed in the first place. That is not really the point of the book and I wonder quite what we are supposed to take from this other than a nihilistic world view which is one that I have a lot of sympathy for so it does speak to me at that level, however depressing that may be.
I am glad I read it and it certainly has me thinking which is, after all, the point of great writing. I am looking forward to reading more of his work and seeing if Chigurh is a one off from his mind, or whether there are similar characters out there for me to discover....more
Guilty pleasure book although the subject is certainly macabre. I’m not altogether pleased to say this but I do have a fascination with serial killersGuilty pleasure book although the subject is certainly macabre. I’m not altogether pleased to say this but I do have a fascination with serial killers, especially those from the more distant past. I’m not sure why but I think it is the intrigue of trying to figure out the motives and what drives these men, almost always men, to such heinous crimes.
I had heard of Dr. Cream and his infamous poisonings during Victorian times but I’d never delved into the sordid details to which we are hereby treated. A monstrous man indeed, and it somehow seems worse and more infamous when a killer turns out to be a physician (Crippin, Shipman etc). However, we should, perhaps, not be surprised as once a doctor turns to murder they are perhaps uniquely placed to end lives.
This book was interesting but I confess to losing the timeframe on a couple of occasions as the narrative switches from the US to the UK on more than one occasion and sometimes the transitions didn’t flow smoothly for me, or were abrupt. It also seems clear that the police were significantly inept at tracking him down and I’d like to have seen more from that aspect of the story, even though it is covered somewhat.
Cream seems to have been a particularly nasty murderer but his motives, other than being simply “evil”, are not really explored in much depth. Poison, especially strychnine, seems to be a very cowardly and sinister way to kill people but we are not really let into any theories as to what Cream’s driving force was. Was he simply a pyschopath driven to kill without remorse and poison was the easiest way? Did he have a god complex? A loathing for prostitutes? Of course we may never know but I’d like to have seen this explored a little more.
There are claims that Cream was Jack the Ripper but this is, rightly in my view, played down here as it has been in other works. It is to the author’s credit that he doesb’t head off on some flight of fancy about this theory, accepting that the fact Cream was incarcerated at the critical points of 1888 as ruling him out. I also think it unlikely, as sinister, and perhaps stereotypically what we imagine the Whitechapel Murderer to look like, as Cream was, why would he switch from frenzied knife attacks to poison as his MO?
An interesting diversion into Victorian life and intrigue but nothing earth-shattering...more
I remember hearing about the disastrous end to the Waco siege but I was living in the UK at the time so I wasn't aware of the backstory that led to thI remember hearing about the disastrous end to the Waco siege but I was living in the UK at the time so I wasn't aware of the backstory that led to the cataclysmic scenes of destruction that ended the siege of the compound near Waco. This definitely filled in the gaps for me, as well as covering the background of the Branch Davidians generally and the Seventh Day Adventists in general. Now, as an atheist, I find the whole religious thing incomprehensible especially when it comes to cults which this branch most definitely was.
This is a well written account and it is refreshing in that it attempts, and I think succeeds, in providing as close an account of the facts as possible, and doesn't seem to me to be taking a side in this dispute. Given the incendiary nature of this standoff, both literally and metaphorically, I appreciated there was no conspiracy of anti-government rhetoric on display in the account, although this was commented upon especially in the conclusion. I could have done with more of this commentary I think. Also, there is no specific lean to the government side where there were clearly faults aplenty. Abrahams tanks? I didn't realize that the FBI had access to such significant weapons of war as that. I wonder if they still do.
The story of this type of cult does force us to ask questions of ourselves. For example: at what point does this type of activity become worthy of government intervention? It is clear that the cult had managed to acquire a huge arsenal of weapons that they put to us killing ATF agents who were trying to get into their compound, having squandered any element of surprise they arrogantly assumed they had. A two hour gun battle was the result with deaths on both sides and I am still not clear exactly for what. Ostensibly this was to get to them for illegally modifying guns from semi-automatic to fully automatic mode and this is a worthy aim but one can't help wondering if it could have been done in ways other than a raid of this type.
Once the FBI took over and it ended up a 51 day siege eventually ending with the storming of the building speaks to other mishandling. However. It is also clear that Koresh was a charleton, a cult leader who conveniently decided he was entitled, as the next Christ figure, to take all the women in the compound for himself and sire as many kids as he could. He was undoubtedly a charismatic figure but also a liar and a conman and someone who the FBI were foolish to ever trust. When you run a doomsday cult that is praying for the end times, playing into that narrative is probably a bad idea.
This has clearly become a cause celebre for those who are anti-government, extreme right wing, militia groups etc. I hadn't realized there was a direct connection to Timothy McVeigh for example, who cites Waco as one of the causes of his radicalization. He wouldn't have termed it that way of course. It is clear that the government handled this very badly but I blame religion for a lot in this culture and whilst everyone is entitled to follow whatever charismatic preacher they want of course, I do find Koresh to be a vile character who may have believed what he was shilling, but who clearly had a self-serving agenda too. A sorry and sordid tale on all sides really....more
I am a sucker for books like this, I must confess. For me, there is a thrill in uncovering stories from history about which I knew nothing and I have,I am a sucker for books like this, I must confess. For me, there is a thrill in uncovering stories from history about which I knew nothing and I have, perhaps an unhealthy, fascination with the true crime horror that is the serial killer. Serial killers are something that the US seems to be particularly good at producing. Add to this a bio of Eliot Ness, and there are elements here that are guaranteed to appeal to me, as I am also a history buff who finds the environment of the past especially interesting.
I am aware of criticisms of this fine work of non-fiction as weaving together Ness and an unsolved series of murders being somewhat contrived. In other words they run concurrently but are not directly connected. I don't think this is fair. It is clear that Ness was a key figure in America in the 30's and whilst Stashower clearly has admiration for him, and enjoys telling his story, he presents a very warts and all profile of the man, who certainly had his faults. Don't we all. I actually find it refreshing to learn about him in more detail, since his life has been so well covered, and greatly distorted, via the various "Untouchables" stories over the years. I must confess that "The Untouchables" is one of my favorite movies.
There is something uniquely horrifying about a serial killer, obviously. The fact that they seem to be able to commit carnage within a society as the police and others try desperately, and sometimes unsuccessfully, to prevent further deaths and catch the culprit sends a frisson through all of us. We wonder if we would potentially fall victim. Have we rubbed shoulders unknowingly with such monsters in the past? What drives people, usually inadequate men, to such depravity? It is particularly troubling when such cases are especially gruesome (the torso murders include decapitation, emasculation, dismemberment) and remain unsolved.
Unsolved cases are difficult subjects for books sometimes I think. We like to have the ends tied off and know "whodunnit" but life isn't that neat. There have been endless books about Jack the Ripper, trying to resolve who was the fog-shrouded fiend who killed at least 5 women in the Whitechapel area of London in 1888. The failure to apprehend him (almost certainly a man although there is speculation, as there is with the Mad Butcher of Cleveland that the perpetrator was a woman) means that speculation runs rife. When there is dissection and mutilation of the bodies, thoughts inevitably turn to those skilled in such practices ie morticians, butchers and especially, surgeons.
This pattern follows here, in the same way it did in the search for Jack the Ripper. We are presented with a prime suspect although there was never enough to charge him despite the intense interrogation over several days by Ness and his "Butcher Squad". Evidently Ness was in no doubt as to the doctors guilt but the latter’s descent into alcoholism and institutionalization means he was never tried or even charged. The pattern of the book becomes clear: body parts found, clues that quickly go cold, police and latterly Ness (The Safety Director) desperately trying tactics to flush out the killer to no avail, and then a repeat several weeks later. This is a typical serial killer story it seems.
There is much of interest here. Ness wasn't the boy scout he was sometimes made out to be and was clearly a self publicist but seemed greatly driven by a desire to root out corruption, at which he excelled. Chasing serial killers was probably not his forte and it brought him into conflict with the police who often mistrusted him, especially as he was charging many senior officers with corruption throughout his tenure. At the end of his life, tragically cut short by a heart attack in his 50s, he seemed to have found personal happiness after two failed marriages, and his commitment to his duty was clear and laudible I think .
After 1938 there were no more torso murders. The book takes us through the suspects, including one who supposedly confessed to one murder before recanting that confession and it seems as though he was basically killed whilst under interrogation and wasn't a likely fit for the killer anyway. This is a sordid tale indeed and we are left wondering if this could happen today with modern surveillance and policing techniques, DNA analysis etc. but it is chilling how it happened when it did. Stashower also cleverly weaves in the political climate and how this further entrapped Ness into a life he may not have enjoyed, although that is debatable, as is so much about his character.
A fascinating, pretty fast paced read the covers Ness's rise to fame as an enemy of Al Capone, but dwells much more on his subsequent career which was all new to me, as was the story of this grotesque serial killer in itself. Learning things, no matter how unpalatable, is always a good thing I think....more
It's always interesting to peer into the dark corridors of EAP's mind. I wonder how he spent his time when he wasn't writing macabre fiction. This is It's always interesting to peer into the dark corridors of EAP's mind. I wonder how he spent his time when he wasn't writing macabre fiction. This is pretty horrifying in its description of a couple of seriously disturbing murders that took place in an apartment. Never having read this before, and not caring for horror movies, I assumed that the action actually took place in a morgue but apparently that is simply the name of the street where the murders took place.
It is a very well known tale and I was vaguely familiar with the solution to the case, since the plot line has made its way into the general discourse. I have even seen it referenced in "Frasier". This doesn't plumb the depths of supernatural activity, and whilst the denouement and the discovery of the culprit is somewhat farfetched, it doesn't stretch credibility too far. The story does introduce elements of plot that are compelling and have been used throughout literature since, although EAP is widely credited with introducing them with this tale. Namely: baffling murders in a locked room where there is no obvious means of ingress or egress. Strange elements to the nature of the murders that speak of savagery but with no additional elements such as robbery involved. It's a detective story that introduces us to detection and allows us to follow the lines of thought of those investigating.
As always with EAP, this is a dark and disturbing story but perhaps more rooted in the real world than much of his horror genre defining work....more
This is a novel that has been turned into several swashbuckling adventure films and one can see why. This is an easy to read novel that covers themes This is a novel that has been turned into several swashbuckling adventure films and one can see why. This is an easy to read novel that covers themes of murder, international espionage, pre-war intrigue, mistaken identities, hero on the run that is common in many such adventure yarns but it is well done here.
The best parts of the book, for me, are actually the early and middle passages where Hannay meets his man who has information of international import, only to be caught up in a murder and heading on the run to Scotland where there are some great passages as he attempts to escape from both the law, and also the dark forces that seek to silence him as he tries to decipher codes and clues from his previous time in London. He also seeks to understand the context of these things in terms of the international situation which is teetering on the brink of World War. It is very entertaining writing.
I feel as though the finale is, though, something of an anticlimax with the final apprehension of the guilty men almost humdrum. Maybe, after what had come before, I was wrong to expect another taut chase across the moors or out at sea but that is not how Buchan chose to finish it. It does set up his hero for future novels of course, and I may well seek those out too as I did very much enjoy this novel. Some of the classic scenes that made it to the movie are absent here - no hanging off the big hand of Big Ben for example which is what I mean; it all ends somewhat tamely. It is perhaps disingenuous of me to write that, since I am on the record in criticizing other novels for their unrealistic ending, but it felt this one rather fizzled out at the end....more
I've noticed that many great novelists (Tolstoy, Steinbeck, Melville et al.) are most famous for their classic, weighty novels, and probably rightly sI've noticed that many great novelists (Tolstoy, Steinbeck, Melville et al.) are most famous for their classic, weighty novels, and probably rightly so. However, I have developed a particular penchant for the shorter works/novellas penned by these literary genii and, indeed, for the genre of the novella more generally. So, this pattern continues with this dark gem, the first of Hugo's works I have read after the lengthy consumption of "Les Miserables".
It is not without reason that every town, supposedly, in France has an avenue or some other feature named after the great man and reading him in this format forces him to be succinct, avoiding the lengthy descriptions of peripheral matters like the Parisien Sewer system, that punctuate the narrative of Les Mis. This makes, as with all the great novellas, for a taught and sometimes brusque read which I love. I'm all for flowery prose but sometimes it becomes hard to consume.
This is a simple tale, the premise of which is given away by the title. As I read more about Monsieur Hugo it is clear that he was socially ahead of his time, and was pretty much an activist about his social view too. As someone who is vehemently and, at this stage of my life, probably implacably opposed to capital punishment, the message of this novella is likely to fall on fertile ground, and it does.
The reasons cited in support of the state murdering its citizens are raised in this book and curtly dismissed. It is fascinating to me that Hugo articulates the arguments that still rage to this day and, as I am on his side, ably demolishes them in my view. Revenge, justice, deterrence, the issue of executing innocent people, these are all raised and the counter arguments, with evidence, presented. His expressed hope that this barbaric act would soon die out has proven to be in vain, but I love that he is raising this in the early part of the 19th Century, and advocating for the abolition of the practice.
As far as the narrative is concerned, we are not told the details of the narrators crime and, for the argument Hugo is making, this would be irrelevant. If one is opposed to judicial killing, there shouldn't be exceptions for particularly heinous crimes, despite our understandable thirst to see such horrendous acts suitably punished. Therefore, although Hugo hints at this being a murderer, and the narrator makes no effort to claim innocence, it is not a major part of the story. I also get the impression that Hugo was not particularly religious in a traditional sense (also appealing to me) since his description of the priest he encounters isn't flattering and is pretty cynical. In addition, the priest in question doesn't believe his half-hearted proclamation of belief in God. I understand Hugo was an anti-catholic deist. Therefore there is no particular discussion of afterlives (although Hugo is said to have believed in this) or much dwelling on the religious aspects of death, although they do come up.
Dark, melancholic for sure, but this novella treats us to a range of emotions that might be faced in such a situation: anger, sadness, hope, disgust, interest etc. and as befits such a gifted novelist, these are all highly relatable. Truly a great work to rank alongside Hugo's great literary works, really gives us a view of what he felt about this topic and should be read widely today in the capital punishment debate....more
Another of my guilty pleasure reads although it is disquieting to use the term for such a sordid topic as a serial killer. There are a number of theseAnother of my guilty pleasure reads although it is disquieting to use the term for such a sordid topic as a serial killer. There are a number of these in my reading record as such crimes retain the power to both repel and fascinate in equal measure. At least for me. Not perhaps a work that will be widely read but it is important for a number of reasons I think.
When examining the most heinous crimes it is very easy to train ones gaze on the perpetrator. How could he (almost always men) do such a thing? Why wasn't he identified and stopped? How can we tell who these monsters are, who walk among us? How can people live such double lives? Why do we always say: "He seemed so normal, I had no idea". All these are valid of course, and send a frisson of fear down our spines and rightly so. It is also a useful area of study for psychologists, psychiatrists and law enforcement as well as all of us who may come across these people, but often time, the victims are forgotten and merely become statistics: "Ted Bundy killed 30 women and probably many more".
Green takes an opposite, and very effective approach to telling this story that has largely been forgotten. Indeed, even though I have a, perhaps unhealthy, interest in these matters, I was also unfamiliar with the Last Call Killer. Now I wonder why that could be? Could it be a result of the fact that Rogers killed gay men, picking them up at piano bars catering to predominantly gay men? The fact that the community was being even more stigmatized at the time, being blamed for the AIDS emergency? Of course.
The novel approach EG takes here is to highlight the lives of the men we know Rogers killed (although we suspect there to be many more). This is a very powerful approach. These were men from varied backgrounds: successful business men, married, single, a sex-worker, closeted, openly gay. Regular people in other words who were just living their lives and, in many cases, struggling to do so in a society that didn't allow gay men to live the lives they wanted free of judgement, prejudice, bigotry and often extreme violence. If anything, I think EG underplays this element of the narrative, and whilst he touches on the bigotry displayed by police officers assigned to the case, I would have liked rather more on this.
There is actually a lot more on this aspect of the case too, that I think could be amplified. The ineffectiveness of the police when crimes covered many jurisdictions: New Jersey, NY, NYC, Pennsylvania. This is often used as an excuse for the decades it took to apprehend Rogers, even though he was previously charged with murder (reduced to manslaughter) and acquitted, despite bludgeoning an acquaintance with a hammer. As EG mentions when discussing this book, so many of these killers are apprehended almost by chance.
The stories of these men are poignant, and one is left with the impression that many people were not interested at the time, and don't remember the crimes now, because they were gay and therefore, by extension, not as important. It's similar to the murder of prostitutes; people seem to become especially engaged and outraged when killers target "respectable" folks. This is despicable but I reckon it continues to this day. None of the men murdered by Rogers deserved what happened to them, or are less valuable members of society and they need to have their cases investigated with similar outrage to others, but that never seems to be the case and this book highlights that well.
If anything, I would have liked to see more on this aspect. More societal comment generally and pointed criticism of the police in particular. Perhaps this was beyond the scope of the book and the relatively short nature of the narrative has power in itself. But still, I'd like to have seen this developed a bit more. This is a minor point. We are not told all that much about the detail of the killings so whilst very disturbing, this is not a book that seeks to play up the gory side of the story although we are left in no doubt as to Rogers' brutality. Despite everything, and what I said at the top of this review, one cannot but avoid letting one's mind drift back to him. As an elite ICU nurse, how many people did he help to save, whilst in his spare time, hunting down and killing gay men? How many others did he kill and their bodies were never found before ending up in a landfill? Chilling. The focus on the victims makes this a very worthy entry into the vast literature devoted to this gruesome topic. The victims deserve to have their stories told, Rogers really doesn't, outside of how it is done here. It is a very worthy approach....more
To my shame, I was only vaguely aware of The Black Panthers and their charismatic leader in Chicago, Fred Hampton, who was outrageously gunned down byTo my shame, I was only vaguely aware of The Black Panthers and their charismatic leader in Chicago, Fred Hampton, who was outrageously gunned down by Chicago police whilst he slept (possibly) drugged in a back room. This book is authored by one of the lead attorneys arguing that there was a plot by the FBI, in conjunction with local law enforcement to eliminate those they believed to be a threat to law and order. The Panthers obviously qualified under this sordid plot especially when you layer racism on top of it, Hoover's FBI obviously not above these sort of shenanigans.
This is essentially an account of the assassination (for which I think the case is proven), along with some details of Hampton's life and influence, followed by a lengthy and detailed account of the civil rights case held before outrageously biased and racist judge Perry. Since this is largely a first person account, it is light on detail of Fred's personality itself and I would have liked a little more depth on that even though the book is already 350 pages long.
There are a ton of enraging details here. It is clear that Fred Hampton's death was an extra-judicial killing at the hands of the police, in furtherance of a joint endeavor with the FBI. After which there was a disgraceful coverup, or attempted coverup, orchestrated by Edward Hanrahan, Illinois State Attorney. Hanrahan was ostensibly a Democrat but was clearly racist and a protector of the police who he believed could do no wrong. It is galling on the one hand he never paid a criminal penalty for his pernicious activities, but it is somewhat gratifying that the assassination torpedoed his political career and reputation. Stop me if this sounds familiar but this is a sorry tale of outrageous police brutality and murder, explained away by the police defending themselves from aggression, acting reasonably and in fear of their lives from a dangerous bunch of lawless thugs who just happen to be black. This is a story we hear to this day.
Fortunately, there were lawyers on had to fight for thirteen years for accountability. There is obviously no justice here because a civil suit can never bring back the lives that were lost or seriously damaged by that horrific raid where the police weapons account for over 99% of the shots fired in a pre-dawn assault. The first trial, subsequently and rightly overturned on appeal resulted in a hung jury despite the outrageous bias and summing up of the trial judge, who then decided the case himself by issuing his verdict for all the defendants and dismissing the suit.
This trial is the bulk of the narrative and is immensely frustrating to read. Of course, this is naturally a one sided account, coming as it does from one of the lawyers involved. However, I think the subsequent events prove the horrendous judgeship of that first trial as does his subsequent fate when his powers were reduced.
An excellent account, one that needs to be widely read (but probably won't be) as it has a great deal to teach us not only about the events of the late 60s to the 80s but the vile legacy of racism and civil rights abuse that persists to this day, especially with regards to police brutality and the institutional attempts to simply kill black people who are somehow deemed to be a threat to white society or otherwise "uppity". We have a long way to go....more
I'm completely convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin. I've read a lot of books on this subject, many of which examine, often outlandiI'm completely convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin. I've read a lot of books on this subject, many of which examine, often outlandish, conspiracy theories blaming everyone from the CIA to the Cubans to the Illuminati and all fail to meet their burden or proof. In a complex event such as the assassination of JFK there are going to be things that defy easy explanation but that doesn't lead us to conclude there was skulduggery afoot. I think the Warren Commission was essentially correct in its investigation. We seem to find the banal explanation for profound events somehow unsatisfactory which causes us to reach for the shadowy world of conspiracy theory thinking. I think this is dangerous and in this case, it seems to be because we can't bring ourselves to agree that a young, popular president could be felled by a disaffected nobody like LHO. However, that is the explanation that best fits the facts.
Jack Ruby didn't help those of us who are unconvinced there is a conspiracy afoot. Gunning down the alleged assassin before he could be tried, or even properly interrogated, robs us of the chance to get to the bottom of what happened and the motivations thereto. However, when one is looking into the facts of the Kennedy assassination, it often ends after Oswald was felled by Ruby and though we know that the latter passed from cancer four years later, that part of the story was less familiar to me.
This is a detailed account of what happened to Ruby after his arrest, including a detailed account of his trial. The account emphasizes the role played by Ruby's celebrity lawyer Mel Belli (who is sufficiently famous to rate a bio of his own) in defending Ruby, and the prosecution team who successfully prosecuted him unsurprisingly given he committed the act on live TV. Belli's defense of temporary insanity was relatively novel at the time and seemed controversial, even with Ruby himself who subsequently fired the irascible lawyer before appealing his death sentence.
It certainly filled in the gaps for me but I guess reading transcripts of a trial that took place over 50 years ago, albeit one of great note, is ultimately interesting but only up to a point. It is to DA's credit that, although he touches on the conspiracy theorizing that started pretty much before Kennedy reached Parkland Memorial. However, I would be interested to hear his views on this and hopefully make the case that both Oswald and Ruby were essentially unfulfilled and inadequate people who will be forever linked in history by these sordid acts of 1963. I am glad I read it but as others have mentioned, it is a somewhat slow slog through a trial really, and ultimately I am not sure Ruby is really worthy of our time....more
There's always a word I hate to read in the summary of a work of non fiction and that word is "searing". I don't know why it annoys me so much, I thinThere's always a word I hate to read in the summary of a work of non fiction and that word is "searing". I don't know why it annoys me so much, I think it is just code for a book that tackles controversial and/or politically charged topics. I used to be a supporter of the death penalty in my callow youth, but as I have moved left I have become strongly opposed to capital punishment. I have read a lot about it and the ultimate penalty the law has to offer is decreasing all the time in terms of its use here in the US.
As I have read on this subject, there is a common pattern that emerges. We hear about the crime and often times these are heinous acts of barbarity and whether it is the intent or not, they make one think that the death penalty is entirely appropriate. This is a natural reaction and surely, if a loved one of mine suffered such a fate I would want the perpetrator to be executed and probably, if I were honest, in a way that was cruel and unusual. But that is why we need to look at this as a more nuanced issue and not simply allow the grieving loved ones to set sentencing policy.
After a description of the crime, the book delves into the cases more deeply, through the eyes of the lawyers and the systems themselves. When we look into this it is clear that there are many issues that need to be considered, especially when the sentence of life without parole is now more widely available. It is clear that the death penalty is highly political and the entire system, in this narrative, considers the heart of death penalty country: Texas.
It is an interesting take on this subject about which so much has been written and it's certainly interesting to hear the lawyers side primarily. At the end though, I didn't feel that I had been "seared" by the honesty, or even had my mind changed at all. It was interesting to fill in the background from this point of view and consider this as a political and lawyering issue rather than dwelling on some of the more moral questions, although these are touched upon as well.
An interesting addition to the literature on the subject for sure. I wonder if any minds will be changed as the death penalty seems, although not nearly soon enough for me, to be falling into disuse....more
As a bleeding heart, progressive lefty I have a morbid fascination for the criminal justice system. Prisons and jails are things that repel and fascinAs a bleeding heart, progressive lefty I have a morbid fascination for the criminal justice system. Prisons and jails are things that repel and fascinate me in almost equal measure. Therefore, I have tremendous admiration for journalists such as Bauer who go completely undercover as he did here. He successfully applied for a job as a corrections officer (CO) in a privately run prison in Louisiana and spent four months undercover working that job.
I enjoyed the book for the insight it provides into the reality of being a CO and a horrible one it is too, as far as I can tell. I didn't learn much that I hadn't already absorbed from other reading and documentary watching on this subject ie this is a dangerous, stressful, grossly underpaid job subject to daily hazards most of us would never want to face once, never mind daily. So, he is to be admired for putting himself through that.
However as interesting as this was, it wasn't the main thrust of the book I don't think. That primary objective seems to be to shed light on the current, and long history also, of private prisons in the US. In other words, prisons run for profit. This seems to me to be a horrible idea and one of the all to common manifestations of a desire for the free market to run everything and it will magically be more efficient and cost effective. I don't buy that for many elements of society and I don't buy it here in particular. It seems Bauer agrees and pulls no punches in his disdain for his employer in particular and the privatized prison system in general.
He achieves this by alternating chapters discussing the history of "prisons for profit" in the US (essentially slavery by another name up until at least the 60s) with his experiences at the prison where he worked. I think this works as a writing style and I learned a lot about this sordid experiment in incarceration post emancipation. However, and maybe this is because I am anti-privatized prisons anyway, I was more interested in his personal experiences and how they changed him. He covers this but I would like to have seen more about his personality and cognitive changes which resulted from his time as a CO. The Stanford Prison Experiment (mentioned in the narrative) is fascinating and he seems to feel those forces at work in him.
So, I enjoyed it, agree with the line of argument although would like to have seen it made even more forcibly. We hear many comments that violence is more prevalent in private prisons that state run institutions, but there is little hard data to back this up and I would have liked more comparisons of the regimes in both since without the evidence, it's really hard to know just how bad things are comparatively. Still I enjoy reading undercover investigative journalists and this is a pretty good example but somehow I found it a little less engaging than I expected....more
I am scared of the police in this country and I am a middle aged white guy. I have long studied the roots, history and manifestation of racism across I am scared of the police in this country and I am a middle aged white guy. I have long studied the roots, history and manifestation of racism across the World but particularly in the US as I strive, every day, to be an anti-racist.
Amid calls to defund the police and the appalling race baiting that is going on from the White House, it seemed a good idea to turn my attention to the police - specifically the apparent racism and police brutality that is becoming ever more present in the news as these dreadful events are captured on video. It was only a month ago that George Floyd was lynched on the streets of Minneapolis by a white cop.
This was an interesting read, replete with examples from a career, African American police officer. There is a narrative currently predominating in many circles that holds that examples of police brutality are simply the results of a few "bad apples" that need to be weeded out of the force. Horace addresses this and writes what I think; this is simply not good enough. It allows us to think that we can remove these officers and all will be well whilst failing utterly to consider there is a more structural and systemic problem here.
The book moves between general observations but is heavy on specific examples of police corruption and brutality. The New Orleans PD and Chicago PD come in for particular criticism and the activities of those two forces fell into blatantly criminal activities under corrupt police chiefs. These are interesting and make the point that police forces are perfectly capable of becoming that type of organization and can't be written off as a few bad cops. Changing them is possible, but they become a culture of silence and complicity and I think this is the point. If police officers won't hold each other to account, and most forces have a culture of not reporting bad behavior, then they can, literally, get away with murder.
Add to that corrupt systems in which forces can operate (prosecutors, mayors etc) who also refuse to charge, indict or even investigate brutality and you get a force that can indulge racist activities with impunity, and they do.The Chicago experience was very telling - hundreds of police shootings, disproportionately wounding and killing black people, somehow almost all officers being exonerated and the killings deemed appropriate use of force. It is only with the advent of body cams and dash cams that we are gaining sight of these outrages and STILL, many of the powers that be sought to circle the wagons, suppress release of incriminating video and officers sworn to protect and serve providing sworn testimonies of events that never happened. Laquan MacDonald is a case that had receded in my memory but he was shot by an officer 16 times, 15 of which as he lay on the ground and the officers present all swore he had been threatening with a knife. It was caught on dash cam and he was walking away, not threatening and was shot within 10 seconds of the officer arriving. This was an execution. The officer may be a bad apple, but that doesn't explain the departmental, political, city cover up that was only exposed when video surfaced.
Horace makes great points about broken systems. Homelessness and mental illness and social problems that we put on the police to solve and I agree this is part of the problem that needs broader societal solutions. However, I do think we need to look at training, pay and rations, recruitment and many other aspects of the law enforcement community. It is clearly broken too and allows racist officers to not only survive, but to thrive and gain promotion.
So ultimately, this lifted the lid to a certain extent, on just how systemic are the problems. It is the ultimate white privilege to be able to support the police and think that when you call them the outcome will be good for you. It's all very well to look at the police and see them as there to support you, when for black and hispanic people that is simply not the case and there is a chance they will kill or abuse you. I didn't really learn anything here that was a surprise to me, but I am glad I read it because it articulated many of the issues very well. It also gives the reader more on an insight into how corrupt police departments can become if we are not careful, which makes the whole "protect and serve" motto a cruel joke to far too many people. I would have like to have seen a checklist of suggested actions in summary at the end of the book as I think that would have rounded it off nicely....more
I was vaguely familiar with the name of Attica and the close association with prison conditions and the 1971 riot. Only having lived in the US since 2I was vaguely familiar with the name of Attica and the close association with prison conditions and the 1971 riot. Only having lived in the US since 2005, I missed the tail end of the court fights that were still, unspeakably, going on in the early 21st century.
It is very obvious that we live in a world where we want simple answers to very complex questions. Generally speaking there is a lack of contextualization, a lack of critical thinking and generally an unwillingness to think hard about these issues. As a result, it is very easy to come up with a trite, simple statement about complexities that, on the surface, sound reasonable. This book does a great job in tackling this pernicious trend on our thinking and discourse.
Both sides of the political divide are guilty of this but I find the conservative approach much more culpable here. By this I mean that it would be very easy, and indeed this was the case at the time, to look at Attica and come to the conclusion that these were reactionary convicts who took over a prison, held correction officers hostage and so deserved everything they got. To the extent that around 30 prisoners AND hostages were murdered in the retaking by officers manifestly unqualified to storm a jail, is neither here nor there. Nobody needs to be held accountable apart from the prisoners and who cares about them? The events after the retaking (the torture, murder, denial of medical care, summary beatings etc.) don't deserve scrutiny or censure.
Any questioning of this summation of the situation, as this book ably achieves, is seen as somehow pandering to the left, soft on crime etc. etc. Indeed the deplorable conditions at Attica that led to the discontent among the inmates actually became worse after the riot and we continue to have a prison issue to this day. However the narrative remains that these people are somehow subhuman and therefore need no improvement or sympathy. This is a simple narrative and makes most people living in their suburban homes feel better that we are somehow being "tough on crime".
However the story isn't, or shouldn't be that simple. The agencies of the state should be held accountable for reckless and lethal action. There is no doubt that the prisoners have a share of accountability for what happened here. I also believe that negotiating a way out of the situation is hazardous too, for the precident it sets for other potential riots. This is the same argument against negotiating with terrorists. It merely encourages similar outrages in the future.
However we have to ask whether it is right for the state to use such extreme violence in a case like this. Many hostages were killed and the firing of high calibre weapons indiscriminately seems more than clear. However the vile nature of the reprisals, the racially motivated attacks, the torture and humiliation go far beyond what we should expect or tolerate in a civilized society. Worse perhaps than all this was the cover up that continues to this day. No accountability accepted by the state even to the families of the slain hostages. The state of NY had to be dragged, kicking and screaming to court before any compensation was finally drawn from them.
The overall conclusion of this book is pessimistic. It seems that this sordid event still resonates and we can't even point to overall improvements in prison conditions, the treatment of racial minorities or indeed much else as a positive legacy of this riot. It is a story that is hard to read and takes some ploughing through. The events of the riot and retaking of the prison take up perhaps a quarter to a third of the book, the rest details the legal battles that followed. Interesting and vital as these are, they are long winded as befits the nature of legal wrangling. As usual there are incompetent judges, fighters for legal justice etc. and it is all fascinating to follow....more
A straightforward account of the Christie murders infamously committed at the memorable, now defunct address, 10 Rillington Place. Interwoven with thiA straightforward account of the Christie murders infamously committed at the memorable, now defunct address, 10 Rillington Place. Interwoven with this sordid tale is an account of the great London smog of 1952 which occurred in the middle of Christie's murderous spree. I am a fan of books such as this that tell a particular historical story and set it in the context of the times which these two, broadly contemporaneous events most certainly are.
It is written in a very easy to read manner and switches between the two story lines both within and between chapters as is the way with such genres of nonfiction. However I am not convinced that these two subjects go together quite as neatly as we are led to believe. It seems to me that they are parallel and not really that intertwined. Unlike some other murderers (Gordon Cummins in the blacked out London of WW2, the S-Bahn murderer using similar cover to kill in Nazi Berlin) the fog seems entirely incidental to Christie's MO; he didn't use the fog to stalk people, to bury his victims or indeed to advance his sordid aims at all. If anything he was just another Londoner suffering breathing difficulties at the time.
So this somewhat negates the premise of the book I feel. Both topics are interesting in their own right and could (and have in other accounts) stood alone as subjects for a book. Therefore one gets the impression that the narrative is somewhat forced and ultimately we are left with the conclusion that both changed society, but that our prurience over serial killers has taken precedence over the larger issue which was smog and air pollution. This isn't unreasonable but as I say, seems a little forced.
Still, not bad. As a Brit living in the US this is clearly written with a US audience in mind therefore the explanations of UK terms are very basic to me but that isn't a critique as much as an observation. ...more
Loading...
