No comments about The Havana Mob: Gangsters, Gamblers, Showgirls and Revolutionaries in 1950s Cuba.

5 comments about Deadly American Beauty (St. Martin's True Crime Library).

1. I was engrossed in this story from the minute I started reading it. I found it so amazing, looking at the pictures of this beautiful young girl, that Kristin Rossum could be with no conscience and so cold-blooded. As much as true crime repels us, it still is something you want to read because you just can't believe people do these things. Kristin's husband is portrayed as such a sweet, loving guy and how she murdered him was ruthless; it was overkill. I totally believe she was guilty, although she professes to this day she is innocent. I think she is a compulsive liar who actually started, at some point, believing her own lies. Her drug of choice was methamphetamine and I'm sure it heightened her imagination and determination to get rid of her husband so she could be with her lover. I say, get a divorce if you want out that bad. If you love true crime stories, you will love this book.



2. This was a great read that you could not put down. It went in to details that suspense never left the story. Nothing was dragged out it was written perfectly.It tells the Story of Kristen Rossum all through her life and after she murdered her Beautiful husband Greg DeVillers.So sad and just a very selfish woman Kristen was. Why did she go wrong? her parents gave her so much in life.She was driven to succeed at a young age with so much help and family support.So things that went on in her childhood when she started using drugs and could never stop then leading to murder leaves so many questions open that she will never answer.
   
   Just such a sad situation that should have never happened. To take away Greg's life And Greg's family will always live in pain from this.In the book I never saw her show remorse for this nor did I hear that her parents shoes remorse for Greg's family.



3. This is by no means a great book, but the story is so riveting it more than makes up for the mediocre writing skills of John Glatt. Kristin Rossum seemed to have it all: beauty, brains, a good job, a loving husband. That she chose to throw it all away by because of a drug addiction and an ill-fated affair (where is Michael Robertson these days, by the way? I hope he's in jail too) is mind-boggling to me and, I'm sure, to her family. Even though it's clear to me that Rossum indeed killed Greg and there's nothing in the world that could ever justify that, I was surprised to found myself feeling sorry for the beautiful young woman who ruined so many lives, including her own.



4. I will admit, I am not one to read true crime books, so I maybe off the mark in this review, but overall I was not too happy with this book. I never felt like I really knew the people (they almost seemed stiff or cardboardy, for a lack of a better word) and the author seemed to repeat a lot of information, in an effort to make it a longer book, I guess. I think he could have cut out much of the repeats and cut the length down quite a bit.
   
   I also question the phrase "almost perfect murder" because honestly, Kristin was so hyped up on meth when she killed her husband, she wasn't thinking straight at all. To buy the rose at Vons with a debit card instead of cash, and then also use her Vons store discount card to boot, was nothing short of completely retarded. Her stories varied by the moment, and she freely admitted to lying. This was supposed to be the great master mind behind the "almost perfect murder"? Maybe she was smart when she wasn't high, but that didn't seem to happen very often.
   
   If you're a huge fan of true crime books, and can't find anything else to read, you can pick this one up at the library, but otherwise I'd say skip it and spend your time reading something interesting. This author seems very interested in hype and sensationalism, and not much else.



5. This was really the best book I've read for awhile. Great detail. It like yiou're there seeing things happen. Not too much focus on one thing to the point of that it got boring.

5 comments about Unbridled Rage.

1. This was a fast read, the author handled this sad story with delicate care, it is a testimony that eventually whether you believe it or not what comes around goes around.



2. If you grew up in metropolitan Chicago you are aware of the events covered in this story. Your eyes have glazed over countless news stories and telecasts, all of which served to confuse you more than help you. O'Shea has superbly connected the dots of crime stories more complex than the collective Dashielle Hammett. Terrifying that it is non-fiction.



3. Gene O'Shea has done a remarkable job in telling how two ATF agents solved a heralded Chicago murder mystery 40 years after the killings. Chicago was shocked in 1955 when the naked bodies of three young boys were found in a ditch in a forest preserve. An incredible effort on the part of police and investigative authorities for years was unable to solve this horrible crime. It took two outstanding agents, John Rotunno and Jim Grady, through intensive investigation to crack this "cold case." O'Shea has detailed a most interesting summary of just how these agressive agents turned up enough evidence to convict horseman Kenneth Hansen. His book is a fascinating read. This worthy story would make a top-notch movie...



4. Atf John Rotunno's many, many lies are promoted in this book. ATF John Rotunno is a pathiological liar! Gene O'Shea attempts to make John Rotunno and himself wealthy and great men by solving the Helen Brach murder with countless lies. The truth of the ATF's con has been exposed all over the internet! Just take a look and see the ATF caught in one of their biggest blunders ever! How did the author become Illinois Gaming Commissioner? Please tell us if John Rotunno got you this job?
   
   This book is shameful because innocent people have been lied about by ATF John Rotunno! ( The truth will set you free!)



5. 
   Unbridled Rage is the story of the solving of the 40 year old muder of three young boys in Chicago. Along the way, the author, Gene O'Shea, touches on a number of other murders connected to the notorious Silas Jayne gang in Chicago. The story is fascinating and the writing is just excellent. For example there are courtroom scenes where necessary to advance the story, but these scenes which in the hands or lesser writers can be numbingly boring, are brief and relevant. O'Shea writes as a reporter presenting a clear narrative, rather than as a cheerleader, which unfortunately is an all too common phenonmenon in true crime writing. He remains as non-judgemental as anyone could, given the nauseating nature of the crime, and of the personal make-up, which O'Shea explores in interesting depth, of the murderer. The time frames of this book range from 1955 to the early 21st century. This could have become difficult to follow, but at the start of each chapter, O'Shea lists the dates covered in that particular chapter.
   A very strong effort.

5 comments about Abuse of Innocence: The Mcmartin Preschool Trial.

1. With all the publicity surrounding the McMartin preschool trial, now over a decade removed, one would suppose that the definitive book on the subject-and this is certainly the definitive book, and a good one at that-would be a best seller, but it didn't happen. Why? Because the public wanted a villain, somebody to hate, and what they got were some innocent people wrongly accused. With that kind of result the public lost interest. The Jon Benet Ramsey case sold a lot better because the public had clear targets for its hate, John and Patsy Ramsey. Here, Ray Buckey was to be the designated fall guy with his creepy glasses and his nerdish style, but he wouldn't fall because he was clearly innocent of the sensational charges against him. So the public was stuck with no clear villain on whom to vent. The real villains, as graphically revealed in this book, were the press, the prosecutors and the social workers, especially Kee MacFarlane, who indoctrinated the children into describing perverted events that never took place.

   This was written from the trenches on a daily basis when the overwhelming tide of public opinion was that of a lynch mob desperate to hang Buckey and his family from the nearest tree. The Eberles built a strong case in blaming the media for poisoning the public's understanding of the case, partially through incompetent reporters, and partially through a media lust to sensationalize. Part of what's interesting about this book is how it presages the O.J. trial, especially in the incompetence seen in the district attorney's office. Ira Reiner was D.A. at the time with Garcetti as a critical underling. It is scandalous that they would find the need to use a paid felonious informant to bolster their case against Buckey. He was a five-time loser, no less, who previously had falsely testified for the prosecution in exchange for favorable treatment. Also stupid was the prosecution's use of an incompetent and prejudicial child abuse "expert," Dr. Gordon, who said that he possessed "the largest collection of photographs of children's anuses in the state of California." [p. 106] The authors estimate that 97.5 percent of the people in L.A. thought Buckey was guilty. The sad truth is what he was really guilty of was being a young man who liked to work with preschool children. Now THAT ain't natural was what a large number of people thought. I hope we're getting over that prejudice because what our children need are role models and guides from both sexes.

   The book is peppered with courtroom asides from an unidentified lawyer. Here's one of the most pertinent from page 105, a exchange between a friend of the Buckeys and the lawyer:

   "They're putting on witnesses who they know are lying. They concealed exonerating evidence. Don't we have enough criminal conduct by the prosecutors to put them behind bars?"

   "It doesn't work that way," the lawyer laughed. "The law is just for the little people. When we break the rules we go to jail. When they break the rules they go to lunch. And maybe get a promotion if they do it right."

   "But what about the law?" the woman gasped. "What about the Constitution?"

   "I'm afraid that's just one of those nice, comforting fantasies like the tooth fairy. There are only two classes of people. Those who hold power and those who do not. And in any dispute the guys who hold power will decide which way it's going to go. And if there's any problem the rules go out the window. I hope you understand that this is not about child abuse, just as McCarthyism was not about Communists." Amen.




2. At the time this book was written is seemed very biased but now, years after the trial and after the Satanic Ritual Abuse scandals, it is closer to the truth than most imagined.
   
   The authors of The Abuse of Innocence is written by two authors who have a predisposition against child sexual abuse allegations. However, they clearly state this opinion and I simply skipped those sections. Normally, I would not rate a book highly when the authors show such bias, but history has showed that when it came to the McMartin case, they were in fact correct.
   
   This book illustrates the faults of the Los Angeles District Attorney's office, problems with the testimony of the witnesses, and most important, the inaccuracies of confessions obtained on procedures similar to the Miami Method.



3. Did any of the reviewers attend the McMartin Preschool? Are any of you related to someone that attended the school? All of the reviewers and the author must be related to Peggy or Buckey.
   I guess none of the reviewers saw the aftermath of what that sick and demented school did to the children that attended.
   If the school was still standing, would you send your child there?
   I am disgusted!



4. This information is TRUE!
   I rate it one star because that is as low as you can go.
   
   Paul and Shirley Eberle: A Strange Pair of Experts
   by Maria Laurina
   
   Paul and Shirley Eberle wrote The Politics of Child Abuse, a book that accuses mothers, mental health professionals, and prosecutors of feeding children stories about sexual abuse. Since the book was published by Lyle Stuart in l986, the Eberles have been cited as experts in sexual abuse trials. They were featured speakers at a conference of the Victims of Child Abuse Laws, a group formed to protect accused parents.
   What is startling about the Eberles' reputation as ground-breaking experts in the field is that their dubious credentials have not been widely challenged. Paul and Shirley Eberle edit a soft-core magazine in California called the L.A. Star that contains a mixture of nude photos, celebrity gossip, telephone sex ads, and promos for The Politics of Child Abuse.
   In the 1970's, however, the Eberles were also publishing hard-core pornography. Their publication, Finger, depicted scenes of bondage, S & M, and sexual activities involving urination and defecation. A young girl portrayed with a wide smile on her face sits on top of a man whose penis is inside of her; a woman has oral sex with a young boy in a drawing entitled "Memories of My Boyhood."
   The Eberles were featured nude on one cover holding two life-size blow up dolls names "Love Girl" and "Play Guy." No dates appear on the issues and the Eberles rarely attach their names, referring to themselves as "The L.A. Star Family."
   The Eberles were the distributors of Finger and several other underground magazines, says Donald Smith, a sergeant with the obscenity section of the Los Angeles Police Department's vice division who followed the couple for years. LAPD was never able to prosecute for child pornography: "There were a lot of photos of people who looked like they were under age but we could never prove it." The pictures of young children in Finger are illustrations, and child pornography laws were less rigid a decade ago than they are today.
   "Sexpot at Five," "My First Rape, She Was Only Thirteen," and "What Happens When Niggers Adopt White Children" are some of the articles that appeared in Finger. One letter states: "I think it's really great that your mags have the courage to print articles & pixs [sic] on child sex...Too bad I didn't hear from more women who are into child sex...Since I'm single I'm not getting it on with my children, but I know of a few families that are. If I were married & my wife & kids approved--I'd be having sex with my daughters."
   Another entry reads: "I'm a pedophile & I think its [sic] great a man is having sex with his daughter!...Since I didn't get Finger #3, I didn't get to see the stories & pics of family sex. Would like to see pics of nude girls making it with their daddy, but realize its too risky to print."
   Lyle Stuart plans to print the Eberles' forthcoming book on the McMartins preschool trial. Carole Stuart, the publisher, describes the Eberles as "experts in the field," and family friends "for years."
   
   (...)



5. The Eberles have shone a much-needed spotlight of analysis on one of the worst miscarriages of justice in U.S. history: the McMartin Preschool case. After a brief introductory section to tell of how the fiasco all began, they give a detailed, blow-by-blow accounting of the trial, often with lengthy, word-for-word quotes of the lawyers' questions and the witnesses' responses. This is a good journalistic technique if not overdone; I often used it in reporting on criminal trials during my 39 and one-half years as a daily newspaper reporter.
   The couple also illuminates the "child molester" witchhunt which has preoccupied this country for a number of years now. The battle cry, "We must protect the children!" which any sane adult obviously wants to do, has been used to justify some hideously extra-legal investigations, arrests, and prison sentences for palpably innocent people. The Eberles tell us about this in some detail.
   The flaws in their book come in the areas of attribution and of sources. Over and over the authors tell of "a lawyer in the cafeteria" or "a heavyset woman" approaching them to comment on the trial, with no names or other hints as to identity. While this is sometimes necessary in reporting, excessive use of it as is done here makes the reader suspicious about the authors' fairness. At any rate, it made THIS reader suspicious. Several instances are recounted in which someone approaches outside the courtroom and says words to the effect, "You don't REALLY think they're innocent, do you?" Then one or the other of the Eberles proceeds to make the person look like an ignorant fool with a brilliant interrogation as to what they really know about the trial (nothing, in each case.) Once again, it's a little too pat, especially with no names to pin the quotes to. Did the Eberles make up any of the anecdotes? I'm certainly not accusing them of that, since there is no way to know for sure. But they leave themselves open to such suspicions by the way they wrote their book.
   In addition, there are no notes at the end of the book -- zero. Now the Eberles might say that this is because the "original sources" for this book were their own experiences. But again, a book that describes a major public event, and related events that they learned about somehow from all over the country (a witchhunt for "child molesters" in practically every county in the country, thousands of people imprisoned unjustly, the law and Constitution dragged through the mud, according to various overheated passages in the book) should have cited some news media sources, at the very least.
   I agree with the Eberles' premise: That the McMartin Preschool case was a huge and hugely expensive farrago that wrecked the lives of a number of innocent people, and that never should have happened, and that it led to other, similar witchhunts across the country. But they have damaged their own credibility by the above careless practices in writing their book.

No comments about Low Life.

No comments about The Lurking Devil of Murder.

5 comments about Summer Wind: Thomas Capano and the Murder of Anne Marie Fahey.

1. I read this book after reading Ann Rule's "And Never Let Her Go". I was actually very glad that I had read her book first, because had I not I would not have understood anything about the background of the people involved, which this book did not go into. It was gripping and definately readable but it just sort of covered the story from the time Capano murdered Anne Marie through the trial. If a person just wants an overall view of the case, this would be the book. But if you want more details and more information into the lives and background of these people, I would recommend Rule's book.



2. I started this book in Las Vegas in August ... and I couldn't stop myself from reading. It took me three days (with all the distractions the Venetian has to offer). Anastasia's style was wonderfully blunt. I knew the outcome going in, yet I couldn't wait to turn the next page and read how this author laid it out for me. An incredible story that could've been handled like so many of those "O.J." books ... but it wasn't. Incredibly well done. Bravo, Mr. Anastasia. You have a way with words ...



3. This book ranks right up there with HELTER SKELTER in my favorite true-crime books. I live in Philadelphia, just a stone's throw from Delaware, the locale of the story, and I heard plenty about the Anne Marie Fahey case at the time it happened.

   TSW is the story of gubernatorial secretary Anne Marie Fahey and Tom Capano, a high-powered attorney with political aspirations and connections. This is a story of appearances. To all observations, Anne Marie was vivacious and fun-loving; what wasn't readily apparent was the fact that she was a troubled young woman with eating and emotional disorders that stemmed from a dysfunctional upbringing. Tom was Delaware royalty, the scion of a wealthy Italian-American family who had the brains to take the Capanos to new levels both politically and socially. To all who knew him, he was the biggest mover and shaker in the state. What wasn't readily apparent was the fact that he was a manipulative, obsessive lothario who preyed upon helpless, insecure women.

   You will be glued to this book as you read how Capano literally tried to get away with murder and the anguish the Fahey family experienced as all attempts to locate their sister were in vain. The culmination came with the incriminating discovery of the cooler and the decree of the death penalty, which Capano appeals to this very day.




4. This is the worst of the books written on this subject. The author has a cynical, stereotypical attitude towards women and it's so annoying and so ignorant that it ruined the book. It's like "if she was with a rich, powerful guy then she was a gold-digger and well what can you expect would happen" sort of attitude. The author is the sort of man who automatically would judge a woman in the most cynical way if they happen to be involved with a powerful guy like Tom Capano. Despite the fact Anne Marie's diary actually was {at first} loaded with true affection and statements of love about Tom Capano. The author ignored a lot in order to promote his narrow-minded and ungenerous attitude. The book comes off as having been written by a fairly uneducated person, and I don't care how educated the author might actually be...because the book stinks. What he ought to know is, women can actually love in the sort of relationship Anne had with Tom. That is, before she realized how messed up he was she thought she loved him. The author would rather make chauvinistic statements than see that fact. Everyone said, Tom could be very charming and seem to take great care and interest in a woman....and so of course Anne Marie would love him for that {and I got that good, more honest info from Ann Rule's book}. Also, if Tom Capano had decided to spend money on Anne Marie, that was between the two of them...Tom wanted to do so and Anne Marie was grateful for it {during the days before disillusionment she ended up experiencing}....but the author wants you to think that's all Anne Marie cared about was money. I recommend Ann Rule's book instead. She doesn't see things in total black and white like chauvinist author George Anastasia does.



5. The Summer Wind is investigative reporting at its finest.
   George Anastasia goes behind the scenes of Delaware's Trial of the Century, uncovering the good, bad and plain out ugly of the Capano family and its golden boy Tom Capano's seriously twisted psyche.
   Capano, clever, intelligent, successful attorney and partner, and also a serial adulterer and apparently a man with little or no conscience, begins a relationship with Anne Marie Fahey, secretary to Delaware's governor. When she wants to end the relationship after several years, he is not willing to let her go and kills her, disposing her body in an ice cooler in the Atlantic, in order to keep control.
   What makes this tale of the sad Fahey-Capano case superior to other versions is Anastasia's unbiased reporting. Rather than making Fahey look like an unwitting party, he admits her faults and knowledge that she was conducting an illicit affair with a married man. He tirelessly relives Fahey and Capano's relationship, with their email correspondences and Fahey's diary entries. In this way, Fahey comes across as a real person, faults and all. He spends equal time dissecting the Capano family and, in particular, Tom's long history of lies, deceit and schemes.
   Even knowing the outcome of the trial, this book still had me eagerly turning each page - - feeling sympathy and sorrow for the Fahey family, for Tom Capano's long suffering wife and daughters and absolutely repulsion for Tom Capano himself.
   A classic case of someone having everything only to throw it all away.
   Definitely recommended over the other Capano books out there.

5 comments about Vulgar Favors: Andrew Cunanan, Gianni Versace, and the Largest Failed Manhunt in U.S. History.

1. I live in urban Minneapolis, Minnesota so I watched the Cunanen case unfold from the beginning. I am also a fan of Maureen Oarth. Her meticulous research in Vanity Fair articles carried over into this book. I was most concerned with the Minnesota aspect of the case and her work on it seemed excellent. I was less familiar with the later outstate aspects of the case by Oarth's book seems to make sense.

   Reactions of some in the gay community, who seemed to judge the book by a "political agenda" seemed to mirror the response to Randy Shilts classic book on the AIDS epidemic "And the Band Played On". Many of the worst critics of Shilts classic book were from the gay community.

   As they say, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it. Law enforcement and the gay community cooperation on the Cunnanen case went from excellent to horrible. In Vulgar Favors Oarth describes the extremes, and everything in the middle, in great detail. It provides a foundation on how this "odd couple" can work together better in the future.

   I recall reading somewhere that there were several gays on the books editing and publishing team and they didn't have any problem with the book and it's contents.

   I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in the Cunanen case who has an open mind. Gays are like everyone else, you have to take the good with the bad. Early on the Minneapolis newspaper wouldn't even use the word "gay" to describe Andrew Cunanen even though they listed several of his lovers with obviously male names (like duhh!). The local gay press ironically, tended to be supportive of Vulgar Favors and the Vanity Fair coverage because it got coverage and awareness for local gay community issues like substance abuse and cooperation with police.

   Again I highly recommend this book.




2. Sheesh! Andrew's story is fairly absorbing as far as those of serial killers go, and Orth has collected an impressive mountain of facts about it. However, this book's shortcomings far outweigh any of its strong points:
   
   1. The text is fairly clogged with spelling errors and illiteracies of every kind. I mean, I'M embarrassed to read them, and I had nothing to do with the book!
   
   2. Why couldn't we have pictures? Because Orth didn't want to stoop to sensationalism? Then how to explain the completely inaccurate and misleading title? At no point is it ever alleged that Cunanan performed "vulgar favors" for Versace, hence I must conclude that that title was chosen only for the basest of reasons.
   
   3. There was no reason the book needed to be this long; it could have been much shorter and still effective. The author seemed unable to weed out uninteresting aspects of her story, instead dumping EVERY damn fact in her possession on us (e.g., do we really need two entire chapters on the history of the FBI's fliers?!?)
   
   4. Orth just can't seem to make the characters come alive, although she evidently suffered from no lack of rich material.
   
   5. Her prose style is mediocre and over-stylized at the same time.
   
   6. I suppose this is inevitable when writing the life of a serial killer, but here I must accuse Orth of "playing the ending" too much. What I mean is that she goes back into his life in high school (and before) reading all these sinister meanings into the most innocuous teenageisms (what high-school boy, for example, isn't a barefaced liar?). As if he'd spent his entire life preparing to go berserk and kill Versace. Brother! Only somebody with a ludicrous and gratingly shallow understanding of human nature would have slanted her facts thus.
   
   Avoid this one: A weak and forgettable effort.



3. Nine years after the crimes, this book's flaws are all the more apparent: overwritten and in desperate need of an editor's hand. The reader has to wait more than 300 pages to get to Gianni Versace. The buildup, many extraneous details about four previous murders of obscure individuals by Andrew Cunanan, while interesting in its way, is not why anyone would want to read this work. This reporter never met a detail she didn't decide to incorporate into her writing. There are reams of tedious detail about police investigations, with many gratuitous quotes by cops who are unimportant to the theme. No one really cares about the non-celebrities who preceded Versace in death at the hands of this particular psychopath.



4. It was well written for the most part, but I detected a lot of homophobia between the lines. Orth comes off as judgmental and seems to blame the victims....they deserved to be murdered because they were gay and were guilty of risky behavior (Note to Mrs. Russert: straight folks are promiscuous and do drugs, too).
   
   Orth wrote a lot of things about the victims that I don't think belonged in the book - who cares whether or not Gianni Versace had or didn't have AIDS?
   
   Andrew Cunnan's sexual orientation had nothing to do with his being a serial killer. This individual was the product of psychotic parents (SOME people should NOT reproduce) who made Andrew what he was: an overindulged, spoiled, narcissistic sociopath with an out of control ego and a huge sense of entitlement.
   
   As I said, good book for the most part but maybe the story should have been told by someone less prejudiced.
   
   And, by the way, I am a heterosexual woman.



5. Orth is the wife of Tim Russert. This is her first book, and it is very interesting. She gives all the details of the murders of Trail, Madison, Miglin, Reese, and Versace. What she describes is the unknown lifestyle of the kept men. Cunanan lived a life of lies. He was popular mainly because he picked up the tab. He dealt drugs, and when he life was collasping around him, he decided to kill his friends and associates. Whether he actually ever knew Miglin and Versace before their murders, Orth goes deeply into the lifestyles of all those involved in this story. I am normally not disposed to crime stories, but Orth does a great job of showing the national manhunt for Andrew Cunanan. The only bad thing is that there were no pictures in this detailed book.
   
   This is a great and detailed read about the national manhunt for Andrew Cunanan. The author did the legwork in uncovering everything we need to know about the characters. She assumes much, but the level of detail leads you to these assumptions about Versace and Miglin.

5 comments about Murder At Morses Pond.

1. Not being familiar with this case I found the book easy to read and understand as well as informative. Maybe if I had followed the case closely I might have had another opinion, but I think it's a good read.



2. This portrayl of the Dirk Greineder murder case is an awful piece of work that is riddled with errors and sheds no new information on the case. Author Rosencrance clearly did little more than watch the Court TV coverage of this case, read the local media accounts, and consult the trial transcripts. Beyond the local police chief and several jurors, none of the main participants in the case were interviewed and there is virtually no character development. The story line is disjointed, confusing and devoid of emotion and description. Some parts read like clinical police reports while other sections are trial transcripts run verbatim. Avoid this book at all costs as the errors are too numerous to list. It does not deserve a single star but there is no option for zero stars.



3. I read this book because I was well aware of the case and the trial and I have to disagree about there being a lot of errors. I understand that you may not like the style -- a lot of court stuff -- but it's wrong to say it's riddled with errors.



4. I have been watching for a book to be published on the Greineder case since the completion of the trial. When I saw this book, I was very excited to purchase a copy. I watched the trial from beginning to end and was quite fascinated by it. As mentioned in other reviews, the book was not what I expected. I assumed it would be a well researched story and would have new information, but I was wrong. It is written from court records, transcipts of the trial, etc., so it was just a written form of what we had seen visually via Court TV.
   Even though this was the case, I enjoyed reading it. I would have enjoyed reading it better, though, if there were more background information, character development, and input from family members, etc. Of course, I felt that the children and May's extended family would never agree to be interviewed for a book like this. They are very private people and probably felt that there would not be anything to be gained by participating in a project like this. I purchased a used copy, so I felt that I wasn't out too much. It wasn't just awful, but neither is it well researched like an Ann Rule book or other popular True Crime writers.



5. I like some trial coverage in my true crime books, but Rosencranz overdid it. All she did was use the trial transcripts basically verbatim. She did little research as far as I can tell. A little bit of info from the jurors and cops and that is it. I got tired of the constant repetition of what happened as she interviews every single cop, etc. who came to the crime scene. I had absolutely no feeling for who May and Dirk Greineder were as real people. No emotional connection, no nothing. If I had wanted to know about this crime from this angle I would have strictly read the newspapers. A total waste of paper.

4 comments about Dead Move: Kate Morgan and the Haunting Mystery of Coronado, Second Edition (Nonfiction).

1. Dead Move: Kate Morgan and the Haunting Mystery of Coronado, Second Edition (Nonfiction)Dead Move: Kate Morgan and the Haunting Mystery of Coronado
   
   Here's a ghost story and a mystery with a REAL twist. I've enjoyed many a ghostly tale and have a passion for mysteries, too, but rarely have I seen the two combined as well as this. It's not just speculative fiction; looks like John Cullen sorted through a lot of history and combined it with some reasonable speculation to spin this tale. I got caught up in it from page 1 and couldn't let go. Definitely a winner and a worthwhile read. I recommend it highly!



2. In a meticulously researched book, Cullen comes up with an intriguing solution to a 19th century mystery. This is a fascinating story with many twists and turns. Who was Kate Morgan? Did the mysterious visitor to San Diego kill herself? If so, why? Over the years, many people have tried to guess what really happened. This book may have the answers.



3. Cullen does a great job of building the theory of Kate Morgan and the other characters in this twisted plot of the 1890's. I was able to attend a presentation by John Cullen in Coronado at Bay Books earlier this summer and I was thrilled by his knowledge and his theories about what happened at the Hotel Del Coronado. I will order more of his books. He is obviously a very talented local writer.



4. It's hard to believe that no one knows who killed Kate Morgan. Or was the dead woman even Kate Morgan? Well researched and penned in a highly readable and entertaining way, Dead Move, showcases John Cullen's talent as a historian and writer. A beautiful young woman dies dramatically and tragically on a stormy night on the back steps of the Hotel Del Coronado. Presented as one of San Diego's most intriguing ghost stories, the narrative travels countrywide and even globally, introducing historic characters whose intricate relationships could easily be found in a classic whodunnit. Was it murder or was it suicide? John Cullen has dug up a true Victorian mystery and offers a convincing alternative solution to a death that has puzzled authorities for decades.