1 comments about The Principal Upanishads: The Essential Philosophical Foundation of Hinduism (Sacred Wisdom).

1. After searching long and hard for a quality edition of the Upanishads, I found this little abridgement to be the best of its kind. The ten texts that make up this selection, are, as advertised, the most consequential for Hindu philosophy, and the hardcover volume itself is quite handsome, and comes complete with a ribbon bookmark. Highly recommended.

5 comments about Zodiac Unmasked: The Identity of America's Most Elusive Serial Killer Revealed.

1. Author too long winded. I love true crime, but this book just couldn't hold my attention.



2. I enjoyed both Graysmith/Zodiac books, but ZODIAC UNMASKED was 100 PAGES TOO LONG. Plus much of the info was repeated 2-4 times. I was almost expecting a test at the end!



3. After seeing David Fincher's film ZODIAC I got a craving to find out more about the crimes Zodiac committed, so I ordered a copy of Zodiac Unmasked, seeing as how the screenwriters adapted this book into the script. All I can say now is, the screenwriters must be geniuses for I have never read so disorganized and badly written a true crime book and I've plowed through some doozies in my lifetime. If you've seen the movie, you've seen Jake Gyllenhaal playing Robert Graysmith, this inoffensive, innocuous mousy cartoonist who hangs out all day at the Chronicle newsroom and little by little he becomes obsessed with the case to the detriment of his home life.
   
   It's not that cartoonists can't write good books, but I wonder how good a cartoonist Graysmith was because as a writer, he's the bottom of the barrel. Not one sentence he writes make sense. Okay, some make sense but then the problem is that whatever interest you had at the beginning of the sentence evaporates by the time he gets to the end. Part of the problem is the hugeness of his topic. Not only are there literally hundreds of suspects, very few of whom ever come alive as "characters," but there are hundreds of cops, ditto, and witnesses, ditto, all of them a huge blur, and there also seem to be hundreds of Northern California towns all of which Zodiac knew well and left terror there.
   
   We can never get an estimate of how many crimes Zodiac committed nor how many letters he wrote. Graysmith doesn't want to say "no" to any possibility, so all of them are left flapping in the wind like the monkey's gumballs.
   
   And yet another part of the problem is that, halfway through the events he relates, he makes the central one the publication of his first book about Zodiac, in which he identified his main suspect under a pseudonym (the man was still alive at that time), so we get hundreds of new sightings based on readers who read #1, called up Graysmith, told him they knew who he was talking about, and he was right, that man is strange. Maybe the first book was better for it wouldn't have all this patting himself on the back in it. This one is nigh unreadable. However since it was the basis for one of the best thrillers I've ever seen, I'm bumping it up a notch or two.



4. I'm shocked by the reviewers who read this and didn't think Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac. It reaches a point where an unbelievable number of coincidences, and identifications from witnesses and victims are too compelling to consider otherwise.
   
   Yes, Leigh's fingertips didn't match. Yes, his handwriting didn't match. Yes, they never found a "smoking gun." Leigh was an intelligent person who took considerable precautions to ensure he wouldn't get caught. Plus, there is no proof the fingerprints in question were from the Zodiac. They could have come from a number of different people (they did not get elimination prints from everyone at the scene).
   
   As for peoople who didn't like the way the book was written, keep it mind this is not a mystery novel. Events were written in chronological order and often required additional information so the reader would understand.
   
   I agree that some material is repeated and could have done without some of it myself. If you're interested at all in this case, the overwhelming amount of research and information is worth such a minor flaw.



5. HUGE DISSAPOINTMENT. I READ THE FIRST BOOK AND WOULD HAVE GIVEN IT 5 STARS. IS THIS AMERICA? ARE WE NOT INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY? WE SHOULD LEARN SOMETHING FROM RICHARD JEWELL. YEAH, I GUESS THERE IS A REMOTE POSSIBILITY HE COULD HAVE BEEN ZODIAC, BUT WHAT IF HE WASN'T. ALTHOUGH HE WAS ODD, NO ONE DESERVES TO BE PERSECUTED BY THE MEDIA IN THEIR FINAL YEARS OF LIFE (UNLESS FOR SURE HE WAS ZODIAC). COME ON-HIS DNA DID NOT MATCH, THE FINGER PRINT DID NOT MATCH. IT SEEMS THAT MR GRAYSMITH HAD TUNNEL VISION AND IS TRYING HIS HARDEST TO CONVICE US THAT HE WAS ZODIAC, WHEN THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SAYS DIFFERENT. SKIP THIS BOOK, JUST BUY "ZODIAC", GRAYSMITH'S 1ST BOOK.

5 comments about Everything She Ever Wanted.

1. I was able to keep up with the order in which the events occured without much effort. That means a lot when you only have time to read a chapter before you have to go to work or other things. But one thing that did tend to drive me crazy was the author's cont. comments about the allegedly beauty of Pat Allanson. From the pictures that were in the book except for when she was three I thought maybe the author was being fecisious. Pat may not be ugly but beautiful is a little over the top. The women has buck teeth for goodness sake. And that picture of her in a two piece were not exactly model looks. I also had a hard time feeling any sympathy for her victims except the elderly ones. Her oldest daughter for example was given many clues about what her mother was doing and she chose to ignor it as did so many others. Since that was their choice I find it hard to feel sorry for them. Of course her parents got just what they deserved. Anyway except for that loved the book.



2. At first, this story would not have been interesting without Ann Rule's insights into the diabolical mind of Mary Patricia Vann Radcliffe Taylor Allanson who was always the center of attention since her infancy. Her crimes are just shocking and always selfish to best suit her needs. Never mind that she provoked her brother's suicide by outing his former girlfriend or revealing his true paternity, she manipulated her former husband to murder his own parents, she poisoned his grandparents and those she took care of. how did she get such a position when it was already known that she poisoned her husband's grandparents as well and went to jail. She is a true sociopath in the terms of Sante Kimes. You have to feel pity and admiration for Susan, the daughter, who went against the family, and even Debbie who played the dutiful daughter unaware of her mother's true intentions. Ann Rule is again in Georgia working on another true crime story. This story should be made into a movie as well. Of course, Ann has moved on with other stories but this story is with you long after you stop reading it. It's such a shame that there are no color pictures in my book but black and white. The story is long and complicated. Pat's crimes won't be forgotten. Her daughter Susan's only crime was being truthful. How she didn't get stopped before is a wonder?



3. I blame Ann Rule for making me forget all about Thomas Hardy and the 19th century and turning me to a life of crime.
   After I read her book, "The Stranger Beside Me," (about working beside Ted Bundy before he was known as our nation's first true serial killer) I was hooked on crime and non-fiction. Unfortunately, I found out that most crime writers don't write like Ann Rule. She is very special.
   True, the book "Everything She Ever Wanted" has been out for years and it doesn't need any kind of comment or review by the likes of me....But I spotted it in one of my bookshelves, took it out, thumbed through it, ended up reading it again and....There just aren't that many non-fiction crime books of the high caliber Rule sets. She is the ablsolute best. (Except for maybe that guy who wrote "Echos in the Darkness" or whatever it was called.)
   I e-mailed her once to tell her how disappointed I was by the last book (at the time) she'd written. To my shock, she e-mailed me back and in a 'round about way told me I'd hurt her feelings. Though she made me feel awful, I still think that book she wrote about the husband from San Antonio killing his wife wasn't up there compared to her others.
   "Everything She Ever Wanted" is about a woman who loves no one but herself. If she'd loved any other human as much as she loved herself, she'd been crowned a saint.



4. I've become something of an Ann Rule junkie over the last year, after friends gave me her Green River Killer book as a present during a hospital stay.
   I found myself a bit intimidated by the size of this volume. But, I dove in and was glad I did as it tuned out to be quite the page-turner.
   
   I found myself filled with all sorts of emotions while reading 'Pats' tale. Anger and disgust that she was allowed to hurt so many people. I felt a sense of incredulous humor as time after time her actions were forgiven and she continued being enabled by her family.
   I even admire her in a strange way. Despite only a tenth grade education, she was an absolute master at the art of scheming and manipulating people. Devoting as muchtime and energy into destroying others than most people put into a lifetime working 9-5. One wonders what she might have accomplished had she been given a little discipline.
   
   If this truely were a just universe, this creature would still be rotting in prison somewhere, rather than living free in Georgia.



5. The way it was written the story read like a dark comedy. For instance, when Pat Radcliffe accuses Walter Allanson of exposing himself he denies it by stating the he hasn't had sex in years because he can't get an erection...his lengthy explanation is so quirky it becomes comical. Then there's the chapter where Tom Allanson hides in a hole in the basement of his parents home, and Walter pokes him and yells to his wife "I got him trapped in the hole." All of the characters are very eccentric and quirky, and it's so hard to take them seriously because the way their actions and mannerisms are presented the story reads both bazaar and farcical. Nevertheless, Pat does indeed come off as manipulative, sinister, and evil in a very real way. I think much of the book was padded, and the story could have been told using far less space than it did.

5 comments about The Journalist and the Murderer.

1. In 1970, a respected army physician named Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald claimed that four strangers broke into his home in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and killed his wife and two daughters. Although an army tribunal tried Dr. MacDonald and cleared him, years later the case was reopened. This time, MacDonald was convicted and sent to prison, where he still is today.
   
   Janet Malcolm does not reopen the MacDonald case in her book, "The Journalist and the Murderer." Rather, she examines the issues behind a libel suit that MacDonald brought in 1984 against his supposed friend, Joe McGinnis, author of "Fatal Vision." Joe McGinniss posed as an ally of Jeffrey MacDonald for years. McGinnis lived with MacDonald for a while and even joined his defense team. McGinniss sent MacDonald sympathetic letters in support of his cause. In these letters, he frequently expressed his belief in MacDonald's innocence.
   
   It was only after "Fatal Vision" was published that MacDonald discovered the truth. McGinniss did not believe in MacDonald's innocence; on the contrary, he portrays MacDonald as a psychopathic murderer. The author posed as a friend for the sole purpose of keeping MacDonald in the dark so that McGinniss would continue to have access to his subject. "Fatal Vision" became a huge bestseller and it eventually became a miniseries.
   
   Malcolm's book, written in 1990, takes on added significance in 2003, when the ethics of journalists are under fire as never before. Time and again, a small number of journalists have been accused of plagiarizing and fabricating stories. The public is beginning to recongnize that reporters are fallible people who suffer from the same pressures, ambitions, and even psychological disorders as other ordinary mortals.
   
   Malcolm's book is not merely a condemnation of McGinniss's behavior towards MacDonald. Her premise is that the journalist's relationship to his subject is, in its very essence, a perilous one. The gullible subject babbles away to his "sympathetic" listener, revealing more of himself than he realizes. When all is said and done, only the journalist and his editors have control over the final product. They are sometimes tempted to distort the facts to make the piece more interesting.
   
   Malcolm asserts that certain journalists are con men who prey on people's loneliness, credibility, and narcissism to get a good story. Journalists have their own agendas and the "truth," which is elusive at best, is not always their top priority. Malcolm's book is a warning not to believe everything that is printed in a newspaper or a magazine, since each story is only one version of reality.



2. I'd have a bit more respect for Ms. Malcolm if:

   a) she had actually attended MacDonald vs. McGinniss, so that she could write from an informed viewpoint instead of relying on second- and third-hand accounts;

   b) she had spent less time oohing and ahhing over MacDonald's personal magnetism, and stuck to the facts of the case at hand;

   c) she had bothered to read the literary releases to McGinniss's publishing company, SIGNED BY MACDONALD HIMSELF, that gave McGinniss license to write any type of book he wished (including, one presumes, a book that might actually say that McGinniss himself had concluded that MacDonald was guilty, despite the friendship the Journalist may have felt for the Murderer);

   d) she hadn't stated - repeatedly - the total fiction that the jury hung 5-1 in MacDonald's favor. The fact is, the jury hung on ONE QUESTION OUT OF THIRTY-SEVEN, never actually voting on the other 36, because one juror believed that MacDonald had violated his agreements with McGinniss by cultivating other journalists and by ignoring his agreement not to sue McGinniss.

   Or is MacDonald next going to sue Malcolm, because in her very title, she herself calls him a murderer?

   Let's call an egg an egg, Dr. Jeff. You killed them. Pay the price. Be done with it.




3. Ms. Malcolm slices off the hand that feeds her
   
   With regard to item "a)" from "...pointless exercise," MacDonald v. McGuiness was over when Ms. Malcolm got involved. According to Fatal Justice by Palmer & Bost, McGuiness's lawyers threw a post-trial press conference for the court of public opinion: only Ms. Malcolm showed up.
   
   Otherwise, Journalist & Murderer is mainly about journalistic ethics, if there are any. Here, McGuiness insinuated himself into the defense team (he was privy to trial strategy) of Jeffrey MacDonald, with the promise presenting him in the best possible light. When McGuiness sours on MacDonald, he puts up a cheery front & presses on. After Fatal Vision, MacDonald felt betrayed.
   
   Of course, in our Cartesian-dualist society, since it's always either-or, we ask why he should feel betrayed? Guys convicted of killing their families have no reason to feel betrayed. They're bad guys; they deserve betrayal.
   
   However, when McGuiness concluded that MacDonald was guilty, trial evidence just wouldn't do. McGuiness shamefully proved himself a member of the old Star Chamber (maybe Joe expected some votes as Cheney's heir @Halliburton?) by trundling out Cleckley's (1941) old psychopathology checklist & diagnosing Dr. MacDonald an incurable, speed-fueled sociopath. Dr. Phil's forbearer: super!
   
   Ms. Malcolm is my favorite contemporary writer: she is foremost literate & like my favorite noncontemporary writer Mencken, she can be vicious without being vengeful. However, when you read, say, 1999's Sheila McGough, you may well wonder what sort of journalistic ruse Ms. Malcolm might cook up while slicing vegetables in the McGough kitchen. The Journalist & the Murderer is a blueprint for any such ruse. Better news is that after reading J&M, you can laugh without a twinge of guilt @gaudily & nightly paraded notions like "journalistic integrity."



4. Joe McGinniss put himself on the map writing the classic 1969 book, THE SELLING OF A PRESIDENT. That book detailed how Richard Nixon was sold to the public like any other consumer product. It's worth reading if you can find a copy. The Nixon book was such a hit and McGinniss was so young he couldn't find material good enough to follow it up and his next few books were mediocre.
   
   Determined to find another worthy subject, he tackled the case of Dr. Jeffrey McDonald, a man accused of killing his wife and children. That story became the bestselling FATAL VISION and this book, THE JOURNALIST AND THE MURDERER, chronicles the techniques that McGinniss used to get close to McDonald, and how he pretended to support McDonald through the years of legal proceedings although he always thought him to be guilty and wanted a guilty verdict for a better book. McGinniss' technique led to unfettered access to legal files, evidence, but most importantly access to McDonald. They'd drink together, strategize together and were pals during the experience.
   
   The central question is how far can a journalist go to get the story? Although a jury found McDonald guilty of murder, a later jury found in favor of McDonald in his suit against McGuinniss because they felt that his techniques were so underhanded and self-serving that even a murderer deserved better. The book shows the divide between the win-at-any-cost media and the public that grows weary of the techniques used against people to create news. Does the public have the right to know enough that journalists can lie to subjects to bring the story to press?
   
   This short book makes you question a number of journalistic techniques and it doesn't hurt either that McDonald has strong supporters and could possibly be innocent of the murders, at least in the context of this book.



5. This is another book I read because it is on the Modern Library's Top 100 non-fiction list. The overall topic of the book is the journalist/subject relationship, which was interesting, but I thought Malcolm could've gone a lot more in depth on the issues. She stuck only to one particular case and seemed to have been discussing more of the innocence or guilt of the subject, Macdonald, rather than fully delving into the broader issues. I thought the book would've been much more powerful if she had worked more on proving her thesis, rather than detailing the accounts of the murder trial.
   She seems to barely touch on the ideas of the original thesis, therefore ending on a very weak note.
   The only reason I would suggest this to anyone is if you are itching for a quick and somewhat-interesting, and definitely thought-provoking read.

5 comments about The Complete History of Jack the Ripper.

1. Like many others, I have been interested in the story of Jack the Ripper. When I finally decided to read about the crimes, I wanted to read only the best, most definitive account. I believe that Sugden's book fits the bill. He sticks only to the facts; when he theorizes, he presents an opposing view as well. He does not claim to know who Jack the Ripper was, but he does put forth a theory. After having finished this book, I cannot imagine that there is much of anything else to know about the case. I would highly, highly recommend this book to anyone interested in reading an emotionless, fact-filled book about Jack the Ripper to pick this one up.



2. First let me state the categories of people who should (please note the emphasis) study (not 'read') this book: -
   1. Anybody who is interested in the any or all of the following: the Whitechappel killings, the subsequent frenzy, investigation into the murders, armchair investigations by "Mycroft" wannabes, and the literally literary withchhunt being carried out over the past century & more to "unmask" the killer;
   2. Anybody who is interested in understanding the socio-economic dynamics of the world's largest, richest, proudest and yet ruthlessly exploitative (of its own citizens, esp. the young and the women) city at that point of time when the nails were finally being hammered into the coffin of the 19th Century that had experienced the pinnacle of British glory;
   3. Anybody who, after being overfed on the serial killers (Hannibal et.al) produced by the "hot" American novelists, actually wishes to know how it is like to be chasing a black cat in an enormous dark cavern while blindfolded;
   4. Anybody who actually thinks that "the truth" might have been out there at some stage, but even with a centuries old "cold" case something can be done (unlike some trashy attempt sub-titled: "CASE CLOSED").
   
   This book is not only accurate and free from all the popular & obscure misconceptions, it is also a living proof that history can be made more attactive than fiction while staying rigorously free from falsehoods. Recommended to everybody belonging to the afore-mentioned 4 categories as well as to all who, after reading some new adventure pitting Sherlock Holmes against Jack the Ripper, start pondering over "what if.."-s.



3. I got interested in this book knowing that I was soon going to see the JtR exhibit in London, so I started reading it before I left on my trip. Unfortunately, when I got to the actual exhibit in July of `08, there was little there that the book hadn't covered--although I got to see some of the original police reports, the Ripper letters, and an interesting timeline display of suspects (most recently added to in 2007). This book is organized in such a way that it gives an intimate profile of both the victims and the suspects and the crimes themselves--which were truly horrific. The author relies mainly on contemporary sources, yet certain references make you aware that he has pawed over other accounts proclaiming "evidence" in order to separate the wheat from the chaff. So what you get is real scholarship, of a sort, and the author's best guess at the end as to Jack's identity. The many photos in this book also help to tell this unhappy story. Will this mystery ever be solved? I doubt it, having read how many missing pieces there are . . .



4. There's not a lot I can add to the great reviews other people have given it except to say that this book, while not being released as recently as some others, is still essential reading for anyone with an interest in the facts about the Jack the Ripper case. Sugden is a historian with impeccable credentials and research skills whose insights are a welcome addition to Ripperology.



5. This book is very detailed but you have to be wary of the slants. Sugden writes witness Matthew Packer down and dismisses his important testimony, and he also leaves out an important section of a letter that was published in the Telegraph in November which alludes to the capture of the killer (the "hideous bellowing of the news boys" letter). He also gets the Hanbury Street writing wrong. This was "Five - another fifteen and I give myself up." Sugden has it has "Four - another sixteen and I give myself up" - an absurd message which gets the total right but has changed the compenents to fit the assumption that the Fairy Fay murder did not happen. I find the book fairly morbid and irksome to read, and this is not because of the fascinating subject matter but the way that it is written. This subject needs a sharp-eyed Daniel Defoe, or a Jack the Ripper A-Z with all the rubbish taken out.

5 comments about Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows.

1. I read Juanita Brooke's Mountain Meadow Massacre several years ago and decided to follow up with this book to see what if anything was different. This book actually compliments the work of Ms. Brooke's. It includes much more detail and as the author indicated does give many new insights not previously available.
   
   It is certainly a disturbing chapter in Mormon history and certainly made me think. I highly recommend this book to any person looking for honest information regarding this incident.



2. The book, _Blood of the Prophets_ was unfortunately written by a 'for hire' author with an a priori conclusion that, in Will Bagley's words, would "pin it on Brigham Young". When you pour your research into an anti-Mormon polemic, it tends to be wasted taint and that's what we've gotten here.



3. I was hopeful of getting a straight story of what happened at Mountain Meadows when I read this book. My ancestor is involved. Bagley warned that if the reader came to read about the "Saints" this and the "Saints" that, then the reader would be disappointed. I was excited about reading a balanced and unbiased story. I checked it out of the public library. I did not see the biased word "Saints" but I did read a very biased book.
   
   
   I am not a big conspiracy person. However, Bagley's conspiracy goes like this:
   
   1. The much beloved Parley P. Pratt is murdered.
   2. Two Mormon men see the "Arkansas" party leave.
   3. They notify the Utah Mormons that the wagon train is on the way.
   4. The Mormons want to take revenge for Parley P. Pratt's murder
   5. The apostle Charles C. Rich (my ancestor) kicks them out of Salt Lake. He sets in motion the conspiracy and tells them not to take the route that the Donner Party took but rather to go to Mountain Meadows.
   6. There Brigham Young has devised a plan to murder all in the wagon train.
   7. (By all accounts) About 50 Mormon men (remember no Indians) are led by Lee, a somewhat less of a leader. These 50 men (remember no Indians) keep tough wagon train men with guns pinned down for several days. (That would be tough. I've been there. There were more trees back then.)
   8. No attempt is made to cover up the crime site. (The bodies were just left)
   9. A very weak story is contrived to explain how everyone in the wagon train was murdered.
   10. It doesn't take long for the real story to come out.
   11. Still the crime site is not cleaned up. The US Army does that later.
   
   I am not a conspiracy person. I feel Oswald acted alone when he killed Kennedy.
   I do not think there was a conspiracy to kill everyone in the wagon train. It is silly, nonsensical, and intellectually offensive to say that Brigham Young ordered the massacre. Such people put themselves in the same class as the Kennedy conspiracy theorists.
   
   What made Bagley write this?
   
   1. I think he has issues with his Mormon past. He hints of it in his writing.
   2. He "does not like Brigham Young". It is probably not a good idea to write a book if you feel that way. The best Hitler books are balanced. Bagley's book is not balanced. He all but admits it.
   
   Conclusion: Bagley blew it. He wrote an implausible book based on an unlikely conspiracy. He started out with the goal of pinning it on Brigham Young. This reveals a bias..
   
   The conspiracy that is the foundation of his book is not supported by other unbiased historians.
   A recent book, The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Vincent Bugliosi, put to rest the Kennedy conspiracy. The upcoming book by Turley will hopefully put to rest the Bagley conspiracy.



4. Book is in A-1 condition; arrived earlier than expected. Has the perfect information required for a graduate history class I am taking at Western New Mexico University. Truths finally being told by historians is a welcome sight.
   mitchell



5. i found a reference to this in re-reading Krakauer's Under the Banner of Heaven. Juanita Brooks' Mountain Meadows Massacre had been, for me, the bible about these doings. Bagley has gained access to additional information (eg, letters, meeting notes, etc) and fleshes out the context of the ongoing disputes (from the midwest to the west) in a thorough way, giving me a better understanding of both perspectives. It is a more "academic" book than Brooks'; I wouldn't dispense with either.
   
   Just FYI, my interest in this is based on the decade-plus later murder of the Howland brothers and Bill Dunn* in the "wardhouse" in Toquerville, Utah, on the supposition that they were investigating the MM Massacre. I was disappointed that Bagley didn't get into this.
   
   *the Howlands and Dunn had left the Powell expedition through the Grand Canyon.

5 comments about When Men Become Gods: Mormon Polygamist Warren Jeffs, His Cult of Fear, and the Women Who Fought Back.

1. This book was done before the April, 2008 raid on the FLDS property near San Angelo, Texas, which put the cult back in the news again following the events depicted here. It is essential background in understanding how the Texas stronghold of this religious sect might play out. Why this group appeals to women at all is a mystery to me, but it seems like a good deal for a man, as long as he does NOT cross the self-annointed prophet, who functions as God on earth to the thousands of members. The man can have many women, including teens. The women, or "wives" in a non-legal, spiritual sense, can't contradict or refuse to service their husbands or especially decline to let the husband accept another "wife" into the family. You've heard the name Warren Jeffs, the now disgraced prophet, but this book tells you about his damaged personality, his crimes against his followers, and his short time as the supreme leader. One surprise is that many of the people still living in the twin cities of Hildale, Utah and Colorado City, Arizona, the original home of the FLDS, are no longer following the Jeffs' prophet-producing line, or taking underage girls to bed. That's good news. The bad news is that many living members apparently practiced pedophilia, incest, and (in effect) pimping their daughters to curry favor, while abandoning and rejecting their teen sons in order to make more girls available for older men. It is unlikely many of them will ever be prosecuted in this life. If you have even a casual interest in the doings of the FLDS cult, this book will be useful to you. We have not yet figured out why so many people are susceptible to the divine claims of the David Koresh/Jim Jones/Warren Jeffs brand of psychopathology, and this volume does not address that question except to note that if you are born into that belief system, and isolated enough so that contrary views are never presented to you, it is pretty damn hard to break out. The HBO series "Big Love", about a man with three families in an urban setting, is well-written and well-acted by beautiful men and women. Some of the secondary characters represent the darker side of fundamentalist LDS life. This book presents more about the less pleasant folks, and less prominent are the articulate, educated plural wives and hard-working husbands seen in the television show.



2. Warren Jeffs is indeed a twisted man. But the author is either ignorant or has an unexpressed agenda. I've done some reading on the Mormon's enough to know that they excommunicate polygamists like Jeffs, or in his case, his father who started this sect.
   
   So, to include in the title of the book the phrase "mormon polygamist Warren Jeffs" is misleading. In fact, I understand it to be an oxymoron -- once a mormon becomes a polygamist, he is excommunicated, so can no longer call himself a mormon (since "mormon" refers to the Church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints -- the one with HQ in salt lake). But then again, the author may have done so purposely in order to sell more books which, after all, is the objective, true?
   
   I would look elsewhere for info on these Fundamentalist LDS groups and for info on the Mormons themselves.



3. First of all, I need to point out that indeed Warren Jeffs is not a "Mormon Polygamoust." He is a fundamentalist Mormon, which the author does enforce many times throughout the book. I wonder why this is part of the title...
   
   Anyway, I found this book very objectively written, and very respectful of the FLDS members themselves, which I applaud fullheartedly, however, the book wasn't as interesting as I expected it to be. It was full of legal jargon and drawn out courtroom scenes.
   
   This is certainly worth the read if you have read "Stolen Innocence" by Elissa Wall. It puts her story in a different light and very interesting to compare the two books.



4. I know, I know, I should wait until I finish reading this. But I am 2/3 of the way through this book, and it gets better every day. I can't wait another moment. I bought it because I worked with Mr. Singular in Denver 25 years ago. He was a great writer then, and he's better now.
   
   This book goes way beyond everyone's repulsion at the sex-with-a-minor charges or the polygamist-cult aversions most of us have. It drills way down into the history of all of the players in this drama. A saga like this doesn't grow and build for as many years as this one has unless it's complex and has a huge cast of characters with a variety of needs/lusts.
   
   It covers the willingness of the U.S. government to turn a blind eye for many decades (and still seems to be doing so, in many cases). It names names, and introduces us to the people who got passionately involved in exposing Jeffs and his cohorts for what they really stand for. And, perhaps best of all, Singular tells us the stories of the women who were (are) victimized by this man and his way of life. It shows us how they each came to the realization that the way of life they'd grown up with was wrong, and how they extricated themselves. It introduces us to others who have come in from the outside to protect them, and why.
   
   This freak has affected so many people--Singular also goes into great detail about the society of "Lost Boys"--countless "useless" male teens (these communities have an excess of men, who are useless because they can't carry children) he threw out of their homes and cast into the streets with no education, no skills, and no normal socialization experience--and the efforts to save them. Efforts that seem to be working.
   
   Others have written books on this subject, but I venture to say this is the best researched and most detailed. This book shows us how easily a religion becomes a cult. At the end of it all, which religion doesn't have a dark side?



5. The author explains how the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints (FLDS) church began. When people began following the teachings of Joseph Smith, and believed him to be a Prophet of God, they followed his teachings and were polygamists, because Smith told the people that a revelation from God told him that men were to take multiple wives in order to build up the kindom of God by allowing unborn soles bodies in which to incarnate. This continued until the United States outlawed multiple wives and began to imprison men who were practicing this. At that time the standing leader of the LDS (Mormons) said he had had a revelation from God that pologamy would no longer be accepted.
   
   Many men and women did not believe these revelations, and moved around hiding their pologmany. From this, two cities on the borderline of Colorado and Arizona were "born," and the people migrated to this region. Nestled away near the desert, this group lived in peace for years under the leadership of a President AND several men who made up the governing board of the FLDS church. Problems existed for women and children even with the governing body.
   
   Warren Jeff's was a man who liked to study Hitler, and how he controlled his victims. As the elder men died, Jeff's was put in as the current Prophet. Jeff's was able to disolve all the committee men, and ruled himself with no one watching what he was doing. Under his leadership, the people lived in total fear. All their money was taken and placed in a community fund that Jeff's controlled. Children were molested by Jeffs, both boys and girls, and it was not uncommon for him to knock on a member's door and demand they allow their 13 or 14 year old daughter to marry someone HE had picked out, stating that God directed him.
   
   During his reign, all pets were taken out of town and killed on one day, boys were kicked out literally on the streets for minor offenses in order to keep the young girls available to be married to old men.
   
   The police force, judge, county government, etc were all FLDS members and ruled by Jeffs. Men who complained were sent packing, and their wives and children were given to other men.
   
   Men, boys, women and young girls began to speak out, and eventually the FBI became involved.
   
   The author tells the story well, ending with the conviction of Jeff's for the rape of two 14 year old girls, and sodomizing a boy. It is well written, interestering, and answers a lot of questions that arose recently with the government taking 400 children from the compound.

5 comments about The Silent Don: The Criminal Underworld of Santo Trafficante Jr..

1. For those who don't know, Santo Trafficante, Jr., was the Mob boss of the Tampa, Florida area from at least the late 50s to his death in the 1980s, and he may have had some sort of connection with JFK's assassination. Scott Deitche does a marvelous job of giving us his background and details about his life, as well as other incidents in the Tampa crime family during his reign.
   
   Deitche's second book is very impressive. He has shown tremendous growth and uses a wealth of primary sources, including oral interviews of living relatives of deceased mobsters. For the researcher, the endnotes are greatly appreciated. As far as writing style, it's almost academic compared to the informal style of his first book. So if you want to know what went on in the field of Florida organized crime in the second half of the twentieth century, this is the book for you. If you are just interested in true crime, this is also for you. And for those interested in Tampa or Florida history, I think you will enjoy it too.



2. certainly worth reading if you like digging a bit deeper into the Mafia literature. Trafficante usually figures as a minor character in other books, so I was glad to learn more about him. I wouldn't call this a great read, though. There are a number of references to "Mob Lawyer," Selwynn Raab's biography of Ragano, Trafficante's lawyer. Haven't read that yet, but have read Raab's "Five Families," which I can highly recommend as being very well-written & informative. Most bothersome to me about "Silent Don" was the index - the page references were off on every single entry - and I checked dozens. There was some regularity to the discrepancy, but it was a real pain to work around.



3. "The Silent Don" is the story of Santo Trafficante, longtime Mafia boss of South Florida. SD provides an endless parade of mafiadom, crime personalities and corrupt officials. Author Deitche has certainly done his homework. Like a good reporter, the author buttresses his text with piles of references and footnotes, almost to the point of overkill. SD touches many the many bases of Trafficante's line of work, but two chapters stand out: 1) Chapter 6 deals with the "good old days" in Havana before Fidel Castro overthrew the place, closed the casinos and kicked the mob out. What a fun, free wheeling, anything goes place Havana must have been-and how profitable for the bosses like ST. One wishes this fascinating sector had been longer. 2) Chapter 15 takes us to, if not down, the slippery slope of the JFK assassination and the Mob's involvement with that treacherous act. Did Trafficante REALLY confess his role in the JFK murder to his lawyer? Deitche suggests so. Or, as the author also hints, was Carlos Marcello, Mafia boss of New Orleans, behind the JFK hit? Marcello controlled Dallas in those days. Perhaps it was that eponymous bunch of "rogue" CIA agents harboring grudges from the Bay of Pigs fiasco? Again, one wishes for more concrete evidence, however fascinating the speculation. The final call on SD makes a 5 star rating impossible. Deitche would have served his readers better had he narrowed the scope of the text rather than covering so many of ST's criminal activities. Also, the typesetting is wearying: Paragraphs need to be better spaced. Physical layout is a problem here and the footnoting is awkward. Do we need 536 of them in a 229 page book? A good stern editor with a sharp blue pencil could have tidied up the text, but those guys were laid off years ago! That kvetching aside, SD remains an entertaining 4 star story. This is only a first edition; perhaps future printings can address the housekeeping issues. That might nudge "Silent Don" up into the 5 star category.



4. Being from Tampa I've been looking all over for info on the 400 pound elephant in this town. People still whisper his name around here as if he's going to come back from the grave and seek revenge on them. My parents used to tell me stories about him and his family's activities in our "hood"(it sure as hell wasn't happening in his neighborhood). Hell, he's buried less than a mile from where I live, along with majority of his "family members". So let's just say his presence still seems to loom over Tampa. But the old guard of Tampa just tries to forget the past, especially "his" past. Finally, this author comes with some juicy details from the exploits of Santo Trafficante Jr. Everything from his father's start, Santo Sr., to Cuba, to Appalachian, to La Stella, Bay of Pigs, Hoffa, all the way to JFK. Not to mention Donnie Brasco. This book was a huge bounce back from CIGAR CITY MAFIA, and will not dissappoint. GREAT JOB SCOTT!! Now give us something on Charlie Wall or Primo Lazzara. Hell, I'll buy it.



5. The author's second book on the history of the Tampa (Florida) Mob does not disappoint. As great a read as his first book, Cigar City Mafia. Keep writing them Scott and Ill continue buying them!

5 comments about Devil's Knot: The True Story of the West Memphis Three.

1. Since I watched Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills, I have been learning what I could about the case of Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelly ("The West Memphis Three"), and Mara Leveritt's book compiles a vast amount of information on the case-- a case that just gets stranger at every turn.
   
   The major drawback I could see was that Leveritt seems to assume the three are innocent. I lean toward thinking that they are, but there are still some odd facts that need to be resolved for me to completely believe that they are. She hints at the fact that there is evidence pointing to the teens' guilt, but also points out that, frustratingly, the police investigators who hint at this refuse to speak openly about it. Whether or not they are guilty, the amount of secrecy, bungling, and prejudice surrounding this case is infuriating, and all but unbelievable in a country where citizens, if they are to be sentenced, must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Leveritt also weakens her argument by focusing on John Mark Byers, stepfather of one of the victims, as one of the only other suspects. Byers has certainly lived an outlaw's life, and made many bizarre and self-incriminating statements (for instance, that he himself had been tortured as a child in a way that was very similar to the way the three 8-year-old boys were murdered). However, recent DNA evidence seems to link Terry Hobbs (stepfather of another of the victims) to the scene of the crime, but he is hardly mentioned in Leveritt's book. In all fairness, she couldn't have foreseen this development, but I hoped that she would investigate each of the victims' families in more depth.
   
   I highly recommend this book, mostly because I would like people to know about the case of the West Memphis Three, but also because the case is well-told and highly interesting.



2. A must read for anyone that is familiar with this tragic story. Very well written. FREE THE WEST MEMPHIS 3 and find the real killers of these little boys.



3. If Damien looked like Franken-Byers instead of the lead singer of Good Charlotte, not one of these "activists" would have lifted their heads from their soy lattes to take a second look at this case. Not that they looked at the facts anyway.



4. I wouldn't read JUST one book and decide if three convicted teenagers were innocent, but I could (and will) make a good judgment on all the adults involved in this case of three teenagers accused and convicted of murdering three eight-year-old boys in West Memphis, Ark. All the adults should be ashamed of themselves--including the police, the lawyers, the judges, the parents, and a couple of the witnesses.
   
   And certainly the three convicted teenagers deserve new trials.
   
   Leveritt's story is good, although I believe that a good TIMELINE of all events would have served the reader better. I used a calendar to note dates of events on each character in the story and some of events make no sense. However, that said, the police did not make a case against the accused. Their chief witness was another child named Aaron Hutchinson, who supposedly witnessed the crime, although he was spared death. And he was never called to testify. The other evidence was the confession of Jessie Misskelley, an angry, confused young boy of seventeen, whose outlook on life was that of a eight-year-old, too.
   
   What lies beneath all this mess is Ignorance, Poverty, and Pain. The three murder victims were killed in a wooded area near their homes, yet, even with all the writings, we do not know how they were really killed. Who could re-enact the crime? Who could explain a timeline of events on how these children were killed, their clothes stripped, their bikes dumped. Two drowned. One bled to death. But how? They don't even know when? [There are some great photos of the crime scene online.]
   
   And what is the timeline on the accused and convicted? Where were the three accused when the murder victims were let out of school. How did they get to the wooded area without being seen? How long did it take the accused and convicted to carry out the events, how did they, and then make their escape, without being seen or heard, in a small wooded area that is more or less about 2 acres of land between a subdivision and an Interstate service road.
   
   The emotional pain that all of the children in this story suffered is a crime in itself.
   
   This whole case needs to be redone, not just for those convicted, but for the murdered boys, for the self-respect of a police department that was unable to serve its community, and the JUDGE!--who still sits in judgment on this case after all these years! Let someone else make a decision.
   
   All the boys, the accused and convicted and the three murder victims need a fresh look. I live in north Mississippi. After reading this book, I've decided to go take a look at the scene myself. Whatever really happened, the trials were indeed like witchhunts, along with hysteria, and some of the evidence being who owned how many black T-Shirts!
   
   Lastly, the why? That's too long a post. But why did this all happen--the murders, the shoddy investigation, the trials with talk of Satan, Sodomy, and black T-Shirts?



5. The author has a way of keeping the reader informed and not overwhelmed. With so many names and locations, a huge amount of confusion is likely but doesn't happen.
   I feel well informed about a troubling case. I highly recommend you read this book.

5 comments about Savage Grace: The True Story of Fatal Relations in a Rich and Famous American Family.

1. A biography is written by an author, a biographer. This is a compilation of transcribed interviews and letters. This book was not written, it was compiled. An amazing family tragedy, however the format of the book made it confusing, boring and frustrating to read. Oh if only Dominick Dunne had chosen to write about this family, a page turner it would have been. Don't waste your money.



2. I bought this book for beach reading, and was buried in it until the last page. I could not put it down. Contrary to what some have said, I found the format very easy to follow, and in fact very creatively composed. Just when you're scratching your head about something, it's answered in the next entry. Coincidentally, after reading through the first few pages, I came to find out that one of the main contributors used to be my landlady- not long after the book was originally published. I thought she was wacky back then, and now I realize that she was from a world far weirder than I could have ever imagined! This book is definitely a testament to the saying, truth is stranger than fiction.... MUCH stranger!



3. This excellent oral history Natalie Robins and Steven M. Aronson of the doomed Bake-lite plastic heir Tony Baekeland (and of his beautiful mother Barbara, whom he slept with and later stabbed to death) has been enjoying renewed interest since the release of Tom Kalin's beautiful but somewhat limp film adaptation of it starring Julianne Moore. I came to the book through the movie, but the book is so much more interesting than the film version that in many ways it puts it to shame. Robins and Aronson wrest a compelling and very trickily wrought narrative arc out of their archive of letters, hospital reports, police accounts, and interviews: we start with Barbara Baekeland's stabbing in 1972, and the narrative follows both Tony's progress through the courts, the Broadmoor mental hospital in England, and then through his almost inexplicable release from incarceration back to the United States where tragedy inevitably strikes a second time and then a third; all the while, the authors follow a wider narrative path by describing how the great chemist Leo Baekeland invented Bake-lite, the first practical plastic, decades earlier, and how his own problems with his socialite wife repeated with his son George and then with his grandson Brooks, who married the beautiful Bostonian model Barbara Daly. As Brooks and Barbara race from Cadaques to Mallorca to London to Paris, hanging out with the moneyed European expatriate crowd (they numbered among their friends the writers James Jones and William Styron, the heiress Ethel Woodward de Croisset, and all kinds of minor princelings and society doyennes), their marriage begins to crumble... with their only child Tony being alternately smothered with attention and then neglected.
   
   The suspense about what's going to happen as Tony's schizophrenic behavior keeps exploding rachets this oral biography even above more famous works such as Jean Stein and George Plimpton's EDIE and Plimpton's TRUMAN CAPOTE. Moreover, the kind of demimonde the Baekelands move through is absolutely fascinating, although the constant snobbishness, pretentiousness, and absolute refusal to take responsibility for anything among their circle begins to drive you to distraction after a good while. Most maddening of all is Brooks Baekeland himself, whose voice dominates more than any other this oral history (since of course of all the surviving characters he was closest to the epicenter), constantly excoriating his son for all the traits he himself exemplified: arrogance, dilettantism, and concupiscence. This book brings you into a heightened and fragile jetsetters' world you may have longed to see, but in then quickly makes you glad you were never a part of it.



4. I thought this would be a fascinating read. Not so. It is simply one statement after another by different people regarding the Baekland family. These statements do not tie together smoothly, nothing to keep a good rhythm or flow. Turns a fascinating subject into a boring read. The book is as interesting as a police report.



5. Savage Grace is a riveting, oral history of the Baekland dynasty that started with so much promise, and ended with a tragedy. It begins in the 1970s with the murder of Barbara Baekeland by her son, Anthony Baekeland. It then delves into the history of Bakelite (a plastic)which was invented by the GreatGRandfather of the family Leo Hendrik Baekeland in the early 20th century. This invention made the family very wealthy (and was also used in the atomic bomb, I had no idea of this until I read the book). The book discusses Brook Baekeland, Leo Baekeland's Grandson in detail and his excessive spending and aimlessness. He marries Barbara Daly, and the marriage is a disaster. Barbara Daly-Baekeland has a personality disorder and is a spendthrift social climber. She smothers her son, Anthony, a gentle soul who is eventually diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, and does not accept his homosexuality (to the extent that it is commented on by several people interviewed that Anthony reported sleeping with her). The FAther Brooks BAekeland does not accept his son's personality so he neglects his son. It discusses the decadence and decline of this family, which culminates in the murder of Barbara Baekeland by Anthony.
   I originally read this book when I was in high school and did not finish it due to not understanding the oral narrative style the authors chose to use. I recently picked this book up and finished it due to the movie on HBO that was released last year. It was beyond my comprehension in high school, but now that I am older I appreciate it.
   This book has everything someone interested in true crime would like. Incest, murder, untreated mental illness, scandal, social climbing, celebrities, and american and european nobilty appear in abundance in this sad tale. This book is up there with the other true crime greats Helter Skelter, and Fatal Vision. It is a classic that is well worth your time.