1 comments about Into the Minds of Madmen: How the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit Revolutionized Crime Investigation.

1. Many true crime fans, myself included, have torn through the books by John Douglas and other ex-members of the Behavioral Sciences Unit or BSU. We marveled at their ability to deduce intricate details of a killer's personality and lifestyle from the type of crimes they committed. We read with wonder at how they became almost overnight sensations after helping catch Wayne Williams, the man convicted of the Atlanta Child Murders.
   
   Movies have also engrained them in our psyche. From Silence of the Lambs and Manhunter, we see these men as brave, driven, and inteligent almost to the point of clairvoyance.
   
   But what are these men really like, behind closed doors? And how did they come to form the group that law enforcement agencies and laypeople alike admire and respect?
   
   That is where Into the Minds of Madmen starts. It is not a book filled with chapter after chapter of car chases, midnight plane rides, or stakeouts to catch a serial killer. Instead it deals with the minutiae of how the Behavioral Science Unit came into being.
   
   Granted, there are stories of how the team of "profilers" worked on several cases. But the goal of this book, as they state clearly in the forward is not to "resort to retelling the same sensational serial-killing stories," but instead to tell of the formation of a group that would revolutionize crime scene investigation and the methods used to catch serial offenders.
   
   I will admit, the book can be a bit bland at times. But there is a lot of history contained in these pages, history you won't probably find anywhere else. And several of the men who spoke with DeNevi and Campbell, agents who worked in the early years of the unit, give a hint at some of the theories, books, and studies they read, which led them to create this new method of criminal investigation.
   
   For those folks that are truly interested in the BSU, not just the thrilling stories, this is a must-read. The history contained here and the chance to get a glimpse into what made these men tick, how they developed the advanced procedures and methods almost taken for granted today, will give you a newfound respect for these men who blazed a trail that has given us all a better feeling of security.

3 comments about The Unmasking: Married to a Rapist.

1. This was a good book with alot of detail,it also goes back into his childhood which tells you alot about his behavior.I could pick this book up again and read it in a couple of years and still get into it.Is what I really like about it is that alot of it comes from his own mouth and he is very honest with his feelings.The writeing is really good and don't run on and on saying the same thing over and over but a different way.I almost wish that this guy could of found a cure for his behavior,he seemed to be sorry for what he did and you could tell felt bad about his actions.Although he's not to be trusted on the pages it just drawls you into how bad he really feels.



2. I haven't always looked at this story as a five star story - especially since the drama is my own. Now, 25 years after the fact, I can say that this experience - while utterly horrible and disruptive of our lives - has made me into the woman I am today. For that I am thankful.
   
   In August of 2007 Eddie is still in prison. Diana is married, a wonderful mom, and working on her masters degree in counseling. Paul is unmarried and busy with his life. Both have had to face their past and it has not been an easy task. Both Paul and Diana are still the loves of my life. The Unmasking is "our" story. I don't regret the sharing of it - though it was very painful. You need to know, we made it! There has been life after the nightmare. God is still good. Ronda (Wyatt) Knuth



3. In THE RAPIST, Kevin Flynn has produced an intelligent and professionally written account of the marriage of Eddie and Ronda Wyatt. Eddie, a criminally delinquent teenager from Galveston, TX, who became "saved" while in prison, married Ronda after meeting her at a Christian outreach center in Dallas. Though he apparently tried hard to quell his demons, Eddie eventually resumed his lifelong profession of burglary, adding a more mature touch by including rape in his repertoire.
   Ronda, a Godly, naive, and insecure individual, was unaware of Eddie's criminal behavior and felt guiltily responsible for the obvious downturn in their marriage. I will not write more about the plot so as not to spoil the story for any potential readers.
   
   Kevin Flynn has done a good job here. The book flows well and is an easy and compelling read. The backgrounds of both Wyatts are well researched, and the primary sources of Flynn's material are interviews with Eddie and, especially, Ronda. Flynn makes extensive use of material quoted from Ronda's journals as a sort of touchstone for the narrative, and it is only here that I have any criticism of THE UNMASKING. While I have no problem with the device itself, Ronda's journal entries are, to me as a reader, all virtually the same, and they quickly become boring since basically all Ronda does is bemoan her feelings of failure as a wife and ask for God's help in becoming a better person. I don't wish to diminish the horrible trauma Ronda Wyatt suffered upon learning that she had been deceived for seven years by her rapist husband, but I found her, as presented in the book, to be a kind but not especially interesting person.
   
   Nonetheless, THE UNMASKING is quality true crime, and fans of the genre should like it.

5 comments about Blood Lust: Portrait of a Serial Sex Killer (Onyx).

1. Blood Lust centers around the story of Dayton Leroy Rogers, respected businessman and father from Portland Oregon who had a 2nd life as a serial killer at night. The things he did to these girls you wouldnt beleive and the story tells what he did and how he eventually got caught and the horrific things they found. Overall , great read - i read whole book in less than a day. Great for crime lovers.



2. 
   
   
   "Blood Lust" represents good no nonsense true crime about a serial killer in Oregon. That seemingly peaceful and scenic State certainly has had more than its' share of sickos, as TC aficionados (and no doubt the natives) are well aware. In BL, the protagonist is one Dayton Leroy Rogers who killed and mutilated eight young Portland area women in the mid 1980s. There is little suspense here. The killer is identified from the outset. The reader's interest will revolve around the portrayal of the gruesome manners of the young ladies' deaths and how the local authorities find the corpses and compile their case against Rogers. Author Gary King strikes a solid balance between crime reporting and the human suffering of the victims. Since the perpetrator is known, readers may ignore the "Ann Rule rule" and peruse the centerfold where pictures of the demised humanize them. It's chilling to think that most likely there are more female of Rogers' victims somewhere in this vast area. This reviewer visited Oregon recently and appreciates how rural the state is once one leaves the Portland/Seattle metroplex and the I5 corridor. 12 reprintings since 1992 are a testimony to the obvious and well-deserved popularity of "Blood Lust".



3. Well Gary... What about this? "The author sometimes stretches the narrative, offering interior monologue from Rogers even though the killer, who is now on death row, hasn't spoken to him or investigators". Do you not think that maybe just maybe there is an entirely different story to this case? I assure you that there is. It is going to be coming out soon.............. :-)
   By the way.... I am Kathy and I DO know what REALLY happened up there in that forest. ;)



4. This book is horrible, and that is only talking of the first few chapeters. The writer talks of the victims as trash, and does not honor their memory or the fact that they were living people, with families that loved them. A true waste of paper, ink, and time.



5. Gary C. King is truly a well-known crime author. This book is probably one of the first that I have read and it's an easy read. He does explain how a man emerged from respected citizen to a serial killer with a deadly lust for blood, torture, and terror of innocent women who didn't deserve the horror. Granted, all of his victims were prostitutes which happen to be the top victims in serial killer cases like Ridgway and Dayton Rogers. He made a mistake and it caught up with him with many victims such as prostitutes who came forward with their tales of torture to frighten the most harden of criminals. King writes the story to explain the discovery and that the first victim that wasn't laid in his unofficial burial ground. Unlike Bundy and Ridgway who returned to visit their victims after their murder, Dayton left them to rot away and not be discovered. These women were mothers, daughters, sisters, wives, and yet they had their share of problems such as drug addiction, alcoholism, prostitution, and poverty.

5 comments about Takedown: The Pursuit and Capture of Kevin Mitnick, America's Most Wanted Computer Outlaw-By the Man Who Did It.

1. This book was painful to read. It is poorly written drivel. If you are truly interested in the topic, there are much better books written on Mitnick, Hacking/Phreaking, and/or computer security issues. With every paragraph that Shimomura writes about his love life (and there are plenty of them,) the book, (although calling it that is insulting to other books) continues on a long downward spiral into the absolute load of poop that it is. I feel sorry that paper was wasted to create this mess. I cannot believe I wasted several hours of my life reading this.



2. Fans of the Kevin Mitnick mythos will have a ball with this book dissecting everything that's wrong here. In the process of tracking Mitnick, Shimomura (and another important name, Markoff, whose relationship with Mitnick would be laughable if it didn't violate every concievable rule of morality) basically took free leave of both the law and personal decency. Mitnick became a "thing", and the two of them pushed that image of Mitnick to cover up the legal mess they would have been in if they'd been tracking some average Joe instead of Kevin Mitnick: The Man, The Myth, The Legend (again, an image which these two men essentially created).
   
   It's amazing to see how egotistical Shimomura is willing to be on the issue, and as noted by others, he shows this off in spades in this book. Shimomura and Markoff boh essentially believe that they are the lone men responsible for the takedown and capture of Mitnick, and that not even the dozens (hundreds?) of security firms and companies who spent millions of their own money tracking Mitnick deserve any credit at all. And in a sense, they are mostly correct- we wouldn't be talking about Mitnick today if Markoff and Shimomura weren't working so desperately hard to make money off of this story.
   
   If you're a fan of Mitnick, skip this book just because you don't want to give this man any royalties. If you're a fan of reading, skip this book because it's core is a mess of egotism. The only real reason to pick this up is if you have an insatiable urge to know every detail of this story that you can possibly get your hands on- in which case, it is another piece to the puzzle.
   
   I reccomend that interested parties check out Mitnick's own books: "Deception..." and "Intrusion...", as well as the fan favorite Jonathan Littman's "Fugitive Game".



3. I have The Fugitive and Takedown (this book) sitting in my room now. I borrowed both of them simultaneously. I had only heard of Mitnick before in anecdotes, and I thought it would be interesting to get both viewpoints.
   
   I started reading the Fugitive, but found it to read like a cheap B novel. The story jumped around in some sort of "stylistic" way that made it a bit incomprehensible and not very entertaining. There was a lack of coherence that made you wonder where it wwas going. The author also seemed to think that mentioning a lot of sex and drugs was the only way to keep the reader's attention.
   
   So about 80 pages through, I switched to Takedown, and finished it. I found it to be much better written and very engaging.
   
   All the negative reviews here are due to the fact that a lot of online people worship Mitnick, for some reason. I find him an interesting character, and definitely a skilled con-man. But he's no hero, no invincible genius.
   
   Shimomura can definitely be egotistical depending on your viewpoint, but it didn't bother me. It doesn't get in the way of the story, which was told beautifully and naturally.
   
   The story is engaging enough without having to dress it up in sensationalism. I'll have to go finish the Fugitive now to see if it can redeem itself.



4. Tedious, self-indulgent subplots. I dont care about Julia. No one cares about Julia. No one cares about where you eat or where you rent a car. These subplots REALLY screw-up the read. But the computer stuff is interesting enough. But somebody, please, toss Julia overboard.



5. Shimomura teamed up to write the most trivial, and boring details in this book about himself, and when he wasn't doing that, he was making up things about Kevin Mitnick. He never met Kevin Mitnick, he never knew Kevin Mitnick, he never had anything to do with Kevin Mitnick other than helping track him down because he was starved for attention and wanted to look like some super computer hero. Almost nothing in this book actually happened, I say almost because the only stuff that did actually happen were the trivial mundane details about Shumomura himself. Don't waste your time reading this sensationalist, tabloidian, garbage.

5 comments about Fire Lover: A True Story.

1. This is the first Wambaugh book that I've read. I've heard lots of good things about his books. I work in law enforcement and have enjoyed other true crime books written by former law enforcement personnel, so thought I would Wambaugh as well. I had seen the documentary about John Orr and wanted to know more.

   However, although the author is an excellent writer, this book was very biased and Wambaugh comes across to me as very arrogant -- a trait that I cannot tolerate under any circumstance. In fact, his bias that police officers are better than firefighters is downright cocky.

   Although I knew the story of John Orr and felt he was guilty, while reading Fire Lover, I found myself wanting him to get off from page to page because of the cockiness of the writer.

   I would NOT recommend this book to anyone.




2. I think he could have written in 200 words or less that he hated John Orr, thinks cops are better than firemen, and thinks prosecutors should always have the upper hand.

   One thing he could have included was photos, to make the book less boring. And, he could have explained just how we went from the judge disallowing Orr's manuscripts into evidence to the prosecution being allowed to use them as evidence.




3. This is an unusual book. I don't think I've ever read a book about an arsonist before, certainly not a non-fiction book, and the story that it tells is so fantastic that it's one of those stranger-than-fiction tales that defies belief.

   The book tells the story of John Leonard Orr. Orr was a frustrated individual, from a split household, who tried to become a policeman and failed, and wound up becoming a firefighter, both in the Air Force and then in the city of Glendale here in Southern California. He rose to become Glendale's senior arson investigator, actually teaching classes that other arson investigators, even Federal ones, attended. He was considered one of the leading authorities on arson fires and arsonists in California. Then suspicion fell on him and his activities, and he was arrested and accused of being an arsonist himself. The accusation was followed by a pair of trials.

   Now I live in Montrose (yards from the border of the city of Glendale) and used to actually live in Glendale, so it was interesting to read about the locale and the people of my new home (I've lived here for five years). Everything's reasonably well-recreated, though I didn't think Glendale was made that unique compared with other Southern California cities. Orr comes across as something of a nerd, a doofus who's always trying to fit in while never quite making it, and always cheating on the current wife with the prospective one, while paying child support to the ex.

   Wambaugh's writing style is interesting, in that he uses a lot of slang and emphasis to show what he means, and has a very conversational style. It'd be interesting to hear Ken Howard read this book: it reads as if it would sound better than it looks on the page. I will confess that the cast of characters is large enough that I had trouble keeping track of all of the investigators and attorneys involved, and I think it would have helped if the author provided a dramatis personae at the beginning of the book.

   One note: several of the other reviewers presented the idea that the author thinks cops are somehow better than firefighters. This is erroneous. It's his position, stated and restated through the book, that the crime spree was solved by a firefighter turned arson investigator, and that he was ignored by his cop colleagues until the evidence confirmed his suspicions. He does say, several times, that cops themselves sometimes think themselves firefighters, but he's clear that he thinks this is unfortunate. Strange when people have read the same book as you, and come to a different interpretation of what was written. Altogether a good book, though.




4. Having read and thoroughly enjoyed four of Wambaugh's earlier books, I was sure this one would be a page turner; however, it was strictly the story and not the writing that kept my interest. So my feelings are mixed and my rating is lukewarm. Wambaugh tries too hard to depict John Orr as evil, yet without the hard-sell, the reader would come to that conclusion anyway. I finished the book still feeling that there is more on John Orr that could have been included in the book. An additional thought - one reviewer mentions that Wambaugh copies Truman Capote's style of not including photographs of the characters, yet Wambaugh's own picture is on the back. I'd much rather see who I'm reading about.



5. In Fire Lover, Wambaugh attempts to get into the mind of a convicted serial arsonist, one who nevertheless has never (at least as documented in this book) admitted to his crimes. The story is well-written, intriguing, and at times even a page-turner. The few occasions when the story drags are most often in the telling of Orr's trials, when Wambaugh seeks thoroughness in telling the story of the trial, but occasionally at the expense of the reader's interest. But all told, this is a good, even haunting story of a true case.

5 comments about The Death of Innocents: A True Story of Murder, Medicine, and High-Stake Science.

1. I can't say enough how much I enjoyed this book. I came across a mention of the Hoyt family and this book while reading Michael Kelleher's "Murder Most Rare" (another really good read), and decided to order it. From page one, I was hooked.
   It starts with a case of familial infanticide, then explores the earlier Hoyt case that was so important. The best part about the book is when the authors leave the Hoyt case and take us on a detailed tour of the history of SIDS and apnea. The very scientific and potentially dry discussion of research projects is told in a way that leaves you with the feeling that you really understand what is going on in the SIDS research arena, and you also feel like you know each player in this community. When the story turns back to the Hoyt case and its conclusion, the reader fully undertands the what, why, and how of the events. Without the exploration of the history of SIDS, the ending of the story would have much less impact. I didn't realize until I was finished just how personal the book had become for me. I went immediately online to Amazon and typed "Munchausen by Proxy" in the search bar.



2. This book was an eye-opener. As a mother of four, I take any threat to my children's safety very seriously (including SIDS). After reading this book, I was forced to rethink much of what I thought I knew about the phenomena.
   
   The Death of Innocents takes an analytical look at how the apnea theory of SIDS was forced upon this country. Firstman provides an intriguing look into the lives of two families and one doctor. The two families had multiple SIDS victims, the doctor had an agenda: the rest is pediatric history.



3. Munchausen syndrome by proxy is always difficult to read about, especially if you have your own children and do not abuse them. This is a intriguing account of one episode of munchausen's syndrome by proxy that was mistaken for sleep apnea/sids for years, until it was uncovered. It was a great book, I could not put it down, but I was very sad and thought about it for a while after I read it. Prepare to be unhappy.



4. Two very interesting suspects are portrayed in this book, the first, Vandersluys, was an already convicted statutory rapist who fooled around extramaritally (a great deal) with a flirtatious hussy teenager next door, then apparently cashed in his life insurance policies on one SIDs child after the next. Crime happens, but by then there were some 10,000 + cases of SIDS per year in the United States (Where exactly are the statistics, or has the CDC removed those government records as well as Autism's?); you know, making an opportunity of drinking water poisoning going on where you live to collect AD&D policies is still the fault of the water utility--it has no indemnity. The man's words sound more like the brainwashing of the already guilt ridden into accepting coaching he was negligent whether he was or not. Wiping your baby's face with a wash cloth could be used to prove you tried to smother them right before their cyanic apnea nap, then SIDS diagnosis. I don't see the wave of insurance fraud claim these fools are trying to confabulate, and I definitely take issue with the unconstitutional framing of Wanneta Hoyt. There's a woman with profound, unexplained illness, nearly complete balding, osteoporosis, who made every effort to seek medical attention for her infants. Not a killer, a victim who never had an affirmative defense, much else a civic government with the backbone to forensically investigate, prosecute and hang premeditated water poisoners. Why don't we just insist on the Death of the Guilty? Or are they all `Arab males of military age' in Iraq? Is it al Qaida or is it AL COA?
   
   Not only the flagrant police misconduct to which authors Firstman and Talan remained completely, passively complacent, I mean actually coercing a confession without the accused having an attorney, and under emotional duress like a gulag plus her ill health disorienting, confusing and exhausting her (clear indication of severe environmental toxic poisoning in her home), but also the forging of written confession, not once, but redrafted again on her behalf with no counsel. That's not supposed to happen in America, but it does. And worse, books like this that attempt a crude cover for clandestine fluoropoisoning, going around manufacturing alibis and framing victim suspects are not supposed to be well received either, nor escape exposure and stiff public censure. No wonder they had to stick a silly award on it just to make it seem even more unquestionably respectable. I think this book is condemnable, it's authors thenceforth essentially unpublishable, crony hack writers of ill repute assisting a criminal evasion and the bowling over of the justice system--imminently denunciated. They have helped to mainstream and manufacture an alibi for a big killer and mutilator by anoxic brain injury.
   
   Court appointed defense for Vandersluys, when loosely throwing together a few cross examination questions to screen for toxic hazards in the home, inquired about risk of carbon monoxide poisoning in some indirect questions regarding a heater and a metal treatment, (not wanting to mention chemicals in the context of air or water other than any solvent the victims might've used in the home), inquired about painting in the home, but made no inquiry as to what was coming out of the household water tap--none. In other words a bogus, court appointed defense counsel and understudy of the prosecution--marsupial justice complete with a pouch for the defense counsel and state's employee.
   
   For the other case there was no toxicology screening of Wanetta Hoyt's household nor what was drawn from the tap and fed to her infants--conviction based solely on staged, coerced, and forged confession. Judicial malpractice like that only points to official corruption and cover-up of the government and utility's premeditated mass murder, murder one, `in the first degree', and the automatic finger pointing framing of the guardian in closest proximity to the deaths: aggravated offenses of perjury, misprison, obstruction of justice, and manufacturing false charges and statements to frame another for the purpose of criminal evasion, i.e. racketeering conspiracy, violating transportation and commerce, undue influence, and all of them in office.
   
   That is what the un-clever, idiotic in fact, ruse of fluoridating drinking water achieves for its perpetrators, it appears to be a crime they can blithely pipe into their victims' homes from miles away with *legerdemain*. Therefore, (in their hare brained, euphoric March naiveté) they haven't done anything wrong. They have every duty, right and responsibility to make every effort to protect your teeth for you--whether you brush them or not. And besides, nobody's going to put their picture up on a most wanted list, nobody knows who they are or what those magoos really do. That's real immunity. See how long it lasts, or who cares if `history will have to judge'; the public has judged fluoridation, so has Toxicology, the Institute of Medicine has judged the proxy misdiagnosis of vaccine injury, and epidemiologists and geneticists have judged the autism epidemic as a pandemic actually, and not genetic. Something's disguises aren't holding together are they--and trying to rope in wheat gluten, food allergies, streptococcus-meningitis or dyslexia for a broad spectrum of anoxic brain injury ain't gonna work for an alibi either. BUSTED!! A sheer equivocation catastrophe is in progress, make popcorn.
   
   ---review coninues with the book "While Innocents Slept"



5. I read this a year ago and am still reeling. I'm in the mental health/child welfare field and this story hammers home the need for professionals of all stripes to maintain skepticism and personally evaluate the quality of new research before relying on findings in practice. Shameful. We should all know better.

5 comments about Inside the Mind of Sexual Offenders: Predatory Rapists, Pedophiles, and Criminal Profiles.

1. This is a better book than Inside the Criminal Mind, but not as good as the works of Lonnie Athens. Stevens seems to have done his fieldwork by dispatching students with questionnaires to prisons. The result is an insightful guide into the mind of serial rapist with some compelling advice for potential victims based on his findings. The text is hampered by numerous typos (there is more than one reference to people "steeling" for example) and a few glaring grammatical mistakes. He does, at least, rely more on what criminals have told him than on vague statistical studies and he is no dupe. His strength is that he understands the complicated factors that go into making a predator, the difficulty of getting them to change, and the need for better programs to protect the public from the development of such hard core abusers. You will have a better, less slanted insight into how a rapist thinks after you read this book. Stephens, like Lonnie Athens, dares to look at the problem head on, refute the myths and political expediencies of the past, and suggest a program for both government and individual citizens that could go a long way towards reducing the incidence of predatory rape and pedophilia.



2. This book was full of typos and other mistakes, which made the reading difficult. The author does illuminate some theories, but not fully. He spends a great deal of time bashing the media and other sources for their perpetuation of the rape myths and fears. While I agree that his insights may be valid and certainly share some important views, the book is basically a collection of interviews from convicted sex offenders and their perspective. Most sex offenders will tell you that they rape for sex. Most people often don't realize the true motivation for their behavior. I don't think the offenders interviewed had the insight or the vocabulary to truly describe their experiences and cognitive processes, but their actions certainly reveal how they objectify women and use them to satisfy their own desires. Therefore, the book contains their own accounts in their own words with little commentary from the author on the psychological significance of their statements. Rather, the author spends more time arguing that we should base research on these sources rather than anything else. As a therapist, I didn't find this book particularly enlightening or useful in treating these individuals in therapy. The grammatical errors and misspelled words also made the book difficult to read.



3. This is a brilliant and fascinating subject matter, however, I could not for the life of me decide how a Ph.D. author could possibly get a book published with so many English spelling and grammar errors that I had to check repeatedly the front cover for the name of the author. I thought perhaps English was not his first language. But a Ph.D? And a name like Dennis Stevens? Well, in any case, there were so many completely unbelievable spelling, grammar, and syntax errors that unfortunately these over-shadowed what may have been a good book. Also, be forewarned: If you CAN get past the errors, this author loves statistics, he does his studies by interviewing actual inmates or felons/criminals themselves, then goes on to say less about the mind of the criminal than the statistics of the crimes they are likely to commit. I usually pass on my books. This one is trash. I gave it two stars because there actually was a paragraph or two that made sense.



4. This book was a complete waste of money. Even if you can withstand the many typographical and grammatical errors that occur on every page, you cannot get over the fact that the author relies on an incredibly small sample size (only 61 offenders) to draw far-reaching conclusions about his topic. The book seems to be a compilation of several different "studies" he has done, and there is a great deal of repetition throughout. It is an embarrassment that someone with a doctoral degree would produce something of such poor quality. This reads like a first draft of a term paper by a failing high school English student.
   
   As other reviewers have hinted, this book's only redeeming quality is the space the author devotes to the actual words of the offenders. However, I would recommend "Predators" by Anna Salter instead. "Predators" includes much more of the offenders speaking in their own words, and Salter's conclusions are based on a much larger sample size. Salter also makes several important recommendations for parents about how they can be more vigilant and take steps to protect their children.
   
   Stay away from "Inside the Mind of Sexual Offenders."



5. Certainly it's an interesting work, and probably an important work, but gosh I wish the author had employed a copy editor. The book is full of unintentional howlers, probably the result of putting too much faith in voice-recognition software or optical scanning software, and then somebody was asleep at the spellchecker. We find,
   
   --- "...adults can bass in the sun of safety," when the word obviously should be "bask."
   
   --- Use of the word "emerging" when the context clearly calls for "immersing."
   
   --- One dreadful sentence says "His brothers and sisters took refuse with his aunt." No, no, no, it was REFUGE they took. I'm sure of it.
   
   --- "Darin was easily leered into the relationship." Cute, but there's a very strong likelihood that word ought to be LURED.
   
   --- something "saved him from his dome," when I'll bet you a nickel it was supposed to be DOOM.
   
   --- in the instances where the interviewee calls a woman a "hole", I suspect that a more accurate transcription would be 'HO.
   
   
   
   My candidate for worst blooper concerns a pedophile blaming his victim, who asked for it by using the "secret fag eye beam." Next, the creep makes the boy promise not to use his "bean" on others. Laughing out loud yet? The rape of a child is not a topic suitable for inadvertent humor. Really, there's no substitute for a pair of eyes with a literate brain backing them up. Attention, all writers who hope to be taken seriously: please get yourself a human proofreader, or run the risk of looking foolish. A reader who is busy gleefully combing through your text for the next inexcusable proof of ignorance, can't give really good attention to your arguments.
   
   
   
   And another thing - although the present author is by far not the only one guilty of this. Stevens notes that Edward Gein "danced in the moonlight wearing the face, the hair, the breasts and the vaginas of his victims." First, the grammar police say all his victims did not share just one face. If they had vaginas, plural, then they also had faces, plural. And although the victims did indeed have vaginas, neither Ed nor anyone else has ever danced adorned with any victim's vagina, because a vagina is a negative space; literally, a hole. Even a PhD can't pin a hole onto anything.
   
   
   
   On the plus side, I like Stevens's style. Making a strong point, he is apt to begin a sentence with, "Look,..."
   
   
   
   I like the un-academic way he puts himself in the book. Of the wrong-headed "don't fight back" advice that has been given to women, he says, "That makes me equally angry as some of these rapists in this study."
   
   
   
   Discussing the refinement of earlier research, which led him to rewrite his conclusions about some point, Stevens says "I was wrong." Anybody who can say "I was wrong" is a superior human being.
   

5 comments about The Irish Game: A True Story of Crime and Art.

1. This is the first true crime book I have ever read, and it won't be the last! Hart gives a history lesson of the Russborough Mansion and some of the paintings in it. You don't have to be familiar with art to really understand the heists and why the paintings were stolen. Hart gives you enough overall information; by the end of the book you will be an expert yourself. This book is packed to the max with great information. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants suspense, and historical information about the paintings.



2. A delightful book. If you like true stories about the almost perfect heist involving great works of art, then you'll enjoy this book. And like any good book, it is not only entertaining but teaches you something you didn't know...in this case about the world of crime and art.



3. 
   I don't generally read mystery novels;for the simple reason that when I finish one,I don't really feel that I've learned anything.Sure,there is the suspense, of trying to figure out whodunit;in the final analysis,logic isn't the governing factor;and the author calls the shot.
   True crime is quite a different matter,and I find that getting into the real mind of a real person,is much more interesting.
   Reading this book, one gets a very real insight into crime in the art world. The way the mind of Cahill works is unveiled as well as the way that the Irish police operate. After all,Irish culture is the result of many centuries of the people fighting the establishment.
   The author beautifully sums it up with this paragraph;
   "But the roots of insurrection stretch much farther back in time,into an ancient tradition of secret,peasant societies formed by the dispossessed Gaels in the centuries following the Norman invasion,and persisting into later times. These small,clandestine bands had no chnce of reversing history. Their mission was to exact a steady taxation of terror from those in power over them. They depended on concealment on the complicity of their fellow Irishmen,who shared their language,race and fate. This old tradition of resistance to authority was too deeply engrained to evaporate with Irish independence,and the job of a policeman in Ireland is always at war with the past."
   Along with gaining a good insight into Irish crime; we get a real understanding of the nature of crime in the world of priceless art. I often wondered why criminals stole these items when they are so easily identifiable and therefore virtually impossible to fence. This book clearly explains what goes on here. When a great piece of art is stolen,we also see that it becomes an international crime.
   This book reads like fiction; but when you come to the end ;you are left with the satisfaction that you've really learned something.



4. Matthew Hart's The Irish Game : A True Story of Crime and Art is an excellent read about Ireland, art, art theft, and criminal investigation. This is a very intiguing non-fiction book about the theft of art by Johannes Vermeer in 1986 from a great house/museum known as Russborough in Ireland.
   
   Not only is this book a pleasure to read, I walked away learning quite a bit about art techniques, and art theft. Whereas non-fiction, if not done right, can tend to drag, this real story moves along at a brisk pace due in large part to the story, compelling characters, and smooth pace.
   
   I really enjoyed learning about the Irish police AKA the Garda and the techniques they employed to track the art theft's chief suspect Martin Cahill.
   
   I would encourage anyone interested in any of the aforementioned matters, inlcuding but not limited too: art theft, criminal investigative techniques, art techniques, and Ireland, to give this excellent book a try.



5. "The Irish Game" tells the true stories of two separate art robberies at the palatial Russborough House in Wicklow. Of several paintings stolen, The Dutch master Jan Vermeer's "Lady Writing a Letter with Her Maid" (called the Dublin Vermeer) is easily one the most valuable at several hundred million dollars. I'm not ordinarily predisposed to enjoying true-crime tales, but I found this intriguing and engaging. The world of art theft is a labyrinth of interconnected criminal factions and the trail of stolen art can easily traverse several countries. To accurately present the myriad details--not only of the heists, but also of the extraordinarily convoluted stings that would recover the stolen art--is a feat of painstaking research. To present this to the reader as a thrilling read as opposed to mere reportage is an even bigger challenge. I think that Hart did a splendid job in both.
   
   Whether there was too much background or not enough of the characters' lives, the heists, and the coterie of detectives, depends greatly on one's preference. In a story such as this, I consider it vital to be given a surplus of details rather than a mere spattering. The art theft world is not as straightforward as most people would assume, that is steal the art then sell it. Most of the stolen art, we are informed, are not fenced but used as collateral for other crimes, usually drug dealing and arms procurement. To catch these criminals and recover the lost art goes beyond conventional detection, to say the least, and Hart does a fine job in elevating the narrative from a mere recitation of facts to a thrilling account of this complex game. As to be expected, there are maps, illustrations, color plates, photos, etc., that serve as visual aids to heighten interest.
   
   Of particular interest to me was the segue into the discovery by an art conservationist of a Vermeer "secret." Anyone who's seen a Vermeer is amazed by the realism. The other thing that amazes is the perspective (the convergence of parallel lines into a vanishing point). To refresh my memory, I pulled out my copy of "Vermeer" by Arthur Wheelock, Jr., one of the National Gallery of Art's curators and the U.S.'s leading Vermeer scholar, and once again stared at each of the forty color plates. When I look at them, I get the sensation that I can almost `step into' the picture or that the scene depicted is immediately in front of me. It's both wondrous and chilling, and his mastery of perspective has baffled scholars for close to four hundred years. Several years ago, I saw a documentary featuring David Hockney of the "Secret Knowledge" infamy, illustrating his theory that the old masters had used optics such as the primitive versions of the camera obscura to help create their masterpieces. His theory was equated to heresy and fueled controversies and numerous critics, but I will admit that I found it logical and utterly believable. Shame on me. In Chap. 9, I was stunned by the spectacularly simple technique the innovative master must have used, and for some of us, it will evoke memories of the grade-school technique we were taught on how to draw a perfect circle (bet you want to know now, don't you?). I had forgotten that oftentimes, truth is simply...simple!
   
   Two of the more astonishing facts the reader learns is that the Dublin Vermeer was stolen twice from the same place, first in 1974 by a gang headed by Rose Dugdale, an IRA supporter and the spoiled daughter of a millionaire, and second by a career criminal, Martin Cahill, twelve years later, and the other is that the two separate cases were solved by a father and his son, Ned Hogan and Liam Hogan. Both were officers in the Garda Síochána (Ireland's police force) and Ned was one of the major players in the recovery in the 1970s. When the second heist occurred in 1986, Liam was instrumental in the recovery of the same Vermeer. As father and son look at the recovered Dutch Vermeer, Liam says to his father, "If they lose it again, they can get it back themselves." Ned's reply? "If we get it back again, we keep it."

5 comments about The Last Gangster: From Cop to Wiseguy to FBI Informant: Big Ron Previte and the Fall of the American Mob.

1. First it is known in the LCN circles that former members of law enforcement should not become made members. This is one of the rules but yet Previte slipped in. The whole recollection of Merlino (a former racing jockey) and Ralph Natale are hillarious. Time and time again Previte explains how these two could not get on the same page.
   
   Anastasia himself gets better with time. He is Philadelphia's Jerry Capeci. Despite the fact that in the scheme of things Previte was a high-level in a crime family that pales in comparison under the previous leaders. A good read and likeable subject!



2. Previte sounds like a loud mouth braggert to me. He is one of those guys who talks like hes done it all but sounds like a phony. The FBI are not as dumb as Previte says they are. I doubt he recieved all the money he says the government gave him. The other characters in the book are dull, immature. If you want to read about the mob try a book about Chicago or NY.



3. I love mob books and this one doesn't dissappoint. Must have for the mob book lover.



4. Anastasia is perhaps America's leadest expert on the mob -- and certainly the most skilled writer. The Last Gangster is up to even his high standards with well-sketched portraits of mob thugs, rats. cops and corrupt politicians. Unfortunately for the reader (though fortunately for the rest of us) the mob isn't as powerful as it once was, and these crooks are pathetic indeed by the standards of the old Bruno-Scarfo mob. The title may stretch things a bit -- "The Last PHILLY Gangster" would be more appropriate -- but it's valuable to understand why there really is no honor among thieves, and why the Italian mob is dying.



5. Usually, I breeze through books like this. I read WiseGuys in one sitting. I had to resolve myself to finish this. I think it's less the author's fault and more the fault of his subjects. These guys are boring. Their crimes are quotidian. There is no Lufthansa heist here. I'd recommend only if you have an insatiable curiousity about the mob in Philly.

5 comments about Murder in Greenwich: Who Killed Martha Moxley?.

1. Let's face it, Mark Fuhrman is not somebody that I consider reliable. Dominick Dunne, another old man bent on revenge over his daughter's murder, goes after the Kennedy family. Okay, I'm not saying that Michael Skakel did it or not because he was convicted of the crime but the story's not over until the case was done in the court of law. I believe the book came well before the guilty verdict which was too soon and judgmental. Yes, the Kennedys have a lot of power and money but Greenwich is still a place where people drive expensive cars, live in mansions, and are completely out of touch with reality. I don't believe Fuhrman anymore than I believe Dunne because they're totally ready to convict based on little evidence, hearsay, and gossip.



2. The problem with this book is that Heir Furhman takes the credit for solving the crime. This couldn't be further from the truth.
   
   If you want to read the most factual account of this murder, read "Conviction" by Len Levitt.
   
   However, I believe that if Mr. Skakel can't recall if he committed the murder, how can anyone else be so sure.



3. My book is called Murder In Greenwich and it is about a murder of a 15 year old girl named Martha Moxley.The book is written by Mark Fuhrman.The case was never solved but i think its an excellent book because it gave alot of details.It also show pictures of where the murder occurred and also of Martha Moxley.The author is also an excellent writer.I recommend this book if u like Mark Fuhrman books or mystery books!I would not recommend this book to people that dont like murders or blood. ~~~~BY TORI SORIANO 16 YEARS OLD LINCOLN CITY OR!!!~~~



4. This is an okay book. Furman repeats alot of the info over and over. I didn't even finish the last few pages as they started out the same as everything we already read.



5. This book was a great read! I started reading and couldn't stop until it was finished. Mark Fuhrman is a top notch author, he really constructed an excellent book here.
   
   Be careful not to do too much research about the Moxley case before reading this book, it may ruin the ending for you.