2 comments about The Atlanta Youth Murders and the Politics of Race (Elmer H Johnson & Carol Holmes Johnson Series in Criminology).

1. I was so excited when I read the title of this book, however upon reading it, I am infuriated. Headley starts off strong, carefully illustrating the history of Atlanta and the backdrop upon which the murders took place. Headley ommitted several important facts and added many trivial comments in place of simple truth. Headley for some reason has convinced himself that Wayne Williams is guilty of the murders in spite of glaring inconsities with that theory. It is hard to believe and even more it is scary to think Headley is a criminologist. Headly ignores details that any untrained civilian could perceive as information contrary to the belief that Wayne Williams is guilty or more importantly got a fair trial. Headley often accuses anyone involved in trying to disprove the lone nut theory against Wayne Williams as a person with their own agenda or possibly a vendetta against the Task Force, FBI, GBI, and the various police departments who at the time were mishandling these cases. If you are a person well versed on this case however, at some point you will be compelled to ask, " What exactly is Bernard Headley's agenda?" It is hard to believe that someone who calls themselves a criminologist and attended Williams' trial could overlook the terrible investigation and the ultimate unfair trial that took place. In my opinion, Headley is the kind of conspirator that kept the lies that have dogged this case going strong for over 25 years now. He tries to come off so sympathetic when it comes to the victims and their loved ones but he has done a great disservice to them by writing this propoganda he tries to pass off as a book. He got his information from the FBI's freedon of information act files and they themselves are so redacted that it serves for the excuse of why his book and his assertions are so full of holes. The only saving grace of this book is its accounts of the victims, their ages, the last time they were seen alive and how and when they (if it was even them the investigation was handled so sloppily that many mothers never believed it was their sons who had been found) were found dead. I could go on and on on Headley's flawed account of a serious tragedy that has never been properly addressed, but I won't. I'll just end this with, Don't buy this book. For a more in depth and truthful look at this tragedy buy The List buy Chet Dettlinger or Those Bones Are Not My Child by Toni Cade Bambara. In addition there are recent documentaries as well as the movie Echo of Murder that further cast doubt on Williams' conviction and more plausible explanations of what happened to the murdered youth of Atlanta. I have written this review because the Atlanta Youth Murders have become very important to me and I hate the way Mr. Headley for some unapparent reason chose to write a book and ignore the glaring evidence that justice wasn't done. Here's a suggestion Mr. Headley, take a closer look at this case and try to see it without prejudice then write a new book and you can call it, The Atlanta Youth Murders and the Politics That Blinded Me.



2. I understand how people can criticize Mr. Headley. However, his book is a vital part of any worthy collection regarding the Atlanta Child Murders. I can't argue with the socioeconomic analysis Mr. Headley does on Atlanta - circa the era in which the murders took place.
   As the title implies, Bernard Headley details Atlanta's development leading into the tragedy, and the impact the murders had on the community. He provides a thorough, yet tidy account of the facts, and chronicles how the saga developed, leading to the conviction of Wayne Williams.
   I caution everyone, before you criticize Bernard Headley's book, read it first. As a longtime resident of Metro Atlanta, the controversy surrounding the Atlanta Child Murders has never really died, and there are several people who still believe Wayne Williams was railroaded. However...Mr. Williams - as is often stated - is his own worst enemy. We're not talking about an innocent bystander who was eating his ice cream, walking down the street - when the authorities swarmed in and arrested him for a heinous crime. At the very least, Wayne Williams was/is a habitual liar and antisocial individual. Do not discredit Bernard Headley for his eventual conclusion. Read the book and gauge it for what it is. At the very least, the book does an excellent job chronicling the social/racial dynamics and societal panic surrounding the staggering murder spree in Atlanta.

5 comments about The Confessions of an American Black Widow : A True Story of Greed, Lust and a Murderous Wife (Confessions of Black Widow).

1. Another great read Gregg!! How this woman could persuade men the way she did is astounding. These men were intelligent and still fell under her spell. She left a path of destruction in a lot of lives.



2. Another great book by Gregg. This women stops at nothing to get what she wants. She jumps from man to man just to get what she wants. All they mean to her is what she can get out of them. And each and every one of those men knows it and are willing to take her back no matter what she's done to them. One in particular is even willing to kill for her.



3. Sharon Fuller Nelson Harrelson is the epitomy of an American Black Widow. This oversexed beauty-queen-wannabe wrapped her finger around men's hearts so that she could sneak into their wallets. And when she had sucked the monetary life out of them, she had them killed by her on-again-off-again lover, Gary Adams. But in the end, the Nepho rolled over on her Mountain Man...and I don't mean she didn't it in the bedroom!
   
   I am a huge fan of Gregg Olsen's work. He is number one on my list of my favorite true crime writers. What I particularly enjoy about this work is that he is able to make a story "a story." His books do not subject me to repetitious recounts taken straight from Court transcriptions, but puts those same aspects into an interesting story that is easily read and understood without lulling you into sleep (or skimming, as I so often do.)
   
   Black Widow is particularly interesting to read as the whole book is a storilized form of Sharon Harrelson's confession to police about the deaths of her husbands, Perry Nelson and Glen Harrelson. From front to back, this is simply a story filled full of interesting recalls from Sharon herself and those who, unfortunately, knew her and was affected by her in some shape, form or fashion.
   
   To date, this is my favorite true crime story. Excellent job, Gregg Olsen!



4. "Whatever labels affixed to her - Black Widow, ambitious gold digger, insatiable slut - she was a killer. Much more, but never less than that." This early sentence in the book says it all. A sold 4 and 1/2 star read!
   
   So aptly described by someone who knew her, Sharon Lynn Fuller Nelson Harrelson was indeed a "Bitch on Wheels." The former wife of a minister, it was all about sex and money for Sharon Lynn and she stopped at nothing to get what she wanted. Superficially charming and attractive, she was an expert at manipulating others, especially men who were too naive, too lonely, or too blind to see who Sharon really was. Underneath the polished smile, alabaster skin, and revealing clothing, Sharon Lynn was a woman who took orders from no one. Shunned by her own family and almost everyone who knew her, Sharon moved from man to man, bleeding them emotionally and financially. When there was nothing left, she convinced her long time off-and-on lover, Gary Starr Adams, to kill 2 of her 3 husbands. Cashing in on a sizable life insurance policy, Sharon continued to live as if there were no consequences and no tomorrow. However, Sharon Lynn was not quite the smooth operator she believed herself to be. Ultimately, her own indiscretions and a monstrous ego were her downfall.
   
   Gregg Olsen writes a compelling story of lust, greed, and deception. Well researched and well written, Olsen draws the reader into the warped world of Sharon Lynn, providing not only an accurate description of the woman she is, but a history of the young woman Sharon once was and how she became a cold-blooded killer. Whirling through the pages like a West Texas tornado and cutting a wide path of destruction, Sharon Lynn is a woman True Crime fans will love to hate!



5. Calling Sharon Nelson trashy would be an insult to landfills everywhere.
   
   Gregg Olsen starts out his story as a standard police procedural: law enforcement is called to the scene of a fire at a fireman's house. Then they stumble across a body with an "unexploded head." You might think, as I did, that this was a good thing. It's not. It immediately alerts the police is that is in fact a murder. The action quickly turns to the past and the widow of the victim, the awesomely trampy Sharon Nelson.
   
   Former preacher's wife, former good girl and current town pump Sharon is like Bette Davis's camp classic Rosa Moline (from Beyond the Forest) brought to life. Whether seducing every man in the zip code or setting up her step-daughter to be expelled from boarding school or just strutting around town in painted-on short-shorts, Sharon is a trip. Unfortunately, she's a trip to the morgue for two of her husbands.
   
   It seems a simple story: girl raised by ultra-religious parents marries minister and then rebels against the strictures in her life. What makes Sharon Lynn Fuller Nelson (Adams) Harrelson's story more complex isn't just the murders, it's her relentlessness in acquiring a trailer-park version of the finer things in life. These include a Jeep, hot rollers, and romantic lunches at Pizza Hut. That's one of the first things that struck me in this story - for someone willing to resort to murder to get what they want Sharon set her sights a little low. But then Sharon doesn't come across as a deep or expansive thinker, she's more like a child distracted by a red helium balloon. If the town eye doctor looks like a better catch than her minister husband, Sharon goes after him. Then she goes after the eye doctor's slightly better off good friend the rancher. You get the picture. Then Sharon plum loses her mind over ... a "mountain man", which I can only assume is Sharon's personal code for "complete loser than I'm inexplicably attracted to." No job, living in a trailer, and in need of Viagra before it was invented, this is the man of Sharon's dreams.
   
   In lesser hands, this would be a dreary tale. Gregg Olsen makes it a cross between a classic true crime investigation and, well, a camp classic. And bless him for it. If you're going to tell the story about a woman who thinks nothing of having the neighbors walk in on her having sex on the kitchen floor with a man other than her husband it helps to have a sense of humor, which Olsen has. He's hilariously droll at times, letting "mountain man" Gary Adams confide his love for Sharon's special sauce (no, he's not talking about McDonald's). Other times Olsen is a master at the throwaway bitchy remark like having Sharon wonder "Hadn't she pleased him in bed? In the woods? By the lake?"
   
   Olsen does a fine job of presenting Sharon's story and the story of her numerous victims, he doesn't skimp on showing the human toll of her selfishness. He lets the people of the small towns in Colorado where Sharon lived act as a Greek chorus with more than a few sage remarks on human nature coming from ordinary working folks. And then there's Sharon. Telling strangers that she sun bathes in the nude or greeting dinner guests by letting them know what great sex she and her husband had the night before. And, bizarrely, using the local Pizza Hut for pivotal moments in her life. Apparently nothing goes with adultery or confessions to murder quite like a deep dish pizza.
   
   This book is good solid true crime and its just plain fun. This is my first Gregg Olsen book but it definitely won't be my last.

5 comments about Madam Foreman : A Rush to Judgement?.

1. Upon first hearing the not-guilty verdict in the O.J. Simpson trial, I was sure it was because at least some of the Simpson jurors had some self-serving, self-righteous agenda. However, after reading this pathetic, to the point of being comical attempt, to justify their verdict, I have changed my mind... Not only was their so-called "analysis" of the evidence completely devoid of any truly intelligent thought, it contained leaps of logic so vast, Evil Knevil would have been too scared to jump it. For example, one juror said she had doubts O.J. did it because only a "little" blood from the victims was found in Simpsons bronco.If he was truly innocent, then why is ANY of the victims blood in his car! Throughout the trial Johnny Cochran continuously lied or distorted the truth. During the defence for instance, in an attempt to show police "contaminating" the crime scene, Cochran shows a still picture of a policeman "carelessly" walking through a bloody path. Contamination,right? Well, no. Upon simple cross-examination, we find out that only AFTER the crime scene had been processed and all blood evidence been collected did this officer then walk through this bloody path. Was there any mention of this in this book? Of course not. When Cochran tried to show an attempt by police to "plant" evidence, he showed a videotape of Simpsons bedroom depicting the ABSENCE of bloody socks that the police claimed were there. Planting of evidence you say? Again, upon cross-examination the person who shot the videotape testifies that he was there to videotape the premises for insurance purposes only. And that he was told by police NOT to go into the bedroom until AFTER they collected whatever was in there, including,of course, those bloody socks! Did any of these hapless jurors make note of this?...In fact, rare is it, that you will find consecutive coherent sentences, such is the collective wisdom shown here. So, the question is, would I recommend this book to others? To that question, my answer is surprisingly, a resounding YES!...Because while on one hand, this book was so tedious to read,what with its complete utter lack of knowledge and insight of the subject matter, I still found it facinating to delve into the minds of people who have such little powers of deduction...



2. An attempt to cash in on the Simpson trial, this book is an embarrassment for all concerned. Just how bad it is cannot be conveyed in a mere 1000 words, so you'll simply have to read it yourself -- but maybe that's too high a price to pay. Read the summary provided by Dove Publishing. It's as though they are trying to expose the jurors as the cerebral cripples they are. Couldn't they find one coherent line in what must have been hours of mind-numbing recordings with the "authors"? While reading the book, keep in mind that this is _their_ side of the story; it is told in a manner most sympathetic to the jurors. Still, they come off as spit-drooling morons. The mind reels at the thought of someone hostile to Cooley, Bess, and Jackson having written this. As for Tom Byrnes (he garners "as told to" credit for this mess) and editor Mike Walker, don't hate them... pity them. Then again, perhaps Byrne and Walker have intended this as an indictment of our judicial system, where the search for impartial jurors has evolved into a quest for those who never read newspapers, news magazines, or even watch television more challenging than "Jackass." If this is the case, their success is complete beyond any possible expectations they might have had.



3. Like many Americans I was stunned when after just 3 hours the OJ Simpson jury came back with a verdict of not guilty. There was little gaiety even after the civil court brought back a verdict of guilty and set an award of $33.5 million for the families. I thought I might gain some insight into the jury's thoughts through this book. I most certainly did gain some insight, but it wasn't noble or uplifting - it was banal, small-minded, stupifyingly shallow and completely wrong-headed. This book, while apparently an attempt to save face, falls far short of the mark. During the trial Judge Lance Ito might well have saved his breath when instructing the jury on how to view evidence. These people willfully and deliberately ignored his instructions and based their decisions on how they "felt" about evidence, how a witness "seemed" to them. Facts? Evidence? Pshaw...those pesky things. Appallingly bad writing coupled with poorly reasoned rationalizations show these jurors to be people who had their minds made up long before deliberation began. They were far more concerned about their own comfort than about the victims (alive and dead), segregated themselves from non-black jurors, either ignored or willfully failed to consider evidence that didn't support their position, and refused to deliberate. I'm not sure what they hoped to gain in writing this book, but it confirmed what I had long suspected. Race was always the issue - an opportunity for them to pay back the criminal justice system for years of entrenched injustice to black men. And OJ was their chosen hero. Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown weren't even considered. They were just props. While I understand the sad state of the judicial system and how unfairly it has treated black men over the years, the truth is, these jurors picked the wrong guy to champion for two simple reasons. One, he did it - a civil court had no problems wading through the same evidence presented at the criminal trial and coming to that conclusion. Two, Simpson could quite simply care less about the black "cause" as regards the courts. He just simply isn't interested in anything but himself. He prefers the company of whites, spends his time and money on self-gratification, and has never expressed even the slightest interest in helping improve conditions for blacks in America through word or deed. Then, as now, he was nothing more than an ego-driven wife-beating bully without a shred of interest in black education, black health care, black poverty, black justice. His only interest in racism was what it could do to get him out of the worst jam he had ever gotten himself into. This book appears to be nothing more than a poorly written attempt by these jurors to rationalize their despicable act of jury nullification which resulted in allowing this man to walk free simply because of the color of his skin. Jury nullification laws protect them from prosecution, but in my opinion their actions make them as guilty of the murders as Simpson himself. Disgusting.



4. I wouldn't even give this book the time of day. Here's a group of people who completely dropped the ball when it came time to do their civic duty and then couldn't wait to cash in on a book deal. How utterly disgusting!! My opinion on the juror's conduct has noting to do with Simpson's guilt or innocence. There is no way these people could've weighed ALL the evidence presented in this trial and come to the conclusion they did in just 3 short hours. Garbage!!



5. The Trial of O. J. Simpson covered "wealth, fame, celebrity, sex, race, adultery, drugs, domestic abuse, and murder". Public opinion was mostly based on race, which is not the best method to determine guilt or innocence. Any jury decides the facts in the case to resolve conflicting claims. Given the murders occurred after 11pm no other true verdict was possible. Joseph Bosco said the news on TV made the trial different from what he observed in the courtroom. This can explain mistaken opinions. This book is important because of the insight as to the jury's decision, assuming nothing was left out or distorted.
   
   After the verdict the jurors wanted to avoid the plague of journalists (Chapters 1&2). Some were approached to sell their story. They did not want to be on TV because of all the crazy people out there (p.18). Were those offers of payment reliable (p.19)? Maybe not (p.20). A "Letter of Intent" isn't a cashier's check (p.21). A book will provide money up front and insure the story is honest, not garbled as in a late night talk show, tabloid news, or corporate TV shows (p.23). Chapters 3, 4, and 5 tell about the lives of the co-authors. Chapter 6 explains the nine months as a sequestered juror. Being isolated affected people's nerves (p.72). The jurors believed their rooms had audio and video monitors (p.85). They would have preferred to go home a few times to check things out.
   
   Chapter 7 describes the witnesses at the trial. The coroner was not called in a timely manner (p.100). Why wasn't Simpson's house searched (p.101)? Fuhrman wasn't credible (p.104), or Vannatter (p.106). Some of the prosecution witnesses weren't credible (p.116). There was a problem with the blood evidence from the fence (pp.121-122). Simpson's blood wasn't on either of the gloves (p.123). Some believed the gloves fit (p.126). The domestic abuse testimony showed it happened when they were drunk (p.127). "Marcia Clark did an excellent job" (p.137). They had a problem with the way the evidence was gathered and preserved (p.140).
   
   Chapter 9 tells how the jury arrived at their verdict. They had several reasonable doubts plus questions that could not be answered from the exhibits and evidence (p.156). The testimony of the limo driver said OJ was in the doorway, not the driveway (p.157). The time element was a big factor (p.160). There was a problem with the bloody glove (p.161). After talking over the evidence the verdict was not guilty on both counts. The jury's verdict caused Judge Ito's expression on his face to change (p.174). "The evidence just was not there" (p.177). A juror noted the lack of blood evidence from the crime scene was questionable (p.178). The coroner who performed the autopsies wasn't allowed to testify.
   
   Chapter 11 is titled "The Race Card". At first they thought OJ was guilty. The subject of race was not a part of the deliberations (p.181). The lack of evidence and the shoddy prosecution led to the verdict (p.182). [Those who charge racism may be confessing to something.] Cochran said Detective Fuhrman was "the only one who found all the evidence" (p.186). If you throw out that testimony (Fifth Amendment) you have no case (p.189). Page 190 explains the jurors protest because of the dismissal of deputies. Chapter 12 has the questions and answers from their post-verdict forum. Their conversations will enlighten you, they wonder why certain "evidence" was not introduced (p.197). Money and a passport are not proof themselves of any crime. [Nicole's diary in a safety deposit box seems like a concocted threat. Who keeps a diary there?] Geraldo Rivera's question is dishonest (p.201). They did not decide whose blood was there until months later. Glenn Peterson's question is loaded (assumes the answer in the question, petitioning the principle). Ditto for Tom Greenburg. Christine Mauro is wrong, hearsay evidence is banned because it is not corroborated. Some of the Appendices contain information not found in any other book.
   Those short reviews seem to have not read the book!

5 comments about The Ghosts of Hopewell: Setting the Record Straight in the Lindbergh Case.

1. Fisher's first book was clearly a better work. This second book appears to be nothing more than Fisher's response to his many critics. It is very brief with only a thumbnail sketch of the case. I think this would have been better as a magazine article than a full book.
   
   Additionally, Fisher makes some Herculean leaps in logic. The finding of a bottle of Ether produced after the date of the kidnapping, i.e. March 1, 1932, forms the basis of a claim by Fisher that Hauptmann was planning to kidnap again. The leap is just too great.
   
   To his credit, Fisher does debunk many of the great fallacies of this case, especially concerning the ladder and wood evidence. Nevertheless, I think this book was unnecessary and Fisher should have just let his first book do the talking for him.



2. A typical ignorant diatribe to convince the pliable that the state does not make mistakes.
   
   A view of the trial documents by anyone ready for a bar exam would reveal any number of reversable errors, not to mention an inadequate defense. Hauptmann's own words just before his execution are cause for reasonable doubt. It is one thing to claim there is no proof that Hauptmann was innocent, but that goes against the standard of assumption of innocence.
   
   The fact is only Hauptman (and the real killer/killers if any) knew if he was innocent, and the state proved its case only to the jury. I can't imagine anyone the state would have had in that position going free, regardless of guilt or innocence.
   
   To call any question of the acuracy of the verdict in this trial "revisionism" is akin to objecting to the modern day view that the segregation and Jim Crow laws up to the 60's satisfied the current legal process, but were nonetheless morally despicable.



3. I read his first book.And knew ,it was full of lies.And his second book is even more treacherous ! This guy is a former FBI agent ?? I could write the real Lindbergh story.Without me writing out a long story here,the author Upton Sinclair and author Sinclair Lewis helped plan the Lindbergh kidnapping.They were concerned that ,Charles Jr.,would run for Jersey governour and later became President.They didn't want a "World War 3".Lindbergh was a Nazi sympathizer,big time.(In 2003,three Bavarian siblings ,exposed their mother's secret love-affair with Charles Sr.They are the products of that 1950s hidden romantic relationship.) The authoress ,Gertrude Stein, with Isodore Fish, may have written the Lindbergh ransome notes.However,that is speculation only.All the major writers of the 1920s,knew about the kidnapping plot.Hemmingway,Fitzgerald,Willa Cather,W.Somerset Maugham,George Orwell,Sherwood Anderson,Edgar Cacye,William Faulkner,etc.,knew about the plot.John Condon was a close associate of David Willentz,and was the real estate agent to Richard Hauptmann.The "Lindbergh Ladder" was of sawyered wood that came from Hauptmann's attic and ultimately from a lumber-yard in South Carolina,with contacts to David Willentz. You do the addition,and go figure . Prime example of a top government conspiracy!
   Updated-nov.25.06.-Beware of the History Channel! I taped a day's worth of programmes,and watched this morning.There was a segment on Lindbergh,Edgar Cayce and ESP.The programme claimed that the baby was sadly found in the flower-box,several feet under the nursery window.That is not true.An infant was found one and half miles from the Lindbergh estate,just over the county line and by an orphanage run by David Willentz.



4. For goodness' sake, how much evidence do the conspiracy wackos need before they come back to planet Earth? Fisher shows how Hauptmann a) had the money, b) owned the wood that was used to make the ladder, c) owned the nails that were used to make the ladder, d) had a criminal record involving threats on babies and the use of ladders, e) gave up work as soon as the ransom was paid, f) never worked again once the kidnapper was paid his money - and much more. His book (and his original and more comprehensive earlier work) should be a breath of fresh air for the conspiracy theorists. Unfortunately, absolutely nothing will convince them that Bruno Richard Hauptman was a thoroughly evil child murderer.



5. "The Ghosts of Hopewell: Setting the Record Straight in the Lindbergh Case", Jim Fisher, Southern Illinois Univ. Press 1999, ISBN: 0-8093-2285-4, HC 161 pgs., plus 18 pgs. Notes; 10 pgs. Biblio.; 6 pgs. Index; and 20 B & W Illus.-Photos. 9 1/4" x 6 1/4".
   
   Author Fisher, both law graduate and former FBI agent (albeit but 6 years), writes again after some 18 years of studying the Lindbergh case. He previously authored "The Lindbergh Case" in 1987. This book is divided into 3 sections: I - The Case, II - The Theories, and III - The Evidence.
   
   Above all, Fisher takes on the disbelieve(r)s who profess innocence of Bruno Richard Hauptmann (BRH) in the kidnapping, murder and ransom of baby Lindbergh (Eaglet), Mar. 1, 1932. Fisher underscores in great detail the Hauptmann handwriting found both at the crime scene of kidnapping and later in ransom notes - and cites detailed peculiarities believed conclusively incriminating by virtue of a writing 'tic' or unique agraphia that provided a discrete signature to BRH's written vocabulary. Further details are also proffered on Hauptmann's failed stock market transactions, purchase of ether, etc., financial difficulties by lack of employement, and a past criminal record.
   
   Fisher is distressed by the impetuous publication of defectively researched books beseeching acquittal of BRH and culpability by 'the usual suspects' that embraced hired help, relatives, and he censures that most disturbing 1993 book "Crime of the Century: The Kidnapping Hoax" by Ahlgren and Monier.
   
   Aside from a few unneeded repetitions, i.e. ranson letters, etc. the book's intent is to checkmate (or dispose of) opposing viewpoints and to present new supportive information - and admittedly, it is well written with legal and forensic evidence presentations which must now be balanced by the reader against Ahlgren and Monier's indictment of the father, Colonel Charles Lindbergh, whose alleged prank and subsequent kidnap hoax went awry. With all parties dead, one's beliefs may well reside within the domain of the prevailing or most current best writer of truth and/or fiction, so choose wisely or not at all. I am currently transfixed in a decision-making process akin to game theory.

1 comments about Insured for Murder.

1. I first heard about the John-Hawkins, Melvin-Hanson case from the movie, "If Looks Could Kill"(1996), starring Antonio Sabato and Brad Dourif. Then I heard about the case again on an episode of "Murder by the Book" from TruTV, which featured commentary by the author Jonathan Kellermann as well as Cathy Candisky, co-author of >Insured for Murder<. The TruTV program first brought the book to my attention.
   Candisky and co-author Robin Yocum were just reporters at the Columbus Ohio >Dispatch< who had been assigned to follow up on a story about the death of a local man, Melvin Hanson, co-owner of Just Sweats, Inc., a chain of clothing stores around Columbus; but his death had apparently been faked as part of an insurance scam. The day after Candisky filed her first story, her phone began to ring off the hook:
   Page 19: "Are you the reporter who wrote this article about Just Sweats?"
   the caller asked.
   "Yes."
   "Why didn't you write about all the money those two embezzled?" the woman demanded, as if to imply Candisky was protecting Hawkins and Hanson.
   Candisky scrawled "embezzlement" on a pad.
   Page 20: "Are you going to write any more stories about John Hawkins?"
   "Planning to," Candisky answered. "Do you know him?"
   "Sort of . . . . Did you know Hanson ripped off the company big time before he quit?"
   Page 20: "This is Cathy."
   "Yeah, about the story in today's paper. Where did you get your information?"
   Candisky rolled her eyes. "Mostly from the lawsuit."
   "Man, I'm telling you, this is such total b___s___ . . . . Gene Hanson is dead. He had AIDS."
   Page 21: "Hi, this is Cathy Candisky at the >Dispatch<. Is this John Hawkins?"
   The man's laugh was groggy. "No, John is not here. This is Erik DeSando.
   I'm John's roommate."
   "Well, I was trying to get a hold of him for a follow-up of today's story."
   "Story?" DeSando asked. "What story?"
   
   A confidence man fools everyone, and his spouse or best friend is often the last one to realize it.
   >Insured for Murder< will leave the reader laughing at the incidental and gallows-type humor of two hardened urban journalists.

5 comments about The Mammoth Book of Unsolved Crime: The Biggest and Best Collection of Unsolved Murder and Mystery Cases (Mammoth Book of).

1. No truer statement has ever been made! If you like true crime books you MUST pick this one up. Like other Wilkes books it is compiled of essays written about unsolved crime. They are presented VERY well and some are very good reading. The good thing about this book is that they take all kinds of cases and present them to you for your thoughts. Some of the crimes were 'solved' but the evidence was flimsy, at best. Some of the crimes (Jack the Ripper, The Zodiac Killer, etc.) were never solved. For you armchair crime solvers this book has everything you could possibly want.



2. This book is a compilation of short works written by many different writers over the last 150 years or so. Therefore, the quality of writing varied greatly from chapter to chapter.

   Each chapter is devoted to a separate unsolved crime (mostly murders), going all the way back to Jack the Ripper. Some of the chapters were merely a couple of pages, and were unable to do much except describe the bare facts of the case.

   I had to give this book 3 stars, because some of the chapters WERE interesting. But some of them were drudgery to get through.




3. Thin and perfunctory renderings of common information: an absolutely dull stew with no visceral effect whatsoever. The historical content is vague & undocumented, and only marginally above that of pulp magazines. There are so many better books than this: don't bother!



4. This book's overall effect is uneven, since it's a compilation of many different authors' works. It is definitely not meant as scholarship. Some of the essays (such as Philips Sugden's "Jack the Ripper") give a thorough overview of the case discussed. Many are not so worthwhile. A few of the stories (e.g., F. Tennyson Jesse's "Checkmate" and Morris Markey's "Who Killed Joe Elwell?") present the basic evidence and then draw a wild conclusion that is not necessarily supported by it, while others do no more than express the writer's personal feelings about the crime and suspect (e.g., Sydney Horler's "The Hoop-La Murder Trial"). As the writings were made during various decades, the prejudices of these different times are evident. Authors occasionally assume the reader is well-versed in stories that are only local or have now been forgotten. And because several of the authors writing on American crimes are British, the American reader can amuse herself with their errors and biases. (Horler's essay, originally published in 1940, mentions a barbershop quartet song called "Sweet Adelaide" [Adeline, duh] and refers to "the highly-spiced sex magazines in which American journalism abounds.")
   
   Yet, reading this book gave me some unexpected insights. I was shocked to see how many obvious miscarriages of justice have taken place in the public eye, often due to personal prejudices on the part of judges and officials. (For example, Louis Stark's report on the Sacco and Vanzetti case quotes Governor Fuller as rejecting the testimony of 18 witnesses because "they were all Italians".) And it was instructive to see how the public reacted to these notorious crimes. The outcomes of several trials covered in the book were apparently decided by local opinion. In one story, an innocent man commits suicide because he has received so many anonymous hate letters. And the brilliance of some defense lawyers' testimony shows how difficult it is to actually solve some crimes "beyond a reasonable doubt".
   
   Many of the authors are well-known: they include Damon Runyon, Rebecca West, James Thurber, and Irving Wallace. Fans might enjoy their contributions to crime writing.



5. it's true that since the essays are by many different authors there is a great range in the quality of writing and the validity of the content. However, this is a Mammoth book and enough of the articles are excellent that I realy don't have any qualms recommending this book. Some of the sections are dry and some of the writers seem to have adopted the title of "Armchair Detective" but alot of it is just plain interesting and a good chunk of it is obscure.
   
   Highlights:
   
   The Obsession With the Black Dahlia (The Black Dahlia Murder)
   A Coincidence of Corpses (The Brighton Trunk Murders)
   Jack the Ripper (The Whitechapel Murders)
   Florence Maybrick (The Death of James Maybrick)
   
   however if you're looking for something a bit more constistantly awesome I recommend The Cases That Haunt Us it's by and FBI profiler, so you know he's a bit better than an armchair detective.

No comments about At Mother's Request: A True Story of Money, Murder and Betrayal.

No comments about The Lex Street Massacre.

5 comments about Mortal Remains: A True Story of Ritual Murder.

1. Fall River is well known for its Lizzie Borden murders but these murders in 1978 were so much more gruesome than the Bordens. The scary part was that I knew some of these people including Carl Drew. This book is worth reading because it tells you how cults operate and how dangerous they are.



2. i HAVE READ THE BOOK.AND IT IS VERY WELL DETAILED ON HOW THE MURDERS BEGAN IN THAT MASSACHUSETTS TOWN.I LIVED THERE FOR ALL MY LIFE.AND THE TOWN WAS KNOWN FOR PROSTITUTES AND IT STLL IS THAT WAY TODAY.
   I THINK THAT IT IS ONE OF THE TRAGEDIES THAT YOU WANT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT BECAUSE IT IS SO GRUESOME AND HORRIFYING TO JUST IMAGINE.



3. Since this book is unfortunately out of print, I was excited to find a cheap used copy in good condition and having lived in Fall River all my life, it was interesting to read about the "cult murders" that happened about a year or so prior to my birth. The book goes into detail of the interviews,the trials, and the way the victims met their brutal demise. It also includes some great pictures although I was disappointed that they did not include any pictures of one of the victims (barbara raposa). However, it is a very read interesting read and you wont be disappointed.



4. Twenty-five years have passed since the guilty have been sentenced. Robin Murphy may be released, but new facts have been uncovered to the murders and many of the characters are going to be exposed. These facts caused authorities to reopen this case and by the end of this summer (2004) a new trial will occur. I am sure there will be a sequel to Scammell's novel and many prominent people will lose their credibility.



5. Henry Scammell is a freelance writer who consulted with Dr. Douglas Ubelaker, a physical anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institution. This book is based on the evidence contained in the legal processes. The `Preface' acknowledges those who helped the author. Where there were no verbatim records Scammell relied on memories and reports. The first two chapters read like they were a novel. On October 13, 1979 the body of a young woman was found under the bleachers of the Vo-Tech High School. It was Doreen Levesque, a 17-year old with a troubled life (p.28). There is a short history of Fall River, once the cotton-spinning center of the world (pp.31-32). The result was a depressed town. On January 26, 1980 another body of a young woman was found. The police continued their investigations.
   
   A man bought a lot near Devol Pond and began to clear away the brush. He found a skull and the police were called (Chapter 22). Was Karen Marsden killed because of a love triangle (Chapter 23)? The first American murder trial that involved the identification of a skeleton was that of Professor John Webster for the murder of Dr. George Parkman, both from the Harvard Medical School (Chapter 24). Scammell tells of the alleged murder victim who returned just in time to stop an execution (p.193). [F. Lee Bailey told of another case, and there is the famous Boorne case.] Chapter 24 tells about the work of the Smithsonian Institute. Chapter 25 reveals the facts about two of the murders. Robin Murphy, Carl Drew, and Carl Davis were indicted for the murder of Karen Marsden (Chapter 26).
   
   Because of pre-trial publicity the trial was moved to Fitchburg in Worcester county (Chapter 33). Dr. Douglas Ubelaker explained how the skull fragment matched the x-ray of Karen Marsden (Chapter 34). Chapter 35 reconstructed the murder of Karen Marsden at Devol Pond from the trial testimony. The verdict was guilty of first degree murder (Chapter 36). Chapter 38 has the ending. The sex and dope trade has shifted to New Bedford. Ten murdered prostitutes have been found by the roads outside this city. The prosecutor quit to become a personal injury lawyer and help people.
   
   There are two faults in this book. It lacks an index, and maps of the Fall River area and the streets mentioned in this book. This book educates all who think Satanism was some fiction from Renaissance times and is not a danger today.

5 comments about Sleep My Little Dead: The True Story of the Zodiac Killer (St. Martin's true crime library).

1. I read a lot of true crime books and all I can say is: spend the money and read the book. Crowley really gets into the mind of the killer. Awesome story-telling.



2. Save your time, save your money, don't purchase this book.

   Yes, in NYC this guy was called the Zodiac, but this author uses California's infamous Zodiac Killer symbol, etc. on the cover. So much for imagination.

   The book itself is a total waste of time, the writing is poor, there are spelling and grammatical mistakes throughout. If I could have given this book a zero star rating I would have.

   If you want good true Crime check out books by Graysmith, Keppel, Rule, Bledsoe and Carlton Smith, these names are KNOWN in the True Crime genre, Crowley is not.




3. I've read material safety data sheets more engaging than this. Stick with Graysmith or others if you want a good read.



4. THIS BOOK GIVEs INSIGHT TO A SMALL PERSON WHO WAS NOT THE BIGGEST OR BEST OF THE SERIAL KILLERS I HAVE READ ABOUT. THIS PERSON WAS VERY RANDOM AND JUST WANTED TO MAKE HIMSELF A NAME.HE TRIED TO PATTERN HIMSELF AFTER THE ORIGINAL ZODIAC KILLER & DID NOT DO A GOOD JOB AT THIS. APPEARS TO BE A YOUNG PERSON WHO HAD MENTAL ISSUES THAT GOT TOTALLY OUT OF HAND & DESTROYED PERSONS LIVES IN THE PROCESS. A GOOD BOOK BUT NOT THE BEST I HAVE READ!!



5. I have not read this book but when I came across it at the book store one day I immediately recognized that the author uses the notoriety of the San Francisco Zodiac murders as his selling point. I am very familiar with the San Francisco Zodiac killings and I admit for a second that I thought the murders had been solved until I realized that the picture of the man on the cover looked too young to be the Zodiac from the late 60's. The release of ZODIAC in 2007 may inspire some viewers who are unfamiliar with the case to want to read the books by Robert Graysmith and may also buy this book as well thinking the case has been solved.