Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Recommendations for True Crime books?
I got violently ill over the holidays, and in my mix of delirium and tedium I re-listened to Tom.O'Neill's Chaos about the Manson family murders, and really enjoyed it. Now I'm in the mood for more in the genre, but I'm having trouble finding ones that don't completely blow. Tom did a great job in Chaos of blending the lurid with the Nancy Drew with solid reporting. I'd want something just like that if it exists.
A bit niche, but having read several books about the OJ trial, here are my evaluations:
The Run of His Life: The People v. O.J. Simpson by Jeffrey Toobin. This is the "official account" of the trial, such that one can exist, and it's pretty good, but not great. Toobin starts with the premise that OJ is guilty and paints the entire case in the light that the defense was acting borderline unethically and the prosecution and judiciary incompetently, and that the jury were all idiots. While this all may be true, Toobin is a journalist, not an attorney, and nothing in the books suggests he did the kind of research necessary to justify his snarky tone. B+
Reasonable Doubts: The Criminal Justice System and the O.J. Simpson Case by Alan Dershowitz. Easily the best book about the case, though it's not so much a blow by blow account as it is a series of meditations on what it says about the criminal justice system. Dersh takes no stance on guilt or innocence (despite being an appellate advisor for Simpson) and explains why most of the criticisms from various media commentators are off base. A
The Search for Justice: A Defense Attorney's Brief on the O.J. Simpson Case by Robert Shapiro. Shapiro was OJ's lead attorney before he was informally elbowed out by Johnny Cochran, and he spends most of the book explaining the case from the defense side. While he doesn't apologize for anything, he doesn't really make the case for Simpson's innocence that well, and he doesn't really give any insight into how the defense strategy led to the acquittal. It's adequate, but that's about it. C
O.J. the Last Word by Gerry Spence. Spence is one of those criminal defense attorneys who handled three slam dunk cases in his life and acts like he's some kind of genius for having never lost. After starting this book I'm certain I wouldn't want him defending me if I were ever in trouble. He was actually approached about defending OJ but backed out after Shapiro made it clear he'd be part of a team and not acting solo. I actually only made it about 50 pages in as it was unreadable. F
Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O. J. Simpson Got Away with Murder by Vincent Bugliosi. I didn't actually read this, but I watched the 7 hour video supplement that includes interviews with the key players and clips from the actual trial and news reports. I don't imagine that the book covers anything that isn't covered in the video, so I'm counting it. Anyway, Bugliosi was so outraged by the verdict he had to go on a whinge about how everybody involved with the trial fucked up royally, and second-guesses the prosecutions entire strategy by saying that they should have spent more time pursuing the domestic abuse angle that clearly wasn't playing with the jury, whom he only just falls short of calling complete morons. It's entertaining, but if Bugliosi thinks he would have won the case had he still been with the Los Angeles DA at the time, he's dreaming. The video is more entertaining because you get the full dose of Bugliosi's sanctimonious ire. He also uses logically fallacious arguments, and he left the DA's office so he could be a defense attorney, but didn't get much work since he only defended people whom he thought were innocent. He's a prick, and if I were on the jury I would have voted to acquit just to piss him off. C+ for content, but recommended for unintentional hilarity.
Without a Doubt by Marcia Clark. Clark spends 300 pages blaming everyone but the prosecutor's office for the acquittal, and doesn't pull punches when it comes to Chris Darden's mistakes, though she insists they're still friends. She mostly blames Lance Ito for letting the defense run wild, but she's at least entertaining enough that she comes across as a cool lady rather than the icy bitch she was portrayed as in the media. She also gives actual insight into the prosecution's strategy and why she thinks it didn't work. Bonus points for admitting up front she wrote the book for the money. A-
More options
Context Copy link
Obviously you should start with In Cold Blood, arguably the first of the genre. Unless you've already read it. Helter Skelter by Bugliosi offers what was the contemporary take on the Manson family, though folks like Lynette Fromme and Sandra Goode say Bugliosi was making up his own narrative.
More options
Context Copy link
A couple recent releases:
Say Anything by Patrick Radden Keefe
Dark Wire by Joseph Cox
The Art Thief by Michael Finkel
More options
Context Copy link
It's not a book, but I love the First 48 for my true crime. Each episode follows 1 or 2 murders ver the first 48 hours of the investigation under the theory that murders without a leadafter 48 hours have a terrible clearance rate!
What I like is that each episode follows evidence collection, research, and interrogation. But you also get the detectives thinking in between those. They often have enough time between filming and publication to write up the court casem.
More options
Context Copy link
Here's my comment on Hunt For The Green River Killer from this June
I don't know if it would meet your requirements for sheer writing quality and story telling. This one is almost dry in its "this happened, then this happened, then this happened" narrative style. The good news is there's no politicization of the case, and there's no histrionic hagiography of the victims ("Susan always loved to laugh").
The specific reason I recommend it (as my comment states) is that it does an exceptional job of demonstrating how fucked up a investigation can get by seemingly doing "the right thing." So, if you have an interest in how police solve crimes, I think it offers an interesting and unique perspective.
More options
Context Copy link
Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets is one one the all time greats
More options
Context Copy link
Colin Wilson, A Criminal History of Mankind. I expected it to be a general book on criminology, but Wilson was only interested in pathological murderers, which should be right up your alley.
More options
Context Copy link
Norovirus?
Might have been, might have just been a wicked case of COVID or flu.
Regardless, poor outcomes resulted.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link