Repetitive and biased.

To be far to the author, most of the people he had to write about in this book came across as pretty insufferable, including the victim with the constant insistence that she was the purest angel to ever walk the face of the earth.

But I can't blame the people involved with this case for the fact that he felt the need to repeat the same irrelevant facts over and over. How many times does the reader need to hear about Michigan's humidity or Dr. Dragovich's love for Sherlock Holmes, or that Gloria is the Miseners' rock? How many times does it need to be said how much the jury loathed certain witnesses? I'm pretty sure he actually repeated the same quotations multiple times.

Between heading off in irrelevant and dull directions- namely, the life history of everyone involved in the trial- and the constant repetition, the only reason I finished this book is that I got it in a 2 for 1 deal and didn't think I could return it without losing the other. After the verdict especially, the final chapters stretched on, as though Henderson felt as though he needed to write the reaction of every single person he had interviewed.

It's unfortunate, because the story itself is incredibly interesting, but when it's told through the eyes of someone who quite clearly glossed over the defense and demonized the prosecution on top of the amateurish writing, it's no better than reading or watching any other account where the prosecution is praised and the defense is ignored. I finished this book with a strong feeling of irritation, salvaged only by the narrator. If Paul Michael Garcia can make this tolerable, I'd love to see what he can do with a really good book.

11 people found this helpful

Stupid Murderer

I truly horrific murder of two people. Good storyline and decent performance but why writers tend to put too much inane background or court fluff into the story is beyond me. Having to continually advance through stuff that really isn't of importance, takes away from the book.

3 people found this helpful

Keeps you guessing

Well written and well read! This true sad story still has me guessing. Tom Henderson is the best with true crime.

3 people found this helpful

I Remember This Case Well!

I remember following the events of this trial when it was happening. Therefore I felt compelled to finish listening to the book, even though at times I felt a little overwhelmed by so many back stories. Especially since not only am I a lie long Michigander, I'm also a resident in the area described in detail in the story.

2 people found this helpful

Thoroughly uninteresting and unenjoyable

I miss the days when true crime books included lead-ups to the court trial and follow-ups after, books that concentrated on exploring the human condition and the lives of the people involved. This book is essentially a tedious, word-by-word, gesture - by - gesture description of the court proceedings. If I'd wanted to have that experience, I would have watched the trial. On top of that, the author picks and chooses what he emphasizes to promote his own views on the defendant's guilt and really piles it on at the end of the book, going so far as to include an incredibly self-serving and insulting interview by the killer. In the end, because of this approach, and because of the lack of insight and empathy for all parties involved, you find yourself listening to a book full of characters you really can't stand, and that includes the author. Not his finest work.

2 people found this helpful

held my attention from beginning to end

I dont want to ruin the book or ending. if you've read Blood in the Snow, this is nothing like that. there was no doubt in that book. I'm incredibly conflicted about this case after hearing the book. the author really did an astounding job of staying objective. read it and decide for yourself whether or not this was a miscarriage of justice.

2 people found this helpful

What really happened? Two know, only one is alive.

Would a lawyer actually be so stupid? This is a story a juvenile mind would think sounded brilliant. They can't live with or without each other. She didn't seem to hold his philandering against him. He had the best of both worlds she was his safety net if the girlfriend got too possessive. Not sure if he did it or not.

2 people found this helpful

Accidental?

I enjoyed that this book was very descriptive and spoke a lot about the victim and how her husband may have been the one who actually shot her instead of killing herself by accident. I wish there was more information on the mistress and her backstory and more of why she was part of the motive.

2 people found this helpful

Too much

Good story but it is drug out with unneeded and unwanted info. Very boring at times.