I was expecting this book to be more about the survivors, but it turned out to be too much about the actual killers. I guess the author in a sense felt that he needed to recap each story for those who might not be familiar w/ it or just simply forgot, but I just didn't like it. Especially when he dedicated over 10 pages of his closing notes on Dahmer's brain and BTK's letters! What do any of those things have to do with their survivors?
I wish he would have had more info on how these events affected each survivor and how (if in any) way did this change how they live their lives today..

Share/Like this Review?

Way too much space devoted to Rosen's liberal prejudices. Way too much time spent mocking and painting as rubes the few people who consented to waste their time being interviewed. Way too much time padding stories and misquoting facts. Rosen was lazy on this one, and my opinion of him as even a mid-level crime writer has truly dropped. One of my interests when I got the book was hearing how survivors have matured through the years and what they honestly think about how the crimes they lived through affected them. What Rosen delivered was his opinion on how they'd handled things and demeaning comments about their current jobs or life situations. A major disappointment was that he devoted a chapter to the sole survivor of Richard Speck - yet claimed he wasn't even able to track her down. Why would one tell this woman's story with no material in a book advertised as tales of the survivors? Just to show that one is a lazy researcher? If I want to hear someone make fun of fashions or food in my neck of the woods, mock WalMart workers, or trivialize nervous habits, I can get that without buying a book.

Share/Like this Review?