Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
a dark tale, 10 Sep 2006
This book is something of a paradox: finely written and fantastically detailed, but also gratuitous and even prurient in its descriptions of the women's hideous deaths and miserable lives. They may have not been paragons, but they were victims, and David Seabrook shows little humanity to them in these pages. But if nothing else, the book certainly lifts the lid on the seamy side of 60s west London.
|
|
|
10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
A Decidedly Odd Work, 24 Jan 2007
I will begin by saying that in terms of new, and in many cases surprising, information about the nude murders of the early to mid 1960s, this is a four star book and worthy of at least one read-through.
However, I can honestly say that I have never before read a true crime book that treats the victims in such a vulgar and, frankly, disturbing manner. One passage, worth quoting (mostly) in full, illustrates this. Concerning victims Hannah Tailford and Irene Lockwood's mug shots:
"Mind you, Hannah Tailford's is more like a morgue shot. 'She has told me often that a geezer has had it up --- ----' recalled window cleanrer Frederick Townsend, and hers is a face, I suppose, that only a b--ger could love. And if Tailford is Nora Batty's understudy, Lockwood is Freddy Starr in drag. Just look at them. You wouldn't trust these two as far as you could throw them. You wouldn't pay them either, not unless you were truly hard up."
Had these comments been made by pre-"Sensitivity Training" officers, original to the case, discussing the women in a ca. ,1966 report, they would still be distasteful but somewhat excusable. The fact that they were made in the 21st century, by an author describing two murder victims, makes these remarks not only loathesome but also depressing. And the book is full of such moments.
I wish that Mr. Seabrook had spent more time quoting directly from the 1960s reports, and less time offering editorial comment about the victims.
|
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Review, 21 Nov 2007
This book concerns a series of murders which took place between 1959-1965, but are almost unknown. This book is the most detailed one to date and discusses the lives of the unfortunate victims in great detail. Yet there is not much about the polcie investigation or how the media worked. It brings a lot more information to the fore than was already known and so the author has to be congratulated on that. It is a sordid and disagreeable tale - but reflects reality.
However, the style of writing is confused and the book is difficult to read. Given that these crimes are not well known, some sort of introduction would have been helpful, letting the reader know where he is going and what to expect. Instead it jumps about in an episodic manner. It is a hard slog.
The other odd point is that though the author does not name the man suspected of these appalling crimes, he does give us a lot of information about him; certainly enough for him to be identified by cross referencing birth and marriage indexes and electoral registers. Given the man is still alive, this does seem rather dangerous.
Finally, as a fellow crime writer, I am puzzled as to how the author ahs bene given access to files which relate to a recent unsolved murder; usually the closure period is far more stringent.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|