What do you think?
Rate this book
By Harry Farrell - Shallow Grave in Trinity County (1999-08-16) [Paperback]
Harry Farrell worked as a newspaper journalist for 40 years in San Jose, California. His first book, Swift Justice , about a 1930s kidnap-murder case that ended in a lynching of the perpetrators, won the Edgar Award for best fact crime of 1992. Shallow Grave in Trinity County is equally brilliant. In steady prose that is rich with details, Farrell describes how a weak-minded and repellent UC-Berkeley student was apprehended and convicted of the kidnap-murder of a 14-year-old girl, in the comparatively peaceful times of the 1950s. Shallow Grave is a model of how a true crime book should be the text is clear, chronological, compassionate, unembellished, and quietly gripping. Farrell not only gives readers all the facts of the case, both relevant and irrelevant, he also provides three maps of the region on which the exact sequence of the killer's actual movements ( vs. those he alleged in his testimony) can be traced.
Unknown Binding
First published November 1, 1997
2 people are currently reading
149 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
March 19, 2022
Interesting local history
December 27, 2013
Finished it this morning. This book had been on my wish list for many years till finally managed to buy a secondhand copy. I can say it was worth the wait.
Maybe not as gripping as some true crime books, Harry Farrell writes with a bit more distance but you must not forget that when he finally got all the documents and trial papers, a lot of people who played a big role in the Abbott case had already died.
It is much harder probably to write about a case that happened long ago, I think of Harold Schechter's great books but I can truly say this author did just as well.
A good writer who even though the case happened more than 60 years ago,managed to grab the attention of readers.
I for one had never heard of this case and yes there have been maybe more cruel and infamous killings this case was really interesting thanks to the excellent writing of the author.
Now I know there is another book about this case where that author thinks Abbott was innocent but checking the reviews of his book ( A Trail of Corn by Keith Walker), the majority of his readers still think Abbott was guilty, even after reading Walker's book.
He was very handsome so I think that was another reason why this case got so much attention back then. His wife Georgia was very pretty as well. In my hardback there were lots of great photo's.
Maybe not as gripping as some true crime books, Harry Farrell writes with a bit more distance but you must not forget that when he finally got all the documents and trial papers, a lot of people who played a big role in the Abbott case had already died.
It is much harder probably to write about a case that happened long ago, I think of Harold Schechter's great books but I can truly say this author did just as well.
A good writer who even though the case happened more than 60 years ago,managed to grab the attention of readers.
I for one had never heard of this case and yes there have been maybe more cruel and infamous killings this case was really interesting thanks to the excellent writing of the author.
Now I know there is another book about this case where that author thinks Abbott was innocent but checking the reviews of his book ( A Trail of Corn by Keith Walker), the majority of his readers still think Abbott was guilty, even after reading Walker's book.
He was very handsome so I think that was another reason why this case got so much attention back then. His wife Georgia was very pretty as well. In my hardback there were lots of great photo's.
March 7, 2009
Shallow Grave is an incredibly detailed, day-by-day account of the disappearance of fourteen-year-old Stephanie Bryan in 1955, and the subsequent search for her and the trial and execution of her presumed murderer, a young accounting student named Burton Abbott. Methods to find missing children were very primitive back then compared to now; if Stephanie had been kidnapped today, an Amber Alert would probably have been issued and while it might not have saved her, it certainly would have lead police to her killer sooner. It is chilling to think that Burton, a skinny, sickly and deceptively bland man, would certainly have gotten away with his crime and very possibly kept on killing had he not been stupid enough (or arrogant enough) to hide Stephanie's belongings in his own basement.
The issue of Abbott's guilt or innocence is controversial even to this day, and though Farrell never outright states his opinion, it's pretty obvious from the writing what he believes. And that's fine. This is a compulsively readable story; I've re-read my copy so often that some of the pages have fallen out. My only complaint about Shallow Grave is that while there is pretty good characterization of Abbott, Stephanie's personality is less clear. I think this is in part because Farrell chose to interview her brother rather than her sister, who had been much closer to her.
The issue of Abbott's guilt or innocence is controversial even to this day, and though Farrell never outright states his opinion, it's pretty obvious from the writing what he believes. And that's fine. This is a compulsively readable story; I've re-read my copy so often that some of the pages have fallen out. My only complaint about Shallow Grave is that while there is pretty good characterization of Abbott, Stephanie's personality is less clear. I think this is in part because Farrell chose to interview her brother rather than her sister, who had been much closer to her.
January 21, 2016
A fascinating read with great personal resonance for me, because the author casually revealed midway through the book that the victim was not only the first cousin of someone I grew up with, but also the niece of my dad's boss. It was even more satisfying than average to read about this guy going to prison. Unusually well written, too. The author passes no judgement on the parties involved but also refuses to sympathize with the killer, which is refreshing.
January 21, 2013
The extremely controversial Abbott case fair bids to go down along side the Borden case as a classic American study in ambiguity,hysteria,and lurking hints of subsurface malevolence which suggest far more appalling evil than evan the original crime.
As in the Borden case,we have the situation of a well-liked young person of some intellectual ability(Lizzie was the first woman to ever sit on the board of an American hospital)caught in a web of circumstances,all of which(with a bit of perhaps excessive ingenuity)can be logically explained.Moreover,Abbott, like Lizzie,was backed by independent witnesses (with absolutely no axe to grind) who,if believed, (and they had no conceivable incentive for lying) provided him and his automobile with an iron clad alibi.Both defendants had,and still have,a surprising and almost inexplicable charisma which s continues both to attract, and repel, quite intelligent people these long generations after their deaths
Much of the genuine fascination which both their almost unique cases hold,lies,of course, in the absolute certainty that if either defendant were innocent the jurors must, inevitably, have met the real killer-or, at least, one other person who knew the truth of what happened very precisely indeed.
As in the Borden case,despite its international notoriety,the Abbott case remained without its historian for nearly fifty years;as in the Borden case at the very last possible moment the prosecution has opened its files,for the first time and handed them to an already like minded crime reporter of literary credit to prepare the definitive account(or rather the definitive account of the prosecution) for posterity,all packaged in three hundred pages.As in the Borden case it is inevitable that another equally gifted(and less biased) investigative reporter will come along within the next thirty years, review the files, and debunk Mr.Farrell's book,just as Edward Radin mercilessly reduced the efforts of hostile Lizzie "biographer" Edmund Pearson to a heap of little pieces in the early sixties.
The anti-Lizzie forces skulked for about fifteen years and then came back swinging.Who won? Check out your internet.There have been four mock trials of the Borden case held since then (one presided over by a chief justice of the United States Supreme Court) and all four have ended in acquittals as did the original trial in 1893.Does this ever convince the losers? Of course not,they will write more books and eventually get yet another posthumous trial.
Fortunately for posterity,Mr. Farrell's book was,almost simultaneously, balanced by an even more comprehensive treatment of the defense case,"A Trail of Corn" by Keith Walker,who likewise spent some thirty-five years on the case starting from near day one.He is a professional court room reporter who has incorporated what must be thousands of pages of original interviews with now deceased individuals and trial transcripts into his text.
Unfortunately,Mr. Walker has chosen to publish his massive notes in the form of conversations between the interrogators and the witnesses without indexed references to his original sources. Farrell doesn't give his specific sources for quotes either but he professes(and I am sure that he is)largely citing otherwise unavailable interviews(however biased) with people whom he specifically names and which caan be found(next time the State of California decides to open them up)in the government archives.His accuracy can and will ,eventually,be checked out.
Mr. Walker is dealing with private people(he was the confidant for many years of the late Elsie Abbott,Burton's mother) unless he deposits his raw materials in a museum archive posterity will have no way of fairly appraising his efforts.He is the nearly last survivor of one of the most bitterly fought cases of its time.He owes it to his friends to see that their position is correctly represented.(I will post a separate review of "A Trail of Corn" shortly).
One thing is certain Mr.Walker is a professional stenographer who reproduces the already known testimony in painstaking(nearly agonizing) detail.He regularly serves as a corrective to Mr. Farrell's quite consistent hit and run techniques.
Let's take an elementary example of how the two authors handle a single indisputable fact.The jurors after eight days deliberation found Abbott guilty and, knowing that they would be judged most unfavorably by a large minority of the public,one of them immediately issued an extremely detailed statement(Walker,pp.613-615 ) explaining exactly what part(by no means all) of the prosecution evidence they believed and why they were rejecting the alibi witnesses even though they believed them to be honest.
Farrell,incredibly,not only fails to print this but fails to indicate that it even exists.Probably because it is highly skeptical of two of the three identification witnesses called by the prosecution.What is more it specifically state that they did not convict on the basis of the forensic evidence, on which most subsequent writers including reviewers here, justly, lay most of their emphasis
On the other hand Walker has probably crafted most of his book by following up the juror's statement, and he systematically ,and effectively, attacks the credibility of each witness on whom the jurors relied .This reviewer checked every indexed citation of these witnesses in both books and it is obvious that Farrell as well as Walker knows exactly what the game is.He owed it to his readers to make plain that the jury that convicted found key parts of the police case to be unbelievable or barely believable.
Or to take just one other example.The jurors certainly did believe the third and last identification witness called by the prosecution during its direct case,a woman named Reva Leidecker.No question,if Reva is to be believed,she takes them the whole way,and they did believe her.She swore that she saw Burton beating Stephanie Bryant in his 1949 Chevy at a very precise place and time.But Farrell mentions her only three times in his entire book.He has Reva being called to the stand then cuts,omitting all of the examination -and the cross-examination(pp.208-209). She is mentioned only once more in the book.We never find out, from him , what she said.
Now Walker spends pages on this witness and with equally good reason.She was the last of fifteen alleged eyewitnesses to come forward,a mere few days before trial.Hundreds of thousands of words had been written describing an altercation which may,or may not,have involved Abbott,or Stephanie,or the Chevy.Thousands of pictures of both suspect and victim had been printed and featured on television.And Reva rushes in at the last minute to say she is the only one in the world to identify all three.In these more enlightened days her testimony would be thrown as scientifically incredible, and legally inadmissible as she was sprung on the defense at the last minute.Nevertheless she was the only eye witness called by the prosecution on whom the jurors in the end relied,not upon the eminent Paul Kirk(Kirk was the equivalent of to-day's Henry Lee) who gave the odds as 125,000 to one that certain hairs found in the Abbott car came from Stephanie.
But just a minute. 125,000 in a city of several million means there were over a dozen local women who could have supplied the hairs and Mrs.Abbott was professional beautician and Kirk didn't find those hairs till months after he started his investigation and his pupil Lowell Bradford,who testified reluctantly for the defense,said he agreed on Kirk's analysis on everything except one of those hairs.It appeared to have been dyed.In which case it definitely came from the beauty parlor,not from the head of the victim.
The defense has repeated moved to have all these items retested in the light of modern DNA discoveries.So far the state has successfully stone walled the motions.
But why should it? if DNA can prove the hairs and the blood and the fibers came from Stephanie so much the better for people who are as positive as Mr.Farrell.If not,"Let some amends be made to a most gallant gentleman who was in quicklime laid."
But,of course,to cite just this one example(there are hundreds of other possibilities) should it someday turn out that the hair did originally come from Stephanie BUT that it has been dyed,the case will,as in the Borden case,be right back in the fascinating limbo of perhaps permanently irresolvable historical mysteries.
I have singled out a number more in my review of "A Trail of Corn".
As in the Borden case,we have the situation of a well-liked young person of some intellectual ability(Lizzie was the first woman to ever sit on the board of an American hospital)caught in a web of circumstances,all of which(with a bit of perhaps excessive ingenuity)can be logically explained.Moreover,Abbott, like Lizzie,was backed by independent witnesses (with absolutely no axe to grind) who,if believed, (and they had no conceivable incentive for lying) provided him and his automobile with an iron clad alibi.Both defendants had,and still have,a surprising and almost inexplicable charisma which s continues both to attract, and repel, quite intelligent people these long generations after their deaths
Much of the genuine fascination which both their almost unique cases hold,lies,of course, in the absolute certainty that if either defendant were innocent the jurors must, inevitably, have met the real killer-or, at least, one other person who knew the truth of what happened very precisely indeed.
As in the Borden case,despite its international notoriety,the Abbott case remained without its historian for nearly fifty years;as in the Borden case at the very last possible moment the prosecution has opened its files,for the first time and handed them to an already like minded crime reporter of literary credit to prepare the definitive account(or rather the definitive account of the prosecution) for posterity,all packaged in three hundred pages.As in the Borden case it is inevitable that another equally gifted(and less biased) investigative reporter will come along within the next thirty years, review the files, and debunk Mr.Farrell's book,just as Edward Radin mercilessly reduced the efforts of hostile Lizzie "biographer" Edmund Pearson to a heap of little pieces in the early sixties.
The anti-Lizzie forces skulked for about fifteen years and then came back swinging.Who won? Check out your internet.There have been four mock trials of the Borden case held since then (one presided over by a chief justice of the United States Supreme Court) and all four have ended in acquittals as did the original trial in 1893.Does this ever convince the losers? Of course not,they will write more books and eventually get yet another posthumous trial.
Fortunately for posterity,Mr. Farrell's book was,almost simultaneously, balanced by an even more comprehensive treatment of the defense case,"A Trail of Corn" by Keith Walker,who likewise spent some thirty-five years on the case starting from near day one.He is a professional court room reporter who has incorporated what must be thousands of pages of original interviews with now deceased individuals and trial transcripts into his text.
Unfortunately,Mr. Walker has chosen to publish his massive notes in the form of conversations between the interrogators and the witnesses without indexed references to his original sources. Farrell doesn't give his specific sources for quotes either but he professes(and I am sure that he is)largely citing otherwise unavailable interviews(however biased) with people whom he specifically names and which caan be found(next time the State of California decides to open them up)in the government archives.His accuracy can and will ,eventually,be checked out.
Mr. Walker is dealing with private people(he was the confidant for many years of the late Elsie Abbott,Burton's mother) unless he deposits his raw materials in a museum archive posterity will have no way of fairly appraising his efforts.He is the nearly last survivor of one of the most bitterly fought cases of its time.He owes it to his friends to see that their position is correctly represented.(I will post a separate review of "A Trail of Corn" shortly).
One thing is certain Mr.Walker is a professional stenographer who reproduces the already known testimony in painstaking(nearly agonizing) detail.He regularly serves as a corrective to Mr. Farrell's quite consistent hit and run techniques.
Let's take an elementary example of how the two authors handle a single indisputable fact.The jurors after eight days deliberation found Abbott guilty and, knowing that they would be judged most unfavorably by a large minority of the public,one of them immediately issued an extremely detailed statement(Walker,pp.613-615 ) explaining exactly what part(by no means all) of the prosecution evidence they believed and why they were rejecting the alibi witnesses even though they believed them to be honest.
Farrell,incredibly,not only fails to print this but fails to indicate that it even exists.Probably because it is highly skeptical of two of the three identification witnesses called by the prosecution.What is more it specifically state that they did not convict on the basis of the forensic evidence, on which most subsequent writers including reviewers here, justly, lay most of their emphasis
On the other hand Walker has probably crafted most of his book by following up the juror's statement, and he systematically ,and effectively, attacks the credibility of each witness on whom the jurors relied .This reviewer checked every indexed citation of these witnesses in both books and it is obvious that Farrell as well as Walker knows exactly what the game is.He owed it to his readers to make plain that the jury that convicted found key parts of the police case to be unbelievable or barely believable.
Or to take just one other example.The jurors certainly did believe the third and last identification witness called by the prosecution during its direct case,a woman named Reva Leidecker.No question,if Reva is to be believed,she takes them the whole way,and they did believe her.She swore that she saw Burton beating Stephanie Bryant in his 1949 Chevy at a very precise place and time.But Farrell mentions her only three times in his entire book.He has Reva being called to the stand then cuts,omitting all of the examination -and the cross-examination(pp.208-209). She is mentioned only once more in the book.We never find out, from him , what she said.
Now Walker spends pages on this witness and with equally good reason.She was the last of fifteen alleged eyewitnesses to come forward,a mere few days before trial.Hundreds of thousands of words had been written describing an altercation which may,or may not,have involved Abbott,or Stephanie,or the Chevy.Thousands of pictures of both suspect and victim had been printed and featured on television.And Reva rushes in at the last minute to say she is the only one in the world to identify all three.In these more enlightened days her testimony would be thrown as scientifically incredible, and legally inadmissible as she was sprung on the defense at the last minute.Nevertheless she was the only eye witness called by the prosecution on whom the jurors in the end relied,not upon the eminent Paul Kirk(Kirk was the equivalent of to-day's Henry Lee) who gave the odds as 125,000 to one that certain hairs found in the Abbott car came from Stephanie.
But just a minute. 125,000 in a city of several million means there were over a dozen local women who could have supplied the hairs and Mrs.Abbott was professional beautician and Kirk didn't find those hairs till months after he started his investigation and his pupil Lowell Bradford,who testified reluctantly for the defense,said he agreed on Kirk's analysis on everything except one of those hairs.It appeared to have been dyed.In which case it definitely came from the beauty parlor,not from the head of the victim.
The defense has repeated moved to have all these items retested in the light of modern DNA discoveries.So far the state has successfully stone walled the motions.
But why should it? if DNA can prove the hairs and the blood and the fibers came from Stephanie so much the better for people who are as positive as Mr.Farrell.If not,"Let some amends be made to a most gallant gentleman who was in quicklime laid."
But,of course,to cite just this one example(there are hundreds of other possibilities) should it someday turn out that the hair did originally come from Stephanie BUT that it has been dyed,the case will,as in the Borden case,be right back in the fascinating limbo of perhaps permanently irresolvable historical mysteries.
I have singled out a number more in my review of "A Trail of Corn".
January 17, 2018
This is a well written true crime account of the kidnapping and murder of 14 year old Stephanie Bryan in 1955. The story is laid out in a concise manner without too many details that often bog down a non fiction book.
I was amazed at all the excuses lawyers and family members tried to find in order to explain Stephanie’s purse, school books, and bra that were buried in the suspect’s basement. Even though it was clear how the story would end, it was fascinating to see how the lawyers collected evidence and laid out their case.
I was amazed at all the excuses lawyers and family members tried to find in order to explain Stephanie’s purse, school books, and bra that were buried in the suspect’s basement. Even though it was clear how the story would end, it was fascinating to see how the lawyers collected evidence and laid out their case.
May 11, 2023
"Shallow Grave in Trinity County" is the haunting true story of a murder case that horrified 1950s America. In a classic case of "truth is stranger than fiction", Farrell's book opens with a shocking discovery: the wife of 27-year-old college student Burton Abbott stumbles upon a mysterious purse hidden in their basement. Strangely, the purse contains the ID card and other belongings of missing 14-year-old Stephanie Bryan, who disappeared in Oakland California three months earlier. The police are called, and from that point on, the author never relinquishes tension, vividly recounting the strange twists and turns in the extensive investigation culminating in a landmark murder trial. Veteran journalist Farrell, who originally reported on the story as it unfolded in 1955, brings a reporter's eye for detail to his steady, well-crafted narrative of the suspenseful investigation, trial, and aftermath. Farrell's book is a masterful mixture of police procedural, legal drama, and psychological thriller which simultaneously serves as a meditation on lost innocence, family secrets, and the elusive quest for truth. This is one of my favorite true crime books. Highly recommended.
November 13, 2024
Great nonfiction crime book with fascinating well written detail on the strategies and tactics from both the defense, prosecution, police, defendant and witness's perspectives. Especially interesting if you live or are familiar with the SF Bay Area particularly Berkley and Oakland. It must have taken an amazing amount of research for the author who use to be a San Jose Mercury reporter to put this book together and writing it in such a way that it makes for an interesting read despite all the details which were critical to both sides of the criminal case that was a spectacle in the mid to late 1950s.
March 30, 2023
An in-depth, well-researched accounting of the notorious kidnapping/murder of Stephanie Bryan of 1950's Berkeley, California; and the arrest, conviction and execution of Burton Abbott whose guilt concerning this crime has been questioned by several over the years.
June 4, 2021
The changes in the criminal system were need to protect people from the government. I do believe he was guilty, but I do not believe in the death penalty.
October 20, 2023
One of my favorite true crime books.
September 5, 2015
As a Bay Area native, this book was pretty spellbinding as a criminal case study with lots of local history and trivia thrown in. I mean, Earl Stanley Gardener even makes a cameo at the courthouse near Lake Merritt!
The book stands alone, though, as a well crafted tale of true crime. Burton Abbott is as enigmatic a character as any fictitious villain. The opening scene (which takes place months after Bryan's disappearance) seems to cast a great shadow of guilt over Abbott from the very beginning: items belonging to the missing girl are found in the Abbott's basement in Alameda. He quickly becomes the focus of the investigation and too many coincidences come to light for there to be any doubt who killed the poor Bryan girl.
The reader can't help but wonder what evidence might have been found if this case were being investigated today. The case presents a very difficult dilemma in the ethics of juris-prudence: should someone be penalized to the fullest extent of the law if the only evidence against them is circumstantial? Burton Abbott's story and its ethical implications will simmer in your mind well after you've finished the book.
The book stands alone, though, as a well crafted tale of true crime. Burton Abbott is as enigmatic a character as any fictitious villain. The opening scene (which takes place months after Bryan's disappearance) seems to cast a great shadow of guilt over Abbott from the very beginning: items belonging to the missing girl are found in the Abbott's basement in Alameda. He quickly becomes the focus of the investigation and too many coincidences come to light for there to be any doubt who killed the poor Bryan girl.
The reader can't help but wonder what evidence might have been found if this case were being investigated today. The case presents a very difficult dilemma in the ethics of juris-prudence: should someone be penalized to the fullest extent of the law if the only evidence against them is circumstantial? Burton Abbott's story and its ethical implications will simmer in your mind well after you've finished the book.
September 15, 2011
on page 125 or so the author suggests a flaw in the defendant's alibi, says it is impossible to get lost in sacramento because the streets are laid out so well. HA i've done it three times. of course i can get lost following a straight line. maybe i shouldn't be bragging about that...
interesting read. knowing the places, roads talked about makes for a good and uncomfortable read.
interesting read. knowing the places, roads talked about makes for a good and uncomfortable read.
June 1, 2016
Another very interesting true crime story about one of the first serial killings in the Bay Area. Farrell does a great job at explaining how innocent people were then, and how unusual this type of crime was for the times (The 1950s). It's very sad, but very sensitively written. Such a good author and a great reporter.
June 30, 2010
This is the non-fiction story of a fourteen year old girl who was kidnapped and murdered in Berkeley, California in 1955. My oldest brother was in the same grade in school as this girl's brother so I was aware of this tragedy during my childhood.
June 6, 2013
This book was a little too distant. I never felt like I knew the victim, or the alleged murderer for that matter. The most interesting aspect was the way laws have improved to protect the accused, and also the difficulty in gathering evidence before DNA testing.
March 26, 2009
This book was really well written true crime. It also does a nice job of placing the East Bay in its historical context.
Really an awesome and creepy book.
Really an awesome and creepy book.
July 1, 2010
I love this book for the slice of very local history it provides. The actual subject matter is horrifying. But the glimpse of my neighborhood 50 years before I moved here is fascinating.
July 22, 2016
Shallow Grave in Trinity County shed light into an unknown aspect of America's middle class, hidden psychopathic tendencies in married men.
January 31, 2016
4.5 stars. I've never read true crime before. This book made me want to start
April 25, 2017
Attending grammar school in Alameda during the late 50s I remember drills about not getting into cars with strangers, not accepting candy from strangers, etc. So when I heard about this book I thought Bud Abbott must have been the reason. While he might have been the reason, this book takes place several years before I reached grammar school. Either way this was an interesting read. Because I am a Bay Area girl I knew of many of the places in this book. I could easily picture the spot where different events take place and I think that added to the book. It amazed me how much our legal system has changed within those 60 years. How quickly he was put to death. Really the whole story hinged on the night the red purse was founded in Abbott's basement and the fact the neighbor happened to be there that night and suggested calling the police. Had the neighbor not been there who knows how many other girls Abbott might have killed before getting caught? Worth your time.
March 19, 2018
Not the best book, but if you want to learn about the Burton Abbott case, it was really informative.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews