What do you think?
Rate this book
Five Bullets: The Story of Bernie Goetz, New York's Explosive '80s, and the Subway Vigilante Trial That Divided the Nation
From CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams, a revelatory account of how one man, four teenagers, and a struggling city collided over race, vigilantism, and public safety . . . exposing the fault lines of a nation
On a dirty New York subway car on December 22, 1984, Bernhard Goetz shot Barry Allen, Darrell Cabey, Troy Canty, and James Ramseur, four teenagers from the Bronx, at point blank range. Goetz claimed they were going to mug him; the teens claim that one of them had simply asked for five dollars.
Crime was at an all-time high. So was racial tension. Was Goetz, who was white, a hero who finally fought back? Or a bigot whose itchy trigger finger seriously wounded three unarmed black kids and condemned a fourth to irreversible brain damage? By the time Goetz went on trial for quadruple attempted murder, the “Subway Vigilante” saga had become a global sensation, and New Yorkers across race and class were split over whether he deserved decades in prison…or a medal.
In Five Bullets, Elliot Williams vaults back to gritty 1980s Manhattan and reexamines the first major true-crime story of the cable news era. Drawing on archives and interviews with many main characters, including Goetz, Williams presents a masterful and vivid tale that also tells the origin stories of larger-than-life Al Sharpton, a polarizing young local activist rocketing to national prominence; Rudy Giuliani, a rising-star prosecutor with an important decision to make; the NRA, which needed a poster boy for its transition from hunting club to political juggernaut; and Rupert Murdoch, whose new purchase, the New York Post, grew his empire by keeping a scary story in the headlines.
A shocking account of a pivotal moment in our history, Five Bullets demonstrates why, in order to understand today’s debates about race, crime, safety, and the media, it’s imperative to reflect on what went down in the subway four decades ago. As Williams’s powerful narrative reveals, it was not just Goetz on trial, but the conscience of a nation.
On a dirty New York subway car on December 22, 1984, Bernhard Goetz shot Barry Allen, Darrell Cabey, Troy Canty, and James Ramseur, four teenagers from the Bronx, at point blank range. Goetz claimed they were going to mug him; the teens claim that one of them had simply asked for five dollars.
Crime was at an all-time high. So was racial tension. Was Goetz, who was white, a hero who finally fought back? Or a bigot whose itchy trigger finger seriously wounded three unarmed black kids and condemned a fourth to irreversible brain damage? By the time Goetz went on trial for quadruple attempted murder, the “Subway Vigilante” saga had become a global sensation, and New Yorkers across race and class were split over whether he deserved decades in prison…or a medal.
In Five Bullets, Elliot Williams vaults back to gritty 1980s Manhattan and reexamines the first major true-crime story of the cable news era. Drawing on archives and interviews with many main characters, including Goetz, Williams presents a masterful and vivid tale that also tells the origin stories of larger-than-life Al Sharpton, a polarizing young local activist rocketing to national prominence; Rudy Giuliani, a rising-star prosecutor with an important decision to make; the NRA, which needed a poster boy for its transition from hunting club to political juggernaut; and Rupert Murdoch, whose new purchase, the New York Post, grew his empire by keeping a scary story in the headlines.
A shocking account of a pivotal moment in our history, Five Bullets demonstrates why, in order to understand today’s debates about race, crime, safety, and the media, it’s imperative to reflect on what went down in the subway four decades ago. As Williams’s powerful narrative reveals, it was not just Goetz on trial, but the conscience of a nation.
384 pages, Hardcover
Published January 20, 2026
133 people are currently reading
3783 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 - 30 of 50 reviews
November 6, 2025
New York City in the 80s was an interesting place. I suppose interesting is doing a lot of heavy lifting in my previous sentence. NYC was a scary place in the 80s. High crime rates, corruption, and filth was easy to find. In the middle of this maelstrom stepped 4 teenagers and one Bernhard Goetz. You may know him as Bernie.
In December of 1984, Troy Canty asked Bernie for 5 dollars on a subway car. Bernie started shooting. Hence, we have the title of Elliot Williams' excellent Five Bullets. One of the most infamous court cases of the 20th century almost literally divided the nation. It certainly divided New York City.
For context, I grew up in the suburbs of NYC. My father was a DEA agent who worked out of Manhattan. So of course, I knew the name Bernie Goetz. However, it's worth pointing out that in 1984 I was only 2 years old. This case was so huge that I can literally remember Bernie's name being thrown around dinner parties as I spied on adults as they went back and forth about whether he was a hero or a whack job.
All of this to say, maybe this story is not as formative for people outside the northeast of the U.S. Luckily, Williams writes such an engaging story that it doesn't matter. This is exceptionally written and well-balanced. The story never slows down and even slight tangents are vital in understanding the setting of the gritty NYC of the 80s. Yes, you will get quick asides on big names like Al Sharpton and Rudy Giuliani, but Williams makes sure to keep his focus on Bernie and this case. Williams' legal background is especially helpful in understanding the twists and turns of the wild trial.
Most importantly, Williams doesn't take the easy way out of the narrative. Any good author, and Williams is one, is going to be honest that you cannot take one side when it comes to Goetz and this case. If you brand Goetz a racist and portray him as a common criminal, then you completely miss the real fear of crime running rampant around the city. If you look at Goetz and see an avenging angel, then you are ignoring some bright red flags that nearly everyone in this story acknowledges, including his own lawyers. This case should make you uncomfortable, and Williams doesn't flinch. You shouldn't either. Make sure you pick this one up.
(This book was provided as an advance copy by the author and The Penguin Press.)
In December of 1984, Troy Canty asked Bernie for 5 dollars on a subway car. Bernie started shooting. Hence, we have the title of Elliot Williams' excellent Five Bullets. One of the most infamous court cases of the 20th century almost literally divided the nation. It certainly divided New York City.
For context, I grew up in the suburbs of NYC. My father was a DEA agent who worked out of Manhattan. So of course, I knew the name Bernie Goetz. However, it's worth pointing out that in 1984 I was only 2 years old. This case was so huge that I can literally remember Bernie's name being thrown around dinner parties as I spied on adults as they went back and forth about whether he was a hero or a whack job.
All of this to say, maybe this story is not as formative for people outside the northeast of the U.S. Luckily, Williams writes such an engaging story that it doesn't matter. This is exceptionally written and well-balanced. The story never slows down and even slight tangents are vital in understanding the setting of the gritty NYC of the 80s. Yes, you will get quick asides on big names like Al Sharpton and Rudy Giuliani, but Williams makes sure to keep his focus on Bernie and this case. Williams' legal background is especially helpful in understanding the twists and turns of the wild trial.
Most importantly, Williams doesn't take the easy way out of the narrative. Any good author, and Williams is one, is going to be honest that you cannot take one side when it comes to Goetz and this case. If you brand Goetz a racist and portray him as a common criminal, then you completely miss the real fear of crime running rampant around the city. If you look at Goetz and see an avenging angel, then you are ignoring some bright red flags that nearly everyone in this story acknowledges, including his own lawyers. This case should make you uncomfortable, and Williams doesn't flinch. You shouldn't either. Make sure you pick this one up.
(This book was provided as an advance copy by the author and The Penguin Press.)
February 26, 2026
Let me say first that I experienced this book in the Audible format. It was read by the author, which in this case was an asset to the listening experience.
There are probably a number of books about the Subway vigilante who shot four black teenagers in 1984 just before Christmas. This particular book was not written until 40 years later in 2023. I don’t know if I could list the benefits and liabilities of that delay in putting these particular words together. The book does a considerable amount of digressing, but it is mostly interesting. I was living on Long Island when all of this was going on in NYC. I remember it very generally, but hardly at all specifically. It went on quite a long time in the courts after the incident. Bernard Gaetz was still alive and kicking when the book was written.
Here is something that Claude AI had to say:
Five Bullets: The Story of Bernie Goetz, New York’s Explosive ’80s, and the Subway Vigilante Trial That Divided the Nation is a 2026 nonfiction book by CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams. Here’s a thorough summary and review:
What It’s About
On December 22, 1984, Bernhard Goetz shot Barry Allen, Darrell Cabey, Troy Canty, and James Ramseur — four teenagers from the Bronx — at point blank range on a New York City subway car. Goetz claimed they were going to mug him; the teens maintain that one of them had simply asked for five dollars.  Three were seriously wounded and one, Darrell Cabey, was condemned to irreversible brain damage.  The incident made Goetz a polarizing national figure — celebrated by some as the “Subway Vigilante” and condemned by others as a symbol of racial violence.
What Williams Explores
Williams doesn’t just retell the story — he uses it as a lens to examine much bigger forces. The book describes the socioeconomic conditions of New York City that set the tone for the shooting and the subsequent debates in the public, the press, and the courts. It goes into the backstories of all five of the main people involved, then delves into a detailed account of the shooting and the trial, drawn from archival sources and interviews. 
One of the book’s most compelling threads is how the case launched or accelerated the careers of figures who would become major national players. Williams presents origin stories of larger-than-life figures: Al Sharpton, a polarizing young local activist rocketing to national prominence; Rudy Giuliani, a rising-star prosecutor with an important decision to make; the NRA, which needed a poster boy for its transition from hunting club to political juggernaut; and Rupert Murdoch, whose new purchase, the New York Post, grew his empire by keeping a scary story in the headlines. 
Williams also dedicates significant attention to the role of the tabloid media. He devotes an entire chapter to Murdoch’s takeover of The New York Post, showing how it shifted coverage toward the most sensational aspects of crime, with three-inch screaming headlines, and how other tabloids followed suit — creating an arms race of shock and fear throughout the 1980s. 
The Legal Analysis
As a former federal prosecutor, Williams is particularly sharp on the trial itself. He explores how the central legal argument — the “reasonableness” of Goetz’s fear — still resonates today, amounting to a sharp look at a touchstone moment in American conceptions of race, self-defense, and who has a right to feel safe.  In the book’s conclusion, Williams compares Goetz to more contemporary vigilantes like Kyle Rittenhouse and Daniel Penny. While he refers to the jury’s verdict in Goetz’s criminal case as “supportable and sound,” he draws a distinction between that and the morality of the case. 
How It Ends
The book concludes with Williams describing an interview he conducted with Goetz by phone, in which Goetz fully defended his actions, sidetracking at points into discussions about race, cannabis, and politics. 
Critical Reception
Five Bullets has an overall positive reception. Critics praised Williams’s careful inclusion of multiple viewpoints and balanced, thoughtful commentary, saying it goes far beyond typical true-crime accounts and elevates itself to relevant social commentary.  Kirkus called it “a lively and haunting account of five men linked by a shooting — echoing New York’s enduring tensions over fear and race.”  Some critics noted that it suffers slightly by comparison to a simultaneously released companion book, Fear and Fury by historian Heather Ann Thompson, which takes a more humanizing approach to the four teenagers.
Bottom Line: Five Bullets is a richly reported, legally astute, and culturally resonant book. It’s not simply a true-crime retelling — it’s an argument that the Goetz case was a crucible in which America’s ongoing debates about race, vigilantism, media sensationalism, and who gets to feel afraid were forged. Highly recommended for anyone interested in American legal history, race relations, or the political forces that shaped the modern era.
There are probably a number of books about the Subway vigilante who shot four black teenagers in 1984 just before Christmas. This particular book was not written until 40 years later in 2023. I don’t know if I could list the benefits and liabilities of that delay in putting these particular words together. The book does a considerable amount of digressing, but it is mostly interesting. I was living on Long Island when all of this was going on in NYC. I remember it very generally, but hardly at all specifically. It went on quite a long time in the courts after the incident. Bernard Gaetz was still alive and kicking when the book was written.
Here is something that Claude AI had to say:
Five Bullets: The Story of Bernie Goetz, New York’s Explosive ’80s, and the Subway Vigilante Trial That Divided the Nation is a 2026 nonfiction book by CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams. Here’s a thorough summary and review:
What It’s About
On December 22, 1984, Bernhard Goetz shot Barry Allen, Darrell Cabey, Troy Canty, and James Ramseur — four teenagers from the Bronx — at point blank range on a New York City subway car. Goetz claimed they were going to mug him; the teens maintain that one of them had simply asked for five dollars.  Three were seriously wounded and one, Darrell Cabey, was condemned to irreversible brain damage.  The incident made Goetz a polarizing national figure — celebrated by some as the “Subway Vigilante” and condemned by others as a symbol of racial violence.
What Williams Explores
Williams doesn’t just retell the story — he uses it as a lens to examine much bigger forces. The book describes the socioeconomic conditions of New York City that set the tone for the shooting and the subsequent debates in the public, the press, and the courts. It goes into the backstories of all five of the main people involved, then delves into a detailed account of the shooting and the trial, drawn from archival sources and interviews. 
One of the book’s most compelling threads is how the case launched or accelerated the careers of figures who would become major national players. Williams presents origin stories of larger-than-life figures: Al Sharpton, a polarizing young local activist rocketing to national prominence; Rudy Giuliani, a rising-star prosecutor with an important decision to make; the NRA, which needed a poster boy for its transition from hunting club to political juggernaut; and Rupert Murdoch, whose new purchase, the New York Post, grew his empire by keeping a scary story in the headlines. 
Williams also dedicates significant attention to the role of the tabloid media. He devotes an entire chapter to Murdoch’s takeover of The New York Post, showing how it shifted coverage toward the most sensational aspects of crime, with three-inch screaming headlines, and how other tabloids followed suit — creating an arms race of shock and fear throughout the 1980s. 
The Legal Analysis
As a former federal prosecutor, Williams is particularly sharp on the trial itself. He explores how the central legal argument — the “reasonableness” of Goetz’s fear — still resonates today, amounting to a sharp look at a touchstone moment in American conceptions of race, self-defense, and who has a right to feel safe.  In the book’s conclusion, Williams compares Goetz to more contemporary vigilantes like Kyle Rittenhouse and Daniel Penny. While he refers to the jury’s verdict in Goetz’s criminal case as “supportable and sound,” he draws a distinction between that and the morality of the case. 
How It Ends
The book concludes with Williams describing an interview he conducted with Goetz by phone, in which Goetz fully defended his actions, sidetracking at points into discussions about race, cannabis, and politics. 
Critical Reception
Five Bullets has an overall positive reception. Critics praised Williams’s careful inclusion of multiple viewpoints and balanced, thoughtful commentary, saying it goes far beyond typical true-crime accounts and elevates itself to relevant social commentary.  Kirkus called it “a lively and haunting account of five men linked by a shooting — echoing New York’s enduring tensions over fear and race.”  Some critics noted that it suffers slightly by comparison to a simultaneously released companion book, Fear and Fury by historian Heather Ann Thompson, which takes a more humanizing approach to the four teenagers.
Bottom Line: Five Bullets is a richly reported, legally astute, and culturally resonant book. It’s not simply a true-crime retelling — it’s an argument that the Goetz case was a crucible in which America’s ongoing debates about race, vigilantism, media sensationalism, and who gets to feel afraid were forged. Highly recommended for anyone interested in American legal history, race relations, or the political forces that shaped the modern era.
Review of advance copy received from Netgalley
Five Bullets is an interesting read that sits in between a true crime easy read and an academic piece of nonfiction. I found it to be a fairly fast read, but I must acknowledge that there is quite a bit of legal topics examined throughout that I found easier than a lay person would, as a criminal defense attorney. (I greatly appreciated the author's repeated shout out to the difficulties and intricacies of both the law and appellate work, as an appellate attorney myself!) Williams examines the case of Bernie Goetz with the perspective of hindsight, and the examination of what America has turned into in the decades since his shootings, but he doesn't go too deep into examining how race played a factor as I would have liked. We learned very little about Bernie himself, other than the fact that he was an annoying bigot (which perhaps that is all there is to know about him). I simultaneously wanted more from this, while also finding myself reading chapter after chapter in each sitting.
Thank you to Penguin Press and NetGalley for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Thank you to Penguin Press and NetGalley for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.
April 13, 2026
Fascinating non-fiction book about the subway shooting in NYC in 1984. I was like 7 at the time, so I don't remember this exact incident but I do remember that at that time and up to the late 1990's, NYC was considered a den of iniquity and this book lets you peer into that time. The author really paints a good picture and the first 2/3's of this book are well done. He lays out the scene, the background of the 5 boys and the shooter Bernie Goetz and more importantly the atmosphere of NYC of the early 1980's. I felt like I was there.
His writing leading up and during the incident is spot on - I'm there, what is going, minute to minute and than when Goetz runs away - as if watching a crime show!
The book hits the speed bump once the court case starts, way too many details that were boring, I didn't need to know so much about the background of the lawyers and the judges. The minutiae of the law was deadly dull. I wanted more of the court case - just tell me what the witnesses were like, what they were saying. And the last 2-3 chapters is mere pontification by the author - probably good for book club discussions or classrooms but for a casual reader, like myself, didn't really add anything to my experience.
However, I would still recommend the book - the issues it addresses are still as relevant today as they were in 1984. I would even go so far as to recommend for college courses or one of those "everyone on campus read" events. It has a lot of talking points and would make for interesting, if probably heated, discussions. Fairly easy to read, if a bit long in the end.
His writing leading up and during the incident is spot on - I'm there, what is going, minute to minute and than when Goetz runs away - as if watching a crime show!
The book hits the speed bump once the court case starts, way too many details that were boring, I didn't need to know so much about the background of the lawyers and the judges. The minutiae of the law was deadly dull. I wanted more of the court case - just tell me what the witnesses were like, what they were saying. And the last 2-3 chapters is mere pontification by the author - probably good for book club discussions or classrooms but for a casual reader, like myself, didn't really add anything to my experience.
However, I would still recommend the book - the issues it addresses are still as relevant today as they were in 1984. I would even go so far as to recommend for college courses or one of those "everyone on campus read" events. It has a lot of talking points and would make for interesting, if probably heated, discussions. Fairly easy to read, if a bit long in the end.
May 2, 2026
Part of the rating here is for a book that helped me understand the racial subtext that I missed when I was in high school and college in the 80s. Part of the rating is also for Williams' narration which was delivered well, especially when he recreated Goetz's voice and frantic cadence. I kept asking myself, were white Americans that racist 40+ years ago to support this guy? The answer is much more complicated than yes or no.
April 21, 2026
lmao what a freak
February 3, 2026
4.5 stars. I saw some reviews that complained about bias; the author is a lawyer and legal commentator on CNN, not a historian. So he offers up some commentary on this case, but I wouldn’t call it bias. It didn’t bother me in the least. But if you think that will bother you, you can read a historian’s book on the same subject: Fear and Fury by Heather Ann Thompson, which is excellent.
Review of advance copy received from Edelweiss+
This is a very long and thorough book, nearly a minute-by-minute reenactment of Bernie Goetz' 1980s New York City subway shooting of five black teenagers and his subsequent trial. What I found compelling was not only the meticulous detailing of the shooting, Goetz' disappearance and eventual arrest and the trial, but how the trial divided the city and the country on the race issue. What came to light was the surprising number of people on both sides - black and white - who believed Bernie to be innocent, that he'd defended himself, bringing to light their fears and attitudes towards personal safety rights and the right to bear arms. What I found eye-opening is that this trial was the moment that forever changed the NRA's intent. No longer did the right to bear arms relate only to farmers and hunters rights; citizens forced the NRA to recognize their demand for personal safety in its constitution. Forty + years later we live with the impact of that constitutional change and how it's destroyed and continues to destroy the lives of innocent victims and their families.
March 2, 2026
Fuck white grievance.
March 22, 2026
I listened to a few podcasts where the author discussed this book, so I was looking forward to reading it. It is well-researched but it ended up being way more biased than I would have thought, given the interviews I had heard.
March 23, 2026
This was a very thorough and fast paced read- definitely enjoyable that way. I will say, I was disappointed at how one sided the book felt. I learned almost nothing about the four victims.
March 17, 2026
Very well-written analysis of the Bernie Goetz NYC subway shooting in late 1984. I learned a ton of info about the nuances and components of the criminal trial. As a grade school kid I remember this incident dominating the news for weeks on end but had never taken the time to read about the era’s backdrop and circumstances surrounding this event. Engrossing and informative book!
March 15, 2026
Interesting book when focused on the factual history of the event. However, this is not a history it is an opinion piece. Williams sees racism under every rock, and his bias influences his conclusions. He made it no further than page four and he began making unsupported assertions.
If you read this book, approach it with a critical eye.
If you read this book, approach it with a critical eye.
April 27, 2026
Five Bullets is a well written, deeply researched book about the shooting of four black teenagers by a fragile appearing young white man (Bernie Goetz) on a subway in 1984 New York City. Unbeknownst to the shooter, all four teenagers had criminal records and were currently on their way to an arcade to rob the video machines. Unbeknownst to the teenagers, the white man was illegally armed with a loaded handgun for which he had been denied a carry permit.
The 1980s were a bad time for New York City. The city was broke, poverty was rampant and street crime was out-of-control. Thanks to lack of faith in the police force, many people felt they would have to defend themselves if challenged, particularly by a black or brown attacker.
Needless to say, despite repeated confessions by Goetz, that he had intentionally attacked all four teenagers and hoped to kill them, after being approached by only one, he was acquitted of all charges except carrying a gun without a permit and labeled as a hero in the local press.
The book does about as good a job as anyone could in presenting the story of the Subway Vigilante in an unbiased fashion. The question was one of reasonableness: was Goetz afraid of possible muggers, was this fear reasonable, if so was shooting all four boys a reasonable response to a reasonable fear? The fact that the teens were black was not addressed. The author, himself a lawyer, devotes a lot of time to the legal concept of "reasonableness" only to conclude that ability of jurers to understand such a convoluted concept itself probably isn't reasonable.
The importance of the book lies in the fact that although the environment of NYC has changed dramatically in the past 40 years, poverty and crime are both substantially reduced and the city is no longer on the verge of bankruptsy, people are still afraid and the question as to the reasonable reaction to fear has yet to be answered. In 2023, a mentally ill young man entered a NYC subway car, began to shout and scream and was put down by a younger ex-Marine who killed him with a choke hold. He, too, was aquitted.
Furthermore, if this was ever simply a New York problem, it isn't today. Today, stand your ground and self defense arguments abound nationwide and still most usually involve white shooters and black wounded.
In addition to addressing the question of the appropriateness of vigilantism, the author points out that the Bernie Goetz incident gave the NRA the opportunity it needed to change from a support organization for duck and deer hunters to a nationwide gun rights lobby and gave Rupert Murdoch, the then recent purchaser of the New York Post, the case he needed to jumpstart his right-wing media empire in the United States.
The 1980s were a bad time for New York City. The city was broke, poverty was rampant and street crime was out-of-control. Thanks to lack of faith in the police force, many people felt they would have to defend themselves if challenged, particularly by a black or brown attacker.
Needless to say, despite repeated confessions by Goetz, that he had intentionally attacked all four teenagers and hoped to kill them, after being approached by only one, he was acquitted of all charges except carrying a gun without a permit and labeled as a hero in the local press.
The book does about as good a job as anyone could in presenting the story of the Subway Vigilante in an unbiased fashion. The question was one of reasonableness: was Goetz afraid of possible muggers, was this fear reasonable, if so was shooting all four boys a reasonable response to a reasonable fear? The fact that the teens were black was not addressed. The author, himself a lawyer, devotes a lot of time to the legal concept of "reasonableness" only to conclude that ability of jurers to understand such a convoluted concept itself probably isn't reasonable.
The importance of the book lies in the fact that although the environment of NYC has changed dramatically in the past 40 years, poverty and crime are both substantially reduced and the city is no longer on the verge of bankruptsy, people are still afraid and the question as to the reasonable reaction to fear has yet to be answered. In 2023, a mentally ill young man entered a NYC subway car, began to shout and scream and was put down by a younger ex-Marine who killed him with a choke hold. He, too, was aquitted.
Furthermore, if this was ever simply a New York problem, it isn't today. Today, stand your ground and self defense arguments abound nationwide and still most usually involve white shooters and black wounded.
In addition to addressing the question of the appropriateness of vigilantism, the author points out that the Bernie Goetz incident gave the NRA the opportunity it needed to change from a support organization for duck and deer hunters to a nationwide gun rights lobby and gave Rupert Murdoch, the then recent purchaser of the New York Post, the case he needed to jumpstart his right-wing media empire in the United States.
March 7, 2026
It is hard to believe after the statements Goetz made about the shooting that the jury found him not guilty of the attempted murder and reckless endangerment.
When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
This was a look beyond the crime scene and the people involved. The jury was clearly not given enough instructions on how to apply the law based on the evidence. The media didn’t help matters either but they rarely do.
When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
This was a look beyond the crime scene and the people involved. The jury was clearly not given enough instructions on how to apply the law based on the evidence. The media didn’t help matters either but they rarely do.
April 5, 2026
3.5 rounded up to 4 for Goodreads.
I was intrigued by the cover of this book, since I vaguely knew the name Bernie Goetz and before this I maybe could have tied it to the phrase "Subway Vigilante," but I didn't really know anything else about this incident (it having happened about 3 years before I was born). The thing is, it's a...pretty long book about a single case. So it's INCREDIBLY thorough and well-researched. But yes, went a little bit toooooooooo overly detailed into-the-weeds on every little thing since, well, it's an entire 350-page book about 1 case, so it sorta had to.
(Also, I am confused that this and Fire and Fury both came out this year about the Bernie Goetz case specifically...why? Did some sort of media gag order JUST expire or something? It's not a major anniversary -- 41st isn't a major milestone year right? -- he didn't just die or anything...why 2 books the same month NOW? Does anyone know? Is this like a "someone scooped this idea and then they both just got published around the same time" thing?)
Anyway, that's really my main detraction from the book -- that it's just, a very long book, about one case, so it had a lot of details I kinda skim-listened through. That said I really liked how he used it as a lens for a bunch of other cultural stuff. My favorite thing to do with books like this is pull out maybe 3-4 stories, pieces of trivia, or anecdotes that I could see myself wanting to share with people and just try to retain those (since I will forget 90% of what I read almost immediately), and this book had some good ones!
1. It was fascinating reading the "butterfly effect" style chain of events linking the debut of games like Space Invaders to increased crime in NYC. Basically, the debut of "no limit" "play as long as you keep winning" coin-operated arcade games --> explosive growth, new cash cow opportunity for cash-based businesses --> coin-op arcade machines popping up all over NYC restaurants, liquor stores, bodegas, etc. --> urban businesses now basically all had giant piggy banks holding thousands of dollars at a time that could be broken into incredibly easily --> the law hadn't really caught up with this yet so even if you did get caught breaking into a video game machine the sentence might be like 30 days in Rikers as opposed to far more severe sentences for mugging or burglary that would probably give you just about the same payout in terms of $$ --> video game robbery became VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY EASY AND COMMON. Just a very cool domino-meme type chain IMO.
2. The way this served as a major turning point for the NRA pivoting more towards GUNS RIGHTS and SELF DEFENSE and even seeing NY as an attainable proselytizing location where they'd previously written the city off as too liberal, based on how favorably people felt towards Goetz.
3. Lol Rupert Murdoch was so thirsty and salty about the fact that Son of Sam sent his missives to the Daily News instead of the Post that the Post tried to set a trap to lure Son of Sam into attacking two of their reporters so they could get a good photo of him?
4. Bernie Goetz's entire mayoral run in 2001 and just...everything about this...made me laugh SO HARD. His incredibly specific platform. I CARE ABOUT TWO THINGS AND TWO THINGS ONLY. EATING VEGETABLES AND NOT CUTTING DICKS. The squirrels. The pea costume. I just...it's like a Mad Libs of each line being better than the last. So I'm just going to grace us all with the direct copy/paste. You're welcome.
"Any self-imposed exile ended in spectacular fashion in 2001, when Goetz ran for mayor of New York on the Fusion Party ticket, campaigning for vegetarian food in public schools, jails, and hospitals. He was perplexed that many of his thirteen hundred supporters did not vote for him on the basis of his platform, instead supporting him for the issue for which he will eternally be a poster boy: gun rights. He ran for public advocate (the city’s ombudsman) in 2005 on a pro-vegetarian, anti-circumcision platform. “I think eating meat is primitive and barbaric, just like circumcision,” he said. “Add that to shallow television, new chemical drugs, and national leadership that can’t be trusted, and you have a lot of people who are confused and lost.” His advocacy on behalf of animal rights was not limited to his runs for public office. He has been spotted at animal rights parades and occasionally volunteered with an organization called the VivaVegie Society, dressed up as a sexy female legume (named “Penelo Pea Pod”) wearing a sign around his neck that read “Give Peas a Chance,” and saying in a high-pitched voice, “I was born in this costume!” and “Don’t eat the animals!” Over time, Goetz also grew committed to the cause of rescuing squirrels from New York’s Union Square Park. Sliwa said that when he first went to Goetz’s apartment in 1985, he was struck by the squirrels. “I said, oh man, is this guy a nut job? You know, he’s got squirrels from the park,” Sliwa said. “But I could see the squirrels had been damaged. He’s helping to nurture them back.” Goetz said at one point that he liked squirrels better than he liked people. A problem: however good a substitute for human companionship wild rodents are, they run afoul of New York building codes, and Goetz eventually faced eviction proceedings from his squalid apartment over them. Goetz’s fondness for the animals was widely known to his neighbors, who referred to him as “Squirrel Man.” According to court papers, neighbors observed him “washing a wild squirrel in the building’s laundry room,” with Goetz allegedly explaining that “the squirrel had fleas.” A worker commented that Goetz would frequently be seen in the building trying to hide a squirrel, “holding it close to him, tucking it under his arm or shirt. But you can’t miss that.” Goetz’s attorney argued that it was a “comfort animal,” protected under the law."
I was intrigued by the cover of this book, since I vaguely knew the name Bernie Goetz and before this I maybe could have tied it to the phrase "Subway Vigilante," but I didn't really know anything else about this incident (it having happened about 3 years before I was born). The thing is, it's a...pretty long book about a single case. So it's INCREDIBLY thorough and well-researched. But yes, went a little bit toooooooooo overly detailed into-the-weeds on every little thing since, well, it's an entire 350-page book about 1 case, so it sorta had to.
(Also, I am confused that this and Fire and Fury both came out this year about the Bernie Goetz case specifically...why? Did some sort of media gag order JUST expire or something? It's not a major anniversary -- 41st isn't a major milestone year right? -- he didn't just die or anything...why 2 books the same month NOW? Does anyone know? Is this like a "someone scooped this idea and then they both just got published around the same time" thing?)
Anyway, that's really my main detraction from the book -- that it's just, a very long book, about one case, so it had a lot of details I kinda skim-listened through. That said I really liked how he used it as a lens for a bunch of other cultural stuff. My favorite thing to do with books like this is pull out maybe 3-4 stories, pieces of trivia, or anecdotes that I could see myself wanting to share with people and just try to retain those (since I will forget 90% of what I read almost immediately), and this book had some good ones!
1. It was fascinating reading the "butterfly effect" style chain of events linking the debut of games like Space Invaders to increased crime in NYC. Basically, the debut of "no limit" "play as long as you keep winning" coin-operated arcade games --> explosive growth, new cash cow opportunity for cash-based businesses --> coin-op arcade machines popping up all over NYC restaurants, liquor stores, bodegas, etc. --> urban businesses now basically all had giant piggy banks holding thousands of dollars at a time that could be broken into incredibly easily --> the law hadn't really caught up with this yet so even if you did get caught breaking into a video game machine the sentence might be like 30 days in Rikers as opposed to far more severe sentences for mugging or burglary that would probably give you just about the same payout in terms of $$ --> video game robbery became VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY EASY AND COMMON. Just a very cool domino-meme type chain IMO.
2. The way this served as a major turning point for the NRA pivoting more towards GUNS RIGHTS and SELF DEFENSE and even seeing NY as an attainable proselytizing location where they'd previously written the city off as too liberal, based on how favorably people felt towards Goetz.
3. Lol Rupert Murdoch was so thirsty and salty about the fact that Son of Sam sent his missives to the Daily News instead of the Post that the Post tried to set a trap to lure Son of Sam into attacking two of their reporters so they could get a good photo of him?
4. Bernie Goetz's entire mayoral run in 2001 and just...everything about this...made me laugh SO HARD. His incredibly specific platform. I CARE ABOUT TWO THINGS AND TWO THINGS ONLY. EATING VEGETABLES AND NOT CUTTING DICKS. The squirrels. The pea costume. I just...it's like a Mad Libs of each line being better than the last. So I'm just going to grace us all with the direct copy/paste. You're welcome.
"Any self-imposed exile ended in spectacular fashion in 2001, when Goetz ran for mayor of New York on the Fusion Party ticket, campaigning for vegetarian food in public schools, jails, and hospitals. He was perplexed that many of his thirteen hundred supporters did not vote for him on the basis of his platform, instead supporting him for the issue for which he will eternally be a poster boy: gun rights. He ran for public advocate (the city’s ombudsman) in 2005 on a pro-vegetarian, anti-circumcision platform. “I think eating meat is primitive and barbaric, just like circumcision,” he said. “Add that to shallow television, new chemical drugs, and national leadership that can’t be trusted, and you have a lot of people who are confused and lost.” His advocacy on behalf of animal rights was not limited to his runs for public office. He has been spotted at animal rights parades and occasionally volunteered with an organization called the VivaVegie Society, dressed up as a sexy female legume (named “Penelo Pea Pod”) wearing a sign around his neck that read “Give Peas a Chance,” and saying in a high-pitched voice, “I was born in this costume!” and “Don’t eat the animals!” Over time, Goetz also grew committed to the cause of rescuing squirrels from New York’s Union Square Park. Sliwa said that when he first went to Goetz’s apartment in 1985, he was struck by the squirrels. “I said, oh man, is this guy a nut job? You know, he’s got squirrels from the park,” Sliwa said. “But I could see the squirrels had been damaged. He’s helping to nurture them back.” Goetz said at one point that he liked squirrels better than he liked people. A problem: however good a substitute for human companionship wild rodents are, they run afoul of New York building codes, and Goetz eventually faced eviction proceedings from his squalid apartment over them. Goetz’s fondness for the animals was widely known to his neighbors, who referred to him as “Squirrel Man.” According to court papers, neighbors observed him “washing a wild squirrel in the building’s laundry room,” with Goetz allegedly explaining that “the squirrel had fleas.” A worker commented that Goetz would frequently be seen in the building trying to hide a squirrel, “holding it close to him, tucking it under his arm or shirt. But you can’t miss that.” Goetz’s attorney argued that it was a “comfort animal,” protected under the law."
March 13, 2026
On December 22, 1984, Barry Allen, Troy Canty, Darrell Cabey, and James Ramseur jumped the turnstiles and boarded the subway. They were, by their own admission, headed to Pace University in Lower Manhattan to break into video machines. Three of them were carrying screwdrivers to do the job. "Canty was careful not to have one on him. He knew that if caught, having a screwdriver on him brought an extra charge of possession of burglar's tools." Once on the train, the men were loud, boisterous, and annoyed at least two passengers sufficiently to force them to move. A short time later, a scrawny, bespeckled man entered the subway. Finding most of the other cars full, he entered the sparsely populated car that Allen, Canty, Cabey, and Ramseur had made their own. Unbeknownst to anyone, he was carrying (illegally) a gun. Shortly after 2 pm, Troy Canty approached Bernhard Goetz. The words five dollars were used. Several moments later, Canty, Cabey, Allen, and Ramseur were all shot. Goetz waited an unspecified amount of time before fleeing the scene, and remained a fugitive for over a week.
The above are the only undisputed facts about the infamous Goetz Subway vigilante case. Whether the money was demanded or asked for, no one can agree. The exact placement of the individuals is also in question. Did Canty approach Goetz with the other three backing him, with just two of them backing him, or by himself? Goetz supposedly used all his bullets on the men. Would he have harmed others in a frenzy if he hadn't?
For most people, the right and wrong of the case depended on none of the above factors. In a New York furious about crime and tired of having to deal with it, Goetz was quickly glorified as an everyman who had had enough and took a stand for all the little guys who were sick of being bullied by young thugs. That narrative, lauded by the sensationalist Murdoch-owned NY Post, soon became a rallying cry for much of the nation. The NRA got involved. People pointed to films like Death Wish and Escape from NY to show how the city was experiencing an apocalypse, where only people packing heat survived.
The police, lawyers, and politicians working the case soon realized "The legal system did not exist outside of public opinion." Pressure from all sides existed, with calls to exonerate Goetz completely, and yet others decrying the racial overtones and pointing out that a white man had shot four unarmed Black youths. Adding to the issue was the question of "reasonable". Should the subjective definition be applied, with Goetz found not guilty if he sincerely felt threatened? At least one youth had mentioned they intended to "scare" him into giving them money. Was Goetz then responsible for determining whether he was indeed in danger of being harmed or if he was just being intimidated? Another way "reasonable" could be construed is to ask if it is reasonable to open fire on a subway car where others might be harmed when no physical altercation had yet to take place? Would a "reasonable" person take such acts?
The author takes us through this legal tangle, showcasing how the abandonment of NY by wealthy taxpayers and a lack of necessary aid from the Federal Government created the situation in which Goetz and these four young men found themselves. All of them had a history with the city that led to that moment in 1984. Goetz had been robbed, beaten, and severely wounded in 1981, with the perpetrator receiving only a short sentence. We would probably diagnose him with PTSD today. The four young men from the Bronx were caught in a hopeless economic situation, forced upon them by a system that worked against them. They had long rap sheets, but did that mean they deserved to nearly die at the hands of a vigilante? And Goetz wasn't precisely an angel - racist statements in his past made it pretty clear he would have responded differently to four white men approaching him. And to reiterate, he was carrying that gun illegally and had numerous others at home, all without permits.
I wish the author had spent a bit more time on just how America had failed NY and why that led to this mess. I would also have appreciated a sterner look at how the media creates a frenzy in which we fear our own shadows, leading to unnecessary tragedy, but overall, I liked his look at the case and the questions it leaves you with. He reminds us that we are still struggling with these issues now - think of Kyle Rittenhouse's vigilantism in 2020. The volume offers a good look at a case that highlights America's racial struggles and how our romance with guns exacerbates them.
The above are the only undisputed facts about the infamous Goetz Subway vigilante case. Whether the money was demanded or asked for, no one can agree. The exact placement of the individuals is also in question. Did Canty approach Goetz with the other three backing him, with just two of them backing him, or by himself? Goetz supposedly used all his bullets on the men. Would he have harmed others in a frenzy if he hadn't?
For most people, the right and wrong of the case depended on none of the above factors. In a New York furious about crime and tired of having to deal with it, Goetz was quickly glorified as an everyman who had had enough and took a stand for all the little guys who were sick of being bullied by young thugs. That narrative, lauded by the sensationalist Murdoch-owned NY Post, soon became a rallying cry for much of the nation. The NRA got involved. People pointed to films like Death Wish and Escape from NY to show how the city was experiencing an apocalypse, where only people packing heat survived.
The police, lawyers, and politicians working the case soon realized "The legal system did not exist outside of public opinion." Pressure from all sides existed, with calls to exonerate Goetz completely, and yet others decrying the racial overtones and pointing out that a white man had shot four unarmed Black youths. Adding to the issue was the question of "reasonable". Should the subjective definition be applied, with Goetz found not guilty if he sincerely felt threatened? At least one youth had mentioned they intended to "scare" him into giving them money. Was Goetz then responsible for determining whether he was indeed in danger of being harmed or if he was just being intimidated? Another way "reasonable" could be construed is to ask if it is reasonable to open fire on a subway car where others might be harmed when no physical altercation had yet to take place? Would a "reasonable" person take such acts?
The author takes us through this legal tangle, showcasing how the abandonment of NY by wealthy taxpayers and a lack of necessary aid from the Federal Government created the situation in which Goetz and these four young men found themselves. All of them had a history with the city that led to that moment in 1984. Goetz had been robbed, beaten, and severely wounded in 1981, with the perpetrator receiving only a short sentence. We would probably diagnose him with PTSD today. The four young men from the Bronx were caught in a hopeless economic situation, forced upon them by a system that worked against them. They had long rap sheets, but did that mean they deserved to nearly die at the hands of a vigilante? And Goetz wasn't precisely an angel - racist statements in his past made it pretty clear he would have responded differently to four white men approaching him. And to reiterate, he was carrying that gun illegally and had numerous others at home, all without permits.
I wish the author had spent a bit more time on just how America had failed NY and why that led to this mess. I would also have appreciated a sterner look at how the media creates a frenzy in which we fear our own shadows, leading to unnecessary tragedy, but overall, I liked his look at the case and the questions it leaves you with. He reminds us that we are still struggling with these issues now - think of Kyle Rittenhouse's vigilantism in 2020. The volume offers a good look at a case that highlights America's racial struggles and how our romance with guns exacerbates them.
January 28, 2026
I wanted to give this book 3 1/2 stars. I took off half a star because the author seemed to be interjecting his own bias into the story. It was only a little, but it was enough for me to throw up the "caution flag."
FYI, there is nothing wrong with an author showing some bias toward his/her subject, but this author (or his publisher) was advertising his association with CNN as its legal correspondent. Therefore, one would expect more objectivity than I saw here. On the other hand, I saw a lot more objectivity than I would have expected from someone from CNN. So, it was just half a star instead of a full star gone.
I remember the sensation caused by the Bernie Goetz shooting of those "urban youths" as we used to call them back then. That was a euphemism for African American or Hispanic ghetto punks. I'm not sure what they are called now: disadvantaged neighborhood people? Whatever. I wish they would just pick some term and stick with it.
FYI, I am Hispanic... straight outta Compton. Really.
Some of the people the author interviewed (or at least quoted from news accounts) said that if Bernie had been black and shot white people, he wouldn't have received as much sympathetic treatment as he did. At first I thought that was a correct assumption, but thinking about it, I realized that this would not always be true. An anonymous black guy wouldn't get very much sympathy without a really, really good justification for the shooting. However, if he was a famous black guy... say... Bill Cosby... or... that famous football player, O. J. Simpson... then I think that kind of guy would get a reasonably sympathetic treatment. Not a free pass, but a lot more sympathy.
In any case, I was glad to be reminded of the incident which I followed in the news, lo those many years ago. I was reminded of how terrible New York crime was in those days... at least as it was perceived to be. It was bad. I think the author quoted someone saying about New York, "If you can make it here, you can make it anywhere... as long as you don't get stabbed the first day." That sounded right to me... given what I remember of those days.
Objectively speaking, it is difficult to track all crime, but the FBI crime statistics (as I recall) showed a downward trend in violent crime long before the laws to "get tough on crime" were actually implemented. That meant that the "get tough" laws had little to do with the downward trend. As I recall there were other reasons brought forth to explain it, but I won't list them here. I don't have the documentation on it, but I suspect that if the documentation were anywhere, it would be written down in the book, "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything".
Regarding Bernie Goetz's character... he seemed like a nut to me... just like Jack Kevorkian. They both changed the way that people looked at an issue, but they themselves were deeply flawed people. They seemed to trigger the change that was ready to spring forth.
The author's comments on the problem with the media driving an issue to make it worse were well taken. Perhaps, I would have been more impressed if he had applied it to his employer, CNN more vigorously.
I might read this book again.
FYI, there is nothing wrong with an author showing some bias toward his/her subject, but this author (or his publisher) was advertising his association with CNN as its legal correspondent. Therefore, one would expect more objectivity than I saw here. On the other hand, I saw a lot more objectivity than I would have expected from someone from CNN. So, it was just half a star instead of a full star gone.
I remember the sensation caused by the Bernie Goetz shooting of those "urban youths" as we used to call them back then. That was a euphemism for African American or Hispanic ghetto punks. I'm not sure what they are called now: disadvantaged neighborhood people? Whatever. I wish they would just pick some term and stick with it.
FYI, I am Hispanic... straight outta Compton. Really.
Some of the people the author interviewed (or at least quoted from news accounts) said that if Bernie had been black and shot white people, he wouldn't have received as much sympathetic treatment as he did. At first I thought that was a correct assumption, but thinking about it, I realized that this would not always be true. An anonymous black guy wouldn't get very much sympathy without a really, really good justification for the shooting. However, if he was a famous black guy... say... Bill Cosby... or... that famous football player, O. J. Simpson... then I think that kind of guy would get a reasonably sympathetic treatment. Not a free pass, but a lot more sympathy.
In any case, I was glad to be reminded of the incident which I followed in the news, lo those many years ago. I was reminded of how terrible New York crime was in those days... at least as it was perceived to be. It was bad. I think the author quoted someone saying about New York, "If you can make it here, you can make it anywhere... as long as you don't get stabbed the first day." That sounded right to me... given what I remember of those days.
Objectively speaking, it is difficult to track all crime, but the FBI crime statistics (as I recall) showed a downward trend in violent crime long before the laws to "get tough on crime" were actually implemented. That meant that the "get tough" laws had little to do with the downward trend. As I recall there were other reasons brought forth to explain it, but I won't list them here. I don't have the documentation on it, but I suspect that if the documentation were anywhere, it would be written down in the book, "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything".
Regarding Bernie Goetz's character... he seemed like a nut to me... just like Jack Kevorkian. They both changed the way that people looked at an issue, but they themselves were deeply flawed people. They seemed to trigger the change that was ready to spring forth.
The author's comments on the problem with the media driving an issue to make it worse were well taken. Perhaps, I would have been more impressed if he had applied it to his employer, CNN more vigorously.
I might read this book again.
February 21, 2026
By the standards of our true-crime-fixated culture, the events of Dec. 22, 1984, don’t look like much on paper: a man shot four strangers in New York, killing none of them (yep, there’s not even a body count). However, the aftermath had such cultural significance, such sociopolitical impact, it could safely be called one of the most infamous crimes of the 80s, and its perpetrator’s name a byword for decades to come.
How can this be? Well, the paradox is thoroughly explained in Elliot Williams’s new “Five Bullets: The Story of Bernie Goetz, New York’s Explosive ‘80s, and the Subway Vigilante Trial That Divided the Nation.”
I would say that everyone knows the story, but—42 years on—maybe they don’t, so: after Bernie Goetz boarded a subway car, four teenagers approached him, one engaging him verbally. Goetz produced a gun and shot all four, even shooting one a second time as he lay on the ground. At the next stop Goetz made a hasty-yet-composed getaway.
That’s the most objective telling of the events one will find, because… it’s almost impossible to describe the Bernie Goetz shooting non-subjectively. Varied interpretations render a fuzzier picture of just what happened in that enclosed space, i.e., What were teens’ intentions toward Goetz? How exactly did they ‘engage’ him? Why was the nebbish, 37-year-old Goetz carrying an illegal gun in the first place? And, of course, the overriding doozy: what was the significance, if any, to the fact that Goetz was white and all four teenagers were black? As Goetz became a twisted folk hero and the case devolved into a media circus, these questions became a kind-of Rorschach Test of the beholder’s feelings about race, crime, and New York’s ostensible role as the forefront of society’s breakdown.
What’s more, as if all that weren’t ambiguous enough to begin with, there were the details, oh the details! E.g., 1) Some couldn’t resist the life-imitates-art angle of the crime as weirdly similar to the “Death Wish” movies (as a fan of 70s/80s B-movies, I was also glad to see 1981’s “Escape from New York” namechecked). 2) Despite his sudden cache, Goetz was NOT an ideal hero. Even ignoring a history of questionable statements, Goetz was a filter-less motormouth prone to impolitic rants… On the other hand, though, 3) Neither were the four teenagers the noble victims the other side wanted. For instance, when the trial finally commenced 2+ years later (!), one of the “victims” called to the stand had to be transported from prison, where he was serving a sentence for his part in the gang-rape of a pregnant woman.
As for “Five Bullets” itself, it’s both a good book and a good read. Williams rightfully understands that a story this crazy cannot be told without the context of time and place. Of course, as stated above, it’s impossible to tell this story objectively, so Williams naturally brings his biases to the narrative. While I liked some of his observations (such as the dispassionate assessment of crime rates by era), Williams IS a current media figure (CNN), so we also get more predictable takes, such as unrelated, perfunctory complaints about… wait for it!… Trump.
Those things aside, however, just like with his colleague Jeffrey Toobin’s 2016 “American Heiress” (the Patty Hearst case), Williams has produced a compelling book about a crime that oddly encapsulated its decade. The chance that “Five Bullets” may introduce this instance of American history to a generation that didn’t already know about it… well, that’s a damn good achievement in itself.
How can this be? Well, the paradox is thoroughly explained in Elliot Williams’s new “Five Bullets: The Story of Bernie Goetz, New York’s Explosive ‘80s, and the Subway Vigilante Trial That Divided the Nation.”
I would say that everyone knows the story, but—42 years on—maybe they don’t, so: after Bernie Goetz boarded a subway car, four teenagers approached him, one engaging him verbally. Goetz produced a gun and shot all four, even shooting one a second time as he lay on the ground. At the next stop Goetz made a hasty-yet-composed getaway.
That’s the most objective telling of the events one will find, because… it’s almost impossible to describe the Bernie Goetz shooting non-subjectively. Varied interpretations render a fuzzier picture of just what happened in that enclosed space, i.e., What were teens’ intentions toward Goetz? How exactly did they ‘engage’ him? Why was the nebbish, 37-year-old Goetz carrying an illegal gun in the first place? And, of course, the overriding doozy: what was the significance, if any, to the fact that Goetz was white and all four teenagers were black? As Goetz became a twisted folk hero and the case devolved into a media circus, these questions became a kind-of Rorschach Test of the beholder’s feelings about race, crime, and New York’s ostensible role as the forefront of society’s breakdown.
What’s more, as if all that weren’t ambiguous enough to begin with, there were the details, oh the details! E.g., 1) Some couldn’t resist the life-imitates-art angle of the crime as weirdly similar to the “Death Wish” movies (as a fan of 70s/80s B-movies, I was also glad to see 1981’s “Escape from New York” namechecked). 2) Despite his sudden cache, Goetz was NOT an ideal hero. Even ignoring a history of questionable statements, Goetz was a filter-less motormouth prone to impolitic rants… On the other hand, though, 3) Neither were the four teenagers the noble victims the other side wanted. For instance, when the trial finally commenced 2+ years later (!), one of the “victims” called to the stand had to be transported from prison, where he was serving a sentence for his part in the gang-rape of a pregnant woman.
As for “Five Bullets” itself, it’s both a good book and a good read. Williams rightfully understands that a story this crazy cannot be told without the context of time and place. Of course, as stated above, it’s impossible to tell this story objectively, so Williams naturally brings his biases to the narrative. While I liked some of his observations (such as the dispassionate assessment of crime rates by era), Williams IS a current media figure (CNN), so we also get more predictable takes, such as unrelated, perfunctory complaints about… wait for it!… Trump.
Those things aside, however, just like with his colleague Jeffrey Toobin’s 2016 “American Heiress” (the Patty Hearst case), Williams has produced a compelling book about a crime that oddly encapsulated its decade. The chance that “Five Bullets” may introduce this instance of American history to a generation that didn’t already know about it… well, that’s a damn good achievement in itself.
February 13, 2026
I live in NYC, but didn't know all the details of this case before moving here. I can understand someone feeling victimized and wanting to fight back, but you have to make sure you don't victimize someone else based on your own fear. Bernie Goetz is certainly a complex person, but so are his victims. I think the author does a great job showing that. I enjoyed learning about the different criminal cases and atmosphere of NYC during that period in the 80s to show the mindset of many citizens, including the jurors. The role of the politicians, lawyers, officers, press, citizens, and neighborhood watch groups were fascinating as well. It helped the book move along and was an enjoyable read. The author does a great job of also comparing this case to that of the killing of Jordan Neely by Daniel Penny. In the latter, no gun was involved that could have wounded innocent bystanders but the case was just as sensationalized. Bernie Goetz doesn't sound like someone who has changed and will always view himself as right in his actions. On the other hand one of his victims was able to turn his life around and prove you are not necessarily always going to be the same person. His other victims unfortunately did not or were not able to take the same road, one due to being critically injured by Goetz with a lifetime of disabilities. The other two because let's be honest were not necessarily good upstanding people. I highly recommend reading this book if you're interested in NYC history.
February 10, 2026
Not a Bernie Bro
In the publishing world's never-ending quest to issue works together on the same subject, you have this and Heather Ann Thompson's "Fear and Fury: The Reagan Eighties, the Bernie Goetz Shootings, and the Rebirth of White Rage" coming out within the same few weeks. It's one of those Rashomon recountings (although not from primary sources living through the events themselves) where you have totally different versions of events. Williams account is for me the more nuanced and thoughtful, carefully laying out the details of the events and the trials that unfolded. Thompson presents a caricature as if it was written by a Columbia University Gaza student protest committee along with the requisite list of grievances, half-baked truths and obfuscations all wrapped up in the tenor of the eternal righteous case. I wonder in the far future if someone is interested in this case and reads both works what they'll come away with? Certainly we can hope that racial animus and over-the-top identity politics will no longer be prevalent as humanity will have moved past that, right? In any event, Williams discusses this group of extremely flawed individuals and the gradations of events and their aftermath in a thoughtful and reasoned tone throughout.
In the publishing world's never-ending quest to issue works together on the same subject, you have this and Heather Ann Thompson's "Fear and Fury: The Reagan Eighties, the Bernie Goetz Shootings, and the Rebirth of White Rage" coming out within the same few weeks. It's one of those Rashomon recountings (although not from primary sources living through the events themselves) where you have totally different versions of events. Williams account is for me the more nuanced and thoughtful, carefully laying out the details of the events and the trials that unfolded. Thompson presents a caricature as if it was written by a Columbia University Gaza student protest committee along with the requisite list of grievances, half-baked truths and obfuscations all wrapped up in the tenor of the eternal righteous case. I wonder in the far future if someone is interested in this case and reads both works what they'll come away with? Certainly we can hope that racial animus and over-the-top identity politics will no longer be prevalent as humanity will have moved past that, right? In any event, Williams discusses this group of extremely flawed individuals and the gradations of events and their aftermath in a thoughtful and reasoned tone throughout.
April 13, 2026
First, PLEASE get this book in audiobook. Hearing Williams do an impersonation as Goetz made me laugh so hard during an otherwise super bleak part of the book.
Second, I think I came out a little frustrated because this book felt moreso like a play-by-play of the arrest and prosecution rather than the totality of the issues. Like, there is maybe a chapter talking about Murdoch's role in whipping up white flight from the city that I think could have been more fleshed out about how the media really screwed with senses of race correlating with aggression. Like, don't get me wrong; the discussion of self-defense is a really important part of the Goetz case in a legal standpoint (hell, part of the reason I picked up this book was because I read the case for Criminal Law) but I don't think it should've been the whole book. I think of something like the Containment that's able to talk in depth about the political and social aspects about the case in fervent detail so that the actual discussion of the legal case is super-powered by all of the background discussion.
I really enjoyed reading the history, however. This writer knows his stuff! Really excited for his next work :)
Second, I think I came out a little frustrated because this book felt moreso like a play-by-play of the arrest and prosecution rather than the totality of the issues. Like, there is maybe a chapter talking about Murdoch's role in whipping up white flight from the city that I think could have been more fleshed out about how the media really screwed with senses of race correlating with aggression. Like, don't get me wrong; the discussion of self-defense is a really important part of the Goetz case in a legal standpoint (hell, part of the reason I picked up this book was because I read the case for Criminal Law) but I don't think it should've been the whole book. I think of something like the Containment that's able to talk in depth about the political and social aspects about the case in fervent detail so that the actual discussion of the legal case is super-powered by all of the background discussion.
I really enjoyed reading the history, however. This writer knows his stuff! Really excited for his next work :)
February 20, 2026
My dad is a retired NYPD officer who came on the job in the early 80s shortly before the Bernie Goetz incident. We read this book at the same time so we could discuss it. It was a fascinating book. It gives you a great sense of what New York City was like at that time, including insight into some of the big personalities of the era (Ed Koch, Rudy Giuliani, Curtis Sliwa, Al Sharpton, just to name a few.) On the one hand, the city today is almost unrecognizable. On the other hand, there is a thread that connects the two eras. New York's biggest constant is change!
Anyway, another reviewer mentioned the author's biases creeping in. That is somewhat true but I do think he tried to be as objective as possible and it was pretty clear when he was offering his opinion on something as opposed to stating facts or presenting questions. I learned a lot and I hope to read more non-fiction in this vein.
Anyway, another reviewer mentioned the author's biases creeping in. That is somewhat true but I do think he tried to be as objective as possible and it was pretty clear when he was offering his opinion on something as opposed to stating facts or presenting questions. I learned a lot and I hope to read more non-fiction in this vein.
April 29, 2026
A nonfiction account of Bernard Goetz and the four individuals he shot on a subway in the early '80's. It is a compelling story because one can identify with the fear and crime that permeated the city during that time - so there is Goetz's side of the story. Additionally, there is the effects of trauma on an individual. Goetz, who had recently been attacked on the streets of New York in broad daylight. However, it is difficult for me to imagine going to such lengths as Goetz did. Regardless of his victims past criminal life, there is still the issue of taking life itself. Did Goetz really feel that his life was in danger? Perhaps. But there is more that lingers. To kill someone at point blank when there is a perceived threat vs. the actual threat (which we will never know) is the constant question that stayed with me through the book. It is thorough and engaging read, well and clearly written. A relatively fast read - about a week.
May 5, 2026
You get to an age where being lectured just doesn’t do it for you anymore. Not necessarily because the lecturer is wrong, but because you’re a certain age now, and you know the arguments. You’ve made your peace with whatever nonsense things you believe in, and that’s kind of the end of it. No other outside opinions are needed, thanks, let’s just get to the upshot if you don’t mind.
Five Bullets suffers from a syndrome where the author decides the story itself isn’t compelling enough, and feels compelled to get into some moralizing. As a Man of a Certain Age, I can do without the moralizing, let’s just get to the history of the thing I don’t know a lot about because I was 12 when it happened. A three star book that could have been four.
Five Bullets suffers from a syndrome where the author decides the story itself isn’t compelling enough, and feels compelled to get into some moralizing. As a Man of a Certain Age, I can do without the moralizing, let’s just get to the history of the thing I don’t know a lot about because I was 12 when it happened. A three star book that could have been four.
March 30, 2026
With the passage of time I had forgotten about Bernie Goetz and his shooting spree in December of 1984 until I heard Elliot Williams being interviewed on the radio. My curiosity was piqued as to what had happened to him and his four young victims. I listened to the audio version and was intrigued with all that was going on in NYC in the 1980s: violence, poverty, filth, fear, Rupert Murdoch, Rudy Giuliani, the NRA. The details of the court case and the need to understand reasonableness got tedious towards the end. Now much to my surprise I find that there is a second book about the Goetz case that has just been released. Fear and Fury by Heather Ann Thompson
Review of advance copy received from Publisher
I found this book to be pretty problematic. Williams is very hard on and skeptical of the teens that were shot in this story, and does not grant them the benefit of the doubt in any instance. He is very friendly to Goetz (the shooter) and allows him so much space. He brushes off some hard evidence and also chose to frame more unclear things as facts. He also uses coded language and phrases often for the boys that paint them in a pretty rough light. The tone of his narration is almost cheery and was very off putting. I wanted to like this book but was pretty let down by what I read.
February 10, 2026
Book 9 of 2026.
4.25 Stars
“Five Bullets” tells the story of “The Subway Vigilante” Bernie Goetz. On 12/22/84, one white guy with a gun and 4 young black males all on the same subway car. Did they simply ask him for money? Or did they attempt to rob him?
5 shots, 4 men hit, no deaths.
This book tells an extensive story not only about the incident but also about NY during the 80s.
Was it self defense? Or was Bernie a racist looking to get revenge for previous muggings?
Read the book and decide for yourself!
4.25 Stars
“Five Bullets” tells the story of “The Subway Vigilante” Bernie Goetz. On 12/22/84, one white guy with a gun and 4 young black males all on the same subway car. Did they simply ask him for money? Or did they attempt to rob him?
5 shots, 4 men hit, no deaths.
This book tells an extensive story not only about the incident but also about NY during the 80s.
Was it self defense? Or was Bernie a racist looking to get revenge for previous muggings?
Read the book and decide for yourself!
April 9, 2026
The Goetz case is the ultimate Rorschach test: People see what they want to see and interpret aspects of the case (i.e. motive) that fits with their POV. The author does a good job of walking the reader through the "messiness" of the case and demonstrating why it's not so black and white (IMO). I enjoyed the authors writing style-he had a good balance of details vs narrative flow so that it never felt bogged down; the story moved at a nice pace. While I don't think this book will change one's opinion (see my Rorschach comment), it's well worth one's time.
March 8, 2026
Listened to the audiobook version yelled by the author. Goetz had anger issues and a gun.
The 4 youths had attitude and hassled the wrong guy. This whole event had to happen someday.
I appreciate the research and time it took to assemble the book but I really don't want a narrator shouting at me.
Elliot Williams you should have hired a professional because you holler instead of narrate and it becomes tiresome very quickly.
The 4 youths had attitude and hassled the wrong guy. This whole event had to happen someday.
I appreciate the research and time it took to assemble the book but I really don't want a narrator shouting at me.
Elliot Williams you should have hired a professional because you holler instead of narrate and it becomes tiresome very quickly.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews