The Man from the Train: The Solving of a Century-Old Serial Killer Mystery

by Bill James, Rachel McCarthy James

An Edgar Award finalist for Best Fact Crime, this “impressive…open-eyed investigative inquiry wrapped within a cultural history of rural America” (The Wall Street Journal) shows legendary statistician and baseball writer Bill James applying his analytical acumen to crack an unsolved century-old mystery surrounding one of the deadliest serial killers in American history.Between 1898 and 1912, families across the country were bludgeoned in their sleep with the blunt side of an axe. Jewelry and valuables were left in plain sight, bodies were piled together, faces covered with cloth. Some of these cases, like the infamous Villasca, Iowa, murders, received national attention. But few people believed the crimes were related. And fewer still would realize that all of these families lived within walking distance to a train station. When celebrated baseball statistician and true crime expert Bill James first learned about these horrors, he began to investigate others that might fit the same pattern. Applying the same know-how he brings to his legendary baseball analysis, he empirically determined which crimes were committed by the same person. Then after sifting through thousands of local newspapers, court transcripts, and public records, he and his daughter Rachel made an astonishing they learned the true identity of this monstrous criminal. In turn, they uncovered one of the deadliest serial killers in America. Riveting and immersive, with writing as sharp as the cold side of an axe, The Man from the Train paints a vivid, psychologically perceptive portrait of America at the dawn of the twentieth century, when crime was regarded as a local problem, and opportunistic private detectives exploited a dysfunctional judicial system. James shows how these cultural factors enabled such an unspeakable series of crimes to occur, and his groundbreaking approach to true crime will convince skeptics, amaze aficionados, and change the way we view criminal history.

Genres: True Crime, Nonfiction, History, Crime, Mystery, Audiobook, Historical

481 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 19, 2017

About the author

George William “Bill” James (born October 5, 1949, in Holton, Kansas) is a baseball writer, historian, and statistician whose work has been widely influential. Since 1977, James has written more than two dozen books devoted to baseball history and statistics. His approach, which he termed sabermetrics in reference to the Society for American Baseball Research (SABR), scientifically analyzes and studies baseball, often through the use of statistical data, in an attempt to determine why teams win and lose. His Baseball Abstract books in the 1980s are the modern predecessor to websites using sabermetrics such as Baseball Prospectus and Baseball Primer (now Baseball Think Factory).

In 2006, Time named him in the Time 100 as one of the most influential people in the world. He is currently a Senior Advisor on Baseball Operations for the Boston Red Sox. In 2010, Bill James was inducted into the Irish American Baseball Hall of Fame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_James

Reviews

[Nancy Oakes · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book has a great premise, to be sure -- in a 2016 article in The New Yorker Mr. James notes that

"... a hundred and four years ago eight people are found dead, murdered with an axe, inside this locked house, in a quiet, small town in the southern part of Iowa. It's a famous crime, and the reason that it became famous is that at the time it was obvious that it was the latest in a series of similar attacks. I had the idea that I'll bet there are others like this which have not been tied to the same murderer, because at the time they didn't have the methods you have now to connect the dots between unrelated events. So I started looking for them, and I found several.""

He also claims to have discovered the identity of the murderer who had eluded justice for years, with crimes going back to 1898. However, rather than being the "compelling" or "dramatic" book promised by the dustjacket blurb, this has to have been one of the most frustrating, amateurish and utterly confusing true-crime accounts I've ever read.

Why this is the case you can discover here at my reading journal; otherwise, I'll just give a summary here.

First, the lack of any sort of bibliography or footnotes is just wrong when someone is writing an historical account. While he does say that "it is inadequate to acknowledge in a footnote those whose work you use," and that he feels that "sources should be directly acknowledged in the text," and that he "tried to do this throughout the book," that's just not always true. Another issue: the author makes assumptions about the killer that have absolutely no factual basis; not only that, but then after he's made one statement, he contradicts himself later. In one huge example, he notes that the murderer "likely" lived around Marianna, Florida between 1901 and 1903 but then fails to elaborate any further. Third, when in some cases he's decided that The Man From the Train was responsible for a particular crime but it doesn't fit into the author's pattern, he makes it fit. As just one example he tries to justify including a murder in North Carolina in 1906 where the killer left people alive (which he hadn't done before) he says that the killer "heard a train coming." Not "may have heard a train coming," or "probably heard a train coming," but "heard a train coming" and therefore decided to catch it, implying that he was in a hurry to get out of town.

And then there's the fact that after he's taken us through a whopping 121 murders, some in chapters that could have been left completely out of the book, he tells us that while "the authors do not believe that all 121 murders were committed by the same man," they do believe that a "substantial number" can be attributed to him; that gets narrowed down on page 336 to " "perhaps fourteen crimes about which we have enough information to be certain they were committed by the same man." So why write about all 121 and not focus just on the fourteen? That makes no sense at all and fills the book with a lot of unnecessary details and way more conjecture than fact.

Finally, the writing style and I did NOT get along, but I will say that when his daughter takes the reins in the last few chapters, it was like a breath of fresh air after sitting through a thoroughly disorganized, meandering, not-so-well written rest of the book by her father.

I was so disappointed here because of the premise and I'd been looking forward to this one for a long time. It is getting some wonderful ratings and reviews, but in this case, not from me. It's one where you'll have to decide for yourself, I suppose.

[Julie · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Man from the Train: The Solving of a Century-Old Serial Killer Mystery by Bill James and Rachel McCarthy James is a 2017 Scribner publication.

A most unorthodox approach to True Crime, but interesting and fascinating.

Right from the start, the author explains he mainly writes books about baseball. I know nothing about the sport or the statistics that Bill James writes about. But, whatever it is he writes about the sport, it obviously requires the ability to analyze, theorize, and puzzle out various probable outcomes. For some his name is very recognizable, but this is my introduction to his writing.

When Bill stumbled across ‘the first crime’, his natural instincts prompted him to scratch beneath the surface and do a little digging. Before long he had found several other similar crimes, and so he commissioned his daughter, Rachel, to help him with the research.

This book is the result of what looks like a great deal of painstaking and time consuming exploration. The sheer volume of crimes is shocking. We are talking about WHOLE FAMILIES that were slaughtered!! But, uncovering similar crimes was only the beginning.

The authors attempt to connect the dots and find commonalities between these ghastly killings hoping to find a pattern that would link the crimes, which would hopefully lead to pinpointing whom ‘the man from the train’ might be.

True Crime enthusiast might be taken aback by the writing style or approach the author chose to employ. He speaks to the reader as though is expects them to be highly skeptical, imploring them to just hear him out, to try out his theory, to look at what facts are available, to take into consideration the approach to crime solving nearly a century ago, to see if maybe he might be on to something after all.

Sometimes, it felt as though he were speaking to me directly, which was effective in that I found myself paying rapt attention to his narrative, almost as though I were a student and he a professor. I think I absorbed more details that way, but I also felt like he was trying too hard sometimes, or trying to sell me snake oil on a few occasions. But, I enjoyed the challenge and the opportunity to exercise my critical thinking skills.

However, there were times he mentioned a random event or crime, then told me he had no intention of delving into that situation, or he would get back to it later, or that it had nothing to do with these crimes, which was very distracting, and I wondered why he even brought it up in the first place.

But, I did find myself caught up in his enthusiasm, and was determined to keep an open mind. It is obvious that besides the research, that much thought went into how these crimes were connected- or not- in some cases. He explains why those arrested or suspected were probably innocent, and proceeds to lay out a case for the defense or prosecution, as the case may be.

As the title of the book suggests, Bill believes the killer traveled by train, chose victims close to a train depot, perhaps to put distance between himself and his crimes once they had been committed.

Law enforcement typically looked inward at those living nearby, or connected to the community in some way, and often pinned the crimes on the uneducated, the poor, or minorities. Some suspects were convicted without due process and some were released due to lack of evidence.

The murders do have a few striking similarities- an ax was always the murder weapon, no valuables were stolen, and the victims lived close to a railway track or depot, just to name a few.

The author laid out each instance of mass murder, the towns in which they lived, the suspects, and if they believed the murders were linked or not. It is an amazing and surreal connection of dots, but sadly, there is not on shred of actual concrete proof, forensics, witnesses, etc. If this case were indeed brought into a court of law and presented before a jury, it would all be circumstantial conjecture.

The authors do eventually present their prime suspect, then proceeded to apply a unique mathematical percentage method to measure the probability their guy could have committed each individual set of murders, how he may have selected each family, how he escaped, and how he remained at large, and if or why he may have stopped killing.

The one downside, is that the title is just a bit misleading, since it is really up to you, the reader, to decide to convict based on the information presented. You may or may not believe the case is solved.

Overall, this was a very fascinating read, with a fresh approach and presentation. It is nearly impossible to know for certain if they have guessed the real identity of the ‘man on the train’, or if these mostly forgotten crimes are indeed the work of one killer, but I think the authors did an amazing job of collecting evidence and researching police procedures of the era in question.

I’m on the fence about how much stock I put into the some of the author’s theories , but overall, I believe they make a compelling case.

3.5 stars rounded up

[Tom Mathews · Rating 2 out of 5]

Years ago, I read on a website listing top unsolved murders a report of the 1911 murders of six people in two adjacent houses on West Dale Street in Colorado Springs. These murders were of particular interest to me as I once lived on West Dale Street in Colorado Springs. Both families were apparently bludgeoned in their sleep in the middle of the night. Nothing was stolen and the houses were then closed up and the murder weapon, a bloody axe, was found leaning against the wall of one of the houses. Pretty hairy stuff to have happened just down the street from your house, even if it was seventy-odd years earlier.

So when Scribner announced recently that a book was soon to be released about a string of serial killings that occurred mostly between the years 1910 and 1912 in which an unknown person used an axe or similar item found at the scene to murder families in their beds in houses near railroad tracks (the 300 block of West Dale is less than three blocks from the D&RGW tracks), I knew this was a book I had to read.

Thank god I waited until a library copy was available.

While the book contains a lot of fascinating information about a truly horrific series of murders, the writing is wretched beyond words. Author Bill James began his career by self-publishing books on the statistical analytics of baseball, a springboard which secured him a job with the Boston Red Sox and a reputation that was said to influence Nate Silvers Fivethirtyeight.com and The Upshot at the New York Times. In 2011, though, he decided to change course and published Popular Crime: Reflections on the Celebration of Violence, a disjointed mishmash about a wide variety of notorious criminal cases. He does not shy away from unlikely theories, as indicated by his assertion that President Kennedy was killed by the accidental discharge of a Secret Service officer’s weapon.

James’ conversational tone may work well in writing about baseball games but when talking about murderers, or more importantly, their victims, folksy banter comes off as disrespectful and just plain weird.

“After their marriage they moved to Centerville, Ohio, where they boarded with Mr. and Mrs. George W. Coe. (We might say they coe-habited with them [you might, but you shouldn’t]...Anna's maiden name was—"Axxe"really—but we're going to let that pass without comment.”[You should have, but didn’t])

In other cases James’ tone is almost conspiratorial which make me feel in need of a shower.

Something in the room would later cause the chief detective to describe the perpetrator as a “moral pervert”; what that was was never revealed, but you and I know.

Shudder!

In one chapter he lists four reasons why a particular set of killings should not be considered as one of this series with the first reason being that there was insufficient information to include it. Then he immediately offers ten reasons why it should be included ending with "The absence of any factor that would make us think that it isn’t him." In short, he has two contradictory lists that each say that there is no data belonging in the other list. Go figure.

Bottom line: I’m torn on how to rank this as I’d like to give it five stars for the material but only one star for the writing which is abominable. The only thing that is keeping me reading it is the desire to find out what happens but the author's history of favoring unlikely conspiracy theories makes me wonder if I will be able to trust his conclusions. Additionally, the book is lacking an index, footnotes, pictures, or much in the way of maps that would help readers gain a better understanding of the case. While the material in this book is very interesting, the author makes enjoying the book all but impossible. The writing is disjointed. He regularly refers to cases which have yet to be mentioned in the book. At one point he admitted that newspaper accounts of a certain murder exist but admitted that he hadn’t bothered to read them. I can’t be sure what research he actually did and what material he lifted from the research of others. Sometimes I wonder why I keep reading this, and yet I do. It's like watching a car wreck. I can't turn away.

FYI: On a 5-point scale I assign stars based on my assessment of what the book needs in the way of improvements:
*5 Stars – Nothing at all. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
*4 Stars – It could stand for a few tweaks here and there but it’s pretty good as it is.
*3 Stars – A solid C grade. Some serious rewriting would be needed in order for this book to be considered great or even memorable.
*2 Stars – This book needs a lot of work. A good start would be to change the plot, the character development, the writing style and the ending.
*1 Star – The only thing that would improve this book is a good bonfire.

[lawyergobblesbooks · Rating 1 out of 5]

No room in the budget for an editor?

[Emily · Rating 2 out of 5]

The subject matter was fascinating and the authors clearly did a lot of research. They make a convincing case for the crimes being committed by the same person and for their hypothesis about the identity of the killer. That being said, this book was bizarrely written and I found that the writing style took away from the effectiveness of the book.

I don't think that non-fiction needs to be dry and boring, and I have read non-fiction books that were both well written and humorous. This book, on the other hand, tries to be funny and conversational but it's just jarring. For instance, the authors quote a contemporary newspaper account of one of the crimes, then follow it with a "Ho-kay" to show that they don't find it believable. I just don't need the authors of my axe murder books saying "ho-kay."

The writing is choppy, with random tangents thrown in for good measure. There are many, many passages which would have been better as end notes or edited out altogether. I post-it note flagged one of the more egregious: the authors are talking about the Villisca axe murders and discussing various non-fiction books that have been written about the case. Then for some reason, this sentence is included: "There is another book about the case, Morning Ran Red, by Stephen Bowman, but that's a fictionalization, so I haven't read it and don't know anything about it." To quote this book, ho-kay. I would have no problem if this were in the notes section of the book, but there are no notes. There is also no index or bibliography. In Bill James' acknowledgments at the end of the book, he states that he prefers acknowledging the work of other authors directly in the text, rather than relegating them to a mere footnote. That's great, but I still find the absence of notes, bibliography, etc. to be problematic in a book that is as heavily dependent on historical research as this one. The quote about the Stephen Bowman book also illustrates another issue with the text, which is the seemingly arbitrary switching between "we" and "I" throughout. I understand it was written by two people who may not have agreed on everything, but it was just weird to read.

The timeline for the murders was also presented in a choppy and confusing way. I suppose it had to be presented somewhat out of order so that the reveal of the killer and the linking of the cases could have some drama and tension, but it was perhaps too out of order. There were many, many points where the authors would mention something in passing and say "we'll tell you more about this in a later chapter." That chapter would be so much later that I would have usually forgotten the first mention by the time they got around to circling back. The jumping around in time and location was all the more difficult to follow due to the lack of any sort of list, map, or appendix that would give a quick reference to what happened when and where. However, they did see fit to include a cartoon of a man talking to a mule.

That said, it was still an interesting book and I would recommend it to anyone with an interest in axe murderers. Just don't expect a normal non-fiction book.

[Julie · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the past, Freight trains thundered through most American communities, big and small, several times a day. I owned a home in a very small Kansas community in the 1990's. Coal trains would clatter through shaking the windows and making that easily recognizable, loud clack-clack whine and whistle. The trains and their noise became a regular, comforting part of life. When the trains became fewer and fewer, the lack of that sound seemed wrong and somehow disturbing. But it is also true that sometimes drifters and criminals rode the trains, jumping off to cause problems in the town and nearby farms. At times they were just travelers, modern day hobos....but at other times they were looking to do harm or steal.

The front cover of this book caught my eye immediately. It's a sight that is disappearing in many towns.....railroad tracks going off into the distance. In Western NC, the county I live in has re-purposed most of its train routes into paved fitness rail-trails with the real train traffic going through the more rural, smaller towns. It isn't like in decades past where livestock and freight trains were essential for all communities across the country.

In the early 1900s, trains were the lifeblood of most communities. But, someone evil rode the rails. Not just another hobo, freely riding, strumming a guitar like in all those country songs. But a killer. A serial killer who murdered from one end of America to the other. He was never caught. Nobody ever noticed the massive scope of his killing streak until now. Bill James and his daughter, Rachel researched and found the killer's trail 100 years after the fact. The Man From the Train: The Solving of a Century-Old Serial Killer Mystery presents the facts and their conclusions. It's a tale of a murder and unprepared small town law enforcement and justice systems. The story makes me incredibly appreciative of modern forensic science and investigation techniques. The murders were never linked or properly investigated because of communication and investigation problems, plus lack of modern scientific processes. Plus, by the time the bodies were discovered, the murderer was long gone, riding the rails to another town and other potential victims.

The first section of the book focuses on details and background of crimes that the authors believe were perpetrated by the same man. The second section shares details about law enforcement procedures in the early 1900s and the limitations of forensic testing at the time,and more details of crimes the authors believed can be traced to The Man From the Train. In the last section, the authors reveal their conclusion and present a suspect that they believe was The Man on the Train. The man who killed multiple families in the middle of the night, in their own homes over several years in the early 1900s.

This book is very different from most true crime books. The information presented combines researched factual accounts of crimes mixed with added conjecture based on the authors' research and opinion. There is no way to jet back more than 100 years in time and put the research and theories to the test, so in the end, readers are left to form their own opinions. The writing style is an interesting mix of factual reporting, humor and conversational tone. I didn't mind the mix, as a former reporter I fully understand that humor makes it possible to more easily discuss horrible details. Plus, the conversational tone and occasional jokes make this a much more readable book. It pulled me in and made me feel more engaged with the writers...like they were sharing their information with me rather than formally presenting bare evidence. I wouldn't have enjoyed 450 pages of dry facts about 100+ year old axe murders. But I enjoyed this book immensely. If this were a book about a more recent crime spree where evidence, documentation and witnesses were still available to interview, then this writing style might be inappropriate. But, given the passage of time, the subsequent limitations on research, and the fact that guessing is pretty much required in this case, the more relaxed style works.

The authors make a lot of assumptions about the researched data, but I enjoyed reading about their theory and the potential suspect. All in all, an enjoyable read that will have me pondering for days, wondering if they got it right. Especially when I'm walking, alone at night, on the rail-trail.

[Anne · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was awful. It seemed to go on forever. I was listening to the Audible book which meant I couldn’t skip ahead. The author took tangents that had nothing to do with the main murders and went on for chapters. This book needed a strong editor. At times the author tried for a folksy tone that fell flat.

I hated this book and wish I had not wasted my time listening to it.

[Merryl · Rating 1 out of 5]

I think a writer, who says about the slaughter of a family with the name of Pfanschmidt, that the "schmidt had hit the pfan" says it all about this book...........

[Emily · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is the first review I've typed out. I cannot overstate how much I hate this book. It's repetitive, it's incredibly boring, and there's no substance to connect us with HOW James actually found out about the murders or how he figured it out. It's just 445 pages of the people Train Man killed, why they're ALL the same, and if the people of 1899-1912 lived today, they TOTALLY would have seen the similarities between the murders. But they didn't, so, no connections were made. Those dumb fucks.

The ONLY reason I made it through this book is so I had something to talk about for book club and I can bring and eat yummy snacks for 4 hours.


Fuck this book.

[Krista · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you read about a crime in a small town, you will encounter frequently the comment that these people lived in the kind of quiet place where nothing very interesting ever happened. This is a despicable thing to say. It is a form of bigotry directed at the past, and bigotry directed at people who live in small towns – and worse yet, it's ignorant. Pardon my French, but it's an ignorant asshole comment, and if you ever say anything like that, you are revealing yourself to be an ignorant asshole.

The Man from the Train just may be one of the most poorly written books I've ever read. I should really keep track of what prompts me to seek out a book – something made me put this book on hold at the library – but whatever it was in this case, I was led astray. I had a vague idea that this was written by someone who is well known for his many books on baseball stat analysis (the fault is mine that I conflated author Bill James with Michael Lewis of Moneyball fame) and it seemed like an interesting concept that he used his statistical modelling to track down an unsolved, hundred-year-old serial killer cold case; in many instances linking a murder in one part of the country to another very far away for the first time. When I noted that this book was co-written with Bill's daughter Rachel McCarthy James – who studied creative writing at Hollins University – I reckoned this would be at least readable. But it's really not – dull when it's not hectoring the reader (that's a nice, authorly quote I opened with, eh?), The Man from the Train could have easily been cut down to article length to share what the Jameses ultimately put together and saved me many eyerolling hours.

I will assume that between the Jameses, they competently scoured the records and were able to trace their serial killer, making a reasonable case for the murders they say he committed between the years of 1898 and 1912; they are even able to give him a name in the end, and I have no reason to distrust their conclusions. But it seems like their book was written as an antagonistic rebuttal to an argument that I wasn't aware of. They quote other researchers into these crimes and let us know which sources are partially correct, which are laughable, and which “pollute” the field. They preemptively accuse the readers of “irrational skepticism” if they refuse to follow their logic, and I kept getting the feeling that they were speaking to specific imagined readers with bits like:

Late in the day on February 17, Big Bill Haywood was arrested in Idaho in connection with the murder of former governor Steunenberg. I know the Man from the Train did not kill Steunenberg; I am just trying to help those of you whose knowledge of history is mostly from crime books keep track of where we are in time.

I wasn't personally offended as my imperfect knowledge of history is not “mostly from crime books”, but who do the authors think they're “helping” with shade like that? So, I don't want to trace their logic or conclusions, because I somehow don't think I was the primary intended audience, but do mean to demonstrate what I think of as bad writing. This bit comes rather early:

The nickname “Billy the Ax Man” has been picked up in the twenty-first century and is sometimes used to refer to our criminal. But while we have tried to minimize the gore, we are dealing here with perhaps the most despicable criminal in American history, a truly ghastly felon who enjoyed hitting small children in the head with an axe, and who may have killed around a hundred people. Giving him a cutesy nickname that sounds like it came from a kid's cartoon seems to us not fitting, and there will be no further reference to that nickname in this book.

Again, the Jameses seems to be scolding other true crime researchers/readers who would desecrate the memories of the killer's many victims by employing this “cutesy nickname”, but they are not above using questionable humour in their narrative. In writing about the murder of the Pfanschmidt family in Illinois in 1912, they note that the surviving grown son, Ray Pfanschmidt, attracted police attention and write, “When the Schmidt hit the Pfan...”. That line is not clever or funny enough to warrant its inclusion, and neither is either of the following:

After their marriage they moved to Centerville, Ohio, where they boarded with Mr. and Mrs. George W. Coe. (We might say they coe-habited with them; it's a very dark story and we're desperate for relief. Anna's maiden name was “Axxe” – really – but we're going to let that pass without comment.)

A man named George Wilson, a neighbor of the Cobles, confessed to murdering them, sort of. Wilson was not of sound mind (no Dennis the Menace jokes, please).

Despite maintaining that they, and they alone, have finally cracked the century old mystery, the Jameses, bizarrely, make this offhand statement about crimes that they insist couldn't have been committed by the Man from the Train:

So what happened in this era, and who killed all of those families in Texas in 1912? We don't know. We're not sociologists or psychologists or criminologists or detectives. We're not even real historians. We're just writers. These are just the facts as best as we can tell.

But just in case that might make you think that the Jameses are humble in their conclusions (they are not experts, after all), this back-handed statement near the end should put you to right:

1. What could have been done to stop him?
2. How many people did he kill? and
3. What happened to him?
We don't absolutely know the answers to any of those questions, but we have thought about them a lot more than you have or will, so we'll share our thoughts with you; take them for whatever you think they're worth.

I can 100% concede that the authors have thought about these key questions more than I have or will, but again, I get the feeling that they are speaking directly to other readers who have devoted a lot of time and research to these matters; and that's some aggressive condescension to throw at them. The bottom line: The Jameses make a convincing case (to me, anyway) as to who the killer was, how he operated, and which murders can be attributed to him. Because they seem to be speaking to readers who have some preconceived ideas about these theories, the authors tell the stories of many murders that seem linked, but in their minds, are only similar: the inclusion of these ultimately unrelated cases made a too-long book too-much-longer. And because the authors deemed themselves to be (for whatever reason) in aggressive rebuttal mode, their antagonism for the reader is palpable and off-putting. Not for me; probably not for you.

[Taranee Anne · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was awful. It's so bad, I'm going to apologize in advance for what will likely read as a emotional outpouring of hatred for this book, because it is.

It's terribly written. I hate when authors talk to you colloquially in the text, like they're telling you the story over a shitty beer in a dank local tavern (and I love dank taverns). It's unprofessional, amateurish, and in this book, falls absolutely flat. For example:

(pg 15, regarding the story of Howard Little)
"I believe Howard Little to have been an innocent man, although I can't explain to you *now* why I believe that. Much later in our book, in chapter XXXV, we will return to the [...] murders [...]. When we return to the story I will explain what I believe happened, and why I believe that, and you can decide then whether you agree or disagree. Perhaps, until then, you will be kind enough to suspend judgment? Appreciate it."

PLEASE. I picked up this book to learn about how you and your daughter figured out this hundred year old mystery, which is quite an achievement and genuinely interesting, but instead you give me this fake-fireside-chat attempt at writing. It's terrible, and honestly it creeps me out. He doesn't stop with it either: Later when he insinuates that the killer masturbated over the dead bodies of his juvenile victims, he then continues the creepy vibe he has already developed between himself (the investigator/narrator) and us (the unsuspecting reader):

(pg 83) "Something in the room would later cause the chief detective in the case to describe the perpetrator as a 'moral pervert'; what that was was never revealed, but you and I know."

GROSS. Get your hand off my shoulder.

But I kept reading to see if it got better. I try to give books at least a hundred pages before I give it up in despair. Sadly, my perseverance was not rewarded.

The book continued on with no structure. He spent the ensuing chapters and chapters telling us about random towns all over the US where this axe murder took place, and that axe murder took place, and here's another axe murder that is *not* part of the serial killer's body count, but it added confusion to those who were investigating at the time, so let's talk about it too. Case in point:

(pg 43, the one page chapter entitled "Chapter VI - Which is Not Really a Chapter")

[First two paragraphs briefly detail two unsolved murders, promising to go into greater detail later in the book]

[Last and final paragraph of the chapter] "... There are several things about the crime[s] that suggest the possibility that it could be part of our series, but the best evidence is that it is not. You will be better equipped to decide what you think about that after you know more [...] so we will hold off for now [until] chapter XXXVII.

AND THAT IS THE WHOLE CHAPTER. Three stupid paragraphs (on one page) in which you just told us something that ultimately has nothing to do with the serial killer the book is written about, and you can't even tell us why for another 30 chapters.

And this crap only gets worse. He makes specious assumptions, and terrible leaps of logic. See just one example of what passes for the author's "logic" below, regarding a bucket of beer found at the scene of one of the murders:

(pg 64) "By far the most likely explanation for the bucket of beer is that it was simply a mistake. [...] How likely is it that a man who does not drink, and who had to be at work at seven o'clock the next morning, would go and buy a bucket of beer at eleven o'clock at night, even if he was expecting a houseguest? It doesn't make sense. It never happened. Either the saloon keeper confused the date of the purchase, or - more probably - he confused Casaway with somebody else."

HOW DID YOU COME TO THIS CONCLUSION? What facts, if ANY, do you have to support this assumption? How is this supposed to be a feat of investigative journalism if you can't even string together a coherent, factual thought?

There continues to be no organization to the story he is attempting to tell us, just chapter after chapter of murders with a connection to the serial killer and murders with no connection at all. No footnotes. No references. No evidence at all of his research. This is basically the journalistic equivalent of that conspiracy theorist that hangs out at your local dive bar.

I realize my rambling diatribe against this book may bring echoes of pot-calling-the-kettle-black, but firstly I know that I'm doing it, and second I am still just that mad at wasting my time with this book. Please, spare yourself and vehemently skip this book.

[Rob Neyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a difficult book to put down, as Bill tells a great number of compelling stories without allowing the details to bog down the narrative. As the subtitle might suggest, one of the big selling points of the book is (presumably) that the co-authors have solved a "century old" mystery: Who was the axe murderer responsible for (probably) many dozens of murders in the early part of the 20th century? And the passage in the book on this serial killer's (presumed) identity is compelling, no question. But that passage is also largely beside the point of the book, which is filled with small insights and observations of life, in that time and place, that will stay with you for a long time.

p.s. Full Disclosure: I once worked for (and later, with) Bill James, and still consider him a friend. Still, I believe this is the best writing he's ever done. Which is saying something.

[Mara · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book made me rue my inability to not finish books.

[GoldGato · Rating 2 out of 5]

I always used to wonder about all those axe murders which took place in the early 1900s in the rural areas of the United States. In fact, it seemed every time I read about 1899-1912, there was at least one murder of a Midwestern family with an axe. Very curious. I just assumed that was the murder weapon du jour for that era. It never occurred to me that the reason for so many like-minded killings was because one nutbucket was behind it all.

This book takes the concept of so many multiple murders (always families, not individuals) and ties it all together by introducing the idea of a train-hopping serial killer. Very interesting. The research is presented, showing a thread of cross-country killings, all done with the blunt portion of an axe, in rural communities near train tracks. I certainly believe the evidence presented, which means the psycho who did it all would, theoretically, be the greatest serial killer of all time.

So the subject was interesting, but I had one heck of a time trying to enjoy the book. The tone is very snarky, which I didn't like. There was also a constant "we'll get to this point later", which drove me crazy. As a reader, I feel it's the author's job to keep everything together, not ask me to remember what to remember when it should be remembered several pages later. Urggh.

The author also names the suspect, which is fairly amazing, as it's been more than a 100 years since the events took place. The book ends with another similar murder in another country, showing a possible trail for the named killer. Overall, a very interesting subject, but I read quickly to get past the sarcasm and the overall yuckiness of the deaths of so many innocent people (including those mistakenly lynched and executed).

Book Season = Autumn (the season for nutbuckets)

[Howard · Rating 5 out of 5]

5 Stars for The Man From The Train: The Solving of a Century-Old Serial Killer Mystery (audiobook) by Bill James and Rachel McCarthy James read by John Bedford Lloyd.

I’m impressed by the amount of research went into this book. The authors did a wonderful job of laying out their case for these murders being committed by the same person. And it looks like all of that research payed off. They solved the mystery of who was responsible for all of these killings.

[Johann (jobis89) · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars. I don’t know… it dragged on somewhat and got a little confusing at times, and the author was kinda patronising.

[Kirsti · Rating 5 out of 5]

Enthralling. If you don't like true-crime books, I doubt this one will convince you, but if you think reading about a horrific series of axe murders is a pleasant way to spend a rainy Sunday, HOLD ON TO YOUR EFFING HAT. Bill James puts his laser focus and his quirky writing style to work answering the question: "Were there serial killers in the olden days?" Along the way, I learned a lot about the early 1900s in the United States, including law enforcement, media coverage, prejudice, con artists, social mores, and rural life.

Thank you, Rob, for telling me about this one!

[Jess · Rating 2 out of 5]

One and a half stars.

This book gets two stars only because the concept of the Man on the Train and the connection between these crimes is fascinating.

This book is so poorly written. Grammatically, fine. But the tone and overall organization leads me to highly “un-recommend” this title to anyone. James write in a conversation tone, using ellipses, asking the reader questions, and saying the reader is “off the reservation” if s/he doesn’t agree. Not just unprofessional but strange.

The organization of this book is like someone had a few too many drinks and decided to talk at a dinner party about the Man on the Train. James thinks he is making sense but he isn’t. James thinks he outlining the crimes but he isn’t. He jumps around in time and (more times that I can count) tells the reader he’ll explain something “later.” I do not think I could even begin to count the number of times he says he'll explain something "later."

If this book was written in chronological form, it would be a HUGE improvement. This book must have had a weak editor to not suggest such a simple but critical improvement. Also, to nitpick, why does use chapter numbers in roman numerals--is this supposed to be witty?

One of my favorite examples is the tables he includes at the end of each section to note the victims from a specific period of time (defined by James, completely not chronically and in a way that makes little sense to the reader). These tables are supposed to, I think, list the victims of the Man on the Train. A great quote that highlights this book (page 330): “We believe that a substantial number of the murders were committed by the same man, and that any of the murders on this list might possibly have been his work.”

Hmmmm “might possibly.” Wow. This book “might possibly” be a train wreck disguised as strongly written true crime. Cannot believe this book was nominated for an Edgar.

Do not recommend.

[Scott Hitchcock · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting story that required a lot of research. James being a statistician just kills me at times with his pedantic repetition citing the list of the commonality between crime scenes ad nauseam. I get the need to establish the pattern but after a while you want to scream OK Bill I get it.

It's also hard to remember this is such a brutal set of crimes because the telling is often detached, analytical and clinical. Still overall very informative.

[Casey · Rating 2 out of 5]

I received a free Kindle copy of The Man from the Train by Bill James and Rachel McCarthy James courtesy of Net Galley and Scribner,  the publisher. It was with the understanding that I would post a review to Net Galley, Goodreads, Amazon, Barnes and Noble and my history book review blog. I also posted it to my Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and Google Plus pages.

I requested this book as the description sounded very interesting. It is the first book by the authors that I have read.

The subtitle, The Solving of a Century Old Serical Killer Mystery, is an adequate description of the book. It is a rather dull read due to the writing approach of the authors presenting the material in an almost "Joe Friday" format from the Dragnet television series (I know I am showing my age). Another slightly annoying detail is the authors briefly discussing a crime and then telling the reader that it will be covered in more detail in chapter xxx. They also included murders that were not part of the pattern or associated with individual that they identified as the serial killer. Again, I ask why include it other than fill pages.

In summary, this book just did not grab me or engage me. It is unfortunate becaus I had high hopes for the book. I will say that others have given it rave reviews on Goodreads so they must have found value in the book that I did not.

[♥ Sandi ❣ · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.75 stars Had this book not had such an effect on me I would probably have rated it higher.

This is the only book I can ever remember giving me nightmares! I had to read it almost one chapter at a time to get through it.

I finally finished this book. Many times I thought I would just quit reading it. I am far from the flighty, scaredy-cat type, however this book had me leaving on lights at night and double locking my doors. Never before has a book had such a visceral effect on me. Intellectually I knew that it was impossible for the Man from the train to be still be killing people, but that knowledge did not prevent me from laying awake at night and seeing shadows move.

From the late 1800's to 1912 a multitude of families were bludgeoned to death in the night as they slept. Most were hit in the head with the blunt end of an axe. This crime spread across the country from Florida to Maine and from the Carolina's to Colorado. This was a time when law enforcement was very lax at sharing information and felt that each crime committed was single to their own community. Forensics were almost none existent and many crime scenes were opened for the public to freely walk through. This was a century old unsolved crime spree.

No one, until the author, had actually traced these crimes through the 20 year or so period to really determine if there was one serial killer or if each crime was singular as was thought at the time. In a few instances two crimes were linked together, but that was not until almost the end of the crimes, once newspapers were more broadly distributed. This book shifts through many many crimes, some in no way related, some possibly related and then those crimes that are unmistakably committed by the man from the train.

Some of similarities of this mans killing spree were that they occurred very close to a train track intersection, they were in small towns and in a house often just yards from the rails. The victims were killed using the blunt end of an axe, in the early morning hours. Some had their faces covered, there was usually a young female in the home, and everyone, regardless of age was slain. The axe was left in the home. Nothing, in the way of money or jewels, was ever taken from the home, and the house was closed up, windows covered and locked from inside and the doors were either locked from inside or jammed shut. This, in small towns, where everyone left their homes unlocked.

Many people went to their death being accused and convicted of these crimes. Some people were lynched without benefit of a trail. Some crimes just went unsolved with the small towns not having the manpower or the funds to chase what leads they had. Most crime scenes were soiled, not only by the police but by the public. Checking with surrounding towns and villages for similar crimes was unheard of at that time. In total over 1000 people lost their lives, either being murdered or accused of the murders.

The story itself told of many more similar crimes committed during this period of time, then concluded with facts, as to why they were not murders of the man from the train. The probability of each crime was given a percentage. I understand the reasoning for adding in the additional crimes, but over time they did seem to overwhelm the story. They made the criteria the man from the train used stand out more significantly, but I felt the additions slowed the story quite a bit.

In the end the authors did finally give the name of the man from the train. They then explained how they believed he was the one. With months of hours doing research on this pattern of murders, then tracing routes, and analyzing newspaper accounts, trial records, arrest and public records, his identity became clear. A once unsolved century old crime spree was finally solved.

[Erin Clemence · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the beginning of the twentieth century, entire families were being brutally murdered in their sleep. Men, women and children were viciously killed by an axe, and left to die. Famed sportswriter, Bill James, and his daughter, Rachel McCarthy James, take the investigation into the twenty-first century. The pair examine the murders that shocked the small towns they happened in, and answered the questions the police at the time couldn’t. All of the crimes seemed to take place in small towns within miles of a train crossing, so the original axe murderer was soon deemed “The Man on the Train”. The James’ examine the different beliefs throughout the era about possible suspects, and dismiss all of the false claims from the media of the time.

As mentioned, Bill James is known for his sports writing. In “The Man on the Train”, he does most of the writing, and his sports experience is evident, as he tends to write as if he is carrying on a conversation (for example, he will say things like- “Not sure you believe me? Well let’s see what happens next”) . The writing style wasn’t exactly off-putting, it was just unusual for an avid reader like myself. He also really, really seems to like bullet points, as he uses them regularly.

“The Man on the Train” is more police procedural than serial killer study. The James’ compare and contrast police methods from the time, and analyze the crime scenes, exploring the clues from a historical perspective. Although it was interesting to hear about the practice of police work from the early twentieth century, I wanted to know more about the thinking and behaviours of the supposed train-traveling-axe-murderer. But of course, as this crime to this day remains unsolved, it is difficult to explore the psyche of an unknown subject.

The novel has a choppy flow, which made it a little difficult to follow. The authors started by introducing a little bit of all of the murders, then would go back and discuss the murders in further detail. I am a stickler for good flow, and I would’ve enjoyed it more had the authors started at the beginning and carried through to the end, instead of stopping and re-starting the plot.

There are some interesting things to be learned in this novel for sure, and the comparisons made between police work then and now will definitely give you pause (how have we changed? How, sadly, has society stayed the same?) . The crimes of the “original axe murderer” are grisly and heartbreaking, to be sure, and the ease with which the murderer seemed to go undetected for years is absolutely terrifying.

“The Man on the Train” is definitely a novel for those who are interested in 20th century police procedures, and the way society functioned before the era of DNA and crime scene analysis. But if you are looking for an in-depth serial killer examination, you will not find what you are looking for.

[Valerity (Val) · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is quite an amazing dig into a long series of killings that include the Villisca murders, along with a whole lot of others that appear to be connected going both before and after that time. Bill James and his daughter Rachel did great research and this book is the bloody and frightening result. Read it and see what you think. Did "The Man From The Train" commit this series of twisted killings with such a distinct pattern to most of them? True crime, mystery and history lovers will be intrigued by this. My thanks to NetGalley, Scribner, and the authors, for providing me with a Kindle ARC for review.

[Katya · Rating 1 out of 5]

Okay, I give up. I'm about 20% in and I just cannot get through this.

We've hit the point where the tautological arguments are making my eyelid twitch, and that's never a good sign. Also, harping on all the amateur detectives who set themselves up as experts and interfered at the time with no idea what they were doing in a book by an amateur detective who is setting himself up as an expert but who clearly has no idea what he's doing is...something.

James does a lot of cherry-picking from the reams of psychological data we now have on serial killers, selecting items that support his arguments and ignoring anything that doesn't, which is just bad rhetoric.

[Stephen Newman · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was a marathon, not a sprint. As others have said, the premise is a good one - solving a hundred years old serial murder. And their conclusion about his identification is a logical one. It just took so long to get there.

After awhile the case by case recounting became tedious. The authors sometimes seemed to reach in their conclusions that one man is likely responsible for the majority of these murders, perhaps due to their own confirmation bias.

Also as others have also noted, the two distinct styles of the authors is obvious and noticeable. The book suddenly becomes more readable as you get closer to the end, while still complicated by their stubborn and distracting insistence to avoid end noting or footnoting by inserting all references directly in the text.

Finally, some illustrations or at least a map would have added greatly to the telling of this story as the killer moves by train from town to town.

[Martha☀ · Rating 1 out of 5]

It didn't take me long to pass judgement on this book. On page 15, my eyebrows furrowed and I wondered what I had got myself into. During the first chapter, which describes the murders of one family, I was already adjusting my expectations of this non-fiction historical crime book due to James' confusing writing.

But then he wrote this:

I believe Howard Little [the apparent murderer] to have been an innocent man, although I can't explain to you now why I believe that. Much later in our book, in chapter XXXV, we will return to the Meadows family murders; by then you will have a great deal of background information that you do not have now.

What?? Why are you speaking to me?
And why have you wasted 15 pages of text, giving details about a set of murders that you researched but which ended up not being relevant to your crime investigation?

And later, in that same excuse-filled paragraph, he dare to write

Perhaps, until then, you will be kind enough to suspend judgement? Appreciate it.

If you, Bill, are going to try to have a conversation with me and ask me a direct question, then you must prepare yourself for a solid "no" answer.

But I didn't stop there, believing that an author should be given a 40 page chance. I did however jump ahead to chapter XXXV to see if I was indeed too stupid to understand the complexities to which he referred. And then, I began jumping around through the chapters, attempting to read this pile of nonsense in chronological order. I came to the same conclusion all the same.

This is a work of fiction, filled with odd details and a lot of speculation. There are no footnotes, no index, no bibliography, no maps. Shame on the publisher Scribner and the three listed editors for such shoddy work - although there may be more to that story with this quote from Bill's Acknowledgements:

I would also like to thank my first editor at Scribner, Brant Rumble, and my second editor, John Glynn, and my third editor, Rick Horgan; apparently I am hell on editors.

That sentence alone makes me want to leap to conclusions about what actually happened behind the scenes, and call it factual.

[Stephen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting book about a serial killer who killed families close to railroads at the turn of the 20th century quite a detailed book and gives insights into detective methods which on the whole were poor.

[Brad · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is what listening to The Man From the Train: The Solving of a Century-Old Serial Killer Mystery feels like: imagine you've walked into a pub in Kansas City; you can smell the underlying yeasty rot of years of spilled beer, but along with it is an overtone of slowly roasted pulled pork, the sweet tang of rib sauce, the deep fryers boiling away at stick potatoes, and the pungent scent of hot wings of the old school -- no lazy sriracha but homemade "Buffalo" spices dripping off the wings -- and sitting in a booth while the Chiefs play the Packers on the pub's big screen TV is a man with a tidy little beard and moustache, and beside him is a beaten up file box filled to the brim with documents, (some are photocopies, some are reprints, and one or two are actually originals) separated neatly and tidily into an order you know only he understands. You slip into the booth across from him and he instantly pours you a cold one from the pitcher on the table. He doesn't wait. He just starts talking. And does he have a story to tell. He wants to convince you, and he has the proof right there in his old file box, that he's solved an old murder mystery, and "By God!" he's going to prove it to you. You take a pull of your beer. It's watered down, but it's cold, and the company seems nice enough, and the football game is there to watch if you get too bored, so you humour the man. And then he gets started, and he has a way of telling a story that quickly makes all the noise of the pub fade into the background, and he has a way of making you part of the tale telling that compels you to listen, and before you know it you are pulling files across the table, you're skimming through old court transcripts, you're reading accounts of men lynched for crimes they couldn't have committed, accounts of family's with their heads smashed in by the blunt side of an axe head, accounts of valuables always being left untouched (and the man with the beer and file box suddenly gets excited and tells you that he thinks The Man From the Train may have even left money of his own behind as a sort of ritual payment, and he explains why, and it all makes so much sense you almost believe him), and accounts of who The Man From the Train might be and even insights into how he behaved and how he worked and how kind he could be to animals. And by the time you've helped the man with the tidy little beard finish three pitchers, and you've decided to order some food, you find yourself convinced by his arguments, and thrilled by his passion, and terrified of The Man From the Train, terrified and in awe. And you never want the man with the tidy little beard's story to end. And later, when you are taking a cab home because you had a little too much beer and you think about what you've learned, of the story the man told you, you realize that it doesn't matter a whit whether The Man From the Train killed everyone the man with the tiny little beard thinks he did or even if it is the man he thinks was The Man From the Train because someone committed all those crimes, and many of them were committed -- almost certainly -- by one killer, and that one killer was someone, and there is just too much in the story you have been told that is obviously true that the speculations -- wild though some may be -- can't diminish what you heard and the compelling way the man with the tidy little beard told you the tale. Besides, you held evidence, reports, contemporary accounts in your hand, and if you try to weigh the difference between fact and speculation in your brain you can't help feeling that fact is the much weightier of the two. And a good story told to you by a good storyteller is always going to keep you coming back.

[Sabrina · Rating 2 out of 5]

Alright guys, I had to wave my white flag at this one. At 60 pages in I knew I wasn't going to enjoy this book, but at 160 I just can't waste anymore of my time.

This non-fiction novel about a serial killer who murders people with the blunt end of an axe, over the course of 30 years.. feels like it was written for a 7 year old child. Even as the Author writes his words he doesn't seem convinced by them, if you can't convince yourself how the hell are you going to convince me?

Bill James is normally a Baseball writer where I am sure witty remarks and social commentary are much appreciated if not even expected.. while discussing the murders of entire families and the investigations (or lack there of) that followed, however WAS NOT the time for such things.

I try usually to give positive reviews, and paint a book in whatever silver lining I can find... there was none to be found here. I really did try to enjoy this book, but the thought of picking it up to read was not joyous to me.. I felt obligated!

I would not recommend this book!

[Cathi · Rating 1 out of 5]

Life is too short to read bad books. I got about half way through this. When I read any book, but particularly a true crime book, I don't want to know what the author thinks. In true crime I just want the facts. I want to know what happened, not the author's opinion of what happened. I have my own brain for that. This author kept inserting his opinion, sometimes making jokes. It was like he was talking to me but I couldn't talk back. It's like on tv when the actor breaks the fourth wall and talks to the camera. I don't like it there either. Sorry Karen Kilgariff. I know you liked this book. I asked for it for my birthday on your recommendation but I did not like it.