The subtitle of this book is what grabbed my attention and I was sorely disappointed that it was the reader version of "click bait". Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is mentioned a handful of times and his connection to the murder being discussed is tenuous at best, a flagrant attention grab and lack of truth in advertising at the worst.
That being said, it wasn't a bad book. It was written very well and took you to the time and place of 1860s England very well. The book was well researched, but it wasn't a bunch of facts shoved down the reader's throat, which I appreciated. I'm not a big reader of true crime anymore, I'm a bit too squeamish now, but it wasn't overly graphic and in your face, so I was able to handle it. The historical perspective was the best part and was the true main character of the story as far as I am concerned.
I felt badly for Mullins. He was most definitely railroaded. He wasn't innocent of crime, but his crimes didn't warrant death, IMHO. Though trying to pin the blame on an innocent man to get the reward money is a pretty crappy thing to do, especially if the innocent man was found guilty, because back then, the penalty for murder was pretty much instant death, with very little chance for appeal. So he DID attempt murder for money in a roundabout way, so pretty crappy thing to do, but not sure it was worth death.
If Mullins didn't try to get rich quick in the way he did, he probably would have been fine. If Mrs. Emsley hadn't been quite so mean/unsympathetic to others and their struggles, she would have quite possibly lived longer than she did. Very sad. I don't usually like to read true crime because it makes me sad, for the victim, their loved ones and for the person/s who committed the act and their loved ones as well. The violence never needed to happen, yet the perfect storm of instances put together creates havoc. So sad.
Also sad is the fact that the true murderer was probably not Mullins and was never punished for their crime.
*SPOILERS FOLLOW*
The author theorizes that the murder was really the pastor, Briggs, that he just snapped and did it, but there is no evidence to support the theory, other than circumstantial as with Mullins himself. Not a bad theory, very plausible, but not enough to hang a man over. Just like with most mysteries, this is something we may never know the answer to. Sad, because this time, 1860, was about when the science of forensics was starting to come into being. If this had happened a few years later, there may have been more usable evidence to find the true killer. Then again, maybe not.
So sad book. Well written and great peek into the time of 1860 and the place of London England. 3.5 stars, rounded down to 3, because the subtitle is HUGELY misleading and I didn't appreciate that. If it wasn't for that, it would be closer to a four. Recommended if you like historical true crime, where the killer isn't necessarily found.
My thanks to NetGalley and Quarto Publishing Group - Aurum Press for an eARC copy of this book to read and review.