What do you think?
Rate this book
Wedderburn
'The slaughter was extravagant and bloody. And yet there were people in the small town of Wedderburn in Central Victoria who, while they did not exactly rejoice, quietly thought that Ian Jamieson had done them all a favour.'
One fine Wednesday evening in October 2014, 65-year-old Ian Jamieson secured a hunting knife in a sheath to his belt and climbed through the wire fence separating his property from that of his much younger neighbour Greg Holmes. Less than 30 minutes later, Holmes was dead, stabbed more than 25 times. Jamieson returned home and took two shotguns from his gun safe. He walked across the road and shot Holmes' mother, Mary Lockhart, and her husband, Peter, multiple times before calling the police.
In this compelling book, Maryrose Cuskelly gets to the core of this small Australian town and the people within it. Much like the successful podcast S-Town, things aren't always as they seem: Wedderburn begins with an outwardly simple murder but expands to probe the dark secrets that fester within small towns, asking: is murder something that lives next door to us all?
One fine Wednesday evening in October 2014, 65-year-old Ian Jamieson secured a hunting knife in a sheath to his belt and climbed through the wire fence separating his property from that of his much younger neighbour Greg Holmes. Less than 30 minutes later, Holmes was dead, stabbed more than 25 times. Jamieson returned home and took two shotguns from his gun safe. He walked across the road and shot Holmes' mother, Mary Lockhart, and her husband, Peter, multiple times before calling the police.
In this compelling book, Maryrose Cuskelly gets to the core of this small Australian town and the people within it. Much like the successful podcast S-Town, things aren't always as they seem: Wedderburn begins with an outwardly simple murder but expands to probe the dark secrets that fester within small towns, asking: is murder something that lives next door to us all?
304 pages, Paperback
Published October 1, 2018
18 people are currently reading
250 people want to read
About the author
Maryrose Cuskelly
6 books26 followersMaryrose Cuskelly is a writer of fiction and non-fiction.
She is the best-selling author of The Cane (Allen & Uwin 2022), shortlisted for best debut in the 2023 Davitt Awards.
In 2019, her book Wedderburn: A True Tale of Blood and Dust (Allen & Unwin, 2018), was longlisted for Best Debut and Best True Crime in the 2019 Davitt Awards.
In 2016, she was awarded the New England Thunderbolt Prize for Crime Writing (non-fiction) for her essay on the 1972 abduction and murder of Marilyn Wallman.
She is the author of Original Skin: Exploring the Marvels of the Human Hide (Scribe 2010) and The End of Charity: Time for Social Enterprise (Allen & Unwin 2008) co-written with Nic Frances, and winner of the Iremonger Award for Writing on Public Issues.
Her essays and articles have been published in a range of magazines, journals, and newspapers, including Crikey, The Age, The Australian and The Melbourne Magazine.
She has twice been awarded fellowships at Varuna, the National Writers’ House, most recently in 2020 for her novel The Campers, which will be published by Allen & Unwin in early 2025.
She lives in Melbourne with her husband and their two sons.
She is the best-selling author of The Cane (Allen & Uwin 2022), shortlisted for best debut in the 2023 Davitt Awards.
In 2019, her book Wedderburn: A True Tale of Blood and Dust (Allen & Unwin, 2018), was longlisted for Best Debut and Best True Crime in the 2019 Davitt Awards.
In 2016, she was awarded the New England Thunderbolt Prize for Crime Writing (non-fiction) for her essay on the 1972 abduction and murder of Marilyn Wallman.
She is the author of Original Skin: Exploring the Marvels of the Human Hide (Scribe 2010) and The End of Charity: Time for Social Enterprise (Allen & Unwin 2008) co-written with Nic Frances, and winner of the Iremonger Award for Writing on Public Issues.
Her essays and articles have been published in a range of magazines, journals, and newspapers, including Crikey, The Age, The Australian and The Melbourne Magazine.
She has twice been awarded fellowships at Varuna, the National Writers’ House, most recently in 2020 for her novel The Campers, which will be published by Allen & Unwin in early 2025.
She lives in Melbourne with her husband and their two sons.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 66 reviews
July 12, 2022
Yet another Aussie crime book, this time nonfiction, is Maryrose Cuskelly’s Wedderburn: A True Tale of Blood and Dust. It’s a true crime case study of a grisly triple murder in Central Victoria in October 2014. Starting with the gruesome details of the crime and apparent neighbour’s tiff, the characters and personalities of those involved are explored to help understand a seemingly brutal yet casual-like murder spree. A small town hiding its secrets are exposed as Cuskelly recounts the entire legal process and family rifts at the basis of this out-of-the-blue horrific violent explosion. It’s a most readable tale, yet failed to fully portray the perpetrator’s motivation. Perhaps that is due to the incomprehensibility of the actual act and the inability to enter the mind of another person. Overall, a three and a half star read rating that leaves you feeling somewhat dissatisfied. As always, the opinions herein are totally my own and freely given.
October 1, 2018
WEDDERBURN is not just a book, it's a small community situated in North Central Victoria - in the area known as the Golden Triangle. Like so many small communities out here, it's battling drought, population decline, and doing a pretty good job at holding back the tide. In 2014 when the unthinkable happened everyone with any connections or knowledge of the place couldn't help but wonder what on earth would trigger such an appalling act.
The primary reason behind this book, and the reading of it, has to be to search for a meaning. The weirdness of these awful murders was followed closely by the weirdness of shifting pleas by Ian Jamieson, and ultimately, no trial to explore that meaning fully and provide understanding for those left to mourn. It seems Peter Lockhart was known to be a "bit of a stirrer" and there had been niggling arguments over dust being raised when Lockhart was carting water, there was tension over cropping activities, basically tension, stirring and odd reactions left right and centre from the sounds of it. What would make somebody turn from being a bit pissed off with a neighbour to extreme, and very explicit violence (the injuries inflicted on the Lockhart's had particularly nasty overtones) is anybody's guess, although Cuskelly does raise a possible psychological explanation of male friendship turning toxic that was particularly compelling.
Jamieson originally pleaded guilty to the shooting murders of Mary and Peter Lockhart and not guilty to the stabbing murder of Greg Holmes. Holmes was the first to die, and Jamieson's switch to a third guilty plea and then an attempt to return to not guilty again muddied the waters and created a technical legal argument that all but obscured the crimes, and his victims. But provocation seems to have been at the heart of all of Jamieson's protestations - despite much of what he claimed had occurred at the time that Greg Holmes died not being supported by the evidence or logic. By pleading guilty to the Lockhart murders at least he acknowledged the deliberate, cold and calculating way he went about it - even if he seems to have ended up feeling resentful of everything and everybody - including the legal system.
Reading another book about rural locations recently (political not criminal that time), there was a comment in it that resonates, and I'm paraphrasing here but, in large cities, different types of people and circumstances are often divided into postcodes, but in small towns they live up close and personal. I've always said there's nothing really different about people in rural and regional locations to those from the big city, it's just harder to ignore. Tolerance, forbearance, amused observations, bitching, whinging, stirring and being stirred up are all part of daily life. How somebody responds to the minor irritations of life often says more about the annoyee than the annoyer, and it's hard to come away from WEDDERBURN without a very clear picture in your head of two blokes, having at each other on a regular basis, niggling and pissing each other off - with one having had a lifetime's practice at being the annoyer and one not handling being the annoyee until all hell broke lose.
For the record - the blurb quote ending "done them all a favour" is, in my opinion, sensationalist and not fair to the book, the entire community and the victims. Nobody deserves the sorts of deaths that Greg Holmes, his mother Mary and her husband Peter Lockhart were subjected to and there are family and friends out there still suffering. Especially as, after reading the book and understanding as much as can be of the circumstances, it's not justified in anyway by anyone's behaviour before or during the murders, and definitely not during the long-drawn-out legal proceedings that Jamieson inflicted on everyone. Seeking an explanation is the task of books like WEDDERBURN and it does this incredibly well, much better than that one quote indicates.
https://www.austcrimefiction.org/revi...
The primary reason behind this book, and the reading of it, has to be to search for a meaning. The weirdness of these awful murders was followed closely by the weirdness of shifting pleas by Ian Jamieson, and ultimately, no trial to explore that meaning fully and provide understanding for those left to mourn. It seems Peter Lockhart was known to be a "bit of a stirrer" and there had been niggling arguments over dust being raised when Lockhart was carting water, there was tension over cropping activities, basically tension, stirring and odd reactions left right and centre from the sounds of it. What would make somebody turn from being a bit pissed off with a neighbour to extreme, and very explicit violence (the injuries inflicted on the Lockhart's had particularly nasty overtones) is anybody's guess, although Cuskelly does raise a possible psychological explanation of male friendship turning toxic that was particularly compelling.
Jamieson originally pleaded guilty to the shooting murders of Mary and Peter Lockhart and not guilty to the stabbing murder of Greg Holmes. Holmes was the first to die, and Jamieson's switch to a third guilty plea and then an attempt to return to not guilty again muddied the waters and created a technical legal argument that all but obscured the crimes, and his victims. But provocation seems to have been at the heart of all of Jamieson's protestations - despite much of what he claimed had occurred at the time that Greg Holmes died not being supported by the evidence or logic. By pleading guilty to the Lockhart murders at least he acknowledged the deliberate, cold and calculating way he went about it - even if he seems to have ended up feeling resentful of everything and everybody - including the legal system.
Reading another book about rural locations recently (political not criminal that time), there was a comment in it that resonates, and I'm paraphrasing here but, in large cities, different types of people and circumstances are often divided into postcodes, but in small towns they live up close and personal. I've always said there's nothing really different about people in rural and regional locations to those from the big city, it's just harder to ignore. Tolerance, forbearance, amused observations, bitching, whinging, stirring and being stirred up are all part of daily life. How somebody responds to the minor irritations of life often says more about the annoyee than the annoyer, and it's hard to come away from WEDDERBURN without a very clear picture in your head of two blokes, having at each other on a regular basis, niggling and pissing each other off - with one having had a lifetime's practice at being the annoyer and one not handling being the annoyee until all hell broke lose.
For the record - the blurb quote ending "done them all a favour" is, in my opinion, sensationalist and not fair to the book, the entire community and the victims. Nobody deserves the sorts of deaths that Greg Holmes, his mother Mary and her husband Peter Lockhart were subjected to and there are family and friends out there still suffering. Especially as, after reading the book and understanding as much as can be of the circumstances, it's not justified in anyway by anyone's behaviour before or during the murders, and definitely not during the long-drawn-out legal proceedings that Jamieson inflicted on everyone. Seeking an explanation is the task of books like WEDDERBURN and it does this incredibly well, much better than that one quote indicates.
https://www.austcrimefiction.org/revi...
November 22, 2018
Ostensibly an investigation into the reasons behind the seemingly senseless murders of three people one evening in the small central Victorian town of Wedderburn, this book actually shed no light at all on the reasons for the crime and I'm wondering what it's purpose was.
Cuskelly is a competent, compassionate writer, but I'm very unsure of what she set out to achieve.
Her story faithfully depicts the events, the crushing pain caused by the the crime and the self-pity of the convicted perpetrator, all in somewhat repetitive detail, but ultimately fails to answer the question posed on the cover - 'What does it take to provoke a murder?'
By the end of this book the reader unfortunately comes away no wiser.
Cuskelly is a competent, compassionate writer, but I'm very unsure of what she set out to achieve.
Her story faithfully depicts the events, the crushing pain caused by the the crime and the self-pity of the convicted perpetrator, all in somewhat repetitive detail, but ultimately fails to answer the question posed on the cover - 'What does it take to provoke a murder?'
By the end of this book the reader unfortunately comes away no wiser.
April 6, 2019
I didn't like this book at all & got quite angry with it since it's all I had on a tedious day catching buses & my phone was out of battery so I was forced to read it. I just don't see the point of this story from this angle being made into a book, maybe she could have stretched the story out for a long article but it didn't deserve a book.
Basically the premise is what drives a decent bloke to murder? A guy kills his 3 neighbours, people say they got what was coming to them, turns out they didn't. The guy was an asshole & we got to read brutal replays of the murder & the injuries sustained a good 4 or 5 times. Maybe 6 including the court descriptions. The interviews with family & friends of the deceased come toward the end of the book & I would have preferred they be brought to life earlier, Ian Jamieson got far too much airtime. The biggest tragedy that night was Greg, the author mentions the family of the Lockharts & Greg will feel betrayed by something she will write but acknowledging it doesn't give her license to do it. There are better ways to write a true crime book, not make it all about someone who remains opaque. Actually you can do that, The Arsonist was brilliant. I think because that book put the victims first. I'm left with a lingering unease, I don't usually go in for sensationalism & that's what this feels like.
Basically the premise is what drives a decent bloke to murder? A guy kills his 3 neighbours, people say they got what was coming to them, turns out they didn't. The guy was an asshole & we got to read brutal replays of the murder & the injuries sustained a good 4 or 5 times. Maybe 6 including the court descriptions. The interviews with family & friends of the deceased come toward the end of the book & I would have preferred they be brought to life earlier, Ian Jamieson got far too much airtime. The biggest tragedy that night was Greg, the author mentions the family of the Lockharts & Greg will feel betrayed by something she will write but acknowledging it doesn't give her license to do it. There are better ways to write a true crime book, not make it all about someone who remains opaque. Actually you can do that, The Arsonist was brilliant. I think because that book put the victims first. I'm left with a lingering unease, I don't usually go in for sensationalism & that's what this feels like.
August 23, 2019
‘The slaughter was extravagant and bloody.’
On a fine evening in October 2014, in the small community of Wedderburn in Victoria, Ian Jamieson (aged 65) climbed through the wire fence separating his property from that of his neighbour Greg Holmes. Within 30 minutes, Holmes was dead. He had been stabbed more than 25 times. After returning home and collecting two shotguns from his gun safe, Jamieson walked across the road and shot Holmes’s mother, Mary Lockhart and her husband Peter, multiple times. He then called the police.
Why did Ian Jamieson murder three people? What caused him to murder three of his neighbours in this small community?
In this book, Ms Cuskelly attempts to find some meaning behind Ian Jamieson’s actions, some reason for these brutal murders. Jamieson originally pleaded guilty to the murders of Mary and Peter Lockhart and not guilty to the murder of Greg Holmes. He then switched to a third guilty plea, and then tried to return to a not guilty plea. These changes (and attempted changes) resulted in a technical legal argument which overshadowed the crimes and the victims. Ultimately there was no trial, and Jamieson was sentenced to life in prison in 2016.
‘It is a fearsome thing, the pronouncement of a sentence; an attempt to render justice for a crime for which there can be no real reparation.’
Jamieson appealed against the sentence in 2017: his appeal was disallowed.
I read this book and found no answers. Yes, it seems that there was tension between Jamieson and his neighbours over several different issues. But the issues seem comparatively small to this outsider. I guess we’ll never really know what caused Ian Jamieson to snap and to murder his neighbours. Ms Cuskelly does raise a possible explanation, of a friendship between Peter Lockhart and Ian Jamieson which turned sour, but I’m left wondering, dissatisfied, unsettled.
At the end of the book, Ms Cuskelly writes: ‘On my drive back to Melbourne, I feel I have caught a glimpse of what lies beyond this tale of murder, grief, cruelty, obstinacy and hard-headedness.’
We have the events, some (limited) sense of the impact of these murders on the community, and Jamieson’s self-pity. A glimpse perhaps, but no answers.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
On a fine evening in October 2014, in the small community of Wedderburn in Victoria, Ian Jamieson (aged 65) climbed through the wire fence separating his property from that of his neighbour Greg Holmes. Within 30 minutes, Holmes was dead. He had been stabbed more than 25 times. After returning home and collecting two shotguns from his gun safe, Jamieson walked across the road and shot Holmes’s mother, Mary Lockhart and her husband Peter, multiple times. He then called the police.
Why did Ian Jamieson murder three people? What caused him to murder three of his neighbours in this small community?
In this book, Ms Cuskelly attempts to find some meaning behind Ian Jamieson’s actions, some reason for these brutal murders. Jamieson originally pleaded guilty to the murders of Mary and Peter Lockhart and not guilty to the murder of Greg Holmes. He then switched to a third guilty plea, and then tried to return to a not guilty plea. These changes (and attempted changes) resulted in a technical legal argument which overshadowed the crimes and the victims. Ultimately there was no trial, and Jamieson was sentenced to life in prison in 2016.
‘It is a fearsome thing, the pronouncement of a sentence; an attempt to render justice for a crime for which there can be no real reparation.’
Jamieson appealed against the sentence in 2017: his appeal was disallowed.
I read this book and found no answers. Yes, it seems that there was tension between Jamieson and his neighbours over several different issues. But the issues seem comparatively small to this outsider. I guess we’ll never really know what caused Ian Jamieson to snap and to murder his neighbours. Ms Cuskelly does raise a possible explanation, of a friendship between Peter Lockhart and Ian Jamieson which turned sour, but I’m left wondering, dissatisfied, unsettled.
At the end of the book, Ms Cuskelly writes: ‘On my drive back to Melbourne, I feel I have caught a glimpse of what lies beyond this tale of murder, grief, cruelty, obstinacy and hard-headedness.’
We have the events, some (limited) sense of the impact of these murders on the community, and Jamieson’s self-pity. A glimpse perhaps, but no answers.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
January 20, 2019
I know Wedderburn the town (I live in the next town) and whilst I didn’t know any of the people personally I know some of the families. So this book for me will be quite different than for those that don’t know Wedderburn at all. I can only say that I found it quite interesting and it changed my mind completely. My former opinions had been formed from gossip and talk at the local fire shed. At the end of the day it was all so tragic. And Wedderburn the town takes a bit of a hit in the book. I found myself mentally defending its people as I read the book. For those interested in reading it, I don’t think it would be nearly as entertaining if you don’t know the town. However it is really well written and researched. The author has an easy to read story telling style.
October 9, 2018
What I liked
-the story
-the approach the writer took when investigating
-the lack of judgement
What I disliked
-the bland writing
-the fact that it was Aussie orientated, others not from Australia picking this up could be confused by the language
-the story
-the approach the writer took when investigating
-the lack of judgement
What I disliked
-the bland writing
-the fact that it was Aussie orientated, others not from Australia picking this up could be confused by the language
January 19, 2019
Despite its early promise, like so many others I found this book rather petered out. An interesting story but the author never seemed really to get past shallow waters in delving into an unusual crime.
May 3, 2019
This book started off strongly and was compelling as I couldn't quite believe what I was reading. A 64 year old man callously walks out of his house and stabs one neighbour 20 times, leaving him for dead then heading over to his other neighbours, one of whom is the mother of the stabbing victim and shoots them both dead with a shotgun.
The premise of the book is to establish what provokes a murder. We're told early on that Jamieson just 'snapped' after a long running feud regarding a dirt track alongside his property and a seemingly belligerent bully who just liked to rattle people.
I was horrified to read about the injuries sustained by all three victims which only served to turn me against the perpetrator due to the ferocity of them. The author provides a thorough report about the events and then proceeds to provide testimonies from friends and family about the victims and the killer. This was insightful and sad all at the same time, especially when she describes the recollections of Mary's extensive collection of china, dolls, etc.
The upshot is that I felt we never really got a proper explanation as to why the killer did what he did. There seemed to be no escalation in the supposed provocation or any simmering tensions perceived by friends and family - just that this was how it was between Jamieson and Lockhart and nothing had changed to result in the events that took place. What we do discover is more about the people involved; their character, their lives and the impact the deaths had on their friends and families.
I did feel at the end that Jamieson was a self-centred whinger trying to justify his abhorrent act and he deserves to spend the rest of his life in jail. I felt no sympathy for him, only his long suffering wife and despite the petty antagonistic behaviour of Peter Lockhart, he, his wife and step son did not deserve to meet such a gruesome end.
The premise of the book is to establish what provokes a murder. We're told early on that Jamieson just 'snapped' after a long running feud regarding a dirt track alongside his property and a seemingly belligerent bully who just liked to rattle people.
I was horrified to read about the injuries sustained by all three victims which only served to turn me against the perpetrator due to the ferocity of them. The author provides a thorough report about the events and then proceeds to provide testimonies from friends and family about the victims and the killer. This was insightful and sad all at the same time, especially when she describes the recollections of Mary's extensive collection of china, dolls, etc.
The upshot is that I felt we never really got a proper explanation as to why the killer did what he did. There seemed to be no escalation in the supposed provocation or any simmering tensions perceived by friends and family - just that this was how it was between Jamieson and Lockhart and nothing had changed to result in the events that took place. What we do discover is more about the people involved; their character, their lives and the impact the deaths had on their friends and families.
I did feel at the end that Jamieson was a self-centred whinger trying to justify his abhorrent act and he deserves to spend the rest of his life in jail. I felt no sympathy for him, only his long suffering wife and despite the petty antagonistic behaviour of Peter Lockhart, he, his wife and step son did not deserve to meet such a gruesome end.
July 29, 2020
Even though I read this book in three days it felt like it took two weeks. it was a really very slow.
The recounts by the people that Ian, Greg, Mary and Pete knew were interesting as too the way Maryrose explained the trial. But for some reason it didn't work and i wouldn't recommenced this book to anyone.
The recounts by the people that Ian, Greg, Mary and Pete knew were interesting as too the way Maryrose explained the trial. But for some reason it didn't work and i wouldn't recommenced this book to anyone.
July 14, 2019
A depressing journey through the inexplicable slaying of three people by their neighbor in a small country town in Australia. The overwhelming feeling at finishing this is Why? Why did it happen? Even the author can’t answer that question. Madness.
April 24, 2020
A good book. The author looks at the way a small town reacts to a murder and how neighbours and toxic masculinity can be a bad mix. The style of writing held your attention as it is a book less about graphic details and more about our own biases and how gossip can be harmful.
June 9, 2019
Very much like s-town podcast where it's more about the dynamics of the town and the people living there. The crime seems black and white but yet everything about it is gray gray gray.
August 26, 2022
I enjoyed the different POVs from all affected by the murders. Will definitely read more of these books
April 1, 2019
A well written and thoughtful account of the tragic and shocking murder of three family members by their neighbour for who knows what reason.
Read
July 25, 2019Cuskelly frequently indulges in victim shaming and paints victims of domestic violence as weak. Indeed much of the material in the book had nothing to do with the crime. I believe, people who involve themselves in books such as this, use the platform to support their own agenda, giving no thought to the victims and their families. Cuskelly is an acquaintance of a friend of the perpetrator of this crime. Cuskelly included unfounded gossip, which she knew to be incorrect, which continues to denigrate the memory of the dead and the haunt the lives of the living. Salaciously including this to sensationalise and sell her book, but then that is what this is all about isn’t it?. Profiting from others grief with no thought for those of us left behind.
February 15, 2019
The entire book seemed to be based on a handful of interviews and of those about the victim who appeared to be a bit player in the whole thing. Well written and interesting but had the potential to be a whole lot better.
March 31, 2019
2.5 ☆
Finished reading ... Wedderburn: A true tale of blood and dust / Maryrose Cuskelly ... 30 March 2019
ISBN: 9781760528072 … 285 pp.
This true crime story of a triple murder in country Victoria was an OK but ultimately unsatisfying read. It was OK in that the characters you heard from were well, if a little repetitively, presented but so many characters were missing. The author's opinions count for much in the narrative and don't make up for the missing voices. She also leaves some of the family rifts unexamined.
What is really missing and unsatisfying for me, as for everyone else, is the voice of the murderer. We will never really know why this happened. Many reasonable guesses are made but they remain that, just guesses.
To be honest, I think the story is worth a long article in the weekend newspapers but at book-length it's stretched too far.
Borrowed from my local library.
February 1, 2019
In October 2014 the small country town of Wedderburn in central Victoria was shocked by a triple murder. The victims were an elderly couple and her adult son by a previous marriage. This book is the story of those murders and the man responsible. This book felt underdone to me like there is a story there but the author didn't take the time to research backgrounds throughly. Mention is made of the murderer Ian Jamieson's difficult childhood but it is just mentioned as word-of-mouth and no real research has been done into his life history. It feels like it was put together in a hurry and the real deeper story needed more time and investigation. I felt there was enough here for a good investigative newspaper article but not enough for a book
October 16, 2018
Well written. Could be in any country place during drought and difficuleties incurred. Showed the personalities well and how family upheaval and and in a troubled character passionate feelings can occur.
Well written. Easy to read. Could be in any place during drought heat and perceived threat. Showed the personalities well and how family upheaval and a troubled personality could collide tragically. Shows family loyalties.
Well written. Easy to read. Could be in any place during drought heat and perceived threat. Showed the personalities well and how family upheaval and a troubled personality could collide tragically. Shows family loyalties.
October 21, 2018
Just boring
June 21, 2023
This book attempts a Helen Garner-esque portrait of a crime in its tone, the foregrounding the thoughts and feelings of the writer, and looking at one unusual crime in depth throughout a trial. The angle Cuskelly takes is around 'provocation', particularly that the triple murder in the town of Wedderburn was provoked by the killer's anger that the victims used a dirt road that caused dust to settle on his property. I like the conceit; I think a book that examines the legal, ethical and philosophical ideas surrounding provocation could actually be really interesting.
The problem in making this story compelling is that the killer turned himself into police, admitted he was guilty, said he did it because "he's a c**t" and then pled guilty at trial. What, really is there left to examine, then, except Cuskelly's refusal to believe that a person could not really have a motivation to kill people beyond being a bad person. Cuskelly doesn't get interviews with the killer or his family, so little insight is shed on what could have caused him to 'snap' and what's left is speculation that left me wondering how the book got through legal in its current form, especially without the endorsement of all immediate members of the survivor's families. The book spends a lot of time speculating on whether one of the victims was a paedophile - which doesn't help explain the crime, as the killer never mentions this as a reason. Every person Cuskelly actually talks to about the crime refutes this accusation, including the victim's family and alleged victim. If this was a true allegation, then the author was exposing a victim who had made the decision not to go to police and to live a completely private life; if untrue, this speculation forever casts doubt on the reputation of a murder victim whose life would never have been open to public scrutiny had they not been murdered in their own home. Cuskelly even admits that speculation that the town was 'glad' one of the victims died was her own invention; she never actually heard anyone she interviewed say that they were glad the victim died. The writer casts judgement on the victim'sfamily, particularly around the lack of loving phrases on one of the victim's headstones and the possible reasons for this, when really the most obvious reason was a family rift caused by an affair. In all, it made me feel icky. The relevance of discussing town rumours about the victims of this horrible crime, including paedophilia, the PTSD of a war veteran, and the behaviour within a family was never made clear and didn't help to explain or shed light on the crime; at worst it felt a victim blamey - as though these people had to have some deep secret that the killer knew that motivated the crime. I read and listen to true crime, I usually do so without feeling ethically compromised. The focus is typically on the reasons for violent crime, or police process, or the attempt to solve the crime. This book walks a tight line or crosses over into voyeurism into the private lives of victims, and if I was a family member I couldn't imagine being especially thrilled with the book - Cuskelly herself even acknowledges feeling like she is betraying the victim's family members. I would suggest that maybe is you feel you are betraying the victims, maybe don't?
The problem in making this story compelling is that the killer turned himself into police, admitted he was guilty, said he did it because "he's a c**t" and then pled guilty at trial. What, really is there left to examine, then, except Cuskelly's refusal to believe that a person could not really have a motivation to kill people beyond being a bad person. Cuskelly doesn't get interviews with the killer or his family, so little insight is shed on what could have caused him to 'snap' and what's left is speculation that left me wondering how the book got through legal in its current form, especially without the endorsement of all immediate members of the survivor's families. The book spends a lot of time speculating on whether one of the victims was a paedophile - which doesn't help explain the crime, as the killer never mentions this as a reason. Every person Cuskelly actually talks to about the crime refutes this accusation, including the victim's family and alleged victim. If this was a true allegation, then the author was exposing a victim who had made the decision not to go to police and to live a completely private life; if untrue, this speculation forever casts doubt on the reputation of a murder victim whose life would never have been open to public scrutiny had they not been murdered in their own home. Cuskelly even admits that speculation that the town was 'glad' one of the victims died was her own invention; she never actually heard anyone she interviewed say that they were glad the victim died. The writer casts judgement on the victim'sfamily, particularly around the lack of loving phrases on one of the victim's headstones and the possible reasons for this, when really the most obvious reason was a family rift caused by an affair. In all, it made me feel icky. The relevance of discussing town rumours about the victims of this horrible crime, including paedophilia, the PTSD of a war veteran, and the behaviour within a family was never made clear and didn't help to explain or shed light on the crime; at worst it felt a victim blamey - as though these people had to have some deep secret that the killer knew that motivated the crime. I read and listen to true crime, I usually do so without feeling ethically compromised. The focus is typically on the reasons for violent crime, or police process, or the attempt to solve the crime. This book walks a tight line or crosses over into voyeurism into the private lives of victims, and if I was a family member I couldn't imagine being especially thrilled with the book - Cuskelly herself even acknowledges feeling like she is betraying the victim's family members. I would suggest that maybe is you feel you are betraying the victims, maybe don't?
September 29, 2018
WEDDERBURN by Maryrose Cuskelly An Allen and Unwin book
Review by Ian Smith
The town of the title is where it all happened, the triple murder that is, and this is all about that event as you might expect. However it’s also much more, especially the events beyond the bloody crime scenes left behind.
It begins with a detailed description of the horrific events that took place on that October day in 2014. How it all unfolded, the event itself and the immediate aftermath. That PTSD is involved in a couple of the individuals there can be no doubt. From then on come the details but, more importantly, how different people view the story.
Those who are family, located nearby, or knew the deceased and the perpetrator are all approached for their take on events and this is what makes it different from many similar books on this type of subject. Those who allow an interview each have their own chapter, their view on the happening, how it came about and, importantly for me, what happened afterwards.
How peoples felt, but rarely uttered, prejudices come to the fore and disrupt the community afterwards is the part I felt fascinating. Long held resentments boil over and some innocent families have to leave Wedderburn as a result.
Maryrose attends the multiple court hearings, complicated because the defendant constantly changes or wants to change his plea on the first killing to self defence. She gets to meet some of the family members and learns more about the estrangement of many of them and how rifts that have never healed show their ugly side. There was more than one person who uttered the phrase, “did the town a favour”.
Those who live in country towns anywhere will certainly relate to many of the characters, their problems and their impact on the locality. Even the aftermath as it applies to some of the animals is noted.
Though at times I thought it a little drawn out, with some details I felt unnecessary, I enjoyed this work and appreciated the effort Maryrose has gone to in order for a balanced view to be presented, one that will leave you wondering just how the town has settled down since.
This is an excellent account, told in an unbiased manner and a worthy read.
Review by Ian Smith
The town of the title is where it all happened, the triple murder that is, and this is all about that event as you might expect. However it’s also much more, especially the events beyond the bloody crime scenes left behind.
It begins with a detailed description of the horrific events that took place on that October day in 2014. How it all unfolded, the event itself and the immediate aftermath. That PTSD is involved in a couple of the individuals there can be no doubt. From then on come the details but, more importantly, how different people view the story.
Those who are family, located nearby, or knew the deceased and the perpetrator are all approached for their take on events and this is what makes it different from many similar books on this type of subject. Those who allow an interview each have their own chapter, their view on the happening, how it came about and, importantly for me, what happened afterwards.
How peoples felt, but rarely uttered, prejudices come to the fore and disrupt the community afterwards is the part I felt fascinating. Long held resentments boil over and some innocent families have to leave Wedderburn as a result.
Maryrose attends the multiple court hearings, complicated because the defendant constantly changes or wants to change his plea on the first killing to self defence. She gets to meet some of the family members and learns more about the estrangement of many of them and how rifts that have never healed show their ugly side. There was more than one person who uttered the phrase, “did the town a favour”.
Those who live in country towns anywhere will certainly relate to many of the characters, their problems and their impact on the locality. Even the aftermath as it applies to some of the animals is noted.
Though at times I thought it a little drawn out, with some details I felt unnecessary, I enjoyed this work and appreciated the effort Maryrose has gone to in order for a balanced view to be presented, one that will leave you wondering just how the town has settled down since.
This is an excellent account, told in an unbiased manner and a worthy read.
February 13, 2019
I grew up in Central Victoria and we played Weddeburn in the school sports games. I think they were called 'carnivals' back then? This very much had the feeling of a small country town and I fought constantly as I read not to take sides, this impulse coming from my own farm, and then living in town for a few years, childhood. The author has captured well the claustophobic nature of small country town life, incl nearby farming, in central VIctoria and why some young go and never come back, and some do bringing back skills and experience gained in the bigger world outside and giving back to their home. Some stay because they want to, and some because they can't but need to. All of that played inside my head as I read so on that level I think this book is a success and would be for all who are familiar with that environment, and those that don't but are open to learning it. The reporting of the case to me had a bias however for one set of people over another although I also think the author tried not to do that. I found some of the descriptions of one of the characters to equate how he looked and behaved in what was obviously an environment alien to him to imply things about him that were out of place in a book trying to be impartial. Some comments made about his friends loyalty also concerned me. Small towns don't give up their secrets easily, and the truth is badly distorted by time and the repetition that the constant retelling through gossip of an event inevitably causes. There are also some people and families that are simply more attractive than others, and easier to like. The sadness of the event for all involved however comes through loudly. The sheer size of the tragedy for family and friends alike is heartbreaking. The author has captured well how far more deeply country people are enmeshed in each other's lives, for good and for bad.
February 10, 2019
I remember the case in the paper. This is a sensitively written account, and I can understand how some of those close to those involved - the victim's families - would have trouble with it. As the writer states, they may feel like they have been misrepresented, but it is the writers point of view. It is a sad tale, with no explanations, if you are looking for a reason you won't find it in this book. It's trying to explain a horrible event and the aftermath. Some things cannot be explained. The writer doesn't delve in detail into the early life of the murderer, and I don't think that this matters as much as other readers suggest. How could it explain his irrational actions? There is no sense or logic. I don't think it portrays the town unfairly, however, I am not close to anyone there. I would not think badly of the town for what happened there, how could anyone have prevented this? People gossip yes, that is human nature, they want something salacious and people can be so unkind and unthinking in repeating gossip and innuendo. That's in any community, big or small. However being small magnifies these thoughts. It's ultimately a sad tale, for everyone. It is written thoughtfully and compassionately, with an author bias, however she does develop throughout the trial and hearings and offers a balanced view of all the protagonists along with her own views. Also an insight into the legal world. An easy writing style to read. however not an easy topic to read about.
February 13, 2020
'Wedderburn' examines an awful act of violence in a small and insular community in rural Victoria in 2014. I was drawn to read it because my family lived in Wedderburn around the time I was born and I spent time there during my childhood.
The author tries for a Helen Garner style in her observations of the court proceedings and strained family dynamics, but doesn't quite achieve the desired effect. I did enjoy the strong characterisation of and interviews with various residents of Wedderburn and the picture Cuskelly paints of the town's unique social dynamics, but would have liked to see her delve further into the notions she touches on of the masculinity and shame that spurned the violence. There's a lot of hypothesising as to the killer's motivations - largely unavoidable as he is not interviewed in the book and never truly gets his 'day in court' - but it felt like a lot of unfounded speculation and rumour-mongering. The book ran out of steam after the initial court proceedings were concluded, and could have been structured more effectively, but it was an interesting read.
The author tries for a Helen Garner style in her observations of the court proceedings and strained family dynamics, but doesn't quite achieve the desired effect. I did enjoy the strong characterisation of and interviews with various residents of Wedderburn and the picture Cuskelly paints of the town's unique social dynamics, but would have liked to see her delve further into the notions she touches on of the masculinity and shame that spurned the violence. There's a lot of hypothesising as to the killer's motivations - largely unavoidable as he is not interviewed in the book and never truly gets his 'day in court' - but it felt like a lot of unfounded speculation and rumour-mongering. The book ran out of steam after the initial court proceedings were concluded, and could have been structured more effectively, but it was an interesting read.
May 4, 2019
Maryrose Cuskelly says she started out curious about the community disrupted by three murders, rather than the crime itself, but lost this thread and ended by being absorbed by the crime and making judgement on who she sympathized most with. Alluded to the psychological tendency for power motivated males to be more likely to commit atrocious murders - but didn’t offer an exploration of this. In fact, beyond constructing a reporter style narrative of the facts and the interviewees anecdotes - much of which can be read in any Google search - this book ignored the community, ignored the victims beyond the family. The stoic faced police who never worked again, the broader community that weren’t members of a couple of obscure clubs, those that to this day live with the fall out of extreme and eccentric behaviors and live to wonder why Mary was killed at all - that would have been a great story.
November 18, 2019
I wasn’t impressed with this book, predominantly because I don’t really think it offered any particular insights into the crime. The first third or so was interesting as you learned what happened, but after that you don’t really gain any additional insight into what happened or, critically, why. The narrative structure doesn’t really draw you in, either. Overall I think it would have probably been a good long read if you condensed it to like 20 or so pages, but it wasn’t enough to carry a book. I finished it in the hope that something would happen or there would be some revelation but there wasn’t, and for me there was no real evoking of a sense of place or the desperation of the Australian bush during drought, which is maybe what it was going for? I was disappointed and would not recommend.
June 2, 2023
As others have said, the story repeats, I listened to it on Audio book, and I thought I must have hit rewind a few times! I didn't know the story before reding it. It is a pretty grim reminder you don't know what people are capable of, and also that firearms are dangerous + not something you want your neigbours aiming at you!!!
Didn't appreciate the writing all that much, I was glad to get to the end, if it wasn't an Audio book I probably wouldn't have persisted with all the repetition. I also struggle with names and relationships when reading a book and this was a doozy that I slowly got my head around!
Didn't appreciate the writing all that much, I was glad to get to the end, if it wasn't an Audio book I probably wouldn't have persisted with all the repetition. I also struggle with names and relationships when reading a book and this was a doozy that I slowly got my head around!
June 12, 2019
I’m not really sure where the story was in this one. I would have liked more on the effect this triple murder had on the town, as the title suggests, and less on the unfathomable decision one man made to kill his neighbours in cold blood, of which I am no more enlightened than before reading. Despite the unusual circumstances I didn’t think was a particularly gripping or insightful piece of true crime, particularly when compared to other unique Australian writers like Chloe Hooper or Helen Garner.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 66 reviews