What do you think?
Rate this book
Evidence Ignored: What You May Not Know About Columbine
Evidence Ignored presents an unfiltered account of the events that led to the tragedy at Columbine High School. Despite the mountain of police reports, journal writings, video and audio transcripts that have been released, the general public knows only what has been presented to them; information distilled by a variety of law enforcement officials and journalists. No understanding of this senseless attack can be gained if we ignore vital pieces of information. Evidence Ignored seeks to set the record straight, outlining all that is known about Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold in hopes that it will help to open a dialogue of how we, as a society, can better recognize at-risk kids and step in before we face yet another Columbine.
350 pages, Kindle Edition
Published October 21, 2019
216 people are currently reading
328 people want to read
About the author
Rita Gleason
1 book7 followersRita Gleason grew up in Poughkeepsie, NY where her passion for investigative analysis and the study of the psychology of crime was sparked in the aftermath of a triple homicide committed by a student in her high school. Rita combined her love of problem solving and animals into a career as a small animal veterinarian, graduating from Cornell University's College of Veterinary Medicine in 2002. Now a successful DVM, Rita has retained her interest in exploring the untold truths of criminal events, and for helping others look beyond the headlines to develop a more complete understanding of a crime. Her debut novel, Evidence Ignored, is an in- depth exploration of the timeline of events leading up to one of this country's most infamous modern crimes, the shootings at Columbine High School.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
April 24, 2022
4.5 stars—“Evidence Ignored” by Rita Gleason is a very well researched account of the questions that have arisen about the Columbine shooting from online sources and rumor mills. I definitely wouldn’t consider this an introductory book if you know nothing about Columbine prior to reading this book, but for those familiar with the countless theories and questions surrounding Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, this book is essential reading. This book is heavily footnoted and relies primarily on the Columbine Report to answer the major questions surrounding Columbine. I love the author’s approach of tackling issues head on and answering questions using the sources cited. Also, the author does as good of a job of clearing the other potential suspects/co-conspirators of any wrongdoing as any book I’ve read on this subject. The author also does excellent work in showing that Dylan was more than just a depressed stooge that was putty in Eric Harris’s sociopathic hands. His rage at the jocks and bullies was a definite catalyst in the plot moving forward and the massacre that followed.
September 7, 2022
On April 20th, in 1999, two male students brought guns and home-made bombs to their high-school in Columbine, Colorado. Fifteen people were left dead, including the perpetrators. I followed the news closely and have since read several books about this horrific attack. When I became aware of Rita Gleason’s Evidence Ignored: What You May Not Know About Columbine, I ordered a copy immediately.
And, for the very first time in my extensive book-buying history, I want my money back.
I found the tone off-putting. This was not an objective overview. It feels like the author is in a heated argument, but I have no idea with whom or about what. She seems to have an agenda: she wants us all to “know” that bullying had absolutely no affect on E.H. and D.K. D.K. was not a sad follower, he was as bad-to-the-bone as E.H. She is disproving the conspiracy theories. Although she fails to mention what the conspiracy theories are, or where they are coming from.
Ms. Gleason devotes time to the “Trench Coat Mafia”. As in, she essentially shared random students’ answers when asked if the student had heard of the “TCM”. I went over the collection of quotes from students who may or may not have ever even heard of E.H. or D.K. I did not find one statement relevant to what actually happened. The conclusion seems to be that E.H and D.K. were members of the “Trench Coat Mafia” in the same way that John Bender, Allison Reynolds and Claire Standish were “members” of The Breakfast Club.
Moving on to “evidence ignored”, she tackles the criminal complaints against E.H. that were filed by the Brown family. When the Browns first contacted the authorities, County Sheriff’s records state “…did not follow up on these concerns because officers were unable to reach the Browns despite several attempted phone calls.”
That is not ignoring. That is a valid attempt to follow-up.
Later, the Browns contact the authorities to report disturbing content on one of E.H.’s websites. The officer submitted a report to a County Investigator.
I don’t think very many people consider the criminal justice system in the U.S. to be perfect, but this author doesn’t seem to show where any “evidence” was “ignored”.
Page 203: speaking of witness testimonies: “…Brooks Brown, one of the murder victims…”
“Moreover, neither Brooks Brown nor the other student named, indicated that they saw E.H. there that day, with Brown specifically stating that he did not see E.H. until immediately before the start of the attack.”
Brooks Brown was not killed at Columbine and the author clearly knows this, as she as provided his statement, after-the-fact. Brooks Brown was not a “murder victim”.
Page 210: Author presents her opinion as a fact: “Nature rules all and nurturing has nothing to do with it.”
I’m currently reading a book by a retired FBI agent. Seems like this is still debatable.
Page 211: Author defines the word “shy” as “often the misused generic term to describe a person who has trouble opening up to others in social situations.”
Dictionary definition of “shy”: being reserved or having or showing nervousness or timidity in the company of other people.
How is “shy” being “misused”?
The author continues with: “There are varying degrees of shyness, the most severe of which are, these days, characterized as psychological disorders.”
This sounded like blarney to me, so I took a minute to look into this and can’t find anything about it. There is no footnote.
The author makes an adamant effort to exonerate people that were merely interviewed, never charged. She refers to all of the “rumors” surrounding student Perry, but there were no “rumors”, multiple students had apparently mistakenly identified D.K. as Perry.
Ms. Gleason spent a chapter telling us about a 23-year-old woman who had come forward purporting to have had knowledge of the attack and a relationship with E.H. Authorities checked out her story, it was quickly proven false. Thus, it was not actually “evidence” and it certainly was not “ignored”.
While I could continue with specific examples, I’ve probably already said too much.
And, for the very first time in my extensive book-buying history, I want my money back.
I found the tone off-putting. This was not an objective overview. It feels like the author is in a heated argument, but I have no idea with whom or about what. She seems to have an agenda: she wants us all to “know” that bullying had absolutely no affect on E.H. and D.K. D.K. was not a sad follower, he was as bad-to-the-bone as E.H. She is disproving the conspiracy theories. Although she fails to mention what the conspiracy theories are, or where they are coming from.
Ms. Gleason devotes time to the “Trench Coat Mafia”. As in, she essentially shared random students’ answers when asked if the student had heard of the “TCM”. I went over the collection of quotes from students who may or may not have ever even heard of E.H. or D.K. I did not find one statement relevant to what actually happened. The conclusion seems to be that E.H and D.K. were members of the “Trench Coat Mafia” in the same way that John Bender, Allison Reynolds and Claire Standish were “members” of The Breakfast Club.
Moving on to “evidence ignored”, she tackles the criminal complaints against E.H. that were filed by the Brown family. When the Browns first contacted the authorities, County Sheriff’s records state “…did not follow up on these concerns because officers were unable to reach the Browns despite several attempted phone calls.”
That is not ignoring. That is a valid attempt to follow-up.
Later, the Browns contact the authorities to report disturbing content on one of E.H.’s websites. The officer submitted a report to a County Investigator.
I don’t think very many people consider the criminal justice system in the U.S. to be perfect, but this author doesn’t seem to show where any “evidence” was “ignored”.
Page 203: speaking of witness testimonies: “…Brooks Brown, one of the murder victims…”
“Moreover, neither Brooks Brown nor the other student named, indicated that they saw E.H. there that day, with Brown specifically stating that he did not see E.H. until immediately before the start of the attack.”
Brooks Brown was not killed at Columbine and the author clearly knows this, as she as provided his statement, after-the-fact. Brooks Brown was not a “murder victim”.
Page 210: Author presents her opinion as a fact: “Nature rules all and nurturing has nothing to do with it.”
I’m currently reading a book by a retired FBI agent. Seems like this is still debatable.
Page 211: Author defines the word “shy” as “often the misused generic term to describe a person who has trouble opening up to others in social situations.”
Dictionary definition of “shy”: being reserved or having or showing nervousness or timidity in the company of other people.
How is “shy” being “misused”?
The author continues with: “There are varying degrees of shyness, the most severe of which are, these days, characterized as psychological disorders.”
This sounded like blarney to me, so I took a minute to look into this and can’t find anything about it. There is no footnote.
The author makes an adamant effort to exonerate people that were merely interviewed, never charged. She refers to all of the “rumors” surrounding student Perry, but there were no “rumors”, multiple students had apparently mistakenly identified D.K. as Perry.
Ms. Gleason spent a chapter telling us about a 23-year-old woman who had come forward purporting to have had knowledge of the attack and a relationship with E.H. Authorities checked out her story, it was quickly proven false. Thus, it was not actually “evidence” and it certainly was not “ignored”.
While I could continue with specific examples, I’ve probably already said too much.
November 10, 2019
This book opened my eyes to a lot of the misinformation we've had for years about Columbine. I had believed it to be rather cut and dry- psychopath kid manipulates his depressed friend to bomb and shoot up their high school. However, this book proves that the kids were equal partners in the massacre. Klebold wanted to do it just as much as Harris and put in just as much work. Not only that, he was pretty ruthless during the shootings.
The previous reviewer obviously has a lot of respect for Sue Klebold and her book, but Evidence Ignored backs up every fact and claim with links directing the reader to exactly where they can find it in the police reports or other reports on Columbine. I looked into a few things myself this way.
So to say there are mistakes because they differ from what Dylan's mother said, isn't factual. Sue Klebold has a different version of events, and she also has a reason to not want to know the worst in her son.
Other things I became aware of include that the shooters actually were significantly bullied, even though it wasn't a main cause of Columbine. Harris wasn't some smooth talking charmer who romanced a bunch of girls, as portrayed in another book. This book outlines all of his very brief relationships and they do not include the 23 yr old who claimed to have slept with him. In fact, there is some really disturbing info about what was apparently the first Harris fangirl in there. The book also talks about the alleged role of Harris's antidepressant use in the killings, the Trench Coat Mafia, and blasts rumors about involvement by other kids by showing what they were doing at the time. I have a very different impression of this crime than I did when I started the book. I thought it was really interesting.
The previous reviewer obviously has a lot of respect for Sue Klebold and her book, but Evidence Ignored backs up every fact and claim with links directing the reader to exactly where they can find it in the police reports or other reports on Columbine. I looked into a few things myself this way.
So to say there are mistakes because they differ from what Dylan's mother said, isn't factual. Sue Klebold has a different version of events, and she also has a reason to not want to know the worst in her son.
Other things I became aware of include that the shooters actually were significantly bullied, even though it wasn't a main cause of Columbine. Harris wasn't some smooth talking charmer who romanced a bunch of girls, as portrayed in another book. This book outlines all of his very brief relationships and they do not include the 23 yr old who claimed to have slept with him. In fact, there is some really disturbing info about what was apparently the first Harris fangirl in there. The book also talks about the alleged role of Harris's antidepressant use in the killings, the Trench Coat Mafia, and blasts rumors about involvement by other kids by showing what they were doing at the time. I have a very different impression of this crime than I did when I started the book. I thought it was really interesting.
July 2, 2020
This is definitely a book worth looking into. There is some minor criticism that I have with it (but I think I truly have that with any book ever written about Columbine, so here we go):
-Chapter 10. There are some things I do not entirely agree with, e.g. the notion that being a psychopath or malignant narcissist would lead inevitably to them becoming a murderer/otherwise dangerous in the future. As far as I am aware this is not in any way implied whenever psychologists talk about psychopathy. In fact, it is usually mentioned that people with psychopathic traits are rarely dangerous criminals. I don't entirely agree with the opinion of the author in regards to the psychological profiling of Harris and Klebold, she does however state clearly that each post mortem diagnosis is only a hypothesis and that is a very important point and I can really appreciate that. So in that regard, well done! (Plus, this is all mostly up to how some of the diary entries are interpreted and that can easily vary from person to person.)
-The sources for the book are mostly the 11K (or the Columbine Report which afaik covers the 11K) and "No Easy Answers" by Brooks Brown. There are a good few more books from different perspectives that can help gain some insight into Columbine and the minds of the perpetrators (I have to admit I am a fan of Langman, so maybe I'm a little biased here). It would have been interesting to address some things from these other sources, but that's just me being nitpicky right now.
Now, onto the good stuff!
-There are a lot of very detailed points made that are only to be found in the 11K and for everyone who really doesn't have the attention span to go through all of that and make notes (read: me) it is a great insight into those documents!
-There were a good few eye witness accounts that were summarized that I wasn't aware of, so the author presents a good few lesser known details which are quite interesting. The analysis of the source material cited is very thorough.
-There are a lot of sources cited for EVERYTHING (opinions exempt, of course, but this is always clearly stated) and I can really appreciate that.
-I like how the author makes an effort to show several contrasting opinions (and there are a lot when it comes to Columbine), even if she doesn't agree with one side. This is well done.
-The book has an overall very scientific and factual tone to it, which can be rare in books about Columbine.
-Even though I said that I wasn't entirely agreeing with the author's opinion in Chapter 10, I have to admit she brought up some good points to think about and that might make some readers re-evaluate their opinions.
Overall, it's definitely worth the read, if you're interested in Columbine. It might be a bit more of a niche book (so far, as The Big Three are Dave Cullens' Columbine, No Easy Answers and Sue Klebold's A Mother's Reckoning), but it has potential.
-Chapter 10. There are some things I do not entirely agree with, e.g. the notion that being a psychopath or malignant narcissist would lead inevitably to them becoming a murderer/otherwise dangerous in the future. As far as I am aware this is not in any way implied whenever psychologists talk about psychopathy. In fact, it is usually mentioned that people with psychopathic traits are rarely dangerous criminals. I don't entirely agree with the opinion of the author in regards to the psychological profiling of Harris and Klebold, she does however state clearly that each post mortem diagnosis is only a hypothesis and that is a very important point and I can really appreciate that. So in that regard, well done! (Plus, this is all mostly up to how some of the diary entries are interpreted and that can easily vary from person to person.)
-The sources for the book are mostly the 11K (or the Columbine Report which afaik covers the 11K) and "No Easy Answers" by Brooks Brown. There are a good few more books from different perspectives that can help gain some insight into Columbine and the minds of the perpetrators (I have to admit I am a fan of Langman, so maybe I'm a little biased here). It would have been interesting to address some things from these other sources, but that's just me being nitpicky right now.
Now, onto the good stuff!
-There are a lot of very detailed points made that are only to be found in the 11K and for everyone who really doesn't have the attention span to go through all of that and make notes (read: me) it is a great insight into those documents!
-There were a good few eye witness accounts that were summarized that I wasn't aware of, so the author presents a good few lesser known details which are quite interesting. The analysis of the source material cited is very thorough.
-There are a lot of sources cited for EVERYTHING (opinions exempt, of course, but this is always clearly stated) and I can really appreciate that.
-I like how the author makes an effort to show several contrasting opinions (and there are a lot when it comes to Columbine), even if she doesn't agree with one side. This is well done.
-The book has an overall very scientific and factual tone to it, which can be rare in books about Columbine.
-Even though I said that I wasn't entirely agreeing with the author's opinion in Chapter 10, I have to admit she brought up some good points to think about and that might make some readers re-evaluate their opinions.
Overall, it's definitely worth the read, if you're interested in Columbine. It might be a bit more of a niche book (so far, as The Big Three are Dave Cullens' Columbine, No Easy Answers and Sue Klebold's A Mother's Reckoning), but it has potential.
January 23, 2020
Gleason makes exaggerated conclusions from witness statements. She is also clearly hellbent on dismantling a number of widely propagated narratives and theories, which I have no issue with. However, there is plenty of "evidence ignored," ironically, in her own deductions. As such, I would not recommend this book to anyone.
October 11, 2023
Evidence Ignored: What You May Not Know About Columbine by Rita Gleason makes you want to forget everything about those memorable Columbine conspiracies and stick to the pages of this book. This Columbine-related book is incredibly detailed and well researched with handy reference notes primarily based on The Columbine Report, which is nearly 30000 pages long! If you’re looking for a detailed account of what happened in Littleton, Colorado, on April 20 1999, this isn’t going to be for you. But it is certainly worth reading as it examines the major factors of why this tragic event happened.
It provides us with a complete picture of Harris and Klebold through the knowledge we have of them, left behind in writings and gathered from statements made by their families and friends, to understand and prevent future Columbines is ultimately Gleason’s aim. This book does contain one chapter in which the author CLEARLY states that she is not a psychiatric professional and is merely offering her opinion about the mental state of the perpetrators at the time of the attack.
It provides us with a complete picture of Harris and Klebold through the knowledge we have of them, left behind in writings and gathered from statements made by their families and friends, to understand and prevent future Columbines is ultimately Gleason’s aim. This book does contain one chapter in which the author CLEARLY states that she is not a psychiatric professional and is merely offering her opinion about the mental state of the perpetrators at the time of the attack.
June 3, 2022
I am very late to the whole Columbine massacre, so I have been reading any book I can on the subject.
This book is very good - actually digging into the mindset of Harris and Klebold's into minute detail. Based on the "basement tapes" and the various journal the two wrote.
I would say that about 80% of this content I did not know about, so I was quite interested in that. Having said that though, sometimes there was too much detail and the book started dragging a bit.
Still, this book is very interesting, for the most part and was meticulously researched considering the level of detail.
A good book to read after the book Columbine who tackles more the events of the day and less the mindset.
This book is very good - actually digging into the mindset of Harris and Klebold's into minute detail. Based on the "basement tapes" and the various journal the two wrote.
I would say that about 80% of this content I did not know about, so I was quite interested in that. Having said that though, sometimes there was too much detail and the book started dragging a bit.
Still, this book is very interesting, for the most part and was meticulously researched considering the level of detail.
A good book to read after the book Columbine who tackles more the events of the day and less the mindset.
November 19, 2021
Pretty down to earth aproach.
The author analyze the evidence -available to anyone- and inform us what she thinks (does not claim to have insider knowledge or anything). So yeah, very good.
Also, the more one reads about this the less good that Dave Cullen book seems.
The author analyze the evidence -available to anyone- and inform us what she thinks (does not claim to have insider knowledge or anything). So yeah, very good.
Also, the more one reads about this the less good that Dave Cullen book seems.
January 29, 2022
A well written book and well researched. I found it very difficult to read because of the subject matter, but it was informative nonetheless.
November 14, 2025
I don't know if this is evidence ignored- its more like evidence explained. The author goes into painstaking detail to disprove common conspiracy theories. I want to say it's a fruitless job, as to this day I will read people online talk about specific third shooters or (insert whacko theory here). But certainly this book is highly educational and should clarify events for most.
I'd like to read a modified version where we are actually seeing the names of who said what, because all of the generic descriptors of who gave whatever info got a little confusing at times. I understand for privacy sakes why it was done, I'm just saying I struggled a bit keeping track of who was who.
I'd like to read a modified version where we are actually seeing the names of who said what, because all of the generic descriptors of who gave whatever info got a little confusing at times. I understand for privacy sakes why it was done, I'm just saying I struggled a bit keeping track of who was who.
October 28, 2024
Truly a passion project - basically a direct response to 10 different dominant narratives or conspiracy theories surrounding the Columbine tragedy, using excerpts from released primary sources (police interviews, available websites and journals, school records, etc). Worth reading at least for the chapters on bullying culture at Columbine and the deconstruction of the "Dylan was just a people-pleaser/follower who got in too deep" angle that his media-savvy family has pushed.
February 7, 2020
Super detailed, really thorough review of events around the shootings at Columbine in 1999. Worth checking out. Wanted to read it because I saw Randy Brown, who reported Harris to police a bunch of times, gave it a 5-star on Amazon.
August 8, 2022
Not a standalone book. More a collection of responses to other peoples’ poor reporting. I feel like you’d need to have read other books and reporting on Columbine, and to have recognized the flaws in that work, to find this a worthwhile read. Informative though. Well researched.
October 30, 2019
Complete and utter shi&
Within the first 3 chapters there were glaring mistakes. Things that contradicts what the Dylan's mum has said in her book. Worst book i have ever read.
Within the first 3 chapters there were glaring mistakes. Things that contradicts what the Dylan's mum has said in her book. Worst book i have ever read.
June 16, 2021
Less easy to read than, eg Dave Cullen's book on Columbine, but I appreciated how it skewered some of the myths that have grown up around the event. It's clearly very well researched.
April 5, 2024
Very informative and I enjoyed them giving facts to prove certain conspiracies wrong.
December 26, 2025
Cautionary tale of edgy bastards and the misinfo round em
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews