I would probably be remiss if I didn't note that the author of this book went on to graduate from law school, become a defense attorney and then commit suicide on the unlikely date of June 6th, 2006 (6/6/6.) For those looking for some sort of psychological damage or mental problem that the author might have had which would motivate him to engage so dramatically with serial killers, there are a lot of implications possible with that information. I don't know if either becoming a defense lawyer or killing himself are relevant to this fairly brief period in the author's life, but they are strange factoids, particularly with the title of this book in mind, and worth noting so that folks can draw their own conclusions.
When this book came out I heard the author interviewed on a radio station. He has a fascinating and morbid story to tell, and it ties into the sensational and lurid details of those who murder in the most dramatic, disturbing and depraved way. But I was on a road trip, and didn't bother the note his name or the title of his book, so I promptly forgot about it.
Years later, I was discussing the death penalty with some folks and this book came up again as an example of how the state winds up preserving the lives (in relative comfort) of those who have preyed on it citizenry. This time, I wound up hunting up the book. The verdict:
Guilty.
That is, you probably shouldn't bother.
It's not really a terrible book, but also not a particularly good read either. The author spends an awful lot of time giving us his conversations with his mother, which is about as interesting as you'd imagine--especially if you picked up the book to specifically read about his correspondence and sometimes even meetings with serial killers, particularly John Wayne Gacy. There are some interesting bits in the book, and the author's experience corresponding with Gacy and other imprisoned killers is itself also very interesting, but his writing about it isn't. His prose might have appealed to his psycho pen pals, but probably won't to other readers. For instance, who cares about his relationship with his girlfriend? His relationship with his mom makes some sense in that it relates to the fact that the killers he deals with had troubled families, but the comparison is strained at best, and breaks down into a kind of whiny narcissism more than anything insightful.
Essentially, there are few details or insights in the book that can't be gleaned from fuller, more in-depth books written by professional criminologists, doctors or forensic scientists, despite the access the author had to his subject. I'll grant that he was very young and inexperienced, but that youth and inexperience show throughout the text, and make it little more than the memoir of a creepy kid with a few IQ points above the norm. For that kind of thing we can turn to any number of goths at a local high school.
The book does, in my opinion, validate a lot of the opinions of those who support the death penalty, particularly as it relates to the relative loss of freedom of prisoners. After all, if Mr. Moss's account is to be believed--and I don't have any serious reason to doubt it--Gacy managed to arrange a 3-day visit, pretty much unsupervised, with a teenage boy just a few weeks before being put to death. During that visit he repeatedly threatened to rape, torture and murder his "guest." He clearly reveled in memories of his past horrific crimes daily in his imagination and with his fellow serial killer inmates. Was a last assault and murder his plan for the third day--which the author wisely cancelled? It certainly reads that way. Of course, we can't really know, but it seems Gacy was actually attempting to arrange for a victim to be brought to him like a delivery service--which seems to run counter to the idea that a lot of folks will suggest: that he should be kept alive in prison "to suffer" for his crimes behind bars.
Personally, I think it's of value to society to take that kind of person off the planet, rather than have him around like some recurring cancer in our media. However, I don't think reading the book will necessarily convince others of the same thing, because it lacks the moral suasion that either a pro-death penalty or anti-death penalty stand needs in order to be persuasive. So, I don't think it's worth bothering with no matter which side of the death penalty debate one falls on, or as a study of those who may deserve it. Overall, I wouldn't recommend it for anything other than a few lurid stories.