The original title, The Milwaukee Murders, fit this book better than the more generic, more ubiquitous The Jeffrey Dahmer Story: An American Nightmare. This is because writer Don Davis goes into great unnecessarily graphic detail about the geography of Wisconsin. The reader is, in fact, given an impromptu history lesson regarding the German origins of Milwaukee, placing emphasis on the beer-based economy thereof.
While it can be said that Jeffrey Dahmer was an alcoholic, having been discharged from the army for his potable indiscretions, the focus on this does come across as exceptionally superficial - filler for a book that would otherwise have been significantly stunted. Several chapters are devoted to the geography and history of the area, rattling off factoids and statistics for upwards of eight pages in certain passages of the book.
Too, various trite phrasings apparently intended to enhance suspense fall flat, almost abrasive in their blatant sensationalism. In one particularly absurd entry, Davis describes the apprehension experienced by a former fellow soldier stationed in Dahmer's battalion in Germany, "realizing that when Dahmer had looked at him in that small barracks room, he could have been visualizing dinner." This immediately follows Davis' derision of a German publication's headline which "left absolutely nothing to the imagination."
In this, its third printing (the first after the death of Dahmer himself), Davis includes a new chapter on the case of the homosexual necrophiliac who ran into a dead end of a different sort in a prison restroom, at the hands of a violent fellow prisoner. The chapters leading up to this final sequence of events clearly had not been edited to reflect this turn of events (referring to Dahmer as if he were, indeed, still alive at press time), and this subtle neglect reflects harshly on the book as well.
Not a challenging biography so much as an exploitative attempt to cash in on the infamy of a name, The Jeffrey Dahmer Story provides little by way of insight moreso than as an outsider's recanting of known elements in the highly-publicized case.