The premise was interesting so I gave this a try but it really failed to reel me in. Maybe it’s because the author decided to tie an unsolved double murder with the begin of the gossip newsrag age.
The book starts off well and the murder is presented quickly, and confusingly, as a lot of locals were somehow being inserted into the speculations running amok. We find a local minister and a member of the choir are having an affair without concern for who they might hurt. The priest is shot once, but the woman is shot 3 times in the head, her head nearly cut off from a postmortem slash from ear to ear and her tongue was missing.
Oddly enough, the theories presented in the book focus more on who wanted the priest dead rather than who the poor woman had hating her so much damage to her, especially given the second bullet should have been the fatal wound.
And some of the theories are bonkers. Being that this is the 1920s and the murders taking place at night on a little dirt lane where lovers would go for a bit of canoodling under the moonlight, it seems a lot of the town was in and around the lane at the time of the murder (with conflicting stories as to what they saw/heard). Many more townsfolk managed to get there before the police even managed to get photos or sketches taken. The two lovers posed underneath a crabapple tree were the talk of the town, and trophy hunters had no problem snagging mementos, including stripping the poor tree of completely free of leaves and small branches.
The newly-emerging tabloids get involved and it’s suddenly a race to see which New York gossip paper will pull ahead in their sales figures.
The various players in the upcoming court drama are varied- and much of the testimony strains credibility, but, for a book claiming to be thorough about the double murder, the focus is primarily on everyone orbiting the adulterous couple and the locals involved.
The portion of the book directly about the homicides is over quickly and the various testimonies and theories take over, with a lot of dry insertions about the journalists involved. The lead journalist has an entire chunk of the book about what happened to him afterwards and his untimely death (rather stupid and also not really seeming important to the story in itself). The third section is the author talking about a couple deathbed clues passed around some 40 years later and which reporter covered those.
I was left wondering how can I only be 80% through the book when the author then inserted themselves: how they became interested, their own search for documents and tracking down where/how some of the key witnesses died, etc.
The author speculates a lot and relies on the speculations of others and even mentions “well this person fell of the face of the earth” at one point only to later point out “oh, no, here’s her death date and a little bit more, but I can’t find any family”. Which is funny, because a single Google search gave me the name of a nephew who has a website to the memory of this person and their known involvement.
The journalism asides of who worked where and moved to other papers and so on were of no interest to me and I began to have a hard time keeping them straight as some would get a single mention “this woman was mentored by this person” and then neither would be mentioned again or maybe just once more, pages later after I’d have forgotten them.
Too much pointless name-dropping just to show how there were female lawyers and journalists during the time. Our main journalist, however, referred to time and again was, of course, a man. I believe I learned more about his life alone than I did about the two murder victims!
Fairly dry, rambles around, but hey, I learned something about an old homicide investigation that eventually grew a little clearer with an additional online searching.
I read this on Kindle, so the photos only popped up once for some odd reason and then stopped almost as quickly. Pretty sure the formatting did not show me everything that was included.
Given how plodding this was, it’s not a surprise that someone like myself would have never known about the crime, as apparently the author, who claims that this is the most in-depth and researched about the crime”, admits the last book written on the subject was published in 1999.