What do you think?
Rate this book
The Murder Business: High Profile Crimes and the Corruption of Justice
Crime stories fascinate the public. But between factual news stories, overblown “human interest” reports and salacious murder mystery exposes, it’s difficult to tell where news ends and entertainment begins. Mark Fuhrman, best-selling author of Murder in Brentwood, explores this fine line and how it is increasingly being crossed, revealing new and shocking details on such high-profile cases as JonBenet Ramsey, Martha Moxley and Chandra Levy. In The Murder Business, Fuhrman argues that the media’s approach to covering crime (“if it bleeds, it leads”) has allowed many criminals to get away with murder and impeded the search for justice. The Murder Business presents a compelling plea for journalists, cops and citizens to demand higher ethical standards in the pursuit of justice.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published October 12, 2009
8 people are currently reading
159 people want to read
About the author
Mark Fuhrman
10 books98 followersFormer LAPD detective, true crime writer and talk radio host.
He is primarily known for his part in the investigation of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman and his subsequent felony conviction for perjury.
He is primarily known for his part in the investigation of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman and his subsequent felony conviction for perjury.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
January 2, 2016
Where to start?
Written pedestrianly.
Not particularly insightful outlines and sketches of trials/cases better dealt with by other sources.
Inaccurate facts (for exmple, nonsense about the reliability of polygraph tests.)
A brief and highly misleading description of the Vince Foster controversy.
An amazingly self serving description of the Simpson trail.
And yet, a fascinating example of how writers often reveal far more about themselves in their work than they ever intended.
Written pedestrianly.
Not particularly insightful outlines and sketches of trials/cases better dealt with by other sources.
Inaccurate facts (for exmple, nonsense about the reliability of polygraph tests.)
A brief and highly misleading description of the Vince Foster controversy.
An amazingly self serving description of the Simpson trail.
And yet, a fascinating example of how writers often reveal far more about themselves in their work than they ever intended.
January 21, 2019
Quick and interesting read about how the media turns tragic stories into a circus. We already knew this, but Mark gives us further insight into some of the stories that grabbed the headlines.
July 30, 2011
Mark Fuhrman justifies why he is no longer a police investigator and why he is so valuable as a FOX reporter. He gives his opinions on major cases, which he has investigated as a report while promoting his books along the way. It feels whiney and self serving throughout while he does bring out some good points, it serves no purpose except to add to his writing successes and income. Not really worth the time I spent.
March 6, 2015
I was surprised to discover that Mark Fuhrman, former cop, has more faith in human nature than I do. I remember my mom and I grumping about the fact that the prosecution in the O.J. criminal trial didn’t deal with the Racist Fuhrman problem by bringing in his partner to testify, which seemed an obvious enough solution. But I never seriously considered the idea that the media should have tracked the partner down and taken the focus off the racial issue. Why would they do that, when they could milk the “racist cop” angle so profitably?
Yet Furhman says; “I kept hoping that some journalist or defense investigator would ask the question: “Where is Fuhrman’s partner?” Thinking that at the time is one thing – the desperation of a cornered man. But, best I can tell, he still thinks that. Some part of him is still shocked that no one in the media noticed Roberts existence, and pointed out that a witness who had presumably not compromised himself supported Fuhrman’s version of things.
I think, in his heart of hearts, Fuhrman really doesn’t understand people who’re profoundly different from him. He’s likely the kind of guy who assumes that rape victims who shut down and seem very calm instead of hysterical “must be lying,” because that’s not how he or his friends respond to traumatic situations. While discussing a Pasty Ramsey interview, he says, “Here we learn that JonBenet, as well as her brother Burke, as well as John Ramsey’s daughter from his previous marriage, were all bed-wetters many years past the normal toilet training stage. And you can see from Pasty’s coments that she has arranged to be 100 percent unperturbed and clueless about this, rationalizing it as if it were perfectly normal…”. He’d earlier argued that “Bedwetting is a “telltale” sign of sexual abuse.”
Well, maybe in a cop’s world, it is. Speaking as a mother, bedwetting at those ages is more commonly a “telltale” sign that the kid’s got engineers and/or Asperger’s in the family, because they travel together. And parents of bedwetters do commonly rationalize it as normal, because having a bedwetting kid is embarrassing. One mom never said word one to me about it until after her kid slept over, when she thanked me for how we’d handled the situation (by making sure someone woke him up in the middle of the night after I overheard him tell my son something that clued me in). Not to say I disagree with Fuhrman that Patsy’s was guilty; I just don’t think that a bedwetting kid of that age is very telling. The fact that all John Ramsey’s kids bedwet would have made me question the situation, but not Patsy’s acceptance or rationalizing of it.
I’m guessing Fuhrman and his kids do not hang around with families with a lot of engineers and Asperger members; most cops don’t (going on the one cop who showed up in a group I belong to and lasted about a week, I think they prefer groups that are considerably less internal and theoretical). In his circles, a kid bedwetting at that age indicates a serious problem that must be dealt with. In my circles, it’s a genetic quirk you learn to work around that the kid will grow out of, just later than average. Point is, Fuhrman’s basically viewing Patsy’s statements through his own experience. He assumes people’s experiences and reactions will, on the whole, reflect his own, unless they are criminals of some sort.
Fuhrman says, more than once, that the cop is supposed to be on the side of the victim. Not on the side of the victim’s family (because they might be the criminals). Not on the side of the press, or the DA, or anyone who might want to make use of the victim for their own purposes. The cop must be on the victim’s side. Period. And yet he regularly excuses other people for getting caught up in the media circus or not thinking things through or otherwise failing to put the victim’s side first. He recognizes that people don’t put the victim first, but he still, I suspect, believes that most people – including most or many in the media -- would put the victim first if they thought through the situation and recognized the harm they’re doing.
I don’t have that kind of faith in humanity. When it comes to this reader, Fuhrman’s preaching to the choir in arguing that the media is in “the murder business,” that the media has failed to yell when a charismatic guy abuses and murders which has led to said charismatic guy killing again, that the media has ignored or even abetted many times when the police or legal system screwed up, and pretty much everything else he says. I may not have known the particular cases he describes, but I knew all this was true long before I read the book.
But, while the book is well-written and entertaining on that level, what I find extraordinary about it is Fuhrman’s belief that “One Woodward or one Bernstein could change the entire industry, remind reporters of their responsibilities to the public and balance out the soap opera on the air.” It’s not often you see a faith in humanity like that, and it amazes me that it’s a cop showing that unusual depth of faith. It says a lot about who he really is.
Yet Furhman says; “I kept hoping that some journalist or defense investigator would ask the question: “Where is Fuhrman’s partner?” Thinking that at the time is one thing – the desperation of a cornered man. But, best I can tell, he still thinks that. Some part of him is still shocked that no one in the media noticed Roberts existence, and pointed out that a witness who had presumably not compromised himself supported Fuhrman’s version of things.
I think, in his heart of hearts, Fuhrman really doesn’t understand people who’re profoundly different from him. He’s likely the kind of guy who assumes that rape victims who shut down and seem very calm instead of hysterical “must be lying,” because that’s not how he or his friends respond to traumatic situations. While discussing a Pasty Ramsey interview, he says, “Here we learn that JonBenet, as well as her brother Burke, as well as John Ramsey’s daughter from his previous marriage, were all bed-wetters many years past the normal toilet training stage. And you can see from Pasty’s coments that she has arranged to be 100 percent unperturbed and clueless about this, rationalizing it as if it were perfectly normal…”. He’d earlier argued that “Bedwetting is a “telltale” sign of sexual abuse.”
Well, maybe in a cop’s world, it is. Speaking as a mother, bedwetting at those ages is more commonly a “telltale” sign that the kid’s got engineers and/or Asperger’s in the family, because they travel together. And parents of bedwetters do commonly rationalize it as normal, because having a bedwetting kid is embarrassing. One mom never said word one to me about it until after her kid slept over, when she thanked me for how we’d handled the situation (by making sure someone woke him up in the middle of the night after I overheard him tell my son something that clued me in). Not to say I disagree with Fuhrman that Patsy’s was guilty; I just don’t think that a bedwetting kid of that age is very telling. The fact that all John Ramsey’s kids bedwet would have made me question the situation, but not Patsy’s acceptance or rationalizing of it.
I’m guessing Fuhrman and his kids do not hang around with families with a lot of engineers and Asperger members; most cops don’t (going on the one cop who showed up in a group I belong to and lasted about a week, I think they prefer groups that are considerably less internal and theoretical). In his circles, a kid bedwetting at that age indicates a serious problem that must be dealt with. In my circles, it’s a genetic quirk you learn to work around that the kid will grow out of, just later than average. Point is, Fuhrman’s basically viewing Patsy’s statements through his own experience. He assumes people’s experiences and reactions will, on the whole, reflect his own, unless they are criminals of some sort.
Fuhrman says, more than once, that the cop is supposed to be on the side of the victim. Not on the side of the victim’s family (because they might be the criminals). Not on the side of the press, or the DA, or anyone who might want to make use of the victim for their own purposes. The cop must be on the victim’s side. Period. And yet he regularly excuses other people for getting caught up in the media circus or not thinking things through or otherwise failing to put the victim’s side first. He recognizes that people don’t put the victim first, but he still, I suspect, believes that most people – including most or many in the media -- would put the victim first if they thought through the situation and recognized the harm they’re doing.
I don’t have that kind of faith in humanity. When it comes to this reader, Fuhrman’s preaching to the choir in arguing that the media is in “the murder business,” that the media has failed to yell when a charismatic guy abuses and murders which has led to said charismatic guy killing again, that the media has ignored or even abetted many times when the police or legal system screwed up, and pretty much everything else he says. I may not have known the particular cases he describes, but I knew all this was true long before I read the book.
But, while the book is well-written and entertaining on that level, what I find extraordinary about it is Fuhrman’s belief that “One Woodward or one Bernstein could change the entire industry, remind reporters of their responsibilities to the public and balance out the soap opera on the air.” It’s not often you see a faith in humanity like that, and it amazes me that it’s a cop showing that unusual depth of faith. It says a lot about who he really is.
July 26, 2012
This non-fiction book was written by a previous detective now an investigative reporter for FOX News. He has chosen to write about major murder cases and how the media has helped or hindered each case. In this book Fuhrman covers the Caylee Anthony case, Drew Peterson case, Medina Duckett case, Martha Moxley case, Scott Peterson case, JonBenet Ramsey case, Victor Foster case, and the O.J. Simpson case; which started it all with the media circus that now involves investigations and high profile cases. This is of course one person's views of these cases and their facts, but the fact of how the media affects criminal investigations is great and well depicted in this book. Writing is not all correct, which spelling and grammar errors throughout, however, this is minor to the fact of what influences the media has on criminal investigations and how they affect it. Very interesting to see how the media has hindered many investigations, not to mention how political involvement affects the cases as well along with police negligence. A great eye opening book.
May 31, 2011
I found this to be an interesting, I think it paints a true picture of how the the media, tabloids, etc will do anything to gain ratings and spin a story. Crime stories fascinate the public. However, between factual news stories, overblown “human interest” reports and salacious murder mysteries, tabloids, etc., it’s difficult to tell where news ends and entertainment begins. Mark Fuhrman, author of Murder in Brentwood, explores this fine line and how it is increasingly being crossed, revealing shocking details on such high profile cases as JonBenet Ramsey, OJ Simpson, Martha Moxley and Scott Peterson. In The Murder Business, Fuhrman argues that the media’s approach to covering crime (“if it bleeds, it leads”) has allowed many criminals to get away with murder and hampered - sometimes even harming the quest for for justice.
October 16, 2013
I liked this book a lot. I always felt that Mark Fuhrman had to be destroyed because he was the detective that found all the evidence. If he could be labeled a racist, then somehow OJ wasn't guilty? I never quite got how that worked, so it was nice to read this well-written book by a good detective.
He examines several high-profile murders and explains why these caught on with the media and became best-selling stories that the media hit over and over again.
Frankly, with so much news in the world, it always bothers me how our media concentrates on a few shallow stories it chooses to promote as BESTSELLERS. I imagine that for many people, reading about or watching these stories on television makes them feel informed about the world.
Anyway, I enjoyed this book.
He examines several high-profile murders and explains why these caught on with the media and became best-selling stories that the media hit over and over again.
Frankly, with so much news in the world, it always bothers me how our media concentrates on a few shallow stories it chooses to promote as BESTSELLERS. I imagine that for many people, reading about or watching these stories on television makes them feel informed about the world.
Anyway, I enjoyed this book.
October 26, 2018
As a quick and entertaining reading experience I really enjoyed this. Would have read it years ago had I known of it's existence. I do have a few quibbles with some of his details about cases I'm familiar with, but they are reasonably minor so I won't bother listing them. As a self-styled OJ Simpson expert...having watched the trial myself and read everything I've ever found about it, how did I not know this additional information about the Brad Roberts affair? Apparently Fuhrman covered it in the paperback edition of "Murder in Brentwood" which I've not seen (of course, being the "expert" that I am, I have the hardback) I've never fully understood why they never called Roberts, had no clue that it could have had a lot to do with Phil Vanatter testifying in the preliminary to finding evidence himself that Roberts actually found. Fascinating.
October 12, 2009
While I found this book interesting, I have to say shame on Regnery Publishing for letting through so many grammatical errors and one huge typo that created a factual error in the Scott Peterson chapter! I also found his style to be a bit too anecdotal and his message too repetitious, even though he was making good points. I enjoyed reading his behind-the-media-scenes view of these cases, and agree with him that the media can be overly invasive to the detriment of police investigations. It made me want to read his other books, though I hope those are better written and better edited!
March 20, 2017
I listened to the audio and it was pretty good. A nice distraction from traffic and it provided some insightful commentary on some of the most sensational crimes, including the Simpson case. Mark engaged in some boosting of his ego--that was the only distraction. In addition, I was turned off by his comments on Marcia Clark; he essentially blamed her for the loss and put himself in a better light--which was pretty ludicrous. But--he was a good detective and his insights into these cases was interesting to listen to.
May 7, 2010
This book explains the reasons the media loves murder cases and the degree to which the media interferes with criminal cases and does everything possible to create a media frenzy when a missing person case involves a pretty female as well as the degree to which cases that do not involve the right type of victim are ignored.
January 2, 2011
Fuhrman does an excellent job of illustrating the fact that the news media has become too focused on ratings and entertainment, rather than finding the truth. Overall the book was very interesting, there were a couple of cases that felt a little like conspiracy theory paranoia but most cases were intriguing, and well the arguments well-written.
January 23, 2016
This was a great read and I'll read it again with pleasure. The author -- a former LAPD homicide detective you may have heard about, now a journalist with Fox News -- discusses how the mass media interfere with criminal investigation, prosecution, and every other stage of the criminal-justice process.
March 12, 2010
An interesting viewpoint of how the media controls the length and outcome of some murders. Also his take on who killed JonBenet, the O.J. trial, (what really happened to foul up the prosecutions case, Scott Peterson et al. A quick and well written read.
May 26, 2010
Okay, I don't usually read non-fiction but I do pick up a true crime book from time to time. This true crime work by Mark Fuhrman is a chilling read, but one that will make readers turn pages into the night, and lock their doors.
September 2, 2011
Uh, what is the point..typical Mark Furhman omniscient writing. I went into this book with some trepidation..which ended up being founded. He did have a couple of good points in the book thus the two star rating.
January 4, 2011
Finished this in a record three days. Fuhrmann, now a correspondent for Fox News, details how media has interfered with investigations and justice in several high profile cases. I found this easy to read and informative- the kind of true crime book that won't give me nightmares.
October 9, 2013
fascinating. I never followed the high profile crime cases when they were on TV so this book was all new news to me. I loved the perspective of how the media can manipulate and botch a crime investigation. I would definitely read more from this author.
August 15, 2014
There clearly are problems in the way that journalism managed crime reporting these days. Fuhrman raises good questions.
If his comments about the Simpson trial are true then we have to ask even more questions about the way we let our knee jerk reactions about race to influence our behavior.
If his comments about the Simpson trial are true then we have to ask even more questions about the way we let our knee jerk reactions about race to influence our behavior.
February 19, 2015
I really enjoyed this book. I feel like it very accurately portrayed the media's current "role" in showing America what "justice" is being done. Good examples of how the media is a business and their techniques to sell their stories when it comes to crime.
June 24, 2016
Surprisingly interesting. Yes, there are definitely a lot of self congratulations but I found the details of old crimes worth it. I was especially interested in the detailed account of the OJ Simpson trial and how incompetent some police are.
March 26, 2012
Really just a rehash of prominent crimes.
Read
December 5, 2012excellent!
April 13, 2018
A good reminder of what can happen to news and facts when touched by the hands of the media. Although I find it interesting that this is written by a former detective, now Fox News employee?...
January 27, 2021
This was an interesting read. A real-life cop turned FOX news journalist who was actually part of the OJ Simpson investigation. There were many different crimes referenced in this book and I enjoyed the insights the author brought to the table.
The most interesting chapter of this book for me was the one about OJ Simpson - maybe because I remember when that crime happened; the police chases, the speculation, the trial, the media frenzy. And this book gives a lot of insight into the investigation behind this trial, and some of the things that happened in the actual trial itself. I did feel, however, that the writing in this chapter was a bit more about the author explaining himself and things that happened while he was an investigating officer - rather than talking about media involvement and the way they the media can make things difficult?
But a good read, and narrated in a style that was easy to listen to and quite informative.
The most interesting chapter of this book for me was the one about OJ Simpson - maybe because I remember when that crime happened; the police chases, the speculation, the trial, the media frenzy. And this book gives a lot of insight into the investigation behind this trial, and some of the things that happened in the actual trial itself. I did feel, however, that the writing in this chapter was a bit more about the author explaining himself and things that happened while he was an investigating officer - rather than talking about media involvement and the way they the media can make things difficult?
But a good read, and narrated in a style that was easy to listen to and quite informative.
August 14, 2023
This book was completely eye-opening to me. Mark Furhman takes on the stance that media is ruining our chances at putting murderers behind bars. With their only interest being ratings and how many people are watching, the media doesn’t care whether or not that missing girl really gets found.
Furhman dives into a handful of cases that he personally investigated as an employee for FOX. He also gives a firsthand account on OJ Simpson’s trial, to which he testified and got ridiculed for.
This book dives into the truth of it all and how we’re fantasizing about murderers because they’re “just like us” or too pretty or too handsome to have committed such a heinous crime. Absolutely, 100%, read this book.
Not only will it open your eyes, it will give you such interesting and mind boggling cases.
Furhman dives into a handful of cases that he personally investigated as an employee for FOX. He also gives a firsthand account on OJ Simpson’s trial, to which he testified and got ridiculed for.
This book dives into the truth of it all and how we’re fantasizing about murderers because they’re “just like us” or too pretty or too handsome to have committed such a heinous crime. Absolutely, 100%, read this book.
Not only will it open your eyes, it will give you such interesting and mind boggling cases.
March 13, 2021
A few things were interesting (like the conflict between media and police in handling a crime) and the way that media gets around laws against paying involved parties.
I kind of lost him when he spoke so highly of working at Fox News and how they are interested in honest, investigatory behavior. It was... odd. He also talked about it more than once.
Additionally, near the end (at least the several last topics), the author went on a soap-box tirade. It was a shame because it undermined so much of what he had to talk about. Conspiracy theories and how horrible everyone is, etc.
I kind of lost him when he spoke so highly of working at Fox News and how they are interested in honest, investigatory behavior. It was... odd. He also talked about it more than once.
Additionally, near the end (at least the several last topics), the author went on a soap-box tirade. It was a shame because it undermined so much of what he had to talk about. Conspiracy theories and how horrible everyone is, etc.
February 13, 2026
Exceptional book.
December 15, 2015
It was a good book until he started speaking of his case with OJ
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews