What do you think?
Rate this book
Devil Among Us: How Canada Failed to Stop a Pedophile
Peter Whitmore could be the poster boy for Canada’s revolving door justice system. The notorious pedophile had already established a horrendous criminal record before he shocked the nation with a sadistic con job in 2006 that saw him kidnap two young Prairie boys from their unsuspecting families. The case sparked a desperate manhunt and a flood of anger as citizens were left wondering why such a dangerous predator wasn't locked up. Crime journalist Mike McIntyre takes readers inside Whitmore's crimes, into the lives of his many victims and reveals how a lax legal system ignored repeated warning signs that another violent attack was imminent. McIntyre’s latest true crime tale represents a wake-up call to justice officials and a chilling reminder to Canadians about the devils who live among us.
- GenresTrue Crime
352 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
3 people are currently reading
45 people want to read
About the author
Mike McIntyre
11 books8 followersMike McIntyre is a justice reporter with the Winnipeg Free Press and a national radio show host. His previous books — Nowhere To Run: The Killing of Constable Dennis Strongquill (2003), The Yuletide Bandit: A Seven—Year Search for a Serial Criminal (2004), and To the Grave: Inside a Spectacular RCMP Sting (2006) have spent time on Canada's bestseller lists.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
February 20, 2017
This book grabbed me right at the beginning. It told the true story of 2 boys who were abducted - one from Manitoba and one from Saskatchewan - by a pedophile named Peter Whitmore.
But the next 150 page talked about Whitmore's troubled past, his criminal background, and his history in prison. It continued with lots of statistics and laid out Canada's flawed judicial system. I skimmed a lot of this. Perhaps others may find that interesting, but I did not.
But the last part of the book redeemed itself. It once again talked about the 2 boys Whitmore had taken. The book got me thinking about what rights a person who can do this type of thing to children should be given.
But the next 150 page talked about Whitmore's troubled past, his criminal background, and his history in prison. It continued with lots of statistics and laid out Canada's flawed judicial system. I skimmed a lot of this. Perhaps others may find that interesting, but I did not.
But the last part of the book redeemed itself. It once again talked about the 2 boys Whitmore had taken. The book got me thinking about what rights a person who can do this type of thing to children should be given.
August 12, 2015
Absolutely horrific and terrifying. It was a really well laid-out story, but I cannot recommend that people read it. I feel like I lost a little faith in humanity knowing that people like Whitmore are out there.
July 25, 2023
I've enjoyed Mike's writing for the Free Press, so was/am glad to see that he has written some true crime books.
I can't say how, when, or what due to confidentiality, but I was acquainted with one of the families whose son was a victim of Whitmore in the infamous abduction case in Saskatchewan. To say it was a nightmare is an understatement as you might imagine.
While McIntytre does a decent job of talking about the families, I felt we could have heard more from or about them. Like the title suggests, the emphasis was all on Whitmore and how the Canadian justice system had an epic fail due to its' structure and legal loopholes that left a monster like Whitmore on the loose. He's still behind bars, but could make parole and that is a horrific thought.
While McIntyre touches on the fact that the Indigenous boy who was abducted was unfairly painted as an accomplice by the other boy's family and most of the Saskatchewan town, I felt McIntyre could have done a better job to drive home the fact that this boy was very much a victim the same as the other one. I remember how the younger victim, the white boy, got far more sympathy in the press and that seems to still continue now when people mention the case. The papers posted a lot of misinformation about the Indigenous boy and his family and focused on the fact that the Indigenous boy had had behavioural issues. McIntyre plays into that a bit. While the teen was no angel, that had nothing to do with his abduction, assault,and torture that he underwent with Whitmore. Both boys were victims.For some reason, the publication ban has been lifted for the white victim (now a man), but not for the Indigenous victim, even though the Indigenous victim in a Free Press article a few years ago spoke out about things anonymously and said he was more than willing to have his name known, but the ban would not be removed for some reason. From recent articles I've read, it seems that the white victim is doing reasonably well. The Indigenous victim has sadly committed serious crimes and is back in jail. I'm not condoning his actions, but I think the fact that he suffered such a serious trauma and was treated as a perpetrator by an unfriendly, racist press likely had a lot to do with this. His self-esteem and PTSD never recovered, it seems. Assault victims already think it's their fault due to the grooming and brainwashing that the perpetrator exacts upon them-imagine everyone else saying it's your fault, too, and airing your dirty laundry to the press. It was ugly.
I think McIntyre, despite lip service in the book, still shows clearly more sympathy for the white victim. He seems to highlight the Indigenous victim's family struggles prior to the event, which had nothing to do with his abduction and assault. He plays into some racist tropes.
The endless pages of Whitmore's court documents and statements got dull. I had to skim them. A lot of legalese and posturing by Whitmore and his aunt (his biggest advocate) that was repetitive and hard to read. Whitmore refused interventions in prison and was difficult to deal with. He was not at all rehabilitated, but under the justice system such as it was/is, he was let go time and time again. Part of it had to do with his lawyer, Dan Brodsky, who sounds like a slimy lawyer stereotype: he slams society for not accepting Whitmore and wanting where he lives to be known, saying that isn't giving him a chance to live. Please. He also argues that Whitmore's escape to Mexico, days after his parole, was due to the fact the town he was living in didn't want him there, and maybe they should have just left him alone in Mexico.Yeah. when he was already strategically planning to harm more children there. I don't know how people like Brodsky sleep at night.His dad, famed defence attourney Greg Brodsky in Winnipeg, is basically the same. Think the Canadian prairie version of Mark Geragos, the slimeball that defended Scott Peterson. While I'm aware that all offenders, no matter how heinous, have a right to defence counsel and due process, some of these lawyers are just unbelievable in their expectations and excuses for hardened criminals like Whitmore- and the scary thing is, the system and often society buys it. I don't know how Whitmore, a man with a disgusting criminal track record of abusing children and no money, got a prominent Toronto attourney to defend him when his crimes were in other provinces. The only explanation is Brodsky wanted the publicity. Gross. He should have been given a public defender like everyone else- he certainly deserved no special privilege.
Pedos like Whitmore cannot be rehabilitated and outright refuse it. In his sick, disgusting mind, he thinks he's done nothing wrong. He's only "sorry" when he wants parole. He recently was allowed to join a personals' site online from prison- what? Why is this guy allowed internet, let alone personals?
I'm all for rehab, but this man has proven time and time again he can't and won't be rehabilitated. Lock him up, give him no special protection or privilege, and throw away the key before he harms another child. His victims have to live with this for the rest of their lives, he should have to at least be given conditions in which to suffer, even if he never admits remorse.
I can't say how, when, or what due to confidentiality, but I was acquainted with one of the families whose son was a victim of Whitmore in the infamous abduction case in Saskatchewan. To say it was a nightmare is an understatement as you might imagine.
While McIntytre does a decent job of talking about the families, I felt we could have heard more from or about them. Like the title suggests, the emphasis was all on Whitmore and how the Canadian justice system had an epic fail due to its' structure and legal loopholes that left a monster like Whitmore on the loose. He's still behind bars, but could make parole and that is a horrific thought.
While McIntyre touches on the fact that the Indigenous boy who was abducted was unfairly painted as an accomplice by the other boy's family and most of the Saskatchewan town, I felt McIntyre could have done a better job to drive home the fact that this boy was very much a victim the same as the other one. I remember how the younger victim, the white boy, got far more sympathy in the press and that seems to still continue now when people mention the case. The papers posted a lot of misinformation about the Indigenous boy and his family and focused on the fact that the Indigenous boy had had behavioural issues. McIntyre plays into that a bit. While the teen was no angel, that had nothing to do with his abduction, assault,and torture that he underwent with Whitmore. Both boys were victims.For some reason, the publication ban has been lifted for the white victim (now a man), but not for the Indigenous victim, even though the Indigenous victim in a Free Press article a few years ago spoke out about things anonymously and said he was more than willing to have his name known, but the ban would not be removed for some reason. From recent articles I've read, it seems that the white victim is doing reasonably well. The Indigenous victim has sadly committed serious crimes and is back in jail. I'm not condoning his actions, but I think the fact that he suffered such a serious trauma and was treated as a perpetrator by an unfriendly, racist press likely had a lot to do with this. His self-esteem and PTSD never recovered, it seems. Assault victims already think it's their fault due to the grooming and brainwashing that the perpetrator exacts upon them-imagine everyone else saying it's your fault, too, and airing your dirty laundry to the press. It was ugly.
I think McIntyre, despite lip service in the book, still shows clearly more sympathy for the white victim. He seems to highlight the Indigenous victim's family struggles prior to the event, which had nothing to do with his abduction and assault. He plays into some racist tropes.
The endless pages of Whitmore's court documents and statements got dull. I had to skim them. A lot of legalese and posturing by Whitmore and his aunt (his biggest advocate) that was repetitive and hard to read. Whitmore refused interventions in prison and was difficult to deal with. He was not at all rehabilitated, but under the justice system such as it was/is, he was let go time and time again. Part of it had to do with his lawyer, Dan Brodsky, who sounds like a slimy lawyer stereotype: he slams society for not accepting Whitmore and wanting where he lives to be known, saying that isn't giving him a chance to live. Please. He also argues that Whitmore's escape to Mexico, days after his parole, was due to the fact the town he was living in didn't want him there, and maybe they should have just left him alone in Mexico.Yeah. when he was already strategically planning to harm more children there. I don't know how people like Brodsky sleep at night.His dad, famed defence attourney Greg Brodsky in Winnipeg, is basically the same. Think the Canadian prairie version of Mark Geragos, the slimeball that defended Scott Peterson. While I'm aware that all offenders, no matter how heinous, have a right to defence counsel and due process, some of these lawyers are just unbelievable in their expectations and excuses for hardened criminals like Whitmore- and the scary thing is, the system and often society buys it. I don't know how Whitmore, a man with a disgusting criminal track record of abusing children and no money, got a prominent Toronto attourney to defend him when his crimes were in other provinces. The only explanation is Brodsky wanted the publicity. Gross. He should have been given a public defender like everyone else- he certainly deserved no special privilege.
Pedos like Whitmore cannot be rehabilitated and outright refuse it. In his sick, disgusting mind, he thinks he's done nothing wrong. He's only "sorry" when he wants parole. He recently was allowed to join a personals' site online from prison- what? Why is this guy allowed internet, let alone personals?
I'm all for rehab, but this man has proven time and time again he can't and won't be rehabilitated. Lock him up, give him no special protection or privilege, and throw away the key before he harms another child. His victims have to live with this for the rest of their lives, he should have to at least be given conditions in which to suffer, even if he never admits remorse.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 30, 2020
I have to admit that I don't remember these events from the news. So I grabbed this book to educate myself. The facts are there and the interviews clarify what was going through everyone's minds at the time. The writing was dry but the content kept me holding on.
April 10, 2019
Bad, bad Canada! She should be punished as an accomplice and sent to jail.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews