What do you think?
Rate this book
The Supernaturals #2
In the Still of the Night: The Strange Death of Ronda Reynolds and Her Mother's Unceasing Quest for the Truth
From true crime legend Ann Rule comes this riveting story of a young woman whose life ended too soon—and a determined mother’s eleven-year crusade to clear her daughter’s name.
It was nine days before Christmas 1998, and thirty-two-year-old Ronda Reynolds was getting ready to travel from Seattle to Spokane to visit her mother and brother and grandmother before the holidays. Ronda’s second marriage was dissolving after less than a year, her career as a pioneering female Washington State Trooper had ended, but she was optimistic about starting over again. "I’m actually looking forward to getting on with my life," she told her mother earlier the night before. "I just need a few days with you guys." Barb Thompson, Ronda’s mother, who had met her daughter’s second husband only once before, was just happy that Ronda was coming home.
At 6:20 that morning, Ron Reynolds called 911 and told the dispatcher his wife was dead. She had committed suicide, he said, although he hadn’t heard the gunshot and he didn’t know if she had a pulse. EMTs arrived, detectives arrived, the coroner’s deputy arrived, and a postmortem was conducted. Lewis County Coroner Terry Wilson, who neither visited the death scene nor attended the autopsy, declared the manner of Ronda’s death as "undetermined." Over the next eleven years, Coroner Wilson would change that manner of death from "undetermined" to "suicide," back to "undetermined"—and then back to "suicide" again.
But Barb Thompson never for one moment believed her daughter committed suicide. Neither did Detective Jerry Berry or ballistics expert Marty Hayes or attorney Royce Ferguson or dozens of Ronda’s friends. For eleven grueling years, through the ups and downs of the legal system and its endless delays, these people and others helped Barb Thompson fight to strike that painful word from her daughter’s death certificate.
On November 9, 2009, a precedent-setting hearing was held to determine whether Coroner Wilson’s office had been derelict in its duty in investigating the death of Ronda Reynolds. Veteran true-crime writer Ann Rule was present at that hearing, hoping to unbraid the tangled strands of conflicting statements and mishandled evidence and present all sides of this haunting case and to determine, perhaps, what happened to Ronda Reynolds, in the chill still of that tragic December night.
It was nine days before Christmas 1998, and thirty-two-year-old Ronda Reynolds was getting ready to travel from Seattle to Spokane to visit her mother and brother and grandmother before the holidays. Ronda’s second marriage was dissolving after less than a year, her career as a pioneering female Washington State Trooper had ended, but she was optimistic about starting over again. "I’m actually looking forward to getting on with my life," she told her mother earlier the night before. "I just need a few days with you guys." Barb Thompson, Ronda’s mother, who had met her daughter’s second husband only once before, was just happy that Ronda was coming home.
At 6:20 that morning, Ron Reynolds called 911 and told the dispatcher his wife was dead. She had committed suicide, he said, although he hadn’t heard the gunshot and he didn’t know if she had a pulse. EMTs arrived, detectives arrived, the coroner’s deputy arrived, and a postmortem was conducted. Lewis County Coroner Terry Wilson, who neither visited the death scene nor attended the autopsy, declared the manner of Ronda’s death as "undetermined." Over the next eleven years, Coroner Wilson would change that manner of death from "undetermined" to "suicide," back to "undetermined"—and then back to "suicide" again.
But Barb Thompson never for one moment believed her daughter committed suicide. Neither did Detective Jerry Berry or ballistics expert Marty Hayes or attorney Royce Ferguson or dozens of Ronda’s friends. For eleven grueling years, through the ups and downs of the legal system and its endless delays, these people and others helped Barb Thompson fight to strike that painful word from her daughter’s death certificate.
On November 9, 2009, a precedent-setting hearing was held to determine whether Coroner Wilson’s office had been derelict in its duty in investigating the death of Ronda Reynolds. Veteran true-crime writer Ann Rule was present at that hearing, hoping to unbraid the tangled strands of conflicting statements and mishandled evidence and present all sides of this haunting case and to determine, perhaps, what happened to Ronda Reynolds, in the chill still of that tragic December night.
464 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published May 4, 2010
427 people are currently reading
3451 people want to read
About the author
Ann Rule
141 books4,525 followersAnn Rule was a popular American true crime writer. Raised in a law enforcement and criminal justice system environment, she grew up wanting to work in law enforcement herself. She was a former Seattle Policewoman and was well educated in psychology and criminology.
She came to prominence with her first book, The Stranger Beside Me, about the Ted Bundy murders. At the time she started researching the book, the murders were still unsolved. In the course of time, it became clear that the killer was Bundy, her friend and her colleague as a trained volunteer on the suicide hotline at the Seattle, Washington Crisis Clinic, giving her a unique distinction among true crime writers.
Rule won two Anthony Awards from Bouchercon, the mystery fans' organization. She was nominated three times for the Edgar Awards from the Mystery Writers of America. She is highly regarded for creating the true crime genre as it exists today.
Ann Rule also wrote under the name Andy Stack . Her daughter is Goodreads author Leslie Rule.
She came to prominence with her first book, The Stranger Beside Me, about the Ted Bundy murders. At the time she started researching the book, the murders were still unsolved. In the course of time, it became clear that the killer was Bundy, her friend and her colleague as a trained volunteer on the suicide hotline at the Seattle, Washington Crisis Clinic, giving her a unique distinction among true crime writers.
Rule won two Anthony Awards from Bouchercon, the mystery fans' organization. She was nominated three times for the Edgar Awards from the Mystery Writers of America. She is highly regarded for creating the true crime genre as it exists today.
Ann Rule also wrote under the name Andy Stack . Her daughter is Goodreads author Leslie Rule.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 375 reviews
May 7, 2017
I am not a fan of Ann Rule as such, though I did like her first ever book. But that's about the only one. Every true crime fan claims they are a big fan of Ann Rule, so I keep giving her yet another chance, every single time. Well, no more! She tends to insert herself into her stories continuously that is very distracting. She is also extremely biased. In the few books I have read, she quickly made friends with one of the survivors and then everything is written from that person's viewpoint. This book is no different.
In fact, this book is just terrible. It was crying out for an editor, or at least a proofreader to cut out the uhs and ums. I can't believe someone would publish a book like this with so many grammatical mistakes and fragmented sentences. It's like Rule just wrote some stuff and had the first draft published. The purple prose and emotional manipulation were also very irritating. For example, This was the second day in thirty three years that Ronda wasn't alive.
In this book, Rule becomes friendly with the victim's mother, Barb Thompson, and the story is pretty much the mother's story, a naturally biased narrative. We even are told about the mother's childhood and just random information that has no relevance to the actual murder case. The same thing goes for a few people who were helping Barb, and their entire biographies are discussed. There simply wasn't much information on the actual case. Barb refuses to believe that her daughter committed suicide, so sets out to investigate the case. The book is about how she tried to change the death certificate rather than about finding the murderer. Why would anyone be interested in this? But no, on Rule goes endlessly with Barb's views, emotions, discussions and so on, much of it irrelevant.
And then, the sexism. Barb is very attractive and good looking. Ronda was sexy and beautiful. Why is this relevant? None of the men were described continuously like this. At one point, Rule even claimed that Ronda was the kind of beautiful woman who would attract a stalker. This is absolutely unbelievable, coming from a woman who has worked as a crime reporter and has written many books on this subject. What the actual fuck?
Barb and Ronda were also very 'strong'. I never got the impression that Ronda was a strong woman. She gave her paycheck to her husband just because he demanded it, and didn't even have access to her own money. She never takes any action even when she knew that her dogs were beaten to death by her stepson. How is this 'being strong'? This is another tendency I have noticed with Rule. All victims were 'strong'. Well, Ronda wasn't. And you know what, that's okay! Ronda deserves justice whether she was strong or not, likable or not. This insistence of strength in victims is problematic because it sort of indicates that victims who weren't strong don't deserve that much sympathy.
The case remained unsolved, and I found it extremely unprofessional that Rule had written about it in the first place. But even worse, she actually has a final chapter where she names her suspects. She names people as suspects in a murder case in a book, knowing she is a popular author and would be read by thousands of people! This is unacceptable and very unprofessional! One of them might be a murderer, but the others have just been publicly humiliated for nothing, just so that Rule could satisfy her 'friend'. The bottom line is that we do not know, and since these suspects are still alive, they should never have been mentioned!
I can't express how despicable I found the entire book, right from the lack of perspective of the author, her unprofessional conduct, and the extreme rudeness of a bestselling author towards her readers in not doing even basic proofreading!
In fact, this book is just terrible. It was crying out for an editor, or at least a proofreader to cut out the uhs and ums. I can't believe someone would publish a book like this with so many grammatical mistakes and fragmented sentences. It's like Rule just wrote some stuff and had the first draft published. The purple prose and emotional manipulation were also very irritating. For example, This was the second day in thirty three years that Ronda wasn't alive.
In this book, Rule becomes friendly with the victim's mother, Barb Thompson, and the story is pretty much the mother's story, a naturally biased narrative. We even are told about the mother's childhood and just random information that has no relevance to the actual murder case. The same thing goes for a few people who were helping Barb, and their entire biographies are discussed. There simply wasn't much information on the actual case. Barb refuses to believe that her daughter committed suicide, so sets out to investigate the case. The book is about how she tried to change the death certificate rather than about finding the murderer. Why would anyone be interested in this? But no, on Rule goes endlessly with Barb's views, emotions, discussions and so on, much of it irrelevant.
And then, the sexism. Barb is very attractive and good looking. Ronda was sexy and beautiful. Why is this relevant? None of the men were described continuously like this. At one point, Rule even claimed that Ronda was the kind of beautiful woman who would attract a stalker. This is absolutely unbelievable, coming from a woman who has worked as a crime reporter and has written many books on this subject. What the actual fuck?
Barb and Ronda were also very 'strong'. I never got the impression that Ronda was a strong woman. She gave her paycheck to her husband just because he demanded it, and didn't even have access to her own money. She never takes any action even when she knew that her dogs were beaten to death by her stepson. How is this 'being strong'? This is another tendency I have noticed with Rule. All victims were 'strong'. Well, Ronda wasn't. And you know what, that's okay! Ronda deserves justice whether she was strong or not, likable or not. This insistence of strength in victims is problematic because it sort of indicates that victims who weren't strong don't deserve that much sympathy.
The case remained unsolved, and I found it extremely unprofessional that Rule had written about it in the first place. But even worse, she actually has a final chapter where she names her suspects. She names people as suspects in a murder case in a book, knowing she is a popular author and would be read by thousands of people! This is unacceptable and very unprofessional! One of them might be a murderer, but the others have just been publicly humiliated for nothing, just so that Rule could satisfy her 'friend'. The bottom line is that we do not know, and since these suspects are still alive, they should never have been mentioned!
I can't express how despicable I found the entire book, right from the lack of perspective of the author, her unprofessional conduct, and the extreme rudeness of a bestselling author towards her readers in not doing even basic proofreading!
October 27, 2011
I am so disappointed in this book. It really ( in my mind, at least) had a lot going for it: written by Ann Rule right there was a biggie. Love her books ( this one being an exception…) and know that she has an excellent track record. Secondly, I am finally living here in the Pacific Northwest and might actually have been to many of the locations she cites. AND I think I even remember some of the news reporting about the case she chronicles. SO, no brainer. This had to be a winner, right?
Sorry Charlie. No such luck. The book starts losing steam rather early and by half way through it, I just started pretty much scanning the paragraphs for a quick read. Being the latest Ann Rule book, I was convinced it had to get better. But it did not. Sigh.
This story is subtitled: The Strange Death of Ronda Reynolds and Her Mother’s Unceasing Quest for the Truth”. It is unfortunate when the subtitle completely gives away the plot line and author’s bias of the entire book. What happened here is that Ann Rule became BFF ( best friend’s forever—if we remember the text abbreviation) with the victim’s mother. The verbiage is cloying, sentimentalized and reads like a small town obituary that ran too long.
Sorry Charlie. No such luck. The book starts losing steam rather early and by half way through it, I just started pretty much scanning the paragraphs for a quick read. Being the latest Ann Rule book, I was convinced it had to get better. But it did not. Sigh.
This story is subtitled: The Strange Death of Ronda Reynolds and Her Mother’s Unceasing Quest for the Truth”. It is unfortunate when the subtitle completely gives away the plot line and author’s bias of the entire book. What happened here is that Ann Rule became BFF ( best friend’s forever—if we remember the text abbreviation) with the victim’s mother. The verbiage is cloying, sentimentalized and reads like a small town obituary that ran too long.
February 7, 2017
This case. This bizarre, baffling, infuriating case.
Ronda Reynolds was shot sometime in the early morning hours of December 16, 1998. Somebody made a very clumsy effort to make it look like suicide. And the first police officers on the scene--let's be brutally honest--fucked up. They moved the gun. They let the victim's three teenage stepsons leave the house without being questioned. They decided that the victim's soon-to-be-ex-husband's story (a story which makes NO SENSE) was true, and that Ronda had committed suicide. Because they decided that (when the rule of thumb in death investigations is, prove it's NOT homicide, THEN consider suicide), they didn't follow basic procedures to secure evidence (and much of the evidence they did collect would be "lost"). The history of this case thereafter, from 1998 until Rule's book was published in 2010, is at least 75% the history of Lewis County law enforcement trying to make their fuck-up go away. They drove one of their best homicide detectives to resign because, in refusing to let go of the case, he made them look bad. So they punished him instead of punishing the detectives who fucked up.
Or, y'know, choosing a less dysfunctional alternative than punishment.
By and large, Rule is pro-cop. She makes no bones about it. She was a cop herself, she made an effort as a reporter to maintain good relationships with the cops she wrote about, she admired--and I, too, admire--the homicide detectives who work cases like bulldogs. I don't think I can really imagine how hard it must have been for her to write this book, in which officers she knew and liked come across as men who are corrupt, who don't care, who are vastly more invested in their egos than they are in the truth. That's a harsh judgment, and it's my judgment, based on the evidence Rule presents. I don't think Ronda Reynolds' death was an insoluble homicide when it was committed; I think it may very well be insoluble now, unless somebody talks. And it seems less and less likely--with the complete lack of interest demonstrated over and over again by Lewis County law enforcement--that anybody ever will.
The trial in this book is not actually a murder trial. It's a judicial review of the (criminally incompetent) Lewis County coroner and his handling of Ronda Reynolds' death. The triumph of this book is the jury deciding that (a) the coroner mishandled the case dreadfully and (b) that the manner of Ronda Reynolds' death was homicide. Ronda's mother's website Justice for Ronda has not been updated since 2010, and the only evidence of activity on the case is Ron Reynolds (the soon-to-be-ex-husband who told such a flimsy and ridiculous story) and his son suing Lewis County for violation of their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Note that the coroner who convened this inquest in 2011 was not the coroner who made such a botch of the case originally. Also note that: "The jury unanimously ruled that Ronda Reynolds’ manner of death was homicide and identified Ron Reynolds and his son Jonathan Reynolds as responsible for her death. After the inquest, McLeod issued arrest warrants for Reynolds and his son. The Lewis County Prosecutor’s Office declined to press charges."
I'm gonna be honest: I did not enjoy this book. I hate reading about botched investigations and I hate even more reading about the kind of stonewalling that Lewis County law enforcement has continued and continued to practice, defeating efforts to find the truth simply by inertia. Even when individuals, like Coroner McLeod, try to rectify the glaring failure, they are met again with "declined to press charges." (I know that there can be very good reasons for a county prosecutor or district attorney to decline to press charges, and in this case I imagine that it was actually that they didn't think they could win the case rather than any lack of desire to see justice done, but it's just so fucking emblematic of the whole damn thing.) It makes me angry, and because there's no constructive outlet for my anger--there's nothing I can do--it makes me frustrated ("seething" is probably the correct word), and that leads to a kind of unpleasant reading experience. But that's not a judgment of the quality of the book, just of the nature of its subject.
Ronda Reynolds was shot sometime in the early morning hours of December 16, 1998. Somebody made a very clumsy effort to make it look like suicide. And the first police officers on the scene--let's be brutally honest--fucked up. They moved the gun. They let the victim's three teenage stepsons leave the house without being questioned. They decided that the victim's soon-to-be-ex-husband's story (a story which makes NO SENSE) was true, and that Ronda had committed suicide. Because they decided that (when the rule of thumb in death investigations is, prove it's NOT homicide, THEN consider suicide), they didn't follow basic procedures to secure evidence (and much of the evidence they did collect would be "lost"). The history of this case thereafter, from 1998 until Rule's book was published in 2010, is at least 75% the history of Lewis County law enforcement trying to make their fuck-up go away. They drove one of their best homicide detectives to resign because, in refusing to let go of the case, he made them look bad. So they punished him instead of punishing the detectives who fucked up.
Or, y'know, choosing a less dysfunctional alternative than punishment.
By and large, Rule is pro-cop. She makes no bones about it. She was a cop herself, she made an effort as a reporter to maintain good relationships with the cops she wrote about, she admired--and I, too, admire--the homicide detectives who work cases like bulldogs. I don't think I can really imagine how hard it must have been for her to write this book, in which officers she knew and liked come across as men who are corrupt, who don't care, who are vastly more invested in their egos than they are in the truth. That's a harsh judgment, and it's my judgment, based on the evidence Rule presents. I don't think Ronda Reynolds' death was an insoluble homicide when it was committed; I think it may very well be insoluble now, unless somebody talks. And it seems less and less likely--with the complete lack of interest demonstrated over and over again by Lewis County law enforcement--that anybody ever will.
The trial in this book is not actually a murder trial. It's a judicial review of the (criminally incompetent) Lewis County coroner and his handling of Ronda Reynolds' death. The triumph of this book is the jury deciding that (a) the coroner mishandled the case dreadfully and (b) that the manner of Ronda Reynolds' death was homicide. Ronda's mother's website Justice for Ronda has not been updated since 2010, and the only evidence of activity on the case is Ron Reynolds (the soon-to-be-ex-husband who told such a flimsy and ridiculous story) and his son suing Lewis County for violation of their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Note that the coroner who convened this inquest in 2011 was not the coroner who made such a botch of the case originally. Also note that: "The jury unanimously ruled that Ronda Reynolds’ manner of death was homicide and identified Ron Reynolds and his son Jonathan Reynolds as responsible for her death. After the inquest, McLeod issued arrest warrants for Reynolds and his son. The Lewis County Prosecutor’s Office declined to press charges."
I'm gonna be honest: I did not enjoy this book. I hate reading about botched investigations and I hate even more reading about the kind of stonewalling that Lewis County law enforcement has continued and continued to practice, defeating efforts to find the truth simply by inertia. Even when individuals, like Coroner McLeod, try to rectify the glaring failure, they are met again with "declined to press charges." (I know that there can be very good reasons for a county prosecutor or district attorney to decline to press charges, and in this case I imagine that it was actually that they didn't think they could win the case rather than any lack of desire to see justice done, but it's just so fucking emblematic of the whole damn thing.) It makes me angry, and because there's no constructive outlet for my anger--there's nothing I can do--it makes me frustrated ("seething" is probably the correct word), and that leads to a kind of unpleasant reading experience. But that's not a judgment of the quality of the book, just of the nature of its subject.
August 8, 2011
5-star story, 1-star writing. A policewoman from the pacific northwest was killed, or killed herself (that's the basic question, resolved by a jury ultimately as homicide, but who killed her remains unclear at the end) in the late 90s. Her Mom never believed it was suicide and relentlessly pursued the case with assistance from a private eye, an attorney, etc.
The forensics (e.g., would her hands have both been under the blanket if she'd shot herself?) and tangled motives (stepson who hated her? husband who was about to leave her to go back to his ex-wife and wanted to collect on her life insurance?........) are fascinating. There's a very good 200-page book in here, but it's unfortunately ensnared in another 200 pages of nonsense. A photo of the author with victim's mom with caption explaining why the author was having a "bad hair day", an explanation of what "dope" is (marijuana, for those of you not as well-versed in cutting edge street slang as I am), dozens of reminders that the author and the victim's mom became friends and that the author does not believe it was a suicide, and on and on.
The only book I ever wrote was a co-authored textbook published by a large New York company, and at the time I know I resented the number of eyes that had to review every single sentence before it made the final bound copy, but reading books like this one makes me appreciate the importance of having someone with clout aside from the author read everything and pressure the author to drop self-indulgent stuff that takes up space without advancing the story.
The forensics (e.g., would her hands have both been under the blanket if she'd shot herself?) and tangled motives (stepson who hated her? husband who was about to leave her to go back to his ex-wife and wanted to collect on her life insurance?........) are fascinating. There's a very good 200-page book in here, but it's unfortunately ensnared in another 200 pages of nonsense. A photo of the author with victim's mom with caption explaining why the author was having a "bad hair day", an explanation of what "dope" is (marijuana, for those of you not as well-versed in cutting edge street slang as I am), dozens of reminders that the author and the victim's mom became friends and that the author does not believe it was a suicide, and on and on.
The only book I ever wrote was a co-authored textbook published by a large New York company, and at the time I know I resented the number of eyes that had to review every single sentence before it made the final bound copy, but reading books like this one makes me appreciate the importance of having someone with clout aside from the author read everything and pressure the author to drop self-indulgent stuff that takes up space without advancing the story.
October 21, 2010
I have been closely following the Ronda Reynolds case for years, ever since Ronda's mother, Barb Thompson, asked me to post Ronda's unsolved case on our Real Crimes Web site at http://www.realcrimes.com. Now my good friend, true crime author, Ann Rule, has presented a brilliantly written and fascinating account of this terrible story and the multiple people involved. In my own mind, I thought I had figured out who the killer was, based on correspondence with Barb over all these years and the many posts on her message board, which my husband and I sponsor. But Ann has entered into this case as an investigator as well as a writer, and she and Barb have become a team that has unearthed new information and opened doors to possibilities that I had not previously considered.
(I've done my best not to include spoilers in this review, but holding back has been difficult.)
(I've done my best not to include spoilers in this review, but holding back has been difficult.)
April 14, 2011
My only run-in with the law was a parking ticket in 1975. True crime books, especially stories of murders, have a fascination for people like me. Those of us who can’t imagine slapping a child are chilled at the very idea of taking another life.
But once we get over the initial distaste, true crime becomes enthralling, as we learn the details of the crime, the search for the kidnapping victim, the slow, detailed work of the detectives who search for the perpetrator.
One of the finest writers of true crime books in the US is Ann Rule, who is from the Seattle area and who in this book writes about a young woman who grew up in the Spokane area and whose mother owns a ranch here.
In fact, In the Still of the Night focuses on the mother of the murdered woman. Conspicuously sloppy police work led the coroner to declare the death of Ronda Reynolds a suicide. But her mother, Barb Thompson, refuses to believe that her cheerful, optimistic daughter, who had everything to live for, would kill herself.
One of the detectives assigned to the case lists some 20 “red flags,” things at the scene or in the subsequent investigation that make him suspect this was a murder. Starting with the fact that the woman’s hands were both under a blanket and that the gun that shot her was in a position it could not have been in if she had shot it herself, these flags also include a “suicide note” written in lipstick on the bathroom mirror which is not in her handwriting and is so high she would have had to stand on a chair to write it.
It took 10 years but eventually Ronda Reynolds’ mother sued the corner to have the cause of death changed to “undetermined.” She is now working with a private detective to investigate the crime as should have been done a decade ago.
2011 No 62 Coming soon: Lalique Perfume Bottles
But once we get over the initial distaste, true crime becomes enthralling, as we learn the details of the crime, the search for the kidnapping victim, the slow, detailed work of the detectives who search for the perpetrator.
One of the finest writers of true crime books in the US is Ann Rule, who is from the Seattle area and who in this book writes about a young woman who grew up in the Spokane area and whose mother owns a ranch here.
In fact, In the Still of the Night focuses on the mother of the murdered woman. Conspicuously sloppy police work led the coroner to declare the death of Ronda Reynolds a suicide. But her mother, Barb Thompson, refuses to believe that her cheerful, optimistic daughter, who had everything to live for, would kill herself.
One of the detectives assigned to the case lists some 20 “red flags,” things at the scene or in the subsequent investigation that make him suspect this was a murder. Starting with the fact that the woman’s hands were both under a blanket and that the gun that shot her was in a position it could not have been in if she had shot it herself, these flags also include a “suicide note” written in lipstick on the bathroom mirror which is not in her handwriting and is so high she would have had to stand on a chair to write it.
It took 10 years but eventually Ronda Reynolds’ mother sued the corner to have the cause of death changed to “undetermined.” She is now working with a private detective to investigate the crime as should have been done a decade ago.
2011 No 62 Coming soon: Lalique Perfume Bottles
July 28, 2012
I found this fascinating, not least because I knew Ronda. I worked with her for a short time and when she was killed all of us who had been her co-workers knew it was not what the police called it-suicide. Thank you Ms. Rule for speaking for her and not allowing it to be forgotten! The story is a grim one, but well told. The seperate threads are discussed, and many facts I was not aware of are brought to light. Justice may never be reached here on this earth, but the scales will be balanced eventually. And this book helps to hold up to the light of day the ugliness that would have otherwise been buried.
March 16, 2017
I've been getting really into true crime stories lately. I actually spent the last couple of days binge listening to the My Favorite Murder podcast (I'm late to the game, I'm aware), and my obsession has grown. I knew I needed to get my fix in book format too, and what better way to get into the genre than a Ann Rule book.
The events are horrific, but the way she wrote about them is amazing. There is something about it that makes it not only readable, but enjoyable.
The events are horrific, but the way she wrote about them is amazing. There is something about it that makes it not only readable, but enjoyable.
November 9, 2016
Typical Ann Rule. Exceptional investigation and a twist to the end. I am rating it a 3, though, as a have no intention of owning this book.
August 29, 2013
THERE WILL BE SPOILERS AHEAD!
This book drove me bat-shit crazy. The whole thing was such a cock-up from the start and it kept getting worse. Unbelievably worse. It wasn't even the mistakes themselves that were most astounding, it was the unending torrent of mistakes that really frustrated me. Everyone made ridiculous mistakes. Every single player, regardless of whether they were friend, or foe, made a slew of mistakes. I have an especially hard time when someone admits that they are making a mistake and goes ahead with it, anyway. This entire tragedy would never have happened if the victim had taken her own advice (and the advice of loved ones) to get the hell out of that house while she was still alive.
Since pointing fingers at a murdered domestic violence victim feels unnecessarily gruesome to me, I did my best to put that aside and focus on the murder and it's aftermath. Which is when it got even worse. The mistakes made by the first-responders were mind-blowing. They were so idiotic, and were piling up so quickly, that I figured I'd downloaded one of her books about a case in the 80's. I figured there was no way this was a 21st century crime because even the most casual "CSI" viewer would have realized that Grissom would have been throwing these imbeciles out of his crime scene like they were frisbees.
When I checked the timeline and realized that this WAS an account of a 21st century crime, and that "CSI" had already been airing by that point, as well. There was no excuse for the ginormous cock-up of what should have been a fairly straight-forward murder investigation. Sure, a lot of the idiots were determined to label this a suicide but a few decent detectives could have easily discounted that theory.
Because who would really think that a woman would try to sleep in a closet that couldn't even fit her entire body and then that she would commit suicide while partially crammed in this closet? And somehow her abusive husband failed to hear the fatal gunshot even though he was only 10 feet away in their bed, supposedly fast asleep?
Except it keeps getting weirder. No one bothers to secure the scene, or round up the other members of the household. Idiot paramedics and junior police officers make a huge mess out of the crime scene. One first-responder actually moved the murder weapon before any pictures could be taken of it's original placement. And he wasn't wearing gloves, either. Grissom would have destroyed that guy for doing something so damned stupid.
That's certainly the worst cock-up but the hits keep rolling. When the (supposedly) competent detective arrives and tries to sort through this damned mess of a crime scene, he mostly just blunders around uselessly. As he walks down the hallway, he notices that the smell of incense is wafting out from the teenage son's bedroom. The detective makes a mental note of this oddity but doesn't do a damn thing about it. Because COME ON, we all know that there is only one reason for a teenage boy to be burning incense in the middle of the night.
Of course, the kid's alleged drug use becomes vital to the investigation many weeks later but there is no proof of his drug use because no one thought to search his room as part of the FRAKKING CRIME SCENE. Apparently these detectives don't realize that they can (and should) declare the entire house the crime scene and proceed to search the whole damn thing. Instead, they fail to search over 90% of the house and do not realize until much later how much they messed up their own murder investigation.
Not to mention how they let the two kids who were also in the house when the crime occurred, be spirited away by their mom before they were even questioned by the police about the incident. She said that her boys must be tired and she wanted to take them away and put them in bed. And the police let her do just that and, of course, by the time the police did get around to questioning the kids, they had their stories well ironed out.
As their murder investigation continues to go nowhere because they collected almost no useful evidence at the crime scene, the cling to the evidence that they DO have--the victim's body. This is actually supposed to be the real thrust of the saga because the coroner is clearly a hack, at best, and most likely also a criminal. He can't settle on the cause of death--suicide or undetermined. He goes back and forth many, many times and the victim's mother is adamant that her daughter will not be officially labeled a "suicide."
It's a noble struggle and it was easy for me to empathize with the victim's Mom. When she realized that the initial investigation was an unmitigated disaster, she set out to do her own investigation, guerrilla-style. I was amazed at her ability to sweet-talk her daughter's husband, and killer (allegedly), in order to get any scrap of evidence that might be left. This was one pretty amazing Mom.
And she was uber-determined and never stopped fighting. When the coroner finally settled on cause of death (suicide) and released the body to the family for burial, I believed the victim's Mom when she said that she would never stop fighting for her daughter.
THEN SHE CREMATES THE DAMN BODY.
I am still flabbergasted by it all. The body is the only useful evidence that they have left--the ONLY physical evidence of a murder that has clearly been committed and they frakking cremate it. They don't try to find even a moderately competent forensic examiner who would be willing to give a second opinion, especially since it took the coroner-of-record ages to finally determine a cause of death. They don't think ahead enough to realize that it might be helpful to their cause if they found a way to preserve the body. Especially since the victim's Mom is still adamant about finding justice for her daughter, so maybe she shouldn't have burned up the only useful evidence she had left.
I damn near stopped reading at that point because there is only so much idiocy that I can take before my head starts aching but I wanted to see how the Mom's lawsuit against the wretched coroner turned out. She was still trying to wipe "suicide" off her daughter's death certificate and was suing the coroner for gross incompetency (among other things) and she wanted his "suicide" ruling thrown out. It was a pretty interesting case, and I tried to ignore the voice in my head that kept reminding me that the Mom cremated the body in question and thus had very little physical evidence to support her case.
Once the book moved beyond the murder investigation and into the civil case against the incompetent coroner many years later, it actually becomes quite a good read. It was a landmark case and surprisingly juicy (that was one shady coroner) at times and it kept me very interested in how the case unfolded. That part is definitely worth reading.
But skip damn near everything else--which is most of the first two-thirds of the book. The dead-end murder investigation is frustrating to read about it because you know that it was the massive incompetency of the officers involved that stymied their own damn investigation. I even tried to turn it into a spot-the-CSI-mistake game but even that got really depressing after a while.
This book drove me bat-shit crazy. The whole thing was such a cock-up from the start and it kept getting worse. Unbelievably worse. It wasn't even the mistakes themselves that were most astounding, it was the unending torrent of mistakes that really frustrated me. Everyone made ridiculous mistakes. Every single player, regardless of whether they were friend, or foe, made a slew of mistakes. I have an especially hard time when someone admits that they are making a mistake and goes ahead with it, anyway. This entire tragedy would never have happened if the victim had taken her own advice (and the advice of loved ones) to get the hell out of that house while she was still alive.
Since pointing fingers at a murdered domestic violence victim feels unnecessarily gruesome to me, I did my best to put that aside and focus on the murder and it's aftermath. Which is when it got even worse. The mistakes made by the first-responders were mind-blowing. They were so idiotic, and were piling up so quickly, that I figured I'd downloaded one of her books about a case in the 80's. I figured there was no way this was a 21st century crime because even the most casual "CSI" viewer would have realized that Grissom would have been throwing these imbeciles out of his crime scene like they were frisbees.
When I checked the timeline and realized that this WAS an account of a 21st century crime, and that "CSI" had already been airing by that point, as well. There was no excuse for the ginormous cock-up of what should have been a fairly straight-forward murder investigation. Sure, a lot of the idiots were determined to label this a suicide but a few decent detectives could have easily discounted that theory.
Because who would really think that a woman would try to sleep in a closet that couldn't even fit her entire body and then that she would commit suicide while partially crammed in this closet? And somehow her abusive husband failed to hear the fatal gunshot even though he was only 10 feet away in their bed, supposedly fast asleep?
Except it keeps getting weirder. No one bothers to secure the scene, or round up the other members of the household. Idiot paramedics and junior police officers make a huge mess out of the crime scene. One first-responder actually moved the murder weapon before any pictures could be taken of it's original placement. And he wasn't wearing gloves, either. Grissom would have destroyed that guy for doing something so damned stupid.
That's certainly the worst cock-up but the hits keep rolling. When the (supposedly) competent detective arrives and tries to sort through this damned mess of a crime scene, he mostly just blunders around uselessly. As he walks down the hallway, he notices that the smell of incense is wafting out from the teenage son's bedroom. The detective makes a mental note of this oddity but doesn't do a damn thing about it. Because COME ON, we all know that there is only one reason for a teenage boy to be burning incense in the middle of the night.
Of course, the kid's alleged drug use becomes vital to the investigation many weeks later but there is no proof of his drug use because no one thought to search his room as part of the FRAKKING CRIME SCENE. Apparently these detectives don't realize that they can (and should) declare the entire house the crime scene and proceed to search the whole damn thing. Instead, they fail to search over 90% of the house and do not realize until much later how much they messed up their own murder investigation.
Not to mention how they let the two kids who were also in the house when the crime occurred, be spirited away by their mom before they were even questioned by the police about the incident. She said that her boys must be tired and she wanted to take them away and put them in bed. And the police let her do just that and, of course, by the time the police did get around to questioning the kids, they had their stories well ironed out.
As their murder investigation continues to go nowhere because they collected almost no useful evidence at the crime scene, the cling to the evidence that they DO have--the victim's body. This is actually supposed to be the real thrust of the saga because the coroner is clearly a hack, at best, and most likely also a criminal. He can't settle on the cause of death--suicide or undetermined. He goes back and forth many, many times and the victim's mother is adamant that her daughter will not be officially labeled a "suicide."
It's a noble struggle and it was easy for me to empathize with the victim's Mom. When she realized that the initial investigation was an unmitigated disaster, she set out to do her own investigation, guerrilla-style. I was amazed at her ability to sweet-talk her daughter's husband, and killer (allegedly), in order to get any scrap of evidence that might be left. This was one pretty amazing Mom.
And she was uber-determined and never stopped fighting. When the coroner finally settled on cause of death (suicide) and released the body to the family for burial, I believed the victim's Mom when she said that she would never stop fighting for her daughter.
THEN SHE CREMATES THE DAMN BODY.
I am still flabbergasted by it all. The body is the only useful evidence that they have left--the ONLY physical evidence of a murder that has clearly been committed and they frakking cremate it. They don't try to find even a moderately competent forensic examiner who would be willing to give a second opinion, especially since it took the coroner-of-record ages to finally determine a cause of death. They don't think ahead enough to realize that it might be helpful to their cause if they found a way to preserve the body. Especially since the victim's Mom is still adamant about finding justice for her daughter, so maybe she shouldn't have burned up the only useful evidence she had left.
I damn near stopped reading at that point because there is only so much idiocy that I can take before my head starts aching but I wanted to see how the Mom's lawsuit against the wretched coroner turned out. She was still trying to wipe "suicide" off her daughter's death certificate and was suing the coroner for gross incompetency (among other things) and she wanted his "suicide" ruling thrown out. It was a pretty interesting case, and I tried to ignore the voice in my head that kept reminding me that the Mom cremated the body in question and thus had very little physical evidence to support her case.
Once the book moved beyond the murder investigation and into the civil case against the incompetent coroner many years later, it actually becomes quite a good read. It was a landmark case and surprisingly juicy (that was one shady coroner) at times and it kept me very interested in how the case unfolded. That part is definitely worth reading.
But skip damn near everything else--which is most of the first two-thirds of the book. The dead-end murder investigation is frustrating to read about it because you know that it was the massive incompetency of the officers involved that stymied their own damn investigation. I even tried to turn it into a spot-the-CSI-mistake game but even that got really depressing after a while.
August 27, 2024
If there’s one thing I know it’s that I’ll always enjoy something written by Ann Rule. She never fails to reel me in and hook me with her writing. The stories she writes about are terribly sad but she brings light and sensitivity to them every time. This one wasn’t my absolute favourite but I did still enjoy it!
June 21, 2016
Impressive investigation of a very in-depth case. It's frustrating that no one was ever charged with Reynolds' murder (unless that has changed in subsequent years).
While very readable, this book was much longer than it had to be, and I could have done without all the gushing about how gorgeous the victim and her mother are. Does it matter? Are only beautiful murder victims worthy? That said, I've rolled my eyes whenever Ann Rule describes someone as beautiful ever since I read Small Sacrifices. To hear Rule tell it, you would think Diane Downs is a supermodel.
Not that it matters. I would say it doesn't.
While very readable, this book was much longer than it had to be, and I could have done without all the gushing about how gorgeous the victim and her mother are. Does it matter? Are only beautiful murder victims worthy? That said, I've rolled my eyes whenever Ann Rule describes someone as beautiful ever since I read Small Sacrifices. To hear Rule tell it, you would think Diane Downs is a supermodel.
Not that it matters. I would say it doesn't.
January 2, 2015
A fascinating and unsatisfying true-life mystery. I checked this out mainly because I live in Washington State and didn't actually remember this case. Ann Rule is always a very thorough author and you feel as if you are actually there. Unfortunately, it had an unsatisfactory ending - but not due to Ann Rule.
November 3, 2010
I'm afraid that this book was written as a duty by a lady who may just be tired of writing. It was so disjointed and unfocused and the writing so poor that it didn't even resemble Ann Rule's typical writing. I had the feeling that she made an attempt to pull together reams of information and research, and the attempt, while noble, failed her usual standards.
March 31, 2017
Bought this at a thrift store thinking it was fiction and not true crime. It was depressing as all get-out and I didn't like it at all. Worst of all, it doesn't have a satisfying ending. Blech!
February 19, 2011
I am an avid reader of Ann Rule's books and eagerly await each of her new releases. Because I am such a fan of Ms. Rule I can always find positives even if those books that are not my favorites of hers. In the Still of the Night was no different.
From a novice writer In the Still of the Night would be a passably good true crime selection. From Ann Rule, author of the flawless Small Sacrifices, Stranger Beside Me and her True Crimes Files series,among others, it's a bit of a disappointment. For one, I felt that the story was simply not strong enough to be a stand alone book and would have been better served being the central, title story of a True Crime Files volume. The sheer number of pages from being a stand alone book (over 400 pages) made the story feel a bit slow paced and slightly bogged down; compared to being an entry in a True Crime Files volume, where it would clock in at least half the number of pages.
My biggest letdown with In the Still of the Night was the unresolved conclusion. When I read true crime, and I invest my time and energy reading the story and getting to know the victim(s), I want to have closure in my mind that the victim(s) and families have justice. There is no such resolution in this book. It is through no fault of Ms. Rule's and she does lay out a substantial list of possible suspects at the conclusion of the book, as well as a reward for further information on Ronda Reynolds' death, but the unfinished business surrounding Ronda Reynolds' death makes me feel that perhaps this particular crime, or alleged crime, may not have been the best subject for a book.
On the upside, Ms. Rule became personally acquainted and involved with Ronda Reynolds' family and it shows in the pages of the book. I felt as though I grew to know her tenacious mother, Barb Thompson, as I flipped the pages and this admirable woman is to be admired. She does the memory of her daughter proud and I felt her heartache and pain as strongly as if they were my own.
I also believed that Ms. Rule did well in writing former police officer turned private investigator Jerry Berry, expert Marty Hughes and longtime friend to Ronda Reynolds David Bell. These were all people to be admired and they were more than just names in the book.
I do hope that In the Still of the Night creates a very belated proper investigation into what I too consider to be a questionable death, giving Ronda Reynolds justice and her family and friends the peace and closure they deserve.
From a novice writer In the Still of the Night would be a passably good true crime selection. From Ann Rule, author of the flawless Small Sacrifices, Stranger Beside Me and her True Crimes Files series,among others, it's a bit of a disappointment. For one, I felt that the story was simply not strong enough to be a stand alone book and would have been better served being the central, title story of a True Crime Files volume. The sheer number of pages from being a stand alone book (over 400 pages) made the story feel a bit slow paced and slightly bogged down; compared to being an entry in a True Crime Files volume, where it would clock in at least half the number of pages.
My biggest letdown with In the Still of the Night was the unresolved conclusion. When I read true crime, and I invest my time and energy reading the story and getting to know the victim(s), I want to have closure in my mind that the victim(s) and families have justice. There is no such resolution in this book. It is through no fault of Ms. Rule's and she does lay out a substantial list of possible suspects at the conclusion of the book, as well as a reward for further information on Ronda Reynolds' death, but the unfinished business surrounding Ronda Reynolds' death makes me feel that perhaps this particular crime, or alleged crime, may not have been the best subject for a book.
On the upside, Ms. Rule became personally acquainted and involved with Ronda Reynolds' family and it shows in the pages of the book. I felt as though I grew to know her tenacious mother, Barb Thompson, as I flipped the pages and this admirable woman is to be admired. She does the memory of her daughter proud and I felt her heartache and pain as strongly as if they were my own.
I also believed that Ms. Rule did well in writing former police officer turned private investigator Jerry Berry, expert Marty Hughes and longtime friend to Ronda Reynolds David Bell. These were all people to be admired and they were more than just names in the book.
I do hope that In the Still of the Night creates a very belated proper investigation into what I too consider to be a questionable death, giving Ronda Reynolds justice and her family and friends the peace and closure they deserve.
May 7, 2011
This is, I think, one of the only books of Ann Rule's where the crime remains unsolved. I found this to be a great, if hard to believe, read. It is appalling to me that the justice system has so far failed Ronda Reynolds and her family. This is the story of Ronda Reynold's strange death, that spent so long being classified as a "suicide" that it seems the detectives and the crime scene investigators forgot that they were supposed to be doing a proper investigation. Ann Rule lays out the crime scene details and the strange behaviors of certain individuals so that even though the crime is not yet resolved, you get a pretty good idea of who is responsible for it. I feel badly for the Reynolds family and fervently hope that this crime is solved soon.
January 20, 2025
*spoiler*
While the crime remains unsolved, Anne Rule, grew close to Ronda’s mother, Barb and helped investigate for years. Anne Rule did a great job telling Ronda’s and Barb’s story, even if law enforcement seemed to mess up along the way. There were some good investigators and people helping Barb over the years and I believe Rule did a great job at outlining and giving credit where due. After reading this book, I believe Ronda was murdered. Actually - while reading this book, one of my favorite podcasts, The First Degree, covered Ronda’s story. I hope one day they catch and prosecute whoever did it.
While the crime remains unsolved, Anne Rule, grew close to Ronda’s mother, Barb and helped investigate for years. Anne Rule did a great job telling Ronda’s and Barb’s story, even if law enforcement seemed to mess up along the way. There were some good investigators and people helping Barb over the years and I believe Rule did a great job at outlining and giving credit where due. After reading this book, I believe Ronda was murdered. Actually - while reading this book, one of my favorite podcasts, The First Degree, covered Ronda’s story. I hope one day they catch and prosecute whoever did it.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 5, 2010
What a frustrating story. Horrible people, good writing.
February 24, 2013
I love ann rule books...
June 16, 2018
A disturbing, chilling, and unforgettable true crime drama from the master of this genre. Poor Ronda Reynolds: Bright, beautiful, talented, hard worker, yet a failure at choosing men. This is another example of my not wanting to complain about my boring life.
December 3, 2021
Someone in my bookclub gave me this to read since I told them I never read a true crime novel. I really enjoyed this!!! Ronda is found dead in the closet with a gun shot wound to her head. The police believe it’s a suicide and her mother is out to prove them wrong.
June 6, 2022
Another fascinating re-telling of a crime by this great writer. Twists and turns and alibi changes, scorned lovers and drug taking...4 death certificates...and still no answers as at the end of this book. I wonder what might have changed between publication and present day? Off to talk to Google.
August 10, 2019
always a good story by Ann. there is some updates now, just search for Ronda Reynolds and find out the next chapter!
December 19, 2023
Brilliant true crime, one I hadn't heard about. Available on Scribd/Everand now for any subscribers.
December 26, 2021
Rating 3.5/5
November 23, 2022
The tragic death of a young woman was ruled a suicide, then undetermined, then a suicide. The small town cops were incompetent. Eventually the one cop that worked with the woman’s mother, was drummed out of the force. The story is the mother’s determination to prove her daughter’s death was not a suicide. After many years, the coroner of the town was determined in court to be incompetent for the job. The actual murdered has never been found.
December 27, 2018
Did not enjoy this as much as other books I've read by Rule. Part of the problem is that the case remains unsolved. Rule has a habit of inserting her own opinions into her books, and that's okay, she's the author after all. However, with an unsolved case, her opinions left this reader wanting more.
That said, this is an interesting exploration of what happens when law enforcement flubs an investigation from the beginning. Reading this, I was often reminded of the Joe McGinniss' book Fatal Vision (great book btw) in which he tells the story of Jeffrey MacDonald, a MD and green beret who was accused and convicted of killing his family. Though, a jury convicted MacDonald, there were many errors in the investigation that tainted the process from day one, and without hard evidence...or rather tainted evidence, the possible scenario's abound. MacDonald still asserts his innocence.
That said, this is an interesting exploration of what happens when law enforcement flubs an investigation from the beginning. Reading this, I was often reminded of the Joe McGinniss' book Fatal Vision (great book btw) in which he tells the story of Jeffrey MacDonald, a MD and green beret who was accused and convicted of killing his family. Though, a jury convicted MacDonald, there were many errors in the investigation that tainted the process from day one, and without hard evidence...or rather tainted evidence, the possible scenario's abound. MacDonald still asserts his innocence.
July 9, 2016
Before picking this up, I'd only ever come across Ann Rule as a talking head on some of the many crime and investigation shows that I seem to be addicted to, and I'd never come across the strange death of Ronda Reynolds. The case is a fascinating one, the writing only so-so.
Set to divorce her 2nd husband of little under a year and to fly back to her family for Christmas, instead of stepping off a plane, Ronda was discovered in a closet in her home, underneath an electric blanket, dead of a gun shot wound to the head. Her not-so-grieving hubby, Ron, had apparently slept through the gun shot happening mere feet away from him, despite being a light sleeper, and happily told the police - who'd already screwed up the crime scene by moving evidence and letting important witnesses (Ron's three sons) leave without even trying to question them - that she'd committed suicide. And, despite the fact that people who knew her rubbished the idea that she was suicidal, and despite the fact that the circumstances and evidence didn't fit his story, he was believed. And so started her mother's long fight to get the facts straight - it's this fight that is documented here.
While Ronda's mother, Barb, and her few allies eventually succeeded in having Ronda's death ruled as a homicide, the fight to solve her murder is ongoing - and not helped one bit by the fact that a large part of the evidence collected as part of the police 'investigation' had since been destroyed (much to the horror of one of the only detectives actually trying to do his job, who was eventually hounded out of the force).
It should be apparent to anyone with a working brain that Ronda's deceitful and grasping hubby (he was already cheating on her with his ex-wife, and was more concerned about collecting her life insurance than by her death) and his creepy and probably animal killing eldest son should have at least been investigated, but it seems that's far too much to ask for from the authorities.
While the case itself is fascinating, Ann Rule's writing is less so. Simple and pedestrian, Rule is no Capote (as a former detective, I expect there wasn't much call for flair in Rule's crime reports, which has carried over into this book), and there's also a lot of emphasis (too much, for me) put on the friendship she struck up with the grieving Barb, which no doubt coloured her opinions on the personalities involved (and therefore how she wrote about them).
And, while this is no fault of Rule's, the lack of any sort of resolution (even through my disappearing down an internet rabbit-hole in search of updates) also bugged.
So, in all, this was an interesting case somewhat let down by uninteresting writing.
Set to divorce her 2nd husband of little under a year and to fly back to her family for Christmas, instead of stepping off a plane, Ronda was discovered in a closet in her home, underneath an electric blanket, dead of a gun shot wound to the head. Her not-so-grieving hubby, Ron, had apparently slept through the gun shot happening mere feet away from him, despite being a light sleeper, and happily told the police - who'd already screwed up the crime scene by moving evidence and letting important witnesses (Ron's three sons) leave without even trying to question them - that she'd committed suicide. And, despite the fact that people who knew her rubbished the idea that she was suicidal, and despite the fact that the circumstances and evidence didn't fit his story, he was believed. And so started her mother's long fight to get the facts straight - it's this fight that is documented here.
While Ronda's mother, Barb, and her few allies eventually succeeded in having Ronda's death ruled as a homicide, the fight to solve her murder is ongoing - and not helped one bit by the fact that a large part of the evidence collected as part of the police 'investigation' had since been destroyed (much to the horror of one of the only detectives actually trying to do his job, who was eventually hounded out of the force).
It should be apparent to anyone with a working brain that Ronda's deceitful and grasping hubby (he was already cheating on her with his ex-wife, and was more concerned about collecting her life insurance than by her death) and his creepy and probably animal killing eldest son should have at least been investigated, but it seems that's far too much to ask for from the authorities.
While the case itself is fascinating, Ann Rule's writing is less so. Simple and pedestrian, Rule is no Capote (as a former detective, I expect there wasn't much call for flair in Rule's crime reports, which has carried over into this book), and there's also a lot of emphasis (too much, for me) put on the friendship she struck up with the grieving Barb, which no doubt coloured her opinions on the personalities involved (and therefore how she wrote about them).
And, while this is no fault of Rule's, the lack of any sort of resolution (even through my disappearing down an internet rabbit-hole in search of updates) also bugged.
So, in all, this was an interesting case somewhat let down by uninteresting writing.
November 20, 2018
Started off great but towards the end it failed to deliver any real anwers. Disappointed😔
Displaying 1 - 30 of 375 reviews