The Killing of Bonnie Garland: A Question of Justice

by Willard Gaylin

A powerful and passionate indictment of the use of psychiatric testimony in criminal cases.
--The Cleveland Plain DealerA year after Richard Herrin confessed to killing his girlfriend, Bonnie Garland, he was found not guilty of murder. His crime, he pleaded, was committed under extreme emotional disturbance, excusing him from maximum responsibility. He was convicted on the reduced charge of manslaughter.

In this incisive examination of the murder, the trial, and its aftermath, a distinguished psychiatrist addresses the issue of the insanity defense. He shows how psychiatric testimony can distort court proceedings, and brilliantly analyzes the conflict between the individual rights of the accused and society's right to justice.

Genres: True Crime, Nonfiction

384 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1982

Reviews

[Femi · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book tells the true story of a young man that killed his girlfriend and later used the insanity plea. The author also gives a brief history of how the insanity defense has been used in the past and how it has been manipulated. In this particular case, I think it helped reduce the sentence of a man that was smaart enough to know he could use the insanity defense to his benefit. Unfortunately, the author got too wordy and stands on his soap box a little too long and could have cut aboup 100 pages out of this book.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Non-fictional account of, well, the killing of Bonnie Garland, the trial afterwards, and the general repercussions. Very interesting, especially for an analytic book assigned in class. There are definitely some extremely tense moments, though...

[Victoria Lie]

Made me reexamine some of my own ideas about criminal justice, retribution, rehabilitation and forgiveness.

[Andi · Rating 1 out of 5]

Painful to read. Not my cup of tea at all. The guy drowns you in facts (far too many names to keep track of) then peppers in these long theoretical ideations, that aren’t really necessary. Like a chapter on what truth is...I️ mean, I️ speak English and can read, I️ don’t need paragraphs describing what truth is.

The interviews were interesting, but again peppered in with theories, so you just get into something, then your train of thought is lost. He doesn’t give the reader the option to form any of their own opinions.

It’s a bit like reading a professional journal of sorts, has a ton of content, but is a drag to read. I️ gave up.

[Jessica Stern · Rating 4 out of 5]

A compelling read.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

True story of the Yale Murder.