Linda K.

Eye-opening

Revisado: 06-07-20

The "Cadillac Desert" of the twenty-first century. Agriculture in the Central Valley of California involves so many problems related to the environment that no one would have thought big-time theft would step in and complicate these issues. Simply fascinating.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 12 personas

Entertaining and Inductive

Revisado: 09-12-14

Would you recommend this audiobook to a friend? If so, why?

If you read this book, you'll be able to spot the next con artist to cross your path.

Who was your favorite character and why?

Tony, the unwilling, "sane," madhouse inmate, has all the ingenuousness and charm of your favorite cousin, but he probably is, as Ronson surmises, a psychopath. Despite that, you want to let him loose to find out for sure. Maybe he's not. Maybe he needs someone to care about him. Psychopaths depend on the rest of us thinking like that.

What three words best describe Jon Ronson’s performance?

Inductive, anecdotal, hearfelt

Was there a moment in the book that particularly moved you?

I really wanted Tony to be freed, simply because I don't know how sane people would convince the gatekeepers in a madhouse of their sanity. As Ronson goes to bat for Tony, the frustration of the struggle is clear and affecting.

Any additional comments?

Ronson's organization is inductive, which is counter to the style of most nonfiction works: however, as he launches into each anecdote, he creates a personal connection to the subject in each one that makes me interested in whatever point he is attempting to make. And, miracle of miracles, each discussion leads very naturally to the next anecdote. It's like hanging around with friends, telling stories about quirky co-workers.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

unbalanced but interesting

Revisado: 09-12-14

Is there anything you would change about this book?

The focus is heavily on failures, but overall, the anecdotes are interesting. Readers must ask why the author doesn't include more cases that were successfully prosecuted.

What was your reaction to the ending? (No spoilers please!)

The author's rationale for this branch of forensic science is satisfying, underlining the fact that most murders are committed by people who know their victims. If more investigators understood this fact, more murders would be solved. To some extent, Brown indicts law enforcement as inept in collecting, storing, and producing for trial the necessary evidence. Justice is lost somewhere between the crime event and the identification of the perpetrator.

What three words best describe Pat Brown’s performance?

Personal, sobering, revealing.

What else would you have wanted to know about Pat Brown and Bob A. Andelman ’s life?

I would like to know more about Brown's training.

Any additional comments?

This is different from John Douglas's books, in which he tells only about the Bureau's successes. I enjoyed his books, but readers wouldn't guess from reading them that there were any unsolved cases left.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona