Regular price: $24.95
Buy Now with 1 Credit
Buy Now for $24.95
More a voyeuristic look at serial killers than a look at their psychology and the criminal profilers that investigate them.
2 of 2 people found this review helpful
Disclaimer: No Audible review acknowledges this (the Amazon ones do), but evidently this book is identical to a previous book by the same author, they just re-released it years later under a different name and didn't acknowledge it's actually a reprint. Pretty shameful on the publisher's part.
Manhunters is a very comprehensive look at different serial killers, mainly those in the United States in the 20th century (though a chapter at the end is devoted to killers in other countries). There is talk about most of the notorious killers you've heard of, plus many you'll probably be surprised to hear you haven't (Charles Ng, Fred West, Dean Corrl). It's somewhat organized, a somewhat chronological order and loosely organized into chapters based on motives or categories. The book is also threaded together by details on the development of psychological profiling and other technique to find serial killers. It's a bit odd that some mentions about killers are a very brief paragraph and others go on for a very long time and you're never quite aware of which way it will go. The author has written extensively about serial killers before and does seem fairly knowledgeable about the subject. Overall, it's a decent introduction to dozens and dozens of different cases.
From a logical side, I had some big problems though. Things seemed very...unscientific.
1) He thinks every serial killer is sexually motivated. "Every" is not an exaggeration there, he considers it a prerequisite to being a serial killer. He even assumes that a doctor that did nothing sexual and just overdosed his patients on morphine to be sexually motivated. He embraces a lot of Freud theories that are widely discredited in psychology today.
2) He doesn't really explain psychological profiling or other modern procedures at all. He always relies on it being some panacea for crime and psychological profiling is a really interesting topic to me, but he doesn't explain the logic behind it all. You hear some amazing hits that profilers have made, but there's no explanation of the reasoning. But things just feel like "cold reading", the same process that bogus psychics use to appear to talk to the dead. A profiler will say that the killer probably owns a "police-like dog" or is "redheaded" among several other details. A lot of these end up being amazing descriptions, but you get no statistics about what these people based their guesses on or how accurate they actually were. It could very easily be a case of cherry picking. I'm sure there is more logic going into the process, but you get none of that here. It just feels like a lot of gut instincts.
3) He keeps talking about serial killing being an "epidemic" in the 20th century and something that never happened in civilization before, like it's a completely unique and new phenomenon. This is a theme he touches on again and again. He never acknowledges that today: record keeping is better (so we are actually aware of repeat killers) or that police methods are better (so serial killings can actually be linked). The truth of the matter is that homicide rate is at an all-time low in society today. The Boston Strangler or John Wayne Gacy may always be oddities, but it's weird to say that people that deranged were never around during the dark ages or the wild west.
4) There are 2 things we mentions that are so ridiculously unscientific, that I would not have read the book had I known the offer believed in them. He mentions that the Gainesville Ripper claimed to be possessed by demons. The author actually believes that is true. Not like "the guy thought he heard voices and was crazy" explanation, but that the man was literally under the control of a supernatural entity. His justification? One time, the Ripper claimed to pray to the demon that possessed him and magically found a door to be unlocked. The idea that he endorses this theory is ridiculous. The other absurd thing he says is in the epilogue. He goes on a completely irrelevant rant about "biomorphic fields", which is a pseudoscience that is basically equivalent to telepathy. He says this is why we may see a decrease in the rate of serial killing in the future. It's such a nonsense idea, I wish that I knew the author believed that ahead of time so it saved me the time of listening to anything he had to say.
The narrator on Audible was decent. He kinda sounds like he always has a throat lozenge or cough drop in his mouth, which actually isn't too bad. He doesn't have to do a lot of different voices, which tends to be the worst part about narrations in my opinion.
3 of 4 people found this review helpful