Talking with Serial Killers: A chilling study of the world's most evil people

Product Information

Firstly, the title is more than a little inaccurate given that Berry-Dee doesn't actually talk to most of the women discussed in the book. And quite a few of them aren't actually "serial" killers. A large portion of this book is just stating facts about female killers rather than any actual in depth discussion about them. Christopher Berry-Dee gives very detailed insight into the lives of these people, explores many of the murders and their family and communication with them I was fascinated to read it because the subject matter is right up my street, and having read the author's credentials, had really high hopes. However, unfortunately this book turned out to be absolutely dreadful, populist claptrap. The author was much more interested in judging and self-aggrandising than providing a good narrative. The book was terribly written with zero insights that you might expect from the 'expert' writer.

This book like his others also has plenty of grammar and spelling mistakes. I'm sure no one reads these before they are published. Furthermore, by referring to these killers as monsters the author somehow draws a line between us and them. It creates an illusion these killers are not humans, they must be something else. By doing that it unfortunately sends a misleading message that serial killers can be easily spotted, that they are not someone's wife/husband, daughter/son but this odd entity.talking with serial killers' my ass. more like 'incoherent rambling about serial killers while stroking my ego'. This is not to excuse the acts or to sympathize with the individuals mentioned in the books. However, it makes me question how someone so judgemental already decided on what they thought about these serial killers was able to get close to them, corresponded with them so many years before finally meeting them? Even though this book is titled as Talking with Serial Killers, the only talking done is by the author. Despite few quotes it does not introduce the perspective or narrative of the serial killer, rather it provides author's generic view and facts you can easily find on wikipedia.

I enjoyed the book. It provides a lot of detail into the killers childhood, who and how they killed and the law proceedings after. However, the wording of the novel really annoyed me. The writer made many comments about the killers physical appearance, use of the word ‘ugly’, or outdated slurs. Of course they’re bad people but isn’t the author supposed to be a professional? Why does the author write like that when he’s an expert and director of Criminology research? I thought I would really enjoy this book as I love watching documentaries like this on TV, but it turns out I struggled to keep focus on this book and was easily distracted.I'm not sure what he is trying to compensate for, but the whole book seems to be an attempt to convince the reader how much he despises women who kill (and by the end, I suspect how much he just hates women, with his pleas to men to be careful and his constant question about whether the "female of the species is more deadly than the male" - don't remember that depth of analysis from my criminology modules of my degree...). However, he wants to be clear that he really hates the ugly ones... Heres what has me torn when thinking about this book. I enjoy reading about true crime and behavioural analysis of serial killers. The mind is an incredible thing so to think it can be so unhinged to drive a person to be like this is something I enjoy reading the how and why behind it. Although the book gives a lot of factual information and some conversations and quotes from the killers I felt it was quite disjointed. The author at times got his facts mixed up, there are grammar errors which were hard to ignore, on many occasions you get a statement from the author stating if it wasn’t for his interviews and the book certain facts about the murder cases would not have been resolved however when you look into these claims they are not entirely true. Secondly, 'Talking [about] Female (Serial) Killers' doesn't appear to have been thoroughly proofread or edited to any great degree. One more than slightly confusing instance came where the author writes that not enough evidence was found to take a case to trial in 1996; however, in the next paragraph it is written that, after a year or so of police work, the case eventually comes to trial in 1967. Instances such as this occur fairly frequently throughout the book. Mă intrigau motivele unei femei, deși sunt arhicunoscute, de aceea am fost foarte atentă la interviul cu Aileen Carol Wuornos. Se pare că femeile reprezintă doar 2% din numărul infractorilor care au fost condamnați la moarte în SUA, un procentaj mic, dar înfricoșător dacă dai la o parte cortina.

THE TITLE: is also misleading. There is very little content dedicated to any actual conversations he has had with female serial killers. There are one or two bits, but overall, the book doesn't really get into that much at all. In fact, it is more just a collection of information about some female serial killers that have existed. A lot of this is just men hating women, sexist remarks and the like, but I suppose should you really expect any less from serial killers? Berry-Dee uses much of it to pimp his other works, with the rest consisting of awkwardly prosaic lists of names and dates, and name/age/eye colour/hair colour descriptions of every individual. Cu toții au avut parte de traume în copilărie, dar cel care mi-a rămas în minte este Arthur John Shawcross - a ucis 53 de femei, le-a abuzat sexual atât înainte, cât și după crimă, iar unora le-a mâncat anumite părți ale corpului.Like, I don't care. If I'm interested I'll go to the front of the book where most authors list their previous books or are Google your other books. I don't need reminding every five seconds.