The Cases That Haunt Us: From Jack the Ripper to JonBenet Ramsey, the FBI's Legendary Mindhunter Sheds Light on the Mysteries That Won't Go Away

That half star is because there's no bibliography. I especially felt that lack for the two cases with which I am most familiar: Jack the Ripper and Lizzie Borden. It would have been nice to know if the authors had read all of the same books on those two that I have.

Before this book I knew no more about the JonBenet Ramsey murder than the tabloid headlines I'd read in supermarket checkout lines (it happened at a bad time for me). I do not feel that Mr. Douglas skewed the chapter in the Ramseys' favor because he was a paid consultant. I've had some experience researching malpractice and injury liability cases from when I was a medical librarian. I didn't look for only that information which favored my patron's side. I also looked for show more information that favored the other side -- and reported both to my patron. I wouldn't have been doing my job if I hadn't. I believe that Mr. Douglas considers the Ramseys innocent for the reasons and evidence he presented.

None of the photographs are of the victims, alive or dead, except for the drawings of the heads of the Ripper victims on the reproduction of the old Whitechapel map in the photo section. The other photos are of the 9/25/1988 'Dear Boss' letter signed 'Jack the Ripper,' presented on the same page as the 'Mr. Lusk' letter; the Borden house above its floor plan; aerial view of the Lindbergh home above the ransom note; two photos of that house with the homemade ladder used in the kidnapping; part of the Zodiac's cryptogram above a Zodiac letter; the Ramsey ransom note above a photo of the house; and a floor plan of the Ramsey house.

The profiling information was very interesting, and the descriptions of jurisdiction problems are troubling. Fair warning: if you want wild speculations presented as facts, this is not the book for you. show less

Really enjoyed this, a new (if you can call a book from 2000 new) take on some old unsolved crimes. Unfortunately, this book doesn’t solve anything, just looks at the cases from a different angle. My issue is that I like closure, and I’m definitely not getting it here. But it was interesting to read a new take on some old stuff.

You might recognize Douglas as the creator of the FBI's profiling and victimology systems, in which learning about the victim's lifestyle helps to connect to the killer, and by looking for patterns in a serial killer's methods, you have a better idea of who to look for.
In this book, the authors examine some famous cases, with Douglas including what he would have looked for if he were investigating. Included are the cases of Jack the Ripper, Lizzie Borden, JonBenet Ramsey, the Lindbergh baby and the Black Dahlia. Even if you think you know these cases well, there's information here that you've likely never come across. And if you've read about the recent testing in the Ripper case that gave a clear answer as the to the killer, Douglas's show more profile of the likely killer (the book was published in 2000) is spot on. show less

Of course, since this book is a decade & more old, we have a much better understanding of a few of these cases. This whole book could be called, “Police: corrupt fuckups.” I have to agree. In all of these cases, the police are the buffoons or villains of the story. Some of John’s answers were a little far fetched, including a logical fallacy—if this other case has never been solved, why do you think this one should be. Total non-answer. Good book, if a little out of date.

Really enjoyed this, a new (if you can call a book from 2000 new) take on some old unsolved crimes. Unfortunately, this book doesn’t solve anything, just looks at the cases from a different angle. My issue is that I like closure, and I’m definitely not getting it here. But it was interesting to read a new take on some old stuff.

Some of the cases were interesting, but the sheer bombast of the author was really off-putting. Especially in light of recent studies that have shown profiling, and particularly homology (the idea that similar people will commit similar crimes), is unreliable and not an effective law enforcement tool.

Really enjoyed this, a new (if you can call a book from 2000 new) take on some old unsolved crimes. Unfortunately, this book doesn’t solve anything, just looks at the cases from a different angle. My issue is that I like closure, and I’m definitely not getting it here. But it was interesting to read a new take on some old stuff.