3.5 stars (lots of details to keep track of) SPOILER ALERTWhat a heart-breaking story! Bonnie Von Stein is a woman who prides herself on a stoicism that reveals only inner strength. She does not share her personal life with anyone, she never shows outward emotion. She comes across as composed and collected...an intact woman who handles what life throws her way: marriage to a younger man ( consistent cheater who eventually abandons Bonnie and their two children), working to maintain a home for those two children, even when food is scarce and her work takes her from the pre-schoolers for hours, even days at a time. Bonnie is not heartless. She simply fiercely protects her privacy by concealing emotions and opinions.Bonnie's children learn this stoicism from their mother. And at least one of them is damaged by it. Christopher, her oldest, has a keen sense of abandonment...from his father leaving, his mothers work schedule, and the inability of any adult in his life to relate to him through word and emotion. Chris finds release in the fantasy world of Dungeons and Dragons, where he creates a character who goes about powerfully unnoticed. Drugs and alcohol also give Chris a release. And when combined with D & D, Chris breaks from reality. He shares a fantasy with his game partners that he could be rich--if his parents were dead. With inherited wealth, Chris elaborates, he could buy a large house in North Raleigh that he would share with his friends so that the could do drugs and play D & D 24/7. He would also buy his buddies cars.And so the plot hatches...McGinnis came to this story after trial and sentencing of the three murderers/conspirators. He comes at the invitation of Bonnie to set the record straight--to remove her and her daughter from suspicion. But the story is so complicated that he (and his readers) is left certain that there are parts of the story yet to be told...there are people involved in ways that investigators never considered...or determined.I was grabbed by the story of defense attorneys v psychiatrist, both working to protect Bonnie, Chris, and the case. There was a point were Chris confessed to officials and his shrink, but Bonnie was still staunchly defending him, absolutely refusing to believe Chris had any part in the crime. But Chris had come clean and longed to confess to his mother. His psychiatrist agreed that he needed this; without confronting his mother, without the release of the guilt and emotion (feelings he was trained by Bonnie to restrain), Chris was a suicide threat. But Bonnie was to be a witness for the defense. Her belief in her son's innocence was total and unfailing. Though the defense attorneys knew Chris carried responsibility, they wanted to keep him from death row...they needed Bonnie's testimony. The stress between these two forces--truth and mental health--was heartbreaking. That anyone would have to make such choices and carry the burden of with outcome weighed on me, a reader.
This book is obviously well-written, but I did not like it. There were too many unanswered questions. I particularly disliked the fact that the jury sentenced one boy to death based on hear-say, incosistent evidence of his supposed two co-conspirators who both had the obvious motive of saving their own skins. So yes, in the United States of America, it is perfectly possible to be sentenced to death without a single shred of physical evidence. That in itself should be argument enough to abolish the death penalty. In the summer of 1988, Bonnie is awakened by the screams of her husband Lieth being bashed to death. She herself barely survives. Down the hall, her daughter Angela sleeps the whole thing through and does not awaken until the police show up. Her son son Chris, away at campus, becomes hysterical but can't find his car keys nor his car and is driven home by the police. The murder investigation moves interminably slowly, until someone off the radar makes a deal and confesses.The problems with how the story played out are mainly the fact that the dinner Lieth at between 7.0 and 8.30 pm is undigested and Bonnie did not call for help until 4.30 am, by which time dinner should have passed through the digestive system. The other issue, of course, is how Angela could possibly sleep through a violen attack on her parents. I did not find these issues sufficiently answered. However, this is real life, and in real life, all ends to not tie up neatly and the truth isn't always told but the people who could tell it.
What do You think about Cruel Doubt (1991)?
Disclaimer ... I live in Wasilla, AK, so I didn't appreciate this author's hatchet job on the Palin and Heath families. It causes me to doubt his accuracy. That aside, he can be a skillful writer and I've read most of his books. This one was new to me and it did give me some good escapism for a couple of days. If true crime is not your cup o' tea, don't read it. It is a compelling and frustrating case, to say the least. I come away shaking my head at the story. It truly was, and still is, surreal! Good book for true crime aficionados.
—Jeanine
Fluctuated between two and three stars. Story hard to beat, writing excellent throughout, however...so much writing. I suppose a thick book sells better, but so much redundancy. This said, the story deserves five stars I suppose. McGinniss is good, great even, it is his privilege, as a master storyteller, to describe at length if he wishes. I don't have to read it at all, which is my privilege, and my choice was to read it all, so there you have it. It was worth my time.On a side note, I did learn a few tricks reading Joe. If I may call him Joe. He's crafty with plot and clever with description. For all the underlining and starred margins, thanks, Joe.
—Mike Savage
Well researched book. McGinniss spoke to most of the people involved in this crime, and it appears he also had access to the diary of the mother of the young man who had her husband (his stepfather) murdered and tried to murder her as well.This is one of those crimes that we will never know the whole story about. Nobody is telling the whole truth. That I am sure of. But the whole family is so odd, it's clear you can't rely on the emotions or reactions of the players to decide guilt or innocence. I think McGinniss was pretty fair in his telling, and left the reader to make their own judgements.I thought, however, it was a little too long. It seemed to drag, and by the end I was tired of it and skimmed the last few chapters. It could have used more editing.
—Lilly
