To use our price comparison to get the cheapest price, please click on the "Find the Cheapest Price" button located above for Famous Crimes Revisited: From Sacco-Vanzetti to O.J. Simpson by Henry C. Lee, Jerry Labriola (ISBN-10: 1928782140, ISBN-13: 9781928782148).
At this time we have not yet written a review for Famous Crimes Revisited: From Sacco-Vanzetti to O.J. Simpson by Henry C. Lee, Jerry Labriola (ISBN-10: 1928782140, ISBN-13: 9781928782148). Please continue to keep checking back to this page as we are constantly adding reviews.
Summaries and Customer Reviews are supplied by Amazon.com
In "Famous Crimes Revisited," renowned forensic scientist, Dr. Henry Lee, and Jerry Labriola, M.D. re-examine the O.J.Simpson, Vincent Foster, JonBenet Ramsey, Lindbergh baby, Sam Sheppard, JFK, and Sacco-Vanzetti cases. Surprising questions are raised and rare photographs provided.
Forensic Buff
| Customer Rating:  | | This the the first forensic book I got. Things have advanced since then. But it is good reading. |
Be well informed.
| Customer Rating: | | Doctor Lee brings you to and through the crime scenes so much better than a TV show. |
How Past Errors Continue Today
| Customer Rating: | Dr. Henry Lee is Chief Emeritus of the Connecticut State Police Forensic Science Laboratory and has extensive credentials. He investigated over 6,000 major crime cases. Dr. Jerry Labriola is an Assistant Professor at the University of Connecticut Medical School and has practiced medicine for over 30 years. He is an experienced writer. "Sam Constant" is a fictional character who expresses the sentiments of the time. The `Prologue' explains the style of writing for this book, a way to journey to past events and comment on them using the latest scientific knowledge. The authors believe the same technical and judgmental errors continue to this day (p.xiv). External factors affect the legal process. This book has no index.
Section 1 deal with the Sacco-Vanzetti case, both were executed for a robbery-murder they most likely did not commit. There was a "highly unusual" trial for a lesser crime prior to a major crime (p.33). Vanzetti was delivering fish to his customers at the time of the crime (p.41). The head of the Massachusetts State Police believed they were innocent (p.43). Boston agents of the Department of Justice believed the crime was the work of professional gangsters (p.49). There were problems with eyewitness evidence (Chapter 5). There was tampering and suppression of evidence (p.64). Chapter 6 discusses the ballistic evidence, and the lack of a chain of custody. Both the shells and bullets could have been tampered with (pp.78-79). Vanzetti's revolver was not the guard's gun, he was framed (pp.90-91). The claim of "consciousness of guilt" seems to be a euphemism for prejudice (p.91). Sacco & Vanzetti lied about their activities to hide their anarchistic beliefs. Reporters thought the trial was not fairly and impartially conducted.
Section 2 covers five famous flawed cases. Edmond Locard noted the existence of trace evidence (p.103). The footprints outside the Lindbergh home were not measured, photographed, or cast in plaster (p.113). There were no fingerprints anywhere in the nursery (p.114)! A year later some of the ransom money was traced to Bruno Hauptmann (he entered the country illegally and had a criminal record in Germany). Hauptmann's writing was similar to the writing on the ransom note, but document examiners for the Secret Service and Army say Hauptmann did not write the ransom notes (p.118). [This is not an exact science.] Dr. Lee has 24 questions about this case (pp.126-129). One question should be about the pajamas worn by the baby; whoever had them was the kidnapper. Dr. Sam Sheppard was convicted due to commercial rivalry and prejudice. Coroner Gerber was out to get "the Sheppard clan", whose suburban hospital competed with the Cleveland Hospital. Dr. Paul L. Kirk's 1954 examination of the murder scene (after the trial!) documented the facts [Paul Holmes' 1961 book].
The assassination of JFK was never solved, Oswald was neither convicted or even indicted. David Wrone's "The Zapruder Film" explains why Oswald was in the doorway when the first shot was fired, and two films from across the street show nobody at that 6th floor window. [George O'Toole's 1975 book "The Assassination Tapes" provided the evidence to reopen the investigation. The "magic bullet" was not recovered at the crime scene, but was found (or planted) at Parkland Hospital (p.152). Was Vincent Foster a suicide or murder victim? There are arguments for each theory (pp. 175-177). The Starr Report said suicide (p.165). Was JonBenet Ramsey killed by an intruder or insider? The arguments for each theory are on pages 177-178. It is still unsolved.
Section 3 discusses the O. J. Simpson trial. OJ went from a sports hero to a reviled villain in just a few weeks. Has this ever happened before? There was racial bias over the trial and verdict, the facts weren't important! Nicole Brown Simpson's 911 transcript is on pages 189-195. No one was assaulted or arrested but it made people believe OJ was guilty. [Was this tamer than some Jerry Springer shows?] The grand jury was cancelled because they refused to indict OJ for murder; then they used a preliminary hearing to indict OJ. Chapter 1 does not mention that Nicole's boyfriend was about the same size and age as Ron Goldman (mistaken identity?). Chapter 2 has discrepancies in the time line from other books. Fuhrman found a still wet glove at 6am (p.207). There were problems in falsification of a legal document, and mishandling and/or fabrication of evidence (p.211). The Fourth Amendment bans illegally obtained evidence. This safeguards people against government intrusions (pp.212-213). There were conflicts in the testimony of Vannatter and Fuhrman (p.217). The coroner said the time of death was after 11pm (p.219). Two different types of stab wounds were found. Where was the bloody clothing, shoes, and murder weapon (p.219)? Why was a bloody glove placed in the backyard?
Chapter 4 deals with the trial. Robert Shapiro assembled a "dream team" of experts for the defense (p.226). The defense said evidence that exonerated OJ had been disregarded (p.228). Evidence collection did not always follow protocol (p.229). There were problems in the evidence that suggested planting (p.230). The use of videotapes from this highly publicized case provided evidence on the procedures (p.231). Dr. Lee has 16 questions about the facts in this case (pp.238-239). [The answer to #16 may be that the Bronco was parked there after the limo drive exited.] Chapter 5 discusses the opposing viewpoints of the major evidence in this trial. There were many examples where the prosecution claims did not match what the defense experts observed (p.243). The `Epilogue' explains how public opinion (manufactured by the media) affects a trial. There was suspicion of evidence suppression, tampering with evidence, perjury, and destruction or falsification of records (p.250). While science has advanced, fallible human beings can still make errors.
The `Appendix' discusses the past, present, and future of forensic science. It provides an outline for the general reader. [The paragraph on "voice-prints" may be outdated.] The `Bibliography' contains the names of books and articles on the seven cases in this book. [It does not list James Neff's "The Wrong Man", or "Killing Time" by Donald Freed and Raymond Briggs.]
|
The worst forensic book I've ever read
| Customer Rating:  | | I really enjoy reading different experts' views on famous cases, past and present. Although that is the premise of this book, I did not enjoy reading it. The first sign of trouble is the editor's note explaining the "Sam Constant." If the literary device must be explained to the reader, then it shouldn't be used. The forensic case files in the book are very thin and Dr. Lee either breezes past each one (his excuse being that he didn't need his "time machine" - he had been there for the trial in real time) or just lists questions that have already been raised for years. He offers no solutions and sometimes, he doesn't even offer theories or suspicions. The chapter about OJ takes bizarre disbelief to a new level, and when Sam Constant is mixed into this situation, chaos reigns. The Sam Constant character is really the worst part of this book. The sections featuring him are incredibly absurd, and it is truly vexing that, while Dr. Lee barely scratches the surface of the crimes, he lists in painful detail everywhere he goes, everyone he meets, what is in his room, even what he ate at meals. If Dr. Lee wanted to write a novel, that's fine, he should write a novel. This book was supposed to be about true cases, but the hapless reader(victim) is duped. Few books are written so badly that they actually make you angry, but this is one of them. |
Good forensics, with a twist...
| Customer Rating: | A good, quick read if you are interested in forensics. Be aware there is a very different approach to this book then any other forensic book I have ever read, and I have read alot of them. Dr. Lee gives you the dynamics of each case in point. The cases are Sacco-Vanzetti (from the 1920's), the Lindbergh baby, Sam Sheppard (the story that spawned the movie "the Fugitive" and the TV series by the same name), President Kennedy, Vincent Foster, Jon Bennet Ramsey, and OJ Simpson. Here is the twist. He travels back in time to sit through these trials, not to decide if the verdict is correct, but to see how immature our justice system was (or is... Simpson trial). He shows how prejudices, crime scenes and evidence flawed the cases. He talks about conspiracies, planting incriminating evidence, bumbling crimes scenes, and more. It gets better. Not only does he travel back in time, even back just 8 years (1994 OJ Simpson), but even to trials he was present at(Again, OJ Simpson where he was hired by the defence). Which is not to say is a bad thing.. BUT, he has a buddy that he runs into when he goes back in time. This is where I was ambivilent. I could not decide if it was clever or unnecessary. This 'buddy' was Sam Constant. And although Dr. Lee was always unseen, Sam Constant could be seen to people at will. Sam represented public opinion of the times. He showed prejudices and followed medias. Whatever was the publics main thought, such was his.
The largest sections of this book was of Sacco-Vanzetti and OJ Simpson. Very small sections on the others, which was the main reson for me to get this book in the first place. It certainly was not a poor read, and Dr. Lee, who just sticks to his science and does not judge, is a very intelligent man. His insights are very interesting, which thankfully were present and made the book worth the read for me. I suppose you will have to decide for yourself. |
|
