My Life Among the Serial Killers : Inside the Minds of the World's Most Notorious Murderers

Rating:
Summary: Arrogant and Erroneous Author
Review: Count me in among the other reviewers of this book who found the writing poor and the writer pretentious. Morrison is constantly bragging about being an attractive woman of science, and seems bristled and condescending when prison guards react negatively towards a surreal reaction to hypnotism used for uncovering memories, a method even the most prestigious scientists find dubious and controversial.

Morrison makes countless unfounded opinions and inferences regarding her subjects and their intentions. For example, she claims she gradually realized that a prisoner who can't spell, actually misspells in his letters as a way of getting attention. Apparently murdering several people wasn't a sufficient cry for the limelight.

In "studying" the John Wayne Gacy crime for the defense, she interviews Jeff Rignall, maybe the only survivor of Gacy's rampage, and remarks that she "didn't gain a huge amount of insight into Gacy." Rignall ended up being the defense's star witness for the insanity plea.

But perhaps the most egregious error of this book is that this so-called expert on serial killers completely misrepresents the facts of history's most notorious serial killers. She writes of Gilles de Rais and his unimaginably horrific crimes in exploitative detail without even a mention of the fact that his confession was extorted with severe torture and that he was later exonerated of his crimes. Of Elizabeth Bathory, she writes that she killed her victims to bathe in their blood to preserve her beauty, something that never was mentioned in her trial and which was a myth only perpetuated in legenis widely discredited as a myth. This misinformation is from a self-proclaimed serial killer expert!!

One of the most revealing lines of this book is in her interview with Ed Gain, an interview of about 10 utterly mundane statements and an interview that was touted as the last interview with Ed Gain in the promotion of this book, she "added that I was a doctor and I wasn't going to sensationalize his already sensationalized life." But that is exactly what she does with these men.


Rating:
Summary: Interesting in parts, but not really that good overall
Review: Dr. Morrison has a 100 lifetimes of experience with serial killers. She's interviewed and studied many of them including John Wayne Gacy and Bobby Joe Long. She has even been able to conduct mail correspondence with some of them for years. What has she learned from all of this? Quite a bit for sure. She is convinced that serial killers are essentially created in utero. Genetic anomalies create serial killers not parental upbringing or life experience. Dr. Morrison arrives at this conclusion essentially because the data she has collected throughout the years has convinced her that head injuries, childhood experience, social status, etc. does not consistently have much to do with producing a serial killer.

Is she right? In my opinion, she is partially right, but her exclusion of other reasons is simply not good science. No doubt certain people are genetically predisposed to engage in antisocial behavior and even murder, but Dr. Morrison's assertion that serial killers are essentially created in the womb sounds bogus to me. Genetic predisposition can only be operated upon by environmental factors to engender certain behaviors, yet the author dismisses all the killers' life experiences as not significant enough to contribute to their actions. As she points out, it is true that the serial killers that she studied do not have a consistent set of life experiences, but she does not even account for the fact that different life experiences affect different people differently.

Finally, her thesis is not helped by the fact that her writing is obnoxiously self-righteous. She portrays many people she has dealt with including lawyers, writers, and fellow psychiatrists as incompetent, misguided, and dishonest. Her characterizations may be correct, but since she portrays herself consistently as an intrepid, truth-seeking scientist whose views simply must be correct, her writing often comes off as arrogant and hollow.

Don't waste your time on this one. Get Hunting Humans by Elliott Leyton instead for an interesting viewpoint.

Rating:
Summary: Not for the faint of heart
Review: For those interested in serial killers or in understanding the human condition in some of its darkest forms, this book offers a number of wonderful insights. Details from interviews with many of the most notorious killers of our time are both fascinating and truly repulsive. The main reason I gave this book a four instead of a two or three was because of the hard facts that were included from Morrison's interviews and the fact that she did not sensationalize the crimes or criminals, she merely offered the facts. However, it was difficult at times to get past Morrison's self-important attitude and her soap box discussions of the inadequacies she perceives in other psychiatrists and psychologists and many of the police forces she encountered. But Morrison does offer a plausible explanation for the formation of a serial killer, one that will most likely not be proven until advances in science allow definitive answers.

Rating:
Summary: Absolute garbage
Review: I have lost count of the number of books I've read, but this is the first time I've felt compelled to write a review. This is undoubtedly the worst true crime/ forensic science book I've read. It is absolute garbage. Dr Morrison seems to spend much of the book dismissing other forensic expert's opinions as bunk, yet I have been unable to find a single forensic psychiatric article authored by her on Medline. She offers no scientific proof for her opinions and her 'poor me', 'victimised' whingeing is deplorable. Don't buy this book, read Ressler instead ... he's egocentric, but undoubtedly an acknowledged expert in the field.

Rating:
Summary: Serial Killers: Great Book! There's No Easy Answer To Why
Review: I have to say I think Dr. Morrison is the only serial killer profiler/psychiatrist who's honest about her business. You've got so many people explaining why these guys kill; but they can't prove anything they say. Guys like Ressler are just spouting stuff they can't prove scientifically. Dr. Morrison has some controversial theories. I say petition the government and the people who run the jails to let her test her theory of genetics. So, I have to say I disagree with some of the other writers. This is a fine book that makes you think a lot about why serial killers kill. It makes you yearn for an answer. It probably is in genetics. But no one, including Dr. Morrison, knows for sure. That's what makes this book intriguing: there are no quick and easy answers. I think people who give them in their own overly dramatic books are fooling everyone.

Rating:
Summary: My Life Among the Serial Killers--A Torturous Book
Review: I heard Dr. Morrison on NPR. Her accounts of working with serial killers sounded fascinating. I'm a licensed clinical social worker in privare practice ( a psychotherapist) and often work with individuals referred by the Court. So.....I thought this would be a great book to possibly increase my clinical understanding of serial killers.

I was very disappointed. In my opinion, the book was long on graphic descriptions of torture and short on clinical explnations or theories about what personality features/attributes/dynamics these killers have in common.
I found it somewhat torturous to read many of the descriptions of torture and not feel deeply moved by the pain that the victims surely endured. However, the descriptions would have been "worth it" if they and subsequent analysis by Dr. Morrison lead to an increase in my clinical knowledge. Well, it did not. A snipit of insight here and there---but you could probably get more information just surfing the Net.

Typically when I finish with a book, I store it on a book shelf. With this one, I threw it out with the recycleables.

Rating:
Summary: A different view ...
Review: I rather enjoyed this book. I am currently in the stages of deciding exactly what I want to pursue a doctorate in. One of my choices is Forensic Psychology. I did not go into this book thinking it would be a book of theory or a book of study. I viewed the book, both before and after, as one that would show me an inkling of what it might be like to become a Forensic Psychologist. Morrison opened my eyes to the career and made me a little more decided toward this path.

I am so tired of everyone glamorizing these fields. It is actually refreshing to hear from someone who is in the field and who involves the reader in the experiences of a Forensic Psychologist.

Morrison delves into the personal issues to show what it is like to choose this as a career. It is not one of those jobs that you go to at 9am and leave at 5pm. This stays with you and, although you don't want it to, sometimes comes into your personal lives.

I personally enjoyed this book as I feel it shows readers some of the reality behind Forensic Psychology. There were areas where I felt I was being taken off into another direction and just wished she would get back to the client she was discussing and the issues surrounding them. BUT, overall I felt it was a good read.

Rating:
Summary: Bunk Science
Review: I wish I had read the other reviewers on this book before purchasing. I was deeply disappointed that the book didn't live up to the title or flyleaf. Several times I almost threw it away but ploughed on hoping that Dr. Morrison's effort had a real point.

Don't waste your time, it is complete garbage. The good doctor is certified in general, child, adolescent and forensic psychiatry but she is a terrible writer. Furthermore, she is too pretentious and self-absorbed to be objective.

Morrison's introduction to this genre of forensic psychiatry stemmed from a detective who arranged for her to hypnotize and interview Richard Macek. According to Dr. Morrison, "that's one of the primary things I learned about serial killers from my time with Richard Macek. They will be whatever you think they should be". Read the remainder of the book and you realize she didn't learn that at all.

Also, this is what she says about the detective. "It was obvious to me that Tomaselli had his own agenda - getting a conviction -and that he wasn't interested in hearing much of a report on my progress with Richard Macek, let alone any details that didn't serve his own needs. He really wasn't listening to what I had to say about Macek. I felt most of the meeting was useless and was glad when it was over."

This is bogus, psuedo-scientific pablum. Morrison offers her own aimless wanderings, through interviews and correspondence, with certain serial killers to forward what she considers revelatory theories about their psyche and motivations. She proposes that serial killers are born. The exhibits for her thesis are only those with whom she has been granted extraordinary access, such as John Wayne Gacy. She hasn't completed any exhaustive studies. Her sample population isn't even representative of the whole necessarily. With Gacy for instance, she offers some rambling correspondence between herself and Gacy, in which he demonstrated his massive ego and played Morrison like a fiddle. Her taking the stand at Gacy's trial will just make you angry.

If Morrison has been on a career mission to discover the reasons why serial killers are compelled to murder, then she has totally wasted the unique access she has had to some of the most notorious. She has never apparently developed any novel scientific measurements or methodologies. You have to take her word for it. Why? Well, if you listen carefully the list would include that she is educated, earnest, attractive, arrogant, petulant. Not the stuff of science.

Along the way she takes swipes at prosecutors and law enforcement, while occasionally digressing into gratuitous and self-aggrandizing statements, ala Kathy Lee Gifford, about her husband, children, home in the burbs and such. Statements that have nothing to do with delving deep into the minds of serial killers but are intended to humanize the doctor and again show how earnest and committed she is.




Rating:
Summary: Huh?
Review: This book confused me. Why, if the author has interviewed over 80 serial killers, does she feature murderers such as Peter Sutcliffe, Wayne Williams and Marcelo Costa de Andrade that she DIDN'T interview? I bought this book for the insights of someone who'd actually interacted personally with these killers.

Her dismissiveness regarding other theories on what makes a serial killer irked me too. Yes, obviously not all kids that suffer abuse grow up to be serial killers, but no one's saying A will always lead to B, just that B can very often be traced back to A. And her assertion that these guys were criminally insane during the commission (and, presumably, planning) of these murders was very bizarre to me; as far as the McNaughton definition goes, these killers would pretty much have to be so disturbed that they were willing to murder someone in the presence of a police officer. Does that sound like any serial killer you know? Anyone that careless about avoiding capture/detection would never make it to "serial killer" - they'd get locked up after their first murder.

Finally, her distinction between sociopath and serial killer bemused me. She seemed to be saying that serial killers weren't sociopaths, as sociopaths just lack a conscience but otherwise experience the full range of emotions, whereas serial killers lack emotions of any kind. Also, that sexual torture of their victims didn't give them pleasure in any way; that it was just experimentation and they had no reaction to the victim's pain other than curiosity. I try to keep an open mind - let's face it, I haven't interviewed 80 of these guys - but if someone's going to present theories like this that are so contrary to the accepted wisdom regarding serial killers, I'd like a little more evidence to back it up.

Rating:
Summary: Just okay
Review: This book is good, don't get me wrong. However, the reader has to get through the author continuous complaining about her not being treated fairly in the workplace. She should have saved that for another book instead of trying to get her digs in here and there. She basically comes across with a poor me attitude. Her situation is once in a lifetime. She should have tried to profile these killers better. Instead of being insightful, it is just a quick read. She certainly can't top John Douglas.