Book Review
Title: The Cases That Haunt Us by John E. Douglas
Genre: Non-Fiction, True Crime
Rating: 4.5 Stars
Having read Mindhunter and its sequel before, I wanted to read more of Douglas’ work and decided on The Cases That Haunt Us because it focuses on cases that are far older and most remained unsolved to this day. The first cases Douglas lends his expertise to is one we are all familiar with and it is the case of Jack the Ripper. The Whitechapel murders are something everyone has seen, heard or studied at some point in their lives and it is the source of many conspiracy theories, even today many people believe it was the work of a doctor,, a woman or even a Prince. In order for Douglas’ profiling to work he only looks at the factual evidence presented during the case.
I won’t go into detail about the murders themselves since they are very easy to look up but the first thing that Douglas noted using his skills was that the killer was likely a young man from a poorer background than many like to believe with an apparent hatred of women. This basic profile fits many of the suspects at the time and after but he goes on to explain that the killer had some knowledge of anatomy but his skill level was low meaning he probably worked with butchering rather than a doctor. He also noted that this person wasn’t someone know to the victims or if they did know him it wasn’t well. Looking at the evidence including the letters the Ripper sent to the police and papers, Douglas believes them to be insignificant to the investigation since they were likely part of a hoax.
Douglas caps this off by explaining that the evidence and police procedures weren’t what they are today and because of that he doesn’t believe with certainty that any of the original suspects were the Ripper but there are some that are more likely than others. This chapter serves as a warm up for the cases to come. The second case is also an old one and it is the case of Lizzie Borden, often known as the first woman, to get away with murder. In this case, Lizzie claimed an intruder broke in and killed her father and stepmother yet the evidence didn’t add up. The evidence seemed to point to Lizzie as the killer but as a woman of her standing and her work with charities many believed her to be harmless.
Lizzie it turns out harboured a grudge against her stepmother seeing her as a replacement for her own mother who had died when she was young. She also resented her father for making them live a frugle life which she felt was beneath their station and while there was suggestions of sexual abuse from the father, this was never proven. Lizzie having reached her breaking point murdered them both for the inheritance money making sure her stepmother died first so her half-sister wouldn’t inherit anything before persuading her sister to go along with her story as the dominant force. Despite actually being arrested and tried for the murders, Lizzie walked away a free woman and lived out the rest of her life quite happily although there was so estrangement between the sisters later in life. Douglas believes that Lizzie was most definitely the killer and used her gender and the squeamishness many men showed towards things considered only for women to her advantage which wouldn’t happen today.
The third case Douglas looks at is the Lindbergh baby kidnapping which is an infamous case and one that raised a lot of suspicions earlier on. The Lindbergh baby was supposed kidnapped in the middle of the night from his crib without so much as a cry and wasn’t discovered missing for a few hours until his nursemaid went to check on him as he had been ill recently. Upon learning of the child’s kidnapping the police were informed and some of the most influential people were brought in. Many noted early on that Charles Lindbergh, the father, didn’t have any sort of emotional reaction to his son’s kidnapping but Douglas thinks this is because Charles was a military man and was trained to bottle his emotions in times of stress in order to deal with the situation at hand. While they had a good communication line with the kidnappers who were ransoming the baby, Charles dominated the investigation making certain aspects of the case difficult which is also something that wouldn’t happen today not matter how influential or famous the parents were.
Throughout the investigation there are several people who seem to be the kidnappers making contact with the family through letters, phone calls and a proxy who ends up meeting one of the kidnappers to arrange the drop for the money. When the money is finally handed over, the family are given instructions on where to find their son but he is still nowhere to be found. After several weeks they found the baby deceased in a ditch and they learned he died the same night he was kidnapped. Douglas with his expertise believes that the man that was arrested and executed for the murder of the baby was responsible in part for the kidnapping but he wasn’t the mastermind behind it. The real mastermind might have been the mysterious friend who left him a large sum of the ransom money when he died but those leads didn’t go anywhere.
This was definitely a case where the notoriety of the family and how the public had access to the home before the family moved in where in part responsible for allowing the crime to happen in the first place. Alongside Lindbergh’s control over the case which muddied the waters at times led to a situation where the end was inevitable especially since nothing they could have done would have saved their son. The next case we look at is also unsolved and infamous, that is the Zodiac murders. The Zodiac murder are infamous because they remain unsolved until this day but it was a case that really highlighted how the old style of policing and investigation wasn’t going to work on these more sophisticated criminals who had no apparent motive for their crimes.
One thing to note about these crimes was how the Zodiac killer was in constant contact with the police even calling to report several of his crimes and taunting the police. Yet, he was aware enough to remain one step ahead of them and while he claimed many more murders than are actually linked to him, it is a prime example of easily the waters can be muddied when a known killer is taking credit for crimes that can’t be forensically linked to him. While Douglas does note that there are several suspects from the time that are a good fit for the Zodiac he isn’t certain about any of them. The next three cases seek to show how the story doesn’t always match the reality of crimes beginning with the Black Delilah.
The Black Delilah case was one among many that really showed how the media portrayed the crime really didn’t match the reality. This case was one were a wannabe Hollywood starlet was brutally murdered yet the reality was the woman was a high risk, down on her luck girl who wanted to be someone making her more vulnerable to the attack. Douglas goes on to explain that there are many cases like this such as a police officer convicted of killing her husband’s ex-wife when the evidence clearly doesn’t add up and leaves a lot open to debate. He also mentions the Boston Strangler, another infamous case, but he believes the man convicted of these crimes wasn’t the actual killer because the motive behind the two sets of cases are completely different.
The man arrested for these crimes was a serial rapist and broke into the homes of many women but he wasn’t sadistic in nature, in reality, he was a power-reassurance rapist which is one of the most common kinds of sexual predator. The Boston Strangler, on the other hand, was entirely sadistic in his approach to these crimes and Douglas reasons that with his experience and knowledge two different men committed these crimes although only one was arrested, leaving people questioning whether the Boston Strangler was gone or whether he was still out there. After this we move onto a case that is infamous for remaining unsolved and for the ambiguity surrounding the crime, that is the case of JonBenet Ramsey. JonBenet Ramsey was a sweet, innocent child when she was murdered inside her family home, she was initially thought to have been kidnapped and a ransom note played into this.
Douglas notes that many mistakes were made that night that might be why JonBenet’s case remains unsolved. While many suspected the family to be involved including the police, Douglas thinks with some certainty that neither the mother or father were involved but he says nothing about the older brother and given he thinks the killer was male and relatively young and we know that killers can be children, it isn’t unreasonable to assume that the brother might have been involved. While Douglas makes no mention of this within the book it is something that occurred to me while reading it. Douglas also makes reference to a similar crime that happened later but doesn’t think they were related, in his opinion he believes that the killer was known to the family and had a good idea of the layout of the house which would explain why JonBenet didn’t make any noise and how she consumed pineapple before her death as she knew her killer and trusted them. The motive behind this Douglas believes was a grudge against the father and forcing a man who has already lost one daughter to lose another would be devastating blow to him.
While I found this book to be informative and provide an insider’s perspective on these unsolved crimes, it wasn’t as gripping as Mindhunter but I will continue to read more of Douglas’ work in the future. If you haven’t read Mindhunter already then definitely check it out and the show is worth a watch as well.
Buy it here:
Paperback/Hardcover: amazon.co.uk amazon.com
Kindle Edition: amazon.co.uk amazon.com
Comments