Negative Positive
Title: Second half disappoints
Review: I have to agree that the first half of the book is very thorough and well done. But from the point of the murder forward, things just fall apart. There seems to be no logic in the presentation of the case. For example, he reproduces large segments of the autopsy reports for both the victim and the suspect without pointing out the significance of anything. He seems to spend an inordinate amount of time proving facts that have little or no significance whatsoever. I was disappointed that he failed to introduce any psychological forensics to support his case. And he produces little or no concrete evidence to support either his thesis for the murderer or the linkage between both murders. I wish he could have been as thorough in the second half of the book as he was in the first.
Is the review positive or negative? 