Though the author explores the psychology and motive of two siblings who survivied the murder of the rest of their family, one of whom executed the slayings, we ultimately learn little about the ostensible subjects, and more about the authors effort to understand her own disturbed past and present. ( )

I really struggled through this book. I did not like they way the author blended all her past experiences with the Gilley children. When I read a true crime book it is to learn about the facts of the case. This book was more opinions the author held on "why" things happened the way they did. If she was a psychologist or criminal profiler or some such career that would be okay, but she's not. She just based everything off what she had gone through. It was really distasteful to me. It was like she was using someone else's tragedy to get through her own. It just unsettled me. Throughout reading the book I was just uncomfortable and I didn't care for it at all. No recommendation for this one. ( )

This book was in the True Crime section, but it reads more like a memoir, a combined memoir of the author’s life, Billy’s life and Jody’s life. With extensive interviews of the children, friends, and others she has brought together Billy’s and Jody’s memories into a cohesive account. She details the years of abuse, the alcoholism of the parents and how Jody rebuilt her life as the only survivor of a murderous rampage.

Being a survivor of incest herself, she is able to bring an understanding to the actions of the children, what they had to do to survive.

I found this to be a well written, readable book. ( )

Kathryn undersöker ett gammalt mord, en son som mördar sina föräldrar men skonar sin syster.
Systerns historia fångar Kathryn och hon tar kontakt med henne.
Det som intreserar henne speciellt är skiljelinjen mellan livet före och efter, vad är det som händer där vid gränsen och om nödvändigheten att uppfinna sig själv igen efteråt.
Det som jag tycker var intressant är att Kathryn identifierar sig själv i denna situation och att hon hela tiden refererar och reflekterar över sitt eget trauma i sitt liv, ett incestiöst förhållande med sin far.
Hon använder systerns trauma för att bearbeta sitt eget. Ett ständigt arbete och som hennes skrivande främst går ut på. Jag gillade känslan av att på nära håll följa en persons strävan att försöka bli en hel person.
Är det inte kärnan av skrivandet och läsandet att växa och utvecklas i relation till orden. ( )

As with other reviewers, I found the author's need to constantly view this tragedy in light of her own history deeply frustrating. She is not a psychologist, and yet Harrison is forever analyzing the motives, writings, comments of the Gilley children and even their dead parents, who (of course) she never met . When Harrison is direct, providing facts, she is very good. But when she begins her musings on what someone might have been thinking or wanting (which is more often than not) not only does she lose the reader, her writing suffers. ( )