The Book & The Case: The Golden State Killer

[formerlyfreedom]

Here is the spot to talk about the actual case; especially during the series airing, discussion of the case, the book, and the killer should happen here, and not the episode topics. So talk about the Golden State Killer, the book I'll Be Gone In The Dark, and all things related.

Thank you!

[Razzberry]

I'm surprised they based the series on this particular book because although what's there is very well written, there's actually very little about GSK in it.  To me it was more about the author, but perhaps that was due to her sudden death.  The rest was cobbled together from notes and no one had a clue who he was until his DNA was uploaded to GED Match.  

Apparently it made people from out of state more aware of this case, but what irritates me are the people around McNamara who try to say she helped solve it.  When the news broke about DeAngelo's arrest, for some reason Patton Oswalt was there saying "You got him, Michelle!"  WTF? Not true at all, and disrespectful of those who worked hard for years on it.

[Cherrio]

I just watched one of the many shows on the GSK a few nights ago.

I had this idea that I would of tried if I had lived in one of those area's at the time.

Since he had a regular habit of eating and drinking at scenes, I would of had a really yummy looking turkey or roast in my frig. But, I would of added a special seasoning, cyanide.   It is so quick acting he would of been dead before he could do anything else.

[paramitch]

On 6/30/2020 at 11:52 PM, Razzberry said:

I'm surprised they based the series on this particular book because although what's there is very well written, there's actually very little about GSK in it.  To me it was more about the author, but perhaps that was due to her sudden death.  The rest was cobbled together from notes and no one had a clue who he was until his DNA was uploaded to GED Match.  

Apparently it made people from out of state more aware of this case, but what irritates me are the people around McNamara who try to say she helped solve it.  When the news broke about DeAngelo's arrest, for some reason Patton Oswalt was there saying "You got him, Michelle!"  WTF? Not true at all, and disrespectful of those who worked hard for years on it.

I watched the show, and just finished the book a few weeks ago, and I really echo this.

I was so excited to read the book because my impression (as you can tell from my episode posts) was, wow, this woman really dedicated her life to this and it was all worth it in the end, because she caught the killer, etc. And that's just not the case. In fact, there are many who are actively angry at her choices 

It actually really bothers me, the way the show repeatedly and subtly presented Michelle as being instrumental in his capture in some kind of direct way. She wasn't. I also disliked the way the show sort of bait-and-switched us -- presenting these big moments throughout that seemed like lightbulb revelations from Michelle, and then sort of burying the outcomes -- like those damn cufflinks. Sure, it was a great idea, but the show totally yells about the idea, then whispers about the outcome (they weren't the cufflinks from the crime, so -- dead end). She does this in the book too -- for the first half, she's constantly stopping the action to tell Patton or someone, "I've got him." etc. And she's always wrong.

So after awhile of this, to me the show edged awfully close to dishonesty on this front. I understand how much her family and friends loved her, and how respected she was by the investigators she worked with. I know they want to honor her legacy and memory and those years of hard work.

But they seem desperate to give her credit that as far as I can tell she doesn't really quite deserve. By all means, credit her with naming the GSK, with shining a spotlight on his crimes, in connecting investigators, and in writing one hell of a chronicle of the search for the GSK. And for doing so with real skill, insight, restraint and eloquence. The book -- what she finished of it -- and even the notes that remained -- was superb.

All of that is incredibly praiseworthy. But that's not the same thing as "You got him, Michelle!" Upon further examination and reflection, it is very clear from the book and other interviews and media that Michelle had very little direct bearing on the discovery or capture of the GSK. He was, notably, not on her short OR long lists or evidently anywhere in her files at all. Yes, she had the idea to start checking the ancestry/DNA services, but come on, that's not exactly rocket science. And that's the closest she came to having a direct effect on the outcome. At least the book ends with a clear message that she didn't want credit for any aspect of the investigation and would have saluted whoever caught the GSK. The show sort of messed with that idea, however, giving us a much stronger "she got him" implication.

I thought the book was an absolutely terrific nonfiction chronicle/account of the GSK, his crimes, his victims, and the search and investigation.

I feel like where Michelle went wrong is that she had the perfect opportunity to stop the amateur investigation once her article hit the big leagues and she got the book deal -- and simply write about the investigation, to write its story. And that's what she did incredibly well. But over eight years, she was also constantly getting sidetracked by the investigation as the close to her book, by tasks that she really didn't have to undertake to write about it well -- and that ultimately had no bearing on the case at all. It is very arguable that she in fact potentially harmed the case against the GSK because of the "boxes" heist that was presented so cavalierly, that directly affected chain of evidence.

Anyway.

I just feel after reading the book that her insistence upon investigating AND writing was her downfall. I have no doubt she was driven, talented, and respected for her abilities at investigation. I have interviewed homicide detectives and they have truly been inspiring and good, smart, caring people, and often quietly fascinating people, too. I'm sure it was a big compliment to her that they accepted and liked her, shared theories, etc. But so much of that feels pointless in retrospect. It led nowhere.

The book contract was about her writing the book. Not solving the crimes. And I just feel like the additional tragedy of I'll Be Gone in the Dark is the fact that Michelle poured herself into the investigation at levels that were unhealthy and (to me) unnecessary -- to the point that she neglected herself -- and, it's implied, her loved ones. Not eating, sleeping, having to medicate herself to sleep (which directly led to her accidental death), etc. Anytime you are mixing benzos and opiates (and she was mixing opiates and OPIATES, given the presence of fentanyl), you are playing Russian roulette. I have addicts in my family so I know this extremely well (I account for this in my posts on "Dopesick"). Families do trade and borrow meds all the time, but it looks to me like Michelle was borrowing and mixing liberally just to get some sleep, which Patton may have known in a minor way, but not how bad it was. It is telling that it was evidently a ritual for them that he would make her coffee and put it by her bed so that she could wake up to it ASAP, for instance.

It's just so sad to me. I'm so glad the GSK was caught. But I'm sad that Michelle ended up being another victim, in a way. She couldn't handle the investigation, at a certain point (and I don't blame her; this man was HORRIFYING and enjoyed his cruelty). But she couldn't back away either, or give herself the distance she needed, and it seems to have directly contributed to her death. And that's so, so sad. It reminds me of Truman Capote and In Cold Blood (he never wrote another book -- in a similar way, it destroyed him).

I've interviewed homicide cops -- I was working on a novel about a serial killer at one point about 20 years back. It would have been decent, I think, or I hope (I would have done my best). But I decided to abandon it. It was too upsetting, and honestly even 6 months of research told me that if I went any further, I would be damaged by what I found and wrote. Just the interviews with homicide cops, there are stories they told me that I have never repeated to a single human soul. And never will. They were too incredibly upsetting. They haunt me still.

So what happened to Michelle I think is not a new story. But it's quietly tragic.

There was one anecdote in the book that I keep remembering, from Michelle, about what an amazing and thoughtful gift-giver Patton always was:

Quote

 

Another time he had a young metal worker build me a wooden box. The house we lived in for seven years is depicted in a bronze plate on the front. Inside are a series of hidden miniature drawers, each containing mementos from our life together—ticket stubs, Post-it notes.

Last year he commissioned artist Scott Campbell to paint three small watercolors of me facing off against notorious crime figures. In one I’m holding a cup of coffee and staring down the Zodiac Killer. In another, I clutch a notebook as if I’m about to interrogate D. B. Cooper, the infamous plane hijacker. And in the third, I’m holding my laptop, a curious smile on my face, standing face-to-face with the One, masked and unknowable, my bane, the EAR.

I opened this year’s present. Patton had had my Los Angeles magazine article professionally bound and placed in a custom-made black slipcase. The case had a compartment where I could store the most important notes from my story. A DVD of an interview I did on the local news was in a bottom drawer. I realize later that for two years in a row my wedding anniversary gift has been, in some way or another, about the EAR.

But that’s not even the most telling sign of how much he’s come to dominate my life. That would be the fact that I’ve forgotten to get Patton as much as a card.

—McNamara, Michelle. I'll Be Gone in the Dark (pp. 274-276). HarperCollins

 

This made me so sad and frustrated for Michelle's family, and for Michelle. This is just not healthy or okay, and I find it incredibly sad. I respect that she included this anecdote because it doesn't paint a very nice picture of her, honestly. It's not a good enough excuse.

I'm glad I read the book and watched the show, but the entire thing is a little frustrating in terms of how it was presented on the show.

[Ciarrai]

On 6/16/2023 at 11:40 PM, paramitch said:

The book contract was about her writing the book. Not solving the crimes. And I just feel like the additional tragedy of I'll Be Gone in the Dark is the fact that Michelle poured herself into the investigation at levels that were unhealthy and (to me) unnecessary -- to the point that she neglected herself -- and, it's implied, her loved ones. Not eating, sleeping, having to medicate herself to sleep (which directly led to her accidental death), etc. Anytime you are mixing benzos and opiates (and she was mixing opiates and OPIATES, given the presence of fentanyl), you are playing Russian roulette. I have addicts in my family so I know this extremely well (I account for this in my posts on "Dopesick"). Families do trade and borrow meds all the time, but it looks to me like Michelle was borrowing and mixing liberally just to get some sleep, which Patton may have known in a minor way, but not how bad it was. It is telling that it was evidently a ritual for them that he would make her coffee and put it by her bed so that she could wake up to it ASAP, for instance.

It's just so sad to me. I'm so glad the GSK was caught. But I'm sad that Michelle ended up being another victim, in a way. She couldn't handle the investigation, at a certain point (and I don't blame her; this man was HORRIFYING and enjoyed his cruelty). But she couldn't back away either, or give herself the distance she needed, and it seems to have directly contributed to her death. And that's so, so sad. It reminds me of Truman Capote and In Cold Blood (he never wrote another book -- in a similar way, it destroyed him).

I've interviewed homicide cops -- I was working on a novel about a serial killer at one point about 20 years back. It would have been decent, I think, or I hope (I would have done my best). But I decided to abandon it. It was too upsetting, and honestly even 6 months of research told me that if I went any further, I would be damaged by what I found and wrote. Just the interviews with homicide cops, there are stories they told me that I have never repeated to a single human soul. And never will. They were too incredibly upsetting. They haunt me still.

So what happened to Michelle I think is not a new story. But it's quietly tragic.

I have to echo this. I used to be a reporter, and the biggest thing I ever covered was a nearly year-long serial killer trial.

About 8 months after the close of the trial, I began exhibiting symptoms of PTSD. I have since been formally diagnosed and will live with it for my entire life. 

The book was amazing; the show was great. But seeing myself in Michelle was hard because I received help (therapy and counselling) when I began to spiral so badly. Michelle did not.

[paramitch]

On 9/4/2023 at 7:41 PM, Ciarrai said:

I have to echo this. I used to be a reporter, and the biggest thing I ever covered was a nearly year-long serial killer trial.

About 8 months after the close of the trial, I began exhibiting symptoms of PTSD. I have since been formally diagnosed and will live with it for my entire life. 

The book was amazing; the show was great. But seeing myself in Michelle was hard because I received help (therapy and counselling) when I began to spiral so badly. Michelle did not.

I am so sorry for what you went through! Thank you for sharing that. I have often wondered about the toll it must take to cover that kind of trial over such a long period of time. I wrote about computers and technology -- I never had to report on crime, much less at the level you did. I don't think I could have done it, honestly.

I'm so glad you were able to get support to get through it, but it must have taken a terrible toll. And it was obviously very much the same kind of damage, repeated and intensified year after year, for Michelle as well.

And I have to say -- the book was upsetting, but in combination with the documentary and actually hearing his voice hissing gleefully at his victims? I kind of wish I could unread it. Unwatch it. I'm a wimp in my middle-age. I couldn't have done what Michelle did -- or what you did. I was much colder and more objective in my 20s, oddly enough (maybe because it didn't always seem real and I felt more immortal) but honestly, I've become less able to handle that stuff well  -- I can't even watch half the nature documentaries out there these days without devolving into a weepy mess. (So yes, watching this was dumb of me.)

One thing the documentary and book didn't mention was any kind of therapy or counseling for Michelle. She didn't, did she? If not, I wish she had explored it.

Meanwhile, take care of yourself out there.