free hit counter code Talking with Female Serial Killers - A chilling study of the most evil women in the world - GoBooks - Download Free Book
Ads Banner
Hot Best Seller

Talking with Female Serial Killers - A chilling study of the most evil women in the world

Availability: Ready to download

Christopher Berry-Dee, criminologist and bestselling author of books about the serial killers Aileen Wuornos and Joanne Dennehy, turns his uncompromising gaze upon women who not only kill, but kill repeatedly. Because female murderers, and especially serial murderers, are so rare compared with their male counterparts, this new study will surprise as well as shock, particula Christopher Berry-Dee, criminologist and bestselling author of books about the serial killers Aileen Wuornos and Joanne Dennehy, turns his uncompromising gaze upon women who not only kill, but kill repeatedly. Because female murderers, and especially serial murderers, are so rare compared with their male counterparts, this new study will surprise as well as shock, particularly in the cases of women like Beverley Allitt, who kill children, and Janie Lou Gibbs, who killed her three sons and a grandson, as well as her husband. Here too are women who kill under the influence of their male partners, such as Myra Hindley and Rosemary West, and whose lack of remorse for their actions is nothing short of chilling. But the author also turns his forensic gaze on female killers who were themselves victims, like Aileen Wuornos, whose killing spree, for which she was executed, can be traced directly to her treatment at the hands of men. Christopher Berry-Dee has no equal as the author of hard-hitting studies of the killers who often walk among us undetected for many years, and who in so many cases seem to be acting entirely against their natures.


Compare
Ads Banner

Christopher Berry-Dee, criminologist and bestselling author of books about the serial killers Aileen Wuornos and Joanne Dennehy, turns his uncompromising gaze upon women who not only kill, but kill repeatedly. Because female murderers, and especially serial murderers, are so rare compared with their male counterparts, this new study will surprise as well as shock, particula Christopher Berry-Dee, criminologist and bestselling author of books about the serial killers Aileen Wuornos and Joanne Dennehy, turns his uncompromising gaze upon women who not only kill, but kill repeatedly. Because female murderers, and especially serial murderers, are so rare compared with their male counterparts, this new study will surprise as well as shock, particularly in the cases of women like Beverley Allitt, who kill children, and Janie Lou Gibbs, who killed her three sons and a grandson, as well as her husband. Here too are women who kill under the influence of their male partners, such as Myra Hindley and Rosemary West, and whose lack of remorse for their actions is nothing short of chilling. But the author also turns his forensic gaze on female killers who were themselves victims, like Aileen Wuornos, whose killing spree, for which she was executed, can be traced directly to her treatment at the hands of men. Christopher Berry-Dee has no equal as the author of hard-hitting studies of the killers who often walk among us undetected for many years, and who in so many cases seem to be acting entirely against their natures.

30 review for Talking with Female Serial Killers - A chilling study of the most evil women in the world

  1. 5 out of 5

    Stacey

    I had a lot of issues with this book, but not because of the reasons you would think (i.e.: reading about serial killers is disturbing and horrific, although yes, it kind of is that too). It's probably easier if I just make a list: 1) TYPOS! This is a published book. Why the hell are there typos? And not just little minor things - it was major things like dates, which meant the chronological sequence of events got really confusing before you realised that they were just plain wrong. 2) THE AUTHOR. I had a lot of issues with this book, but not because of the reasons you would think (i.e.: reading about serial killers is disturbing and horrific, although yes, it kind of is that too). It's probably easier if I just make a list: 1) TYPOS! This is a published book. Why the hell are there typos? And not just little minor things - it was major things like dates, which meant the chronological sequence of events got really confusing before you realised that they were just plain wrong. 2) THE AUTHOR. I mean, THIS GUY. THIS GUY. I have so many problems with him. So he gets subheadings: a) This guy calls himself a criminologist, but I couldn't find any evidence of his actual qualifications or credentials. b) He spends half the book pimping out his other work, or quoting people who have praised him. DUDE, WE GET IT. YOU LOVE YOURSELF. c) He needlessly adds commentary where it isn't wanted or necessary. d) He adds his thoughts on a woman's looks - not in a way that explains why it is relevant to events (if it even is), but like... his personal opinion. One woman (yeah, she was a serial killer, but that's not the point) he described as "fat and disgusting". And that is just one example. 3) THE COVER: it has an image of Myra Hindley on the front, but there are ZERO chapters or even pages dedicated to her. She is mentioned in passing once or twice, but there is no discussion around her psychology or crimes. 4) AND TO BE HONEST, THERE IS NO MENTION OF MUCH PSYCHOLOGY AT ALL. I thought this book would maybe delve into some, you know, actual science, or some reputable studies. But no, it seems to be the author's own opinion - or the opinion of someone else who has complimented him, and so he thinks they are great enough to be included. 5) THE TITLE: is also misleading. There is very little content dedicated to any actual conversations he has had with female serial killers. There are one or two bits, but overall, the book doesn't really get into that much at all. In fact, it is more just a collection of information about some female serial killers that have existed. 6) THE CONTENT: according to this book, a serial killer is one who kills three or more times with time between each "event". Some of the women talked about in this book don't even meet this definition. Some were just ONE OFF MURDERERS. I think the author included them because he thinks they would've gone on to become serial killers had they not been caught, but THAT ISN'T REALLY THE POINT OF THIS BOOK. IT ISN'T CALLED "TALKING TO ONE OFF FEMALE MURDERERS". So basically, if you want to read a book by some under-qualified sexist egomaniac and which doesn't really provide what the title suggests, and is really just a book listing some women who have killed and saying what they did, then fine - read this. But otherwise, A BIG OLD NO FROM ME.

  2. 4 out of 5

    Tabatha Stirling

    If you are looking for a detailed, rational, well-written, non-hyperbole filled book then just walk away. Horribly written, fantastical, overly dramatic, ADVERBS. SO MANY. Honestly, I'm not even sure this was edited. From the way the author is described, I actually thought he had some credentials in Criminology - that is not the case. It is incredibly patronizing to women - calling them 'the fairer sex' and desperately trying to give some sort of Victorian value to his awful wittering. He descri If you are looking for a detailed, rational, well-written, non-hyperbole filled book then just walk away. Horribly written, fantastical, overly dramatic, ADVERBS. SO MANY. Honestly, I'm not even sure this was edited. From the way the author is described, I actually thought he had some credentials in Criminology - that is not the case. It is incredibly patronizing to women - calling them 'the fairer sex' and desperately trying to give some sort of Victorian value to his awful wittering. He describes the female murderers in minute, creepy detail, particularly if they were attractive and takes immense pleasure in the alleged offers of sex or marriage. I'm actually cringing as I write. I hate leaving bad reviews because I know the effect they can have being a writer myself, but honesty is the only gift I can give after trying to finish this book.

  3. 4 out of 5

    Tracy

    This book was okay. However, the cover and the blurb are very misleading. The cover features a picture of Myra Hindley. Why? I have no idea because she does not feature in the book. The blurb on the back refers to Rosemary West. Why? I have no idea because she does not feature in the book. There are some interesting chapters within the book such as the one about 11 year old Mary Bell who killed 2 young boys in the late 60s. However, even the title is misleading. It is called Talking with Female This book was okay. However, the cover and the blurb are very misleading. The cover features a picture of Myra Hindley. Why? I have no idea because she does not feature in the book. The blurb on the back refers to Rosemary West. Why? I have no idea because she does not feature in the book. There are some interesting chapters within the book such as the one about 11 year old Mary Bell who killed 2 young boys in the late 60s. However, even the title is misleading. It is called Talking with Female Serial Killers. Most of the killers features are one off murderers rather than serial killers and the author is not talking, or corresponding with any of them. The whole book offers little detail about each killer and then a whole load of the author's personal (and often extreme) opinions about each of them. The worst part of this book however is that it serves mostly as a forum to advertise the author. On every page (and I do not exaggerate, it is EVERY page) he refers to other books he has written, documentaries he has made or featured in. He refers constantly to letters received from various women on death row, but they are not featured within this book. All in all - really disappointing.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Louise Milton

    Disappointing. I was drawn in by the title/subject matter, but this book really is very poorly written. Huge over-use of exclamation marks, overly emotive language, reads like something written by an hysterical teenager or a Sun journalist. Typos also abound. Berry-Dee uses much of it to pimp his other works, with the rest consisting of awkwardly prosaic lists of names and dates, and name/age/eye colour/hair colour descriptions of every individual. Added to which....the majority of cases describe Disappointing. I was drawn in by the title/subject matter, but this book really is very poorly written. Huge over-use of exclamation marks, overly emotive language, reads like something written by an hysterical teenager or a Sun journalist. Typos also abound. Berry-Dee uses much of it to pimp his other works, with the rest consisting of awkwardly prosaic lists of names and dates, and name/age/eye colour/hair colour descriptions of every individual. Added to which....the majority of cases described are not those of serial killers, but rather a seemingly random selection of women who have killed once. Bought in an airport as a holiday read, waste of money.

  5. 4 out of 5

    Kit Eyre

    This book had so much potential because the author obviously knows his stuff and has a lengthy background in the field. However, it was ruined by his constant interference in the text with macabre and seriously unfunny asides. Some chapters were interesting while others were too short to really get anything from. I also felt very uncomfortable reading the concluding chapter with the inference that women are apt to fly off the handle and kill for no real reason. I expected a lot more from this bo This book had so much potential because the author obviously knows his stuff and has a lengthy background in the field. However, it was ruined by his constant interference in the text with macabre and seriously unfunny asides. Some chapters were interesting while others were too short to really get anything from. I also felt very uncomfortable reading the concluding chapter with the inference that women are apt to fly off the handle and kill for no real reason. I expected a lot more from this book and was very disappointed.

  6. 5 out of 5

    Jennifer (moonstruckjen)

    I hate to say it, but I didn't enjoy this book. I don't like giving negative reviews and it's purely because I don't want to put the author down, but I just can't say I enjoyed reading this. First of all I feel like it hasn't been properly proof read before publishing, as there are some spelling errors/typos (actually loads) and sometimes the complete wrong word is used for example "she because a nuisance to her teachers" . Alot of the phrases are repeated throughout which just makes me roll my e I hate to say it, but I didn't enjoy this book. I don't like giving negative reviews and it's purely because I don't want to put the author down, but I just can't say I enjoyed reading this. First of all I feel like it hasn't been properly proof read before publishing, as there are some spelling errors/typos (actually loads) and sometimes the complete wrong word is used for example "she because a nuisance to her teachers" . Alot of the phrases are repeated throughout which just makes me roll my eyes and sometimes it feels like a children's book in the way the author will address the reader. I do like when authors address the reader but you have to keep within the tone of the book I think. Then there's the problem I have with the title "talking with female serial killers" because alot of the killers in the book aren't even serial killers, and there is little to no interaction with them, the quotes are peppered lightly throughout the pages and could have been taken from ANY article written about each woman. I expected to be reading interviews or something. I found some of the passages to be quite sexist in refering to women as the "fairer" sex and there are a few sentences pointing towards the opinion that women are more likely than men to over react and murder for no apparent reason. I just had so many problems with it, like it has Myra Hindley on the front cover and she isn't even featured in the book. The only part I could get any enjoyment out of was the part concerntrating on Mary Bell, and that's because I find her facinating.

  7. 4 out of 5

    Anna

    I would have liked to rate this book 5 stars, as this is a subject I enjoy thoroughly. However, a few things about the author really irritated me: He seems to think self promoting his other works every other chapter or so is acceptable. While I’m sure this is a great achievement I don’t need to read for the umpteenth time how your book “Monster” was then adapted into a feature film starring Charlize Theron, name drop included each and every time. I’m also uncomfortable with the the approach he to I would have liked to rate this book 5 stars, as this is a subject I enjoy thoroughly. However, a few things about the author really irritated me: He seems to think self promoting his other works every other chapter or so is acceptable. While I’m sure this is a great achievement I don’t need to read for the umpteenth time how your book “Monster” was then adapted into a feature film starring Charlize Theron, name drop included each and every time. I’m also uncomfortable with the the approach he took in regards to sexual preferences and professions. For example: just because the woman was a lesbian that does not mean her lover was a mud wrestler or that being a “cheap hooker” doesn’t make you less of a person, being a murderer definitely does, though. I tired quickly of how often he thought these murderesses were making sexual advances to him. We get it, on a whole you fancy yourself rotten. As I said , it’s a pity as I did enjoy the actual stories of these women (also, be warned: it’s mostly one time killers—- considering how often he defined “serial killers” I found that to be a bit of a let down). In short, this would have been an excellent book had it, very simply, not been written by a man.

  8. 5 out of 5

    Alex7w3

    I don't normally review - this book should come with a warning - prepare for extreme cliches and hyperbole. It's not the constant plugging of other books so much, it's the very black and white approach to all the women written out (many of whom are murderers but not serial killers). Also the terrible editing. If I were the author - I would demand a refund from their editor. Badly written paragraphs, words missing, sentences in the wrong place. Avoid - there have to be better, more insightful boo I don't normally review - this book should come with a warning - prepare for extreme cliches and hyperbole. It's not the constant plugging of other books so much, it's the very black and white approach to all the women written out (many of whom are murderers but not serial killers). Also the terrible editing. If I were the author - I would demand a refund from their editor. Badly written paragraphs, words missing, sentences in the wrong place. Avoid - there have to be better, more insightful books than this out there.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Sorcha Crosse

    The author comes across as a shitebag which undoubtedly he is.

  10. 4 out of 5

    James Hartley

    This wasn´t what I expected and, to be honest, it was a bit of a disappointment. It reminded me of those free annual-sized books they used to do for a pound (and maybe still do) with titles like "The Most Evil People In History" or "True Crime". Weirdly, unevenly - yes, badly - written, this is a bitty, unorganised wander through some interestingly grim territory but instead of following some kind of map or well-informed guide, we get a messy, incoherant, self-opinionated rant. Three stars for th This wasn´t what I expected and, to be honest, it was a bit of a disappointment. It reminded me of those free annual-sized books they used to do for a pound (and maybe still do) with titles like "The Most Evil People In History" or "True Crime". Weirdly, unevenly - yes, badly - written, this is a bitty, unorganised wander through some interestingly grim territory but instead of following some kind of map or well-informed guide, we get a messy, incoherant, self-opinionated rant. Three stars for the interesting nuggets among the dung.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Amy Grau

    If you can make it through the first chapter okay, then continue on. Otherwise, abandon the book as it is a giant waste of time. It is rife with factual errors (such as the wrong year or state), filled with conjecture based in the author’s own reality, and despite the premise being female serial killers, the author chooses to focus on whatever women seemingly tickled his fancy. How this man has repeatedly been published I do not understand.

  12. 5 out of 5

    Lauren

    Sadly, this book is poorly written, poorly edited and very patronising to the reader. It’s so painfully melodramatic and all over the place that I couldn’t get past the first few chapters. I would usually feel resistant to write a bad review but Mr Berry-Dee obviously has such an inflated opinion of himself as an expert ‘criminologist’ and sex symbol that I highly doubt this would even scratch the surface.

  13. 5 out of 5

    Jo

    Berry-Dee is a criminal psychologist with decades of experience dealing with serial killers and psychopaths. In this book he focuses on the most twisted and depraved female killers, mostly American and British. This is for anybody who thinks that women are all flowers and puppies.

  14. 4 out of 5

    Katrina

    Misognistic drivel. I hate not finishing books, even if they're not great, but I was glad not to finish this one.

  15. 4 out of 5

    Kamilla Hannibal

    This book feels like a 1 week project just to make some extra cash. It’s incredibly badly written, emotional and judgemental language and feels like one long ahotty tabloid piece. Also the author seems obsessed with the women’s look (if she was attractive/ if she was overweigh) which seems both weirdly misplaced and is huge off-putting. Two massive thumbs down from me- this book should never been published

  16. 5 out of 5

    Liv Macbeth

    Gave up on this book by page 29. So badly written I wonder whether the author just self-published this and placed them in shops himself. He seems completely self-absorbed and so misogynistic I cringed as I read this. 1 star was generous, on reflection.

  17. 5 out of 5

    Kellin Berendorf

    If the grammar and spelling mistakes weren’t so bad, I may have liked it better. Stephen King gets 4 mentions.

  18. 4 out of 5

    teleri llinos

    Overall, this wasn't a good book and I have many problems with it. The first being that Berry-Dee called the book 'Talking' with Female Serial Killers yet the book doesn't exactly have transcripts or conversations he’s had with female serial killers, instead he includes small fragments of letters he’s received from them and it’s a let down. I expected to hear about their crimes in their own words instead I’m getting a paragraph or so, in fact we got more conversation with a killers sister than an Overall, this wasn't a good book and I have many problems with it. The first being that Berry-Dee called the book 'Talking' with Female Serial Killers yet the book doesn't exactly have transcripts or conversations he’s had with female serial killers, instead he includes small fragments of letters he’s received from them and it’s a let down. I expected to hear about their crimes in their own words instead I’m getting a paragraph or so, in fact we got more conversation with a killers sister than any killers combined (I'm pretty sure). So for him to call his book Talking with Female Serial Killers is such a blatant lie. I also noted that Berry-Dee counts serial killers as "three or more people" but the FBI classifies it as two or more, but with BD choosing the three option, it makes me question why he went with the title Serial Killers, and then included double killers and killers in general? He couldn't have called it Talking with Female Killers? Nope, because the world is more fascinated with serial killers and that would get more reads. It's just a little eye roll worthy. But a side note to the person who editor of this book, I really would give up your day job. I wasn't looking for mistakes but I found multiple. Ranging from getting the year of a book published wrong, to adding extra letters, to typing words wrong so that a quote of a killer isn't correct. It made the whole book seem rushed. Also, I feel like the Patrica Wright case and the foreword doesn't fit with the whole book. With the Wright case, BD is pretty much solving it, talking the reading through how the police found her guilty because he went over her case file, which was fine, but it was such a vast difference to just the passing glance at all the others that it felt largely out of place. The same with the foreword, from reading it I thought that it was going to be about BD being in prisons and actually printing transcripts of conversations he's had with the killers but instead it was just a one off. A 'Hey look! I've been to a Russian prison and the people were nice.' Cool, but totally out of place. One of the major faults with this book was that the author called the mentally ill characters 'retarded' and it was such a disgusting thing to read. I would have given him a pass if it was one of his older books when that was the socially acceptable term for back then, but it's now outdated and extremely offensive. I just didn't enjoy this book as much as previous works I've read of his, which is something you couldn't miss, because he was constantly referencing his previous works which got really repetitive and annoying. Like, I'm already reading your book, I've already given you money, now can you please, just talk about the killers and not your other books where I can read in-depth about them. Also, he would often give his opinions and that just spoilt it for me like shhh, lmao. It just felt a bit weird like, just tell me what they've done and let me make my own mind up (but I agree with him when he says they're evil). But it blew my mind that he thinks someone couldn't be sexually assaulted because the have an arrest history. As if that makes sense. Altogether it was a bad book and I regret buying it. Sucks.

  19. 4 out of 5

    mia and her books

    Unfortunately, I did not enjoy this book. I originally picked it up because I am very interested in criminology and because female serial killers are so rare that they aren't really talked about often. I do believe that the idea behind this book isn't necessarily bad; however, it just didn't work out for several reasons: a.) The cover and blurb: One of the things that really drew me to this book was the cover. I just thought that the white on that dark red was absolutely gorgeous and I also reall Unfortunately, I did not enjoy this book. I originally picked it up because I am very interested in criminology and because female serial killers are so rare that they aren't really talked about often. I do believe that the idea behind this book isn't necessarily bad; however, it just didn't work out for several reasons: a.) The cover and blurb: One of the things that really drew me to this book was the cover. I just thought that the white on that dark red was absolutely gorgeous and I also really enjoyed the simplicity of it all. However, after reading the book in its entirety, I cannot help but complain about this: The woman on the cover is Myra Hindley, a British serial killer who, together with her partner Ian Brady, murdered five children. Perfect for this book, right? Except she isn't a part of it. Well, that's untrue. She is mentioned in passing around six times throughout the book. And I do get why the author didn't want to include her. In his own words, he wanted to focus on female serial killers who weren't part of a murder duo where the male was likely the dominant one in the relationship (thus making it unlikely that the submissive would have killed on their own). However, why put her on the cover then? Why use her infamous photo to sell a book when you don't even deem her story important enough to dedicate a chapter or even just a single page to it? But Myra Hindley isn’t just the cover girl, she is also mentioned in the blurb, alongside other women such as Rosemary West – who is also only mentioned in passing (but this time at least a bit more often with what I counted as around ten instances throughout the book). But again: Why put them in the blurb if they don’t play any significance to your book? Those sentences mentioning them, which are really so few and far between, could have easily been left out without losing any relevant information to the story. The title itself bothers me, too. The book is called “Talking with Female Serial Killers”, yet most of the information given to us can be found on the killers’ Wikipedia pages or through a simple Google search. Berry-Dee did include some excerpts of his personal correspondence with several murderers; however, in my opinion, those short bits aren’t nearly interesting enough to warrant the purchase of an entire book. (Also, there is a grammatical or at least stylistic error in the middle of the blurb – how did no one catch that?!) b.) The blatant self-promo: I’m not even kidding when I say that Berry-Dee references other books he has written or other projects he has worked on in the past no less than 17 (!) times! Yes, you read that correctly – se-ven-teen! This includes several mentions of the fact that Charlize Theron won an Oscar for her portrayal of serial killer Aileen Wuornos in a motion picture based on his book Monster. Also, the foreword is basically just one big ego trip about how they simply couldn’t resist worshipping the floor he walked on during his visit to a Russian women’s prison. c.) The continued misogyny: I think we are all very well-aware of the fact that many male writers seem to have trouble writing female characters. However, Berry-Dee takes this to a completly new level by apparently being unable to resist the urge to describe the physical appearance of EVERY SINGLE FEMALE HUMAN BEING mentioned in the book in a quite frankly disgusting manner. I do not understand how it is relevant to the story that a certain murderer used to have a “very shapely body” in the past but now is nothing more than “ugly and overweight”. Yeah, I know that most women in the book were or still are terrible people who did terrible things – but there is still no need to diminish their worth as a human being to how pleasing they are to the eye. Personally, I just don’t need to know the bust size of someone to determine whether their killing spree was morally questionable or not. All of this is in addition to repeatedly referring to all of womankind as “the fairer sex” as well as insisting that all women are naturally nurturing and motherly, discreetly suggesting that if you are not, there is something wrong with you. d.) An apparent lack of editing: I swear that I didn’t go out of my way to find mistakes, and yet I managed to notice at least 45 typos / punctuation mistakes / wrong sentence structures etc. This includes jams such as “She because a nuisance to her teachers, disrupted classes and fellow pupils, […].”, “[…] who could reach out to them of they were distressed, […]”, “[…] but, before feeling the scene, […]” and even “[…] 7 May 2105, […]”. This – in addition to a lot of weird, incomprehensible jump cuts and just generally terrible stylistic choices – makes it seem as though not a single editor ever had a look at this book before it was published. Furthermore, Berry-Dee seems to have a hatred for commas, not using them nearly often enough – thus making it very hard to follow his train of thought during his many trademark multi-clause sentences. When he does use them, he more often than not places them incorrectly. The most infuriating abuse of proper punctuation, however, is his seemingly arbitrary comma use when it comes to the word aka. Sometimes he uses a comma after this word and sometimes he doesn’t, making it clear that his peculiar punctuation isn’t a deliberate stylistic choice but rather ignorance in regards to grammar rules. Also, Berry-Dee apparently doesn’t believe in semicolons. e.) A lack of serial killers: At least 20 of the female murderers mentioned in the book weren’t serial killers at all as they had only killed once or twice – compared to the at least three murders including cool down periods in-between needed to be officially classified as a serial killer. And personally, that wouldn’t really be a problem, had Berry-Dee not repeatedly forced the correct definition down our throats. Why even pretend that the book is specifically about female serial killers then? Why not just write one about female murderers in general? f.) The author’s unprofessionalism: Both the usage of the word “study” in the title as well as the author being referred to as a criminologist in the blurb had led me to believe that I was buying a book written from the perspective of a professional in the field. Of course, I wasn’t expecting to read a dissertation or anything like that; however, I did expect a well thought out retelling of the lives and crimes of different female serial killers. What I got instead was several sexist and racist remarks, a lot of cursing (not that I am against cursing, but it doesn’t seem fitting in a book that is supposedly a “chilling study”), many weird and unfitting exclamations sprinkled in every few pages (such as “No way, Jose!”) as well as a constant overuse of synonyms (Why say Texas when you can constantly refer to it as “The Lone Star State”, am I right?). Despite continually mentioning that research has shown that harsher sentences / death sentences do not work as a deterrent for murderers, Berry-Dee also repeatedly talks about executions of female murderers, all while being weirdly mean about it – it seemed as though he was almost gloating at the chance of seeing capital punishment being used on them. In general, he comes across as not objective at all. These are just some of the things that bothered me about this book. However, as you can see, I still gave it two out of five stars. This is because some parts of it are quite well-written and extremely interesting (for example, I did truly enjoy the bit about poisons and how they were used in the past). That being said, I still wouldn’t recommend this book to anybody, and I unfortunately also do not think that I will ever give this author another try.

  20. 5 out of 5

    Anne Tanner

    What to say? A hotch-patch of information. A grim subject is a given. The great majority of the subjects have never talked to the author. A lot of them pre-deceased his birth! I read with interest the part concerning Mary Bell, but learnt nothing. The writing style was quite judgemental for someone with an ology, quite a bit of self-aggrandisement. How a killer doesn’t fool him and how he disproved some of her claims. Some minor irritations, probably just me. Typos, and HMP Bronzefield is not in What to say? A hotch-patch of information. A grim subject is a given. The great majority of the subjects have never talked to the author. A lot of them pre-deceased his birth! I read with interest the part concerning Mary Bell, but learnt nothing. The writing style was quite judgemental for someone with an ology, quite a bit of self-aggrandisement. How a killer doesn’t fool him and how he disproved some of her claims. Some minor irritations, probably just me. Typos, and HMP Bronzefield is not in Kent! Although why the whole address appears in the book is a bit of a puzzle anyway - maybe he thinks we will all want to write to these people. Not a fan.

  21. 4 out of 5

    Kay

    This book is a load of rubbish. I was hoping for some good information about female killers. What I got was a very opinionated book that if you read it closely gives you a couple of pages at the end of each section all about male serial killers! This book is a prefect example of what not to write about when you don't know the subjects very well. He gives you more details about the police escort than he did about the woman! Shady guy.

  22. 5 out of 5

    Stacey Hammond

    Totally disappointed in this book. As many others have stated, why have Hindley on the front, West mentioned on the back, then not have them in the book. To be fair I hadn't heard of hardly any of these & I've read many serial killer books. Poorly written, he spends more time going indepth about the victims rather than killers. I don't think I'll be reading anything else by this author in a hurry. Totally disappointed in this book. As many others have stated, why have Hindley on the front, West mentioned on the back, then not have them in the book. To be fair I hadn't heard of hardly any of these & I've read many serial killer books. Poorly written, he spends more time going indepth about the victims rather than killers. I don't think I'll be reading anything else by this author in a hurry.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Katie

    I kind of wish I hadn’t read this as it freaked me out. Very chilling.

  24. 5 out of 5

    Charlie White

    Not nearly as good as the other Books, lots of typos in dates and general words. Didn’t really delve much into female “serial killers”, more into women’s motive to kill and many of which were a one off. Some interesting bits though .

  25. 5 out of 5

    Emily

    The concept of this book: great. The execution: bloody awful. I have three main problems with this book. Firstly, the title is more than a little inaccurate given that Berry-Dee doesn't actually talk to most of the women discussed in the book. And quite a few of the aren't actually "serial" killers. Secondly, 'Talking [about] Female (Serial) Killers' doesn't appear to have been thoroughly proofread or edited to any great degree. One more than slightly confusing instance came where the author write The concept of this book: great. The execution: bloody awful. I have three main problems with this book. Firstly, the title is more than a little inaccurate given that Berry-Dee doesn't actually talk to most of the women discussed in the book. And quite a few of the aren't actually "serial" killers. Secondly, 'Talking [about] Female (Serial) Killers' doesn't appear to have been thoroughly proofread or edited to any great degree. One more than slightly confusing instance came where the author writes that not enough evidence was found to take a case to trial in 1996; however, in the next paragraph it is written that, after a year or so of police work, the case eventually comes to trial in 1967. Instances such as this occur fairly frequently throughout the book. Finally, and the reason I ultimately gave this book only one star, is that the misogyny throughout the book is pretty damn ridiculous, especially given the fact that, at the start of the book, Berry-Dee actually calls out the misogynistic way some men have written about women in the past. Berry-Dee refers to the subject matters of his book with a range of charming descriptions including "overweight lump", "once attractive", "disgusting and fat" etc. etc. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting he be *nice* about murderers, but I'm not entirely sure why he's so caught up on their looks when there are a plethora of other aspects for which he could be criticising them (for example the murders they committed perhaps...). It's not only the killers who receive this treatment, however. Female witnesses are "plump" or "graying" and the wives of jury members are "plain". Quite what a jury member's wife has to do with the murderers who are the supposed topic of this book I'm not too sure... but then again I'm also not sure not how Berry-Dee knows they were plain given that this particular trial happened in the '60s, but there we have it. He also frequently implies that women who like sex are immoral and therefore more likely to be murderers... In conclusion, you're probably just better off reading the Wikipedia articles for the women discussed in this book.

  26. 4 out of 5

    Hannah

    This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. This book was a complete disappointment! First the title says female SERIAL killers, half of the women discussed are not serial killers, having only committed one or two murders. Secondly there are so many spelling and grammar errors it’s unreal! There are also mistakes like on one sentence stating that the body was never found, and then in the next talking about when it’s discovered and buried. The way the author talks about these women comes from an extremely misogynistic place. Don’t get me w This book was a complete disappointment! First the title says female SERIAL killers, half of the women discussed are not serial killers, having only committed one or two murders. Secondly there are so many spelling and grammar errors it’s unreal! There are also mistakes like on one sentence stating that the body was never found, and then in the next talking about when it’s discovered and buried. The way the author talks about these women comes from an extremely misogynistic place. Don’t get me wrong these women deserve no kindness but I don’t see the relevance of commenting constantly about their looks and weight. Like the fact that he deems this murderer hideous means anything. He also keeps making a link between being a lesbian and being a murderer like there is an obvious correlation. This is a large paragraph at the end that talks about how crazy lesbians in love can be I am not exaggerating. He constantly try’s to promote his previous work, bring up his “award winning books” and the fact his book “inspired the film monster”. Stop with the self promotion. Maybe if he’d stopped blowing his own trumpet for 5 seconds he would have created a decent book. The book states it’s about talking to female serial killers, no, it’s a description of their crimes and then the author stating his opinion about how women, or the fairer sex as he repeatedly says, are more deadly than men. He mentions every stereotype about a woman you can think, that they obviously must be caring, maternal, fair and lovely, and this is obviously the reason it’s so shocking when women kill. No it’s shocking because they’ve committed a horrible crime and gender has nothing to do with it. The only reason I finished this book is because I, like a large portion of the country, am fascinated by serial killers. However upon writing this reviewed I’ve realised how much this author annoyed me and I have taken the rating from two too one. Go find a book that actually delivers some insight into the psychology of these women rather than commenting about how she got fat whilst waiting on death row.

  27. 5 out of 5

    Nina

    I'm all in all very disappointed by this book. It was a struggle just to finish it. I did find the premise of it really interesting, but the actual content was just really different? Like the title "Talking with female serial killers" for instance. There was a few mentions of correspondence and even fewer mentions/quotes of the content of said correspondence. Not to mention the majority of the women detailed in this book isn't even serial killers?? Most of them are one off killers or people with I'm all in all very disappointed by this book. It was a struggle just to finish it. I did find the premise of it really interesting, but the actual content was just really different? Like the title "Talking with female serial killers" for instance. There was a few mentions of correspondence and even fewer mentions/quotes of the content of said correspondence. Not to mention the majority of the women detailed in this book isn't even serial killers?? Most of them are one off killers or people with the potential of becoming a serial killer somewhere down the road. What actually bothered me the most about this book was how heavily coated it was in the authors own personal opinions. I kept feeling like he was trying to make up my opinion for me which just got old really fast. And all the heavy handed descriptions and overuse of adverbs throughout this entire thing...man. I really don't care about this guys opinions on the physical appearance of these women, it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever and it's just all around distasteful. Not to mention a solid chunk of the book is just shameless self promotion, it almost felt like one long plug of all is other works. Also, was this book even edited?? I found myself flipping back and forth between pages several times because I thought I'd misread/misunderstood something but nope, someone just skipped double-checking the spelling. Not to mention the all over sentence structure and the actual dates and places of events. I don't know if this book was rushed or just really half-heartedly written but either way I wouldn't recommend it.

  28. 4 out of 5

    Caroline Goldsworthy

    I have read some of Berry-Dee's work in the past and it has been rational and reasonably well put together. This work stands apart from his previous work in that it is very badly edited (I'm still not sure what an incient is), dates are incorrect, quotes are incorrect. It comes across as a book which was rushed into print. It's also something of a rant as if the author cannot conceive of women committing such heinous crimes, simply because they are women. He also seems to hint that being a lesbi I have read some of Berry-Dee's work in the past and it has been rational and reasonably well put together. This work stands apart from his previous work in that it is very badly edited (I'm still not sure what an incient is), dates are incorrect, quotes are incorrect. It comes across as a book which was rushed into print. It's also something of a rant as if the author cannot conceive of women committing such heinous crimes, simply because they are women. He also seems to hint that being a lesbian makes a woman kill as the intensity of losing a lesbian lover is too much to bear. I am not convinced by this argument - I rather suspect that the women in question were already disturbed and their sexual orientation is incidental and not causal. One last whinge concerns the cover. If you are expecting anything new or insightful with regard to Myra Hindley then step away now. I have no idea why she is on the cover (other than it's an iconic image). Ms Hindley gets a few mentions as does Mrs West, but there are only passing references. Conclusion: not money well spent.

  29. 5 out of 5

    Laura McConnell

    I bought this book thinking it would be exactly my sort of thing, to be fair I wasn’t wrong, but I think it should have been titled “Talking about female serial killers”. I expected a book of new information about these famous cases, with personal interviews with the women but instead it was just information about their crimes which I could probably have got from Wikipedia. The author has a great insight into this topic, I just wish it had shone through instead of just the odd remark made to him I bought this book thinking it would be exactly my sort of thing, to be fair I wasn’t wrong, but I think it should have been titled “Talking about female serial killers”. I expected a book of new information about these famous cases, with personal interviews with the women but instead it was just information about their crimes which I could probably have got from Wikipedia. The author has a great insight into this topic, I just wish it had shone through instead of just the odd remark made to him by a few of the prisoners. He kept stating that a serial killer is a person that has killed more than 3 people with “cooling off periods in between” yet kept taking about cases where it was not this at all, instead those that killed their victims in one go or only 2 victims saying that they would have gone on to be serial killers. To me it was just reading old cases and a lot of it was already known to me from true crime podcasts. Disappointed to say the least.

  30. 4 out of 5

    Daisy

    This book was awful. Badly written, over dramatic, overly sexual, full of typos, patronising & misogynistic. The cover & blurb are extremely misleading, mentioning Myra Hindley and Rose West who only feature in the book in passing comments, there are no chapters dedicated to them. Instead, most chapters are dedicated to one-off murderers, not serial killers. There are a couple of interesting cases, one being Mary Bell, but the awful writing is so distracting that it was hard to get through them. This book was awful. Badly written, over dramatic, overly sexual, full of typos, patronising & misogynistic. The cover & blurb are extremely misleading, mentioning Myra Hindley and Rose West who only feature in the book in passing comments, there are no chapters dedicated to them. Instead, most chapters are dedicated to one-off murderers, not serial killers. There are a couple of interesting cases, one being Mary Bell, but the awful writing is so distracting that it was hard to get through them. The whole book is a promotion for the author's other ventures and he spends most the time stroking his own ego and talking about how everyone loves him. There's no actual science or fact behind the psychology discussed, it's all the author's own opinion. If you want a book where a qualified author interviews actual serial killers and goes into their psychology using actual science then I suggest Mindhunter by John Douglas & Mark Olshaker, and not this shit show.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.