I am fortunate to be the youngest of five. I had two older brothers who were both avid readers and collected many books. One of them had purchased the paperback edition of this book in the late 1960s. One day in the summer of 1975 (I was twelve) I found it while rummaging through boxes of books in our basement. The cover illustration was an extreme close up of a menacing pair of eyes. The cover read "Look into this man's eyes. Would you trust him? Two thousand women did..." I remember thinking at the time that there couldn't have been two thousand victims in the Boston Stranger case. Still, the cover of that musty paperback remained in my memory for 35 years.In my opinion, one quality of a good book is that it will recommend other books to the reader. Recently I read "A Death in Belmont". It noted Gerold Frank's The Boston Strangler as an authoritative book on the subject. I was curious if this was the same book I had found in the cellar that day. I searched on ebay and found that old book with the menacing eyes on the cover. It was the same book. Fortunately, I obtained the 1967 hardcover through the inter-library loan system of my local public library. It too was musty.A long time ago I watched Tony Curtis in the movie "The Boston Strangler" on tv. I don't know if the film was adapted from the book. However, his affected Boston accent was very amusing. For example, the scene in which he tells the police he had gone into "Joddan Mahsh to buy a rulah." (Translation: He went into Jordan Marsh to buy a ruler.) I didn't know Jordan Marsh sold rulers.Enough reminiscing. On to the review. Gerold Frank was a newspaper reporter. Journalists write the most interesting books. Naturally--that's what they do! An amazing thing about waiting 35 years to read a book is that what was current events when it was written is history now. Since then Albert DeSalvo has been murdered and other convincing theories that he was not the killer and/or was not the only killer have emerged. This book thoroughly provides all of the information that was available in 1967. It is a fast moving story of the victims, their murders, the suspects, and the investigations. Frank vividly describes the suspects. Each was psychotic and could easily have been the one. However. like a musty old puzzle one might find in a cellar, each was missing that crucial piece. Equally fascinating is Frank's account of the detectives' personal obsessions with catching the killer(s) and their utter exasperation with each failed suspect.One of the best pahts (parts) of the book recounts how politics both propelled and stymied the investigation. Frank takes the reader back to the days when there were noble Republicans in Massachusetts such as Attorney General Ed Brooke, and how they clashed with the Kennedy dynasty. A dull paht is the section describing the use of truth serums on suspects.As all good authors should, Gerold Frank recommends another book to the reader. In a footnote he references Thomas Gaddis' "Birdman of Alcatraz". I hope I can find that one in my local library. If I do, I'm sure it will be musty.
Yo no quería comprar este libro. Ni siquiera quería leerlo. Me equivoqué. Se me cruzaron los cables y en vez de leer El estrangulador de Boston, leí Jack el Destripador. Y no una vez, sino dos, tres y hasta cuatro veces. Cuando lo escogí, cuando lo compré, cuando lo recibí y cuando empecé a leerlo. Qué empeño el mío. (No es la primera vez que me pasa. Ayer compré un libro en gallego sin darme cuenta. Menos mal que no está en euskera.)Llegó un momento en el que me di cuenta de que lo leía no tenía nada que ver con Jack el Destripador, claro. En concreto, en la advertencia al lector que hace Gerold Frank. De Londres y de prostitutas no había ni rastro. Se trataba de Boston a mediados de los años sesenta y del asesinato de trece mujeres. Todo presentado como si fuera un documental. Un poco desordenado a veces, con muchos saltos hacia adelante y hacia atrás en el tiempo, pero ceñido a los hechos. Tanto, que en dos ocasiones me quedé dormida mientras leía. Demasiado exhaustivo con los detalles. Los aficionados al crimen o con un interés especial en este caso lo encontrarán interesante y los que no, como en mi caso, o se dormirán o se sentirán indiferentes. O ni siquiera eso.Pese a todo, sí hay algo que me ha llamado mucho la atención y es la tendencia de la policía de Boston de aquellos años a tirar de individuos con métodos bastante alejados de la ciencia forense para resolver los crímenes. Obviamente, ninguno de ellos lo consiguió. El estrangulador apareció por casualidad. Pero no pudieron, supieron o quisieron juzgarle por los asesinatos, sino que lo metieron en la cárcel por otros crímenes. ¿Y a qué encantadora conclusión nos lleva esto? A la teoría de la conspiración. No fue él, fue un compañero de celda, otra persona, un extraterrestre, el tendero de la esquina…
Do You like book The Boston Strangler (1967)?
Man am I a sucker for true crime. This book is great. Frank navigates this labyrinth of a story in a "frank" straightforward manner. The book was very obviously written in the 60's. The approach to how women are thought of and written about is almost comically old-fashioned. A few developments happened after the book came out and I don't think that there is an updated version. I won't say the name of the killer in order to avoid spoilers, but if you are interested, the killer was (post-book) killed in jail by a fellow inmate. His body was also later exhumed and tested against DNA found on Mary Sullivan's body where it was proven within a 99.9% probability that, in that instance, he was the killer. Definitely worth reading and also worth fact checking what happened later on in the story. My copy had no pictures, but you might want to look up an image of the killer as well. The visual really helps.
—Daniel
This true story is so sad. Those poor women dead because of some sick pervert!
—Katy
