The Murder Business: How the Media Turns Crime Into Entertainment and Subverts Justice

5 Responses to “The Murder Business: How the Media Turns Crime Into Entertainment and Subverts Justice”

1. Ricco says:

   November 2, 2010 at 4:22 am

   First, Furman is doing the very thing that has fueled his righteous ire–he is profiting from the suffering of crime victims–he is greedy. I could care less about that, but he is being hypocritical. Or, perhaps he gains nothing from writing any book, which begs the question–Why bother to write?

   Secondly, just like Furman’s book, if the public did not pine for sensational crime tales there would not be sensational crime tales. Lacking a demand (the public), there would be no supply (the public). We are complicit, and to aver otherwise is to be dishonest.

   Finally, it seems preposterous for a man who committed perjury to be on any moral high horse, but Furman seems to have missed this.

   I borrowed it as a replacement for of wasting $$ reading the Gospel According to a Convicted Felon. It was a excellent choice.

   Reader’s Rating: 1 / 5
2. Earl Daly says:

   November 2, 2010 at 6:10 am

   I reflect ancient Fuhrman is a fork tongued liar who is building money hand over fist on the very same mudd he wrote about. Language bout honesty, can any of y’all tell me exactly what murder Fuhrman has solved? Name one. Not Moxley, everybody knows Dominick Dunn handed him the report on it. What murder has Fuhrman solved?
   Reader’s Rating: 1 / 5
3. Lisa Wangsgard says:

   November 2, 2010 at 8:35 am

   Ex- police officer Mark Furhman has written as appealing book about homicide and how the media can hurt people by oversensationalizing certain crimes while ignoring others. The Murder Business did make me reflect a lot about how the media can nearly elevate certain crimes. The chapters on Scott Peterson and Drew Peterson were the most appealing; there is no doubt in the reader’s mind about the guilt of these two men as Fuhrman lays out the circumstances of each case.
   
   I establish myself snorting derisively, but, at the heavyhanded repeated criticism of the media in all-purpose while Fuhrman praises Fox News. No sensationalism there? No one sided reporting? Nonsense. While Fuhrman is right to bemoan the death of investigative television journalism, the entire chapter on O.J. Simpson says nothing about his own screwups in that case, though he knocks additional people easily. I certainly haven’t forgotten that whole audiotape fiasco.
   
   Go to the library to read the Murder Business, but don’t was your money on it.
   
   That is my take on most of Fuhrman’s books. He has some excellent insights, but he does not deserve my hard earned money.
   Reader’s Rating: 2 / 5
4. Kathaleen M. Ray says:

   November 2, 2010 at 10:57 am

   I like Mark Fuhrman… I promise you…IT WILL BE GREAT !!!! If anyone knows
   
   about CRIME… Mark does.
   Reader’s Rating: 5 / 5
5. Loyd E. Eskildson says:

   November 2, 2010 at 12:19 pm

   The bulk of “The Murder Business” is taken up with Mark Furhman’s review of several well-known murder cases, including the media’s involvement. Fuhrman is concerned that too regularly the media turn an investigation into a circus aimed at boosting ratings that also distracts and delays investigation. (Fuhrman makes exceptions, but, for ‘America’s Most Wanted,’ his employer ‘Fox News,’ and books by the likes of his late friend, Dominick Dunne.) Fuhrman also contends that the media’s attention is biased towards attractive females, virtually ignoring eg. young, black males. (One has to marvel about this point, agreed Furhman’s prior excoriation for racism during the O.J. examination.) Another Fuhrman concern is the deferential treatment sometimes agreed the rich and powerful – eg. the Skakel and Ramsey families, as well as law-enforcement personnel (Drew Pearson) and the White House vs. Vince Foster. (Fuhrman raises some excellent evidentiary points vs. the Foster case, but even anti-Clinton fanatic Ken Starr confirmed it a suicide after investigating.)

   Conclusions offered on controversial cases include blaming Nancy Grace for Melinda Duckett’s suicide, though acknowledging she probably was reliable for her young son’s death, and seeing Scott Peterson’s conviction for murdering his wife and unborn son as really warranted by the facts. As for Jon Benet Ramsey’s murder, Fuhrman sees the 2 1/2 page ransom note as ‘bizarre’ (handwritten on a kitchen table pad of paper), the intruder tale as ‘nonsense’ (there were cobwebs across the broken basement window panes, and undisturbed dust on the sill), and notes the presence of prior Jon Benet sexual abuse. As for the D.A.’s 2008 ‘exoneration’ of the Ramsey’s based on weirder skin cell DNA, Fuhrman contends the scene had been hopelessly contaminated as soon as the body was learned; he also noted that the Ramsey’s should have been interviewed immediately upon discovery of the body – as a replacement for, police waited two months.

   Fuhrman’s review of the Martha Moxley murder case was easily the most appealing section of the book. He contends the case was bungled from the start – thanks to the challenger of the powerful and connected Skakel family tree – Moxley’s neighbors. The crime took place in a gated, tiny community, and was remarkable for its viciousness – clearly a ‘rage killing’ involving a name most likely known to the victim, per Furhman. Additional evidence included the expensive, rare, and broken murder weapon – a golf club, the upper end of which had been thrust through Martha’s neck. (The Skakels owned just such a set of clubs, and that particular club was missing; but, the piece thrust through Martha’s neck that also contained Skakel ownership engraving ‘disappeared’ from police evidence.) Things ongoing to get hot for the Skankel boys some 20 years later, thanks to writer Dominick Dunne and others reviving interest in the case. Mr. Skakel hired a P.I. firm to investigate – their findings included new statements and inconsistencies and the revelation that Michael Skakel had even confessed in a group therapy session in rehab, and the P.I. slipped Dunne a copy, which he then gave to Fuhrman.

   “The Murder Business” ends with Fuhrman briefly reviewing the O.J. case. Fuhrman wastes no time telling us that lead investigator Vannatter was in over his head – eg. he hadn’t worked a ‘hot crime scene’ in seven years, and failed to collect key evidence (the bloody print on the Bundy scene gate, rescinded Fuhrman’s direction to tow and impound O.J.’s car with its fresh inside and outside blood). He also blames Marcia Clark for getting him into the ‘N’ word flap because she was the one that originally brought it up; as for his own contribution, Fuhrman declares that the defense’s counter-evidence consisted of a recording of a play he was writing. (Additional sources, but, contend there was additional evidence against Fuhrman.)

   Bottom Line: Fuhrman seems to be a competent and appealing detective; but, his complaints about the media do seem a bit self-serving.
   
   Reader’s Rating: 4 / 5