@READ KINDLE ï Women Who Kill: Profiles of Female Serial Killers ë eBook or E-pub free

This was a very interesting book that goes into quite a few cases I had heard of and many I hadn t Each chapter was long enough to give you a good overview of each individual killer, and there are books on many if you wantin depth It held my interest except at the very end, when it tried to get into the many psychologies of why women might kill Pictures, of those that are available, would have been a plus, but a very good book overall. Synopsis profiles of fourteen women who used arsenic, strangulation, suffocation, injection, guns or stabbing to kill their victims. @READ KINDLE ⚣ Women Who Kill: Profiles of Female Serial Killers á Why does a young woman lure teenagers into her car then participate in their horrific rape and torture What makes a nurse lethally inject the healthy babies in her care Women, statistically, aren t a violent breed but the female of the species can be just as deadly as the male From the mass poisoner to the sexual sadist, from profit killings to crimes committed just for twisted thrills, Carol Anne Davis sets out to explore the dark and disturbing world of the female serial killer In depth analysis of individual cases, including new information from the minister who heard Myra Hindley s confession, provides an invaluable insight into the psychology behind these atrocities Three and a half to four stars for this one This is the book for someone who really just wants an overview of women serial killers The nature of the book means that the author can t go into a whole lot of detail about each of the killers and her crimes, but it s still very interesting and, if you have a heart, depressing. I gave it one star, but it really rates zero stars This book is full of errors and mistakes and lacked a proof reader.1 The author calls a 10 year old child a toddler which is usually for kids under 5.2 A killer named Judith Neeley lived and killed girls who lived in Georgia Yet the author claimed Judith killed a girl at the Grand Canyon, which is hard to believe she wasn t seen, as it is a tourist destination Judith tortured poor Lisa for awhile before killing her so she would have been s I gave it one star, but it really rates zero stars This book is full of errors and mistakes and lacked a proof reader.1 The author calls a 10 year old child a toddler which is usually for kids under 5.2 A killer named Judith Neeley lived and killed girls who lived in Georgia Yet the author claimed Judith killed a girl at the Grand Canyon, which is hard to believe she wasn t seen, as it is a tourist destination Judith tortured poor Lisa for awhile before killing her so she would have been seen Then, Judith calls a radio station in Georgia to taunt them over the kill If it supposedly happened at the Grand Canyon, why not call an Arizona radio station 3 Another killer named Rose West, was pregnant for a year, according to the author.4 The author mocked someone in this book because the person couldn t spell, yet the author herself misspelled believe and there were sentences with words missing letters Clearly indicating a lack of a proofreader This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers To view it, click here This was unfortunate Out of the 13 serial killers 7 had a heterosexual partner This dilutes the supposed topic of female killers and places them in a supposed submissive position to appease their man She points out that even dominant woman wanted to be dominated in the bedroom Seriously She says that people in the family with the most menial jobs are the most sadist and that 90% of parents hit their children at least once Um what Where are your sources for these The book seems to be ba This was unfortunate Out of the 13 serial killers 7 had a heterosexual partner This dilutes the supposed topic of female killers and places them in a supposed submissive position to appease their man She points out that even dominant woman wanted to be dominated in the bedroom Seriously She says that people in the family with the most menial jobs are the most sadist and that 90% of parents hit their children at least once Um what Where are your sources for these The book seems to be backwards as she writes about the killers then analyzes them and her analysis is just pretty much her repeated what she had already told us with the same wording used She uses derogatory words calling victims and perpetrators dumb fat unattractive and one victim as mildly retarded Excuse me I know that this book was written in 2001 but that s not an okay term And she uses the term coloured people instead of people of colour She inserts random, unnecessary sexual anecdotes for shock value that aren t needed We know that the acts were depraved I don t need to know about the perpetrators rectum.I already have two of her other books out of the library so I ll read those but not impressed and offended to boot Wow What a horribly written book Was there an editor involved at all Beside the fact that it was a strange writing style, I was so distracted by the grammatical errors ending sentences with prepositions, for example, andthan once that I could hardly finish the book I am not criticizing the fact that this was a writer from the UK I m used to their spelling differences and the use of whilst I m talking about basic grammar and English The attempt at profiling was such an amateur ef Wow What a horribly written book Was there an editor involved at all Beside the fact that it was a strange writing style, I was so distracted by the grammatical errors ending sentences with prepositions, for example, andthan once that I could hardly finish the book I am not criticizing the fact that this was a writer from the UK I m used to their spelling differences and the use of whilst I m talking about basic grammar and English The attempt at profiling was such an amateur effort that it was almost laughable Don t waste your time Read John Douglas instead It s kind of poorly written I ve never seen the phrase after all so many times in one book, and the constant use of whilst instead of while gets supremely annoying It seems to be decently well researched, but it sure could have used a good editor Not a bad read for a waiting room or airport or bus ride or something along those lines, but there are probably better sources out there. This book was full of glaring errors, grammatical, spelling related, and factual The factual can be forgiven, almost, due to being written thirteen years ago, though I do believe some of the information about some of the killers and their partners was probably available, but there are many interpretations since no one in the public can know exactly what happened However, I seriously could not get past the extremely poor editing If there WAS an editor, they need to be sacked immediately T This book was full of glaring errors, grammatical, spelling related, and factual The factual can be forgiven, almost, due to being written thirteen years ago, though I do believe some of the information about some of the killers and their partners was probably available, but there are many interpretations since no one in the public can know exactly what happened However, I seriously could not get past the extremely poor editing If there WAS an editor, they need to be sacked immediately The spelling was terrible and speaking of the spelling if you re writing a true crime book, and talking about ANY killer, who people know well, you might want to spell their name right Bernardo, not Barnardo Yes, I m Canadian, but spell your subjects names right, come on There was no excuse for the spelling And there was no excuse for the grammar, and the lack of proper punctuation drove me up the wall It makes for a very distracting read.I also felt that I wasn t really getting any information or insights It felt like a Wikipedia account of these women, and if I want that, I ll go to Wikipedia Though I never want that, as I abhor Wikipedia It had no insights into their psyches You could tell she tried, but it was the same recycled theories, and a lot of it was very generalized, and a lot of it was obviously her own bias intruding, and she was judging the women without analysing them Her discussion of feminism, and women being considered to be gentle and nurturing, would have beeninteresting if she had actually discussed that and hadn t just repeated the same information about the women over and over.All in all, I was very disappointed, and also very glad I didn t pay to read this Poorly edited books will always get scathing reviews for me, and she lost credibility the first time she spelled someone s name wrong As she often mixed up victims names and spellings of those names, as well as perpetrators names It was a good idea, but the long chapters were on the most famous cases, and I would have liked to have seeninformation on the lesser known people, but I don t believe enough real research was done to enable that Not a very comprehensive account,of a basic list of the individual women s crimes and a brief history I felt I wasn t learning much that I hadn t heard before, especially as all the longer chapters were on thefamous cases Hindley, West, and Wournos.Basically I would recommend this to someone with a very limited prior knowledge of the area, but for anyone interested inin depth study I would say to give it a miss The psychological analyses aren t detailed or complex in any way Not a very comprehensive account,of a basic list of the individual women s crimes and a brief history I felt I wasn t learning much that I hadn t heard before, especially as all the longer chapters were on thefamous cases Hindley, West, and Wournos.Basically I would recommend this to someone with a very limited prior knowledge of the area, but for anyone interested inin depth study I would say to give it a miss The psychological analyses aren t detailed or complex in any way, giving only a simplistic overview.I also found the text to be problematic, there was use of racist language like coloured ,and female sexuality was handled poorly, the inference being that women engaging in promiscuity or lesbianism were deviants