Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.44 AVERAGE
3.44 AVERAGE
Steve Hodel is a talented writer, and his descriptions of historical events are evocative and engaging rather than dry facts. His family's past is colorful and dark, so even if you don't believe that his father killed Elizabeth Short, there's a lot to take in here. There were moments when I found his tendency to write off conclusions as "facts" a little much, but he does build a persuasive case.
Imagine that your 91 year old father passed away and you suddenly discovered that he has weird pictures of your ex-wife that you didn't know about, oh, and also a couple of pictures of a woman who had been murdered in a gruesome fashion some 50 years before. What would you do?
Steve Hodel, who when he discovers this exact thing, is a retired detective and he does what any good detective would do: he sets out to discover the facts. The facts are weird, and Mr. Hodel becomes obsessed with the case, perhaps to his own detriment.
One of the weirdest moments in this book, and hardly believable if it hadn't happened to Mr. Hodel himself, is when he discovers that his wife dated his father before she married him, and the reason she married him was so she could shock his father with the fact! [Yeah, I know, super weird]
The great weakness of the book is that Mr. Hodel writes it the exact same way that a good detective would compile a case file, by getting fact after fact and document after document and constructing them into a narrative of what (might have) happened. This frankly makes for quite boring reading at times, far better if he would have reconstructed the story a by using the facts that he discovered.
At the end of the day, Mr. Hodel collects a lot of great circumstantial evidence and then declares the case solved. His father was the murderer of the Black Dahlia and perhaps many more women in and around Los Angeles. He certainly convinced me of the fact, but I don't think his case is as air-tight as he himself seems to think. I think a good lawyer would have gotten his father off since there was no physical evidence or eyewitness testimony linking his father to the crime.
Mr. Hodel declares that the LAPD won't investigate and agree with him now [2003] because they want to keep covering up the case because it makes the cops look bad [this is 50 years after the fact]. Far more likely that the LAPD has many current-day, active cases to investigate and simply doesn't have the time to go back and look at Mr. Hodel's circumstantial evidence and come to a positive conclusion.
This is the peril of becoming obsessed with a case [even Mr. Hodel's own son is baffled at how obsessed he is, to this day]. Your good judgment gets clouded and pretty soon anyone who doesn't agree with you is just trying to undermine you, or so you come to think as Mr. Hodel seems to think.
A fascinating story, which could have been so much better if it didn't read like a police case file.
Steve Hodel, who when he discovers this exact thing, is a retired detective and he does what any good detective would do: he sets out to discover the facts. The facts are weird, and Mr. Hodel becomes obsessed with the case, perhaps to his own detriment.
One of the weirdest moments in this book, and hardly believable if it hadn't happened to Mr. Hodel himself, is when he discovers that his wife dated his father before she married him, and the reason she married him was so she could shock his father with the fact! [Yeah, I know, super weird]
The great weakness of the book is that Mr. Hodel writes it the exact same way that a good detective would compile a case file, by getting fact after fact and document after document and constructing them into a narrative of what (might have) happened. This frankly makes for quite boring reading at times, far better if he would have reconstructed the story a by using the facts that he discovered.
At the end of the day, Mr. Hodel collects a lot of great circumstantial evidence and then declares the case solved. His father was the murderer of the Black Dahlia and perhaps many more women in and around Los Angeles. He certainly convinced me of the fact, but I don't think his case is as air-tight as he himself seems to think. I think a good lawyer would have gotten his father off since there was no physical evidence or eyewitness testimony linking his father to the crime.
Mr. Hodel declares that the LAPD won't investigate and agree with him now [2003] because they want to keep covering up the case because it makes the cops look bad [this is 50 years after the fact]. Far more likely that the LAPD has many current-day, active cases to investigate and simply doesn't have the time to go back and look at Mr. Hodel's circumstantial evidence and come to a positive conclusion.
This is the peril of becoming obsessed with a case [even Mr. Hodel's own son is baffled at how obsessed he is, to this day]. Your good judgment gets clouded and pretty soon anyone who doesn't agree with you is just trying to undermine you, or so you come to think as Mr. Hodel seems to think.
A fascinating story, which could have been so much better if it didn't read like a police case file.
In short, this book is a bunch of utter nonsense and fantasy passed off as investigation and evidence.
Steve Hodel starts by finding two pictures in his father's old photo album of women with dark hair and light skin and at this point in the book one should immediately be concerned because he looks at them and concludes there can be no doubt that they are of Elizabeth Short, the Black Dahlia. Here's the problem with this: first of all, yes, there can be doubt. He's offered absolutely nothing as evidence other than his opinion. Second of all, neither of these pictures (poorly reproduced on the page) looks anything whatsoever like Beth Short. They don't even look like the same person.
From here, Hodel embarks on a long and complicated journey into total nonsense, in which he consistently makes assumptions based on completely circumstantial, unsubstantiated information and uses those assumptions to jump to other completely unsubstantiated conclusions. He is following what he describes as a "thoughtprint", which sounds in his explanation like some kind of criminal psychological profiling except instead of starting with the crime and using actual evidence to deduce things about the killer, he starts with the assumption that his father was the killer and proceeds to suggest such "evidence" as: a black watch was found near the body. His father had a black watch once. And several years later, he had a different watch. The editor who spoke to the killer on the phone said he sounded suave and intelligent. His father sounded suave and intelligent. People said they saw Beth Short before she died with a tall, handsome man. His father was tall and handsome. His father liked a painting with a big pair of red lips stretched across the canvas - clearly this was the inspiration for cutting Dahlia's mouth (nevermind that a Chelsea Smile has been a method of torture and killing used for hundreds of years).
Hodel then decides to cobble together some vague information that he insists conclusively proves that Short's murder was connected to multiple other murders of women in the same time period and area (actually, just about all of them). Conveniently ignoring that these murders follow completely different patterns of behavior, he continues to identify vague descriptions of "tall handsome men" or "mysterious Air Force leutenant" as his father, because why not? His father lived in LA at the time. Of course, this was post WWII, and just about every guy on the street could be described as a tall handsome Navy/Air Force/Army man, but sure. Now, his father was evidently not a good guy, and there is significantly more evidence that he was a sexual predator of some sort. But Hodel uses this information to spring board off into wild theories about his father sending missives to the police and serially torturing and killing women with his best friend. Using such stellar investigative techniques as: reading old newspapers, and handwriting analysis by one "expert" who also claims to be able to tell the subject had a bad relationship with his mother based on the formation of his letters.
Now, why, if Hodel has such "evidence", was his father never accused of the crime by police? Ah, Detective Hodel has an answer. Because of a massive LAPD coverup! He knows this occurred because of the following: ten years before the crime there was a big purge of corrupt LAPD officers. Then, around the time of the crime, there's some evidence of a cover up of an abortion ring where doctors would pay for protection from the vice team of the LAPD. His father was also a medical doctor working in LA county. His fathers office was six blocks away from one of the doctors in this alleged abortion cover up ring. THEREFORE, obviously, his father knew about and was involved in the abortion cover up so the LAPD covered up his committing horrific torture murders because he would have exposed their abortion ring. Ignore the fact that someone else actually had already exposed it and they fired that guy and that was the end of it.
Not only this, but Hodel makes the stunning revelation that his father knew and was deeply involved with some of LA's most notorious gangsters at the time, based on his tentative identification of four very poorly printed, fuzzy photographs he found in his father's collection. Forget that "tentative" part that even the author admits to, though, because he's just going to assume it's proven and use it to spiral off into further conspiracy theories. Oh, and since his father was obviously protected by the police, how does he explain how the man was arrested for incest? Just a mess up within the department, a fluke, if you will.
He even contacted an old friend who worked on the Black Dahlia investigation and asked him whether he had ever seen his father's name or mention of any kind of connection to anyone his father knew in the case files. Now, the guy said no, there had never been any connection whatsoever, but Hodel decides this is just further evidence of a massive conspiracy reaching throughout every level of the LAPD, for decades.
Do yourself a favor and read a book that contains some actual evidence or expertise or maybe just makes even a smidgen of sense instead of wasting your time on this sensational piece of garbage. If you enjoy true crime at all, you would be doing yourself a disservice to waste your brain power trying to muddle through the quagmire that is Steve Hodel's blundering attempt to weave evidence out of seventy year old half-recalled ideas presented to him by his father's friend's son's wife. I read that in his follow up books, he also accuses his father of being the Zodiac killer. In no way does this surprise me, since his father existed and lived in San Francisco once, and that's a connection that's good enough for Steve Hodel. Stay tuned for his upcoming novel that conclusively proves his father was also Jack the Ripper AND still lives in the form of Ted Cruz.
Steve Hodel starts by finding two pictures in his father's old photo album of women with dark hair and light skin and at this point in the book one should immediately be concerned because he looks at them and concludes there can be no doubt that they are of Elizabeth Short, the Black Dahlia. Here's the problem with this: first of all, yes, there can be doubt. He's offered absolutely nothing as evidence other than his opinion. Second of all, neither of these pictures (poorly reproduced on the page) looks anything whatsoever like Beth Short. They don't even look like the same person.
From here, Hodel embarks on a long and complicated journey into total nonsense, in which he consistently makes assumptions based on completely circumstantial, unsubstantiated information and uses those assumptions to jump to other completely unsubstantiated conclusions. He is following what he describes as a "thoughtprint", which sounds in his explanation like some kind of criminal psychological profiling except instead of starting with the crime and using actual evidence to deduce things about the killer, he starts with the assumption that his father was the killer and proceeds to suggest such "evidence" as: a black watch was found near the body. His father had a black watch once. And several years later, he had a different watch. The editor who spoke to the killer on the phone said he sounded suave and intelligent. His father sounded suave and intelligent. People said they saw Beth Short before she died with a tall, handsome man. His father was tall and handsome. His father liked a painting with a big pair of red lips stretched across the canvas - clearly this was the inspiration for cutting Dahlia's mouth (nevermind that a Chelsea Smile has been a method of torture and killing used for hundreds of years).
Hodel then decides to cobble together some vague information that he insists conclusively proves that Short's murder was connected to multiple other murders of women in the same time period and area (actually, just about all of them). Conveniently ignoring that these murders follow completely different patterns of behavior, he continues to identify vague descriptions of "tall handsome men" or "mysterious Air Force leutenant" as his father, because why not? His father lived in LA at the time. Of course, this was post WWII, and just about every guy on the street could be described as a tall handsome Navy/Air Force/Army man, but sure. Now, his father was evidently not a good guy, and there is significantly more evidence that he was a sexual predator of some sort. But Hodel uses this information to spring board off into wild theories about his father sending missives to the police and serially torturing and killing women with his best friend. Using such stellar investigative techniques as: reading old newspapers, and handwriting analysis by one "expert" who also claims to be able to tell the subject had a bad relationship with his mother based on the formation of his letters.
Now, why, if Hodel has such "evidence", was his father never accused of the crime by police? Ah, Detective Hodel has an answer. Because of a massive LAPD coverup! He knows this occurred because of the following: ten years before the crime there was a big purge of corrupt LAPD officers. Then, around the time of the crime, there's some evidence of a cover up of an abortion ring where doctors would pay for protection from the vice team of the LAPD. His father was also a medical doctor working in LA county. His fathers office was six blocks away from one of the doctors in this alleged abortion cover up ring. THEREFORE, obviously, his father knew about and was involved in the abortion cover up so the LAPD covered up his committing horrific torture murders because he would have exposed their abortion ring. Ignore the fact that someone else actually had already exposed it and they fired that guy and that was the end of it.
Not only this, but Hodel makes the stunning revelation that his father knew and was deeply involved with some of LA's most notorious gangsters at the time, based on his tentative identification of four very poorly printed, fuzzy photographs he found in his father's collection. Forget that "tentative" part that even the author admits to, though, because he's just going to assume it's proven and use it to spiral off into further conspiracy theories. Oh, and since his father was obviously protected by the police, how does he explain how the man was arrested for incest? Just a mess up within the department, a fluke, if you will.
He even contacted an old friend who worked on the Black Dahlia investigation and asked him whether he had ever seen his father's name or mention of any kind of connection to anyone his father knew in the case files. Now, the guy said no, there had never been any connection whatsoever, but Hodel decides this is just further evidence of a massive conspiracy reaching throughout every level of the LAPD, for decades.
Do yourself a favor and read a book that contains some actual evidence or expertise or maybe just makes even a smidgen of sense instead of wasting your time on this sensational piece of garbage. If you enjoy true crime at all, you would be doing yourself a disservice to waste your brain power trying to muddle through the quagmire that is Steve Hodel's blundering attempt to weave evidence out of seventy year old half-recalled ideas presented to him by his father's friend's son's wife. I read that in his follow up books, he also accuses his father of being the Zodiac killer. In no way does this surprise me, since his father existed and lived in San Francisco once, and that's a connection that's good enough for Steve Hodel. Stay tuned for his upcoming novel that conclusively proves his father was also Jack the Ripper AND still lives in the form of Ted Cruz.
If you’re not into true crime, you might not realize that there is an entire sub genre of retired white guys who believe their estranged fathers committed terrible murders. Hodel’s book is one of the grandfathers of this subgenre, so I had to read it.
It starts with Hodel having conflicted feelings over the death of his father (who sounds like a complete ass, by the way) and instead of finding a therapist to talk it over, decides that two photos in his dad’s photo book are of Elizabeth Smart and that he killed her (apparently now Hodel is claiming is dad is the Zodiac Killer too, because he’s not content with his dad committing one headline grabbing murder, he’s had to have done them all).
The premise is intriguing and while its 100% certain his dad was a terrible human being, Hodel never proves anything. He believes he does, but it’s all a house of cards built upon guesswork, assumptions and gut feelings (the gut feelings of a conflicted son). And don’t even get me started on the “conspiracy” within the police department that could arrest his dad for sexual abuse, but not for murder. Or the fact that, according to Hodel, Smart’s murder was highly ritualized and scripted and the other murders his asshole dad supposedly committed.... weren’t.
In short, therapy is a good thing, writing books about how your asshole dad committed every murder ever isn’t.
It starts with Hodel having conflicted feelings over the death of his father (who sounds like a complete ass, by the way) and instead of finding a therapist to talk it over, decides that two photos in his dad’s photo book are of Elizabeth Smart and that he killed her (apparently now Hodel is claiming is dad is the Zodiac Killer too, because he’s not content with his dad committing one headline grabbing murder, he’s had to have done them all).
The premise is intriguing and while its 100% certain his dad was a terrible human being, Hodel never proves anything. He believes he does, but it’s all a house of cards built upon guesswork, assumptions and gut feelings (the gut feelings of a conflicted son). And don’t even get me started on the “conspiracy” within the police department that could arrest his dad for sexual abuse, but not for murder. Or the fact that, according to Hodel, Smart’s murder was highly ritualized and scripted and the other murders his asshole dad supposedly committed.... weren’t.
In short, therapy is a good thing, writing books about how your asshole dad committed every murder ever isn’t.
Regardless of whether or not George Hodel is the Black Dahlia killer, I found the first part of the book very interesting. The intersection of old Hollywood, surrealism, sadism, sex parties, and murder is fascinating.
It's the other half of the book that I struggled with. I don't find the evidence compelling and it's circumstantial at best. Steve Hodel is a detective so he knows what he's talking about I just didn't find it believable or to be true. For example, I don't think that the supposed picture of Elizabeth Short in the album Steve received from George's widow is of Elizabeth Short. I can't believe that the author just frankly writes that it's her when it clearly looks nothing like her. Did nobody say this to him? Is everyone blind?
I'll be happy if I never have to see the word "swarthy" used again, too. You're in Los Angeles, California. There's a lot of "swarthy" people that live there, your dad is not the only one.
George Hodel was an enigma and obviously bad dude but there's no way in hell he was as prolific a killer and rapist as Steve Hodel so desperately believes. It's kind of sad actually. What makes Steve so convinced his dad was responsible for all this tragedy? Why does he think this? Because the "evidence" he comes up with sounds more like the ramblings of a person obsessed with making everything fit into their narrative no matter what logic or common sense will tell you.
It's the other half of the book that I struggled with. I don't find the evidence compelling and it's circumstantial at best. Steve Hodel is a detective so he knows what he's talking about I just didn't find it believable or to be true. For example, I don't think that the supposed picture of Elizabeth Short in the album Steve received from George's widow is of Elizabeth Short. I can't believe that the author just frankly writes that it's her when it clearly looks nothing like her. Did nobody say this to him? Is everyone blind?
I'll be happy if I never have to see the word "swarthy" used again, too. You're in Los Angeles, California. There's a lot of "swarthy" people that live there, your dad is not the only one.
George Hodel was an enigma and obviously bad dude but there's no way in hell he was as prolific a killer and rapist as Steve Hodel so desperately believes. It's kind of sad actually. What makes Steve so convinced his dad was responsible for all this tragedy? Why does he think this? Because the "evidence" he comes up with sounds more like the ramblings of a person obsessed with making everything fit into their narrative no matter what logic or common sense will tell you.
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Well the author did convince me that his dad is the most likely culprit ,but this would've made a better documentary than book. It was so boring, it did not need to be 20 hours long. This case is not boring, the book is, and the whole case is deeply upsetting to hear about. Whether George Hodel killed the black dahlia or not we will probably never know, it does seem pretty likely to me though but whether he did or not I hope he will be brought to justice in the afterlife since he is now dead , if not for this then for the other horribly disgusting things he did mentioned in this book.
dark
informative
medium-paced
Not my style true crime. It was redundant and boring. The only interesting part to this book was the tie in to the relationship between the author and his father. Could have been a much better book.
The author is a former police officer and the tone of the intro immediately turned me off from the rest of the book.
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced