Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.99 AVERAGE
2.99 AVERAGE
Wedderburn: A True Tale of Blood and Dust by Maryrose Cuskelly is a deeply contemplative and gripping analysis of a small-town murder in Australia written very much in the vein of Helen Garner’s true-crime style (think Joe Cinque’s Consolation and This House of Grief).
It focuses on the brutal killing of Peter Lockhart, 78, his second wife Mary, 75, and her son Greg Holmes, 48, at the hands of their neighbour, 64-year-old Ian Jamieson, in rural Wedderburn, in Central Victoria, 215km north-west of Melbourne in October 2014.
Holmes was stabbed more than 25 times on his rural property, which bordered Jamieson’s, while the Lockharts, who lived across the road, were shot multiple times, at close range.
When Jamieson called the emergency services to report his deeds, he told the operator that it was too late for an ambulance because all three were dead. He then phoned a friend, Wally Meddings, and asked him to look after his wife, Janice, “because the police are coming to take me in and I’ll never see the light of day again”. He then phoned his friend Anna McMerrin, telling her: "I’m just ringing to let you know [that I’ve killed my neighbours] and I want you to look after Janice for me. Five years I’ve been putting up with shit from those bastards and I just snapped."
To read the rest of my review, please visit my blog.
It focuses on the brutal killing of Peter Lockhart, 78, his second wife Mary, 75, and her son Greg Holmes, 48, at the hands of their neighbour, 64-year-old Ian Jamieson, in rural Wedderburn, in Central Victoria, 215km north-west of Melbourne in October 2014.
Holmes was stabbed more than 25 times on his rural property, which bordered Jamieson’s, while the Lockharts, who lived across the road, were shot multiple times, at close range.
When Jamieson called the emergency services to report his deeds, he told the operator that it was too late for an ambulance because all three were dead. He then phoned a friend, Wally Meddings, and asked him to look after his wife, Janice, “because the police are coming to take me in and I’ll never see the light of day again”. He then phoned his friend Anna McMerrin, telling her: "I’m just ringing to let you know [that I’ve killed my neighbours] and I want you to look after Janice for me. Five years I’ve been putting up with shit from those bastards and I just snapped."
To read the rest of my review, please visit my blog.
WEDDERBURN is not just a book, it's a small community situated in North Central Victoria - in the area known as the Golden Triangle. Like so many small communities out here, it's battling drought, population decline, and doing a pretty good job at holding back the tide. In 2014 when the unthinkable happened everyone with any connections or knowledge of the place couldn't help but wonder what on earth would trigger such an appalling act.
The primary reason behind this book, and the reading of it, has to be to search for a meaning. The weirdness of these awful murders was followed closely by the weirdness of shifting pleas by Ian Jamieson, and ultimately, no trial to explore that meaning fully and provide understanding for those left to mourn. It seems Peter Lockhart was known to be a "bit of a stirrer" and there had been niggling arguments over dust being raised when Lockhart was carting water, there was tension over cropping activities, basically tension, stirring and odd reactions left right and centre from the sounds of it. What would make somebody turn from being a bit pissed off with a neighbour to extreme, and very explicit violence (the injuries inflicted on the Lockhart's had particularly nasty overtones) is anybody's guess, although Cuskelly does raise a possible psychological explanation of male friendship turning toxic that was particularly compelling.
Jamieson originally pleaded guilty to the shooting murders of Mary and Peter Lockhart and not guilty to the stabbing murder of Greg Holmes. Holmes was the first to die, and Jamieson's switch to a third guilty plea and then an attempt to return to not guilty again muddied the waters and created a technical legal argument that all but obscured the crimes, and his victims. But provocation seems to have been at the heart of all of Jamieson's protestations - despite much of what he claimed had occurred at the time that Greg Holmes died not being supported by the evidence or logic. By pleading guilty to the Lockhart murders at least he acknowledged the deliberate, cold and calculating way he went about it - even if he seems to have ended up feeling resentful of everything and everybody - including the legal system.
Reading another book about rural locations recently (political not criminal that time), there was a comment in it that resonates, and I'm paraphrasing here but, in large cities, different types of people and circumstances are often divided into postcodes, but in small towns they live up close and personal. I've always said there's nothing really different about people in rural and regional locations to those from the big city, it's just harder to ignore. Tolerance, forbearance, amused observations, bitching, whinging, stirring and being stirred up are all part of daily life. How somebody responds to the minor irritations of life often says more about the annoyee than the annoyer, and it's hard to come away from WEDDERBURN without a very clear picture in your head of two blokes, having at each other on a regular basis, niggling and pissing each other off - with one having had a lifetime's practice at being the annoyer and one not handling being the annoyee until all hell broke lose.
For the record - the blurb quote ending "done them all a favour" is, in my opinion, sensationalist and not fair to the book, the entire community and the victims. Nobody deserves the sorts of deaths that Greg Holmes, his mother Mary and her husband Peter Lockhart were subjected to and there are family and friends out there still suffering. Especially as, after reading the book and understanding as much as can be of the circumstances, it's not justified in anyway by anyone's behaviour before or during the murders, and definitely not during the long-drawn-out legal proceedings that Jamieson inflicted on everyone. Seeking an explanation is the task of books like WEDDERBURN and it does this incredibly well, much better than that one quote indicates.
https://www.austcrimefiction.org/review/wedderburn-maryrose-cuskelly
The primary reason behind this book, and the reading of it, has to be to search for a meaning. The weirdness of these awful murders was followed closely by the weirdness of shifting pleas by Ian Jamieson, and ultimately, no trial to explore that meaning fully and provide understanding for those left to mourn. It seems Peter Lockhart was known to be a "bit of a stirrer" and there had been niggling arguments over dust being raised when Lockhart was carting water, there was tension over cropping activities, basically tension, stirring and odd reactions left right and centre from the sounds of it. What would make somebody turn from being a bit pissed off with a neighbour to extreme, and very explicit violence (the injuries inflicted on the Lockhart's had particularly nasty overtones) is anybody's guess, although Cuskelly does raise a possible psychological explanation of male friendship turning toxic that was particularly compelling.
Jamieson originally pleaded guilty to the shooting murders of Mary and Peter Lockhart and not guilty to the stabbing murder of Greg Holmes. Holmes was the first to die, and Jamieson's switch to a third guilty plea and then an attempt to return to not guilty again muddied the waters and created a technical legal argument that all but obscured the crimes, and his victims. But provocation seems to have been at the heart of all of Jamieson's protestations - despite much of what he claimed had occurred at the time that Greg Holmes died not being supported by the evidence or logic. By pleading guilty to the Lockhart murders at least he acknowledged the deliberate, cold and calculating way he went about it - even if he seems to have ended up feeling resentful of everything and everybody - including the legal system.
Reading another book about rural locations recently (political not criminal that time), there was a comment in it that resonates, and I'm paraphrasing here but, in large cities, different types of people and circumstances are often divided into postcodes, but in small towns they live up close and personal. I've always said there's nothing really different about people in rural and regional locations to those from the big city, it's just harder to ignore. Tolerance, forbearance, amused observations, bitching, whinging, stirring and being stirred up are all part of daily life. How somebody responds to the minor irritations of life often says more about the annoyee than the annoyer, and it's hard to come away from WEDDERBURN without a very clear picture in your head of two blokes, having at each other on a regular basis, niggling and pissing each other off - with one having had a lifetime's practice at being the annoyer and one not handling being the annoyee until all hell broke lose.
For the record - the blurb quote ending "done them all a favour" is, in my opinion, sensationalist and not fair to the book, the entire community and the victims. Nobody deserves the sorts of deaths that Greg Holmes, his mother Mary and her husband Peter Lockhart were subjected to and there are family and friends out there still suffering. Especially as, after reading the book and understanding as much as can be of the circumstances, it's not justified in anyway by anyone's behaviour before or during the murders, and definitely not during the long-drawn-out legal proceedings that Jamieson inflicted on everyone. Seeking an explanation is the task of books like WEDDERBURN and it does this incredibly well, much better than that one quote indicates.
https://www.austcrimefiction.org/review/wedderburn-maryrose-cuskelly
I’m not really sure where the story was in this one. I would have liked more on the effect this triple murder had on the town, as the title suggests, and less on the unfathomable decision one man made to kill his neighbours in cold blood, of which I am no more enlightened than before reading. Despite the unusual circumstances I didn’t think was a particularly gripping or insightful piece of true crime, particularly when compared to other unique Australian writers like Chloe Hooper or Helen Garner.
Ostensibly an investigation into the reasons behind the seemingly senseless murders of three people one evening in the small central Victorian town of Wedderburn, this book actually shed no light at all on the reasons for the crime and I'm wondering what it's purpose was.
Cuskelly is a competent, compassionate writer, but I'm very unsure of what she set out to achieve.
Her story faithfully depicts the events, the crushing pain caused by the the crime and the self-pity of the convicted perpetrator, all in somewhat repetitive detail, but ultimately fails to answer the question posed on the cover - 'What does it take to provoke a murder?'
By the end of this book the reader unfortunately comes away no wiser.
Cuskelly is a competent, compassionate writer, but I'm very unsure of what she set out to achieve.
Her story faithfully depicts the events, the crushing pain caused by the the crime and the self-pity of the convicted perpetrator, all in somewhat repetitive detail, but ultimately fails to answer the question posed on the cover - 'What does it take to provoke a murder?'
By the end of this book the reader unfortunately comes away no wiser.
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
There’s a quote in this book from a Victorian police officer where he says to the author “where’s the story? .... He admitted to it” that was the pens down moment the author missed and continued for another 200 pages.
Authors POV remains on the fence for most of the book, there is a detailed play by play of the court room proceedings (two thirds of the book) if your into that sort of thing. But we know how it ends.
This authors talent was wasted on this grim tale, given a crime with a bit of mystery I think she would shine.
Authors POV remains on the fence for most of the book, there is a detailed play by play of the court room proceedings (two thirds of the book) if your into that sort of thing. But we know how it ends.
This authors talent was wasted on this grim tale, given a crime with a bit of mystery I think she would shine.
'Wedderburn' examines an awful act of violence in a small and insular community in rural Victoria in 2014. I was drawn to read it because my family lived in Wedderburn around the time I was born and I spent time there during my childhood.
The author tries for a Helen Garner style in her observations of the court proceedings and strained family dynamics, but doesn't quite achieve the desired effect. I did enjoy the strong characterisation of and interviews with various residents of Wedderburn and the picture Cuskelly paints of the town's unique social dynamics, but would have liked to see her delve further into the notions she touches on of the masculinity and shame that spurned the violence. There's a lot of hypothesising as to the killer's motivations - largely unavoidable as he is not interviewed in the book and never truly gets his 'day in court' - but it felt like a lot of unfounded speculation and rumour-mongering. The book ran out of steam after the initial court proceedings were concluded, and could have been structured more effectively, but it was an interesting read.
The author tries for a Helen Garner style in her observations of the court proceedings and strained family dynamics, but doesn't quite achieve the desired effect. I did enjoy the strong characterisation of and interviews with various residents of Wedderburn and the picture Cuskelly paints of the town's unique social dynamics, but would have liked to see her delve further into the notions she touches on of the masculinity and shame that spurned the violence. There's a lot of hypothesising as to the killer's motivations - largely unavoidable as he is not interviewed in the book and never truly gets his 'day in court' - but it felt like a lot of unfounded speculation and rumour-mongering. The book ran out of steam after the initial court proceedings were concluded, and could have been structured more effectively, but it was an interesting read.
As the first true crime novel I have read I wasn't really too sure what to expect with this book.
On a Wednesday night in October 2014 Ian Jamieson brutally slaughters his neighbour Greg Holmes by stabbing him over 25 times. He then returns to his property grabs two shotguns and walks to the house across the road where he shoots and kills Peter and Mary Lockhart, Holmes' mother and step father.
Whilst writing this book Cuskelly searches for a true reason behind the seemingly senseless murders.
From interviewing family, friends and the local townspeople of Wedderburn the personalities of the victims and the perpetrator emerge. Cuskelly faithfully depicts the events of the faithful night as well as the backstory of each main characters so the reader is well informed on the events leading up the murders.
Although I was interested in this book I'm not sure I really enjoyed it, towards the end I was rushing to finish it to read something more exciting. Due to the multiple appearances of Ian in court the second half of the book felt very repetitive and dragged on.
I did like that Cuskelly was not afraid to tackle the hard questions continually searching for the answers to 'What does it take to provoke a murder?' and 'If a person is widely disliked does that make their murder more acceptable?'. I also appreciated the authors interviews with the more out there neighbours such as Nicholas the nudist, Paul the bikie and his wife Christine the spiritual hippie. These interviews were really the only thing that kept me going to the end of the book as the rest of the novel can be quite dry and bland.
Overall I would give this book 2 stars, maybe true crime novels just aren't for me?
On a Wednesday night in October 2014 Ian Jamieson brutally slaughters his neighbour Greg Holmes by stabbing him over 25 times. He then returns to his property grabs two shotguns and walks to the house across the road where he shoots and kills Peter and Mary Lockhart, Holmes' mother and step father.
Whilst writing this book Cuskelly searches for a true reason behind the seemingly senseless murders.
From interviewing family, friends and the local townspeople of Wedderburn the personalities of the victims and the perpetrator emerge. Cuskelly faithfully depicts the events of the faithful night as well as the backstory of each main characters so the reader is well informed on the events leading up the murders.
Although I was interested in this book I'm not sure I really enjoyed it, towards the end I was rushing to finish it to read something more exciting. Due to the multiple appearances of Ian in court the second half of the book felt very repetitive and dragged on.
I did like that Cuskelly was not afraid to tackle the hard questions continually searching for the answers to 'What does it take to provoke a murder?' and 'If a person is widely disliked does that make their murder more acceptable?'. I also appreciated the authors interviews with the more out there neighbours such as Nicholas the nudist, Paul the bikie and his wife Christine the spiritual hippie. These interviews were really the only thing that kept me going to the end of the book as the rest of the novel can be quite dry and bland.
Overall I would give this book 2 stars, maybe true crime novels just aren't for me?
Meh - it started great but it just didn’t go anywhere. It asks the question “what provokes a murder?” But it doesn’t answer it in any way which is disappointing