Shakedown response to the 2nd Review of Two Face

It’s the nature of true crime writing to get trolled, and troll reviews. It’s especially frustrating when apparently well meaning readers leave reviews like this:

Fullscreen capture 20180916 135715

Frustrating because at the same time CNN is knocking on your door and considering whether your work is worth featuring on their show.

Fullscreen capture 20180916 135853.bmp

Do you think reviews like that make HLN want to do an interview? If it was me, I wouldn’t.

Obviously less than one month after the crime has been committed there’s not going to be much evidence out there, especially with the police department in Frederick on lock down over leaks. If Two Face proves anything it’s how much we can know and find out from the available evidence before it’s fielded in court.

It’s also the purpose of this blog to provide updates on new evidence as and when it occurs. One example is the fact that the Watts children were last seen alive on Sunday at a birthday party held by Jeremy Lindstrom in Erie, and Chris was also there. These updates are published regularly at this link.

It’s the purpose of the second book in this series to place all these updates and collect all the available evidence in a follow-up narrative, a second book building on the efforts and analysis of the first.

In sum then, this is how I feel about reviews that kick you between the legs for making the first effort at an analysis. Hopefully better ones are in store.

9 thoughts on “Shakedown response to the 2nd Review of Two Face

  1. Whoever wrote that review just wanted to stick it to you. It has nothing to do with your work, or your body of work. Unfortunately in these days and times, where artistic and intellectual offerings are made available to everyone and anyone over the internet anonymous negative comments from anonymous negative people who fancy themselves professional critics will surface. Their mission is to steal your thunder and excitement and cause you to second-guess yourself. Don’t give them the satisfaction.

    Like

  2. Hi Nick,
    Don’t take the first review to heart. It seem to be from a well-intentioned individual who wants instant answers like many of us do, yet I feel I almost now know know tmi about this despicable crime. I stumbled on you site by chance and enjoy reading you updated. They have day-by-day become more informative and open to theories and motives not simply a narrow-minded view.

    Do not take to heart how one casual reader review will affect any interview with any media opportunity. Oftentimes, all they can do is speculate based on past crimes or tell the obvious. I’ve just now downloaded your free e-book on Amazon. I was hesitant at first because I do’t like joining clubs or groups but when I have time I will read it.

    Meanwhile, try to keep your frustrations under your hat and not worn on your sleeve. Internet vultures prey on any sign of weakness or no weakness. There’s a lot of discontented individuals out there ready to lash out at any comment simply to vent. You got off easy with yours.

    Keep at it,
    Lua The Cat

    Like

  3. There is a real mystery here for me – if it was a heat of the moment, or a premeditated act with several weeks in the plotting. I’m sure he had fantasies about wiping out everyone, but compare what he did to Scott Peterson. And for all intents and purposes everyone knew Scott was guilty, yet he put the family through a trial. So it will be interesting to see how Chris Watts pleads.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I hope your work does end up on the CNN show as it deserves to and I would like to see it featured. It must feel harsh to see someone write a two star review but the comment with it seems nicer than the stars given. That reviewer wrote “even better” as well as “great, thought-provoking.” I have read some of your books on previous crimes and really enjoyed them so reading one so-so review on Two Face would not deter me from purchasing, not when you have all the other positive reviews on your past work to help guide a purchaser. Potential purchasers need to take a broader view and as you wrote, there isn’t yet a great amount of hard evidence out there as it is.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. The word you invented in the second Casey Anthony book: intertextuality, is interesting. If we take the word “inter” it is described as or the root word, is – between. Then the word “text” is a thing woven, among other descriptions. There is a word textuality – which is a quality of language as it is used in written texts. You are using the word and applying it to true crime solving. Taken all together do you mean we must look at what is between the lines, what is woven in to content to create the context? I think I had it, then it slipped away. Would you be willing to explain your word intertextuality a bit more?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s