Product Description

Clarkson has traced the course of the career of Britain's most successful serial murder, Dr Shipman. He has made remarkable discoveries that will forever change Shipman's standing in the canon of serial killers, and he reveals that Shipman's victims were not just helpless little old ladies.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #761781 in Books
• Published on: 2001-11-08
• Original language: English
• Binding: Hardcover
• 344 pages

Customer Reviews

Obvious inaccuracies make the book's contents questionable
I live in Hyde and knew Fred Shipman although not as a Dr. I did not read the books that came out immediately as I felt that I wanted a more indepth book and that the early authors would not have had time to do enough research to provide this. It is still difficult to come to terms with the person I felt I knew, if superficially, and the person who committed these dreadful murders and I hoped the book would help with this.

I was put off the book from page 2 when the author immediately sites Hyde in Lancashire when it is in Cheshire. He repeats this on the next page when he is actually talking about relying on facts that he considers to be accurate! Whilst he does write well about the circumstances that could have formed Fred's character and caused him to kill I found myself feeling very sceptical, possibly because of the initial glaring error re the county. There are other mistakes which only someone who lives in the town would perhaps spot eg the wrong first name given to a friend of mine, the fact that he collected newspapers for the primary school and not the scout group. Perhaps I am being picky but these are irritating. Why does he mention John Davison a local police inspector but omit Fred's friendship with John Fairley who became Chief Constable of Norfolk both of whom were involved in the paper collection? Is it the latter's position?

Primrose Shipman appears from the book to be friendless but I know that she was not. She had a very close friend who was shown accompanying her to Fred's trial and who gave her a great deal of support and with whom she ran the sandwich shop in Hadfield (not Hollingworth as in the book). She also had other supportive female friends who stuck by her. I did think that she was portrayed fairly accurately as perceived by the local community.

I do feel I have a better understanding of the events after reading the book but its errors have left me feeling sceptical.

AUTHOR APPEARS TO EXAGERATE TO 'SPICE' UP CONTENTS
The previous reviewer from Hyde tends to think that certain inaccuracies make the contents of this book questionable. I tend to agree with that observation. The fact that the person knew Dr Shipman also adds to this assumption. I am sure Dr Shipman was a lovely man as has been the opinion of many people who knew him.

Wensley Clarkson is an American writer, and as such is used to writing about hideously violent and depraved true crime cases as is advertised in the back of this paperback book. As a result, I got the impression that he was determined to 'spice' up the contents (at least in places) to add to the 'shock' value of the story.

Some of the things he says make me wonder how he could know that, and who told him, and is it true at all?

What I do find interesting is the fact that he acknowledges that it was very probably the death of Fred Shipman's mother when he was 17 years old, that caused Shipman's disturbance and trauma. And he writes in good detail of the effect this must have had on him and his subsequent actions as a doctor.

Apart from the 'dubious' parts in the book, this is quite an interesting read; although the writer does seem to get a little muddled at times, such as when he confuses Winifred Mellor for Bianka Pomfret when he mixes up the two stories of when Father Dennis Maher was in the house after Mrs Mellor's death and the subsequent conversation between some of the bereaved relatives and Dr Shipman. (The writer attributes this story to Bianka Pomfret)Also he dosen't appear to mention Stan Egerton who played such a big part in the police side of things, but rather he seems to substitute Egerton with DCI Williams.........

There is one very small chapter towards the end of the book which was contributed by an 'anonymous doctor' who is a cancer specialist which makes very interesting reading; and I quote:

I've followed the Shipman case closely, and I can tell you I have personally 'killed' hundreds of patients with huges doses of morphine. But because they were suffering from cancer, no one has ever turned around and questioned my wisdom in administering those drugs.

So where do you draw the line? If one of my patients is obviously suffering both emotionally and physically, I often make that decision without any reference to their relatives if I feel certain that painful death is just around the corner.

Does that make me a mass murderer?

And I am not talking about a couple of instances a year. I probably 'kill'at least three or four patients a month.

The 'anonymous' doctor then goes on to say that perhaps Dr Shipman genuinely wanted to prevent people from suffering and had a misguided conviction that he needed to ease the pain for these people,just as morphine eased the pain of his own mother.

As the doctor points out, there appeared to be no sexual gratification on Dr Shipman's part, so this observation should supply us with food for thought as to why this sad, and clever man did what he did in his capacity as a doctor.

Louise

AUTHOR APPEARS TO EXAGERATE TO 'SPICE' UP CONTENTS
The previous reviewer from Hyde tends to think that certain inaccuracies make the contents of this book questionable. I tend to agree with that observation. The fact that the person knew Dr Shipman also adds to this assumption. I am sure Dr Shipman was a lovely man as has been the opinion of many people who knew him.

Wensley Clarkson is an American writer, and as such is used to writing about hideously violent and depraved true crime cases as is advertised in the back of this paperback book. As a result, I got the impression that he was determined to 'spice' up the contents (at least in places) to add to the 'shock' value of the story.

Some of the things he says make me wonder how he could know that, and who told him, and is it true at all?

What I do find interesting is the fact that he acknowledges that it was very probably the death of Fred Shipman's mother when he was 17 years old, that caused Shipman's disturbance and trauma. And he writes in good detail of the effect this must have had on him and his subsequent actions as a doctor.

Apart from the 'dubious' parts in the book, this is quite an interesting read; although the writer does seem to get a little muddled at times, such as when he confuses Winifred Mellor for Bianka Pomfret when he mixes up the two stories of when Father Dennis Maher was in the house after Mrs Mellor's death and the subsequent conversation between some of the bereaved relatives and Dr Shipman. (The writer attributes this story to Bianka Pomfret)Also he dosen't appear to mention Stan Egerton who played such a big part in the police side of things, but rather he seems to substitute Egerton with DCI Williams.........

There is one very small chapter towards the end of the book which was contributed by an 'anonymous doctor' who is a cancer specialist which makes very interesting reading; and I quote:

I've followed the Shipman case closely, and I can tell you I have personally 'killed' hundreds of patients with huges doses of morphine. But because they were suffering from cancer, no one has ever turned around and questioned my wisdom in administering those drugs.

So where do you draw the line? If one of my patients is obviously suffering both emotionally and physically, I often make that decision without any reference to their relatives if I feel certain that painful death is just around the corner.

Does that make me a mass murderer?

And I am not talking about a couple of instances a year. I probably 'kill'at leath three or four patients a month.

The 'anonymous' doctor then goes on to say that perhaps Dr Shipman genuinely wanted to prevent people from suffering and had a misguided conviction that he needed to ease the pain for these people,just as morphine eased the pain of his own mother.

As the doctor points out, there appeared to be no sexual gratification on Dr Shipman's part, so this observation should supply us with food for thought as to why this sad, and clever man did what he did in his capacity as a doctor.