So, Droll... You're reading that new book by "TCDG." What's the word on it? I saw this morning that it's gotten one good review, and it's #1 in the True Crime category. What's your opinion?
Thank you for providing more clarification on the issue of a coroner needing a warrant! I wondered about that, actually.
I'm only on chapter 4 so far, but my preliminary reaction is that it's pretty good. Probably not required reading for anyone who's familiar with the case but a good primer for a newbie or refresher for the casual case follower. It's full of quotes from the other important books (Thomas, Kolar, PMPT), the Ramseys' interviews (even Burke's recent Dr. Phil interview) and other official sources. If you've spent enough time reading about the case, you will be familiar with the material.
Something I appreciate about that, though, is that they take the time to touch on aspects of the case often discussed online (such as the mysteriously oversized Bloomies or the JBR foundation) but not covered in depth in ST or JK's book. So instead of delivering a straight up rehash they do try to highlight interesting things neglected in other books I've read. Considering they haven't told me anything I don't basically already know, I've found their commentary and presentation pretty worthwhile and insightful so far.
It is refreshing that there is really no pretense that the authors think the Ramseys may be uninvolved. Which is not to say they have any stated agenda, it's just that when you lay out the facts of the case and the Ramseys' behavior after the crime, common sense will lead you right to familial involvement. To paraphrase the famous line, reality has an RDI-bias. The false assumption that there is a fifty-fifty chance of RDI or IDI plagues many "unbiased" presentations of this case (see: nearly every recent TV special), leading to a maddeningly wishy-washy analysis and a tendency to give the Ramsey version of events (there was an intruder and we were persecuted by biased police, FBI, CBI, reporters who refused to look at anyone but us) the benefit of a doubt and unnecessary airtime. But the evidence is not fifty-fifty; there is no hard "intruder" evidence to counter the vast amount of circumstantial evidence against the Ramseys. The intruder theory mostly consists of unanswered questions (e.g. where did the duct tape come from, what's the deal with all this DNA) and the aforementioned benefit of a doubt, the human urge to believe a family could not do this to their child. It's more of an intellectual exercise than a coherent theory: how can you contort and finagle the known facts to construct an alternate reality where inserting an outside entity into this crime is necessary, or even makes sense?
So I appreciate that this book does not waste the reader's time (or insult their intelligence) with that noise. At the same time, I do not see any indication that they intend to come to a conclusion as to which R is guilty of what, which is even more appreciated - that is a much more important bias to eliminate when offering an overview of this case. I haven't had a chance to look very hard at the appendices (timelines, floor plans, DNA reports/interpretation) but they look pretty good, although not groundbreaking.
So in summary, at about 1/4th of the way through I'd say it's a good resource for anyone wanting to dig into the Ramsey saga. Not a must buy for old-timers, not offering anything you couldn't find for free by researching online, certainly not perfect...but a solid, up-to-date introduction and case companion that I would have appreciated when I first got into the case.