Whoever Fights Monsters: My Twenty Years Tracking Serial Killers...

Features

• Cover Type: Mass Market Paperback with 289 pages
• Published by: St. Martin's Paperbacks March 15, 1993
• Written in: English
• ISBN 10 Number: 0312950446
• ISBN 13 Number: 978-0312950446
• Book Dimensions: 6.7 x 4.2 x 1.1 inches
• Weighs: 4.8 ounces

Product Review
This book is an overview of the career of the FBI man who nearly single-handedly created the system for personality profiling of violent offenders. If there's a big-time multiple murderer from about 1950 until now who hasn't been interviewed by Robert Ressler, he probably refused the honor. Indispensable reading for serial killer mavens, and better written than John Douglas and Mark Olshaker's Mindhunter, this book is packed with fascinating details from dozens of cases: The killer John Joubert, for example, started his life of cruelty as a kid one day when he was riding his bike with a sharpened pencil in his hand. He rode up next to a little girl who was walking, and stabbed her in the back with the pencil. Ouch!

From Publishers Weekly
Former FBI agent Ressler, who coined the term "serial killer" in the 1970s, recounts in straightforward style his interviews with such infamous murderers as Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy and Ted Bundy. A BOMC selection in cloth. Photos.
Copyright 1993 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Reader Reviews
For those of you who are not big fans of serial killers and the people who catch them (or at least won't admit it publicly), Bob Ressler is the guy who invented the term "Serial Killer" and helped usher in a new understanding of repeat criminals and why they do what they do. The citizens of the U.S. owe a lot to Bob. So does Thomas Harris, who interviewed him extensively for Manhunter and Silence of the Lambs. Alas, truth is stranger than fiction, and the tales Ressler tells are positively awful. There' just one problem: we've heard all of this before. Where? That'd be "Mindhunter: Inside the FBI's Elite Serial Crime Unit," by John E. Douglas, a man I can only assume was Ressler's protégé. It's a bit murky as to their relationship (the two reference each other, but not often). The parallels are unmistakable-it's interesting to read the opinions of two different people interviewing the same serial killer. For example, Douglas has a bit of a creepy admiration for Ed Kemper. Kemper had a diabolical mind that he put to good use, such that eventually he figured out why he was killing women: because he hated his mother. So Kemper did what every good serial killer would do in such a situation...he killed her too. His murders "finished," Kemper called the police and gave himself up. That little story is from Douglas' point of view. It almost makes Kemper out to be a sympathetic figure. A six-foot tall, 300 pound sympathetic figure, but sympathetic nonetheless. Ressler is not so kind. Ressler interviews Kemper alone at one point. Having finished the interview, Ressler rings for the guard...but nobody comes. Sensing his discomfort, Kemper explains how he could probably screw Ressler's head off with his bare hands and nobody would be able to do anything about it. Kemper goes on to explain how he has nothing to lose and how, by killing an FBI agent, he'd get quite a bit of "prison cred." Fortunately, Ressler keeps a cool head (and keeps his head) by playing the little mind game right back at the massive serial killer until the guards escort him out. "You know I was only kidding, right?" says Kemper, putting a hand on Ressler's shoulder. Whoever Fights Monsters is a lot like that. It simultaneously takes on tough subjects, summarizes them from a clinical perspective, and then reminds you-sometimes quite sternly-that these people are murderers. Where Douglas tends to talk about himself and the heavy toll that dealing with serial killers took on his own personal psyche, Ressler is much more detached and observant. Douglas advocates the death penalty, Ressler does not. Douglas embraces the glory and publicity of being a trailblazer in his field, Ressler worries about the depersonalization of the victims and the celebrity-status of the killers themselves. Who's right? There are no right answers here. Of the two books, Douglas' is more entertaining because he chooses to be more dramatic. The two books track each other very closely, such that if you've read one, you probably don't need to read the other one. Unlike Douglas' book, Ressler admits when he makes mistakes. He also goes into more detail as to the method and process of profiling, which is why I originally bought both books. But it's simply not as exciting a read. Nevertheless, Ressler's tale is an important one: serial killers are mistakes. They're the results of terrible human failings and something to be ashamed off, not celebrated. In that respect, Ressler's story is a more socially responsible (if not as thrilling) examination of the worst humanity has to offer. Comment | | (Report this)