As an oral surgeon, I can say this is the best reference book a practitioner of the dental arts can find. It is lavishly illustrated with hundreds of full-color photos of oral lesions. My oldest son even seemed to enjoy this book, although I'm not sure why he borrowed it without asking and kept it hidden under his mattress. Sadly, some of the pages have now become stained, but this book is such a gem I will happily buy another! A fine job, Drs. Neville, Damm, and Allen.

This examination of Yoruba art covers a lot of ground, temporally and geographically. It covers the Yoruba kingdom by kingdom, looking at historical objects within each area. Accessible even to those without any knowledge of African art, it also has lots to interest the specialist--some controversial views on women's roles in Ife art, assignment of Esie carvings to the Yoruba and some previously unassigned bronzes to Ijebu, identification of particular artists' work and more. Written by three experts who specialize in different Yoruba areas, the writing is seamless and well-edited, neither talking down to the reader nor unduly academic in tone. The accompanying illustrations are superb, and many are contextual images. This book introduces Yoruba philosophy, religion, oral literature, and political organization interwoven with art, providing an excellent cultural overview. I use it as a university text, but it would serve as a beautiful addition to the library of anyone interested in Africa, particularly those who want to know more about this creative ethnic group which has left such an impact on the cultures of the Americas.

Unfortunately Jerry Allen isn't much of a writer, so I wouldn't pick up this book for pleasure reading. It does, however, deliver the essential facts about Veidt and presents a convincing case that this thrilling and accomplished actor was also a real nice guy.

This book uncovers the complexities of one of the greatest artists who ever lived, and reveals how human he was. The warm and conversational style with which it is written is so befitting to its subject, and it makes the reader feel as if they've spent many hours with a good friend. Thank you, Mr. Allen, for bringing such a legend alive for fans like me!

I was very impressed with the book and amazed how accurate the information presented was,A must readfor any of my fathers fans.Thank-you Mr. Allen a marvelous job.

This text is a very good reference for oral path. Dentist and Pathologist specialized in oralfacial will find the text very helpful.

As Keith Allen Daniels says in his introduction "most of these sonnets have a past life" but this reviewer found them all fresh and new and worth more than one visit. These three poets are clearly masters of this poetic form--which lends itself well to the diverse themes of horror and dark fantasy as envisioned by the individual authors.

But it is the distinctive storytelling of Ann K. Schwader that truly shines in "Pages from a Paperback Imagination". Her technique of overlaying contemporary heroes (Avalon, Avalon, Do You Read?) with the stuff of myth and legend is unique. The 14 lines of "Dead Girls Don't Cry" are filled with an in-depth characterization this reviewer usually only finds in novels -- and her monsters (Poraymos/The Devouring) are too real to ever be forgotten.

Powerful poetry here. Highly recommended.

Contrary to what MacDonald and his supporters believe, the book and movie "Fatal Vision" did NOT convict him. Twelve jurors did this in 1979. Did he get a fair trial? After reading this, I would have to say no. However, I must take issue with several things printed in this book.

Helena Stoeckley was a chronic drug abuser. Even her OWN MOTHER stated that you couldn't trust a word that came out of Helena's mouth. She was incoherent, she confessed and recanted many times. It is not unusual to have innocent people confess to crimes they didn't commit, especially crimes that garner a lot of publicity. Why they do this is unfathomable but it can be diagnosed as a warped bid for attention.

The candle wax seemed to have been from three different candles, not one candle being carried around the house. If these drippings were from the alleged intruders then three different candles would have been carried around the house during the commission of the murders.

However, a new trial would only result in the same verdict. MacDonald's story doesn't add up. It is a complete enemy to logic and common sense. The weapons used in the crime came from the MacDonald home. Why would intruders bent on committing murder and mayhem venture unarmed to the scene of the crime? Why would the intruders, on the way out, stop, wipe clean the weapons, and place them neatly beside a bush? Isn't it more normal for someone or someones who have committed three brutal murders to hastily discard the weapons or leave with them? And why would these intruders stop, look under the sink, and put on surgical gloves? And how would they have known that the surgical gloves were in this exact location? Remember, blood was found in front of the sink, and whoever daubed the word "PIG" in blood on the headboard of the bed in the main bedroom used surgical gloves. Even though MacDonald supposedly "fought off" these maniacal intruders, according to him, he passed out. Why did these intruders not pounce on him and finish him off? He was the real physical threat to them, not a pregnant woman and two very little girls. His wife and children suffered severe wounds that made the CID photographer physically sick. MacDonald suffered minor injuries that were most likely inflicted by Colette and/or self inflicted, especially the very precise icepick stab wound that caused a partial collapse of his lung. Who else but a physician would know where to cut in order to injure himself and lend some credence to his story yet would cause no permanent and lasting damage? No blood was found where he claimed to have been assaulted. According to MacDonald, as he was being attacked in the living room he heard his wife and daughter cry out to him, indicating that there were MORE attackers in the bedrooms. Where's the mess? How did the cards stay upright on the cabinet? Why no busted walls and furniture in the bedrooms from someone swinging a club? That apartment was small. Colette and Kimberly suffered severe beatings from a club. And the walls of the apartment were paper thin. Why is it that no one else other than MacDonald reported hearing the screams? In a house with five occupants and several attackers, surely someone's got to hear something! It was raining that night. No MP's or medics reported seeing water on the floor or muddy footprints like there would be if someone coming from outside tracked them inside. In MacDonald's first interview with the Army Investigators on 6th April 1970 he made a couple of telling slip ups - he stated three times that he fought the killers off at the foot of the "bed" not the "couch" - because the only fighting he was doing that night was at the foot of the bed. It was dark in the living room that night and things were surely happening real fast. How is it that a man who wasn't wearing his glasses was able to get such a detailed look at his attackers? And what about the pyjama top? How did Colette's blood on it before it was torn? And why were there neat, round, cylindrical holes in it? MacDonald stated that he was using it to ward off the attackers. Well if this was true, wouldn't the holes in the pyjama top be slashes and tears and not neat little holes? And why were there no defensive wounds on his hands? He was supposedly grappling with attackers who were armed with sharp instruments. Colette had two broken arms, obviously defensive wounds and obviously fractured while protecting herself from someone armed with a club. Two year old Kristen had defensive wounds on her hands and fingers. Why not MacDonald? MacDonald was under investigation for nine years before he was convicted. Why did he not seek the murderers himself, if not through the Army CID, the FBI, or the Justice Department, then through a private investigator?

It's been over thirty years since the tragic murders of Colette, Kimberly, and Kristen. MacDonald sits in prison today, still proclaiming his innocence, and there are those who believe him. However, can anyone give a satisfactory answer to the questions I have raised? No. Not in thirty years has anyone been able to do that. And that's why he sits in prison today, because his story is, to use police parlance, hinky. It doesn't jibe. The man is guilty as charged, guilty as convicted, and guilty as imprisoned.

IN MY OPINION THERE IS MORE THAN A 50% CHANCE THAT AN INNOCENT MAN SITS BEHIND BARS FOR A CRIME HE DIDN'T COMMIT. I READ THE BOOK AND HAVE SAW THE MOVIE FATAL VISION AND I WASN'T A 100% SURE HE WAS GUILTY THEN EITHER. I BELIEVE THAT THE PROSECUTORS WITHHELD ANY INFORMATION THAT WOULD HAVE BROUGHT QUESTION OF McDONALDS Innocence AND IT IS CLEAR TO ANYONE WHO READS THIS BOOK THAT THERE WAS A COVER-UP FROM THE ARMY ALL THE WAY UP TO THE FBI. THERE IS SUPPOSED TO BE DNA IN THE PROCESS OF PROVING THIS MAN'S INNOCENCE WHAT IS THE HOLD UP! LET ME LEAVE THE READERS WITH THIS QUESTION TO THINK ABOUT AND THEN TELL ME IF YOU THINK JEFFERY MCDONALD KILLED HIS FAMILY. IF THE GOVERNMENT CAN CONCEAL EVIDENCE ON ONE OF OUR COUNTRYS GREATEST PRESIDENTS (JFK) AND KILL HIM. THEN TO FRAME JEFFERY MCDONALD WOULD BE A WALK THROUGH THE PARK! AND ALSO REMEMBER THERE ARE STILL QUESTIONS INTO PRESIDENT JFK'S DEATH ALMOST 40 YEARS LATER.

What is the real evidence? Why was he charged? Why was he convicted? These questions will be answered by the government laboratory notes and documents obtained by the Freedom of Information Act.

Early one morning the MacDonald family was attacked in their home; only Jeffrey survived. CID disbelieved his story, but the charges were dropped. Later Jeffrey would be convicted of the murder of his wife and children. Yet a number of people in law enforcement and criminal justice believe he is innocent. A former chief of the FBI's LA Bureau says he was framed. A famous defense lawyer said the conviction was "the product of prosecutorial chicanery" (p.19). These claims are based on government reports and documents previously kept secret.

Page 22 tells How Things Work; it is not a conspiracy. "All you need to do is convince your superiors that this guy's getting away with murder. If some of the evidence is confusing, that evidence just disappears or gets interpreted in the government's favor. The judge and jury see a rigged case. It happens more than any of us would like to admit" (p.24). How can an innocent man get convicted? The prosecutor controls the evidence! And the judge is really part of the prosecution. The idea is to get convictions: this leads to a bigger budget. Evidence was manufactured against Jeffrey MacDonald, and the evidence for the others was kept back (p.34). Short brown hair was found clutched in Colette MacDonald's left hand; it did not match anyone in the family. More than three dozen finger of palm prints found at the murder scene were never identified. Long blond hairs were found on a hairbrush at the scene. Multiple bloody gloves were also found. Helena Stoeckly and Greg Mitchell both confessed to taking part in the murders.

JMD was convicted because of suppressed evidence of his innocence and the tainted evidence (p.129). Page 147 tells of the "major discrepancies between separate findings by the CID and FBI labs". The laboratory notes would contradict the prosecutor's claims (p.148). Page 157 tells of created evidence: bloody hair twisted around pajama fiber. It was not found until after the prosecutor hand-carried it to the laboratory. Should this be grounds for an appeal?

The description of the killers given by JMD just happened to match a group of Fayetteville drug users seen around the time of the murders (p.270). The army and government reports show a consistent practice of holding back evidence that supported his claims. This tainted the case. Page 283 tells of the false affidavits filed by the FBI. Page 284 tells how Judge Dupree fixed this case. Pages 293-4 tell of Murtagh's attempts to hide exculpatory evidence before the trial, and how it succeeded at the trial! In 1985 Judge Dupree rejected a petition for a new trial because of the lack of evidence for intruders. But he earlier ruled against turning over this evidence to the defense (p.311)! The Puretz memo documented how this trick worked (pp. 313-4).

Did the local drug lord order the attack on the MacDonald family as a reprisal against Jeffrey's anti-drug efforts? And then use his political connections to blame Jeffrey and avoid a search for the real killers? Page 387 may give a reason why the innocent JMD was railroaded to prison: his affair with a civilian secretary. Did this make a powerful enemy?

well, it should be an excellent book but finally turns out to be a nightmare due to too many mistakes. Few files in the book can be used directly and mistakes could be found every page. Just a waste of time and energy.

This book tries to show how to 'do ActiveX' without explaining what ActiveX (or COM) is. It gives some 'recipes', but doesn't explain the gotchas. As far as recipes go, some areas that were important for my project were missing (variant and safearray manipulation, threading models) I think anyone whose serious about ActiveX programming (especially the distributed-computing part) should have some understanding of the inner-workings of COM. This book does not touch this issue at all. Another issue not touched is the structure of ATL and the OLE parts of MFC (which is hard to explain without explaining COM first). So I'd say this is book is good for someone who needs to get something out the door tomorrow, assuming that the book's 'recipes' cover all the project's needs (which is not very likely...)

Gotta give it to them, when time is money, having full examples for MFC and ATL implementations of the same COM Servers is very very useful. The BaseCtl versions are very specific to a framework very few people even heard about. Two out of three ain't bad. But reality is that there's a third approach that's only lightly touched upon, and that's straight API calls, straight, that is, with VC++5's help. VC++ is getting to be COM savvier all the time, and here is another flaw in this book: instead of talking about both sides of the C/S COM relationship, and mentioning the latest VC++5 wonders like the client side #import statement, the smart pointers and so on, they talk about "containers", like from the old OCX days. COM is a much cooler and wider world than just a way to create ready-made GUI components. Where this book feels dated is in its focus on the server side of the OCX type COM object. Wish they came out with an addendum in electronic form, 'cause at $50 with no CD, it's a little like those one-of-a-kind GM transmission wrenches, which are inescapable when ya need them, but later earn slightly resentful glances taking up space on the wall. But that's still a solid 8, maybe a 10 if ya got a transmission to work on today.