Being Canadian and a former criminology student, I've read all the literature related to the Paul/Karla case. I snagged this book, thinking, 'Hmm, this could be interesting...the whole case from Paul's perspective...', and after reading the first couple pages thought, 'What on earth is this?'

Maybe it's just because I prefer actual content, but I was monumentally unimpressed with this book. I've actually never seen a book that annoyed me more than this one did. I started thinking that this was the author's way of displaying her feelings, and ended up wondering if the author had some sort of obsession with Bernardo. Many of the poems and jottings within this book had me thinking that if someone was sending this stuff to me, I would be writing 'Return to Sender' on the envelope.

Crosbie had an interesting idea in writing her take on one of Canada's most notorious criminals (one of the few whose names Americans recognize), but it didn't come out correctly on paper. Rather than seem as a collage of a woman's thoughts and views on a heinous event, it almost seemed as though Crosbie was obsessing over both the crimes and the criminal, trying to connect herself to both events.

I would highly recommend 'Invisible Darkness', 'Lethal Marriage', or 'Deadly Innocence' (my personal preference is for 'Invisible Darkness', as it gave the information without villifying Paul and glorifying Karla, something many commentaries are guilty of). I do not recommend 'Karla's Web' by Frank Davey for anyone who is interested in the details of the trial itself, as it's more a sociological look at society. But I still keep an eye out for a book that questions giving a self-admitted murdered only a twelve year sentence, and when it comes out, it will be one I jump on.

I have never, and I mean NEVER read a book so terrible (and I've read some bad stuff). This book is very bad!... I bought this book assuming it was a collection of the letters between the author and Paul Bernardo. WRONG! The first page says it is based on a collection of fictional writings. So why is it in "TRUE" crime? What a let down. If anyone reads this review, take it from one person to another... don't waste your money!

Certain other reviewers are upset because this book is listed as "true crime," and offended because it isn't. It's presumably in "true crime" with his face on the cover because the publisher decided that was how they'd reach the largest audience. Authors don't decide these things, and it's not reasonable to hold them responsible.

As to whether it's "fictional" or not -- the author wrote the letters and collected the clippings, so no, it's not really. The book is an exploration of a woman's reaction to these crimes...if you're expecting a movie-of-the-week true crime pulp, this isn't it.