Hot Prowl by Jack Gray

[debris]

Sept 2, 2013 6:00:40 GMT Drifter said:

For the time being, I have no plans to buy this book. Unlike most of you, I am not impressed with what I see.

Who exactly is this "Jack Gray"? Why does he refuse to identify his historical connection to the case? If he had any legitimate connection, you would think he would say so in the book. If he simply failed to identify his connection, then he's a lousy writer.

T&S has already indicated there is no new info here. Sounds to me like an opportunist trying to make some money.

But in a larger sense ...

There's not a lot of critical thinking in this case. A big problem on this board is that very few posters ever question the authority behind media presentations. Posters assume, without justification, that all media efforts are noble, and that the info thus presented is accurate and worthy of respect. And so, posters, in their unlimited craving for legit information, fall over themselves, gushing their approval of every media effort and turn the author or documentary maker into a celebrity.

Movieman makes a documentary about Janelle, but can't answer basic questions about where she lived.

The LA mag article writer allowed herself to be used by current LE in their devious public relations blitz about this case. Yet posters swoon all over the author like she's a deity, seeing no problem with, or more likely not even seeing, her submissive, subserviant role.

And now a book by some author we've never heard of ...

It's really kinda nauseating ... all this hero worship of the media ... Media people are all certainly celebrities on this board. Too bad that most of us are so taken in by them.

Drifter

Drifter, 

You certainly have a point about the importance of sources being credible and not assuming everything we read/see/hear as fact.

Personally, I value every fresh set of eyes and every mouth who's willing to put time & effort into making the public aware that this a$%^&*# is
still out there.  I really don't care about who becomes well known, or even who makes money.  I want this guy identified.  Period.  

JMO

---Deb  

[portofleith]

Drifter-

I happen to work in the field of public relations.  There is no such thing as "bad publicity" when trying to increase visibility of an issue or person in the media.  I have read excerpts of the book and have ordered it, because I do not think anyone can review a book without reading it.  However, I do understand where you are coming from in terms of credibility.  Unfortunately, we all are subjected daily to a selective winnowing of information, each time we log into yahoo, google, etc.  It is our job to to take the research as far as we can go.  It would be irresponsible not to perform our own due diligence on anything we read about this case.

[movieman]

I came onto this board because I was promised this one would be different from the A&E one.

However, I am appalled with the ways Drifter yields his authority as a moderator on here.

His words may not be as troll-like as others in the past, but he is not helping with producing a positive atmosphere on this board.

He takes cheap potshots because he has a bully pulpit to stand on here... and this is obviously feeding his sickening ego.

(And he apparently can't read or understand English or he would know the meaning of what we are writing--without him questioning to the point that we think we need to write in small, simple words for him to grasp the simple structure of a sentence.)

[Drifter]

quote from Port ...
"There is no such thing as "bad publicity" when trying to increase visibility of an issue or person in the media."
----------------------------------------------------------

You certainly are correct in the case of the Original Night Stalker. (Trying to spell out relevant words here, consistent with T&S advising that it will help re: internet searches) .

So yes, lots of publicity is a good thing.

Potential problems reside in the content of that publicity. In other words there are two separate issues here. One is the publicity, per se. I doubt that anyone would disagree with the need for that. The other is the publicity's content which may or may not be helpful, depending on a number of factors.

Recent publicity has been good. But the content, though credible in some ways, has not necessarily been of the highest quality owing to lots of missed opportunities. Media presentations tend to reach a lot of people. As such, the person responsible for such presentations has a responsibility to do the best he or she can with their content. And ideally these individuals should be humble, given that they have a bully pulpit to say just about anything they want to say.

They need to be judged against a high standard, more so than we on this board. Many readers or viewers do not have the critical thinking skills necessary to think for themselves and will, as a result, assume that the presenter is some guru whose material is automatically flawless.

[debris]

Yes, Drifter, you are right....high standards. I feel that we owe it to each other, the victims & the public to take in EVERYTHING
we can that is published or broadcast on these crimes, if for no other reason than to see what is accurate and to perhaps re-educate the public about what is not.

[debris]

And, by the way, nobody ever promised me anything about this board. I'm here because I choose to be here. Good, bad & ugly....It's
all progress as far as I'm concerned.

---Deb

[Drifter]

Sept 2, 2013 22:42:41 GMT debris said:

Yes, Drifter, you are right....high standards. I feel that we owe it to each other, the victims & the public to take in EVERYTHING
we can that is published or broadcast on these crimes, if for no other reason than to see what is accurate and to perhaps re-educate the public about what is not.

You are of course quite right.

Your subtext (I use that word a lot in my IMDb movie reviews) is that we need to read the Jack Gray book if for no other reason than to zero in on possible flaws, inconsistencies, etc. to have a good grasp of the weakness of said book.  And I can understand that.

I believe it was "cerulean" who, over at the A&E board, gave a scathing review of Sudden Terror.  Someone correct me if I'm wrong.  She was about the only one who saw any major flaws in the book.  And she was quite vocal about it.

I didn't really agree with her criticism.  Yes I could see some imperfections and things I would have done differently.  But overall I found the book quite helpful.  But at least she understood the value in reading the book with a critical eye.

But I think I will hold off on the Jack Gray book at least for awhile.  I'm inclined to think I would be too critical in my reading of it.  Sometimes I tend to overuse my critical thinking in an effort to compensate for the under use by others. 

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

Sept 2, 2013 15:33:17 GMT movieman said:

I came onto this board because I was promised this one would be different from the A&E one.

However, I am appalled with the ways Drifter yields his authority as a moderator on here.

His words may not be as troll-like as others in the past, but he is not helping with producing a positive atmosphere on this board.

He takes cheap potshots because he has a bully pulpit to stand on here... and this is obviously feeding his sickening ego.

(And he apparently can't read or understand English or he would know the meaning of what we are writing--without him questioning to the point that we think we need to write in small, simple words for him to grasp the simple structure of a sentence.)

Drifter,  I did invite Movieman to join us and I believe some others reached out to him as well.   I did tell him that this board is a breath of fresh air from the bickering and trollism that went on at a&e.    I, personally, want to welcome Movieman and hope he will stay with us.    Movieman has given us a lot of new information since he has joined us here and I hope he will clarify some of your questions as to which house Janelle's mother rented out and which house Janelle lived in etc. and anything else he can share with us or answer questions on.   

[lepke]

I am not going to take sides in any dispute, and I only want to say that we should all look to ourselves, and not be confrontational even when we feel like it, in order to continue with the good atmosphere on this board, and not let it become like the old board was with all the personal attacks that went on there.

[neksanalet]

Regardless of how Hot Prowl stacks up against Sudden Terror, its good to see another book shed light on this case. I would love to see someone like Larry Pool put pen to paper one day, but whoever Jack Gray is, his contributions can't hurt (unless totally fabricated). And since EAR/ONS is still woefully obscure by most public standards, I doubt the author's main intent is to cash in on some incalculable goldmine or pot of gold waiting for him.

I am curious to read why he thinks the Danville confrontation is BS. While latter-day phone call timeline to victims has remained unclear, and the town hall meeting has been disputed by some, I never read anyone challenge the validity of that particular event (though I might have and it simply slipped my mind).

And while Drifter was forceful in his opinion, I don't think he has fostered any negative atmosphere on this board or succumbed to wielding a bully pulpit. The proper response to his comment is to refute his assertions with one's own defense/contentions... not name calling. Big difference between trolling and people having differences of opinion IMO.

[Great Snowman]

I purchased Hot Prowl. It is a much more "reader friendly" than ST. I take exception to the assertion that it lacks the "narrative/non-fiction aspects of ST. There are moments where the author presumes to get in EAR/ONS's head, but those are limited.



All-in-all, I enjoyed the book. The link to the VR has been a question of mine in the past, Hot Prowl logically explains the link.

The author makes a good case for seeing the VR as EAR/ONS "in training". I was not aware of how close the two Visalia cops were to apprehending the VR. The incident makes you wonder how two cops could walk up on a guy they had observed acting suspiciously, and suspect that he could be a murderer, without having their weapons drawn! Instead, their lack of preparation enabled him to pull his own gun and fire at them and get away.



I am familiar with the areas where EAR/ONS and VR operated. It's that familiarity that makes this case even more erie.



Buy the book! I highly recommend it

[lepke]

Sept 5, 2013 16:58:00 GMT Great Snowman said:

I purchased Hot Prowl. It is a much more "reader friendly" than ST. I take exception to the assertion that it lacks the "narrative/non-fiction aspects of ST. There are moments where the author presumes to get in EAR/ONS's head, but those are limited.



All-in-all, I enjoyed the book. The link to the VR has been a question of mine in the past, Hot Prowl logically explains the link.

The author makes a good case for seeing the VR as EAR/ONS "in training". I was not aware of how close the two Visalia cops were to apprehending the VR. The incident makes you wonder how two cops could walk up on a guy they had observed acting suspiciously, and suspect that he could be a murderer, without having their weapons drawn! Instead, their lack of preparation enabled him to pull his own gun and fire at them and get away.



I am familiar with the areas where EAR/ONS and VR operated. It's that familiarity that makes this case even more erie.



Buy the book! I highly recommend it

You don't happen to be the author by any chance?

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

Sept 5, 2013 17:27:25 GMT lepke said:

Sept 5, 2013 16:58:00 GMT Great Snowman said:

I purchased Hot Prowl. It is a much more "reader friendly" than ST. I take exception to the assertion that it lacks the "narrative/non-fiction aspects of ST. There are moments where the author presumes to get in EAR/ONS's head, but those are limited.



All-in-all, I enjoyed the book. The link to the VR has been a question of mine in the past, Hot Prowl logically explains the link.

The author makes a good case for seeing the VR as EAR/ONS "in training". I was not aware of how close the two Visalia cops were to apprehending the VR. The incident makes you wonder how two cops could walk up on a guy they had observed acting suspiciously, and suspect that he could be a murderer, without having their weapons drawn! Instead, their lack of preparation enabled him to pull his own gun and fire at them and get away.



I am familiar with the areas where EAR/ONS and VR operated. It's that familiarity that makes this case even more erie.



Buy the book! I highly recommend it

You don't happen to be the author by any chance?

ROFL!

[Greg]

I'll seek the book out to read and assess from there. One thing that does strike me is the author believes the Danville confrontation is BS (to quote t&s), but hypothesizes that Sanchez confronted him and possibly inflicted enough bodily harm to cause him to "retire" for 5 years.

[lepke]

Sept 5, 2013 23:26:47 GMT Greg said:

I'll seek the book out to read and assess from there. One thing that does strike me is the author believes the Danville confrontation is BS (to quote t&s), but hypothesizes that Sanchez confronted him and possibly inflicted enough bodily harm to cause him to "retire" for 5 years.

And Apollo Creed retired more men than social security... What possible evidence is there for EAR/ONS having been injured by Greg Sanchez?