True Story: Murder, Memoir, Mea Culpa by Michael Finkel

 

In 2002, Michael Finkel was fired from his job at The New York Times when it was discovered he had used interviews from several children to create a composite character in a news story about the slave trade in the coffee industry. The NYT went through all of his other stories and could find no other examples of misattribution or falsehoods, but he was nonetheless promptly fired.

Meanwhile, a fugitive named Christian Longo was using Finkel's name as an alias while he was on the run in Mexico. Longo's wife and three children had been found murdered and Longo was the primary suspect. When Finkel found out about Longo using his name, he wrote to Longo in jail and thus began their relationship based on letters, phone calls, and occasional visits. 

True Story: Murder, Memoir, Mea Culpa is the journalistic result of this relationship. It is said that the authors of true crime have to either betray the audience or betray the subject. Finkel tries very hard to do neither, but in the end, he cannot write about Longo without doubting every word Longo says, while at the same time realizing that his own hands are not clean with regard to truth telling. Finkel goes out of his way to corroborate every word Longo writes to him, but some things are not verifiable, and, in the end, Finkel must conclude that Longo is a lying liar who lies.  

But is this a true mea culpa? I struggle with this. On one hand, while I see what he did with the composite character in his article was unethical, I honestly don't think it was *that* bad. So I don't know if he really needed to have much of a walk of shame. On the other hand, if you think what he did was the worst offense ever, I don't think this book is going to change your mind. He accepts that what he did was wrong, but basically hides behind an excuse of "my editor made me do it." 

The book is mostly about Longo, not about Finkel. Since I actually find Finkel's story more interesting (look, I listen to a lot of true crime podcasts, including a couple about the Longo case, so what can a story about yet another family annihilator tell me?), I was a tiny bit disappointed in the direction of the book. I also can see why Finkel didn't necessarily want his own story to be entangled with that of a mass murderer.  

It's an interesting story, but not really the story I wanted. 3/5 stars