Comments on: Deadly Deception by Alva Busch (October 1998)

By: Kim Cantrell

Kim Cantrell — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 16:37:10 +0000

Dang that laziness! Shake it off, Bogaty, shake it off!

By: dan bogaty

dan bogaty — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 03:38:11 +0000

I have actually considered writing about a number of cases, but have then been struck with the realization that I’d have to do a massive amount of work.

By: Kim Cantrell

Kim Cantrell — Fri, 04 Mar 2011 23:44:07 +0000

Like I said, I did a lot of skimming in this book.

On a serious note, have you ever considered writing a book on the case?

By: dan bogaty

dan bogaty — Fri, 04 Mar 2011 05:45:33 +0000

Kim,

As you know ( I think), I started this book and found it to be among the worst written I’ve ever read, and ultimately impossible to finish.
And that’s too bad, because this is a tremendously interesting case. Over the years, the St. Louis Post Dispatch printed a number of outstanding articles which, besides being fascinating and very well done, were instrumental in freeing Rodney Woidtke.
This case cries out for an intersted professional author and researcher.
But unfortunately, Alva Busch has probably poisoned the water as far as anyone else choosing to write about it.

By: Lauren

Lauren — Thu, 06 May 2010 18:43:27 +0000

I found this website very helpful, Dale Anderson was at the time of the murders and convictions married to my Aunt. I didn’t find about this “family secret” until about five years ago. I knew there was a book written but I did not know the name of it. I am very interested to see what insight this book can give me about the man my mother called her Brother-in-law. What a creepy thought!

By: Reading Challenge

Reading Challenge — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 14:26:08 +0000

[...] Deadly Deception by Alva Busch [...]

By: Camille Kimball

Camille Kimball — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:37:18 +0000

What an interesting case! It seems too cinematic to be real. Someone could write this script and not get away with it. Just proves truth really is stranger than fiction.

It also gives insight into why courts do not allow “testimony” from the dead. The rule is if you can’t be cross examined, you can’t “testify.” In this case, if the poor girl who wrote the note could have been cross-examined by defense, she would have revealed the circumstances under which the note had been written. That’s why courts usually don’t allow in these kinds of notes although it’s often an extremely frustrating rule. This case shows us why they made the rule in the first place.

Camille Kimball
A Sudden Shot: the Phoenix Serial Shooter