Kate Winkler Dawson is the author of the new book American Sherlock: Murder, Forensics, and the Birth of American CSI. It focuses on the life of pioneering forensic scientist Edward Oscar Heinrich. Dawson also has written the book Death in the Air. She is a documentary producer, and she teaches journalism at the University of Texas at Austin.
Q: You note that you first learned of Edward Oscar Heinrich
while looking through an encyclopedia of crime. What made you decide to write
his biography?
A: I’ve never really been interested in biographies, I’m interested
in events, but with American Sherlock, when I read about his train robbery case
and his moniker “American Sherlock,” how could you not be fascinated by this?
I have a checklist—first, is this somebody people have heard
of before? He didn’t have a Wikipedia page. Is he important? Is what he studied
important now? How did he make history?
It has to be a cool time period for me, the older the
better. I really like the 1800s and 1900-1950. The cases in his heyday fit in
with the period I’m interested in.
One of the biggest challenges was, What is his archive like?
Theodore Heinrich, his son, became famous and had an incredible archive. His
Watson had an archive. That amount of information was really important to me.
It took a long time to dig through it.
I give props to the archivist Lara Michels at UC Berkeley,
who bent over backwards to help me. It was a tapestry I had to put together.
Q: You describe Heinrich as "a productive
hoarder." As you researched the book, what did you find in his archive
that especially surprised you?
A: Particularly with a productive hoarder, you would expect
in-depth files on his cases. I was surprised what a controlling person he was
in his personal life with his finances.
You can’t show a sense of humor in narrative nonfiction, but
there’s a line that he even journaled when he journaled. He even put down when
he smoked a pipe. And he literally chronicled every single thing he spent money
on.
I did a last-ditch search on his father, and I found out
about his suicide, and it all came together. That was the reason he was the way
he was.
Q: How well known was he during his lifetime, and why
haven't more people written about him?
A: He was a household name in the 1920s and ‘30s because he
was connected to cases that were household names.
Nobody has written about him because of the size of his
collection. Any serious journalist would have to sit down and go through it. To
do it right was quite an endeavor.
The collection was so overwhelming. The archive was so big—it
included loaded guns, maxipads, locks of hair from the Arbuckle case, the jaw
of Bessie Ferguson. He shouldn’t have kept any of this.
Q: What do you see as his legacy today?
A: His legacy teaches us about the power of forensics and
how it can be used and misunderstood and keep people safe and also abused. He
was guilty of both.
He was on the forefront of a discipline that shifted who we
are as a society, but he made big mistakes that were not intentional. But when
you develop a new science, you’re going to make assumptions, and he was so
egotistical that he thought he was infallible.
Q: What are you working on now?
A: Another project that involves neuroscience and alienists.
I’ve stared a historical true crime podcast—my books, in podcast form. One
season is about bodysnatchers. Another is about neuroscience. I come from a
documentary background, and this uses my various skills.
I respect people who do straight-up true crime, but my goal
is to elevate the genre by adding historical significance.
And I am a woman who writes about men mostly killing women.
My goal is to have the victims be as strong as the killers. It’s hard in this
field to be a feminist and write about men using women as tools. I can’t keep
making the serial killer the star.
In my podcast, I interview victims’ families; you can talk
about the family’s point of view. In any media I work in, I try to stress the
importance of not glorifying the killer but bring life to the victim and combat
gory exploitation.
Q: Anything else we should know?
A: This book for me is very personal. My father was a law
professor for 37 years. He believed in the legal system and in good forensics.
This was the first time I was able to channel my dad in the kind of book he
would appreciate. It’s been a pleasure to work on.
--Interview with Deborah Kalb
No comments:
Post a Comment