The Murder Business: How the Media Turns Crime Into Entertainment and Subverts Justice

The Murder Business: How the Media Turns Crime Into Entertainment and Subverts Justice

by Mark Fuhrman

NOOK Book(eBook)

View All Available Formats & Editions

Available on Compatible NOOK Devices and the free NOOK Apps.
WANT A NOOK?  Explore Now


Crime stories fascinate the public. But between factual news stories, overblown “human interest” reports, and salacious murder mystery exposes, it’s difficult to tell where news ends and entertainment begins. Mark Fuhrman, best-selling author of Murder in Brentwood, explores this fine line, revealing new and shocking details on such high-profile cases as Jon Benet Ramsey, Martha Moxley and Chandra Levy.

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9781596981294
Publisher: Regnery Publishing
Publication date: 10/12/2009
Format: NOOK Book
Pages: 194
Sales rank: 966,196
File size: 338 KB

About the Author

Mark Fuhrman is a former LAPD detective, true crime writer, and talk radio host. He is primarily known for his part in the investigation of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, and for his subsequent felony conviction for perjury.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See All Customer Reviews

The Murder Business: How The Media Turns Crime Into Entertainment and Subverts Justice 3.6 out of 5 based on 0 ratings. 14 reviews.
dedicatedmysterylover More than 1 year ago
I enjoyed it. A page turner, I couldn't put it down. I agree with him on ALL points, especially his main point of the book regarding the media and it's effect on the criminal justice system. I always asked myself, " if these host lawers are commenting on tv as the trial is going on, isn't there something wrong with that?. Dont the Lawers in that active trial get some pointers from their comments? The jury can"t discuss anything but they can on tv? I have great respect for Mark Fuhrman.He knows his stuff.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
"the murder business" is a very hard to put down book. los angeles police detective mark fuhrman has done a remarkable job researching and documenting many capital murders and he shows how the media has made a killing off of each detail and how certain television outlets use these crimes to up their ratings this book is very fasinating to me because as a law enforment officer the writer is able to bring in more details of these crimes that the average arthur has not been able to find the public will learn more details about these crimes as well as what can be done in the future. great gift idea for a friend or family
dogWY More than 1 year ago
Well worth reading
Carolynn Dixon More than 1 year ago
good job on exsplaining.
mockturtle More than 1 year ago
Mr. Fuhrman is probably a very good detective and is capable of putting together some material that is both interesting and salable. In this book, he puts forth a valid criticism of the media: That they pick certain types of stories with 'attractive' victims to bolster their news ratings by keeping these stories alive. Unfortunately, his efforts to support his premise seem to flounder after the first chapter or two. He seems more intent on proving that he was smarter and more competent than the local law enforcement officers. He's probably right, but that's not what the book purports to be about.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
SurelyYouJest More than 1 year ago
Coeur d'Alene Press, The (ID) RESPONSE: Writer was right about Fuhrman Published: April 15, 2007 My compliments to Ted Leach in his letter to The Press when he told the public that Mark Fuhrman is just that, a fraud. Oh, of course, Fuhrman was with the LAPD for 20 years, most of the time was spent attempting to obtain a medical retirement for emotional stress. This is documented. Let it be known, Mark Fuhrman never was a homicide detective, not even at the time of the Brentwood murders. The truth is when the murders were discovered, Fuhrman was on duty in West Los Angeles as a detective, his duties were limited to burglary investigations, not murder, Fuhrman has FOX News convinced he is an expert in crimes against persons. Take it from me, he is not an expert by any stretch of anyone's imagination but his. For those who remember, F. Lee Bailey cross examined Fuhrman during the Simpson trial, at which time he demonstrated a disgraceful presentation when he lied and stretched his own imagination. Let be known, Mark Fuhrman on at least two occasions made formal application to the famed RHD (Robbery/Homicide Division) LAPD, and was rejected, yes, rejected for lack of experience and emotional stability. His only contribution is his book that told many fabricated episodes of the Brentwood murders. Fuhrman's only responsibility during the Brentwood murders was to preserve the crime scene and relinquish the scene to the homicide detectives upon their arrival - nothing more, nothing less. Those who claim that Fuhrman did not plant evidence at the Simpson house have to think again and examine the record. F. Lee Bailey suggested Fuhrman planted evidence, but then Simpson was guilty, wasn't he? Of course he was, the evidence at the murder scene demonstrated Simpson committed the murders, but the jury found Simpson not guilty. Why? Because of fabrications by Fuhrman. Last but not least, Mark Fuhrman underwent a polygraph examination to demonstrate he did not plant evidence at the Simpson house. The record reveals that Fuhrman underwent a polygraph examination back in Maryland - the polygraph was administered by a former student of mine. When I requested to examine the polygraph test, I was ignored. Very suspicious, wouldn't you think? Then who am I to make the request to examine the polygraph test of Fuhrman - I am just the person who wrote the book on detecting deception, published by the University of North Florida, Institute of Police Training and Management, to mention a simple credential among many, and yes, I was once a scientific investigator at LAPD years before Mark Fuhrman ever thought of becoming a police officer. Again, Ted Leach, you are on the target, but for some reason, I think you could have exposed more concerning Mark Fuhrman. As for Mark Fuhrman looking for another place to relocate to, it may be something worth considering, after all, the radio program is going nowhere, and not a favorite item to listen to during any given day. TED PONTICELLI Post Falls
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
the-13th-juror More than 1 year ago
Fuhrman goes on Fox and makes judgements on how the media is turning crime into entertainment and profit. He is doing the exact same thing! How much will he make on this book or the last one and the one before that. He is right about one thing, that he can't be both journalist and detective. Fuhrman only sees it his way and never leaves room for debate. I think the media's focus on crime is positive because it makes us all aware that it lurks around every corner and to watch kids more closely. I really could not get into it. He still believes the Ramsey parents killed their kid. The Boulder, Colorado D.A. cleared the Ramsey's DNA in 2008, how can you still believe otherwise. Fuhrman makes assumptions on the Caylee Anthony case on how the grandmother keeps her house spotless. I don't equate having a spotless house to knowing of or having knowledge of, their granddaughter's disappearance. She did call the police and reported it, the grandparents are not the guilty party here, nor on trial. I feel sorry for this family who are torn between the love of their daughter and granddaughter. Fuhrman was a detective 6 months prior to working the Simpson murder case and a regular patrol officer for the rest. Fuhrman preaches media dishonesty in his book, then he too should practice it. What murder case has Fuhrman actually solved? Not the Moxley case, because that report was given to him from writer Dominick Dunne. He stated in his book that Lange and Vannatter were inexperienced conducting their initial investigation of the murders of Goldman and Brown-Simpson because their work at the crime scene was incompetent and they were in awe of Simpson. At least Lange and Vannatter have solved a murder. Why he is telling the public, his opinion about the media's fascination with crime? What does Fuhrman expect us to do about it? We don't run the news networks, however, he made Fox an exception to the rule or is that because they write his paychecks? It's so hypocritical, if Fuhrman has a problem with the media, then why doesn't he just quit his own job at Fox first and set an example for the rest of us subverts.