Brainstorm

An Investigation of the Mysterious Death of Film Star Natalie Wood

De: Sam Perroni

Narrado por: Richard Ferrone, Suzanne Toren

Duración: 16 h y 53 m

Resumen del Editor

Brainstorm is an amazing five-year probe into the mysterious death of beloved movie star Natalie Wood by a real-life criminal law authority who determinedly pursued the truth in the face of Los Angeles County officials hell-bent on keeping it buried forever.

“After four decades, there is still more to learn about Natalie Wood’s tragic drowning. Brainstorm is one man’s passionate quest to unearth the truth.” (Beth Karas, host of Oxygen’s Snapped: Notorious, former prosecutor, and investigative journalist)

“If you have any interest in deciding for yourself whether someone got away with the murder of Natalie Wood, this book is for you.” (Marilyn Wayne, eyewitness)

Brainstorm: An Investigation of the Mysterious Death of Film Star Natalie Wood is the first-person account of Sam Perroni’s probing investigation of the actress’s death. Through lawsuits, freedom of information requests, and persistent digging, Perroni obtained unseen and confidential files, documents, photographs, and information from long-lost witnesses revealing the true circumstances surrounding Natalie Wood’s drowning.

©2022 Sam Perroni (P)2022 Recorded Books

Filled with details, theories, and data - TOO MUCH

Although theories about the death of Natalie Wood swirl around every so many years, this author's penchant for age (during event, during interview, and presently) dates, times, and duration, medical dosages and half lives, and monetary values then and now do much to detract from the narrative. To me it seems the constant recitation of such is done solely to make a longer account. Not for me. That, and other repetition, is beyond my patience.

Just the reasonable inferences, ma'am

If you're tempted to select this audiobook to learn something new, or get insight, forget it. The author's opinion about who is criminally responsible for the death of Natalie Wood may very well be true. But he doesn't even remotely make the case in this book. (I won't divulge the name, though there is little fear of a spoiler, as the author makes it clear from the start that there is one particular person whom he despises). The author is just yet another catty gentleman admirer of a Hollywood starlet, scratching the eyes out of anyone who ever ran afoul of the object of his affection. Natalie Wood was a beautiful talented woman, but he presents her quite a bit out of proportion. Similarly, others in her orbit are disproportionately maligned.

The single most annoying element of the book, however, is the willful prejudice of the presentation of the case. As referenced in the title, the term "reasonable inference" must be used two dozen times, in addition to variations and similar sentiments like "one strongly suspects", "the logical inference", "... and there's no reason to disbelieve him/her". It becomes quite clear that the author will never actually present facts or evidence to support his case. At the same time, alternate theories are rebuffed out of hand (the performance gets a higher rating, because even though it was annoying, the narrator did effectively capture the petty snark intended when saying words like "facts", which stray from his narrative). A distant second annoyance would be incessantly giving present values of money, salaries, insurance payouts, etc. Repetitive and thoroughly irrelevant.

Apparently the author is a former district attorney. It's not a surprise. Only someone with that resume could be so arrogantly assured of such a weak case (again, I don't actually think he's wrong, he just has nothing to prove it). In addition, only a DA could be so incredulous that a law enforcement officer would treat a friend with preferential treatment. Gullible or willfully ignorant, I don't know. It demonstrates the author's lack of perspective, however. He's latched onto an idea, and is bound and determined to make it fit, by reasonable inference. But who decides what's reasonable.