Members' web sites

Want to know more about individual Crime Writers? There's a full list of CWA members' web sites on our Links page.

Speakers Groups

Murder Squad logo

Who are the Murder Squad?

Ladykillers logo

Who are the Ladykillers?

Answers on our Speakers page!

Powered By Greymatter

Crimesheet

The weblog of the Crime Writers' Association

Thursday, January 26th 2006

Never Believe a Death Certificate


Ask a member of the public what the reason is for doing an autopsy (never call it a 'necropsy' by the way) and you will probably be told that it is to find out the cause of death; this is a very sensible answer since that is what crime stories on TV, radio and printed page (including mine, I admit) tell them. There is, however, another and equally important reason for doing post mortems, one that is not suited to the ends of the crime writer. That is to determine what diseases people have and die from; in other words, a public health role. The autopsy is the most accurate method of determining what is killing the public in this country. Study after study (and not all by pathologists) has shown that clinical impression, blood investigations and all imaging techniques get it wrong a significant percentage of the time. In something like 25% of cases the PM finds something that the clinician didn't know about but would like to have done; in 10% of cases that 'something' would have affected the clinical management of the patient.

So what does this mean?

Well, for a start off, it means that a significant percentage of the death certificates in this country are inaccurate, and that means that the Public Health authorities only have a hazy picture of what people are dying of. That, in itself, might not be too catastrophic but we now have the Human Tissue Act which is one of the most misguided pieces of legislation by a government that seems to excel at such stupidity. Because of this, when a Coroner's post mortem is done, I cannot by law doing anything other than direct my investigation towards finding a cause of death. If I find something that I think requires further investigation - that might, for instance, be a familial disease with consequences for the rest of the family - I will potentially be imprisoned if I take small samples and look at them microscopically. If I find a rare disease (again not related to the cause of death) the educational value of taking a sample to show to junior doctors or lab staff has now gone; similarly so, if samples are required for research.

All of this was done to stop abuses such as Alder Hey, and that is a worthy objective, but I can't help feeling that once again potential criminals are being created rather than the existing ones dealt with.

Keith McCarthy on Thursday, January 26th 2006 @ 09:11 AM GMT [link]

Sunday, January 15th 2006

The price of ego


When you are interested in reading a book, do you:
a. immediately click on the link to the friendly Amazon site near you,
b. visit your local independent book shop,
c. go to a chain store,
d. hassle your library to order a copy for you?

I confess that ever since an indie store took on a few of my books (all "properly" published with amedium-press publisher, no vanity press here), I buy the bulk of my reading matter through them, even though I could get it up to 20% cheaper elsewhere. I buy them even though I know the Terry Pratchett I order from them will turn out to be the USA edition with geographically-challenged spelling.

Is that telling, or what?

Yvonne Eve Walus on Sunday, January 15th 2006 @ 09:26 AM GMT [link]

Wednesday, January 11th 2006

Ottakar's


We can at least be thankful that the proposed takeover of Ottakar's by Waterstones is being referred to the competition authorities (although I am doubtful of the outcome). From a consumer's point of view I have always found Ottakar's bookshops much friendlier, more relaxed places than the rather austere environs of their Waterstones equivalents. From a producer's POV, it seems to me that Ottakar's as an entity is interested in far more in the whole world of writing, as opposed to Waterstones which seems far more interested in promoting the bestsellers and celeb tie-ins. This is, of course, to a certain extent unfair, as Waterstones stocks a huge range of titles, but one must ask, do they promote them? It gives me huge pleasure to be introduced to the odd, the unusual, the whacky as well as the heavily (and expensively) promoted, and something of the delight of book-buying would be lost if Ottakar's and Waterstones became too similar.

Keith McCarthy on Wednesday, January 11th 2006 @ 07:41 PM GMT [link]

Go to: Latest Crimesheet entries or the Archives

Site map

Front page

Copyright © The CWA and individual contributors