What do you think?
Rate this book
The New York Ripper: The True Story of Serial Killer Richard Cottingham
A shocking case of unbridled sex, sadism, prostitution, porn, singles bars, date-rape drugs, abduction, bondage, handcuffs, duct tape, torture, sexploitation, perverted paraphilic fetishes, serial killing and dismemberment on New York's notorious Times Square and the Forty-Deuce in the 1970s.
The story of Richard Cottingham, the "Times Square Ripper" or "Times Square Torso Killer", one of America's most sadistically depraved serial killers.
Historian Peter Vronsky describes his brief encounter with serial killer Cottingham in a seedy New York hotel in 1979 that later inspired him to write his bestseller history “Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters”. In “Times Square Torso Ripper” Vronsky explores the history of the notorious Forty-Deuce strip on 42nd Street near Times Square and how it spawned the sadistic monster Richard Cottingham in an era before the term "serial killer" had been coined in popular culture.
Renowned serial homicide expert Dr. Robert D. Keppel said of Richard Cottingham, “I kept asking myself what it was that ultimately intrigued me about the Cottingham case. Partly it was the level of sadistic torture that Cottingham acted out on his victims. He didn’t kill them and desecrate their bodies; he forced them to experience pain and humiliation before he killed them. Then he desecrated their bodies.”
The story of Richard Cottingham, the "Times Square Ripper" or "Times Square Torso Killer", one of America's most sadistically depraved serial killers.
Historian Peter Vronsky describes his brief encounter with serial killer Cottingham in a seedy New York hotel in 1979 that later inspired him to write his bestseller history “Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters”. In “Times Square Torso Ripper” Vronsky explores the history of the notorious Forty-Deuce strip on 42nd Street near Times Square and how it spawned the sadistic monster Richard Cottingham in an era before the term "serial killer" had been coined in popular culture.
Renowned serial homicide expert Dr. Robert D. Keppel said of Richard Cottingham, “I kept asking myself what it was that ultimately intrigued me about the Cottingham case. Partly it was the level of sadistic torture that Cottingham acted out on his victims. He didn’t kill them and desecrate their bodies; he forced them to experience pain and humiliation before he killed them. Then he desecrated their bodies.”
- GenresTrue CrimeNonfiction
156 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 19, 2017
57 people are currently reading
236 people want to read
About the author
Peter Vronsky
32 books362 followersPETER VRONSKY is an author, filmmaker, and forensic-investigative historian. He holds a Ph.D. from the University of Toronto in the history of espionage in international relations and criminal justice history.
Peter Vronsky is the author of a series of books on the history serial homicide: Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters (2004); Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters (2007); Sons of Cain: A History of Serial Killers From the Stone Age to the Present (2018)- a New York Times Editors' Choice; and most recently, American Serial Killers: The Epidemic Years 1950-2000 (2021).
He is also the author of Ridgeway: The American-Fenian Invasion and the 1866 Battle that Made Canada, the definitive history of Canada's first modern battle and the subject of his 2010 doctoral dissertation at U of T.
He lives in Toronto and Venice, Italy.
Peter Vronsky is the author of a series of books on the history serial homicide: Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters (2004); Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters (2007); Sons of Cain: A History of Serial Killers From the Stone Age to the Present (2018)- a New York Times Editors' Choice; and most recently, American Serial Killers: The Epidemic Years 1950-2000 (2021).
He is also the author of Ridgeway: The American-Fenian Invasion and the 1866 Battle that Made Canada, the definitive history of Canada's first modern battle and the subject of his 2010 doctoral dissertation at U of T.
He lives in Toronto and Venice, Italy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
March 1, 2017
This book starts out slow with Dr. Vronsky stating how on a cold, grey, overcast Sunday morning in NYC he bumps into a man coming out of the elevator in a seedy hotel in Times Square. The man was carrying a bag with hard round objects in them that felt like bowling balls. He later learns the man is Richard Cottingham and the hard round objects were his victims heads.
He then goes on to discuss the term 'serial killer' for another chapter, then Richard Cottingham's conviction, like I said the book starts out slow, but as long as he takes to get to the "point" so to say, his prolonged introduction is not boring. He writes a lot about how Times Square was in those years, making the city a character in the book, but then it is New York City.
There is a lot of information in this book, what I like is the information is not repetitive, the trial is covered briefly.
Vronsky spends a lot of time on the psychology of killer using the phrase "reptilian brain", not as an excuse, but as an explanation.
Overall I found this to be a very readable book and I recommend it to True Crime Fans.
He then goes on to discuss the term 'serial killer' for another chapter, then Richard Cottingham's conviction, like I said the book starts out slow, but as long as he takes to get to the "point" so to say, his prolonged introduction is not boring. He writes a lot about how Times Square was in those years, making the city a character in the book, but then it is New York City.
There is a lot of information in this book, what I like is the information is not repetitive, the trial is covered briefly.
Vronsky spends a lot of time on the psychology of killer using the phrase "reptilian brain", not as an excuse, but as an explanation.
Overall I found this to be a very readable book and I recommend it to True Crime Fans.
March 8, 2017
This guy was such a horrible creep and a sadist. I had heard of him but I wonder why he is not more infamous because wow. He was nasty.
June 27, 2022
Considering how much I spent on this book after it basically went out of print. A total let down.
I had read another book several years before about this case. I think around 2016 or 2017. The book was really good but was largely about his living victims. Not so much about his murder victims. After all, Richard Cottingham hadn't confessed and claimed he was innocent at the time. The living victim spoke of his methods. One victim said he literally beat her with a garden hose including the muzzle. Let alone the careful slicing and dicing he did with the knife and all the other things he did. One victim's account really said something about Richard Cottingham as a predator and it makes a lot more sense in the context of the fact that he had been active since 1967 and this was in 1979. He literally saw the victim at a club, walked up to her with a Screwdriver [vodka and orange juice] and said "Here, drink this." When I read that I was like "Wow...you just went STRAIGHT for it. Didn't waste ANY time what so ever." laughing in shock "I can't believe you. The balls on this guy!" Didn't even TRY and work his way in, to con her, to "put on the charm" just shoved a glass of liquor in her face "here, drink this!" Just speaks of his total arrogance.
I love horror movies. I've always loved slasher movies. One of my favorites and I've watched it many times for my annual Halloween marathon is Cheerleader camp. Brad, the boyfriend of the "final girl" is constantly checking out other women and he finally get's one of the hot cheerleaders alone with him. He's kissing her and she is like "I don't want this" to just be another screw and asks him "you really like me?" and then she hears the killer off in the bushes and is like "what is that?" and Brad just goes "I've had about enough of this b*llsh*t" and takes off. Every time I watch that my response is "My god, talk about being impatient!" and I aint the only fan who's had the same exact response.
One of my favorite horror movie commentators showed this scene and what was his response? "man, this guys impatient."
According to this author and it would appear so. He was the type of serial killer who liked to charm and get to know his victim beforehand. That was his usual M.O.
This book started off fairly cheap but got more expensive as time went on and now it's not only very expensive but rare to even find. I really wish I had bought it before it that happened because I almost bought a super rare book, but due to the seller's incompetence or maybe mine? I lost out on that deal. So I found a copy of this book, which I had wanted for a while and decided to buy it.
It gives a detailed description "the deuce"; the red light district of 1970's new work. A few facts about Cottingham I hadn't heard before.....but for some reason it wasn't that compelling of a read. Maybe it was the headache due to either the weather change/hard wind or too much seltzer water. Although I was only drinking 2 cans a day, but it seems like just a coincidence and bad timing. Also due to the sudden change in weather my asthma has acted up. Or maybe it has do with the fact that my shoulder began to hurt all day and I thought I might be having a heart attack and kept telling my self "I've had this before"; probably due to too much stress on my arm. But I laid in bed with my arm in pain reading this book.
Or it might be because the author isn't that good of an author to really hook me in.
The author through out the book "spoils" things ahead of the story. I put "spoil" in air quotes because as I've said. I've already read another book about the case and I've watched a docu-short about it multiple times and yes. i am aware that recently there is a docu series on the case....but I've largely been ignoring these documentaries because they end up pissing me off with "no notoriety", and barely have anything new or interesting to add to the case. I watched the recent John Wayne Gacy docu series. It was kind of boring, but had interesting parts. It was interesting to see the full interview Ressler had with Gacy and anyone who knows anything about serial killers will know that Ressler is an FBI star and that of course is another thing that pisses me off about "no notoriety"
*feigns sorrow, clutching chest* "The victims. THE POOR POOR INNOCENT VICTIMS!!!!! I'm so moral! Everyone look at me and my crocodile tears. Awwwww. I'm just heart broken off the death of someone who I NEVER EVER MET and people die every single fucking day, but I'm crying about this one."
As my favorite youtuber has said "Ya 'Murder is bad' What a brilliant fucking PROFOUND statement."
Even the majority of rapists and killers are anti murder and rape.
"What if someone did these terrible things you did to your mother or your daughter?"
98% of all serial killers/rapists: Oh, I'd want them dead. I'd kill em.
To quote mass shooter/killer James Holmes "I wouldn't want it to happen to me."
To quote from an atheist debate about the irrelevant "subjective or objective" morality. Irrelevant because WHO CARES?! WHO THE F**K CARES IF IT'S SUBJECTIVE OR OBJECTIVE?!
Of course the guy brings up raping children and one of the hosts makes this point
"You know, always so funny. People always go to that example; RAPING CHILDREN. WHO IS ADVOCATING FOR RAPING CHILDREN that gives you the impression that that is on ANYBODY'S LIST OF MORALS?"
Of course the main host brings up moses advocating for raping children who they've enslaved after GENOCIDING their entire village "keep the virgins for your self" in those days that would of been children from the age of 12 and down.
Of course the cohost makes this point "but even the people who represent the bible DON'T believe that is advocating for raping children."
EXCEPT FOR A SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL MINORITY. "oh Ted Bundy's hot" that is an INCREDIBLY SMALL niche group, and yet you got to get on f**king twitter and tell women "girl's stop talking about how hot Ted Bundy was" as though we are ALL a bunch of idiots and as if all those women are a bunch of idiots.
Of course the guy who brought this up pointed out another obvious fact and reason why
"To answer the question of why people bring up child rape. Because it's the most obvious that we know is wrong. So that's why I personally use that as an example."
Ya, RAPING CHILDREN IS MORALLY WRONG. WHAT A TOTALLY PROFOUND F**KING STATEMENT.
YOUR NOT F**KING TELLING ME SOMETHING I DON'T ALREADY KNOW!!!!! "The victims. The victims" Ya, we all f**king get that you dumb f**k!!! ARE WE ALL PSYCHOPATHS?!
Ya, you really don't give a f**k about that. You just want to f**king fake virtue signal. "look at me!!!! I'm so superior. I'm so moral. RAPING CHILDREN IS WRONG. MURDER IS WRONG. TORTURING WOMEN IS WRONG."
Ya, great way to CONDESCEND to your own audience!!!!
But the point is....Robert Ressler and a whole host of rock star crime fighters in true crime. Experts in the field. Scientists in the field. "The victims. The victims." Anderson Cooper "I don't think history should remember the killer but should remember your son."
"no notoriety" sympathizer: We don't remember the victims. We forget that there were victims so there's no compacity to empathize with the consequences of such a horrific -
Journalist clearly angry after YEARS of hearing this B*LLSH*T "no notoriety" talking point: Why can't we WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME?! Why can't we learn about the victim without celebrating him or her. At the same time we celebrate the lives of the men and women who were killed?
IT'S NOT TRUE. As another true crime fan said "we hear about victims ALL THE TIME." and we do and we always have! It is such a B*LLSH*T argument in every single way. Too many to list.
But the point is again....WHAT ABOUT PAUL HOLES?! WHAT ABOUT ROBERT RESSLER?! WHAT ABOUT JOHN DOUGLAS?!
"this should really be about the victims" So no Robert Ressler?! No Paul Holes?! No Francis Crick, James Watson, and Rosylan Franklin; the discoverers of DNA?! No Frank Salerno?! In the case of a mass shooting, no first responders? No EMTs?
And again, THIS IS HISTORY. ARE YOU DENYING THIS IS HISTORY?! TRUE CRIME IS HISTORY?! So that is how you think HISTORY should be?! "Ya, let's not talk about what CAUSED the holocaust.
Let's not talk about Adolf Hitler, Himmler, Goebbles, the nazi regime. The great depression. WW1 and the treaty of versailles. FDR and the heroes who took down the nazis. History should just be all about the victims." WHAT A F**KING IDIOTIC INCOHERENT ARGUMENT.
To quote a reenactor about an incredibly ignorant and stupid short bashing Nazi/German WW2 reenactors.
Ignorant douchebag of a "journalist": SELF PROCLAIMED history buffs arm them selves and pretend to be soldiers of Hitler's reich. It's a chance for MIDDLE AGED MEN TO ESCAPE LAWN MOWER DUTIES AND TO LIVE OUT THEIR FANTASIES.
Ignorant douchebag of a "journalist": FOR THEM IT'S JUST A BIT OF A LAUGH *YUK! YUK!* BUT ACROSS MUCH OF THE REENACTMENT COMMUNITY THIS SORT OF THING IS LARGELY BANNED.
SELF PROCLAIMED?! BIT OF A LAUGH?! LARGELY BANNED?! The most dishonest and laughable thing about this claim of "dressing up as the ENEMY during WW2 is largely banned" is....what is his f**king reference?! What is his EVIDENCE for that? What evidence does he use to support that? A News paper article with the head line "War fans banned from Hop farm after wearing SS uniforms at a Christmas party." and I found another article where reenactors got banned from a theme park. HAHAHAHAHA! HOW F**KING RIDICULOUS! He claimed "ACROSS MUCH OF THE REENACTMENT COMMUNITY" dressing up as a nazi for WW2 is banned. NOT BEING BANNED BY A PRUDISH IGNORANT PARK OR RESTAURANT AND WHY SHOULD REENACTORS AND THE REENACTMENT COMMUNITY GIVE A F**K WHAT THEY THINK?! Hop farm where they were banned has NOTHING TO DO with reenactment. Hop farm from my understanding is like a wine festival!! Or a restaurant.
"Ya, furries. Let's listen to the ignorant opinions of NONfurries and posers!"
Reenactor: 'Largely banned.' That's just a ridiculous claim. HOW ARE YOU GONNA HAVE A WW2 REENACTMENT IF NOBODY CAN DRESS UP AS THE GERMANS?! THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA BE REENACTING AT THAT POINT?! HOW CAN YOU HAVE AN REENACTMENT IF THERE'S NO BAD GUYS? I MEAN, HOW?! Please explain this to me. HOW DOES THAT WORK?!
Exactly....HOW?! "But the victims. The victims. We just got to talk about the victims."
I NEVER EVER see anyone say "we need to remember Paul Holes. We need to remember Robert Ressler." It's only EVER the victims. it's just a total FUNDAMENTAL rejection of what true crime actually is and why it appeals to us, etc. It's a strawman, a total distortion of true crime and I am SICK AND TIRED OF IT. SICK AND TIRED OF IT! SICK AND TIRED OF IT! I also notice this as well....by "victims" they mean the actual victims of the crime and their family members. They DON'T mean all the additional victims.
It's making it really hard for me to actually ENJOY true crime and the total hypocrisy of society who want it BOTH WAYS. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU F**KING WANT!!!! Prohibition, everyone was pro prohibition. The majority of Americans were pro prohibition....and what happened?! THEY BROKE THE LAW THEY CLAIMED TO HAVE ENDORSED AND DRUNK ALCOHOL!!!! Alcohol consumption INCREASED during prohibition.
I enjoyed the scummy descriptions of Deuce which includes the author's personal experiences. But overall....not that well written and not as descriptive and details. Doesn't read like classic true crime.
Some really good historical notes and aspects. Love the reference to grindhouses and exploitation films. I'm a fan of those films. As a hedonist and anti prude I love the whole "porn, sex, and nudity as far as I can see." aspect of the Deuce and I love 1970's films that take place in New york. I just love that urban decay look on film. As the cultural and social environment. Especially for a horror movie and I've always been a horror fan and I just love that seedy dark city element on film in general. Whether it be 1970's New york, 1970's/80's L.A, or Robocop 2. Always love the opening scene of that movie. Where the camera moves around the block as each crime and symptom of urban decay gets worse and worse.
Wanted to like it more then I did. I would of liked a far more better written and traditional book and I really disliked the author getting ahead of him self with the narrative. But I enjoyed the context and new information and there is a lot of new information. Such as how Cottingham was able to repeatedly kill women in motels. The torso killer [the first book] on the case is far better written and is more in the true crime style typical of it's pulp magazine origins. Although that book was written soon after Richard Cottingham was convicted and before Richard Cottingham would ever confess to anything. I did enjoy the author's language and writing when it came to certain things "hookers" and many other nonPC writing and words because WORDS have NOTHING to do with prejudice, or bigotry, or "downplaying" violence against women, etc.
The book doesn't include the trial. Doesn't go into detail when it comes to the investigation, etc.
Over all a disappointment, but not useless or terrible or pointless, etc.
I had read another book several years before about this case. I think around 2016 or 2017. The book was really good but was largely about his living victims. Not so much about his murder victims. After all, Richard Cottingham hadn't confessed and claimed he was innocent at the time. The living victim spoke of his methods. One victim said he literally beat her with a garden hose including the muzzle. Let alone the careful slicing and dicing he did with the knife and all the other things he did. One victim's account really said something about Richard Cottingham as a predator and it makes a lot more sense in the context of the fact that he had been active since 1967 and this was in 1979. He literally saw the victim at a club, walked up to her with a Screwdriver [vodka and orange juice] and said "Here, drink this." When I read that I was like "Wow...you just went STRAIGHT for it. Didn't waste ANY time what so ever." laughing in shock "I can't believe you. The balls on this guy!" Didn't even TRY and work his way in, to con her, to "put on the charm" just shoved a glass of liquor in her face "here, drink this!" Just speaks of his total arrogance.
I love horror movies. I've always loved slasher movies. One of my favorites and I've watched it many times for my annual Halloween marathon is Cheerleader camp. Brad, the boyfriend of the "final girl" is constantly checking out other women and he finally get's one of the hot cheerleaders alone with him. He's kissing her and she is like "I don't want this" to just be another screw and asks him "you really like me?" and then she hears the killer off in the bushes and is like "what is that?" and Brad just goes "I've had about enough of this b*llsh*t" and takes off. Every time I watch that my response is "My god, talk about being impatient!" and I aint the only fan who's had the same exact response.
One of my favorite horror movie commentators showed this scene and what was his response? "man, this guys impatient."
According to this author and it would appear so. He was the type of serial killer who liked to charm and get to know his victim beforehand. That was his usual M.O.
This book started off fairly cheap but got more expensive as time went on and now it's not only very expensive but rare to even find. I really wish I had bought it before it that happened because I almost bought a super rare book, but due to the seller's incompetence or maybe mine? I lost out on that deal. So I found a copy of this book, which I had wanted for a while and decided to buy it.
It gives a detailed description "the deuce"; the red light district of 1970's new work. A few facts about Cottingham I hadn't heard before.....but for some reason it wasn't that compelling of a read. Maybe it was the headache due to either the weather change/hard wind or too much seltzer water. Although I was only drinking 2 cans a day, but it seems like just a coincidence and bad timing. Also due to the sudden change in weather my asthma has acted up. Or maybe it has do with the fact that my shoulder began to hurt all day and I thought I might be having a heart attack and kept telling my self "I've had this before"; probably due to too much stress on my arm. But I laid in bed with my arm in pain reading this book.
Or it might be because the author isn't that good of an author to really hook me in.
The author through out the book "spoils" things ahead of the story. I put "spoil" in air quotes because as I've said. I've already read another book about the case and I've watched a docu-short about it multiple times and yes. i am aware that recently there is a docu series on the case....but I've largely been ignoring these documentaries because they end up pissing me off with "no notoriety", and barely have anything new or interesting to add to the case. I watched the recent John Wayne Gacy docu series. It was kind of boring, but had interesting parts. It was interesting to see the full interview Ressler had with Gacy and anyone who knows anything about serial killers will know that Ressler is an FBI star and that of course is another thing that pisses me off about "no notoriety"
*feigns sorrow, clutching chest* "The victims. THE POOR POOR INNOCENT VICTIMS!!!!! I'm so moral! Everyone look at me and my crocodile tears. Awwwww. I'm just heart broken off the death of someone who I NEVER EVER MET and people die every single fucking day, but I'm crying about this one."
As my favorite youtuber has said "Ya 'Murder is bad' What a brilliant fucking PROFOUND statement."
Even the majority of rapists and killers are anti murder and rape.
"What if someone did these terrible things you did to your mother or your daughter?"
98% of all serial killers/rapists: Oh, I'd want them dead. I'd kill em.
To quote mass shooter/killer James Holmes "I wouldn't want it to happen to me."
To quote from an atheist debate about the irrelevant "subjective or objective" morality. Irrelevant because WHO CARES?! WHO THE F**K CARES IF IT'S SUBJECTIVE OR OBJECTIVE?!
Of course the guy brings up raping children and one of the hosts makes this point
"You know, always so funny. People always go to that example; RAPING CHILDREN. WHO IS ADVOCATING FOR RAPING CHILDREN that gives you the impression that that is on ANYBODY'S LIST OF MORALS?"
Of course the main host brings up moses advocating for raping children who they've enslaved after GENOCIDING their entire village "keep the virgins for your self" in those days that would of been children from the age of 12 and down.
Of course the cohost makes this point "but even the people who represent the bible DON'T believe that is advocating for raping children."
EXCEPT FOR A SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL MINORITY. "oh Ted Bundy's hot" that is an INCREDIBLY SMALL niche group, and yet you got to get on f**king twitter and tell women "girl's stop talking about how hot Ted Bundy was" as though we are ALL a bunch of idiots and as if all those women are a bunch of idiots.
Of course the guy who brought this up pointed out another obvious fact and reason why
"To answer the question of why people bring up child rape. Because it's the most obvious that we know is wrong. So that's why I personally use that as an example."
Ya, RAPING CHILDREN IS MORALLY WRONG. WHAT A TOTALLY PROFOUND F**KING STATEMENT.
YOUR NOT F**KING TELLING ME SOMETHING I DON'T ALREADY KNOW!!!!! "The victims. The victims" Ya, we all f**king get that you dumb f**k!!! ARE WE ALL PSYCHOPATHS?!
Ya, you really don't give a f**k about that. You just want to f**king fake virtue signal. "look at me!!!! I'm so superior. I'm so moral. RAPING CHILDREN IS WRONG. MURDER IS WRONG. TORTURING WOMEN IS WRONG."
Ya, great way to CONDESCEND to your own audience!!!!
But the point is....Robert Ressler and a whole host of rock star crime fighters in true crime. Experts in the field. Scientists in the field. "The victims. The victims." Anderson Cooper "I don't think history should remember the killer but should remember your son."
"no notoriety" sympathizer: We don't remember the victims. We forget that there were victims so there's no compacity to empathize with the consequences of such a horrific -
Journalist clearly angry after YEARS of hearing this B*LLSH*T "no notoriety" talking point: Why can't we WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME?! Why can't we learn about the victim without celebrating him or her. At the same time we celebrate the lives of the men and women who were killed?
IT'S NOT TRUE. As another true crime fan said "we hear about victims ALL THE TIME." and we do and we always have! It is such a B*LLSH*T argument in every single way. Too many to list.
But the point is again....WHAT ABOUT PAUL HOLES?! WHAT ABOUT ROBERT RESSLER?! WHAT ABOUT JOHN DOUGLAS?!
"this should really be about the victims" So no Robert Ressler?! No Paul Holes?! No Francis Crick, James Watson, and Rosylan Franklin; the discoverers of DNA?! No Frank Salerno?! In the case of a mass shooting, no first responders? No EMTs?
And again, THIS IS HISTORY. ARE YOU DENYING THIS IS HISTORY?! TRUE CRIME IS HISTORY?! So that is how you think HISTORY should be?! "Ya, let's not talk about what CAUSED the holocaust.
Let's not talk about Adolf Hitler, Himmler, Goebbles, the nazi regime. The great depression. WW1 and the treaty of versailles. FDR and the heroes who took down the nazis. History should just be all about the victims." WHAT A F**KING IDIOTIC INCOHERENT ARGUMENT.
To quote a reenactor about an incredibly ignorant and stupid short bashing Nazi/German WW2 reenactors.
Ignorant douchebag of a "journalist": SELF PROCLAIMED history buffs arm them selves and pretend to be soldiers of Hitler's reich. It's a chance for MIDDLE AGED MEN TO ESCAPE LAWN MOWER DUTIES AND TO LIVE OUT THEIR FANTASIES.
Ignorant douchebag of a "journalist": FOR THEM IT'S JUST A BIT OF A LAUGH *YUK! YUK!* BUT ACROSS MUCH OF THE REENACTMENT COMMUNITY THIS SORT OF THING IS LARGELY BANNED.
SELF PROCLAIMED?! BIT OF A LAUGH?! LARGELY BANNED?! The most dishonest and laughable thing about this claim of "dressing up as the ENEMY during WW2 is largely banned" is....what is his f**king reference?! What is his EVIDENCE for that? What evidence does he use to support that? A News paper article with the head line "War fans banned from Hop farm after wearing SS uniforms at a Christmas party." and I found another article where reenactors got banned from a theme park. HAHAHAHAHA! HOW F**KING RIDICULOUS! He claimed "ACROSS MUCH OF THE REENACTMENT COMMUNITY" dressing up as a nazi for WW2 is banned. NOT BEING BANNED BY A PRUDISH IGNORANT PARK OR RESTAURANT AND WHY SHOULD REENACTORS AND THE REENACTMENT COMMUNITY GIVE A F**K WHAT THEY THINK?! Hop farm where they were banned has NOTHING TO DO with reenactment. Hop farm from my understanding is like a wine festival!! Or a restaurant.
"Ya, furries. Let's listen to the ignorant opinions of NONfurries and posers!"
Reenactor: 'Largely banned.' That's just a ridiculous claim. HOW ARE YOU GONNA HAVE A WW2 REENACTMENT IF NOBODY CAN DRESS UP AS THE GERMANS?! THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA BE REENACTING AT THAT POINT?! HOW CAN YOU HAVE AN REENACTMENT IF THERE'S NO BAD GUYS? I MEAN, HOW?! Please explain this to me. HOW DOES THAT WORK?!
Exactly....HOW?! "But the victims. The victims. We just got to talk about the victims."
I NEVER EVER see anyone say "we need to remember Paul Holes. We need to remember Robert Ressler." It's only EVER the victims. it's just a total FUNDAMENTAL rejection of what true crime actually is and why it appeals to us, etc. It's a strawman, a total distortion of true crime and I am SICK AND TIRED OF IT. SICK AND TIRED OF IT! SICK AND TIRED OF IT! I also notice this as well....by "victims" they mean the actual victims of the crime and their family members. They DON'T mean all the additional victims.
It's making it really hard for me to actually ENJOY true crime and the total hypocrisy of society who want it BOTH WAYS. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU F**KING WANT!!!! Prohibition, everyone was pro prohibition. The majority of Americans were pro prohibition....and what happened?! THEY BROKE THE LAW THEY CLAIMED TO HAVE ENDORSED AND DRUNK ALCOHOL!!!! Alcohol consumption INCREASED during prohibition.
I enjoyed the scummy descriptions of Deuce which includes the author's personal experiences. But overall....not that well written and not as descriptive and details. Doesn't read like classic true crime.
Some really good historical notes and aspects. Love the reference to grindhouses and exploitation films. I'm a fan of those films. As a hedonist and anti prude I love the whole "porn, sex, and nudity as far as I can see." aspect of the Deuce and I love 1970's films that take place in New york. I just love that urban decay look on film. As the cultural and social environment. Especially for a horror movie and I've always been a horror fan and I just love that seedy dark city element on film in general. Whether it be 1970's New york, 1970's/80's L.A, or Robocop 2. Always love the opening scene of that movie. Where the camera moves around the block as each crime and symptom of urban decay gets worse and worse.
Wanted to like it more then I did. I would of liked a far more better written and traditional book and I really disliked the author getting ahead of him self with the narrative. But I enjoyed the context and new information and there is a lot of new information. Such as how Cottingham was able to repeatedly kill women in motels. The torso killer [the first book] on the case is far better written and is more in the true crime style typical of it's pulp magazine origins. Although that book was written soon after Richard Cottingham was convicted and before Richard Cottingham would ever confess to anything. I did enjoy the author's language and writing when it came to certain things "hookers" and many other nonPC writing and words because WORDS have NOTHING to do with prejudice, or bigotry, or "downplaying" violence against women, etc.
The book doesn't include the trial. Doesn't go into detail when it comes to the investigation, etc.
Over all a disappointment, but not useless or terrible or pointless, etc.
April 20, 2017
This is the serial killer that Peter Vronsky encountered in 1979 which inspired him to later write his history of serial homicide Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters in 2004. Although he briefly described the case in his 2004 book, this is the first time he gets into a detailed case narrative of Richard Cottingham "torso ripper" murders in what was New York's Whitechapel in the 1970s: Times Square and the Forty-Deuce (42nd Street). Vronsky not only gets into the mind of Cottingham but describes first hand the sleazy world of the Forty-Deuce before the neighborhood was "Disneyfied" in the late 1990s. The best of recent books on the notorious "Times Square Torso Ripper" killings. Amazing photos, some taken by Vronsky at the time.
January 5, 2022
Peter Vronsky bumped into Richard Cottingham in December of 1979 at a West Side hotel in Manhattan. Richie was carrying two bags which brushed against Vronsky near an elevator. A burning smell was in the air and after the NYC fire department arrived, the author left the seedy hotel. A year later, Cottingham's bloody beheading murders of two prostitutes made the news and Vronsky then realized what felt like bowling balls was actually the decapitated heads of the two hookers; now that is entertainment. The book gives an amazing history of the area, known as the Deuce, with all of its' morbid surroundings. Whores(40,000 in NYC), drug addicts, peep shows, and almost two thousand murders a year at the time are described as a modern " Dante's Inferno."Although a short book, Vronsky's sardonic sense of humor make this a worthy read.
February 5, 2017
Dr. Vronsky recreates the time and place in vivid colors
It's difficult to review a book when you are still stunned from reading it. This well-written, well-researched account of the life and crimes of Richard Cottingham is almost too much for the logical mind to process.
Cottingham's seemingly normal facade covered a monster too depraved to be a product of the imagination. His objective was not to murder but to deliver the maximum amount of pain. His victim's death was just part of the cleanup, like picking up your toys.
WARNING: Shocking photos, and I really mean it this time.
It's difficult to review a book when you are still stunned from reading it. This well-written, well-researched account of the life and crimes of Richard Cottingham is almost too much for the logical mind to process.
Cottingham's seemingly normal facade covered a monster too depraved to be a product of the imagination. His objective was not to murder but to deliver the maximum amount of pain. His victim's death was just part of the cleanup, like picking up your toys.
WARNING: Shocking photos, and I really mean it this time.
September 1, 2017
An enthralling look into the mind of a sadist.
Very well written and researched with a touch of personal experience by the author. True crime enthusiasts will be up reading this one into the night...you won't want to close your eyes!
Very well written and researched with a touch of personal experience by the author. True crime enthusiasts will be up reading this one into the night...you won't want to close your eyes!
Read
January 21, 2023I've already watched the Netflix documentary about the unsolved Times Square (New York) Torso murders but I didn't know that there was a book about it but I can't seem to find a copy of it to buy which is frustrating as a reader of true crime.
June 11, 2018
If you like morbid history, or what makes a serial killer tick, then you will probably like this book. I had been in New York as a teenager in the mid to late 70s occasionally to see Broadway shows and visit Central Park (you know the typical tourist attractions) so it kind of freaked me out that he was there when I was.
September 8, 2017
I'm embarrassed to admit that I read this type of...book.
October 1, 2019
For me this was just an okay book. I wish that it would have had more details about the crimes but than the book would have been longer in length.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
