Customer Reviews

Sympathy for the Devil: The Emmanuel Baptist Murders of Old San Francisco

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Well researched and cleanly written, Sympathy for the Devil relates the events of 2 murders in San Francisco in 1895. The author painstakingly recreates the events leading up to the murders, the media coverage to rival that of the OJ trial, the trial itself, and the subsequent appeals. You can tell the author did her homework. Each chapter is filled with footnotes that provide not only the source of the information, but at times additional facts about the time period, the city, and the mores of the time. It was fascinating to read about a city I visit regularly and recognize some of the places mentioned.

However, the most fascinating part of this book was the trial itself. The media circus surrounding the trial was phenomenal; the 3 major newspapers took turns printing sensational accounts of the murder, the trial, and the defendant as well as out and out lies in the form of forged letters and false testimonies of people involved in the case. Additionally, the differences between trial procedure and proper behavior then and now are astounding. For example, in the trial, jurors actually stood up and asked questions of the witnesses.

The only negative comment I have is that the author waited until the very end of the book to discuss the possible reason behind the murders. Granted, this was her opinion (though backed by facts) so I can understand why she placed it outside the narrative of events from murder to trial, but it was frustrating at times to read the story without any idea why these murders occurred.

Despite this one drawback, I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in mysteries, history, and human behavior.

What exactly is a Victorian murder case anyway?

There's a mystique about "Victorian murder cases" that is possessed by devotees of true crime non-fiction, but it sounds as though all that must happen for a murder or series of crimes to be so regarded is that they take place during the Victorian Era (1837-1901).

Of course, the Jack the Ripper murders from 1888 are regarded as the best and the darkest of all Victorian murder cases. The brutal serial killings of prostitutes, the sexual nature of the crimes themselves, accentuated by the certain body parts which were particularly violated by the Ripper's knife, the exposure of proper British society to the world of prostitution and the seaminess of London's East End - even today, all of these cause right-minded people to solemnly nod their heads and remark on how atrocities are regularly caused by the hypocrisy of blue-blooded aristocrats toward sexual matters. But does the Theo Durrant case, circa 1895, really fit neatly into this same criminal category just because of its chronology?

For the most part, Virginia McConnell is to be commended for her well-researched and comprehensive presentation of the Emmanuel Baptist Church murders. Durrant was regarded by his contemporaries and by many later researchers simply as a monster, and McConnell's contrary theme, as hinted by the title, is that Durrant was a decent man and a genuine religious devotee of decidedly non-murderous disposition for whom these two murders were isolated acts that likely would not have been repeated.

Notwithstanding her moral judgment, she is unsparing in her examination. She marshals the facts impressively and in chronological order, particularly the testimony of the witnesses who observed Theo Durrant in the company of Blanche Lamont as he escorted her to the church, in which belfry her body was later found. The circumstantial evidence which led to the quick conviction of Durrant for the murder of Blanche Lamont (in light of the death sentence imposed upon him, he was never tried for Minnie Williams' death) is impressive for its volume and its probity. The evidence proffered by Durrant and his attorneys in defense is shown to be wanting; and there is even a suggestion of one or more aborted private confessions by Durrant.

McConnell also provides several interesting scenarios as to how and why Durrant murdered the two young women and plausibly maintains that neurological influences (Durrant had suffered from bacterial meningitis) and biochemical influences (she diagnoses Durrant as manic-depressive) likely accounted for his uncharacteristic behavior. But she also seems inclined to portray the murders as peculiarly Victorian crimes - erotic bloody affronts to a repressive 19th century society, in which some elements were struggling for freedom.

However, apart from chronology, it's difficult to see why the Bell Tower murders would be thought of as Victorian crimes. Apparently, it's not even necessary that a crime be committed in Victorian ENGLAND to be so classified. The Emmanuel Baptist Church in San Francisco's Mission District was a good 6000 miles away from Windsor Castle. More importantly, 19th century San Francisco, with its gin joints and Barbary Coast dens of iniquity, frequented openly by all classes, must have been equally distant from Victorian London in the cultural sense.

While McConnell delves extensively into Durrant's family life, she seems to largely overlook its significance. Papa Durrant was a weak impotent father figure, and Mamma Durrant was an overbearing overly-possessive mother whose affection for her son (as well as the affection that she demanded in return) was unhealthy and unnatural, just the sort of mother that has produced monsters on many other occasions. Yet McConnell barely acknowledges these elements as contributing factors to the murderous personality that Durrant temporarily developed.

The fact is that as over the years that have elapsed since the Bell Tower case, as fatherlessness has become more and more prevalent, the combination of overbearing mothers and weak or absent fathers has been the cause of many thousands of particularly brutal murders and perhaps at least one presidential assassination. The Durrant case isn't a Victorian murder case at all; it's a 20th century murder case reflecting what would become that century's principal social epidemic.

On the other hand, what exactly was Theo Durrant's precise role in the deaths of the two women? As convincing a case as the author makes for his guilt, she passes lightly over the possible role played by a figure whose shadow never seems entirely absent from this case: the mysterious Reverend J. George Gibson, pastor of the Emmanuel Baptist Church.

A man of very peculiar tendencies, a man who seemed overly eager to protect the church's reputation by hiding the murders from the authorities, a man who brought in handlers from the outside specifically for the purpose of handling inquiries from a suspicious press, a man who indeed should have known the contours of the church at least as well as Theo Durrant (though he denied this in his testimony), Reverend Gibson was widely suspected at the time and was named by Theo's partisans as an alternative suspect.

And as unlikely as that might appear, McConnell runs too lightly over Gibson's tendency to "hide, ostrich-like and pretend that nothing had happened". She runs too lightly over his flippant and suspicious testimony at the inquest and preliminary hearing and passes these things off as products of his fragile and eccentric nature. This is particularly faulty in light of her own curiosity as to how Durrant managed to carry Blanche Lamont's body to the belfry by himself. Her later explanation that adrenaline gave him the strength to do so is not necessarily satisfying. Was Blanche carried to the belfry by two men?

McConnell's book is an impressive work whose narrative delivers slightly less than the research promises. But it may yet prove to be the Warren Commission Report of the Bell Tower murder case - a weighty tome that is the start of all inquiries but which raises at least as many questions as it answers.

As I have been constructing my own version of this story for years, and have at least developed an experienced sense for what is credible and what is not along the way, I am honored to be the first customer to review Virginia McConnell's book.

To begin with, this is the best book cover anyone ever used for the case - and I have almost every important image ever published on it - because it is the first cover to ever show the unusual red-ocher color of the church and the great shadow it cast onto Bartlett Street. I actually spoke to a witness who claimed to see this in his youth, so it's quite impressive that someone got it right.

The text of this book is just as pleasing, as it not only accurately relates what was known - expertly navigating through the contradictions and pitfalls long associated with this case - but goes well beyond by adding in documents previously missing.

I was particularly impressed at the many firsts achieved here: Previous authors said the first victim, Blanche Lamont, was beautiful, but McConnell actually delivers the best photo to prove it.

Blanche's face reminds me a lot of women like Britain's Kate Winslet and San Francisco's Alma Spreckels. And no other published image ever made that kind of impression on this Titanic fan.

Previous authors only mentioned the mysterious Flora Upton, making it sound as if she disappeared forever, but Ms. McConnell not only traces her movements but provides us with another amazing photo. Yes indeed, Flora had an exquisite face as well.

As Ms. McConnell managed to find these pictures, frequently by finding the relatives in possession of them, she was also able to flesh out the characters of the people better than they were at any time since 1895.

Previous authors merely claimed there was a controversial (but apparently lost photograph) of the murderer taken at a picnic, Ms. McConnell at least provides the newspaper drawing based on it and lets you make of it what you will.

Hopefully, if and when I finish my own book, a publisher will appreciate what I have discovered as well, but Sympathy for the Devil just raised the standard in a big way.

First of all I have to say that Virginia A. McConnell did fantastic work on the Case of William Henry Theodore Durrant and the two young victims.I thought in the last chapter of the book she speculated very well on what happened on the night Durrant supposedly murdered those young girls. But I have to remind myself it's just a speculation. I do not think Theo got a fair trial and the book gave me the impression that they wanted to hold somebody accountable than doing thorough investigation. There is no absolute proof that Durrant did these

heinous crimes so the guilty verdict was not right at all!!

I don't want to hold him accountable just because the media wants him to be. The was no concrete evedience to support his guilt. Besides there were no draw backs in this book from begnning to end. Durrant was a good boy and never had any strange behavior until that massive brain fever he suffered which I'm sure

left his brain with sever damage and I do have sympathy for him for that. Back then very few people survived brain fever in Theodore's day. If someone did survive they were never the same.

The victims of this tragic story I also have deep sympathy for and they were murdered in such tragic circumstances that never should have happened.

This book is great for every crime buff...and a great story to be made into a movie!!!!

Being a "true crime" book lover since Ann Rule wrote "A Stranger Beside Me", I was looking forward to this book which follows a pair of murders in 1895 San Fransisco. It is a fascinating read - really fun to see how over a hundred years ago this was investigated, tried and reported on. The only draw back came at the end when the author expressed her personally sympathy for the murderer because of possible brain damage. The account was very fun to read. The "he who is without sin...cast the first stone" sentiment is preachy and uncalled for. I look forward to more books of this type!

The second book by this author is even better than the first! The story gives insight into both the murderer and his victims.
It was done with great care to detail to compare the cultures present and past, which is fasinating. Could a young man who seemed to have a good future ahead of him have commited these crimes? What possibly could have drove him to do something like this? If not caught, would he have become a serial killer much like modern day Ted Bundy or was it a simple crime of passion and a cover up?
You MUST read this book!

This author is so good. She is amazing in the scope of her details and the depth of her research. I certainly hope she acheives her goal of becoming "The Ann Rule of Victorian True Crime."

In April 1895, two young women followed a man they trusted into the Emmanuel Baptist Church in San Francisco's Mission District and did not emerge alive. The bloody, disfigured corpse of 21-year-old Minnie Williams was found in the library the day before Easter Sunday, and soon afterward searchers discovered the naked body of Blanche Lamont, who had been missing since April 3, in the belfry. Clues and witness statements directed the police to Theo Durrant, a young medical student who also happened to be assistant Sunday School superintendent for the church.

Durrant's murder trial was attended by such eminent spectators as Presidential hopeful William Jennings Bryan and Gold Rush millionaire John Mackay. The evidence against him was so overwhelming that the jury brought in a guilty verdict in less than half an hour. While his January 1898 execution brought closure to the families of Minnie Williams and Blanche Lamont, it also left a lot of unanswered questions. Why did he kill two young women whom he'd known well and never born any malice against? And what motivated a man who had been devoted to his parents and sister and active in church affairs to commit murder in the first place? The press hinted that he was a depraved monster disguised as a pious youth, and referred to him as `the Demon in the Belfry'. In "Sympathy for the Devil", Virginia McConnell questions the justice of these assumptions.

I'll admit that when I began reading the book, I had doubts about McConnell's impartiality: in the introduction, she wrote, "His two tragic deeds aside, I would have been proud to call him `brother' or `friend'." But unlike the mindless, adoring women who simpered over Theo Durrant during his courtroom appearances, McConnell has credible reasons for her partiality. Reviewing his family and medical history, she points out that his father was manic-depressive and prone to impulsive actions, and Durrant himself nearly died from meningitis, or `brain fever', a condition that often left survivors with brain damage. She suggests that he may have been in a manic phase when he killed the two women, and the behaviour he exhibited at that time corresponds to the profile: loquaciousness, impulsivity, and unnatural energy levels. When not in the throes of the disorder, Durrant was apparently a mild-mannered, caring individual who placed women on a pedestal.

"Sympathy for the Devil" is a sympathetic, but not sentimental, treatment of the Emmanuel Baptist murders. It includes rare and unsettling photos, such as a vibrant young Blanche Lamont, the belfry landing where her nude body was found, and the blood-spattered walls of the room where Minnie Williams met her death. Any future books about the case have a very high bar to leap over.

Virginia A. McConnell's account of 'The Demon of the Belfrey' murders is one of the best true crime books I've read, and I've read hundreds. I stumbled upon it here at amazon and I'm disappointed that there are so few reviews for it. The price is prohibitive for many readers as the paperback edition is $25. I was lucky to get around that by ordering a used hardback copy from one of amazon's booksellers. It's unfortunate that this book can't be released in an affordable edition that can be stocked at Barnes & Noble and department stores. No, I am not a friend of or related to the author, but I do believe a book of this quality should be promoted. Ms. McConnell took various accounts, of which there were many, and wove a story that read like a novel - a rare thing in the true crime genre.
According to accounts of those who knew him, Theo Durrant was a good person. He was a young man who was heavily involved in his church, not only through its social activities but also through various offices he held and duties he took upon himself. His world seems to have revolved around the church, but much of his time was spent as a successful medical student who was nearing graduation. Theo was very inventive and must have had a keen mind, at least until his bout with meningitis, as the author details various business ventures Theo engaged in to earn tuition money. The author comes to the conclusion that Theo was responsible for several household duties that kept the family comfortable such as maintaining an adequate supply of coal. It was hazy as to whether or not Theo contributed significantly to the family finances, but that his father was unsuccessful and ineffectual was made clear. I could only surmise that there was a bit of family money that enabled the Durrants to travel to and from Europe which surely took a substantial amount at that time.
It's unclear as to just how much experience Theo had with young women, but one has to wonder how he found the time to interact with women other than his contact with them through his extensive church activities. According to the author, Theo's sexual (in)experience appears to have been intertwined with his twisted relationships with his mother and his sister. No one can know what went on in the Durrant household, but I do feel the author read too much into Theo's relationship with his sister, and especially with his mother. I do understand the author's point, as she used his sister's departure as the reason Theo committed the murder.
The section of the book that deals with Theo's trial was so disheartening. In what is now called a rush to judgement, the press, the police authorities, and the citizens of San Francisco never seriously looked at another suspect and zeroed in on Theo with a vengeance.
It seems as though the people of the Mission District of San Francisco had nothing better to do than watch other people. I was amazed at the number of witnesses who came forward and told of seeing Theo with Blanche Lamont in various spots located between her school and the church. An equal number seemed to have seen Theo alone or with others. Since I can't remember where I was the day before yesterday, I was flummoxed by the witnesses' ability to remember when and where they caught site of Theo, with or without his friends. The account of Theo's time on death row and his actual execution was heart-wrenching for me because I don't believe he deserved the death penalty.
There is so much more, but this is a review, not a summary. I have to say that although I grudgingly accept that Theo was the murderer, he was convicted on purely circumstantial evidence and he most definitely did not receive a fair trial. He was not presumed innocent until proven guilty. Rather, it was the other way round. It would have been so easy to weep for Theo because it seemed as though he had lived his life as a good person without blemish and yet was suddenly involved in this horrible tragedy that not only took the lives of two female victims, but also Theo's, who was a victim of a skewed form of justice.
I did enjoy and appreciate the author's updates on many of the people involved in the case and her theory of why and how Theo committed the murders.
Theo was an enigma and the case will never be truly understood.

Ms. McConnell has done it again. This book is even better than her first book, Arsinic Under the Elms.