What do you think?
Rate this book
The Killer of Little Shepherds: A True Crime Story and the Birth of Forensic Science
A riveting true crime story that vividly recounts the birth of modern forensics.
At the end of the nineteenth century, serial murderer Joseph Vacher, known and feared as "The Killer of Little Shepherds," terrorized the French countryside. He eluded authorities for years--until he ran up against prosecutor Emile Fourquet and Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne, the era's most renowned criminologist. The two men--intelligent and bold--typified the Belle Epoque, a period of immense scientific achievement and fascination with science's promise to reveal the secrets of the human condition.
With high drama and stunning detail, Douglas Starr revisits Vacher's infamous crime wave, interweaving the story of how Lacassagne and his colleagues were developing forensic science as we know it. We see one of the earliest uses of criminal profiling, as Fourquet painstakingly collects eyewitness accounts and constructs a map of Vacher's crimes. We follow the tense and exciting events leading to the murderer's arrest. And we witness the twists and turns of the trial, celebrated in its day. In an attempt to disprove Vacher's defense by reason of insanity, Fourquet recruits Lacassagne, who in the previous decades had revolutionized criminal science by refining the use of blood-spatter evidence, systematizing the autopsy, and doing groundbreaking research in psychology. Lacassagne's efforts lead to a gripping courtroom denouement.
"The Killer of Little Shepherds" is an important contribution to the history of criminal justice, impressively researched and thrillingly told.
At the end of the nineteenth century, serial murderer Joseph Vacher, known and feared as "The Killer of Little Shepherds," terrorized the French countryside. He eluded authorities for years--until he ran up against prosecutor Emile Fourquet and Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne, the era's most renowned criminologist. The two men--intelligent and bold--typified the Belle Epoque, a period of immense scientific achievement and fascination with science's promise to reveal the secrets of the human condition.
With high drama and stunning detail, Douglas Starr revisits Vacher's infamous crime wave, interweaving the story of how Lacassagne and his colleagues were developing forensic science as we know it. We see one of the earliest uses of criminal profiling, as Fourquet painstakingly collects eyewitness accounts and constructs a map of Vacher's crimes. We follow the tense and exciting events leading to the murderer's arrest. And we witness the twists and turns of the trial, celebrated in its day. In an attempt to disprove Vacher's defense by reason of insanity, Fourquet recruits Lacassagne, who in the previous decades had revolutionized criminal science by refining the use of blood-spatter evidence, systematizing the autopsy, and doing groundbreaking research in psychology. Lacassagne's efforts lead to a gripping courtroom denouement.
"The Killer of Little Shepherds" is an important contribution to the history of criminal justice, impressively researched and thrillingly told.
300 pages, Hardcover
First published October 5, 2010
226 people are currently reading
12455 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 529 reviews
January 5, 2020
* Thank you to Shotsmag for a print copy of the book, I have given an honest unbiased review in exchange *
This is a serious account documenting the ascent of forensic science in the late 19th century, set against the background of the story of a notorious French serial killer, Joseph Vacher.
Most of the first half is taken up with the tale of Joseph Vacher and his appalling crimes, which are truly stomach-churning, particularly as all the victims were completely innocent. This is interspersed with the introduction of scientists and lawyers of the period who were actively pioneering new methods of crime investigation.
The real story is that of two men, without whom Joseph Vacher would never have been apprehended. Its hero is undoubtedly Alexandre Lacassagne, head of the Institute of Legal Medicine in Lyon. He was one of the first people to recognise that a murder could be solved by examining the body of the victim. But his convincing medical evidence could not have been produced without the impetus provided by Emile Fourquet, a magistrate, who in 1899 began to make a study of vagabonds – homeless men who were forever on the move, earning a crust here and there. From this he began to understand that the small departments into which the French legal system was divided hindered investigations. Vacher had committed numerous horrific murders in disparate areas of France, always moving on rapidly afterwards... Fourquet gathered information about serious crimes and looked for patterns in the way they had been committed.
When Vacher was finally brought to book he admitted to the murders but claimed he was innocent because he was insane at the time. Lacassagne was convinced he was not insane (although he had spent periods in asylums). The case went to appeal on that basis, with other medical witnesses being equally convinced that Vacher was insane and should therefore escape the death penalty.
In the final sections Douglas Starr points out that there is still no way to prove beyond doubt that a criminal is actually insane.
This is an interesting book, but not for the faint of heart.
This is a serious account documenting the ascent of forensic science in the late 19th century, set against the background of the story of a notorious French serial killer, Joseph Vacher.
Most of the first half is taken up with the tale of Joseph Vacher and his appalling crimes, which are truly stomach-churning, particularly as all the victims were completely innocent. This is interspersed with the introduction of scientists and lawyers of the period who were actively pioneering new methods of crime investigation.
The real story is that of two men, without whom Joseph Vacher would never have been apprehended. Its hero is undoubtedly Alexandre Lacassagne, head of the Institute of Legal Medicine in Lyon. He was one of the first people to recognise that a murder could be solved by examining the body of the victim. But his convincing medical evidence could not have been produced without the impetus provided by Emile Fourquet, a magistrate, who in 1899 began to make a study of vagabonds – homeless men who were forever on the move, earning a crust here and there. From this he began to understand that the small departments into which the French legal system was divided hindered investigations. Vacher had committed numerous horrific murders in disparate areas of France, always moving on rapidly afterwards... Fourquet gathered information about serious crimes and looked for patterns in the way they had been committed.
When Vacher was finally brought to book he admitted to the murders but claimed he was innocent because he was insane at the time. Lacassagne was convinced he was not insane (although he had spent periods in asylums). The case went to appeal on that basis, with other medical witnesses being equally convinced that Vacher was insane and should therefore escape the death penalty.
In the final sections Douglas Starr points out that there is still no way to prove beyond doubt that a criminal is actually insane.
This is an interesting book, but not for the faint of heart.
October 1, 2010
If you're expecting a titillating tale of true crime, this isn't it.
Set in 1890s France, The Killer of Little Shepherds contains two simultaneously-told stories. First, there's the account of Joseph Vacher, who roamed the countryside of France and left only gruesome death in his wake. The second story is that of Alexandre Lacassagne, head of the department of legal medicine at the University of Lyon, who pioneered many forensic techniques in the areas of crime-scene and post-mortem analysis, and was what we would now call a criminal profiler.
Starr begins his story with army Sergeant Joseph Vacher's full-on obsession with a young woman named Louise Barant, a housemaid. After only one dinner, Vacher proposed marriage, and then later told her that if she ever betrayed him, he would kill her. She tried to avoid him and put up every reasonable excuse for not seeing him, but it didn't help. On a four-month leave from the army, Vacher came after her, she refused him, and he shot both Louise and himself. Both survived, and Vacher was put into two different asylums for a total of ten months, then released. With really nowhere to go, Vacher became a vagabond. As he wandered the countryside, he committed the most heinous crimes, with young shepherd boys and young women favorite targets. Because he would wander from department to department, by the time the crimes were discovered, he would have been long gone, thus avoiding detection.
Starr then interweaves his account of Vacher with the story of Alexandre Lacassagne, who was a pioneer in the study of forensic methodologies, including criminal profiling. He also discusses others in the field of criminology including Alphonse Bertillon and Cesare Lombroso, and explains developments in science and psychology that aided in the advancements of legal medicine and crime detection. He also examines the phenomenon of "vagabondage," noting the correlation between unemployment, the increase of people on the move, and the correlating upswing in crime.
Both strands of this book come together when Vacher is caught, imprisoned, and sent to trial, leading to some pretty major questions. For example, was Vacher insane at the time he killed, or was he perfectly rational? And what exactly legally constituted insanity? Is there any way to know if insanity is based on physical causes? What type of punishment is suitable if a murderer is found to be insane? Many of these questions sparked international debates, but they also led to further developments in the field of psychology, which was growing rapidly, as was the gap between medical science and legal codes. And when a person is known to be a "monster," even if he is insane, how can the legal system justify putting him in an asylum where, if he's crafty enough, he'd fake being well and be let out to kill all over again?
Starr expertly catches the era surrounding the crimes of Vacher and the work of Lacassagne and others. He acknowledges work being done in other countries around the same time period, such as Italy, the United States and Great Britain so as to broaden the scope of developments in the science of criminology. He also examines other crimes as well as the limitations of the local rural police departments in the capture of criminals.
I got very caught up in Vacher's story, and I liked the book. The early efforts focused on forensics and criminal profiling are really interesting, and if you're into this kind of thing, you'll be richly rewarded. It's quite obvious that Starr put in immense amounts of original research in the production of this work. The stories of Vacher's victims are also lurid enough so that if you're not interested in the field of forensic study, you'll still find something in the book that will interest you. I do think he could have done without the "postscript" chapter and gone right to the epilogue, but that's nit picky on my part. Overall, it's a good book that will keep you reading.
August 13, 2018
A very well researched non-fiction account of the life, villainous exploits, arrest, conviction, medical observation and execution of serial killer Joseph Vacher, a French soldier turned vagabond in 1890's France.
Vacher's monstrous acts of violence were chronicled extensively in the French press before he was apprehended. The early use of forensic science and medicine in the 1880's and 1890's was used to eventually track Vacher down and end the atrocities. Many citizens were falsely accused of Vacher's crimes and were set free by use of the newly developed methods as well. Many techniques discovered during this time are still used today.
The book was very informative and would be enjoyed by fans of true-crime and detective novels. The Sherlock Holmes novels became popular in this era, but Holmes used deduction instead of science to solve his mysteries.
A good read.
Vacher's monstrous acts of violence were chronicled extensively in the French press before he was apprehended. The early use of forensic science and medicine in the 1880's and 1890's was used to eventually track Vacher down and end the atrocities. Many citizens were falsely accused of Vacher's crimes and were set free by use of the newly developed methods as well. Many techniques discovered during this time are still used today.
The book was very informative and would be enjoyed by fans of true-crime and detective novels. The Sherlock Holmes novels became popular in this era, but Holmes used deduction instead of science to solve his mysteries.
A good read.
November 3, 2024
This book is as much a study of the pioneers of forensic pathology as it is a true crime story of a French serial killer and shows that if any profession has undergone a glamorous makeover over the course of the last century it is without doubt pathology and forensic investigators. Now we see the quirky, black -humoured (if you are in the UK) or empathic attractive (in the US) investigators turning up to a crime scene before carrying out their work in a clinical lab and it seems such an interesting, exciting career choice that almost every university now runs a criminology degree. Reading this book it amazes me that anyone ever did it to start with.
Alternating chapters with the killer and his crimes is the story of the men who brought crime investigation into the discipline it is today. One of the most influential is the killer’s fellow Frenchman Lacassagne, reading the conditions in which he worked marks him out as uniquely driven, a masochist or mad. We read of him carrying out post mortems on bodies already putrefying in a boat on the river which meant sometimes his work station was flooded and he had to wait to complete his work – in an age when the bodies were not refrigerated. This passage highlights just how difficult and disgusting the work was.
Very few morgues had refrigeration at the time, and doctors dreaded that first scalpel cut, when a whoosh of repellent gases would overcome them. Before the Paris morgue installed its refrigerators, Brouardel would make pinpricks in the cadavers and light them, allowing the combustible gases to burn off. They might burn for three or four days, producing “long bluish flames”.
Whatever your opinion on the rights or wrongs of that generation one cannot deny they were made of sterner stuff than today. Can we imagine one of our great pioneers of the day getting their hands equally dirty or even devoting time to such an unflashy pursuit.
Equally worthy of regard is the dedication to mind-numbingly tedious (though necessary) tasks. The man who discovered that the measurements of each persons limbs is a unique combination and so for each criminal a series of measurements were taken that were put on file and could then be cross referenced. The sheer man hours needed to measure and then to file and then to trawl through this physical database is incredible but it was a precursor to fingerprints and so an important step in the history of crime detection.
The murder was one I had never heard of (despite me being a concerningly avid consumer of true crime podcasts), Jospeh Vacher who spent years roaming France, killing randomly (although his penchant was for young shepherds hence the title). While his crimes are undoubtedly horrific, I feel sufficient time has elapsed to say that the whole story is somewhat laughable in the most macabre way. Today we always say you can’t tell by looking at someone and while this is in the main true, Vacher did look like the type of man you wouldn’t want to meet in a dark alley. He had a scarred face and an ear that constantly ran with pus resulting in an unpleasant smell that formed a miasma around him – the results of trying to shoot himself dead after trying to shoot dead a woman he was infatuated with. After spending a short period in a mental institution he was released and until his arrest spent his time walking from place to place murdering along the way. What is incredible is that people opened their doors to this man, despite his appearance, found themselves on the receiving end of his odd and often threatening behaviour and did not connect the dots. The very opposite of today when you hear neighbours of criminals saying, “he was always very nice, quiet, polite”, they knew there was something off about him (and not just the ear). He was able to murder, often not far from where people were going about their business, and then calmly walk away.
It is no surprise that a combination of people being monumentally uncurious, detectives being unable to link crimes or even think outside their own jurisdiction and lack of scientific knowhow meant the only crimes brought to justice were those where someone had been caught red-handed or had a confession beaten out of them.
A fascinating, gory read about the birth of a profession that so much tv and books are based on.
Alternating chapters with the killer and his crimes is the story of the men who brought crime investigation into the discipline it is today. One of the most influential is the killer’s fellow Frenchman Lacassagne, reading the conditions in which he worked marks him out as uniquely driven, a masochist or mad. We read of him carrying out post mortems on bodies already putrefying in a boat on the river which meant sometimes his work station was flooded and he had to wait to complete his work – in an age when the bodies were not refrigerated. This passage highlights just how difficult and disgusting the work was.
Very few morgues had refrigeration at the time, and doctors dreaded that first scalpel cut, when a whoosh of repellent gases would overcome them. Before the Paris morgue installed its refrigerators, Brouardel would make pinpricks in the cadavers and light them, allowing the combustible gases to burn off. They might burn for three or four days, producing “long bluish flames”.
Whatever your opinion on the rights or wrongs of that generation one cannot deny they were made of sterner stuff than today. Can we imagine one of our great pioneers of the day getting their hands equally dirty or even devoting time to such an unflashy pursuit.
Equally worthy of regard is the dedication to mind-numbingly tedious (though necessary) tasks. The man who discovered that the measurements of each persons limbs is a unique combination and so for each criminal a series of measurements were taken that were put on file and could then be cross referenced. The sheer man hours needed to measure and then to file and then to trawl through this physical database is incredible but it was a precursor to fingerprints and so an important step in the history of crime detection.
The murder was one I had never heard of (despite me being a concerningly avid consumer of true crime podcasts), Jospeh Vacher who spent years roaming France, killing randomly (although his penchant was for young shepherds hence the title). While his crimes are undoubtedly horrific, I feel sufficient time has elapsed to say that the whole story is somewhat laughable in the most macabre way. Today we always say you can’t tell by looking at someone and while this is in the main true, Vacher did look like the type of man you wouldn’t want to meet in a dark alley. He had a scarred face and an ear that constantly ran with pus resulting in an unpleasant smell that formed a miasma around him – the results of trying to shoot himself dead after trying to shoot dead a woman he was infatuated with. After spending a short period in a mental institution he was released and until his arrest spent his time walking from place to place murdering along the way. What is incredible is that people opened their doors to this man, despite his appearance, found themselves on the receiving end of his odd and often threatening behaviour and did not connect the dots. The very opposite of today when you hear neighbours of criminals saying, “he was always very nice, quiet, polite”, they knew there was something off about him (and not just the ear). He was able to murder, often not far from where people were going about their business, and then calmly walk away.
It is no surprise that a combination of people being monumentally uncurious, detectives being unable to link crimes or even think outside their own jurisdiction and lack of scientific knowhow meant the only crimes brought to justice were those where someone had been caught red-handed or had a confession beaten out of them.
A fascinating, gory read about the birth of a profession that so much tv and books are based on.
April 1, 2012
This is not the typical true crime book but more of a historical true crime which is genre I love. It is not as easy to read because you also learn a lot of things. That happened to me while reading The Killer of Little Shepherds. I love history so it was interesting to read how the criminologists of the 19th century worked. For instance which devices they used for autopsies, how they figured out what to use and how blood spatters worked. Back then there were alienists who claimed that criminals were born like that and you could see that in their brains.
This is the story of alienists as they were called back then and one in specific Alexandre Lacassagne and how they worked but also the story of a serial killer named Vacher and when they finally caught him they wondered if he was mentally ill and in a way not guilty or if he was sane when he committed the murders. It is very well written book and although it was not a quick read. (I read it in 2 parts) it was a very good read.
This is the story of alienists as they were called back then and one in specific Alexandre Lacassagne and how they worked but also the story of a serial killer named Vacher and when they finally caught him they wondered if he was mentally ill and in a way not guilty or if he was sane when he committed the murders. It is very well written book and although it was not a quick read. (I read it in 2 parts) it was a very good read.
November 16, 2020
Reminded me too much of those articles that insist on presenting "both sides" when one side is 99.9% of scientists, and the other is one lunatic who was for some reason allowed to rant on FOX.
Why write extensively about Cesare Lombroso but never actually take him to task for being a eugenicist?
Why, in a section on witnesses lying, include Zola's quote "Women lie. They lie to everyone, to judges, to their lovers, to their chambermaids, even to themselves" at all? What business does that little bit of nastiness have in a chapter supposedly about forensic science?
There were many more lines of the "I'm sorry, what now?" variety, but I was too lazy to note them all. Just as I feel like Starr was lazy in applying high standards of intellectual rigor to his analysis.
Overall, this is a grim, unpleasant story, and I don't feel like I got anything out of reading it.
Why write extensively about Cesare Lombroso but never actually take him to task for being a eugenicist?
Why, in a section on witnesses lying, include Zola's quote "Women lie. They lie to everyone, to judges, to their lovers, to their chambermaids, even to themselves" at all? What business does that little bit of nastiness have in a chapter supposedly about forensic science?
There were many more lines of the "I'm sorry, what now?" variety, but I was too lazy to note them all. Just as I feel like Starr was lazy in applying high standards of intellectual rigor to his analysis.
Overall, this is a grim, unpleasant story, and I don't feel like I got anything out of reading it.
January 5, 2011
This is one of the best books I've read in quite a while. It reads like the best historical murder mysteries, although it's based upon the true story of Joseph Vacher who killed more people than Jack the Ripper, between the years of 1894 and 1897.
In alternating chapters, we get the gruesome details of Vacher's slaying as he wandered the French countryside and the story of ciminologist Alexandre Lacassagne who is credited as one of the founding fathers of modern forensics. I've had a long-time interest in forensics so the information about Lacassagne and the start of this science were absolutely fascinating to me.
For the chapters on Vacher and his deeds, it truly does read like a crime novel, for Starr recounts Vacher's infamous deeds in often gruesome detail. It is not for the faint of heart, but it does serve to illuminate the character of the murderer, life during the last years of the 19th century, and the impact upon society.
Lacassagne was as fascinating as Vacher, for he studied knife wounds to detect handedness and determined how to match a bullet to a gun. We take these things for granted now, so it is fascinating to see how these things were initially reasoned out and how the sciences we know today got their beginnings.
The two threads of Vacher and Lacassagne are eventually tied together in the book as Lacassagne is called upon to bring Vacher to justice.
I cannot tell you how fascinating this book was on a number of levels. There were glimpses of life and social mores in 19th century France, the birth of forensics, and the crime story itself. I highly recommend this book if you're interested in any of those subjects.
In alternating chapters, we get the gruesome details of Vacher's slaying as he wandered the French countryside and the story of ciminologist Alexandre Lacassagne who is credited as one of the founding fathers of modern forensics. I've had a long-time interest in forensics so the information about Lacassagne and the start of this science were absolutely fascinating to me.
For the chapters on Vacher and his deeds, it truly does read like a crime novel, for Starr recounts Vacher's infamous deeds in often gruesome detail. It is not for the faint of heart, but it does serve to illuminate the character of the murderer, life during the last years of the 19th century, and the impact upon society.
Lacassagne was as fascinating as Vacher, for he studied knife wounds to detect handedness and determined how to match a bullet to a gun. We take these things for granted now, so it is fascinating to see how these things were initially reasoned out and how the sciences we know today got their beginnings.
The two threads of Vacher and Lacassagne are eventually tied together in the book as Lacassagne is called upon to bring Vacher to justice.
I cannot tell you how fascinating this book was on a number of levels. There were glimpses of life and social mores in 19th century France, the birth of forensics, and the crime story itself. I highly recommend this book if you're interested in any of those subjects.
September 15, 2016
Pretty good history about forensics in France.
November 9, 2021
This was a slow read but in a good way. It was thoroughly-researched and packed with information I found enlightening and interesting.
Author Douglas Starr tells the story of the birth of forensics, with French criminologist Lacassagne at the forefront with his remarkable work that seemed positively modern to me as I read even though he was working in the late nineteenth century. We are also introduced to prosecutor Fourquet, who connects the crimes of serial killer Vacher with one another whereas law enforcement otherwise hadn’t been able to since the crimes had been committed in different regions from one another.
Starr does well to contrast Lacassagne’s work with that of one of his prominent contemporaries, Lombroso, a phrenologist whose ideas were already known to be bigoted and outdated towards the end of his career (though it doesn’t seem to have looked that way to all people as his ideas slipped right into eugenics, which was gaining prominence then and in to the early twentieth century.)
Lacassagne, along with some of his French contemporaries, looks for patterns in the body to build the first real guidelines for forensic experts to identify remains. He seeks to find the causes of criminality by asking the imprisoned to write memoirs. Meanwhile, Fourquet uses patterns to connect the crimes committed by a single man. Both Lacassagne and Fourquet find it more beneficial discard the usual harsh ways of interrogation of the time for more humane ways, gaining the trust of suspects and criminals, both for solving specific crimes and for building what essentially are now criminal profiles.
All of this is told to the backdrop of Vacher’s brutal and wide-spread crimes, which Starr does not sensationalize. Reading this book, you can’t help but compare the advances in late nineteenth century forensic science to those of today. As Lombroso’s pseudoscience lost popularity and fingerprinting gained prominence then, fingerprinting today is being replaced by more precise sciences to ensure the guilty are found guilty. That advancement is the progress we all look for in the justice system.
Author Douglas Starr tells the story of the birth of forensics, with French criminologist Lacassagne at the forefront with his remarkable work that seemed positively modern to me as I read even though he was working in the late nineteenth century. We are also introduced to prosecutor Fourquet, who connects the crimes of serial killer Vacher with one another whereas law enforcement otherwise hadn’t been able to since the crimes had been committed in different regions from one another.
Starr does well to contrast Lacassagne’s work with that of one of his prominent contemporaries, Lombroso, a phrenologist whose ideas were already known to be bigoted and outdated towards the end of his career (though it doesn’t seem to have looked that way to all people as his ideas slipped right into eugenics, which was gaining prominence then and in to the early twentieth century.)
Lacassagne, along with some of his French contemporaries, looks for patterns in the body to build the first real guidelines for forensic experts to identify remains. He seeks to find the causes of criminality by asking the imprisoned to write memoirs. Meanwhile, Fourquet uses patterns to connect the crimes committed by a single man. Both Lacassagne and Fourquet find it more beneficial discard the usual harsh ways of interrogation of the time for more humane ways, gaining the trust of suspects and criminals, both for solving specific crimes and for building what essentially are now criminal profiles.
All of this is told to the backdrop of Vacher’s brutal and wide-spread crimes, which Starr does not sensationalize. Reading this book, you can’t help but compare the advances in late nineteenth century forensic science to those of today. As Lombroso’s pseudoscience lost popularity and fingerprinting gained prominence then, fingerprinting today is being replaced by more precise sciences to ensure the guilty are found guilty. That advancement is the progress we all look for in the justice system.
September 2, 2016
In 1893 Louise Barant crossed paths with Joseph Vacher, he became obsessed with her, stalked her and shot her then himself. Both survived the shooting, Vacher was sent to an insane asylum. He was released on April 1, 1894, on May 19 he committed his first admitted murder. Investigators involved with the murders believe that this murder was not his first, but Vacher insisted it was. His last murder was committed on June 18, 1897 and he attacked his last victim on August 4, 1897. He confessed to 11 killings but is believed to have committed more than 25. His victims were spread throughout the French countryside, that was one of the reasons he was not caught for so long. By the time most of his victims were found he was miles away. In a couple of instances, someone else was blamed for the crime, even when Vacher was seen and reported to police as being in the area. Joseph Vacher was known and feared as “The Killer of Little Shepherds”.
Douglas Starr also covers the history of Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne and the development of forensic science. He shows the relationship between his science and a popular theory of the day, promulgated by Cesare Lombroso who believed there were people that were ‘born criminal’ and that the tendency to commit crimes is genetic and revealed in certain telltale body traits. He also writes about Alphonse Bertillon who developed an identification systems consisting of ‘eleven critical measurements’ and Hans Gross, Austrian criminologist who promoted the idea of psychology for interrogation instead of the methods used as the time, namely torture.
This a well researched book. Douglas Starr takes the time to educate his readers on the social and economic conditions of the area and the time period. It is also well written, fascinating to read and not boring in any way. I recommend this book.
Douglas Starr also covers the history of Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne and the development of forensic science. He shows the relationship between his science and a popular theory of the day, promulgated by Cesare Lombroso who believed there were people that were ‘born criminal’ and that the tendency to commit crimes is genetic and revealed in certain telltale body traits. He also writes about Alphonse Bertillon who developed an identification systems consisting of ‘eleven critical measurements’ and Hans Gross, Austrian criminologist who promoted the idea of psychology for interrogation instead of the methods used as the time, namely torture.
This a well researched book. Douglas Starr takes the time to educate his readers on the social and economic conditions of the area and the time period. It is also well written, fascinating to read and not boring in any way. I recommend this book.
June 12, 2015
This is an interesting book that combines the crimes, trial and punishment of a French vagabond named Vacher and the development of the new scientific and investigative techniques of the time, including detailed autopsies and crime scene investigation. Starr follows Vacher as he travels through the French countryside, detailing each of his crimes, which he intersperses with the investigations into these and how different each one was depending on the area and the people involved. This showed the vast differences of the time with some forces making full use of experts and modern science while others relied upon heresay and gossip. Starr then pulls it all together with Vacher capture and subsequent trial as one magistrate, Fourquet, and one of the driving forces behind modern criminal investigations, Lacassagne, combine their efforts and expertise to bring Vacher to justice as he aims to throw the trial on grounds of indiminished capacity (the classic insanity plea). Overall this is a pretty good read, alternating between the gory details of Vacher's crimes and the new science of crime scene investigation and the efforts made to get this recognised by the courts. I did find some of the chapters a little slow a maybe too detailed as I was reading them but it all came together with Vacher's trial so it is worth perservering through these sections.
December 2, 2019
As the title indicates this is actually two different subjects crammed into one book.
The story of Joseph Vacher, a serial killer who stalked the French countryside at the end of the 19th century, is interwoven with the development of forensic science, with the narrative focusing primarily on Dr. Alexander Lacassagne. Individually, they're both well-told, interesting tales, but the melding of the two is sometimes awkward and overwhelming.
A chronological list of events at the end would have been very helpful.
I did really appreciate the author's follow-up on what happened to some of the falsely-accused suspects for Vacher's crimes. Even after they were cleared of suspicion by the authorities, they were often still ostracized and persecuted by the rest of their village. The transition from superstition to science was a rough time, especially in small towns.
The story of Joseph Vacher, a serial killer who stalked the French countryside at the end of the 19th century, is interwoven with the development of forensic science, with the narrative focusing primarily on Dr. Alexander Lacassagne. Individually, they're both well-told, interesting tales, but the melding of the two is sometimes awkward and overwhelming.
A chronological list of events at the end would have been very helpful.
I did really appreciate the author's follow-up on what happened to some of the falsely-accused suspects for Vacher's crimes. Even after they were cleared of suspicion by the authorities, they were often still ostracized and persecuted by the rest of their village. The transition from superstition to science was a rough time, especially in small towns.
May 22, 2012
This is the engrossing tale of serial killer Joseph Vacher, “The Killer of Little Shepherds,” and Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne, France's pioneering criminologist. Author Douglas Starr does an excellent job of weaving the narratives of their lives together to tell not only the story of brutal crimes and the punishment of them, but also the unique historical moment that brought the two men together at the end of the nineteenth century. This moment included the birth of forensic medicine, the growth of the popular press, and the developing debates about the origins of criminal behavior, the treatment of mental illness, and the ultimate goals of the justice system.
This is a very rewarding read, especially for those interested in intellectual history and/or the history of science.
This is a very rewarding read, especially for those interested in intellectual history and/or the history of science.
November 14, 2010
This was an excellent true crime and history. I had heard of Joseph Vacher, but I didn't know very much about him, and I don't think there are any other books about him in English. His crimes are straight out of a Hollywood slasher film -- he made Jack the Ripper look like a sissy. The author was able to seamlessly integrate the life and crimes of Vacher with details about the advent of forensic science, forensic medicine and psychology. He must have done a tremendous amount of research for this book.
April 6, 2011
This was a fascinating non-fiction book that weaved together the story of a serial killer that ravaged the French countryside in the late 1800's, and the simultaneous development of the forensic science field that helped hold him accountable for his crimes. Although at times this connection felt a bit tenuous (and convenient) I felt drawn in by both storylines and, as such, was willing to forgive the author a bit. If you liked "Devil in the White City" I think you would really enjoy this book.
August 25, 2012
Found this fascinating, Laccassagne sounds like a man possessed with a brilliant mind and Starr is obviously a fan of the great man.
The story though non-fiction isn't dry, but reads like a novel. I was going to read this slowly but found I couldn't put it down. Do enjoy historical true crime especially cases over 100 years, safe in the knowledge that the criminal is long gone. There's also the history itself of the people, the culture and the social norms of the time.
The story though non-fiction isn't dry, but reads like a novel. I was going to read this slowly but found I couldn't put it down. Do enjoy historical true crime especially cases over 100 years, safe in the knowledge that the criminal is long gone. There's also the history itself of the people, the culture and the social norms of the time.
November 30, 2015
One of the best historical true crime books I've read in a while. I don't know why I hadn't heard of Vacher earlier. I thoroughly enjoyed reading about the birth of forensic science and how it aided in his capture, and how advances in psychology and mental health at the time worked in his case, as well. A fascinating read.
August 12, 2011
This book was extremely educational about the birth of forensics! It was written as a story, so very easily understood, and not so science-y that a person with little-to-no science background would have difficulty reading it. I was fascinated the whole way through!
January 16, 2016
A great, great read. Takes you inside the era as well as inside the crimes. All superlatives!
May 15, 2022
Brilliantly written true crime book that should be a classic.
This book does 2 separate things really well: 1)tells the story of the horrific serial killer, Vacher, aka the Killer of Little Shepherds, and 2)recounts the birth of forensic science within the context of French society at the turn of the 19th Century.
Starr’s journalistic style means this book is full of meticulous historical detail and engaging storytelling. There’s a reason why so many reviews call this book riveting- it was such an easy read despite the gruesome subject matter and the sheer amount of information dispensed.
I loved the format too. The alternating chapters dealt with the life, crime spree, and finally the capture of Vacher, with the interspersed chapters giving an impressive history and development of forensics. Organizing the chapters this way made it easier to deal with the bloody and difficult parts of Vacher’s murders and gave a foundation for understanding his case and the world he inhabited.
The last few chapters that dealt with Vacher’s capture, court case, and his death by capital punishment were among the best- in an already really great book. The circus of the court case and all the scientific, philosophical and legal questions that came out of it were intriguing.
This book was at once a portrait of a time and place and also a book that reflects back questions we still have about crime and punishment today.
***please note there are many disturbing scenes of sexual and physical violence against women and children, descriptions of dead bodies and bodily fluids, and of capital punishment including guillotine and electric chair, etc. If you are sensitive to those things, or don’t want to read about them, this book isn’t for you***
This book does 2 separate things really well: 1)tells the story of the horrific serial killer, Vacher, aka the Killer of Little Shepherds, and 2)recounts the birth of forensic science within the context of French society at the turn of the 19th Century.
Starr’s journalistic style means this book is full of meticulous historical detail and engaging storytelling. There’s a reason why so many reviews call this book riveting- it was such an easy read despite the gruesome subject matter and the sheer amount of information dispensed.
I loved the format too. The alternating chapters dealt with the life, crime spree, and finally the capture of Vacher, with the interspersed chapters giving an impressive history and development of forensics. Organizing the chapters this way made it easier to deal with the bloody and difficult parts of Vacher’s murders and gave a foundation for understanding his case and the world he inhabited.
The last few chapters that dealt with Vacher’s capture, court case, and his death by capital punishment were among the best- in an already really great book. The circus of the court case and all the scientific, philosophical and legal questions that came out of it were intriguing.
This book was at once a portrait of a time and place and also a book that reflects back questions we still have about crime and punishment today.
***please note there are many disturbing scenes of sexual and physical violence against women and children, descriptions of dead bodies and bodily fluids, and of capital punishment including guillotine and electric chair, etc. If you are sensitive to those things, or don’t want to read about them, this book isn’t for you***
July 25, 2023
I really enjoyed this book. I love reading anything about forensic science anyway and I liked the juxtaposition of the story of an actual killer on his spree and the beginning evolution of forensics (also mix in some psychology) and how it morphed into some of the stuff that is still used today to catch criminals and see what makes them tick. This also worked for me since all of the players in this book are dead so the author couldn't insert himself into the narrative and get all wishy-washy about how people might have felt at the time. This is a pet peeve of mine in true crime books. I am pretty much in the "just the facts ma'am" camp when it comes to these types of books.
February 3, 2023
The story of Joseph Vacher, France’s Jack the Ripper, a uniquely terrible serial murderer. This book also covers the incredible career and contributions of Lacassagne to the development of modern day forensic science. Hooray for legal medicine and modern forensics!
January 17, 2025
It's a funny book, if you're a sick bastard like me ( in Christian Bale voice).
May 25, 2015
So lately, I've been in a bit of reading slump. One of my seminars has monthly book reports (multiple books), and reading three Japanese books in three days basically killed all my drive I had to read. Really. All I was reading, for a time, were comics (thankfully, there's Scribd). It wasn't until I picked up this book that the reading slump was broken, and I managed to finish the book (in about two days, so I'm closer to form).
This book has two components: One follows the case of Joseph Vacher, a serial killer akin to Jack the Ripper (I believe he's called the French Ripper). The other follows Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne and his colleagues, detailing how the created the field known as forensic science. The two characters don't actually meet until near the end of the book, but their stories are told simultaneously. So you have alternating chapters, one about a criminal, and one about a crime-fighter. It could have been jarring, but I didn't really mind. In fact, the author managed to link the two stories by showing how the new methods were or were not used.
Towards the end of the book, it moves away from the story of forensics into the story of the insanity plea. Vacher tried to convince the court that he was insane at the time of the murders, and Dr. Lacassagne tried to do the opposite. Personally, I don't believe Vacher was insane. I think he was a person who, after being jilted and without a job, gave in to the voice of evil and started killing. I don't think he was insane in the sense that he did not know he was committing a crime and thus not legally responsible.
Another aspect of the book I thought interesting was when it explored the lives of those who were falsely accused of being killers. We might think that the internet age is the age that never forgets, but that's not true. Many of the people falsely accused had their reputations ruined for good, and they had to move away for face mob justice. Even the sentencing of Vacher didn't change things, and the families of some victims insisted that this other guy was the real killer.
This is contradictory, but I thought the book was both morbid and hopeful. It's morbid because, hey, it's a story about a serial killer who struck at random and killed many innocents. How much sunshine and rainbows can you put into a story like that? But, it's hopeful because it showed the birth of forensic science, and that there are people in this world who will fight against the monsters.
This review was first posted at Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
This book has two components: One follows the case of Joseph Vacher, a serial killer akin to Jack the Ripper (I believe he's called the French Ripper). The other follows Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne and his colleagues, detailing how the created the field known as forensic science. The two characters don't actually meet until near the end of the book, but their stories are told simultaneously. So you have alternating chapters, one about a criminal, and one about a crime-fighter. It could have been jarring, but I didn't really mind. In fact, the author managed to link the two stories by showing how the new methods were or were not used.
Towards the end of the book, it moves away from the story of forensics into the story of the insanity plea. Vacher tried to convince the court that he was insane at the time of the murders, and Dr. Lacassagne tried to do the opposite. Personally, I don't believe Vacher was insane. I think he was a person who, after being jilted and without a job, gave in to the voice of evil and started killing. I don't think he was insane in the sense that he did not know he was committing a crime and thus not legally responsible.
Another aspect of the book I thought interesting was when it explored the lives of those who were falsely accused of being killers. We might think that the internet age is the age that never forgets, but that's not true. Many of the people falsely accused had their reputations ruined for good, and they had to move away for face mob justice. Even the sentencing of Vacher didn't change things, and the families of some victims insisted that this other guy was the real killer.
This is contradictory, but I thought the book was both morbid and hopeful. It's morbid because, hey, it's a story about a serial killer who struck at random and killed many innocents. How much sunshine and rainbows can you put into a story like that? But, it's hopeful because it showed the birth of forensic science, and that there are people in this world who will fight against the monsters.
This review was first posted at Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
August 21, 2011
The Killer of Little Shepherds is the story of a serial killer and how he came to be detected and caught. The fact that there was a serial killer stalking the countryside of late 19th Century France is less surprising than that he was eventually caught and convicted by the nascent field of forensic science. Douglas Starr has written a well researched book and told the story of Joseph Vâcher in an accessible and fluid manner. Although the body of the text itself has very few references or footnotes, there is a reasonable notes and bibliography section at the end of the book which readers can investigate if they wish.
The true star of the story is Dr Alexandre Lacassagne, a man in the mould of Grissom or Mac Taylor from the popular CSI franchise. However, where Grissom and Taylor et al solve their crimes in less than 60 minutes, Lacassagne spent months trying to understand the mind of Vâcher and amassing the incontrovertible evidence that not only had he committed the crime he was charged with, but had committed others in just three years in some of the most remote parts of France and that he had done so with premeditation and not, as Vâcher and his legal team had tried to claim, whilst insane.
The verdict was vindication of the methods employed by Lacassagne and his team and, as the 20th Century dawned, came to be the standard operating procedures of the world’s police forces. Now, in the 21st Century, science is relied on to prove all manner of crimes, from murder to fraud, and it is believed to be both incorruptible and wholly accurate and there lies the rub – is it? Or can the results be manipulated or misinterpreted? Is there too much reliance on science and not enough on the scrupulosity of rigorous methods of application in the science? Lacassagne himself was certain that investigations had to be carried out methodically, documented at all points, and produced his own handbook as a guide. The well publicised cases of wrongful conviction demonstrate that sometimes, rigorousness is missing in some investigations and reliance on the accuracy of scientific developments such as DNA matching is perhaps at the expense of a thorough and impartial investigation.
This book is a timely reminder of where forensic science started and how important it was in bringing the criminal to justice. It is also a reminder that, once upon a time, the victim and their family were the only people who deserved pity – in Britain at least, we seem to have forgotten that.
The true star of the story is Dr Alexandre Lacassagne, a man in the mould of Grissom or Mac Taylor from the popular CSI franchise. However, where Grissom and Taylor et al solve their crimes in less than 60 minutes, Lacassagne spent months trying to understand the mind of Vâcher and amassing the incontrovertible evidence that not only had he committed the crime he was charged with, but had committed others in just three years in some of the most remote parts of France and that he had done so with premeditation and not, as Vâcher and his legal team had tried to claim, whilst insane.
The verdict was vindication of the methods employed by Lacassagne and his team and, as the 20th Century dawned, came to be the standard operating procedures of the world’s police forces. Now, in the 21st Century, science is relied on to prove all manner of crimes, from murder to fraud, and it is believed to be both incorruptible and wholly accurate and there lies the rub – is it? Or can the results be manipulated or misinterpreted? Is there too much reliance on science and not enough on the scrupulosity of rigorous methods of application in the science? Lacassagne himself was certain that investigations had to be carried out methodically, documented at all points, and produced his own handbook as a guide. The well publicised cases of wrongful conviction demonstrate that sometimes, rigorousness is missing in some investigations and reliance on the accuracy of scientific developments such as DNA matching is perhaps at the expense of a thorough and impartial investigation.
This book is a timely reminder of where forensic science started and how important it was in bringing the criminal to justice. It is also a reminder that, once upon a time, the victim and their family were the only people who deserved pity – in Britain at least, we seem to have forgotten that.
September 19, 2019
This excellent book by Douglas Starr gives a page turning account of a 19th century serial killer, Joseph Vacher and the father of modern forensics, DR. Alexandre Lacasssagne. Vacher shot and wounded a girlfriend and himself and was “cured” after an eight month stay at an asylum. Dr. Lassagne developed criminal investigation techniques throughout the 1890’s, including the use of ballistics, the matching of bullets to their guns. The good doctor was far ahead of his time. Meanwhile, Vacher walked from village to village, leaving a trail of dead boys and girls along the way. At one point, the killer found himself at Lourdes, where he claimed he had the protection of the Virgin Mary during his days of carnage. He also identified with Joan of Arc, a fellow martyr. After his capture, the trial of the century drew a worldwide press including the New York Times. Dr, Lassacgne testified as to the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the killings. The choice of the court would be the guillotine or an insane asylum. It was a 19th century version of our O.J. circus. The final chapter looks at the nature vs. nurture cause of crime. The brains of the executed were sliced and diced to determine whether the madmen were born crazy or they had a dose of bad parenting. One hundred and thirty years later and modern science continues to debate the issue. The Killer of Little Shepherds is a very good read.
December 27, 2015
Joseph Vacher, the subject of The Killer of Little Shepherds, was a contemporary of Jack the Ripper. He killed, raped, and mutilated (in some order) twice as many people as the Ripper, most of them teenagers, both male and female. You've never heard of him because he was caught, tried, convicted, and executed; there's no mystery to build a myth around.
The Killer of Little Shepherds is well written, thoughtful, and persistent; it recognizes that its subject raises very difficult questions about mental illness and legal responsibility and evil, and it talks about those questions both as the authorities of the day understood them and as we understand them now. And it distinguishes clearly between the two.
Also, reading about late nineteenth century scientific in-fighting is always fun.
The Killer of Little Shepherds is well written, thoughtful, and persistent; it recognizes that its subject raises very difficult questions about mental illness and legal responsibility and evil, and it talks about those questions both as the authorities of the day understood them and as we understand them now. And it distinguishes clearly between the two.
Also, reading about late nineteenth century scientific in-fighting is always fun.
July 10, 2011
This is a book that delivers on its title. Joseph Vacher was a serial killer in 1890s France. This is the story of how early forensic scientists (not called that yet) put together the pieces to both convict the killer and exonerate others, who by happenstance had been accused of some of his crimes.
The book also offers a look into mental health practices of the era which were more humane than I'd been led to believe.
The book also offers a look into mental health practices of the era which were more humane than I'd been led to believe.
March 12, 2017
The murders get a little monotonous because there are so many and the method is the same- it is hard to distinguish one from another. The general conversation about what makes a criminal legally responsible is well done and the author acknowledges that the conversation continues - we have yet to really find the answers. A fascinating history, well researched and well written.
January 17, 2018
3.5 Stars
This was the tale of the French Jack the Ripper and the emergence of the science of forensics which helped to send him to the guillotine.
I am fascinated by forensics, and found this aspect of the book really interesting. It's astonishing how little was known at the end of the 19th Century, of the science, and how little of the crime scene and the bodies were examined. There were no fingerprints, obviously, but basic such as the position of the body, the angle of wounds, even rough guestimates on time of death were mysteries in a time when the PM was carried out by a local doctor, and there was no such thin as a CSI. But once it started, it took off at an astonishing pace. Yes, there were bits of this book that were gruesome in the descriptions, but as I said, I found it compelling.
But there was a lot of detail, I have to say, and as one with no medical background, I did find bits of it a bit too technical. The case of Vacher (the little shepherd killer, who actually killed a great more people than just little shepherds) hung ultimately on the question of whether or not he was fit to plea, and that was when I lost a bit of interest, in all the technical arguments for or against insanity.
But, as ever, I've finished this with a host of ideas for other stories to write. I'm not sure I could say I enjoyed it, but it was most definitely insightful!
This was the tale of the French Jack the Ripper and the emergence of the science of forensics which helped to send him to the guillotine.
I am fascinated by forensics, and found this aspect of the book really interesting. It's astonishing how little was known at the end of the 19th Century, of the science, and how little of the crime scene and the bodies were examined. There were no fingerprints, obviously, but basic such as the position of the body, the angle of wounds, even rough guestimates on time of death were mysteries in a time when the PM was carried out by a local doctor, and there was no such thin as a CSI. But once it started, it took off at an astonishing pace. Yes, there were bits of this book that were gruesome in the descriptions, but as I said, I found it compelling.
But there was a lot of detail, I have to say, and as one with no medical background, I did find bits of it a bit too technical. The case of Vacher (the little shepherd killer, who actually killed a great more people than just little shepherds) hung ultimately on the question of whether or not he was fit to plea, and that was when I lost a bit of interest, in all the technical arguments for or against insanity.
But, as ever, I've finished this with a host of ideas for other stories to write. I'm not sure I could say I enjoyed it, but it was most definitely insightful!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 529 reviews