Actual Rating: 3.5. I first heard of this book after the author appeared on a Know Your Enemy episode, at which point I read her previous book, The Real Lolita. While I liked The Real Lolita fine, I vastly preferred Scoundrel, which felt like a solid improvement. However, a lot of the issues I found with Weinman's previous work are here as well.

The best part of this book is the story itself, which is fascinating, appalling, and at times ridiculously funny (the Hatkik chapter had me in tears while brushing my teeth, thank you audible). This isn't a part of criminal justice history that a lot of people know about, and I think Weinman overall did a good job of rendering it in a compelling way. I found some people say they found the writing dull or boring, but personally I disagree and think it suits the genre just fine.

Despite appreciating the story, I had several issues with the book overall. For one, while I loved the way Weinman emphasized women (Buckley's wife and secretary stand out in particular) as especially perceptive of Smith's bullshittery, I found that his actual victims fell to the wayside much of the time. This is compounded by the fact that there was a lot more graphic description of assault and murder than I expected, as that was generally absent from The Real Lolita. The book opens by saying the true crime genre has progressed in terms of its depiction of victims, becoming more progressive and respectful in its portrayals. However, Scoundrel itself seemed not to put much focus on the women Smith murdered, instead focusing much more on the Buckley/Wilkins/Smith dynamic. I understand this choice, but it still did not fully sit right with me.

My larger issue is that I think Weinman could have done more systemic analysis throughout this story. In a weird way, she crafts a "Great Man Narrative" around Smith, depicting him as simply so cunning and manipulative that there was no way any prison system could contain his brilliance. But, she does no analysis about how Smith's characteristics and victim typology (disenfranchised young women) assisted in his getting out. She references these facts but does not dig into what it really means, and how much Smith's release was contingent upon the social construction of redemption and "what a good man looks and talks like." I think this makes the story feel a lot weaker, as tying in a more systemic analysis could have made the story feel more impactful and resonant. As it stands, Scoundrel feels more like an anecdote than an indictment.

Still, I thought this was an interesting book and am glad I read it, if for nothing else than the extremely funny/shocking Hatkik section. I would be interested in reading whatever Weinman wrote next and I really hope she dives more into systems and analysis than she has previously.