What do you think?
Rate this book
Never Suck A Dead Man's Hand: Curious Adventures of a CSI
The author, a forensics expert, shares her experiences as a CSI for the Baltimore County Police Department where she reveals what really happens behind the yellow tape, bringing to life the sights, smells, and sounds of a crime scene.
260 pages, Hardcover
First published February 1, 2007
72 people are currently reading
2734 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 226 reviews
February 8, 2011
This author is a bitch. I’m sorry but I truly can’t think of a more apt description of her. Actually I can but it's worse than the word I just used. In her little book she spends countless pages harshly judging and criticizing others. In no specific order:
*She talks about a house call with a drunken woman she spends (wastes) paragraphs about how ugly she is and calling her a beast and so forth.
*She makes fun of an obese man and refers to him as “Butt Front” because he’s so fat his stomach looks like an ass.
*She writes about “those” neighborhoods, wink, wink. Reminded me of when I was told by a company not to submit the resumes of “those kind of people”.
*She picks apart a burglary victim on the account that he had the audacity to have hairy feet that she found “ghastly”. She refers to him as Frodo and says he should be in the circus. In the same story she bemoans that “Frodo’s” kitchen is filthy and make the observation that the female significant other “sucked at housekeeping”. I guess that outdated thinking crosses into her thoughts on women’s roles as well.
*She writes of a gentleman who accidentally kills himself via autoerotic asphyxia and calls him “Mr. Fancy Pants” because he was dressed as a woman and apparently also because she has the mental maturity of a 12 year old bully.
*When she calls a funeral home to get a quote on some coffins for remains that were removed from their original site and needed to be re-interred, apparently she was annoyed by the voice of the lady who answered the phone, goes on to mock her, make the judgment that she was blonde and big-boobed without seeing her and then basically made fun of the girl because she was confused about her calling to buy as many could for the remains of 16 people in her garage. Really? I don’t think she was confused because she was stupid, clearly you were calling with an out of the ordinary circumstance. She also surmised the lady’s name was Suri or Shiloh or something like that. Because clearly everyone has to have a NORMAL name like Dana.
*She tried to take six skulls on a plane in her carryon baggage and then when she was stopped and questioned by airport security she gets pissy with them for wasting her time and missing her flight, never mind that she didn’t have the proper paperwork or identification with her. Oh and the airport lady’s pants were too tight. Clearly she has issues with overweight people.
Jeez Louise I could go on and on about this woman. It horrifies me she is in a profession where she has to interact with victims, people with cognitive problems, people with lesser education then her, etc. I’m sure her arrogance and disdain are apparent when she has to get off that high horse of hers and actually work with them
*She talks about a house call with a drunken woman she spends (wastes) paragraphs about how ugly she is and calling her a beast and so forth.
*She makes fun of an obese man and refers to him as “Butt Front” because he’s so fat his stomach looks like an ass.
*She writes about “those” neighborhoods, wink, wink. Reminded me of when I was told by a company not to submit the resumes of “those kind of people”.
*She picks apart a burglary victim on the account that he had the audacity to have hairy feet that she found “ghastly”. She refers to him as Frodo and says he should be in the circus. In the same story she bemoans that “Frodo’s” kitchen is filthy and make the observation that the female significant other “sucked at housekeeping”. I guess that outdated thinking crosses into her thoughts on women’s roles as well.
*She writes of a gentleman who accidentally kills himself via autoerotic asphyxia and calls him “Mr. Fancy Pants” because he was dressed as a woman and apparently also because she has the mental maturity of a 12 year old bully.
*When she calls a funeral home to get a quote on some coffins for remains that were removed from their original site and needed to be re-interred, apparently she was annoyed by the voice of the lady who answered the phone, goes on to mock her, make the judgment that she was blonde and big-boobed without seeing her and then basically made fun of the girl because she was confused about her calling to buy as many could for the remains of 16 people in her garage. Really? I don’t think she was confused because she was stupid, clearly you were calling with an out of the ordinary circumstance. She also surmised the lady’s name was Suri or Shiloh or something like that. Because clearly everyone has to have a NORMAL name like Dana.
*She tried to take six skulls on a plane in her carryon baggage and then when she was stopped and questioned by airport security she gets pissy with them for wasting her time and missing her flight, never mind that she didn’t have the proper paperwork or identification with her. Oh and the airport lady’s pants were too tight. Clearly she has issues with overweight people.
Jeez Louise I could go on and on about this woman. It horrifies me she is in a profession where she has to interact with victims, people with cognitive problems, people with lesser education then her, etc. I’m sure her arrogance and disdain are apparent when she has to get off that high horse of hers and actually work with them
September 23, 2018
***NO SPOILERS***
A book titled Never Suck a Dead Man’s Hand isn’t going to be normal. Dana Kollmann is a former crime scene investigator who here shares her most bizarre experiences on the job--and bizarre they are. The title comes from an on-the-job fiasco, and it’s not even the worst.
During her ten years as a CSI, Kollmann saw it all--until she finally burned out, tired of sacrificing her whole life for the profession: “Overtime, court, and scheduling issues would cause me to miss countless bridal and baby showers, retirement and anniversary celebrations, weddings, birthday parties, doctor’s appointments, hair appointments, lunch dates, family dinners, and even the cookout that I was hosting.” She didn’t turn her back on forensics entirely, though. She now passes along her knowledge as a forensics professor.
The book is most valuable as a warning to those considering a career in CSI, a field of study that’s on the upswing thanks to the t.v. show “CSI.” Kollmann wants people to know, however, the extent to which Hollywood has glamorized the profession. There’s no doubt about that after reading Never Suck a Dead Man’s Hand, but she also explains early on that no CSI in her right mind would go to work in heels and a skirt or with a full face of makeup and coiffed hair. It was workman’s boots for Kollmann, unflattering baggy clothing, and a practical ponytail. Many students enter CSI programs expecting the Hollywood version and quickly drop out when they learn the reality. Work hours can be irregular and exhausting; the work itself is gruesome and depressing; and, more than anything, one must have a steel stomach.
The only way to manage CSI work psychologically is to develop an emotional distance, and Kollmann explains that she and her colleagues engaged in a lot of gallows humor. Her decade on the job, however, may have caused her to lose awareness of how inappropriate such humor is outside of the profession. Though much of what Kollmann says is funny, she also often comes off as judgmental of others and heartless, and in these accounts, she and her colleagues don’t regard the dead with any reverence, or, as in one case, her colleagues don’t treat a dead body with respect.
Kollmann’s accounts vary in relevance. She dives right into the disgusting thick of things with anecdotes from her most harrowing experiences on the job, accounts that turn the stomach yet are too riveting to stop reading; however, she couldn’t maintain this kind of storytelling standard. Other chapters don’t fit, either because they have nothing to do with CSI or because they have little to do with CSI.
Nevertheless, when this book is good, it’s very good. With descriptions of everything from the amount of CSI gear needed to process a dead body to the decomposition process itself, Kollmann left out nothing. The simply curious reader could read this and be fully done with the subject, and prospective CSIs would be well served if Never Suck a Dead Man’s Hand were required reading.
Complementary reading: Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers
A book titled Never Suck a Dead Man’s Hand isn’t going to be normal. Dana Kollmann is a former crime scene investigator who here shares her most bizarre experiences on the job--and bizarre they are. The title comes from an on-the-job fiasco, and it’s not even the worst.
During her ten years as a CSI, Kollmann saw it all--until she finally burned out, tired of sacrificing her whole life for the profession: “Overtime, court, and scheduling issues would cause me to miss countless bridal and baby showers, retirement and anniversary celebrations, weddings, birthday parties, doctor’s appointments, hair appointments, lunch dates, family dinners, and even the cookout that I was hosting.” She didn’t turn her back on forensics entirely, though. She now passes along her knowledge as a forensics professor.
The book is most valuable as a warning to those considering a career in CSI, a field of study that’s on the upswing thanks to the t.v. show “CSI.” Kollmann wants people to know, however, the extent to which Hollywood has glamorized the profession. There’s no doubt about that after reading Never Suck a Dead Man’s Hand, but she also explains early on that no CSI in her right mind would go to work in heels and a skirt or with a full face of makeup and coiffed hair. It was workman’s boots for Kollmann, unflattering baggy clothing, and a practical ponytail. Many students enter CSI programs expecting the Hollywood version and quickly drop out when they learn the reality. Work hours can be irregular and exhausting; the work itself is gruesome and depressing; and, more than anything, one must have a steel stomach.
The only way to manage CSI work psychologically is to develop an emotional distance, and Kollmann explains that she and her colleagues engaged in a lot of gallows humor. Her decade on the job, however, may have caused her to lose awareness of how inappropriate such humor is outside of the profession. Though much of what Kollmann says is funny, she also often comes off as judgmental of others and heartless, and in these accounts, she and her colleagues don’t regard the dead with any reverence, or, as in one case, her colleagues don’t treat a dead body with respect.
Kollmann’s accounts vary in relevance. She dives right into the disgusting thick of things with anecdotes from her most harrowing experiences on the job, accounts that turn the stomach yet are too riveting to stop reading; however, she couldn’t maintain this kind of storytelling standard. Other chapters don’t fit, either because they have nothing to do with CSI or because they have little to do with CSI.
Nevertheless, when this book is good, it’s very good. With descriptions of everything from the amount of CSI gear needed to process a dead body to the decomposition process itself, Kollmann left out nothing. The simply curious reader could read this and be fully done with the subject, and prospective CSIs would be well served if Never Suck a Dead Man’s Hand were required reading.
Complementary reading: Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers
Read
March 5, 2009The author of this is deeply annoying, but I read it to the end anyway.
A few things that grated:
1. I don't think you should publish, even anonymously, photos of corpses to take the piss out of, especially not one where I'm pretty sure that if you showed it to the family they would recognise the man pictured. This particular photo is captioned: "This is exactly why you should always put sheets on your bed. After a long night of drinking, this guy decided he'd forgo the bed linens and now look at him.... He's going to be known in heaven as "you know - the guy with the mattress pattern on his back"."
2. Lots of random photos that didn't pertain much to anything.
3. Spelling/grammatical mistakes, including lots of confused homophones, and getting "former" and "latter" the wrong way round.
4. Her insistence on giving everything in 10 codes, then translating in brackets. It's one thing in direct speech, but it's another when you're just reporting something.
5. Her smugness at lots of "hilarious" incidents like playing pranks on people (including one where she adopts "a thick English accent" - what, like Brummie?), trying to fly with a carry-on bag of skulls and no documentation or papers then acting all 'what the hell?' when they dare to question her about it even though she's late for her flight, and calling up a funeral home to ask for coffins for the 16 dead people she has in her garage (bones that need to be re-interred) while refusing to explain the exact situation and acting like they're jerks for wanting to know what's going on.
6. Her habit of over-explaining things. For example, she phoned up the Crime Lab as a prank wanting to know when it was going to "process the tusks of my wombats for latent prints". Of course, we wouldn't have realised this was stupid if she hadn't specified that, "wombats don't even live in the USA, nor do they have tusks". Similarly, prank calls where she "requested detailed information on how to properly destroy blood evidence and reduce a body to ash". Naturally, we wouldn't have got the joke if she hadn't specified that this was to "[leave:] the impression I had just killed someone".
7. The way incidents stretch out over paaaaaages and paaaaaaages unnecessarily.
Nonetheless, parts were interesting. With much better editing, it could have been a not-bad book.
A few things that grated:
1. I don't think you should publish, even anonymously, photos of corpses to take the piss out of, especially not one where I'm pretty sure that if you showed it to the family they would recognise the man pictured. This particular photo is captioned: "This is exactly why you should always put sheets on your bed. After a long night of drinking, this guy decided he'd forgo the bed linens and now look at him.... He's going to be known in heaven as "you know - the guy with the mattress pattern on his back"."
2. Lots of random photos that didn't pertain much to anything.
3. Spelling/grammatical mistakes, including lots of confused homophones, and getting "former" and "latter" the wrong way round.
4. Her insistence on giving everything in 10 codes, then translating in brackets. It's one thing in direct speech, but it's another when you're just reporting something.
5. Her smugness at lots of "hilarious" incidents like playing pranks on people (including one where she adopts "a thick English accent" - what, like Brummie?), trying to fly with a carry-on bag of skulls and no documentation or papers then acting all 'what the hell?' when they dare to question her about it even though she's late for her flight, and calling up a funeral home to ask for coffins for the 16 dead people she has in her garage (bones that need to be re-interred) while refusing to explain the exact situation and acting like they're jerks for wanting to know what's going on.
6. Her habit of over-explaining things. For example, she phoned up the Crime Lab as a prank wanting to know when it was going to "process the tusks of my wombats for latent prints". Of course, we wouldn't have realised this was stupid if she hadn't specified that, "wombats don't even live in the USA, nor do they have tusks". Similarly, prank calls where she "requested detailed information on how to properly destroy blood evidence and reduce a body to ash". Naturally, we wouldn't have got the joke if she hadn't specified that this was to "[leave:] the impression I had just killed someone".
7. The way incidents stretch out over paaaaaages and paaaaaaages unnecessarily.
Nonetheless, parts were interesting. With much better editing, it could have been a not-bad book.
July 3, 2023
This book I should awesome. It is about a serious subject but the dark humor is laugh out loud funny. Not a book to read in public, if you don't want to be stared at. I had to read a lot of the scenes out loud to my DH. If you like NF science type books, I highly recommend this book!
October 6, 2024
Dnf. Interesting topic but unreadable for me as the author is rude and disrespectful towards people and very judgemental
June 13, 2021
I really wanted to enjoy this book. While the author can tell a story well and while it was fascinating to see both the police department politics and what a CSI actually does, I just couldn't get past the utter callousness and contempt the author showed to the people in a lot of her stories. Dark humor and distancing and othering are coping strategies, I get it, and CSIs deal with some pretty horrible, disgusting, and horrifying scenes (see the titular story for example). But she is seeing people on what may be the worst days of their lives; that's not a standard or an example I would like to be judged by, and Kollmann doesn't seem able to pull back the gallows humor when she's no longer dealing with the aftermath of the hangman.
**Thanks to the author, publisher, and NetGalley for a free copy in exchange for an honest review.
**Thanks to the author, publisher, and NetGalley for a free copy in exchange for an honest review.
April 7, 2011
I hated this book. I wouldn’t have finished it were it not for The Project and that I needed it for the tally.
I have a longtime fascination with forensic science (which I had way before it was cool and popular, I feel compelled to point out) and studied it for a short time in graduate school, so pop-science books about it are usually a fun read. One of my favorites of the genre is Dead Men Do Tell Tales, by the late William Maples, one of the founders of the science of forensic anthropology.
This book promised an inside look at the life of a real crime scene analyst and her adventures. What we got were some drawn-out, not terribly interesting anecdotes with no beginning, middle or end, related by an extremely unpleasant narrator who seems to have nothing but contempt and disdain for everyone who isn’t her. She writes her “adventures” as if she’s writing a sitcom script starring herself as the cleverest, most snarky ones, giving herself all the best smartass lines. I say “best” with tongue in cheek, but she isn’t very funny, but clearly thinks she is.
The book is also rife with egregious editing errors. Three times the word “hoards” is used when “hordes” is intended. The tone is offensive, there are long tangents into things I don’t care about (such as her mother’s superstitiousness and – no kidding – the toilet habits of pretty much everybody Kollman knows), and based on the slapdash way she seems to have gone about her job I’ll be amazed if she ever gets another one once people read this book.
Not recommended.
I have a longtime fascination with forensic science (which I had way before it was cool and popular, I feel compelled to point out) and studied it for a short time in graduate school, so pop-science books about it are usually a fun read. One of my favorites of the genre is Dead Men Do Tell Tales, by the late William Maples, one of the founders of the science of forensic anthropology.
This book promised an inside look at the life of a real crime scene analyst and her adventures. What we got were some drawn-out, not terribly interesting anecdotes with no beginning, middle or end, related by an extremely unpleasant narrator who seems to have nothing but contempt and disdain for everyone who isn’t her. She writes her “adventures” as if she’s writing a sitcom script starring herself as the cleverest, most snarky ones, giving herself all the best smartass lines. I say “best” with tongue in cheek, but she isn’t very funny, but clearly thinks she is.
The book is also rife with egregious editing errors. Three times the word “hoards” is used when “hordes” is intended. The tone is offensive, there are long tangents into things I don’t care about (such as her mother’s superstitiousness and – no kidding – the toilet habits of pretty much everybody Kollman knows), and based on the slapdash way she seems to have gone about her job I’ll be amazed if she ever gets another one once people read this book.
Not recommended.
August 14, 2012
The first half chapter was amazing. I was lost in a world of the living having to deal with the dead and all the gore that accompanies these jobs. Then as the book progressed I started to notice she was judgmental, critical, and in some cases downright mean to both victims' families, friends, and victims themselves (burglary victims, ect).
She's even highly offensive when she used the words "midget" and "retarded" to describe thoughts and opinions of others.
To give some examples of her mean streak, she once came upon a delusional/mentally unstable woman and her submissive, if not troubled son in the middle of the night. She spent a lot of time telling us how funny and amusing she found the scene. Rather than care for the outcome of their plight she laughed about how crazy the mom was and how mentally slow the son was. It was humorous to her and she told the story with a comedic tone.
Instead of having some compassion for a raging alcoholic woman and her firefighter husband, she referred to the wife as "The Thing" and called her ugly.
She made fun of an obviously mentally unstable man who had an imaginary wife. She wrote that she used the fingerprint dusting brush she usually reserved for nasty things like toilets to dust "Frodo's" telephone. She got great pleasure in imagining him using the phone without realizing she dusted it and getting not only the germs from her nasty brush but also black face. Her reason? Because he annoyed her. (She called him Frodo because of his large, hairy feet...so she's not above name calling in her book either) It was heart-wrenching reading the pleasure she got from being so mean and cruel to someone who is obviously mentally challenged.
Now that I've explained how mean and cruel she can be, let me tell you how she managed to annoy me. She has a whole chapter on human excrement. It would be explainable if it contained stories of how the dead are sometimes found in it or around it but the first part of that chapter was dedicated in telling toilet stories of herself, her co workers, and others (not dead). It didn't make any sense being in this book. It was just gross. She did throw in a couple of stories of how excrement played a role in some of the deaths she had to work, but otherwise, the chapter only served to gross us out. Her meanness peaked through again with her telling the very detailed (unnecessarily) of the time she flushed the gas station toilet that was already packed with paper and it overflowed, excrement and all on the floor and out the door. She was on duty at the time and was there to process a robbery scene. Instead of telling the manager of the overflow she claims she ran out of there while he was busy talking to a police officer. She said another officer went to use the bathroom after she left and he was blamed for the overflow. She thought that was very hilarious while I find it immature and unprofessional. And....as I said before... unnecessary. That story as was most of the human excrement chapter had no place in this book.
I'm very disappointed in the book as I wish the rest of it was as good as the first several pages. I thought I was getting a writer comparable to books written on the subject by Mary Roach (awesome author, btw). Mary knows how to successfully balance funny with morbid and gore. Kollmann, on the other hand, has a lot of gore but very little funny and almost all meanness. Kollmann is like one of the Mean Girls while Roach is more like the girl-next-door who is funny and charming.
I'm sticking with Mary Roach from now on.
She's even highly offensive when she used the words "midget" and "retarded" to describe thoughts and opinions of others.
To give some examples of her mean streak, she once came upon a delusional/mentally unstable woman and her submissive, if not troubled son in the middle of the night. She spent a lot of time telling us how funny and amusing she found the scene. Rather than care for the outcome of their plight she laughed about how crazy the mom was and how mentally slow the son was. It was humorous to her and she told the story with a comedic tone.
Instead of having some compassion for a raging alcoholic woman and her firefighter husband, she referred to the wife as "The Thing" and called her ugly.
She made fun of an obviously mentally unstable man who had an imaginary wife. She wrote that she used the fingerprint dusting brush she usually reserved for nasty things like toilets to dust "Frodo's" telephone. She got great pleasure in imagining him using the phone without realizing she dusted it and getting not only the germs from her nasty brush but also black face. Her reason? Because he annoyed her. (She called him Frodo because of his large, hairy feet...so she's not above name calling in her book either) It was heart-wrenching reading the pleasure she got from being so mean and cruel to someone who is obviously mentally challenged.
Now that I've explained how mean and cruel she can be, let me tell you how she managed to annoy me. She has a whole chapter on human excrement. It would be explainable if it contained stories of how the dead are sometimes found in it or around it but the first part of that chapter was dedicated in telling toilet stories of herself, her co workers, and others (not dead). It didn't make any sense being in this book. It was just gross. She did throw in a couple of stories of how excrement played a role in some of the deaths she had to work, but otherwise, the chapter only served to gross us out. Her meanness peaked through again with her telling the very detailed (unnecessarily) of the time she flushed the gas station toilet that was already packed with paper and it overflowed, excrement and all on the floor and out the door. She was on duty at the time and was there to process a robbery scene. Instead of telling the manager of the overflow she claims she ran out of there while he was busy talking to a police officer. She said another officer went to use the bathroom after she left and he was blamed for the overflow. She thought that was very hilarious while I find it immature and unprofessional. And....as I said before... unnecessary. That story as was most of the human excrement chapter had no place in this book.
I'm very disappointed in the book as I wish the rest of it was as good as the first several pages. I thought I was getting a writer comparable to books written on the subject by Mary Roach (awesome author, btw). Mary knows how to successfully balance funny with morbid and gore. Kollmann, on the other hand, has a lot of gore but very little funny and almost all meanness. Kollmann is like one of the Mean Girls while Roach is more like the girl-next-door who is funny and charming.
I'm sticking with Mary Roach from now on.
January 24, 2022
NetGalley Audio ARC.
This woman is a bitch. Plain and simple. There's gallows humor and then there's plain old disrespect. She is an asshole and so unbelievably judgmental. Is she doing it for laughs because otherwise the book would be dull? Maybe. But it's still a disgusting piece of work, she is unbearable. Small parts were actually interesting but it was so hard to get past the bitchiness, the judgment, the disrespect to those alive and dead. Calling a woman "the thing," calling a man "front butt," calling a man "Frodo," being unreasonable to several people (one from a funeral home, one at an airport), maybe tell them who the fuck you are first instead of messing with them OR actually having the proper paperwork before being angry because you missed your flight because you have HUMAN SKULLS in your carry-on bag. What the fuck.
This woman is a bitch. Plain and simple. There's gallows humor and then there's plain old disrespect. She is an asshole and so unbelievably judgmental. Is she doing it for laughs because otherwise the book would be dull? Maybe. But it's still a disgusting piece of work, she is unbearable. Small parts were actually interesting but it was so hard to get past the bitchiness, the judgment, the disrespect to those alive and dead. Calling a woman "the thing," calling a man "front butt," calling a man "Frodo," being unreasonable to several people (one from a funeral home, one at an airport), maybe tell them who the fuck you are first instead of messing with them OR actually having the proper paperwork before being angry because you missed your flight because you have HUMAN SKULLS in your carry-on bag. What the fuck.
Read
July 14, 2024This book is not for the squeamish!
If you know any emergency workers, you will know that they use gallows humour to alleviate some of the horrific scenes that they witness during the course of their duties.
The author relates some of the most extreme experiences she has faced, with humour, but with expert knowledge, and proves that the job is not what is seen in television crime series.
If you know any emergency workers, you will know that they use gallows humour to alleviate some of the horrific scenes that they witness during the course of their duties.
The author relates some of the most extreme experiences she has faced, with humour, but with expert knowledge, and proves that the job is not what is seen in television crime series.
July 6, 2011
I took a bunch of classes with Dr. Kollmann at Towson University, and the book is a good addition to her many anecdotes. She definitely has a certain tone in her writing but I found it amusing and right on par with what you'd get from her in person. If you're sensitive about death, gore, etc, then obviously this is not the book for you. It's not a textbook about forensic practices and it's not a crime thriller. It's just some stories about Dr. Kollmann's experiences as a CSI, and how ridiculous the job can sometimes be. I think her derisive tone towards the media is at least in part due to the vast amount of misconceptions the media puts in her students' and colleagues' minds. There's a limited number of times one can be asked if you wear high heels to collect sperm at a crime scene before you want to choke someone. The book is a quick read with a lot of humor (if you don't mind dark humor) so if you like forensics, give it a try.
January 16, 2020
Wowowowow is this author is really ignorant and racist. She comes off as a total dick. The book is riddled with grammatical and spelling errors; I can’t believe it got published. Some of the stories related to the crime she investigated are interesting, but weeding through her shitty jokes and disorganized storytelling is not worth the read.
June 4, 2024
This was so interesting. These situations were unbelievably awful, but the author does a good job of softening the impact and using gallows humor to tell the story. Hearing how they were shunned when they started was more than frustrating, but I'm glad she is happy doing what she does now.
May 23, 2021
This is one of the more fascinating books I have read. If you have any interest in forensics you will enjoy this book. Filled with interesting cases and a great touch of humor.
#NeverSuckaDeadMansHand #NetGalley
#NeverSuckaDeadMansHand #NetGalley
July 28, 2020
The book, the stories, the recollections, the insights, the detail on cases... all of that is interesting and gives an insight into the work of the crime lab. Although some of the details can be gory and highlight the sadness surrounding some of the deaths that Ms Kollman gathered evidence for, unfortunately the whole book is tinged with a different kind of sadness for me.
That sadness comes from complete disdain in which she appears to hold some of people she encounters who are less fortunate that her, less educated, people who have had fewer opportunities, people of a lower socioeconomic class.
As an example, and this is one of very many, on one occasion she speaks about being called to the death of an individual in one of the poorer parts of the county and she was concerned this would mean that the house wouldn’t have air conditioning and therefore the body would smell - “if it wasn’t a stinker yet, it would be soon. Many of the people who lived in that area stunk anyway, so I wasn’t too concerned.”
This is more than a step too far for me. It’s leaps and bounds over any kind of line. There are countless examples like this throughout the book and they totally spoiled it for me.
I understand black humour, gallows humour, I’m an expert in that very field, but this is just disrespectful, unnecessary and reflects badly on the author. Shame, it was a decent book otherwise.
That sadness comes from complete disdain in which she appears to hold some of people she encounters who are less fortunate that her, less educated, people who have had fewer opportunities, people of a lower socioeconomic class.
As an example, and this is one of very many, on one occasion she speaks about being called to the death of an individual in one of the poorer parts of the county and she was concerned this would mean that the house wouldn’t have air conditioning and therefore the body would smell - “if it wasn’t a stinker yet, it would be soon. Many of the people who lived in that area stunk anyway, so I wasn’t too concerned.”
This is more than a step too far for me. It’s leaps and bounds over any kind of line. There are countless examples like this throughout the book and they totally spoiled it for me.
I understand black humour, gallows humour, I’m an expert in that very field, but this is just disrespectful, unnecessary and reflects badly on the author. Shame, it was a decent book otherwise.
June 6, 2022
Książka całkiem ok. Jak ktoś czytuje książki pisane przez m.in. patologów to nic go nie zaskoczy. Zaskakuje jedynie beznadziejne tłumaczenie na język polski; z całą masą literówek, a nawet użyciem słów, które mają zupełnie inne znaczenie… Copywrighter jeśli nie był na mocnym kacu to powinien stracić prace za wypuszczenie tej wersji.
May 31, 2021
I loved how descriptive and gross this was! I think the writer is a tad rude but probably just has a weird sense of humour. I think anyone in that line of work has their own sense of humour. I really loved the details she gives of the crime scenes and some of her jokes were funny. Some were inappropriate and I’m sure some people would not like this at all. If you are fascinated by CSI and forensic stuff I recommend giving this a go.
February 22, 2024
Seeing all the low ratings, I feel bad that this booking is being graded based on the content, without doing justice how well it delivers what’s promised by its title.
Speaking of the content, this book became one of my “the most ??? book I’ve ever read” - that is, the book that was most disgusting to read. If you are considering this, don’t be put off by the reviews, because this is a book like no other and discusses individuals and incidents you won’t find anywhere else.
As someone who finds joy in reading very rarely I skip sections or chapters. But that chapter about human excrement was just too much.
Speaking of the content, this book became one of my “the most ??? book I’ve ever read” - that is, the book that was most disgusting to read. If you are considering this, don’t be put off by the reviews, because this is a book like no other and discusses individuals and incidents you won’t find anywhere else.
As someone who finds joy in reading very rarely I skip sections or chapters. But that chapter about human excrement was just too much.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 4, 2025
The book gives you a lot of information about actual CSI work and the stuff that goes on behind the scenes. I liked it okay until I got to the gas station bathroom part, then it was just majorly gross and I only finished it because I was almost at the end and I wanted to add another finished book to my TBR goal for this year.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 10, 2024
In the first chapter, you're lulled into a false sense of security, hoping you'll read an insightful and respectful book on dealing with the forensics of death
This is not the case
The author comes across as an uncaring, rude, and judgemental individual. Her attitude throughout the book raises real concerns that she attended scenes and was in front of families and individuals going through the worst times of their life.
None of her stories go without making fun of someone for what she sees as their shortcomings, countless pages are used fixating on how people look, where they live and how they spend their time.
Don't waste your time on this book
This is not the case
The author comes across as an uncaring, rude, and judgemental individual. Her attitude throughout the book raises real concerns that she attended scenes and was in front of families and individuals going through the worst times of their life.
None of her stories go without making fun of someone for what she sees as their shortcomings, countless pages are used fixating on how people look, where they live and how they spend their time.
Don't waste your time on this book
April 7, 2022
Probably one of my top 5 favorite books!
November 4, 2008
This book is just okay, although it is compulsively readable. I ma now in the third chapter and I continue to have the same complaint at this point as I had when I first started reading, which is that the author has a tone to her writing which seems confrontational. It's as though she's writing the book to prove something, and indeed, the entire first chapter is about how stupid the crime shows are on t.v. and how the real thing is nothing like those shows. Then she goes on to prove that theory being as gross and crass as she posisbly can be. The thing is, she's undoubtedly right. But the way she's presenting the material is aggressive and annoying. It's too in-your-face. It's got something to prove. And it's a whole bunch of vignettes and stories about how awesome she is and how killer it is that she made it in thie field filled predominantly with men. She IS awesome, and it's wonderful that she made it but I think the book would be more likable if she weren't constantly tooting her own horn. And in three chapters she's found it necessary to use the phrase "swab his rectum" at least 3 times. This is purely for shock and disgust value.
I will read as much of this as I can stand. I wish it were written by someone who didn't seem to have such an incredible chip on her shoulder, and who wasn't using every cliche in the book to try to be funny, clever and cute, all while attempting to come across as deadpan and totally unaffected by the things she sees and experiences. Her descriptions of her own feelings and processes don't make her human and don't let the reader relate to her at all. Instead she keeps herself separate from the reader, and maintains the tired "we're cool because we do gross stuff and don't get burned out but we still have nightmares and we're in a separate club" theme that has been pervasive in books of this type over the last several years. I would have much rather seen the author as a human in a crazy career reacting and experiencing things in a real way rather than this testosterone-fueled, dukes up kind of book she's written.
I will read as much of this as I can stand. I wish it were written by someone who didn't seem to have such an incredible chip on her shoulder, and who wasn't using every cliche in the book to try to be funny, clever and cute, all while attempting to come across as deadpan and totally unaffected by the things she sees and experiences. Her descriptions of her own feelings and processes don't make her human and don't let the reader relate to her at all. Instead she keeps herself separate from the reader, and maintains the tired "we're cool because we do gross stuff and don't get burned out but we still have nightmares and we're in a separate club" theme that has been pervasive in books of this type over the last several years. I would have much rather seen the author as a human in a crazy career reacting and experiencing things in a real way rather than this testosterone-fueled, dukes up kind of book she's written.
July 24, 2021
I half liked this book a lot, thus the 3-star rating. I actively disliked it as well, which is why I am hesitant to recommend it.
The title caught my eye, and the first couple of chapters delivered - Kollman's experiences as a CSI are fascinating, not much like what you see on TV, and definitely not for the faint of heart. Her experiences in the field made for interesting stories, and as long as you don't get queasy from descriptions of gross things, and you're not prone to nightmares, I can recommend that much of the book. I anticipated a lot of dark humor (having a parent who worked at a hospital for 29 years certainly influenced my tolerance for gross pranks and black humor), and there was plenty of that in this book.
The problem is that Dana Kollman appears to be a complete jerk. I understand that you have to be pretty tough to work in this industry. I get that any CSI has to learn quickly to distance themselves from the emotions they'd normally feel from seeing dead bodies and dealing with bereaved family members. I also understand that there's probably not a delicate way to describe many of the situations she writes about. That's not my problem.
My problem is how she talks about the living people she deals with. She gleefully recounts an extended phone conversation where she mocks and deliberately confuses the young woman on the other end of the line, because she thinks the woman doesn't sound serious enough to be working at a funeral company. She uses derogatory nicknames (Front Butt, Frodo, The Thing) to describe people who are clearly struggling with addiction, mental illness, and poverty. The fact that she wrote all of this *about herself*, and presumably left out anything she thought would present her in a bad light, indicates to me that she's probably a lot worse in real life.
I half-wonder if her copy editor left in the dozens of typographical errors as a form of protest.
The title caught my eye, and the first couple of chapters delivered - Kollman's experiences as a CSI are fascinating, not much like what you see on TV, and definitely not for the faint of heart. Her experiences in the field made for interesting stories, and as long as you don't get queasy from descriptions of gross things, and you're not prone to nightmares, I can recommend that much of the book. I anticipated a lot of dark humor (having a parent who worked at a hospital for 29 years certainly influenced my tolerance for gross pranks and black humor), and there was plenty of that in this book.
The problem is that Dana Kollman appears to be a complete jerk. I understand that you have to be pretty tough to work in this industry. I get that any CSI has to learn quickly to distance themselves from the emotions they'd normally feel from seeing dead bodies and dealing with bereaved family members. I also understand that there's probably not a delicate way to describe many of the situations she writes about. That's not my problem.
My problem is how she talks about the living people she deals with. She gleefully recounts an extended phone conversation where she mocks and deliberately confuses the young woman on the other end of the line, because she thinks the woman doesn't sound serious enough to be working at a funeral company. She uses derogatory nicknames (Front Butt, Frodo, The Thing) to describe people who are clearly struggling with addiction, mental illness, and poverty. The fact that she wrote all of this *about herself*, and presumably left out anything she thought would present her in a bad light, indicates to me that she's probably a lot worse in real life.
I half-wonder if her copy editor left in the dozens of typographical errors as a form of protest.
June 3, 2021
Never suck a Dead Man's Hand details the author's experience working as Crime Scene Investigator for over 10 years.
This was not what I expected in an unfortunate way. I expected delightful gallows humor, in depth descriptions of horrific crime scenes and while I did get those two things off my wishlist it was not enough to balance out the unexpected content I encountered. what I wasn't expecting is a profane amount of racism, homophobia, fat phobia, trans phobia, and the outdated use of "retarded".
Never Suck A Dead Man's Hand was like an in depth peek at what Crime Scene investigation is like if it were narrated by your white racist uncle. This is not the first book I have read with a narrator who holds a position that requires humor to remove the narrator from the hideousness of the job they hold. There is a fine line between coarse gallows humor and down right disrespect and instead of tastefully towing the line, this book crossed every line. The fact that I was more disgusted with the author's ignorsnt perspectives than I was at the over the top descrptions of decomposing bodies and brain matter dangling from ceilings, really says A LOT.
I am not sure who I am more disappointed in, the writer who wrote this book or the publisher that allowed it to be published despite the book's flawed, outdated, and dangerous narration. Don't waste your money or time this is not worth it.
Content warning: racism, homophobian transphobia, fat phobian xenophobia, descrimination agains BIPOC, use of the word retarded (i mean COME ON) suicide, murder, animal abuse, rape, etc. This is about crime scenes so crimes are often discussed in depth.
This was not what I expected in an unfortunate way. I expected delightful gallows humor, in depth descriptions of horrific crime scenes and while I did get those two things off my wishlist it was not enough to balance out the unexpected content I encountered. what I wasn't expecting is a profane amount of racism, homophobia, fat phobia, trans phobia, and the outdated use of "retarded".
Never Suck A Dead Man's Hand was like an in depth peek at what Crime Scene investigation is like if it were narrated by your white racist uncle. This is not the first book I have read with a narrator who holds a position that requires humor to remove the narrator from the hideousness of the job they hold. There is a fine line between coarse gallows humor and down right disrespect and instead of tastefully towing the line, this book crossed every line. The fact that I was more disgusted with the author's ignorsnt perspectives than I was at the over the top descrptions of decomposing bodies and brain matter dangling from ceilings, really says A LOT.
I am not sure who I am more disappointed in, the writer who wrote this book or the publisher that allowed it to be published despite the book's flawed, outdated, and dangerous narration. Don't waste your money or time this is not worth it.
Content warning: racism, homophobian transphobia, fat phobian xenophobia, descrimination agains BIPOC, use of the word retarded (i mean COME ON) suicide, murder, animal abuse, rape, etc. This is about crime scenes so crimes are often discussed in depth.
May 15, 2021
I'm pretty sure this is one of those books that happened because someone suggested to Dana that she should write a book about her crazy job. Dana tells stories filled with dark humor, that are not at all politically correct and are plenty cringeworthy. She tears apart the glamor of TV CSIs and reveals what really happens at the crime scene. It's not pretty at all.
As a fan of all of those forensic shows, true crime and the macabre, this book was made for me. Dana had me laughing out loud in a horrible cackle that I would never want people to hear. She also had me almost dry heaving as well.. lol The combination of disgust, wonder and amusement had me binge this book.
The book was originally published in 2007, and I had no clue. I am so glad that it is being redone on audio, and popped up as an option on Netgalley. Listening to it really pumped up the story. The narrator has a no bull$h*t voice that is perfect representation of Dana. I wish Dana had narrated the book herself, but I was happy with who did.
Yes she explains the title in the book. It happened. I'm not telling you how, you need to hear it for your self. Its horrible. Oh and when you read about Jeffery..omg you will pee a little.
This book is getting all the stars. I recommend it highly if you are not a sensitive person and are ok with extremely politically incorrect content that gets a wee bit graphic
As a fan of all of those forensic shows, true crime and the macabre, this book was made for me. Dana had me laughing out loud in a horrible cackle that I would never want people to hear. She also had me almost dry heaving as well.. lol The combination of disgust, wonder and amusement had me binge this book.
The book was originally published in 2007, and I had no clue. I am so glad that it is being redone on audio, and popped up as an option on Netgalley. Listening to it really pumped up the story. The narrator has a no bull$h*t voice that is perfect representation of Dana. I wish Dana had narrated the book herself, but I was happy with who did.
Yes she explains the title in the book. It happened. I'm not telling you how, you need to hear it for your self. Its horrible. Oh and when you read about Jeffery..omg you will pee a little.
This book is getting all the stars. I recommend it highly if you are not a sensitive person and are ok with extremely politically incorrect content that gets a wee bit graphic
January 22, 2024
Some fascinating stories, but they're marred by the author's relentless need to mock and denigrate every person she encountered. Needing humor to defuse a tough situation is understandable, but the delight in making fun of people, especially the mentally ill leaves a poor impression. The descriptions of crimes scenes didn't leave me nearly as disgusted as her arrogance and disdain for pretty much everyone she encountered.
January 11, 2012
What a fun (gross), quick read. :) Be prepared - she spares you nothing! It is the cold hard truth of what she has seen but I found it really interesting. Especially since she comes from this area so it was cool to know that the cases I was reading about were from around here.
I never thought I'd read a book like this but I'm glad I did. It was very entertaining. And it was informative to learn what a crime lab is really like. I'm a CSI watcher and of course it's not at all like TV makes it out to be! :)
I never thought I'd read a book like this but I'm glad I did. It was very entertaining. And it was informative to learn what a crime lab is really like. I'm a CSI watcher and of course it's not at all like TV makes it out to be! :)
September 24, 2009
EXTREMELY graphic and not for the those without strong stomachs. I generally consider myself to be fairly immune to being "grossed-out," but I had to read this book in small doses. Never-the-less I enjoyed reading it. The author is especially good at telling stories in a way that will captivate you and make it truly worth your time. I also feel like I have a more realistic concept of the life of a CSI (and I'm so happy that I went into research instead of forensics!).
June 30, 2019
Okay, I admit it "Never Suck a Dead Man's Hand," is a great title and given the subject matter, forensics, I had high expectations. Unfortunately, for me, the book did not deliver. The author clearly knows her subject matter, but the writing fell flat and made even the most interesting case scenario, not so interesting.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 226 reviews