Michael Duffy (2) (1957–)

To be honest, this was not an easy read for me. It is a little outside the fringes of the genre that I usually read, and felt alarmingly close to the style of true crime, which is not surprising considering the author's background (see the note about the author below).

I struggled first of all with the three time frames that the action bounced between. The more I read though, the better this got, and I was more easily able to identify the time frame and location. The narrative voice was a little easier to handle, although there are mainly three narrators: Bec Ralston, the part Aboriginal detective constable; John (Jabber) Habib who seems to be the only "honest" person in the Habib family; and Karen Mabey the Crown Prosecutor.

I did struggle with back story and with trying to piece together what had preceded Rafiq Habib's trial. Working out why Bec Ralston has been attached to this trial after initially being removed from the investigative team was another challenge. And then about three quarters of the way through, a bombshell drops which challenges all you think you have learnt to that point. Looking back on the novel now though, it seems that almost nothing can be taken at face value, and almost nobody is what they purport to be. And the problem is that almost everybody takes on the role of unreliable narrator. The problem is compounded by the huge amount of detailed information that the reader must try to absorb.

But I am mindful that if you are a reader of true crime or enjoy Australian noir crime fiction, then you will probably like DRIVE BY.… (mere)

DRIVE BY is fiction although readers may find themselves having to work hard to remember that. From the opening voice of Jabber (John) Habib to the build up of mayhem on the streets of Sydney, obviously comparisons are being drawn between Melbourne's Underbelly Underworld wars and the increasingly violent, and therefore reported on, drug wars in Sydney.

The story of John Habib, his brothers, their involvement in the Sydney drugs trade, and the murder trial of the youngest brother, is interwoven with the story of young cop Bec Ralston. Somewhat inexplicably she's pulled into a very responsible position in Habib's trial as senior cops seem to be dodging and weaving around. What's really going on with both the Habib brothers and within the cops might not that hard to connect up, but how it all plays out is more surprising.

Part of what really works in DRIVE BY is the voice of John. On the one hand he seems to be perfectly aware of the "family trade" and its ramifications. On the other, he's staunchly loyal and there's little, if any, sense of right and wrong. That loyalty to, belief in family above all else is quite disturbing, especially given a distinct feeling of whatever it takes for the family to survive. Which makes the possibility that Rafi could have killed a drug dealer in the middle of the night not just believable, but uncomfortably understandable.

What works less well are the police threads which are complicated but obviously leading in the direction of some form of corruption or power play. Whilst it's not a disappointing storyline in its own right, most of what's felt wrong is the way that it pulls focus from the Habib's story for a considerable period of time. Right at the point where things are getting very awkward in the Habib family. Having said that, other readers will probably appreciate that aspect of the tale more, so we're definitely talking horses for courses.

Whilst not 100% convinced about the comparisons with the writing of Peter Temple, known more for his brevity and pointedness, something that DRIVE BY at 379 pages might struggle to justify, there is real skill in the characterisation of John, in particular, in this book. His voice is unique, and there is a real feel of seeing inside the dynamics of a family ruthless enough to do whatever it takes to survive. It's also a peek inside the world of policing that, on a daily basis, works against the tide of the sobering piles of money that the drug world generates, and the violence required to maintain a position on the top of that pile.

http://www.austcrimefiction.org/review/drive-michael-duffy… (mere)

"...one of the most disturbing things about this story is not only that he [Paul Wilkinson] left a trail of broken careers and marriages and lives in his wake - a trail of misery an devastation- but that he almost got away with it." p5

This quote from Call Me Cruel aptly describes why this case is so fascinating. It took five years to bring Paul Wilkinson to account for the murder of Kylie Labouchardiere, and he did very nearly walk away. This book tracks the case from the moment Kylie disappeared until Wilkinson was convicted of her murder. A sad tale of a vulnerable woman whose poor choices led her into the arms of her killer, Call Me Cruel includes the known facts and evidence police painstakingly gathered, the story of the grief felt by Kylie's family and some conjecture about what exactly happened to Kylie, whose body has never been found.
Kylie Labouchardiere was just 25 years old when caught a train from the central coast to meet her lover, Wilkinson and was never seen again. Their affair had begun only a few months earlier after an encounter in the hospital where Kylie worked and Wilkinson was a patient. Unhappy in her marriage to her Navy husband, Kylie was susceptible to Wilkinsons charm that disguised his penchant for lies and manipulation. At the time an Aboriginal Community Liaison Officer (ACLO), though on stress leave, Wilkinson lured Kylie into his life by pretending to need her help with a case and quickly began a sexual relationship with her despite having a wife and brand new baby at home.
On the night she disappeared it is believed that Kylie, who had just discovered she was pregnant, was expecting Paul to leave his wife and move with her to Dubbo to begin a new life.
Kylie's murder is undoubtedly a tragedy, and it was made worse for her family by the difficulties police had in proving a case against Wilkinson. Despite the suspicions of the investigators, Paul was arrogantly certain that they would never tie him to Kylie. But as a man who thrived on attention and manipulation he was unable to resist the drama of the case, repeatedly insinuating himself into the investigation with elaborate lies and fantasies which grew and changed over time, placing him more firmly in the frame as a suspect despite the lack of physical evidence. It is rare that a killer is convicted without a body though there is no doubt Kylie was murdered by Paul Wilkinson. In the end is was one of the more than 20,000 text messages that he exchanged with Kylie over a period of less than four months that proved to be the piece that led to Wilkinson admitting (though later rescinding) his guilt.
In his murderous wake, Kylie was not Wilkinson's only victim - Kylie's broken family, his own wife and son and a police officer he involved in his fantasies accusing him of outlandish crimes all paid a price and continue to do so, for his selfish decisions. Oblivious, Wilkinson refuses to reveal where Kylie was dumped and cares not at all for their misery.

Michael Duffy, a journalist and fiction novelist, has told the story of the investigation with sensitivity and respect striking a balance between dry facts and high emotion. Call Me Cruel is an interesting look at a victim, her murderer and the procedures of the police in a homicide case.… (mere)

An enjoyable crime book with an interesting moral dilemma as a backdrop. Both assisted suicide and the potential cover-up of the molestation of a young boy by a priest are touched upon, while in the foreground the main character, Detective Nicholas Troy, investigates the murder of a well-to-do Sydney hospital administrator (Michael Pearson).

On the front cover of the copy that I read, it says that this is a "Nicholas Troy Mystery". I wouldn't, however, call this a 'mystery' as the murderer is fairly obvious about 1/2 way through - it certainly isn't a whodunnit type of book - just an interesting police story.

The book really could have used a good editor to clear up some of the mistakes and inconsistencies that I found annoying and distracting. Early in the book, Pearson's wife, Emily is described as a well-to-do solicitor with big-name law firm who graduated top of her class at the University of Sydney. Then, only a few paragraphs later she is described as not having very good English. I found this to be rather ridiculous and contradictory. Later in the book, a note that is described as being typed out on a computer (p. 122) is later described as being handwritten ( p.335). One character is all of a sudden referred to by the nickname "China" without any warning, leaving me having to back track to figure out what is going on. Additionally, the Emily and Charlie Pearson characters, are essentially dropped from the story line without the loose ends being tied up.

I also found it a bit unsettling how the author treated the indigenous characters in the book, as well as the victims of childhood molestation.

Despite the negative aspects of the book, I did find it to be an engaging plot. There were interesting concepts and moral challenges. One passage that I found particularly poignant was:
"In this war, I'm a civilian, he thought.... It was an insight into a world he'd no experience of, a place of pain and smells and anguish and death that most people didn't want to know about, let alone speak of. Exactly the kind of situation, he saw, when dark things could happen unnoticed." (p. 331) If only the whole book could have been like that, and without the errors and inconsistencies.… (mere)