The Importance of a Good Critique Group

by Beth Groundwater

I have been in a long-standing writing critique group that originally formed at the 1999 Pikes Peak Writers Conference. The group has had between four and six members since its inception, and members have come and gone. I'm now the only original member remaining, but regardless of the make-up of the group, I've ALWAYS received useful feedback on chapters that I've submitted for review.

I'm currently submitting chapters from the manuscript that will become the third mystery in my Rocky Mountain Outdoor Adventures series, that I'm calling Cataract Canyon. The group members are once again proving their high value to me, and the manuscript is improving a great deal. Also, over the years, I am sure I have become a much, much better writer because of my association with the group. Different members have brought different skills in areas ranging from plot logic to grammar, portrayal of emotions to fight scenes, and more, and all of those skills have rubbed off on me.

I think it is vitally important for authors to have either a critique group or a few trusted first readers to run our manuscripts through before they go to our editors. We need fresh eyes to read those words and fresh brains to try to decipher those sentences and understand those characters and plot points so mistakes can be found. And there are always mistakes! No matter how carefully I pour over my chapters before submitting them to critique group, they always find things I've missed.

Because of the group members' thorough review, most of those mistakes get fixed before my editor sees them. And that makes me look good for my editor. I know that it's because of my critique group that my manuscripts usually only need light editing before they're published as novels.

One thing I always do, though, and I advise other writers to do with their critique groups or first readers, is to get at least halfway through the first draft of your manuscript before you start submitting chapters for review. This is so you have a firm idea of where you're going with the story and who your characters are before you get feedback. Then you can evaluate suggestions from the group against those firm ideas. You'll have a basis for deciding which suggestions to use and which would derail you from your plan.

Otherwise, if you keep re-writing the first three chapters based on multiple people's opinions (which, unfortunately, I've see writers do), you'll end up with mud. Your unique voice will have been lost. However, making the opposite mistake of going it alone all the way won't help you, either, and could very well prevent you from getting published. If your critique group or first readers aren't working for you, find some others, but don't give up on the concept all together.

There are lots of ways for critique groups to work. Some meet weekly, some meet monthly, many meet twice a month or every two weeks. I prefer groups that meet in person, but I know of very effective groups who operate completely on-line. Some groups are single-genre and some are multi-genre. I've seen both work well, and my group is multi-genre. Then there's size. My personal preference is to keep the group fairly small, so everyone has a chance to submit a chapter or twenty pages for every meeting, and everyone's suggestions can be heard.

Also, I think it's very important to have members of both sexes in the group. I find the feedback I get back from my male partners who say "No man would do/say that" to be extremely helpful. You're going to want both sexes to read your published books, so it's important to have both sexes give you feedback on how they perceive your novel.

The most important criteria is to find a group of fellow writers who you can get along with and work with and whose goal is to help each other improve and publish your manuscripts. You don't want a mutual appreciation society or the opposite, people who stroke their own egos by cutting down others. Constructive criticism has to be the purpose of all feedback in the group.

I know for a fact that I would not be published without my critique group, and I thank my lucky stars every day that I have them!

If you're a writer, what experiences have you had with critique groups, good or bad?

A Bitter Sweet Release

GEM OF A GHOST, the third book in my Ghost of Granny Apples mystery series, just launched. It’s also my 11th published novel, my 14th written novel.
You’d think the release of an 11th book would be ho-hum. You know, old hat by now. But it isn’t. I get just as excited now as I did with my others. The only exception might be the publication of TOO BIG TO MISS, my first published novel. Like the birth of a first-born child, nothing could surpass the anticipation of seeing that book in print and on book store shelves and available from on-line retailers. The first time is always the first time, whether we’re talking books or losing one’s virginity.

But this release is bitter sweet.

As most of you know, Diana James, wife of author Darrell James and my manager, died suddenly on January 10th from a pulmonary embolism. With the exception of my first few Odelia Grey novels, Diana played a major part in the releases of my books. She set up most of my book signings, designed my bookmarks, put out my newsletter, set up radio and blog interviews, contacted reader groups and libraries, and did everything she could to get the word out on new releases. She even read my draft manuscripts and made suggestions. Every book signing to promote GEM OF A GHOST over the next several weeks was set up by Diana, and each one will constrict my heart.

A few literary PR people have recently contacted me asking if I was looking for a new publicist. It seems cruel to me that they are already circling. But, times are tough and they need to make a living, just as I do. I’ve decided not to hire anyone at this time. I will go it alone, as I did before Diana and I hooked up, at least for a while.

GEM OF A GHOST has received some rave reviews, including the following starred review from Library Journal, which arrived just days after her death.

"Jaffarian’s welcome third entry in her paranormal series … sparkles as brilliantly as the story’s haunted diamond. Incorporating historical interest with likable characters and steady suspense, she also makes paranormal activity seem plausible. One of the best cozy authors for light chatter and low-key humor, Jaffarian is currently juggling three series with aplomb! "

Diana would have been pleased. She loved GEM OF A GHOST, and thought it was one of my best.

Sue Ann Jaffarian
www.sueannjaffarian.com
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Creative Passion

Cricket McRae

Last Saturday a friend and I went to see an exhibit of Dale Chihuly glasswork. It was small, at least for a Chihuly exhibit, from a private collection. Still, with five of his famous chandeliers and dozens of pieces from the Venetian series, I can only imagine how much that collection is worth!

I have a particular love for Chihuly’s work, and was delighted to find the small theater showing a documentary that chronicled a week-long “blow” that brought together the primary players in each of the visionary’s different series. For an hour and a half, we watched as they created examples of what Chihuly refers to as Cylinders, Baskets, Seaforms, Macchia, Venetians, Putti, Persians, Niijima Floats, Ikebana, Fiori and Pilchuck Stumps.

As soon as the movie started I realized the blow had taken place in the hot shop of the Tacoma Glass Museum. Four years ago I sat in one of those red theater seats and watched another glassblower create amazing pieces.

And years earlier, one of the half-dozen times I’ve attended the summer open house at the Pilchuck Glass School outside of Stanwood, Washington, I was lucky enough to witness Chihuly actually working with glass. He was one of the founders of the school in 1971, but since he lost vision in one eye in 1976 he rarely works directly with glass. He’s the designer, the (big!) idea guy, and the work is carried out by other amazingly talented glassworkers.

Reading this I realize it sounds like I have a latent desire to learn glasswork. I don’t, but I do find the medium utterly fascinating. The molten liquid seems to be almost alive. It behaves organically in the hands of skilled artisans. When cooled it’s solid and fragile all at once. And Chihuly’s vision, implemented via precise teamwork, just blows me away.

So, no, I don’t want to blow glass. I am, however, incredibly inspired by it – by the beauty of the work itself and by the passion that is so evident in the faces and movements of the people I’ve seen working with glass. They are completely present to the process, to each movement, and to each other. Seeing passion like that in any creative endeavor fills my writing well and even primes the pump. It reminds me that art is intensely valuable in its own right.

I hate that I forget that sometimes. Do you? Or are you lucky enough to carry that awareness with you at all times? What acts or products of creativity particularly inspire you?

I’m not sure when I’ll be able to respond to comments, as today I’m flying south to be further inspired by snorkeling in blue-green water and whacking at a golf ball on a course that wends through an Audubon wildlife sanctuary.

Putter in one hand, camera in the other…

Switching Gears

by Kathleen Ernst

My third Chloe Ellefson mystery, The Lightkeeper’s Legacy, has been delivered to Midnight Ink. I’ve also sent copies to content reviewers so that by the time my production editor has a clean copy for me to review, I’ll be ready with their feedback.

It takes me a year to write an adult mystery. Since Chloe is a museum curator, the plots include historical themes and elements that require some research. The Lightkeeper’s Legacy has two timelines—one in the 1980s and one in the 1800s—and so was more complicated to plot and research than my previous mysteries have been. I spent a lot of time immersed in the story.

I’ve also been juggling a couple of projects, so finishing Legacy in time to meet deadlines was a bit intense. I ended up spending a week with my laptop at a monastery so I could work without interruption. There were moments when I dreamed of hitting “send” so the manuscript was---at least for a while---someone else’s baby. I had thoughts of all the things I’d been putting off: having coffee with a friend, excavating piles and files in hopes of finding the surface of my desk, actually cooking dinner.

As soon as the manuscript was delivered, though, I got itchy to work on the fourth Chloe book. I want to keep to the book-a-year cycle if I can. I also had ideas circling in my head that needed to be captured before they flew away. I missed the main characters, and wanted to get back in touch.

So alas, my desk is still largely buried, stacks of reference books cover much of the floor, and I’m still not cooking and baking as much as I’d like. I am, however, having a lot of fun tiptoeing into a new story. This one will be set in a new location, so I’m getting to know a different environment. Aside from Chloe, her mom, and cop Roelke McKenna, the cast will also be new. So many possibilities to consider!

Writers – do you take a break between books? Or do you dive right into the next? Readers – do you appreciate series that generally add one new book a year? I’d love to hear your thoughts!

Please visit me at http://kathleenernst.com to learn more about my mysteries for adults and young readers.

Writing is Rewriting

By Joe Moore

I just finished the first draft of my new thriller, THE BLADE, co-written with Lynn Sholes. This is our sixth novel written together; this one coming in at a crisp 92,500 words. Now that the first pass on the manuscript is finished, the rewrite begins. As E.B. White said in THE ELEMENTS OF STYLE, “The best writing is rewriting.”

Some might ask that if the manuscript is written, why do we need to rewrite it? Remember that the writing process is made up of many layers including outlining, research, first drafts, rewriting, line editing, proofing, more editing and more proofing. One of the functions that sometimes receives the least amount of attention in discussions on writing techniques is rewriting.

There are a number of stages in the rewriting process. Starting with the completion of the first draft, they involve reading and re-reading the entire manuscript many times over and making numerous changes during each pass. It’s in the rewrite that we need to make sure our plot is seamless, our story is on track, our character development is consistent, and we didn’t leave out some major point of importance that could confuse the reader. We have to pay close attention to content. Does the story have a beginning, middle and end? Does it make sense? Is the flow of the story smooth and liquid? Do our scene and chapter transitions work? Is everything resolved at the end?

Next we need to check for clarity. This is where beta readers come in handy. If it’s not clear to them, it won’t be clear to others. We can’t assume that everyone knows what we know or understands what we understand. We have to make it clear what’s going on in our story. Suspense can never be created by confusing the reader.

Once we’ve finished this first pass searching for global plotting problems, it’s time to move on to the nuts and bolts of rewriting. Here we must tighten up our work by deleting all the extra words that don’t add to the reading experience or contribute to the story. Remember that every word counts. If a word doesn’t move the plot forward or contribute to character development, it should be deleted.

Some of the words that can be edited out are superfluous qualifiers such as “very” and “really.” This is always an area where less is more. For instance, we might describe a woman as being beautiful or being very beautiful. But when you think about it, what’s the difference? If she’s already beautiful, a word that is considered a definitive description, how can she exceed beautiful to become very beautiful? She can’t. So we search for and delete instances of “very” or “really”. They add nothing to the writing.

Next, scrutinize any word that ends in “ly”. Chances are, most adverbs can be deleted without changing the meaning of the sentence or our thought. In most cases, cutting them clarifies and makes the writing cleaner.

Next, go hunting for clichés and overused phrases. There’s an old saying that if it comes easy, it’s probably a cliché. Avoiding clichés makes for fresher writing. There’s another saying that the only person allowed to use a cliché is the first one that use it.

Overused phrases are often found at the beginning of a sentence with words like “suddenly,” “so” and “now”. I find myself guilty of doing this, but those words don’t add anything of value to our writing or yours. Delete.

The next type of editing in the rewriting process is called line editing. Line editing covers grammar and punctuation. Watch for incorrect use of the apostrophe, hyphen, dash and semicolon. Did we end all our character’s dialogs with a closed quote? Did we forget to use a question mark at the end of a question?

This also covers making sure we used the right word. Relying on our word processor’s spell checker can be dangerous since it won’t alert us to wrong words when they are spelled correctly. It takes a sharp eye to catch these types of mistakes. Once we’ve gone through the manuscript and performed a line edit, I like to have someone else check it behind us. A fresh set of eyes never hurts.

On-the-fly cut and paste editing while we were working on the first draft can get us into trouble if we weren’t paying attention. Leftover words and phrases from a previous edit or version can still be lurking around, and because all the words might be spelled correctly or the punctuation might be correct, we’ll only catch the mistake by paying close attention during the line edit phase.

The many stages making up the rewrite are vital parts of the writing process. Editing our manuscript should not be rushed or taken for granted. Familiarity breeds mistakes—we’ve read that page or chapter so many times that our eyes skim over it. And yet, there could be a mistake hiding there that we’ve missed every time because we’re bored with the old stuff and anxious to review the new.

Spend the time needed to tighten and clarify the writing until there is not one ounce of fat or bloat. And once we’ve finished the entire editing process, put the manuscript away for a reasonable period of time. Let it rest for a week or even a month if the schedule permits while working on something else. Then bring it back out into the light of day and make one more pass. It’s always surprising at what was missed.

One more piece of advice. Edit on hardcopy, not on a computer monitor. There’s something about dots of ink on the printed page that’s much less forgiving than the glow of pixels. And never be afraid to delete. Remember, less is always more.

How do you go about tackling the rewriting process? Any tips to share?

GOING UNDERCOVER

This week I’m winding down a month-long blog tour to promote the release of Death By Killer Mop Doll. Since the last weekend in December, I have been the guest blogger at 27 different blogs, with six more to go. I dubbed my tour the Sit on Your Butt Book Tour because all of my interaction with readers has been while…well, sitting on my butt. As exhausting as it was to come up with 33 different posts over the course of a month, a virtual tour sure beat driving hours and hours from one book store to the next and hoping that someone showed up.

There are many benefits to a virtual book tour. For one thing, I can do it while wearing my Disney jammies and fuzzy slippers. I’m not constantly filling my tank with gas at close to $3.50 a gallon, and I’m not racking up toll charges on my EZ-Pass account.

However, what I like most about a virtual tour is the interaction I have with readers. I once did a book store signing where in the two hours I was there, exactly two customers entered the store. One wanted to buy a newspaper (the bookstore didn’t sell newspapers,) and the other was looking for a gift for a birthday party her kid was going to attend later that day. Needless to say, neither of these customers was interested in my books.

On a virtual tour many readers pop in to say hello and comment. Do they then buy my books? I don’t know. But that’s a whole lot less stressful than sitting at a table with a pile of unsold books.

The virtual tour is also a lot more fun than trying to engage shoppers at a bookstore. I swear, these people must think that they’ll get sucked in by my “author ray” and be forced to buy a copy of my book! People go out of their way to avoid making eye contact. When I approach them and try to engage in conversation, half the time they act as if I’m a stalker for merely smiling and offering a friendly hello and a bookmark.

I’m a shy person by nature. Putting myself “out there” has never been easy for me. So it takes a lot for me to step out of my writer’s cave and psych myself up for these events. Over the years, I’ve become much better at faking an extrovert personality, but it’s still hard for me.

Except when I can go incognito.

Years ago, I had a friend who made mascot costumes for sports franchises and various companies. Once at a design conference, she needed someone to dress up in one of the costumes for a talk she was giving. Since we were rooming together at the conference, guess who got elected? That’s right, little ol’ shy moi.

I had a blast!

No one knew I was under that red kitty costume. It was a totally liberating experience for an introvert. And that’s what a virtual book tour is for me. This month has been tiring, but it’s also been fun. And a lot less stressful than sitting for two hour stretches at a bookstore.

Maybe next time I’m asked to do a bookstore signing, I should dress up as a giant red kitty.

Lois Winston writes the critically acclaimed Anastasia Pollack Crafting Mysteries series. The first book, Assault With A Deadly Glue Gun, was a January 2011 release and received starred reviews from both Publishers Weekly and Booklist and was recently nominated for a Readers Choice Award by the Salt Lake City Library System. Death by Killer Mop Doll is a January 2012 release. Visit Lois at http://www.loiswinston.com and Anastasia at the Killer Crafts & Crafty Killers blog, http://anastasiapollack.blogspot.com.

That's What I'm Talking About, He Said

By Deborah Sharp

I've been drafted to teach a class on dialogue next month, and I've been thinking that writing good dialogue is as much about what you don't do as about what you do. Sure, it's important to:

LISTEN to the way real people speak (but leave out all the boring uhms, ers, and repetition when you turn everyday speech into dialogue)

READ ALOUD your dialogue (but don't delude yourself that choosing labored tags like John roared or Mary screeched makes you sound more clever than using the perfectly adequate, and not nearly as distracting, word ''said.'')

BREAK UP long blocks of dialogue with action (but resist the urge to info dump by crafting a passage like this:

"I can't take this anymore.'' Jennifer crushed out her cigarette in the overflowing ashtray, even though she'd promised James she'd quit smoking two months before. She lit another, took a deep drag, and thought about all the times she'd begged her own mother to quit smoking, the mother who had died of cancer when Jennifer was still in high school. "I want out, James.'' )

MAKE SURE all your characters don't sound the same (but don't over-rely on tricks such as misspellings to denote dialect, verbal tics, or filthy words that are going to end up annoying readers by the end of Chapter 1.)

PACK your dialogue with emotion and power (but not by using adverbs to tell -- not show -- how your characters speak, Deborah said passionately.

I'll keep you posted about the dialogue class. It's Feb. 4 at Murder on the Beach mystery bookstore in southern Florida. The bookstore is sponsoring an annual series of classes called Author Academy, at $25 per student. It seems like a genius move by the store to bring in paying customers in this ever-evolving biz. But that's a topic for another blog post.

Writers, what's the best advice you ever received about dialogue? Readers, what puts you off about badly written dialogue? Who do you consider some of the strongest dialogue-writers in the business? If you've read/written a good column or post on dialogue, add the link to your comment so others can benefit.

The Lost Boys

by Jennifer Harlow

Since we're all a fan of mysteries and crime here, I wanted to

share the biggest, most horrifying true crime story in recent history. Here is a truly true, dark crime story. Once upon a time, in our terrible times...

In 1994 in West Memphis, Arkansas Chris Byers, Michael Moore, and Stevie Branch, three eight-year-old boys vanished one evening from their neighborhood. The next day after an exhaustive search the boys were found hog-tied naked, beaten, and in one case missing genitals along a creek bank in the Robin Hood hills wooded area. Needless to say the community and country were shocked and upset by this. The case received worldwide attention, especially after rumors of Satanic cults spread. There was precious little physical evidence at the scene, and with the intense pressure on the police to solve it, the police latched onto the cult motive to explain this senseless crime. They zeroed in on local eighteen-year-old troublemaker Damien Echols, known for listening to heavy metal music, wearing black, and having an interest in the occult. The police dragged in seventeen-year-old Jesse Misskelley Jr. for a twelve hour interrogation where he implicated both Echols and sixteen-year-old Jason Baldwin. The boys were arrested. Cue the relief of a nation.

It should have ended there. They had a confession, an apparent motive, even what they thought was the murder weapon found near Baldwin's home. The jury convicted all the teens, Baldwin and Misskelley got life and the apparent ringleader Echols death. The case should have been forgotten, except that a documentary crew had been following the case from the very beginning, getting interviews with both victims families, police, and the accused. Through their movie Paradise Lost, airing on HBO, the country had a front seat to an obvious miscarriage of justice that robbed not only three little boys of rightful justice but three other boys of twenty years of their lives. A rightful uproar began.

I believe in our justice system. I obviously write about officers of the law, and even seriously considered becoming one, but know that the system isn't perfect as it is run by humans. But watching the documentaries, and doing a little research of my own to fill in some blanks, it pressed my nose to just how imperfect it can be when you add intense pressure, mass hysteria, media bias, and just plain incompetence. These boys were convicted before they even went to trial, which never should have happened had the police done their jobs instead of going for the easy answer.

They made several mistakes in this case, and it was not the first time. At the time of the murders the West Memphis Police were under investigation from the state for theft so they refused help. The crime scene was not handled well either. The bodies were not removed in a timely manner for proper forensic examination. The scene was trampled on and the creek wasn't drained in a timely manner either to retrieve more evidence like the boys clothes. Footprints were not taken before a million people walked through it. And the possibility that the boys didn't die at the scene was never discussed though there was no blood anywhere at the creek. The boys neighborhoods were never canvassed, which would have led to a witness who later stepped forward and said she saw the boys with Branch's step-father, the apparent last person to see they alive. He wasn't even questioned in connection to the crime or looked at. (He has since become the prime suspect as his DNA was found in the bindings of one of the boys, was the last to see them alive, fits the FBI profile done of the murderer, and had a very violent history. Plus everyone knows 9 times out of 10 a person is killed by someone close to them. Guess the WMPD missed that day in class). And the coroner wasn't much better. He put in his report that the wounds on the boys came from a knife and that was what was used to emasculate one of the boys. It has now been proven that those wounds were done postmortem by animals. It was a clusterf**k of epic proportions.

The only real evidence was the confession, which was keeping with the quality of the rest of the investigation. Misskelley has a low IQ, this has been proven, as has the fact that those with lower IQs are known to be more susceptible to coercion and false confessions. There have been studies on this (see Dixon-False Confessions). But putting that aside this was a a boy of 17, grilled for twelve hours by men who needed to resolve the case. When he did confess, he got all the details wrong, like what time the boys died (when all the teens had alibis), and what the crime scene looked like. On the tape (of which 11 hours prior to the confession is "missing") you can hear the police leading Misskelley to the correct answers eventually. Any detective worth their salt would realize the kid knew nothing but pressed on anyway. This was the only real evidence of their guilt. The alleged knife was never directly tied to any of the teens, there was no physical evidence they were ever at the scene or even knew the boys, and though there were witnesses who said Echols boasted he committed the murders (who later recanted),they admitted they only heard part of the conversation. But what really pushed the case over the edge was the mass hysteria about cults.

In the early 90s Satanic cults were all the rage. In therapy sessions across the country people were unrepressing memories of their loved ones raping and ripping out their unborn babies to sacrifice to Satan. The media ate it up, as they often do with the sensational. Apparently in every town there was a cult worshiping Satan, and West Memphis was no different. The rumors had been swirling for months, and one name was always attached: Damien Echols. He loved wearing black, listening to heavy metal music, drawing pentagrams, and acting violent. The cuts on the bodies and gelding of Byers was "proof" this crime had Satanic overtones. (Baldwin just had the misfortune of being Echols best friend. Guilt by association.) And at the trial a "doctor" spoke about these cults. I use quotes because he got his degree from an un-accredited, mail order college without taking a single class for this doctorate. (The same judge who let this "expert" testify also turned down every one of the subsequent appeals from the West Memphis Three. I am never going to Arkansas. Ever.) With time, and the media feeding us new hysteria after hysteria like pedophiles and Anthrax in all our mail, this Satanism uprising was later disproven. Several police agencies sent the FBI cases they thought had Satanic overtones and not a one was proven to have said overtones. And those repressed memories have also been proven to for the most part to have been kind of implanted during hypnosis sessions by overzealous therapists. (A lot of that going around.) But the same media machine that got them convicted also sort of saved them in the end.

Paradise Lost came out in 1996, two years after the teens were convicted. (Part 2 came out 2000, Part 3 2012). It created an uproar of support for the teens. Organizations to gather money for their defenses and expert witnesses popped up all over the place and celebrities like Eddie Vedder and Johnny Depp helped spread word of this miscarriage of justice. The DNA was found and tested, the animal aspect was uncovered, and even proof that the foreman of the jury who convicted Echols and Baldwin introduced evidence he learned from outside sources not in the trial (Misskelley's confession wasn't admissible in the Echols/Baldwin trial as he refused to testify against them)which was the only real reason the jury voted to convict. None of this would have happened if not for the movies, everyone involved said so. So maybe the media can be used for something other than making me feel bad about my body so I'll buy their products and freaking us out about stupid things like bird flu so we don't pay attention to the raping of our country from large financial institutions. (Climbing off my soapbox now.)

After the DNA evidence against Terry Hobbs was uncovered (Stevie Branch's step-father) in 2010 the WM3 lawyers went about getting another appeal with the original trial judge, and for the millionth time he refused the appeal so the lawyers went to the State Courts. They overturned the judge's veto of that specific appeal and granted the defense an evidentiary hearing for 12/11, which could finally result in a new trial for the WM3. Coincidentally? (yeah, right) the trial judge went onto the State Senate and a new judge was appointed to the hearing and out of nowhere a surprise hearing was ordered. The men were offered to take an Alford plea, where they still proclaim their innocence but plead guilty so under the eyes of the law they're still murderers but get out of prison. They also cannot sue the state of Arkansas. But August 19, 2011, after eighteen years in prison, the men walked out free men. People speculate, and I agree, that the reason for this was that the DNA evidence would pave the way for a new trial in which none would be convicted again and then could sue the state for millions. (Since they are under the law guilty the Son of Sam law, in which a convicted murderer cannot profit from their crime, still applies so they can't accept money for movie deals, etc.) But to be free they took the deal, as any of us would. The men still do have the chance through more appeals to get the conviction overturned and get another trial, which is what all three want (and deserve.)

So, why you may ask, did Ms Jennifer Harlow just spend two hours writing this post besides her being an obvious true crime buff? Why is this so interesting to her? Three reasons. Since I moved around a lot as a child I was always the outsider. No one ever really picked on me, but I also wasn't included in a lot of activities. My friends and I in high school called ourselves "ghosts," which actually I've come to see the advantage of. (People leave you alone so you can do whatever you want. Freedom. More on that soon.) But I also had friends who were considered outsiders. I went to high school during the Columbine era, which was quite similar to the Satanic era in terms of who was considered potentially dangerous. If you wore all black or an overcoat you were under suspicion. That's what happened with Echols especially. You were different, therefore something was wrong with you. I've never felt like I fit in really with people, so I can relate.

Reason two for my interest. Someone once asked me what my life's philosophy is. I have two basic tenants that I use to guide my life: freedom and fairness. I give people their freedom to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't negatively impact other people. And fairness, where the same rules should apply for everyone equally especially under the law (which is why I'm big on gay rights and a feminist). This case hits on both. These boys were denied their freedom not only of expression (being a Goth and enjoying heavy metal music) but actual freedom. And it wasn't fair these teens were targeted for being different, for liking what the masses deemed odd or not mainstream. But life in nowhere near fair. I just try to do my best to turn that tide in small ways.

And the final, most important reason for this is justice. Forgetting the WM3 for a second, what about those three little boys? If it wasn't the WM3, then the real killer is still out there. As far as the law is concerned the case is closed. There's no reason to re-open it. Until the WM3 gets a new trial and are acquitted nothing will be done. Which is why they need this new trial, to not only be vindicated and clear their names but to find the real killer. (To donate to the defense fund please visit www.wm3.org as all proceeds will go to this goal.) Then and only then will justice be done.

I realize this post is biased. There are still some out there who believe the WM3 are guilty, and you are entitled to that opinion (see? I do try to put my money where my mouth is). I just ask those of you who do to do what I did and what you should always do. Examine all the evidence before you in an unbiased mind before coming to conclusions. Maybe that guy at your school who dresses in all black isn't a freak, he likes poetry and art films. Maybe women who aren't a size 2 aren't lazy and ugly, they're genetically predisposed to having curves and are still worthwhile. Maybe you shouldn't listen to the talking heads about politics and research the issues and candidates for yourself before getting into that voting box. In other words, THINK FOR YOURSELF. Use empathy to put yourself in someone else's shoes before you shun or wreck their lives. If people had in the case of the WM3, then maybe this miscarriage of justice would never have happened. Three teens wouldn't have lost 18 years of their lives. I just hope that justice prevails in the end, but I doubt it. That isn't the world we live in sadly. Fairness just happens in fairy stories.

And nobody lived happily ever after... The End.