First We'll Kill My Husband

by:

Riddle, Lyn

Publisher:

Pinnacle Books, 850 Third Ave

Location:

New York, NY

Cover:

Type:

Paperback

reviewed by:

Lynard Barnes

12/27/2008

Comment:

The only woman on Georgia's death row, Kelly Gissendaner's role in the murder of her husband, Doug Gissendaner is recounted.

As Riddle's book points out in the epilogue, in 2007 there were 105 adults under death sentence in the state of Georgia. Among them, Kelly Gissendaner was the only woman. (The Atlanta Journal Constitution, in a report written by staff writer Carlos Campos, ran a story on Gissendaner on July 18, 2004). FIRST WE'LL KILL MY HUSBAND attempts to explain how she got on death row. The short explanation appears to be a confession by her one time boyfriend, Greg Owen. The long explanation is a combination of Owen's confession and the less than concerned attitude Gissendaner displayed after her husband, Doug Gissendaner, was found shot to death near an isolated road in Gwinnett County, Georgia. Doug Gissendaner disappeared, was killed, on February 7, 1997.

There is nothing imperatively read-worthy about this book. An issue which the book inadvertently highlights however is the death penalty. Author Lyn Riddle does not come out one way or another regarding use of the death penalty. She does quote Gissendaner as saying that the death penalty is not a deterrent. Perhaps not. The caveat for Gissendaner as the only woman on Georgia death row is that no woman has been executed in Georgia since 1945. Of the six women condemned to death in Georgia, all have had their sentences changed to life in prison. Gissendaner is still going through the appeals process for a murder that took place in that February of 1997. Odds are that eventually her appointment with death will be commuted. Deterrent? For the calculating murderer, as Gissendaner is accused of being, the death penalty would definitely not be a deterrent when you factor in all the other traits characterizing such a person. After all, the underlying rationale of such a person is that (1) they will never get caught and (2) they are smarter than the mercenaries of the justice charged with bringing them to justice.

As we wrote in the August 2003 review of Jerry Bledsoe's book, Death Sentence, concerning the capital murder crimes of Velma Barfield,

Does the state have the right to take a human life? The answer is an unequivocal yes. The state which provides the framework in which individuals may enjoy the freedoms of life has the right to protect itself from any who would abridge or negate that

Trices Group Book Review Journal

HTMLBookReview

framework. The state does not and can not have the right to enact vengeance nor act as a surrogate for those who would enact vengeance.

Velma Barfield of North Carolina was executed in 1984 for the murder by arsenic of Stuart Taylor. It is very easy to imagine that if Barfield had been liberally provided her daily mega-does of Valium and other assorted mind-altering drugs, she would not have murdered Stuart Taylor or anyone else. She was not so much a calculating murderer as a driven murderer. In Barfield's case, she was driven by an addiction to mind-altering drugs, which in less extreme form, is sanctioned by society at large. Perhaps, at a fundamental level, all murderers are "driven" by elective ignorance. Caught up in the downward spiral of drug addiction in one instance, tittered to the mental prison of a bad childhood in another. Between the two, which is a candidate for the death penalty? Which truly chooses their ignorance?

Kelly Gissendaner had been married to Doug for six years before his death. They had three children. About a year before the murder, Kelly met Greg Owens. She was separated from Doug at the time--one of several separations during their marriage--and they were talking divorce. They reconciled and purchased a house for the first time in their lives in December of 1996. In February 1997, Doug was dead.

Author Lyn Riddle seems satisfied with the explanation that Kelly Gissendaner masterminded or was actively complicit in the death of her husband because she wanted sole possession of the house the couple shared as well as the double $10,000.00 life insurance on Doug. It is a decision a jury of Gissendaner's peers, ten women and two men, also accepted. It seems an awfully lame excuse for murder. (There are weaker excuses from seemingly rational people-see our review of Ken Englade's Beyond Reason). There was more than sufficient evident to show that Gissendaner goaded Greg Owen into committing the murder for her. The only real question whiffing through FIRST WE'LL KILL MY HUSBAND is whether Gissendaner deserves the death penalty for the crime committed.

Did Kelly Gissendaner kill for financial gain? That the question can be raised in connection with the murder of Doug Gissendaner is the most disturbing aspect of Kelly Gissendaner's life. Author Riddle attempts to provide readers with an alternate train of thought that would raise another question. "Anger. Alcoholism. Divorce. That was the fabric of Kelly Brookshire's early life", Riddle starts out in chapter seven of the book. So we have the "social influence" of a life formed in an atmosphere of self-centeredness, drug induced escapism and violence. Does that explain Kelly Gissendaner's inability to devise an acceptable life-strategy for acquiring something she wanted--a house, money?

Even if we answer yes to that question, we are still left with the question of whether ego--me, myself and I above all else--is an acceptable excuse for murder.

FIRST WE'LL KILL MY HUSBAND is not a must read book by any definition, but it does contribute to examining the pros and cons of the death penalty.

Trices Group Book Review Journal

HTMLBookReview