> The hearing and/or trial can fill in the specifics
that the criminal would
not
> have known directly as they happened. Other details
can filled in through
> dialogue with the police processing the criminal ...
giving criminal a
brief on
> what was going to occur, etc. And a run down by the
criminal's attorney
could be
> used to fill-in other details as well ...
Yeah, i can see that, but then it just becomes expository
info through dialogue. Ugh. The necessary evil of crime
writing. I guess my thoughts leaned towards the
experience--news reports give the criminal some info, and
then he's caught, interrogated (and then, like on LAW &
ORDER, it becomes a legal thriller so we won't deal with that
as Police Proced.). But if he's
*told* the procedures as they happen, I'm not as
interested.
I consider the PARKER books by Stark to be the "anti-police
procedurals", in that they're crime procedurals. Step by step
planning of the crime, pulling it off, getting way, tying up
loose ends.
-- # To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 19 Apr 2000 EDT