Hopefully this is allowed here. I was looking to add more non-fiction into my reading list. Saw a thread in one of the reading subreddits about best true crime books and saw both Helter Skelter recommended heavily but followed up with how you HAVE to read Chaos if you read that to get the whole story. I picked up both and blew through Helter Skelter and found it riveting BUT I knew that Chaos basically posits that large swathes of that book are false so i tried to take it all with a grain of salt.

Then I start Chaos and was so excited to learn more and im about 150 pages in and…i don’t know, it feels light. The author keeps making sweeping assumptions that I don’t see at all. I can’t figure out if he just has more info that he’s not including or more explanation will come later or what. He’ll point out some seemingly minor discrepancy or tertiary lie and immediately claim “therefore the prosecution’s whole case is now disproven!” When i often don’t draw that conclusion at all. It’s also extremely drawn out, going into his reporting while not discovering much.

I’ve heard nothing but great things about this book, and I’m not hating it I’m more curious to hear some thoughts from others who have read it and either liked it or didn’t. Do the bombshells come later? Am i missing something? Do you agree?

Again I hope this is the right place for this just trying to guage at what point I maybe decide this ones not for me. Also any other good true crime classics I should add to my list? Didnt think i was into this genre but was surprised how fascinating i found Helter Skelter. Thank!