An author's obsession with freeing a man from prison | Hacker News Reader

An author's obsession with freeing a man from prison

themarshallproject.org

42 pointssignor_bosco25 comments

How do you sell tens of millions of books and become broke not even twenty years later?

Suppose her publisher was absolutely and utterly ripping her off, only paying $1 per book, that's still burning through about a million USD per year.

Somewhere buried there lies the real crime. With which I mean to say either her publisher ripped her off beyond belief, or she's really bad with money.

I think you overestimate both how much most authors earn as well as how easy it is to blow through $20m.

It's likely also "cash broke" rather than actually bankrupt; it sounds like she still has her house (albeit borrowed against) and other assets.

> I think you overestimate both how much most authors earn as well as how easy it is to blow through $20m.

I actually looked up what an average compensation per book sold is, and $1 is on the low end.

Also blowing through a million USD year-after-year is actually very hard. It's only easy if you really suck at handling money.

If you spent $1000 every single day shopping, you're still not even spending half a million per year.

> it sounds like she still has her house (albeit borrowed against)

Which means she basically already sold it, and is just still allowed to live in it until she either buys it back, or gets kicked out.

I think there's some potential for bias/skew there. The majority of books sold are published under large deals with established authors. There's a long tail end of books published by less well-known authors under less favourable deals. It's possible (and I haven't looked at these numbers myself) that statistics presented make the publishing industry look better. Anecdotally I've read many negative things about the publishing industry and compensation for less established authors. Additionally, if we're talking about averages and not medians, the outliers are going to significantly increase that (J.K. Rowling might earn $3 on a book sale for her books published in the last 15 years, and her books might constitute 1% of all books sold in that period, but that's very much an outlier)

And regardless of statistical truths, we don't know the specifics of the subject's book deal. Sara being an author who did not have as much clout before "Water for Elephants"[1], I wouldn't be shocked to learn she made more like $0.25 per book sold based on lock-in to a contract that included low royalties in exchange for ample marketing to drive book sales.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Gruen

One party allowed to run up unchecked marketing costs, fully recoupable against the other party's royalty.

Is that actually how things work? If so, that's downright abusive.

I thought so too, until I read the part where she has been paying lawyers $20,000/month for many years, taking care of a retired husband, 2 children in college & 1 in high-school and having health problems of her own. And that's only the costs we know.

I can't help agreeing with another comment that so many aspects of the story (along with the way the it's presented) make me raise an eyebrow. She's friends with Jeff Bezos? Pours 20,000 a month into a PI? The man refuses a lie detector? She borrows against her house (while owning horses and with three children) yet can afford to do this (and her husband apparently supports her in the endeavor)? I don't mean to say I don't believe any of this, but it's all incredibly wild in a very uncomfortable way, that makes me question the lifestyle and priorities of someone who can afford to do this in the first place (even though it's a noble cause).

The refusal of lie detector make sense. They are faith based pseudoscience, basically.

It does read like a sort of breakdown. In fact, it reads like a reaction to her guilt at her own success. (Of course of course I can't see inside any of the hearts involved, this is just an internet comment.) Such resources poured into a situation which can only be ameliorated, not fixed. Decades of life can't be got back.

Wow that was fascinating. I admire her dedication.

I hope this brings attention to Murdoch.

Very interesting article, but I had the “plot twist sense” tickling the entire time, maybe due to too much fiction reading. Did anyone also raise an eyebrow on the “refused the lie detector” bit?

What I found most remarkable is that there is no wikipedia entry for the accused, Charles Franklin Murdoch, or his case.

Good luck to anyone dealing with something similar.

My wife had a charge held against her even though the trooper knew he lacked probable cause. The state police say that's fine and the trooper is allowed to do that. The DA and the courts don't care.

Until the system becomes accountable to the people, it will continue to act as an oligarchy and crush us peons.

I assume you got a good lawyer?

Exactly his mistake. He probably got a good lawyer instead of a 'good' lawyer.

What do you mean?

Morally/ethically good vs. competent. OP implies that success in the legal system is only possible with unethical means.

Well, the whole legal system is based on the principle that a fair fight between two sides will yield the truth. So if one side is doing unethical and even unlawful things, then it's less likely the other side will win (or the truth be revealed).

The truth is relative

No it’s not, by definition. Finding the truth is not always easy or clear cut, however.

And there are plenty of things that parade themselves around as truth that are not.

Better Call Saul

Nope. We went pro se due to the racket - the maximum fine is less than the cost to hire a lawyer. Who would think that a 'justice' system would financially punish an innocent person more than a guilty one?

There are actually two scenes in Good Fellas that explain it perfectly. That the mob fills the role of the police in providing protection to those who cannot go to the police. And the classic "fuck you, pay me" scene. We violated your rights? Fuck you, pay me. You're innocent (not that they treat you that way)? Fuck you, pay me. The charge lacks probable cause? Fuck you, pay me.

Had a similar scenario. Rights violation that ended up with me getting a beating and a free ride downtown.

Took a while to find an attorney willing to file a tort after successful defense of two charges.

I got 80 percent of costs back after... about a year and change and many games, change of venue, delays, settle for pittance, etc...

"Fuck you, pay me back"

Mostly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com