That he doesn't cite ANYTHING? He quotes all over the place and makes sweeping claims, but has absolutely no reference list. I don't understand how this is acceptable. He starts out with pure fiction--what boy on a bike? how does he know what that boy, IF he exists, felt about seeing the car?--and it goes on through the book. I feel like he often sacrifices fact for atmosphere. He certainly has an agenda, like everyone who writes Dahlia books. They don't sell if there isn't a whodunit at the end and he certainly has his pet theory, i.e. Jack Anderson Wilson. He sure flogs the hell out of that one. It's sad to read the transcripts of that sodden drunk taking advantage of him.