What do you think?
Kiss and Kill
Recounts the shocking true story of Rick Pulley, a highly respected youth pastor who brutally murdered his wife after she stumbled upon his secret life of adultery, phone sex, rage, and madness and who almost got away with the crime. Original.
- GenresTrue CrimeNonfiction
320 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published February 1, 2008
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
December 4, 2020
The Pulleys were friends of my graduate school roommate, years after we had graduated. I remember getting the email from my friend, urgently asking prayers for Patty Jo because she was missing. I would ask my friend from time to time if they had heard any news and then finally, one day when I asked, I learned that they had found Patty Jo's body.
April 5, 2018
Much of this book held my interest, but when all was said and done it was just too long and too repetitive. The prosecutor's boastful recap of the trial was particularly unwelcome.
March 13, 2017
Rick Pulley was a minister and missionary along with his wife, Patty Jo. They traveled playing Christian music and ministering to youth. Then one day Patty Jo disappears leaving a grieving Rick and friends. Only after her body is found much later, it turns out their marriage was not what it seemed and Rick had dark secrets.
What I liked the most about this book, is the way the author does deep research and really makes you feel like you know the people involved. It is a skill I have found in his other books as well.
True Crime at its best.
What I liked the most about this book, is the way the author does deep research and really makes you feel like you know the people involved. It is a skill I have found in his other books as well.
True Crime at its best.
November 21, 2008
I feel like of bad giving this 2 stars because it was *kind of* better than just 'okay'. I wouldn't go so far as to say "I liked it" though so I don't want to give it 3 and give anyone the wrong impression. I'd probably give this 2.5 if I could.
One or two people, maybe more mentioned the repetitiveness and I saw that before starting to read this. I'm the kind of person that kind of thing jumps out at but I was more alert than usual having seen this in the reviews. I got through a good portion of the book wondering what they had read that I didn't. And then I got to it.....
It did start getting somewhat repetitive and while that doesn't work with any book - with a true crime I think it's even worse. For me anyway. I think most of his repeating things came from the way his wrote this. He went backwards a lot of the time where, had he written forwards in time, this wouldn't have seemed to repetitive to the readers. There was a few instances where it was just plain bad writing though. Page 76 talks about a church the Pulley's were a part of and it goes on to give, like the usual true crime book, a little about the area. This gave a lot. And it gave it over and over and over again. I found out that Ringgold is in Pittslyvanis County about three or four times.....in as many paragraphs. How that wasn't caught I have no idea. It actually was slightly worse because he said the same thing about the area in different ways. One sentence would sat the land was hilly and in the next paragraph would mention the rolling hill in that part of the county. Then the next paragraph would state that the land in that country wasn't flat. Yeah, I get it already. That was the only instance where I really saw anything like that but there were a decent number of smaller examples that could easily have been avoided had the writing been better.
After his wife was missing the book says that Rick Pulley was told my the lead detective on the case that "he was going to get some strange phone calls and mysterious letters." That's all that was said. I can't help but think that any *normal* person in that situation would have to ask the question, "Um, why in the world would that happen and how would you be in possession of that information, Mr Lead Detective?" At the very end we find out where these came from but there was no other mention of Rick Pulley's reaction to this info, if the detective himself told this to Hudson, if Rick Pulley told this to Hudson, if it was indeed said or if it was something Pulley made up, the reader is just plain old in the dark about it.
Page 264 mentions the detective sending a deputy notify the parents of Patty Jo Pulley that their daughters remains had been found. On page 266 it says that Detective Isom, the lead for this case and the same one that sent the deputy to the parents house, emailed the elder Pulley's to let them know her remains were found. Well, which one was it? It's not the biggest discrepency in the world but if Hudson can't keep this straight what else may be wrong about the book? Why would Isom send a deputy AND email? And even if he did, the email wouldn't be a notification but something else. It doesn't make sense and makes for poor writing overall.
Patty Jo Pulley's sister came across a sweater of Patti Jo's at a yard sale in the vicinity of the Pulley's (not sure if she was found at the time, can't remember) and she yelled to the homeowner, "Where did you get this?" The homeowner doesn't get a chance to answer before the sister falls apart. Understandable. But if Hudson knows this info somehow then why is there no elaboration? That's it again. Very confusing and I', sure there was more and I wanted to know it.
Overall it wasn't close to the best t.c. I've ever read. I won't say I won't read any more by Hudson because you never know, but when I do I won't be expecting the likes of an Ann Rule book - that's for sure.
One or two people, maybe more mentioned the repetitiveness and I saw that before starting to read this. I'm the kind of person that kind of thing jumps out at but I was more alert than usual having seen this in the reviews. I got through a good portion of the book wondering what they had read that I didn't. And then I got to it.....
It did start getting somewhat repetitive and while that doesn't work with any book - with a true crime I think it's even worse. For me anyway. I think most of his repeating things came from the way his wrote this. He went backwards a lot of the time where, had he written forwards in time, this wouldn't have seemed to repetitive to the readers. There was a few instances where it was just plain bad writing though. Page 76 talks about a church the Pulley's were a part of and it goes on to give, like the usual true crime book, a little about the area. This gave a lot. And it gave it over and over and over again. I found out that Ringgold is in Pittslyvanis County about three or four times.....in as many paragraphs. How that wasn't caught I have no idea. It actually was slightly worse because he said the same thing about the area in different ways. One sentence would sat the land was hilly and in the next paragraph would mention the rolling hill in that part of the county. Then the next paragraph would state that the land in that country wasn't flat. Yeah, I get it already. That was the only instance where I really saw anything like that but there were a decent number of smaller examples that could easily have been avoided had the writing been better.
After his wife was missing the book says that Rick Pulley was told my the lead detective on the case that "he was going to get some strange phone calls and mysterious letters." That's all that was said. I can't help but think that any *normal* person in that situation would have to ask the question, "Um, why in the world would that happen and how would you be in possession of that information, Mr Lead Detective?" At the very end we find out where these came from but there was no other mention of Rick Pulley's reaction to this info, if the detective himself told this to Hudson, if Rick Pulley told this to Hudson, if it was indeed said or if it was something Pulley made up, the reader is just plain old in the dark about it.
Page 264 mentions the detective sending a deputy notify the parents of Patty Jo Pulley that their daughters remains had been found. On page 266 it says that Detective Isom, the lead for this case and the same one that sent the deputy to the parents house, emailed the elder Pulley's to let them know her remains were found. Well, which one was it? It's not the biggest discrepency in the world but if Hudson can't keep this straight what else may be wrong about the book? Why would Isom send a deputy AND email? And even if he did, the email wouldn't be a notification but something else. It doesn't make sense and makes for poor writing overall.
Patty Jo Pulley's sister came across a sweater of Patti Jo's at a yard sale in the vicinity of the Pulley's (not sure if she was found at the time, can't remember) and she yelled to the homeowner, "Where did you get this?" The homeowner doesn't get a chance to answer before the sister falls apart. Understandable. But if Hudson knows this info somehow then why is there no elaboration? That's it again. Very confusing and I', sure there was more and I wanted to know it.
Overall it wasn't close to the best t.c. I've ever read. I won't say I won't read any more by Hudson because you never know, but when I do I won't be expecting the likes of an Ann Rule book - that's for sure.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 13, 2013
I generally like to read true crime books in order to try to understand what happened and why, but I didn't get the feeling from this one that I understood much more than when I started it. It was often pretty boring and repetitive, with many errors. The photos were also of terrible quality. I could tell little about how anyone looked from them. This was not a satisfying read in any way.
May 30, 2008
Even though this book was based on a true story, it didn't do much for me. The writing bounced around too much and conversations with the suspect were repetitive. Just didn't enjoy it.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews