What do you think?
Rate this book
Star Spangled Scandal: Sex, Murder, and the Trial that Changed America
“… and sir I do assure you he has as much the use of your wife as you have.”
— From an anonymous note delivered to Congressman Daniel Sickles on February 24, 1859
It is two years before the Civil War, and Congressman Daniel Sickles and his lovely wife Teresa are popular fixtures in Washington, D.C. society. Their house sits on Lafayette Square across from White House grounds, and the president himself is godfather to the Sickles’ six-year-old daughter. Because Congressman Sickles is frequently out of town, he trusts his friend, U.S. Attorney Philip Barton Key—son of Francis Scott Key—to escort the beautiful Mrs. Sickles to parties in his absence. Revelers in D.C. are accustomed to the sight of the congressman’s wife with the tall, Apollo-like Philip Barton Key, who is considered “the handsomest man in all Washington society… foremost among the popular men of the capital.”
Then one day an anonymous note sets into motion a tragic course of events that culminates in a shocking murder in broad daylight in Lafayette Square.
This is the riveting true story of the murder and trial that sparked a national debate on madness, male honor, female virtue, fidelity, and the rule of law. Bestselling author Chris DeRose (The Presidents’ War) uses diary entries, letters, newspaper accounts, and eyewitness testimonies to bring the characters to thrilling life in this antebellum true crime history.
— From an anonymous note delivered to Congressman Daniel Sickles on February 24, 1859
It is two years before the Civil War, and Congressman Daniel Sickles and his lovely wife Teresa are popular fixtures in Washington, D.C. society. Their house sits on Lafayette Square across from White House grounds, and the president himself is godfather to the Sickles’ six-year-old daughter. Because Congressman Sickles is frequently out of town, he trusts his friend, U.S. Attorney Philip Barton Key—son of Francis Scott Key—to escort the beautiful Mrs. Sickles to parties in his absence. Revelers in D.C. are accustomed to the sight of the congressman’s wife with the tall, Apollo-like Philip Barton Key, who is considered “the handsomest man in all Washington society… foremost among the popular men of the capital.”
Then one day an anonymous note sets into motion a tragic course of events that culminates in a shocking murder in broad daylight in Lafayette Square.
This is the riveting true story of the murder and trial that sparked a national debate on madness, male honor, female virtue, fidelity, and the rule of law. Bestselling author Chris DeRose (The Presidents’ War) uses diary entries, letters, newspaper accounts, and eyewitness testimonies to bring the characters to thrilling life in this antebellum true crime history.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published June 25, 2019
100 people are currently reading
1687 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews
November 13, 2021
“Why is it that poor human nature so loves to shove downhill with accelerated motion every sinning fellow-creature who once is found failing.”
STAR SPANGLED SCANDAL is an interesting book about a historical footnote I knew nothing about. In 1859 Congressman Dan Sickles shot and killed his wife’s lover across from the White House. Her lover was Phillip Barton Key, a federal attorney and the son of Francis Scott Key, the writer of the “Star Spangled Banner”. It was the makings of a very big scandal for 1859.
The text is well researched, especially considering it is about what is (now) considered a very minor event. The text follows the elements leading up to the murder, focuses mostly on the trial that followed, and ends with the fallout from the verdict and its implications. I found it very interesting to read the logic driven rhetorical arguments that the defense and prosecution made during this court case. Author Chris DeRose also delivers a decent examination of the fallout from the trial and the subsequent century of “Unwritten Law” that allowed countless hundreds (thousands?) to get away with murder.
A huge problem with this book is that it is sloppily written and edited. Has Mr. DeRose never heard of a transition? There can’t be more than a few in the whole book. In many cases the subject changes from sentence to sentence. This is further complicated by the fact that DeRose does a poor job of distinguishing who is who. There is a large cast of characters in this text and because of the above issues at times it gets confusing.
Here are some points/thoughts that have stuck with me upon completion of this read.
When I read this line, I just had to shake my head. “Wicked men did not arrive in office by some foreign power. We the people have done it.” Obviously, this is a sentiment whose relevancy will never fade. Some things are always true, no matter the period.
When I read this line about the media’s manipulation of the public’s desire I had to chuckle. “It is unfortunately the fashion of the present time to give very minute reports of all cases of exciting wickedness as soon as they get public attention; but the fashion is not a good one. It is sustained now by a popular taste for such things.” It might have been written in 1859, but it is still accurate today. As always, the great truth that “there is nothing new under the sun” is demonstrated. Sensational murder and human depravity get wall to wall national attention. I had to chuckle reading some editorialists’ condemnation of the “graphic” woodcuts some papers were printing of the murder. What would those editorialists say today! Oddly, I found it a bit reassuring. People have always sucked, it’s not a recent development.
Consider this comment about a newspaper made at the time, “…persists in pursuing a political opponent and a personal enemy under the cowardly pretext of a concern for public justice.” That is some major truth right there, and particularly so in the case of our uber biased media now. History is always relevant friends. It puts things in perspective.
To sum up my experience with STAR SPANGLED SCANDAL, this is a great topic, and an interesting historical footnote that is mediocrely (sometimes confusingly) written. I read it, I enjoyed it. I especially loved the historical intricacies and primary sources Mr. DeRose used.
No harm, no foul.
STAR SPANGLED SCANDAL is an interesting book about a historical footnote I knew nothing about. In 1859 Congressman Dan Sickles shot and killed his wife’s lover across from the White House. Her lover was Phillip Barton Key, a federal attorney and the son of Francis Scott Key, the writer of the “Star Spangled Banner”. It was the makings of a very big scandal for 1859.
The text is well researched, especially considering it is about what is (now) considered a very minor event. The text follows the elements leading up to the murder, focuses mostly on the trial that followed, and ends with the fallout from the verdict and its implications. I found it very interesting to read the logic driven rhetorical arguments that the defense and prosecution made during this court case. Author Chris DeRose also delivers a decent examination of the fallout from the trial and the subsequent century of “Unwritten Law” that allowed countless hundreds (thousands?) to get away with murder.
A huge problem with this book is that it is sloppily written and edited. Has Mr. DeRose never heard of a transition? There can’t be more than a few in the whole book. In many cases the subject changes from sentence to sentence. This is further complicated by the fact that DeRose does a poor job of distinguishing who is who. There is a large cast of characters in this text and because of the above issues at times it gets confusing.
Here are some points/thoughts that have stuck with me upon completion of this read.
When I read this line, I just had to shake my head. “Wicked men did not arrive in office by some foreign power. We the people have done it.” Obviously, this is a sentiment whose relevancy will never fade. Some things are always true, no matter the period.
When I read this line about the media’s manipulation of the public’s desire I had to chuckle. “It is unfortunately the fashion of the present time to give very minute reports of all cases of exciting wickedness as soon as they get public attention; but the fashion is not a good one. It is sustained now by a popular taste for such things.” It might have been written in 1859, but it is still accurate today. As always, the great truth that “there is nothing new under the sun” is demonstrated. Sensational murder and human depravity get wall to wall national attention. I had to chuckle reading some editorialists’ condemnation of the “graphic” woodcuts some papers were printing of the murder. What would those editorialists say today! Oddly, I found it a bit reassuring. People have always sucked, it’s not a recent development.
Consider this comment about a newspaper made at the time, “…persists in pursuing a political opponent and a personal enemy under the cowardly pretext of a concern for public justice.” That is some major truth right there, and particularly so in the case of our uber biased media now. History is always relevant friends. It puts things in perspective.
To sum up my experience with STAR SPANGLED SCANDAL, this is a great topic, and an interesting historical footnote that is mediocrely (sometimes confusingly) written. I read it, I enjoyed it. I especially loved the historical intricacies and primary sources Mr. DeRose used.
No harm, no foul.
April 11, 2021
As I was sick with what I now believe was a mild case of Covid I don’t remember one thing about this book and will have to reread it later this year.
June 19, 2019
Just wanted to let you know that I received a free copy of this book from the folks at Regnery Publishing in return for an honest opinion and review of the book,
This is the 2nd book that I have read by the author and once again he has done a great job of research and writing. This book deals with the murder of Philip Barton Key (son of Francis Scott Key) by US Congressman Daniel Sickles, due to Key’s adulterous relationship with Sickles wife Teresa. I had remembered Sickles due to his heroic efforts at the Battle of Gettysburg, but was unaware of this part of his life. Here the author delves into the past live of all three involved in the incident, and then gives us a really good overview of the events leading up to the shooting. Probably the most open secret in Washington was the affair between Key and Teresa, with the only person who was ignorant of the situation was Daniel Sickles, and once he found out there was no doubt as to his actions.
One of the best parts of the book is Chapter 15 “Special by Magnetic Telegraph” which introduces us to the telegraph system and how that changed the way news was transmitted as well as the new “speed” getting out the story. So many similarities to today’s internet, texting and Social Media it is truly a great part of this story.
We also have the first Dream Team of defense attorneys, and that harkens back to the OJ trial, as does the media coverage the case receives. Coverage was so extensive that it was next to impossible to even seat a jury of 12 disinterested men.
The book is filled with trial testimony, opening and closing statements and arguments and the use of temporary insanity as a legal defense for the first time in a case such as this.
I give this book a hearty 5***** rating and recommend this to one and all. Fast paced writing, short and highly readable chapters and as a senior citizen a great big thanks for having the book printed in extremely eye-friendly font style!!! Thanks Regnery for a great read!!
This is the 2nd book that I have read by the author and once again he has done a great job of research and writing. This book deals with the murder of Philip Barton Key (son of Francis Scott Key) by US Congressman Daniel Sickles, due to Key’s adulterous relationship with Sickles wife Teresa. I had remembered Sickles due to his heroic efforts at the Battle of Gettysburg, but was unaware of this part of his life. Here the author delves into the past live of all three involved in the incident, and then gives us a really good overview of the events leading up to the shooting. Probably the most open secret in Washington was the affair between Key and Teresa, with the only person who was ignorant of the situation was Daniel Sickles, and once he found out there was no doubt as to his actions.
One of the best parts of the book is Chapter 15 “Special by Magnetic Telegraph” which introduces us to the telegraph system and how that changed the way news was transmitted as well as the new “speed” getting out the story. So many similarities to today’s internet, texting and Social Media it is truly a great part of this story.
We also have the first Dream Team of defense attorneys, and that harkens back to the OJ trial, as does the media coverage the case receives. Coverage was so extensive that it was next to impossible to even seat a jury of 12 disinterested men.
The book is filled with trial testimony, opening and closing statements and arguments and the use of temporary insanity as a legal defense for the first time in a case such as this.
I give this book a hearty 5***** rating and recommend this to one and all. Fast paced writing, short and highly readable chapters and as a senior citizen a great big thanks for having the book printed in extremely eye-friendly font style!!! Thanks Regnery for a great read!!
September 15, 2019
Scandal, sensationalism, and the telegraph! Chris DeRoses’ Star Spangled Scandal, Sex, Murder, and the Trial that Changed America discusses the Daniel E. Sickles trial in Washington City (Washington, DC) in 1859 in which he was charged with murdering Philip Barton Key, the son of Francis Scott Key, for having an affair with Sickles’ wife, Teresa. On Sunday, February 27, 1859, Daniel Sickles left his rental house, Ewell House, to confront Barton Key, as he was known, in Lafayette Square about how Mr. Key has “dishonored my (Sickles’) house .” Sickles then states,
“ You must die.” “What for?” Key asked. “Sickles pointed a pistol at him and fired. The sound shattered the Sunday afternoon quiet, bouncing off the mansions of Lafayette Square and the White House.” And that was only the beginning! Sickles fired three times hitting Key who was unarmed with all three shots. Then Sickles approached closer to Key and “aimed the gun directly at his head. Click. Misfire.” Sickles then turned himself into the police and confessed.
“There has been an almost unparalleled excitement in the public mind ever since the news of the shooting down of Philip Barton Key in the street by Daniel E. Sickles spread abroad upon the wings of the telegraph.” Leslie’s Illustrated.
As a result “of sensational headlines and newspapers selling as fast as people could buy them played out throughout the country.” February 28, 1859 - “His future promised to be most prosperous; but l’homme propose, et le Dieu dispose.” The New York Herald
“......Never was a place (more) mad for scandal than Washington.” The New York Tribune
The trial of Daniel E. Sickle began on Monday, April 4, 1859 and concluded on Tuesday, April 26, 1859. Let me just say that Mr. Sickle had an excellent defense team. (You will have to read the book to discover the verdict. I will not tell ‘tales out of school.) Just let it be known that Daniel E. Sickles became good friends with Abraham and Mary Todd Lincoln and visited the White House often. During the Civil War, Sickles rank was “commander of the Third Corps, one of only seven major generals- one of only two who did not attend West Point.”
The author provides some colorful statements about the Sickles trial, and definitely illustrates how the telegraph sent hews all over the world relating to the trial, but it is almost ‘over the top’. What is annoying and frightening to me is “The Unwritten Law.” which was used successfully twice even in the 1950s.
“Precedents are almost unanimous in favor of the assertion that any man has a right to kill the betrayer of his wife, his sister, or his daughter.” St. Louis Globe-Democrat
How did Sickle look himself in the mirror? When Sickles saw James Barton Key, Barton Key’s son, in Gilbert and Sullivan play, hopefully the ‘lights’ went on, and realization of what he had done, finally hit home!
,
“ You must die.” “What for?” Key asked. “Sickles pointed a pistol at him and fired. The sound shattered the Sunday afternoon quiet, bouncing off the mansions of Lafayette Square and the White House.” And that was only the beginning! Sickles fired three times hitting Key who was unarmed with all three shots. Then Sickles approached closer to Key and “aimed the gun directly at his head. Click. Misfire.” Sickles then turned himself into the police and confessed.
“There has been an almost unparalleled excitement in the public mind ever since the news of the shooting down of Philip Barton Key in the street by Daniel E. Sickles spread abroad upon the wings of the telegraph.” Leslie’s Illustrated.
As a result “of sensational headlines and newspapers selling as fast as people could buy them played out throughout the country.” February 28, 1859 - “His future promised to be most prosperous; but l’homme propose, et le Dieu dispose.” The New York Herald
“......Never was a place (more) mad for scandal than Washington.” The New York Tribune
The trial of Daniel E. Sickle began on Monday, April 4, 1859 and concluded on Tuesday, April 26, 1859. Let me just say that Mr. Sickle had an excellent defense team. (You will have to read the book to discover the verdict. I will not tell ‘tales out of school.) Just let it be known that Daniel E. Sickles became good friends with Abraham and Mary Todd Lincoln and visited the White House often. During the Civil War, Sickles rank was “commander of the Third Corps, one of only seven major generals- one of only two who did not attend West Point.”
The author provides some colorful statements about the Sickles trial, and definitely illustrates how the telegraph sent hews all over the world relating to the trial, but it is almost ‘over the top’. What is annoying and frightening to me is “The Unwritten Law.” which was used successfully twice even in the 1950s.
“Precedents are almost unanimous in favor of the assertion that any man has a right to kill the betrayer of his wife, his sister, or his daughter.” St. Louis Globe-Democrat
How did Sickle look himself in the mirror? When Sickles saw James Barton Key, Barton Key’s son, in Gilbert and Sullivan play, hopefully the ‘lights’ went on, and realization of what he had done, finally hit home!
,
June 17, 2019
Chris DeRose has told the backstory of what is often a historical footnote. Often important legal decisions get named or rate a vague explanation in a footnote. Star Spangled Scandal: Sex, Murder, and the Trial that Changed America gives readers an oppportunity to know more and understand better. This book is being marketed with a title, a book cover, and introductory materials to incite interest. For a while, my interest waned some. I would rather that DeRose had included some more courtroom commentary. Not all of us who are interested in sex, murder, and legal dramas are that fluent/intuitive about what happens in courtrooms. This book is geared towards those who understand and appreciate the courtroom details, nuances, and drama.
I received this book from Regnery History for a short review.
I received this book from Regnery History for a short review.
January 2, 2020
Great story but drag out for too long
August 13, 2019
While most people have never heard of Dan Sickles, he is pretty well known among Civil War buffs for several reasons:
1) He was of the few Major Generals,
2) His act of cowardice/incompetence arguably won the day at Gettysburg,
3) After his leg was amputated (for which he received the Medal of Honor) he donated the remains to what is now the National Museum of Health and Medicine.
4) He was the first person to successfully use the temporary insanity plea after killing his wife's lover.
This book is about the fourth point. The story was made even more notable because Sickle's was a prominent politician. After murdering his wife's lover, he retained the services of Edwin Stanton (one of the few people to serve on a presidential cabinent for 3 presidents---of different parties!)
And did I mention that his wife's lover was the son of Francis Scott Key, the author of the Star Spangled Banner?
Needless to say, the murder of Philip Barton Key (the DC District Attorney) was one of the biggest news events of 1859.
I already knew most of the above. I didn't realize that the case occurred in 1859 or that Stanton was his attorney. The story has all the elements needed to make a great story.
Unfortunately, this book didn't deliver. It was rather forgetable and the thing that I will remember most about the book is a historical anacronysm.
While serving in England, Sickles walked out of an event because the wording of the National Anthem--the Star Spangled Banner-- was changed so that it wouldn't offend the British hosts. DeRose made a fairly big deal about this incident---after all, Francis Scott Key's son was the person Sickles killed.
The problem with this is that the Star Spangled Banner would not become the National Anthem for another 80 years or so. The way the passage is written, DeRose clearly implies that Sickles was upset because of how the National Anthem (not future National Anthem) was altered.
This was a weak 3 stars.
1) He was of the few Major Generals,
2) His act of cowardice/incompetence arguably won the day at Gettysburg,
3) After his leg was amputated (for which he received the Medal of Honor) he donated the remains to what is now the National Museum of Health and Medicine.
4) He was the first person to successfully use the temporary insanity plea after killing his wife's lover.
This book is about the fourth point. The story was made even more notable because Sickle's was a prominent politician. After murdering his wife's lover, he retained the services of Edwin Stanton (one of the few people to serve on a presidential cabinent for 3 presidents---of different parties!)
And did I mention that his wife's lover was the son of Francis Scott Key, the author of the Star Spangled Banner?
Needless to say, the murder of Philip Barton Key (the DC District Attorney) was one of the biggest news events of 1859.
I already knew most of the above. I didn't realize that the case occurred in 1859 or that Stanton was his attorney. The story has all the elements needed to make a great story.
Unfortunately, this book didn't deliver. It was rather forgetable and the thing that I will remember most about the book is a historical anacronysm.
While serving in England, Sickles walked out of an event because the wording of the National Anthem--the Star Spangled Banner-- was changed so that it wouldn't offend the British hosts. DeRose made a fairly big deal about this incident---after all, Francis Scott Key's son was the person Sickles killed.
The problem with this is that the Star Spangled Banner would not become the National Anthem for another 80 years or so. The way the passage is written, DeRose clearly implies that Sickles was upset because of how the National Anthem (not future National Anthem) was altered.
This was a weak 3 stars.
August 3, 2019
True crime with a little history, politics, adultery, courtroom drama, and the evolution of how crimes of passion came to be treated in the law. A lot going in this book! And how did people get their news before the invention of the telegraph?! Quite the interesting story of a long forgotten scandal. Quite enjoyable - solid 3.5 stars for me.
Gracious thank you to the publisher for a gratis copy in exchange for an honest review.
Gracious thank you to the publisher for a gratis copy in exchange for an honest review.
October 7, 2019
2.5 stars. I had high hopes for this book and parts of it were very engaging but overall I found the book too dense and disjointed to really enjoy. The book tells a true crime story set in 1859 involving Washington D.C. elites. If was THE scandal of the day. Although it was tough for me to get through, the lawyers in our book club did enjoy the courtroom drama which was told with great detail.
August 6, 2021
3.5 stars rounded down
This is directly before the Civil War and yet ignores race. So I rounded down.
Otherwise mostly delightful a bit too long.
I read a few books while out of town and this is one of them.
This is directly before the Civil War and yet ignores race. So I rounded down.
Otherwise mostly delightful a bit too long.
I read a few books while out of town and this is one of them.
February 25, 2020
Every so often a trial comes along that is described as "the trial of the century". O.J. Simpson filled that slot in the 20th century but there was a trial in the 19th century that, though many may not have heard of it, was certainly much more exciting. In 1859 U.S. Congressman, Daniel Sickles, shot and killed U.S. District Attorney, Barton Key, son of Francis Scott Key, on a Sunday morning near the White House. Barton Key had been carrying on an affair with Sickles' wife and taking very little care to hide the fact as it seemed that everyone in D.C., except Sickles, was aware of it. There was no dispute about the fact that Sickles killed Keys as it was broad daylight and many witnesses were present. Sickles was heard to yell, "He has defiled my bed" and then, "Is the damned scoundrel dead?" Sickles then turned himself in. What follows is the trial and how a new invention, the telegraph, was able to share this story with the nation. It is interesting to see how people of that era viewed an "honor killing" and how politics played a part in whose side you were on. There were some interesting side stories such as how members of Congress during that time conducted themselves during their sessions. Many times fists would fly and wigs were pulled from heads so, just slightly different from present days. DeRose did a great job with this book in bringing the trial to life. His research was thorough and he gets his information from numerous sources. If you don't like non-fiction don't shy away from this book as it often reads like fiction and you will want to hurry to the end to see what happens to the main characters.
Read
June 9, 2023History rocks!
Did you ever hear of the United States Congressman who blew away the D.C. District Attorney at point blank range right outside the White House lawn in broad daylight on the Sabbath? Did you know these men were close friends and that longstanding marital betrayal would forever divide them? Have you ever heard of the Unwritten Law that effectively put adulterers and other similar violators on the endangered list for the next century? Star Spangle Scandal is the fascinating true story of “Sex, Murder, and the Trial that Changed America”. Writer Chris DeRose makes full use of his talents, easily coaxing the reader to quickly finish one chapter just to start the next. The facts of the case are nothing short of astounding, as were its ramifications for another hundred years in crimes of passion that could (and often would) lead to fatal revenge!
As the trial would become the most covered news in the history of the world, the details are exceedingly available. Incidentally, that’s my only complaint of the book. The author is so terribly good at writing, and the first half of the book is much more prose that quoted conversation, that the trial does slow down the story. It’s a very minor quibble, and the gravity of its impact on history and its truth-is-stranger-than-fiction details more than make up for any other shortcomings.
Did you ever hear of the United States Congressman who blew away the D.C. District Attorney at point blank range right outside the White House lawn in broad daylight on the Sabbath? Did you know these men were close friends and that longstanding marital betrayal would forever divide them? Have you ever heard of the Unwritten Law that effectively put adulterers and other similar violators on the endangered list for the next century? Star Spangle Scandal is the fascinating true story of “Sex, Murder, and the Trial that Changed America”. Writer Chris DeRose makes full use of his talents, easily coaxing the reader to quickly finish one chapter just to start the next. The facts of the case are nothing short of astounding, as were its ramifications for another hundred years in crimes of passion that could (and often would) lead to fatal revenge!
As the trial would become the most covered news in the history of the world, the details are exceedingly available. Incidentally, that’s my only complaint of the book. The author is so terribly good at writing, and the first half of the book is much more prose that quoted conversation, that the trial does slow down the story. It’s a very minor quibble, and the gravity of its impact on history and its truth-is-stranger-than-fiction details more than make up for any other shortcomings.
June 25, 2019
Chris DeRose Star Spangled Scandle comes out for sale today! If it's the only Historical True Crime you read this year, do so and I mean it. It's set two years before the Civil War and it's a true story of sex, murder, and politics...but could easily have been a headline in today's news.
DeRose's style made me feel like a fly on the wall of the most stately places, among the most popular, famous and infamous of D.C. of the pre-Civil War era. Witness the development of their party the Democrats during these tumultuous times.
See where the Republican party got it's start and why.
This is one of the top ten most riveting Historical Crime novels I have ever read.
I am getting nothing out of this but an advanced copy and one of the best books I've ever read.
DeRose's style made me feel like a fly on the wall of the most stately places, among the most popular, famous and infamous of D.C. of the pre-Civil War era. Witness the development of their party the Democrats during these tumultuous times.
See where the Republican party got it's start and why.
This is one of the top ten most riveting Historical Crime novels I have ever read.
I am getting nothing out of this but an advanced copy and one of the best books I've ever read.
July 14, 2019
"Star Spangled Scandal" reads like a current events news release within a fascinating docudrama. The true story takes place in Washington D.C.,1859, with author, Chris DeRose, providing facts of events prior to, during, and in conclusion to the trial of Daniel Sickles culminating with the surprising verdict.
I found DeRose's "Star Spangled Scandal" to be factual, detailed and yet flowing in the style of a historical fiction novel. It kept my interest throughout, providing insight into this page of history and the ramifications of the "Unwritten Law". A thrilling, true crime drama steeped in American history. You will find it hard to put down until the "verdict is in". Enjoy! (5 stars)
I found DeRose's "Star Spangled Scandal" to be factual, detailed and yet flowing in the style of a historical fiction novel. It kept my interest throughout, providing insight into this page of history and the ramifications of the "Unwritten Law". A thrilling, true crime drama steeped in American history. You will find it hard to put down until the "verdict is in". Enjoy! (5 stars)
July 7, 2019
A riveting read a time when America’s foundation was shaking.True crime fascinating especially an episode in history a Senators beautiful young wife a handsome young man a relative of Francis Scott key a love affair a murder and the young mans life is taken.A riveting murder trial a shocking verdict. I could not put this book down an event that would of received headlines at anytime occurring so far back in time.Highky recommend .Thanks #RegeneryHistory for this 5 star read,
July 6, 2019
I received a copy of this book from Regency in exchange for a review. This book was a great read! History, politics, true crime, scandals - what more could today’s readers ask for? DeRose has done an excellent job at relaying the events, providing a plethora of historical information, and telling the story in an engaging and exciting read.
October 24, 2019
Started out great, but became a slog in the second half. Too much flowery language by half and in dire need of a better proofreader.
September 5, 2019
With the invention of the telegraph, Congressman Daniel Sickles's murder of his wife's lover, Barton Key, son of Francis Scott Key, became the first trial of the century, only we're talking about the 19th century.
The murder happened in 1859, just prior to the Civil War. A dead giveaway as to the result of the trial is that Major General Daniel Sickles fought at Gettysburg and is more famous today for what he did there than the murder and trial.
Barton Key seemed to be asking for it. He rented a house near where Sickles lived with his beautiful wife Teresa; it was almost across the street from
where the Sickles lived. This is where he carried on his affair with Mrs. Sickles. He would signal her by waving a handkerchief and she would signal back if she was there. Somehow Sickles never found out until he received a letter from an anonymous source. Almost simultaneously Key received one telling him Sickles knew about the affair. Sickles saw him passing his house and possibly signaling on the day he killed him.
A similarity with the trial of the 20th century, the OJ trial, was Sickles' dream defense. One of the lawyers on Sickles's team was Edwin Stanton, Secretary of War under Lincoln and several other famous lawyers of the day. They decided to claim Sickles was temporarily insane, that Keys had provoked him. They also used the Unwritten Law, that a man had the right to protect his marriage bed, which Sickles claimed when he was apprehended.
The trial went on for twenty days. Most of the witnesses claimed they'd seen Key wave the hanky. After a while it gets downright boring; they all seem to say the same thing. The judge didn't like it one bit. He didn't like the idea of adultery being put forward as a defense. The result was that every man and some woman caught up in the same situation claimed the Unwritten Law defense and they usually won, right up to the 1950's when women began to claim equal rights and weren't put on a pedestal.
The author seems to be a Sickles defender. The worst thing Sickles ever did, beyond the murder of Barton Key, was at Gettysburg, ordering an attack on Longstreet who was trying to flank the Union troops on Cemetery Hill, the high ground, disobeying General Meade's direct orders to hold his ground. According to the author, Sickles was driving Longstreet back when he was hit by a rolling cannon ball, ultimately losing a leg. I've read just about every book on Gettysburg that I could find and most historians side with General Meade. Luckily, for the Union forces, General Hancock saw the hole in the line and called up the First Minnesota who had to hold the line until more troops could be called up. They were cut to ribbons. Every man was either killed or wounded. DeRose claims Sickles was only one of two “political” generals who was a corps commander. That's the point. He never should've held that command in the first place.
Please excuse the diversion; what the trial ultimately did was create a market for trashy stories about the fallibility of the human character that carries to this day. Some people actually believe what they read in the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.
The murder happened in 1859, just prior to the Civil War. A dead giveaway as to the result of the trial is that Major General Daniel Sickles fought at Gettysburg and is more famous today for what he did there than the murder and trial.
Barton Key seemed to be asking for it. He rented a house near where Sickles lived with his beautiful wife Teresa; it was almost across the street from
where the Sickles lived. This is where he carried on his affair with Mrs. Sickles. He would signal her by waving a handkerchief and she would signal back if she was there. Somehow Sickles never found out until he received a letter from an anonymous source. Almost simultaneously Key received one telling him Sickles knew about the affair. Sickles saw him passing his house and possibly signaling on the day he killed him.
A similarity with the trial of the 20th century, the OJ trial, was Sickles' dream defense. One of the lawyers on Sickles's team was Edwin Stanton, Secretary of War under Lincoln and several other famous lawyers of the day. They decided to claim Sickles was temporarily insane, that Keys had provoked him. They also used the Unwritten Law, that a man had the right to protect his marriage bed, which Sickles claimed when he was apprehended.
The trial went on for twenty days. Most of the witnesses claimed they'd seen Key wave the hanky. After a while it gets downright boring; they all seem to say the same thing. The judge didn't like it one bit. He didn't like the idea of adultery being put forward as a defense. The result was that every man and some woman caught up in the same situation claimed the Unwritten Law defense and they usually won, right up to the 1950's when women began to claim equal rights and weren't put on a pedestal.
The author seems to be a Sickles defender. The worst thing Sickles ever did, beyond the murder of Barton Key, was at Gettysburg, ordering an attack on Longstreet who was trying to flank the Union troops on Cemetery Hill, the high ground, disobeying General Meade's direct orders to hold his ground. According to the author, Sickles was driving Longstreet back when he was hit by a rolling cannon ball, ultimately losing a leg. I've read just about every book on Gettysburg that I could find and most historians side with General Meade. Luckily, for the Union forces, General Hancock saw the hole in the line and called up the First Minnesota who had to hold the line until more troops could be called up. They were cut to ribbons. Every man was either killed or wounded. DeRose claims Sickles was only one of two “political” generals who was a corps commander. That's the point. He never should've held that command in the first place.
Please excuse the diversion; what the trial ultimately did was create a market for trashy stories about the fallibility of the human character that carries to this day. Some people actually believe what they read in the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.
June 16, 2019
I had a difficult time choosing how many stars to give this book. I went so far as to tweet the author asking if this was for educational or entertainment purposes. He said he hoped I learned a lot while being entertained. If this book was purely education this is a 5 star book. But. . . as far as entertainment I found issues.
The actual story is buried behind 5 chapters of history which would put off the average reader. In the 3rd chapter I found myself wondering when I would actually get to the murder of Mr. Key. Mid 5th chapter I was asking myself what was this book supposed to be about? Oh there were brief glimpses into the murderers mind set and the scoundrels intent, but only glimpses.
In chapter 6 you finally get to the story, the murder, the reason behind the murder, the shame felt by Mr. Sickles being betrayed by both wife and friend, and the revenge taken.
In some spots it veers off path again concerning itself about the gossip, arguments on the right and wrongs of Mr. Sickles and Mr. Key, and if Mrs. Sickles was victim or harlot.
As far as history goes the most relevant chapter that I enjoyed was chapter 15 which was about the Magnetic Telegraph and Morse Code and how the paper business started to boom with news of a Congressman ( Sickles ) murdering The United States Attorney ( Key ) son of the author of The Star Spangled Banner.
Soon because of the telegraph and inspired by the hunger for murderous news, the whole Newspaper and Magazine business changed, and expanded beyond anyone imagination.
The format of the book would have been much more entertaining if the information in the first 5 chapters just covered a brief account of Mr. Sickles and Mr. Key's political careers, when the Sickles got married and more about Mrs. Sickles and Mr. Key's relationship. The first 5 chapters read to me as some boring history assignment. It is however all historical fact, resource material is listed in the back of the book under notes. So if you like thick history delve in, you will find it bursting with facts and dates. I almost DNFed this book because of the format.
I was given this book in exchange for a fair honest review, all opinions are my own. I liked it, after I got into it, but was far from loving it. It is educational, but doesn't draw you in , you must work for your reading reward.
The actual story is buried behind 5 chapters of history which would put off the average reader. In the 3rd chapter I found myself wondering when I would actually get to the murder of Mr. Key. Mid 5th chapter I was asking myself what was this book supposed to be about? Oh there were brief glimpses into the murderers mind set and the scoundrels intent, but only glimpses.
In chapter 6 you finally get to the story, the murder, the reason behind the murder, the shame felt by Mr. Sickles being betrayed by both wife and friend, and the revenge taken.
In some spots it veers off path again concerning itself about the gossip, arguments on the right and wrongs of Mr. Sickles and Mr. Key, and if Mrs. Sickles was victim or harlot.
As far as history goes the most relevant chapter that I enjoyed was chapter 15 which was about the Magnetic Telegraph and Morse Code and how the paper business started to boom with news of a Congressman ( Sickles ) murdering The United States Attorney ( Key ) son of the author of The Star Spangled Banner.
Soon because of the telegraph and inspired by the hunger for murderous news, the whole Newspaper and Magazine business changed, and expanded beyond anyone imagination.
The format of the book would have been much more entertaining if the information in the first 5 chapters just covered a brief account of Mr. Sickles and Mr. Key's political careers, when the Sickles got married and more about Mrs. Sickles and Mr. Key's relationship. The first 5 chapters read to me as some boring history assignment. It is however all historical fact, resource material is listed in the back of the book under notes. So if you like thick history delve in, you will find it bursting with facts and dates. I almost DNFed this book because of the format.
I was given this book in exchange for a fair honest review, all opinions are my own. I liked it, after I got into it, but was far from loving it. It is educational, but doesn't draw you in , you must work for your reading reward.
January 25, 2020
A Review of the Audiobook
Published by Blackstone Audio in June of 2019.
Read by Traber Burns.
Duration: 8 hours, 36 minutes.
Unabridged.
In February of 1859, Daniel Sickles, a sitting U.S. Congressman, shot and killed a man in Washington, D.C. across the street from the White House.
Why is this not just a weird moment in American history?
Five reasons.
#1) Daniel Sickles went on to become the highest-ranking Union officer in the Civil War that did not graduate from West Point. He performed very well at the disastrous Battle of Chancellorsville and performed bravely, but with great controversy at Gettysburg, where he lost a leg.
#2) The victim was Phillip Barton Key, the son of Francis Scott Key, the author of the Star Spangled Banner. Phillip Barton Key was also the U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C.
#3) Key and Sickles' wife had been carrying on a long-term adulterous affair and Sickles had just discovered this fact.
#4) The new technology of the telegraph spread this story to newspapers across the country and it became THE scandal story of its era. Some newspapers sold literally tens of thousands of copies when this story was on the front page. Record numbers of telegraph messages were sent out across the country - totals only eclipsed by the Civil War just a few months later.
#5) It was the first time the temporary insanity defense was used successfully in the United States and kicked off a wave of similar defenses in adultery cases for most of the next century.
For me, an enthusiastic student of the Civil War, this should have been an amazing book...
Read more at: https://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2020...
Published by Blackstone Audio in June of 2019.
Read by Traber Burns.
Duration: 8 hours, 36 minutes.
Unabridged.
In February of 1859, Daniel Sickles, a sitting U.S. Congressman, shot and killed a man in Washington, D.C. across the street from the White House.
Why is this not just a weird moment in American history?
Five reasons.
#1) Daniel Sickles went on to become the highest-ranking Union officer in the Civil War that did not graduate from West Point. He performed very well at the disastrous Battle of Chancellorsville and performed bravely, but with great controversy at Gettysburg, where he lost a leg.
#2) The victim was Phillip Barton Key, the son of Francis Scott Key, the author of the Star Spangled Banner. Phillip Barton Key was also the U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C.
#3) Key and Sickles' wife had been carrying on a long-term adulterous affair and Sickles had just discovered this fact.
#4) The new technology of the telegraph spread this story to newspapers across the country and it became THE scandal story of its era. Some newspapers sold literally tens of thousands of copies when this story was on the front page. Record numbers of telegraph messages were sent out across the country - totals only eclipsed by the Civil War just a few months later.
#5) It was the first time the temporary insanity defense was used successfully in the United States and kicked off a wave of similar defenses in adultery cases for most of the next century.
For me, an enthusiastic student of the Civil War, this should have been an amazing book...
Read more at: https://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2020...
June 22, 2019
I'd read the book The President's War by Chris DeRose a while back and really enjoyed it. When I heard about this book the story sounded very interesting. Dan Sickles, then a congressman and future Union general, shoots down the son of Francis Scott Key in broad daylight, for having an affair with his wife. The first half of the book covers the events leading up to the event. While this back story is important to know, DeRose bounced around a bit to much and briefly in the episodes presented. For that reason the first half, for me anyway, felt a bit too rushed or without a rhythm. Where the book shines is in it's second half where he covers the trial, and to me it's where the book finally grabbed my full attention. The author does a great job of taking us through the trial, day by day, and it's aftermath. I'd never heard about this event in the past so it was an interesting look into a little known affair. Worth the time to push through the first half, and would be a good, quick summer read!
July 21, 2019
Disclaimer: I received this book for free in exchange for an honest review...
...the integrity of which process I will be testing in what follows. To this reader, "Star Spangled Scandal" was only a decent (odd, using that word to describe a volume about adultery and murder) book at best. Good things first:
DeRose is a lawyer by training, and he clearly understands a courtroom drama. His concluding chapter on how the Sickles trial created the precedent for the Unwritten Law was interesting - in fact, I would have found the book better if he'd indicated this historical significance earlier, and used his narrative to demonstrate his claim.
Beyond this, though, the early sections of the book felt tabloid-ish, while the latter sections read like courtroom transcripts. It did whet my appetite to learn more about Daniel Sickles, however.
...the integrity of which process I will be testing in what follows. To this reader, "Star Spangled Scandal" was only a decent (odd, using that word to describe a volume about adultery and murder) book at best. Good things first:
DeRose is a lawyer by training, and he clearly understands a courtroom drama. His concluding chapter on how the Sickles trial created the precedent for the Unwritten Law was interesting - in fact, I would have found the book better if he'd indicated this historical significance earlier, and used his narrative to demonstrate his claim.
Beyond this, though, the early sections of the book felt tabloid-ish, while the latter sections read like courtroom transcripts. It did whet my appetite to learn more about Daniel Sickles, however.
July 11, 2019
This is a well written book, with great detail. It gave me new insight into the attitudes and lifestyles of the era. I enjoyed it a lot, and also learned a lot from it. I love history and this was a very entertaining book, I highly recommend reading it. I wanted to thank the publisher Regnery for sending me a copy of this lovely book.
July 14, 2019
3 1/2 stars. I knew the name Daniel Sickles from Civil War, but had no idea that he had killed Philip Barton Key, son of Francis Scott Key, who was having an affair with Sickles’ wife. An interesting read. (Own)
May 26, 2022
Murder as Melodrama: The Sickles-Key Affair riveted Washington and the country in 1859
The late 1850s were a particularly violent moment in American history, as the nation teetered on the brink of civil war.
In May 1856, anti-Catholic California Rep. Philemon T. Herbert shot and killed an Irish waiter at Willard’s Hotel because the immigrant informed him that the breakfast kitchen was closed. Later that same month, South Carolina Rep. Preston Brooks viciously attacked Massachusetts Sen. Charles Sumner on the floor of the Senate in retaliation for Sumner’s biting speech opposing slavery in Kansas in which he singled out a relative of Brooks’ for special condemnation. Neither Herbert nor Brooks were seriously punished. Both were meagerly prosecuted by the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Philip Barton Key II.
Not quite two years later, perhaps the most famous brawl in congressional history took place on the floor of the House, sparked by a debate (once again) over the future of Kansas. Again, there were no real repercussions.
These incidents were inspired to one degree or another by political or sectional hostility, but violence of both a political and personal nature had been tolerated in and around Congress for decades.
And while each new attack provided fodder for the ever-expanding field of journalists who happily reported on the mayhem to sell newspapers, with the high-speed telegraph providing a national audience, not every incident of congressional violence was justified by political animosity.
In late February 1859, an anonymous tipster brought to the attention of New York Rep. Daniel Sickles that his wife was keeping company with another man. And not just any man, but the very same Key who had not very enthusiastically prosecuted the congressional miscreants. He was a man about town “fitted by nature to gain the affections of a woman,” and the son of Francis Scott Key, who had written “The Star Spangled Banner.”
Sickles may have been the last man in Washington to know about the affair – rumors had circulated for months but he always dismissed them, as any devoted husband would.
Not that Sickles was all that devoted. In the rogue’s gallery of American history, Dan Sickles stands out as a repeat offender. There’s a reason his best-known biography includes the words “scoundrel” and “notorious” in the title. Sickles was plenty of both.
A child of New York privilege, Sickles carved a legal, political and military career that stretched from Albany to New York City to London to Washington to Gettysburg and beyond. Along the way, he was flagrantly involved with a prostitute, was a serial philanderer, failed miserably as a battlefield commander and -- the subject of Star Spangled Scandal: Sex, Murder, and the Trial That Changed America -- shot dead in the streets of the nation’s capital his wife’s famous lover.
Chris DeRose’s fourth book is a brisk and witty rendition of the Sickles-Key affair. It is not like his other books of 18th and 19th century American history, which were sober, well-told examinations of the political world. Here he moves into a political underworld and speeds up the pace, tending toward a melodramatic telling of what is, in the end, a melodrama.
Dan and Theresa Sickles were “universal favorites” in Washington society, he as a congressman and confidante of the president for whom he had worked in London, she as an important hostess. They were, by most accounts, a love match. Married in 1852, they had a beautiful little daughter. And all the best people came to their home on Lafayette Square, including Philip Barton Key II. They bridged the sectional divide, and “people who would not meet elsewhere would do so in the Sickles’s home.”
That all came crashing down when Key was shot to death near the Sickles home, within sight of the White House, on February 27, 1859. With that, the Sickles family moved from favorites to farrago.
One of the first “Trials of the Century,” the Sickles affair was a voyeur’s delight, with the telegraph spreading every sordid word across the country as fast as the wires would carry them and readers eagerly devouring the daily dose of sordidness.
The reader will hear not-so-faint echoes of the modern in the story.
News coverage of the attack and subsequent trial “displaced coverage of violence in Kansas, the breakdown of politics in Washington, the fracturing of the Democrats, and the ascendancy of the Republicans.” At a crucial moment in American history, trivia replaced substance. Maybe people wanted the distraction. If so, they got what they wanted.
DeRose, a lawyer, is at his best in the courtroom. It’s here the narrative truly soars, not in an ornate way, but through the lawyer’s eye for fact and detail, including the irony that part of the delay in getting the trial started was the need to appoint a new U.S. attorney – “Sickles had killed the man who would have otherwise prosecuted him.”
The delay played against Sickles. In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, the public was largely on his side, as an aggrieved husband defending his honor. But as the Key family dredged up his seamy past, the tide turned against him.
To the extent the Sickles case is famous in legal circles, its renown rests on the use by attorney Edwin Stanton – the future secretary of War – of the temporary insanity defense, a first in a murder trial in America. DeRose explains the history of the plea and its use in clear, concise detail, and walks the reader through the day-by-day sessions of the trial, rivaling any Law and Order episode.
Sickles’ acquittal was met with a mixed response, but the public again turned against him after it became known that he had welcomed his wayward wife back into his arms (at least officially).
Through it all, Sickles persevered. He lost a leg at the Peach Orchard, but never lost his sense of hubris.
Theresa died of tuberculosis at age 31, less than two years after the Civil War. Sickles remarried, fathered two more children and lived to the ripe old age of 94, outlasting almost all his general officer colleagues from the Civil War and dying in 1914. He’s buried at Arlington National Cemetery.
Sickles’ probably apocryphal response to a question about why there is no statue of him at Gettysburg (there is one now) encapsulates the sense of self importance that followed him through his life: “The entire battlefield is a memorial to Dan Sickles.”
Whether he said it or not, it’s a sentiment that perfectly sums up Sickles, and goes a long way toward explaining his actions in the late winter of 1859, which gave Americans one last grand melodramatic spectacle before the truly grand tragedy began.
The late 1850s were a particularly violent moment in American history, as the nation teetered on the brink of civil war.
In May 1856, anti-Catholic California Rep. Philemon T. Herbert shot and killed an Irish waiter at Willard’s Hotel because the immigrant informed him that the breakfast kitchen was closed. Later that same month, South Carolina Rep. Preston Brooks viciously attacked Massachusetts Sen. Charles Sumner on the floor of the Senate in retaliation for Sumner’s biting speech opposing slavery in Kansas in which he singled out a relative of Brooks’ for special condemnation. Neither Herbert nor Brooks were seriously punished. Both were meagerly prosecuted by the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Philip Barton Key II.
Not quite two years later, perhaps the most famous brawl in congressional history took place on the floor of the House, sparked by a debate (once again) over the future of Kansas. Again, there were no real repercussions.
These incidents were inspired to one degree or another by political or sectional hostility, but violence of both a political and personal nature had been tolerated in and around Congress for decades.
And while each new attack provided fodder for the ever-expanding field of journalists who happily reported on the mayhem to sell newspapers, with the high-speed telegraph providing a national audience, not every incident of congressional violence was justified by political animosity.
In late February 1859, an anonymous tipster brought to the attention of New York Rep. Daniel Sickles that his wife was keeping company with another man. And not just any man, but the very same Key who had not very enthusiastically prosecuted the congressional miscreants. He was a man about town “fitted by nature to gain the affections of a woman,” and the son of Francis Scott Key, who had written “The Star Spangled Banner.”
Sickles may have been the last man in Washington to know about the affair – rumors had circulated for months but he always dismissed them, as any devoted husband would.
Not that Sickles was all that devoted. In the rogue’s gallery of American history, Dan Sickles stands out as a repeat offender. There’s a reason his best-known biography includes the words “scoundrel” and “notorious” in the title. Sickles was plenty of both.
A child of New York privilege, Sickles carved a legal, political and military career that stretched from Albany to New York City to London to Washington to Gettysburg and beyond. Along the way, he was flagrantly involved with a prostitute, was a serial philanderer, failed miserably as a battlefield commander and -- the subject of Star Spangled Scandal: Sex, Murder, and the Trial That Changed America -- shot dead in the streets of the nation’s capital his wife’s famous lover.
Chris DeRose’s fourth book is a brisk and witty rendition of the Sickles-Key affair. It is not like his other books of 18th and 19th century American history, which were sober, well-told examinations of the political world. Here he moves into a political underworld and speeds up the pace, tending toward a melodramatic telling of what is, in the end, a melodrama.
Dan and Theresa Sickles were “universal favorites” in Washington society, he as a congressman and confidante of the president for whom he had worked in London, she as an important hostess. They were, by most accounts, a love match. Married in 1852, they had a beautiful little daughter. And all the best people came to their home on Lafayette Square, including Philip Barton Key II. They bridged the sectional divide, and “people who would not meet elsewhere would do so in the Sickles’s home.”
That all came crashing down when Key was shot to death near the Sickles home, within sight of the White House, on February 27, 1859. With that, the Sickles family moved from favorites to farrago.
One of the first “Trials of the Century,” the Sickles affair was a voyeur’s delight, with the telegraph spreading every sordid word across the country as fast as the wires would carry them and readers eagerly devouring the daily dose of sordidness.
The reader will hear not-so-faint echoes of the modern in the story.
News coverage of the attack and subsequent trial “displaced coverage of violence in Kansas, the breakdown of politics in Washington, the fracturing of the Democrats, and the ascendancy of the Republicans.” At a crucial moment in American history, trivia replaced substance. Maybe people wanted the distraction. If so, they got what they wanted.
DeRose, a lawyer, is at his best in the courtroom. It’s here the narrative truly soars, not in an ornate way, but through the lawyer’s eye for fact and detail, including the irony that part of the delay in getting the trial started was the need to appoint a new U.S. attorney – “Sickles had killed the man who would have otherwise prosecuted him.”
The delay played against Sickles. In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, the public was largely on his side, as an aggrieved husband defending his honor. But as the Key family dredged up his seamy past, the tide turned against him.
To the extent the Sickles case is famous in legal circles, its renown rests on the use by attorney Edwin Stanton – the future secretary of War – of the temporary insanity defense, a first in a murder trial in America. DeRose explains the history of the plea and its use in clear, concise detail, and walks the reader through the day-by-day sessions of the trial, rivaling any Law and Order episode.
Sickles’ acquittal was met with a mixed response, but the public again turned against him after it became known that he had welcomed his wayward wife back into his arms (at least officially).
Through it all, Sickles persevered. He lost a leg at the Peach Orchard, but never lost his sense of hubris.
Theresa died of tuberculosis at age 31, less than two years after the Civil War. Sickles remarried, fathered two more children and lived to the ripe old age of 94, outlasting almost all his general officer colleagues from the Civil War and dying in 1914. He’s buried at Arlington National Cemetery.
Sickles’ probably apocryphal response to a question about why there is no statue of him at Gettysburg (there is one now) encapsulates the sense of self importance that followed him through his life: “The entire battlefield is a memorial to Dan Sickles.”
Whether he said it or not, it’s a sentiment that perfectly sums up Sickles, and goes a long way toward explaining his actions in the late winter of 1859, which gave Americans one last grand melodramatic spectacle before the truly grand tragedy began.
September 3, 2023
I was initially interested in the book for the connection to Francis Scott Key. I had no idea that his son had been involved in a scandal until I came across the book. What an interesting peek into the culture of the mid-1800s, especially the upper crust of Washington DC and our elected and appointed officials. This is a book that can be read quickly for the storyline, or more in depth, if you are a legal scholar. Well documented and the era nicely fit into a historical timeline that offers additional insight as to how "new things" (ie telegraph services and development of newspapers) played into the scandal. My take away? Some things never change, at least not yet!
November 21, 2020
A fascinating read! Well-written, entertaining, and engrossing! My only complaint: I wish there had been a bit more analysis from the author from a historical perspective - such as when he examines the potential authorship of the RGB letters, which was thrilling and a nice examination.
July 8, 2019
I will start by saying that I got this book from the publisher for free to review. Now you may say well here comes the rave review because the book was free, but that is not going to happen here. Yes I gave this book a 5 star rating because it deserves it. While the focus of the book is the murder trial of David Sickles in 1859 for the killing of Philip Barton Key. It much more than that. The trial is an interesting case in what it brings about in America. The first thing you as the reader discover it that this trial was the first time that the telegraph was fully utilized by the press to get the story out to readers all across the United States. It is amazing that a sensational murder trial would be the instrument that would show the country how the telegraph could be an important means of communication.
More importantly this story is about how the defense of temporary insanity and the "Unwritten Law" became important tools for the defense in murder trials for almost 100 years. The author was able to bring this home not by just saying this case did it. But by giving a brief case history of this defense. He was very clear that this defense is hard to get an accurate count of the times it was used successfully simply because it was so common a defense some cases didn't make the papers or even got to trial during the period of it's use. Now days we very seldom here of this defense being used.
Did Dan Sickles get away with murder or was he temporarily insane when he shot Philip Barton Key. As I read this account of the trial and events that led to it I had to stop and ask myself that question several times. The author wrote in such a way that you the reader can make your own decision on that point. Spoiler alert; Sickles is found not guilty by the jury.
I don't know why but the words dream team kept popping up in my mind as I read the portion of the book that dealt with the trial. The reason for that is Sickles' did have a team of lawyers defending him and they were I guess a dream team.
The book was written in three parts. The first part was the setting of the stage for the courtroom drama that was to be the third part of the story. In that first part we are introducted to the main characters in this drama, Dan and Teresa Sickles, Philip Barton Key, who are made flesh and blood. I liked this because this make you realize that you are reading about real events and real people. Because to hear this story without the background you would possibly think that this was fiction not history.
The second part is deals with the events on that fateful Sunday in February, 1859. The assembling of the defense team and the cast of minor characters.
The third part is the trial itself. The author has put to good use the transcript of the trial to very good use here. This was the section that really held my interest to read of the testimony given in court and the moves by both defense and prosecution to make their case in court. It was like Law and Order in 1859. Now both sides were very good at their jobs as shown by the author, but I have to say that for me the defense was more interesting.
Now a lot of writers would come to the end of this story at the trial. But in this book you get a good deal more. We find out what happened to the people, who lived through this scandal, which I found to be good. We also found out what the repercussions of the verdict in the trial.
The big question is would I recommend this book the answer is yes. I know some will think how can you cover something like this in 321 pages. Well you can if you know the subject matter and Chris DeRose seems to have his fact in order and that what counts. I have taught history in high school and I know that some time more is not better for a narrative, less is better. This book had my atttention from the start and didn't lose it all the way through. Now I took awhile to read this book, but that was because I want to make sure I had a good grasp on what was happening. My one regret was I did not find out who R.P.G. altough the author tried to find out and tell us his audience the name of R.P.G. Was Sickles guilt or not, was he insane at the time of the murder the reader can decide. As for me you know what you know.
More importantly this story is about how the defense of temporary insanity and the "Unwritten Law" became important tools for the defense in murder trials for almost 100 years. The author was able to bring this home not by just saying this case did it. But by giving a brief case history of this defense. He was very clear that this defense is hard to get an accurate count of the times it was used successfully simply because it was so common a defense some cases didn't make the papers or even got to trial during the period of it's use. Now days we very seldom here of this defense being used.
Did Dan Sickles get away with murder or was he temporarily insane when he shot Philip Barton Key. As I read this account of the trial and events that led to it I had to stop and ask myself that question several times. The author wrote in such a way that you the reader can make your own decision on that point. Spoiler alert; Sickles is found not guilty by the jury.
I don't know why but the words dream team kept popping up in my mind as I read the portion of the book that dealt with the trial. The reason for that is Sickles' did have a team of lawyers defending him and they were I guess a dream team.
The book was written in three parts. The first part was the setting of the stage for the courtroom drama that was to be the third part of the story. In that first part we are introducted to the main characters in this drama, Dan and Teresa Sickles, Philip Barton Key, who are made flesh and blood. I liked this because this make you realize that you are reading about real events and real people. Because to hear this story without the background you would possibly think that this was fiction not history.
The second part is deals with the events on that fateful Sunday in February, 1859. The assembling of the defense team and the cast of minor characters.
The third part is the trial itself. The author has put to good use the transcript of the trial to very good use here. This was the section that really held my interest to read of the testimony given in court and the moves by both defense and prosecution to make their case in court. It was like Law and Order in 1859. Now both sides were very good at their jobs as shown by the author, but I have to say that for me the defense was more interesting.
Now a lot of writers would come to the end of this story at the trial. But in this book you get a good deal more. We find out what happened to the people, who lived through this scandal, which I found to be good. We also found out what the repercussions of the verdict in the trial.
The big question is would I recommend this book the answer is yes. I know some will think how can you cover something like this in 321 pages. Well you can if you know the subject matter and Chris DeRose seems to have his fact in order and that what counts. I have taught history in high school and I know that some time more is not better for a narrative, less is better. This book had my atttention from the start and didn't lose it all the way through. Now I took awhile to read this book, but that was because I want to make sure I had a good grasp on what was happening. My one regret was I did not find out who R.P.G. altough the author tried to find out and tell us his audience the name of R.P.G. Was Sickles guilt or not, was he insane at the time of the murder the reader can decide. As for me you know what you know.
February 8, 2020
Interesting
Daniel Sickles certainly led a full life! I knew him as the Civil War General who lost a leg, I didn't know about the murder trial. Very informative and had a great flow!
Daniel Sickles certainly led a full life! I knew him as the Civil War General who lost a leg, I didn't know about the murder trial. Very informative and had a great flow!
June 10, 2019
I don't know if a "spoiler alert" is appropriate for a history book, but if you are not familiar with the outcome of the trial of Daniel Sickles and want to read this with appropriate suspense, then you may want to come back to this review after you have read the book.
For me, the name of Daniel Sickles was known mostly from his part as a Union General in the battle of Gettysburg. Through that connection, I had already known that Sickles had killed his wife's seducer but was tried and found not guilty. I did not know the details, nor did I realize how his trial had consumed popular attention just a couple of years before his part in the Civil War.
The spectacle of a "media frenzy" is not as modern as I thought. Just as today's technology accelerates the dissemination of information, gossip, and opinion, the newly-developed telegraph and popular press did the same for the trial of Daniel Sickles. The chaotic explosion of facts, falsehoods, rushes to judgment, and wild extremes of popular opinion ... it's all there 160 years ago.
As one reads this well-researched account, the reader is inevitably drawn into the frenzy. It is nigh to impossible to not take sides, to be pulled first one way and then the other. In this way, the author does a good job of transporting us back, as though we were living through the event. Yes, it is hard to keep all of the names straight, but that's part of the reality.
As with all well-written history, there is much to be learned here of human nature. Some things never change.
As Abraham Lincoln said in a book review, "People who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like." With respect to this book, I mean that in the most positive sense!
The publishers of this book somehow knew that I "like this sort of thing," and provided me with a copy with a request (not requirement) to review it. If I found the book a disappointment, I would have said so. The review is my honest opinion.
A word on my "star rating" rationale:
* 5 Stars - rarely awarded, only for books I consider exceptional, books that pretty much everyone ought to read.
* 4 stars - a really good book that I can gladly recommend. It seems that this is what most people give a "5" rating to, but I wanted to reserve something for the exceptional.
* 3 stars - an OK book, probably worth reading, but I see a few faults, either in content or style, that you will have to endure and overlook.
* 2 stars - a not-so-great book, either in content or style. It has just enough valuable points to lift it above a "1".
* 1 star - a book that probably should not have been written. It should only be read to provide an example of poor writing and/or terrible ideas.
*
For me, the name of Daniel Sickles was known mostly from his part as a Union General in the battle of Gettysburg. Through that connection, I had already known that Sickles had killed his wife's seducer but was tried and found not guilty. I did not know the details, nor did I realize how his trial had consumed popular attention just a couple of years before his part in the Civil War.
The spectacle of a "media frenzy" is not as modern as I thought. Just as today's technology accelerates the dissemination of information, gossip, and opinion, the newly-developed telegraph and popular press did the same for the trial of Daniel Sickles. The chaotic explosion of facts, falsehoods, rushes to judgment, and wild extremes of popular opinion ... it's all there 160 years ago.
As one reads this well-researched account, the reader is inevitably drawn into the frenzy. It is nigh to impossible to not take sides, to be pulled first one way and then the other. In this way, the author does a good job of transporting us back, as though we were living through the event. Yes, it is hard to keep all of the names straight, but that's part of the reality.
As with all well-written history, there is much to be learned here of human nature. Some things never change.
As Abraham Lincoln said in a book review, "People who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like." With respect to this book, I mean that in the most positive sense!
The publishers of this book somehow knew that I "like this sort of thing," and provided me with a copy with a request (not requirement) to review it. If I found the book a disappointment, I would have said so. The review is my honest opinion.
A word on my "star rating" rationale:
* 5 Stars - rarely awarded, only for books I consider exceptional, books that pretty much everyone ought to read.
* 4 stars - a really good book that I can gladly recommend. It seems that this is what most people give a "5" rating to, but I wanted to reserve something for the exceptional.
* 3 stars - an OK book, probably worth reading, but I see a few faults, either in content or style, that you will have to endure and overlook.
* 2 stars - a not-so-great book, either in content or style. It has just enough valuable points to lift it above a "1".
* 1 star - a book that probably should not have been written. It should only be read to provide an example of poor writing and/or terrible ideas.
*
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews