Given that Karla Homolka was not lost in the first place, the idea that someone found her is a fiction and given that there was a decidedly commercial side to its propagation, that “finding” might just be fraud.

Not of the magnitude of Conrad Black’s accuser Richard Breenen’s corporate kleptocracy fiction rather more like Martha Stewart’s little lie to the FBI about insider knowledge not being the motivation for her $80,000 stock trade; call it obstruction of the truth by Paula Todd and Derek Finkle for minor financial gain.

I have known exactly where Karla is, and was, for almost two years. I have her physical addresses in Quebec and Guadeloupe, her email addresses and telephone numbers. I also know the three women who actually found her almost three years ago and exactly how they did it.

Unlike Ms. Todd, none us were rude or desperate enough to highjack her.

Unlike Ms. Todd’s vague and improbable descriptions of how she allegedly “tracked down” the “elusive” and “slippery” Karla Homolka by “scouring” obscure “foreign” databases, these women’s success at finding Karla and corresponding with her was quite ingenious, more so when you consider who they are and why they were looking for her in the first place.

Although “found” is still a misnomer. Karla was hiding in plain sight precisely because no one was really looking for her which puts the lie to another of Finkle’s and Todd’s assertions that there were legions of journalists frantically scouring the world for Karla.

If there was so much interest in Karla why did the two broadcasters with whom Paula Todd is closely associated, CTV and the CBC (hubby Doug Grant happens to be the head honcho of “Public Affairs” for the network) not assign the story and set her up with a professional camera man and hidden sound and video recording equipment?

For that matter, Todd could have done the hidden video/ hidden tape recorder thing herself. Why didn’t she?

Why are there no other photographs in “Finding Karla” than the one allegedly shot by the man who spent a week in a tree; albeit a tree a mile away from the Bordelais compound. Macleans Magazine pronounced the innocous and inconclusive snap an “iconic” image.

Why did Paula Todd need a man in a tree for a week? Doesn’t she have a smart phone with a built-in camera? Everyone else on the planet does. I use my iPhone to record stuff every day. It has a very sensitive built-in microphone.

Why are there no shots of the road on which Homolka lives? Or the mailbox with Leanne Bordelais printed on it? Whoops, another fiction: Karla goes by the name Emily Bordelais now and has for years. Never used Leanne. Even discussed why she would never use it with me when she and I corresponded over an 18-month period in 2001 and 2002.

Why not a shot of Ms. Todd’s quaint Guadeloupean hotel? Or the “experienced cabbie” she hired for “company,” the one she explained to – “in French” – that she was “visiting someone” but “it could be dangerous;” the one whose “warm face and intelligent eyes” she studied before she decided to “go for it” i.e. go and highjack the dangerous Karla Homolka. (God, it reads like a bad B-movie script.)

A snap of that guy with his warm face and intelligent eyes beside the post box with Leanne Bordelais’ name on it would have at least added some color to the report.

Why are there not more shots included in her digital publication to establish some sense of place?

Her clumsy, uninspired descriptions don’t cut it for me. It is as though she wrote the piece in her living room while reading the Wikipedia entry on Guadeloupe with a little Ian Fleming on the side.

Are we really supposed to believe, as Todd tries desperately to convey, that she was in fear for her life in Guadeloupe, one of the most friendly and hospitable islands in the Caribbean and therefore afraid to take pictures or use a miniature tape recorder?

The photographer’s description of his ordeal in Macleans Magazine and on the Reuters photography blog sounds so improbable it seems more likely that the picture is photoshopped or a studio set up.

Working photographers, especially ones with Zoran Milich’s pedigree, seldom ply their trade for chump change, let alone live in a tree hounded by hostile goats for a week to score such an innocuous and unremarkable shot. Surely he knew there’s no international market for grainy pictures of women bending over to pick up babies.

The woman leaning over to pick something up in the shot (that it’s a baby or small child is by no means evident) could just as easily be a model. That frame of foliage would have been a breeze to compose.

Having seen Karla in much closer proximity a number of times I can tell you that there are a lot of women out there who closely resemble her. This one photograph proves nothing. It doesn’t even establish that he and Paula Todd were on the island.

I do not “know” Paula Todd but I do know Derek Finkle who is given credit for editing and “publishing” this badly written and researched exercise in reality-based fiction.

I do know that Mr. Finkle is capable of all manner of malfeasance not the least of which is outright theft but also of publishing lies and distortions as fact. He has done so with impunity in the past.

The only difference this time is he seems to have hit a bit of a jackpot, thanks to the overwrought reaction of all Paula Todd’s “colleagues” still embedded in the ever-diminishing ranks of the old media.

I think we are in the realm of H.L. Mencken who said “no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

For a man who has been passing himself off as both a serious person and an editor for well over a decade and a mature woman who calls herself not only an “investigative reporter” (Jack Anderson’s roiling in his grave) but also a lawyer, between the two of them they could not get the facts of Karla’s crimes, deals, sentencing and life after release right.

After all, two-thirds of their e-scam is given over to a factually challenged rehash of Karla’s crimes, something I’ve been repeatedly told by senior publishers and editors in this country, has been done to death and for which there is no more public tolerance.

For instance, Karla and her lawyer had nothing to do with getting her plea agreements; those were the idea and creation of then Assistant Deputy Attorney General Michael Code and the head of the Green Ribbon Task Force, Inspector Vince Bevan. And not because the police did not have any videotape evidence. They did.

Videotape evidence, its presence or absence, had nothing to do with Karla’s deals, their motivation or their details, although you would never know it reading either Todd and Finkle’s “creative journalism” or any of the media logorrhoea it generated.

It’s a very persistent myth that the deals would not have been done if only Bernardo’s lawyer had not held onto a bunch of videotapes for so long.

After all, the Ministry of the Attorney General threw a few more millions after the tens of millions it needlessly spent putting on the deSadean theatrical production called “The Bernardo Trial,” prosecuting Bernardo lawyer Ken Murray in its aftermath for some form of obstructing Justice. Of course he was acquitted but the Ministry considered the money well spent because it reinforced their fabricated version of events.

It remains, just as the authorities carefully scripted it to become, a staple in any commentary or media reportage about the “controversial” Karla and her so-called “sweetheart deals” to this day.

To once again call on the Great Skewer of those who eschew the inconvenient truth, H.L. Mencken defined “the height of mediocrity” as “the ready acceptance of received opinion.” One would have thought a journalist of Paula Todd’s stature would have done everything she could to not end up teetering from those dizzying heights.

There’s much more: I may be splitting hairs here but Karla, legally speaking, is not a serial killer – which should concern Paula Todd – if she really is a lawyer and given that hair-splitting is that profession’s stock and trade.

Nor is Karla, by the definition accepted in law, a pedophile.

Nor is she a psychopath or sociopath as Todd and many others including Andrew Mitrovica (who should know better) unequivocally state; at least not in terms of the Hare Checklist which is allegedly the world recognized test for a condition that most level headed psychiatrists consider a fiction.

It was administered to Karla on three different occasions in the few years before she was released from prison in 2005. The Hare Checklist was negative for psychopathy every time they checked. Karla was not even close to qualifying for that scary distinction. Not that anything hangs on it one way or the other. It’s just more smoke and mirrors.

The great irony in this story is that all the facts are very easily acquired today, all a matter of public record. – absolutely no need to search in “more sophisticated databases” or resort to “forensic surfing” and “cyber border” crossing as Todd claimed she had to do.

While I’m at it, another fiction perpetrated by Ms. Todd is her self-righteous and unprofessional assertion that the Canadian public has a right to know where Karla is and also that it “needs to know” and “wants to know.” Is Paula Todd omniscient? Has an arbitrator of national morality who understands our collective psyche finally found us?

In Chapter Three (pg. 13), Ms. Todd writes in her hyperventilated, breathless style “Homolka’s back story remains seared into Canada’s national conscience…” What? Neither the Canadian public or Ms. Todd know Karla’s “back story” or they would have all of the relevant facts at hand. I mean “..seared into Canada’s national conscience?” Give me a break. Knock me down and call me Susan.

Although there is no such thing as a “national consciousness” or “conscience” they too are very convenient and often-invoked fictions by the increasingly tabloid-tempered mainstream media but the idea that Paula Todd has some kind of psychic connection to the collective Canadian consciousness is just silly. Now she is invoking a fiction to rationalize a fiction.

But let’s consider for a moment I’m wrong. If there is such a thing as a collective mind, consciousness, or conscience, Ms. Todd does not describe how she gained access to it further confounding the idea that she is “a smart, inexhaustible ace investigator”, as Zoran Milich loquaciously described her in his blog post.

Then there is the legion of straightforward factually incorrect statements she asserts such as Karla’s Catholic baptism.

During the conversation that she constructs with Karla in the last chapter (on pg. 143) Todd writes “Then I remember she was baptized a Catholic, and therefore, her confessions to a priest are considered highly confidential and usually won’t be repeated to the outside world.”

Then she says to Karla “It’s not always written that a priest can’t speak, but a priest doesn’t speak,”

It’s as though Todd, so shocked when Karla had no idea who she was told her to “google me,” is trying to draw comparison between her self-proclaimed role as a crusading journalist and avenger of the collective Canadian outrage over Karla’s freedom and future with that of a priest in the spiritual and moral realms.

No wonder Karla had no idea what the hell Todd was talking about, illiciting another sanctimonious and irritating editorialization from Todd: “Again, no sense there.” Maybe that’s the problem. Todd missed the Talking Head’s dictum to “stop making sense.” Particularly when there is none to be made.

The Homolkas are not Catholics. Baptism in the Catholic Church is a problem for non-Catholics. It never happens.

The short e-book is rife with errors like this. How much fiction should we tolerate in a work touted as “investigative journalism?” 25%? 50%? The whole enchilda, if its convenient and we are perpetuately in a resigned state of mind?

In the end, this fiction Todd and Finkle have perpetrated on the Canadian public, aided and abetted as they were by a pliant Canadian media, will evaporate in the blowback of the indisputable fact that the vast majority of Canadians, Americans, Armenians, Spanish, English, French, Chinese etc., etc. etc. do not give a rat’s ass about Karla Homolka.

No one cares where she is, what she’s doing or what she is thinking. Nor do they need to hear her say she’s sorry. As Karla told me shortly before her release from prison, “What would be the point? No one would believe me.” Duh.

And I know this how? I will explain anon.



  1. With the number of fallacies I personally picked out of Ms. Todd’s “work” – I was astounded that she spent as much time publicly promoting it. Did she not think someone would dispute them?

    I agree with your analysis on so many levels. She dressed it up to seem as though it had been a dangerous, life-threatening mission to locate a “serial killer” and “pedophile.” In actuality, if she even made the trip to the island, all she found when she arrived was a busy housewife and mother who works part time as a teacher and runs an environmentally friendly home-based business.

    I will certainly share your blog for the folks who got blindsided into spending the 3.00 on the ebook, at least in one place, there is a way to make sense of everything she’s claimed.

  2. I have to say, I did not really understand the point of the ebook. As you mentioned it was largely a “recap” of the crimes with only thin descriptions of the author’s encounter with Karla. It answered very few questions, and felt like yet another manipulation by Karla. While left alone with the children for a moment, no thought to photograph them or anything for that matter.
    Having known Karla’s specific whereabouts for several years, the idea of the internet sleuthing is laughable. The only difference between Ms. Todd’s search and anyone else with ten minutes on the internet is the airfare to Gaudeloupe.

  3. You took the words right out of my mouth. Karla Homolka isn’t hiding. She’s just trying to live her life and raise her children. Many of us are “curious” about her and her recovery from the horrific events in her past. However, we have no right to intrude on her privacy.

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out how to locate her. I would think a proper introduction and request for interview would be an appropriate step if Ms, Todd’s sincere motivation was to report on survivors of violent criminal acts. I think Ms. Todd’s writing with it’s sensationalism and overt puerile theatrics, made me feel uncomfortable; neither informed nor entertained.

    My reaction to reading the ebook, was “there’s some things here which don’t make any sense”. Thank you for exposing the inaccuracies in her book.

    People need to quit blaming Ms. Homolka for the “deal” she got. This was a normal plea agreement, which happens every day between prosecuting and defense attorney’s. She didn’t cut this deal, the justice system did. They wanted Paul Bernardo, and they wanted to make sure he never saw the light of day again. Therefore, they needed Karla Homolka to secure that conviction. They would have had a hard time without her.

    I agree, Ms. Homolka is neither a psychopath, pedophile, or a serial killer. I really doubt one will see Karla Homolka found guilty of much more than a parking violation ever again. Hopefully, Karla you finally got a drivers license.

    • It was not a “normal” plea agreement. It, and the politics behind it were most unusual. It was unique like virtually everything to do with this case. And “they” i.e. the Attorney General and police did not need Karla to secure Bernardo’s conviction. They had Bernardo from the get-go, fifteen ways to Sunday. The details about how and why Karla was given her future are a matter of public record. They’re in my books, particularly “Karla: A Pact with the Devil.”

      • I beg to differ, deals like Karla’s are made every day in Canada. We are not aware of them as they are not matters of public record. The FULL inquiry to Karla’s plea deal is The Galligan Report, it clearly states why her deal stood. The courts had to honor her deal, they had to save face for future deals with other criminals. More lenient sentences are always given to the lesser in order to convict the greater criminal.

        They had Bernardo for the rapes, without Karla’s assistance they would not have had enough evidence to even bring murder charges. By the time Crown viewed the tapes her deal was already made.

      • I have no idea what declarations about the righteousness of the Attorney General’s deals with Karla have to do with the subject of my series of blogs about the content of the phamphlet entitled “Finding Karla” but the other problem is you are clearly not in possession of the facts of the Attorney General’s relationship with Karla or the real reason the deals were made or even how they were made and by whom. I am not prone to approve comments for posting by people who are not in possession of the facts of the case. And there is only one source for all the facts about Karla’s case. Unless you are very familiar with that source and can demonstrate it your comments will not be published. As for the person who describes himself or herself by the moniker “NotDrinkingThatKoolAid” – I made an exception because after having finally read their comment about a month ago, I became so agitated that I made notes and intend to post them to directly to address the many mistakes of both omission and commission when I get around to it. Normally, I would not have approved it because when I first scanned it I did what it deserved and ignored it. Mine own worst enemy…

      • I meant to add to my initial comment the fact that the Galligan Report is a whitewash. I deal with this fact in the chapter entitled “I Hold No Brief for Karla Homolka” on pg. 273 in the Trade paperback edition of “Karla: A Pact with the Devil.” Unfortunately Justice Galligan was part of the problem, not the solution. Once the decision was made by Michael Code and Vince Bevan prior to any discussion with Karla or her lawyer there was no going back and no possibility that Justice would be done hence no possibility of a solution. The point is, don’t you see, it did not matter one iota what Justice Galligan “found.” Read the books. It’s all there.

    • I don’t think that anyone blames Homolka for her plea deal, but rather for her anhorrent actions. On the topic of privacy, I can only say that those who value it would be well advised to consider steering clear of the Internet, where any/all user-submitted content is harvested for data and archived for posterity.

  4. First I would like to say I am a huge fan of your books . I thoroughly enjoyed reading both of the books you wrote on this case and felt “Karla:A Pact With the Devil” was the perfect compliment to “Invisible Darkness.” After reading your comments I am confused by the statement that the police had Bernardo from the get-go, fifteen ways to Sunday.. I was under the impression that at the beginning they had nothing on Bernardo and needed Karla’s testimony to convict him this being why the deal was made? Not to get off the topic but I had to ask. I did buy “Finding Karla” online and upon my completion I felt as though I knew more about Karla’s life after prison from just online reading than Ms.Todd did with her investigative sleuthing. I couldn’t help thinking that the timing of this book (luka) was a attempt to make a name and possibly some money for herself.

    • Thank you for your kind words. With all due respect, I think you better re-read them more closely. As one reviewer said of “Karla: A Pact with the Devil” “It is not light reading, and it exacts attention and discomfort from its readers.” The Toronto police had Bernardo at least 6 of the 15 ways to Sunday I referred to. Even before Vince Bevan, an Inspector from the Niagara Regional Police Force cleared him as a suspect in the murders. And therein lies the fulcrum. Virtually the first thing Vince Bevan and the Green Ribbon Task Force found when they executed “their” search warrant on the Bernardo/Homolka residence was a videotape sufficiently damning to put Karla away for 3 lifetimes. I repeat, videotape evidence had nothing to do with the deals made with Karla. This fact was one of the core motivations for writing the book. And the unequivocal proof lies therein. One of the last things the prosecutor said in his charge to the jury at Bernardo’s trial was, and I paraphrase, pay no attention to anything Karla said while on the stand for 19 days. You do not need any of her testimony to convict. The police and the government never needed her. And they knew it from the get go. She was a convenient fiction and clearly continues to be.

      • “Virtually the first thing Vince Bevan and the Green Ribbon Task Force found when they executed “their” search warrant on the Bernardo/Homolka residence was a videotape sufficiently damning to put Karla away for 3 lifetimes.”

        Thank you(!!!) for pointing that out. That one “fulcrum” as you put it seems to be entirely disregarded by everyone whenever this topic arises. Take away everything else and this one fact stands in stark relief: that they found evidence – the only real evidence from that house they would have on any crime at all for months and months – that would by all rights have put someone away for a very long time, but that was completely disregarded and NEVER prosecuted to this day… why?

        As far as I can see, aside from the incompetence and power-grabs Mr. Williams (you) describes in his books, mainly because most people have bought into the all-too-convenient fiction that women just don’t “do” those sort of things:

        Despite all evidence to the contrary… sigh.

      • The answer to your question about why Bevan and the puppet master Assistant Deputy Minister Michael Code ignored the videotape evidence the GRTF found in the house is in “Karla: A Pact with the Devil”. It is not a simple answer and people tell me it’s not an “easy read”. Most things worth while are seldom easy.

  5. A terrific rant Mr. Williams.

    You have not lost your eye for detail – or your craft for exposing falsehoods, exaggerations and shoddy work.

    Perhaps a turn as Leader of the Opposition is in order.

    There are a lot of good bits in your epistle – but my favourite has to be debunking the notion that a trip (any trip) to Guadeloupe is remotely dangerous. I believe that, unless you order the puffer fish (or take a jump off Carbet Falls), your chances of encountering danger on the island are as slim as the facts in Ms. Todd’s work.

  6. I have not read the book yet. However, what made me mad about this was the fact that for years, other online sites have had message boards and kept up with Karla and her whereabouts. They kept people informed for different reasons. I did not always agree with how they handled this information. However, they did the leg work for years and should have had some credit given for it. It angered me that Ms. Todd came in out of nowhere and took credit for finding Karla. I never saw her put up a message board discussing Karla. I never heard of the lady until this book came out. I give credit to knowing Karla Homolka’s current whereabouts to Karla Homolka Information (KHI), Watching Karla Homolka (WKH) and Deal with the Devil (DWD) on the Yuku boards. Credit should go where it belongs. Makes me MAD when people swoop in out of nowhere and take credit for someone elses work.

    Thank you for your take on this. I know you have followed this case for many years. I do not think Karla is a danger to anyone. She has been out for seven years and the worst thing she has probably done is gotten a speeding ticket. I figured she would not be a danger once away from Bernardo.

    • Although Karla does appear to have kept her nose (mostly) clean since her release, I do not agree that Bernardo was the reason for all her wrondoings. From what I have observed through years of interest in this case is that above almost anything else, Karla is competitive and she is vengeful. And since zebras aren’t known to outgrow their stripes, I doubt that hers have changed much over the years, either.

      Heaven help anyone who challenges her (directly or indirectly), as we have all seen what this creature is capable of when she feels thretened.

  7. I was on the fence about reading this book for many of the reasons listed above, the article reviewing the book contained enough misstatements to represent the fiction of the book. I remember reading a part about how she decided to go track Karla and thought, “Wow, free trip to such a beautiful place, must have been tough!” Also thinking about how so much of what seemed to be included was just easy to find, public knowledge. I loved “Invisible Darkness” and “Karla: A Pact With The Devil.” I have always thought “Invisible Darkness” to be the most factual of the books I have read, or at least as close to the truth as what I personally believe happened. Thanks Stephen. Always respect your work.

  8. Karla Homolka deserves to be hounded for the rest of her life. And yes, people are concerned about her whereabouts. She brutally raped tortured & murdered 3 young girls. She is undoubtedly a pedophile who lured two young girls to their horrific deaths. She is a Myra Hindley – a weak minded sociopath who enjoyed watching others suffer. How do we know she’s not already abusing her own kids. I feel bad for her daughter when she reaches 14 or 15. Homolka is a remorseless psychopath who never paid for her crimes.

    • How can anyone dispute Karla Homolka aka Emily Bordelais is a danger to society?? What further proof do you need? There are 3 dead young girls who suffered horribly at her hands, and 19 victims of the horrific Scarborough rapes. This woman was never a “victim” – she was an accomplice & is still a danger to society, babies or no babies.

    • And by definition Karla Homolka IS a serial killer. A serial killer is labeled so when they have committed 2 or more murders. She raped tortured & murdered 3 girls under the age of 16. Yes, she is a predatory serial killer. Bernardo cannot be blamed for Karlas actions (or inactions as she never went to authorities or tried to escape when she had dozens of opportunities). Stephen Williams, I believe you have been duped by a manipulative psychopath.

      • One more point: Homolka goes by pseudonym Emily but perhaps she had her legal middle name “Leanne” printed on the mailbox in order to receive parcels. She has been spotted online frequently ordering yarn for her business BebeDouceur. I don’t think this detail discredits Paula Todd’s account of what happened in Guadeloupe.

  9. Karla Homolka uses her legal middle name “Leanne” when trying to do anything “official” like register her ESL company or baby apparel business. A simple google search under Teale Leanne Bordelais will lead anyone to her.

  10. Finally! Some voices of reason in this sordid story. I cannot understand those who claim that Paul Bernardo “only” raped women up to the point of meeting Karla. He was a well established serial rapists. I believe strongly he is a sexual sadist. With or without Karla, he would have progressed to serial murder. Had Karla not met Paul Bernardo, I doubt she ever would have tangled with the criminal justice system.

    I don’t understand the people who think that she is the “real monster”. I also don’t buy Bernardo’s claims that he never killed anyone. Rape is about power. And so is murder. My professional responsibility was to rub elbows with Bernardo types & I know there is no such thing as “just” rape.

    I also don’t understand the people who live their lives through these trials. They seem to think the world is black & white. Karla “wasn’t a battered woman” bc they think she is morally reprehensible. (As if only saints are slapped around by their sexual partners.) It is time to let this woman be. Legally, she has done her time and she has paid her debt. Those who stalk and harass her have no excuse for their behavior. Perhaps rather than chasing Karla Homolka around we might ask ourselves why we are still raising little girls to think “any man” is preferable to living alone.

  11. Interesting…….. everyone of you, who has commented about Karla NOT being a pedophile … and we have no right to intrude on her life, or “her recovery from the horrible past” I can guarantee you have not had a child kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered at the hands of this woman. Its people that keep turning a blind eye to the perpetrators in our world , that help keep our so called justice system a joke. Try telling your “I feel sorry for Karla” story to the parents of these precious children that are not sitting at their table anymore, the parents and familys who suffered not knowing where their children were, meanwhile they were in hell at the hands of Karla and Paul never to come home again. Those are the people that deserve our sympathies

    • Everyone has an opinion and is entitled. I’m quite sure that trying to quantify degrees of evil is futile. Everyone’s sympathy is with the families. There is no death penalty in Canada but if there were Karla would be a candidate … if she had been found guilty of first degree murder rather than two counts, manslaughter. In it’s wisdom, a long, long time ago, the Justice system (i.e. a couple of white men in suits behind closed doors) made the determination that her crime deserved a 12-year sentence. I may not agree with that adjudication and obviously you don’t but what to do? Has anything changed, has the process improved since “Invisible Darkness” was published in 1996. Not that I can determine. In fact, my research suggests it has only gotten worse. (Is “gotten” even a word? It always bothers me when I’m compeled to use it.Check it out: ) Capitalizing words tends to be indicative of some kind of neuroses. Allegorical expression is archaic and should only be practised by seasoned professionals, if at all. In my opinion.

  12. I do not understand the sympathy some people feel for this vile “woman.” She is clearly a narcissist, a sadist and if not a certifiable psychopath, she is clearly a sociopath (and a very manipulative one at that). What proof do I have to back up that statement? Leslie Mahaffy, Kristen French, Tammy Homolka, Jane Doe and the numerous Scarborough rapes she aided and abetted her husband with. It is my sincere hope that she is found every 2-5 years and her whereabouts reported on. I hope that her children are found and interviewed by reporters and that they learn of their mother’s horrid crimes. To call her a “victim” is an insult to battered women everywhere. This pariah deserves no peace. Ever. May she and her family be chased out of every country they reside in. As a civilized society, we are entitled to judge, scorn and punish those who prey on the most innocent members of society – children. If she could commit those atrocious crimes in the first place, she can certainly do it again. She has no boundaries, no conscience, no empathy for anyone other than herself. In the words of FBI profiler Greg McCrary regarding her shady plea deal:

    “Up to that point, much of the research in this area – including interviews with Karla – indicated that females were compliant victims, feeling they had to do as told or else get beaten themselves. However, when Karla wasn’t acting the part she had learned from therapists and books, she seemed more like a female psychopath who enjoyed the victimization of others. She was certainly caught on tape spontaneously telling Paul that she would help him to find and rape fifty virgins, and there was no indication that this remark was scripted. Even Paul had seemed surprised. It appeared to be her own unique inspiration for pleasing “the king.” That she could kill her sister and then continue to participate in more rapes and murders indicated a truly deviant personality.”

  13. Hello Mr. Williams,
    I’ve never purchased your books before, largely because I’ve been victimized by a ‘Karla’ type in my life and have no appetite or tolerance for reading graphic descriptions of that kind of violence – although I can appreciate why you included it in your book. If there had been a book available talking about the back story you describe here without the graphic descriptions of the crimes themselves, I would have purchased it.

    Recently I’ve decided to purchase your books and just try to do my best to skip the graphic descriptions of violence, with the hope that they are removed enough from the rest of the book to enable me to do that. However, I’m posting to ask you about your most recent edition.

    I’ve looked at the various online retailers, and have to say that their listings for your books are – at least to me – confusing: different searches bring up different results for your books (or at least they did when I alst searched), depending on whether one searches for “Stephen Williams”, “Invisible Darkness”, or “Karla Homolka”. It appears that, instead of creating a new entry for your latest edition, some of them (, have just modified the listing for the original edition (in a sloppy way, I might add). It’s not clear, at least to me, from some of their descriptions whether one is purchasing the original or latest edition, depending on the format chosen.

    In one search I made, your new edition didn’t come up on at all. Unless I’m mistaken, has muddled their entry together with the original edition, such that you’re never certain which you’re buying across their various formats: softcover, hardcover, kindle, used, “Mass Market Paperback” (whatever that is). And Chapters-Indigo appears to carry both the American and Canadian versions of your original 1997 version, and the paperback of your most recent edition – but no e-book.

    Could you help us out, and clarify what versions are available where and when: i.e. in the U.S. vs. in Canada, in paperback vs. e-book (kindle only?)? Also, is there any plan to carry your book in various stores in Canada or the U.S., or will it only be available through on-line order?


    • I certainly will. It’s been a chaotic summer/ fall with a number of changes. I will publish links on my website and Facebook page in the next few days to both the e- and physical online sales pages in various countries first and foremost the U.S., Canada and England.

  14. Oh, one more question: what is the difference between your books titled:
    “Invisible Darkness: The Strange Case Of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka”, and
    “Invisible Darkness: The Horrifying Case of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka”?

    Is one the American version and the other the Canadian? Or is one the 1997 version, and the other the 2014 publication?

    • “The Strange Case of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka” is the Bantam Books/ Random House American mass market paperback edition of “Invisible Darkness”. It remains in print and sells quite brisquely year-in and year-out. Bantam/Random House also have the American rights for the ebook edition which adheres to the text of the physical edition without the pictures (I believe). I have actually never seen a copy of the American ebook edition.

      The other sub-title “The Horrifying Case…..” was the Canadian mass market paperback edition. (I say was because the Canadian publisher who bought the rights from the original Canadian publisher, Little Brown (Canada) Ltd., recently went bankrupt [circa 2012] and this edition is now out of print. I have no idea/ or memory of why this happened. Just a quirk I suspect. The text of the two edition was originally exactly the same but the quality of the Canadian edition was much superior in every way. The quality of the paper (both cover and content) is vastly superior, the pictures in the Canadian edition were in full color whereas the American editions are b/w etc., the Canadian edition cover was in full cover whereas the American edition is in black and white and the cover designs are completely different. To my mind, the Canadian edition design is far superior to the American. Whereas the American edition has always sold between $USD8 – $USD9 the Canadian edition sold between $CDN15 – $CDN 16.

      I have now made a new, revised and expanded edition of “Invisible Darkness: The Horrifying Case…” available in a Trade paperback edition. (Trade paperback editions are best described as hardcover books with paperback covers. They are larger format than mmpk’s and generally have larger, more readable type, which is true of this new edition that is, in fact, available around the world and Canada and the United States. It has been published by Ingram so it should be available to any bookseller, online or bricks and mortar in the world, by specifically to any retailer who sells books in Canada and the United States, including Wal-Mart, Costco, Barnes and Noble, Indigo/Chapters etc. It is priced at $USD24.95 but I would imagine that various retailers will make their own price point decisions. I appreciate the opportunity to clear this up. (See my forthcoming response to your first query for more detail about availablity.)

      The Canadian edition has now been

    • If you get in touch through my personal email which you can easily find on my website I will see if I cannot facilitate and expediate your aquistion of the two books. I am sure I can make it easy for you. I apologize for the confusion. Sw

      Ps. If you don’t wish to do that just tell me which country you live it and I will provide the exact co-ordinates for both books, both in ebook format and physical. That why you can order them immediately if you wish. Very grateful for your having taken the time to write to me about this problem. Let me know one way or the other.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s