Elaine's response

Here is my opinion of Lewis' review.Dear Editor:First, I would like to thank Laura Lewis for her review of my book Out With Three. I would also like to clarify several points from that article. Yes, the book was self published. At present, it has not been picked up by a major press, unless being with Amazon is not a large enough market. Since the book went into press on February 14, 2008, it has sold over 1,200 copies. The fact that it was self published really didn’t have to be repeated twice in the review, but it was as if that cast dispersions on the book itself. The facts are what matters even if they had been printed on construction paper with crayon. Let’s stay with the importance of the book’s material, not who printed it.Second, it was kind of Lewis to point out that the book needed to be proofread and edited. Yes, any publication can make it to print needing the same treatment. I have seen mistakes in many books and newspapers where a better job could have been done. However, in this case, time and editing was not a luxury at my disposal. Although the review implied slinging hashed over clippings from newspapers and whatnot in a mishmash to ‘piece’ together a book, it took almost three years of research dealing with primary sources – not newspapers or hearsay – to build the infrastructure. The book had to come to light before any proceedings took place concerning the sheriff. By the time I was satisfied with my own efforts at proofreading and editing, I did not have time to allow a full editing by the publishing company. That would have held up publication until late or early April of this year. I did not want to be accused of publishing this book after the sheriff was already in trouble. I have had no one else complain that any editing errors have caused them trouble in comprehending the materials in the book.Third, while this book may be categorized more closely as ‘true crime,’ it does not fit neatly onto this shelf. There are approximately five (5) steps in writing a true crime book. The first is to pick an interesting crime. I believe I did that.The second is to investigate. That includes interviewing people involved. Iknew two things as certain. The District Attorney would not talk to aBuff – at least he has not so far. If he did talk, he would say the same thing he has said earlier. The others directly involved are either no longer here or would repeat the same they had said earlier. As late as this fall, Gore did an interview, taped (it can be seen on YouTube under Davina Buff Jones or on her website www.officerdavinabuffjones.com) where he does, in fact, say the same thing. She ‘chose another path’ (suicide). Why waste my time? When the Bald Head Island Police were approached, the officers at the office all ran out the back door while I talked to the secretary who was telling me that the chief was ‘out of town’. The other certainty was that as soon as the first one was approached, they would pick up the phone and alert powers that I did not want to know I was working on this book. After all, I would like to keep breathing and not found somewhere where my case would be ruled suicide. My goal was not a true crime book at any rate. The third step is to build a relationship with the law enforcement officials who are involved in the case. Good luck on that one. The same as above.The fourth step is to attend the trial and speak to everyone you can about the criminal, the victim and other characters. No trial. Yet.The last step is to write. I believe I did that. 1,200 sales worth in less than two months…Now, my purpose was not just to show that Davina did not kill herself. My purpose was to find out what happened. Period. A true crime story is not recommended for an unsolved story. I take issue with the Lewis comment that I used newspapers a great deal. Newspapers relied on what they were given from the police. The public in general never knew much about what really went on. The family itself never knew. It was kept secret. My job was to ferret the details out from among what was there, hidden away in what I found. It was and is my contention that the family had a right to know what happened to their daughter. I believe that any family has that same right when a family member has something traumatic happen to them. Furthermore, if it is in the public’s best interest, they have a right to know as well. You can categorize the book as true crime, true news, true whatever. It is TRUE. It is based on FACTS, not news articles. It is based on police work, expert testimony, SBI lab tests, not MY opinion or MY proofreading mistakes or MY editing errors or MY self publishing through Amazon. It is not MY story – it is DAVINA’s story – it is every Brunswick County citizen’s story who only wants to be safe in their own life - safe from thugs, safe from dishonest drug dealers, safe from dishonest powerful influential landowners, safe from dishonest policemen and governmental leaders. And that’s a run-on sentence. But it’s true. Period