Gone Forever: A True Story of Marriage, Betrayal, and Murder

Few writers can really express the evil that some murderers seem to embody, as well as Diane Fanning. Like many other reviewers, I questioned why this bright intelligent and loving woman would stay with this good-for-nothing man for so long, and allow him to have primary care of their children. Obviously, this was a mistake that cost her her life. But, looking at the whole picture described in the book one has to consider many different factors. The killer did love his children, and at first since she had to work, and he wouldn't, it seemed practical for him to provide child care. Once this had gone on for a while, she realized that he might be able to get custody of the children in a divorce. There were also factors such as the religious atmosphere she was raised in, and the fears of a critical response from her mother if she divorced her husband. I don't think she was a faultless person--she should have paid more attention to what was going on in her home, and done something when he started playing with the kids' medication--but what? He was also a parent and the primary caregiver. What a no-win situation. Something was seriously wrong with this man and perhaps early on she could have spotted it, and urged him to get help. But, as anyone who as worked with the mentally ill, or has had a friend or family member with a mental illness, if a person refuses help, they must be shown to be a danger to himself or others, to have treatment forced on them, and then even then, it is often inadequate and ineffective! Sad story, but well told.

It's perhaps not surprising that the author could get little information about the murdering husband and the marriage from the standpoint of his own family and friends. But the victim's family and friends, if they had ever had a negative word to say about her, weren't about to say it to an author after her death. Therefore, the first half of the book, with information about the victim and the marriage supplied almost entirely by adoring girl friends and female relatives, almost seems to have been commissioned as a memorial to an idol. Conspicuous in their absence were any opinions of her fulfillment of her job responsibilities, which I had wondered about because it's still difficult for a woman to hold down a full-time job, with overtime at periods of each month, conduct such an extremely active social life, deal with a husband who turned out to be a loser from almost the first day, and also devote much time and attention to three small children.Unlike older generations of women, she couldn't have been that unaware of her husband's financial failures since she was the one preparing their annual joint income tax returns. She also had the means to engage private detectives if she hadn't been so surprisingly passive, as well as had plenty of girl friends to baby sit while she conducted her own investigations.The victim came of age during a marvelous time for educated women. The civil rights laws and regulations of the early 1960s, along with their increasing enforcement, not only provided women with opportunities their mothers couldn't have dreamed of, but they even made women especially desired by large corporations as token minorities until the racial minorities had had enough time to gear up for the opportunities opening up to them as well. It was also a marvelous time for CPAs, with the need for audit staff by the national and international auditing firms skyrocketing, and the CPA profession accordingly responding by providing them as fast as they could.The victim was no shrinking violet, but an assertive woman and an executive fully capable of supporting herself and her children without being burdened with the kind of husband described in the book. Nearly all of the legal, social and religious restrictions that had made it so difficult for a woman to get out of a bad marriage in the past had been overturned, even in Texas, by the beginning date of this sad story. One of the reasons cited for her hesitancy - the issue that she would have to continue to support her house-husband if she divorced him - was somewhat laughable. According to the book, she was already supporting him. And while the Texas family laws were updated in the 1970s to free women from being the legal property of their husbands, such laws never had, and still didn't, provide mandatory alimony to a spouse who had no other means of support, beyond temporary alimony during the divorce proceedings. If the husband was this bad, was there any realistic risk that he could gain custody? The male-controlled legal system was also being updated, with female attorneys, social workers, etc., having increasing ability to work change, and nonprofit organizations were in place to assist divorcing mothers with issues regarding child custody and domestic violence.The book constitutes a dry catalog of conversations and actions up to a point, but then embellishes them at times with the innermost thoughts of some of the characters, similar to what a novel would provide. It needed an editor.I have no doubt that the husband murdered his wife, but little was said about his motivations or the possibility of insanity. And the reason why the victim had endangered herself and her children by hanging on so long remains a mystery to me.

This was a very sad and yet painful read. How does Sue keep a guy like that around? Richard could not keep a job, let alone want one, when he is given the time and space just to shop and spend money. Seeing he was home and not working he could not take the time to clean, cook, watch the kids instead he took the time to get further into debt, and to figure out just how to kill the only person willing to keep him around. It's a pathetic way to live, in a way nether had the backbone to say goodbye through a lawyer, no let's have a bonfire instead. Richard never wanted those boys, there was nothing telling me that he loved any of them. Thank goodness he has lost his parental rights, the children will be so much better off. The only one the children should miss was Sue, she did love those kids. Such a sad story.

I remember this case very well. This book told details of the story that I had always wondered about, since no trial was held. While it's easy to look back, with all of the information in this book,--the accounts of neighbors,friends, family and acquaintances, and wonder why Sue McFarland stayed in this relationship as long as she did, hind sight is 20/20. I read this book in 2 days, but the events happened over several years. I'm sure there were some good times in between that caused her to stay longer. As for the names of the boys being changed in the book, and the photo of the grave stone showing the real names also shown, I wondered why that was done as well. (as another reviewer did) I didn't know the publisher had the final say. You would think publisher wouldn't have done that, after the author had gone to the trouble of concealing their real names.

Great writer.. great book. Thank you!