corrections

Corrections VIII – posted February 27th

Alison Wrbik emailed to point out two typos:

On page 276, I wrote: “The cops demanded to know:  Where do you buy your marijuana? What suppliers to you know?” The ‘to’ in the last sentence should of course be ‘do.’

On page 293, where it says “I looked him just now,” it should say “I looked at him just now”.

 

And Ron Dodd emailed to point out some more typos.

On page 51, where it says “he said was broke” – it should say “he said he was broke.”

On page 70, where it says “And yet sometimes Chino went looking for Deborah, in the park, on the benches, or on the corner where should could be looking for business, because Chino wanted her.” It should say: “And yet sometimes Chino went looking for Deborah, in the park, on the benches, or on the corner where she would be looking for business, because Chino wanted her.”

On page 76, where it says “sent to back to prison,” the first ‘to’ should be cut.

On page 191, where it says “if I can just stay enough long enough”, the first ‘enough’ is a mistake.

On page 296, when it says “When I learned from Chino and Bud is…” it should say “What I learned from Chino and Bud is…”

 

Also, there is an error in Chapter Six that was picked up in my fact-checking conversations with Leigh Maddox and was supposed to be fixed but – due to an editing mistake – appeared incorrectly in the final edition. On page 86, it refers to Leigh’s dad as having been in the US Army. He was in fact in the US Navy.

 

In addition, Stuart Rodger spotted that I forgot to post one of the audio clips from the book. It is of Chino Hardin saying an act “actually made us look weaker” – I have found that audio clip and it will be posted soon.

 

Seth Mnookin, writing in the New York Times, suggested an attribution in the book should have been clearer and taken out of the footnotes and inserted into the main text. On reflection, I have concluded he is right. On page 213 I write: “Research published in the Proceedings of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh compared Widnes, which had a heroin clinic, to the very similar Liverpool borough of Bootle, which didn’t.” This sentence should be clearer, and in future will read: “Research published by John in the Proceedings of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh compared Widnes, which had a heroin clinic, to the very similar Liverpool borough of Bootle, which didn’t.”

Thanks to Alison, Ron, Stuart and Seth.

If you are reading the book and you spot any other errors please do email me – chasingthescream [at] gmail.com – because it is important to me to make sure everything about the book is entirely accurate.

Comments are closed.