When the Moon Turns to Blood

The book dives deep into the individuals involved, but I'm curious what led the author to highlight their backgrounds and motivations over just the events. Did this approach come from a desire to humanize the story or uncover unseen influences?

The case involves a lot of complex details and shifting perspectives, which made it hard to follow some parts. Was this intentional to mirror the chaos or just a challenge in organizing the story?

The narrative pulls from various court documents, interviews, and media reports. I wonder what process was used to verify facts and prioritize certain perspectives over others.