I received the following suspicious email:
From: Shauna Summers <ssummers.penguinrandomhousse@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, October 12, 2026 at 05:47
To: Kaye, David
Subject: Your work, The Double Helix and the Law of Evidence
Dear Professor Kaye,
The Double Helix and the Law of Evidence caught my attention because it explores the complex relationship between DNA science, statistical reasoning, and the legal standards used to evaluate evidence in American courts.
I’m Shauna Summers, an Executive Editor at Penguin Random House Worlds, where I engage with authors whose work brings important scientific, legal, and intellectual questions to a wider readership.
I was particularly interested in your examination of how genetic evidence became integrated into the American legal system and how disagreements among scientists, lawyers, and expert witnesses shaped its acceptance. Your exploration of probability, the interpretation of DNA evidence, and the challenges of presenting scientific findings to judges and juries offers a valuable perspective on the intersection of scientific research and legal practice.
I understand that The Double Helix and the Law of Evidence has already been published, and I’d be interested to learn more about your experience bringing this work to readers and how you have approached its publication so far.
Are you currently represented by a literary agent, or are you exploring representation opportunities independently?
I’d also love to hear whether you have a forthcoming project in development, particularly another work exploring forensic science, statistical reasoning, or the relationship between scientific evidence and the law.
If you’re open to it, I’d be glad to continue the conversation and learn more about your work.
Warm regards,
Shauna Summers
Executive Editor
Penguin Random House Worlds
What makes it suspicious? First, like many an email from a flaky academic journal, it starts with an alleged editor's claim to have read an old work as if it were hotb off the press. Second, the editor's description of her role is unnecessary and stilted ("I engage with authors . . . "). A published author knows what an editor does, and has to wonder why an executive editor at a very successful publishing house would be trawling for new material in brackish waters. Third, the sentences telling an author what his book does sound like they were lifted from the dust jacket. Fourth, why would an executive editor of a commerical press be interested in my "experience bringing this work to readers" and how I "have approached its publication so far" when it that publication occurred 16 years ago at an academic press? The whole email smacks of the composition by a chatbox.
But the real giveaway is the email address ssummers.penguinrandomhousse@gmail.com, Penguin Random House cautions that "PRH employees transact business directly from their official @penguinrandomhouse.com or @prh.com addresses only. Do not trust individuals claiming to be from PRH but not using an official email domain."
