Review: Good concept poorly executed
Rating: 2 out of 5
Date: 05 30, 2014
The plot was interesting with a great hook at the beginning (so two stars rather than one) but really blatant errors and inconsistencies made reading this truly frustrating. First, the author seemed to have no grasp of police procedures. Then there were the errors. The detective determined one of the missing woman's fellow actors ito be a suspect because he referred to her in the past tense. However, each of the six plus people interviewed before him also consistently referred to her in the past tense. Another example: They request the dental records of a murder victim's coworker in an attempt to identify a body. They had interviewed the coworker shortly before. She wasn't missing as far as they knew. Why didn't they just try calling her? Ironically, this same scenario happens again later in the book but this time they make the call first and ridicule the rookie officer who suggested the dental records. I could cite many more. I am sorry to say this is the technically poorest mystery I have read.