An elite law firm in NYC has 12 full partners, nicknamed the Apostles, and various members wheel and deal with big business clients as an opening comes available.
What I Liked
The story has a very strong “Wall Street” feel to it, but the back and forth between two companies with their punches and counter-punches are fast-paced and real. Most stories in the genre have one or two “business” tricks, but this is much more complicated and relies less on a single tool to advance the plot. The story mixes experienced Apostles, with participating associates gunning for a promotion, and even associates and junior partners slogging in the trenches.
What I Didn’t Like
The romance side of the story detracts from the business manoeuvres, as does the one-dimensional side of one of the business clients and their opposing counsel. In addition, there is some seriously flawed treatment of a sexual assault that shouldn’t be anywhere in the story, it’s completely superfluous to the outcome.
A surgeon wakes up in the hospital, an apparent victim of a home invasion that left him shot in the head, his wife dead, and his infant daughter missing.
What I Liked
There were a fair number of possible red herrings running around in the story, and everybody gets suspected of something. His lawyer friend, his dead wife, his sister, an ex-girlfriend, a scummy adoption lawyer, even the police investigating the crime…all of them are a little bit off.
What I Didn’t Like
There are a couple of scenes that are completely over the top, and the ending is ridiculous. All of the work to find his daughter, with lives at risk all the way along and him accused of murder, and someone he knows knew the truth all along. But he’s semi-forgiving. Ridiculous.
The Bottom Line
Over-the-top plotting in places, ridiculous relationships, and absurd ending.
Jack Reacher is still in the military and gets transferred out of Panama just before New Year’s Eve, 1989. The Berlin Wall is falling, Panama is heating up with Noriega, and Reacher is watching grass grow at his new post, until a General drops dead at a seedy motel.
What I Liked
The story gives more of Reacher’s back story, and it is interesting to see the “man alone” working within a command structure with others. And it is an interesting premise — what do you do in the military when the future looks like you’re about to become obsolete? The supporting characters were good, and it was nice to see Reacher with his brother and mother. At the end, there is a twist about an error Reacher makes early on that comes back to bite him, and it is a great element to keep. The aftermath is kind of abrupt, with who went where and what happened next, but hard to avoid in a “flashback” style story.
What I Didn’t Like
The premise for the story is a little far-fetched, but when they get to the final reveal, the real specific motive is ridiculous as the people involved would never have done what they did, at least not on paper, and not openly. Reacher stumbles around in the dark long past where certain lines of enquiry should have been obvious, particularly for the identity of a specific witness. And the killer.
Nina Reilly gets a call from her old mentor to sit second-chair on a murder case that started with a grave robbery.
What I Liked
The story that the client tells is surprisingly plausible…he was hired to rob a grave, which he did. Except when he’s caught, the cops go back and check the grave he robbed and find out that there’s now a fresh body in it so he’s charged with murder. It’s a simple twist but there is little doubt through the case that he’s not guilty and that there is “something else” going on. And just to complicate things, her mentor is basically dumping the case on her, has done almost no prep, is showing early signs of dementia, and the PI he hired did almost no work either. Nina has her hands full just as Paul proposes.
What I Didn’t Like
There are two threads running through the story that are less than optimal. First, the premise of the mystery is that the dead body that is stolen is tied to a society of Russian conspiracy theorists who suspect he was tied to the Romanoffs (hey, he’s Russian, he must be, right?). This is about the fourth book I’ve read in the last two years that threw in a Romanoff angle, and it’s not handled that well, although most don’t anyway. Second, the marriage proposal from Paul leads to a bunch of emotional drama and angst, and detracts heavily from the story. It reads more like a bad romance novel than a mystery.
The Bottom Line
Good story with the mentor, but the other stuff detracts.
Misty Patterson has problems: an abusive domineering husband and amnesia from her childhood. And now she has a new problem: her husband gets abusive again and she conks him with an Eskimo statue, hard enough seemingly to hurt but not to kill. Then she blacks out. He’s found dead a few days later after having been hit a second time with the same statue and dumped in the lake. And Misty doesn’t know what happened. Enter her lawyer, Nina Reilly, who is newly separated from her husband, newly separated from her neat legal firm, and new to the Lake Tahoe area. And her idea of a perfect introduction to the area is NOT a high-stakes murder case where everyone thinks Misty did it. Maybe even Misty herself.
What I Liked
The Lake Tahoe community comes alive as do some of the characters — Nina, herself; Misty; and Nina’s assistant. Lots of interesting facts about the area and the impact of the lake on a dead body. Well-written, all the characters are real, and adequately developed for the story. In fact, it’s an impressive array: Nina’s ex-husband on the peripheries along with her brother, sister-in-law, and Nina’s son; Paul, her investigator who’s warm for her form; a string of Misty’s lovers and their very jealous wives and girlfriends; Misty’s parents; and a couple of doctors who are trying to help Misty remember her past. A few loose threads are left for the next story in the “series”, if it does indeed become a series. And, on the legal side, the solution is handled in an interesting courtroom finale that is not like simple Perry Mason reruns. A good beginning for “Perry O’Shaughnessy”, which is a pseudonym for two sisters: Pamela (a lawyer) and Mary O’Shaughnessy (a writer).
What I Didn’t Like
The point-of-view switches from Misty to Nina to Paul in various chapters, and the switch does not really develop Misty’s or Paul’s character enough to justify the switch. Unfortunately, I figured out the three key elements of the “mystery” before the end of the story. Didn’t expect the ending, at least not exactly, but I did expect the “baddie”. There are a couple of places where it is a little heavy on the “legal” side, interpreting case law, which is a likely result of one of the two authors being a lawyer.
