There are a few things wrong with this book, both professionally and aesthetically. Spoilers will be present.
1. There is a huge plot hole at the very beginning, which ends up being convenient to the story for without it the author wouldn’t have one. I kept reading, hoping she’d answer the question with a ground-breaking twist, maybe the female main character’s dead father had some previously hidden ties to a mafia group. Nope. Instead the author brings a trowel to an excavator party. This is the mafia! They don’t leave witnesses! Here’s the scene: A lone, young woman, late at night, getting gas at a vacant station. Suddenly, a black SUV pulls up, and a man in an expensive suit steps out, along with three other men. They see her but say nothing. She gets back in her car to leave, but before she can, another three SUVs arrive, men get out, and guns blaze. She dials 911 as she hears tires screeching away and notices that one man of the four is still alive but badly wounded. What? You can’t expect me to believe that 1) the other group didn’t make sure to finish off the first guy (we find out he’s the head of the Russian mafia in New York). He was still standing - literally - when they left! 2) That they didn’t check the car that contained a potential witness. Normally, mafia members wouldn’t just assume that flying bullets got her. They would make sure. 3) When she takes the wounded man to the hospital, and is followed, they still don’t end her. Seriously? This is a whole mess because in the climax, the author doesn’t even try to explain the first two problems; she ignores them completely and skips to the third, where the underboss of the enemy mafia group comes in. He’s the one who followed her to the hospital, not one of his underlings, and, as he explains later, he decided not to kill her there because she was too pretty and he thought he could kidnap and sell her later. Excuse me? Disgust aside. He lets her go because she’s hot? Never mind that in the meantime, she has opportunities to tell what she witnessed. He even acknowledges that his men didn’t understand this, but it was these same men who didn’t finish her in the first place at the gas station. What on earth? Which bring me to the next gripe.
2. What is with the current trend of villains monologuing? This wouldn’t happen in real life with a smart (and we’re told many times he is) crook. We’re also shown as readers, that he is clever because he remains a few steps ahead of his rivals, until he doesn’t, for the sake of the book… A good and truly intelligent and diabolical villain would see no need to explain himself; furthermore, he would get immense pleasure out of withholding answers from his victims. The problem, as I’ve stated, is that enormous plot hole at the beginning of the book. The author needed some way to explain it, and even here fails miserably.
2. Don’t tout things as clean romance when they’re not. Sure, there is no explicit sex, but there is a lot of lusting going on, and certainly actions that should happen only between married couples (even if those actions are not outright sex).
3. Can’t stand insta love, or in this case, lust. Again, this book is not nearly as graphic as even others claiming to be ‘clean romance’, but it was still hard for me to believe these characters actually loved each other, rather than just ‘had the hots’.
4. The writing was choppy. Sometimes I couldn’t tell where characters were or what they were doing in a given scene. There were several portions I had to reread in order to get a clearer picture. This happened with dialogue, too.
5. The use of Stockholm syndrome, along with everything else.