As I have said in reviews of other serial killer novels, I am not a fan of them. After several, I begin to wonder if (a) the writer just wants to slather us in gore, or (b) there’s a clause in his or her contract that requires at least one serial killer novel. Since according to a blurb inside the back cover saying this is James Elliott’s first novel, I’ll assume it’s (a).
There is also a ‘sameness’ about serial killer novels. The killer is always so skilled, cruel, and lucky he (almost always a man) can abduct three or more victims (almost always women) without anyone seeing him, torture them in depraved ways, and put their mutilated bodies on grotesque display in some public place, again without anyone seeing him do it. It’s this last part I always have the hardest time believing. To arrange the body displays (as the killer did here) takes time, and time is the killer’s enemy. The longer he dithers around getting the bodies just the way he wants them, the greater the odds someone will spot him. But in serial killer novels, no one ever does.
The only new twist here is the killer is a Russian KGB defector the CIA set up with a new identity in the U.S., aware he was a psychopath but ignoring the danger he represents until it blows up in their faces. They then free the hero, who took the fall for one of their botched operations and went to prison, and send him to find the killer so they can again cover their asses by tracking him down and disposing of him and any proof he ever existed while the FBI and several law enforcement agencies scramble to capture a guy who has tortured and mutilated a half dozen women by the novel’s end.
This book suffers from incidents of TMI. Several times Elliott takes us out of the flow of the story to dump a pile of information on the reader. Do we really need to know the number of women murdered in various cities across the U.S. in the 20 years before this novel was first published? Or how many serial killers were active at the time it was published? Or did Elliott throw that information in just to shock and scare the reader?
And does the reader really need a six and a half page scene of a character musing on the antagonist?
Perhaps I’ve read too many books like Cold Cold Heart and have become jaded or have raised my expectations to a higher level, but this book at best was so-so. It breaks no new ground. Truthfully, Mr. Elliott, I suggest you go back to whatever career your plied before writing this and concentrate on it.
I can't rate it one star because the main plot was as interesting as these stories get and I did care about the hero (I always root for someone shafted by the government, especially by those in it who are more concerned with their own careers than anything else), but I can't rate it 2 stars because as I said above, it broke no new ground.
Oh, for the ability to add half stars.