Kindle Unlimited, which is how I got it but not how was supposed to get it; 'won' a review copy through book review buzz site, and they sent download link, which was as a protected link having to be opened up in one of the adobe formats, which I have several of but which none would actually open {although it has always opened up others just like it, and recently, so not that}. Then it said could download through kindle mail, EXCEPT I use a pc version, which does NOT have a kindle address to send to, so then went and had it sent to my smartphone, which was too hard to read, then sent to my tablet, which easier to read but those have no audio funtion like my computer app does. Tried to struggle through reading it visually, but as I am legally blind it takes more than the average amount of time plus many stops to rest the eyes. I realize that most authors and probably most people in general are not aware of various limitations with various kindle products, so did not of course take off any stars for that, just a head's up for writers in general. THAT is why the review is so late, because at one time this was not listed for ku or would have just done it that way so could hear the audio on my laptop.
Now, on to the story and review. As a widow myself, trust me, the average person is not going to be perked up by a birthday or any other party after the death of a long term spouse, unless they didn't like the spouse. RFLP analysis was not used until the 1980's so within the supposed time frame BUT it was writing newspaper accounts for the 1930's at which time this was not even a thought in anyone's mind so the back and forth timeline is confusing. DNA analysis with RFLP required relatively large amounts of DNA and degraded samples could not be analysed with accuracy so no idea why this is being used to supposedly explain things considering the decades old case, and yes I watch a LOT of CSI type shows.
There is so much unneeded extraneous background, information, assorted thoughts some of which other than the person having them would not be discernible, and goes way beyond artistic writing license. Really, we 'needed' to go all the way back, decades, to the main person's birth? One also can not exude a palpable air of anything and yet keep it hidden, it's oxymoronic. What was the reason for going all the way back to the girl's birth then detailing births of siblings, year after year after year. There was no reason or point in detailing out the twins attempt at trickery, and there is no realistic way for 2 people to change sweaters in little more than a couple blinks of the eye when at least the second time the teacher had merely turned around to the board. Why would the children not already know English and they were already supposed to be in America, this story makes no sense, and is totally contradictory at so many points. Either that, or we are thrown in to a totally different story or totally different time. Also one can not at the same time 'hide' yet be able to see someone in the other room without closing the door, at least somewhat. Have NO idea what any of this has to do with the murder, totally confusing.
Colored contacts were not invented/available until the 1980's so not sure why or what would be changed in anyone's appearance by contact lens in the 1930's that would be part of a 'disguise', and if they wore glasses then simply take them off. When did the main character gets the evidence, and when did she hand it over? All the extra, unneeded, details in this story and that was not answered clearly enough? The book was almost 5000 pages, there should have been room for that at least.It's also not an 'assault' when someone is killed, that's homicide. Having not only served in the military myself but aware of dog tags in general through history, if the tags were used to secure someone to whatever floating item, then in every modern and not so modern day war, it gives the name of the soldier/wearer, and sometimes even more personal information. Once again showing the writer did no actual research for a supposedly 'historical' book. Then, all the sudden again, we have totally skipped the original birthday party that started it all and are now 10 years later at another one coming up?
The writer not only was a legal nurse consultant but had feedback from other medical people, and yet the main parts of this overly unnecessarily long book got the most basic of medical facts totally wrong? After all the technical issues had with just even getting this book, this is what it was about, a mishmash of everything but nothing? Yes, 1 star, just because can't give it any lower.