I'm a bit baffled by this book. Not the plot - that was straight forward enough - but the choices the author made. She somehow manages to ruin any tension in her own book...and I have no idea why. And then she repeats information as if it's new to the characters *multiple times*. For example. We, as readers, find out that Charles' death is a murder (not an accident) FOUR SEPARATE TIMES. First, there's the scene where the murder happens, then the scene where the mortician looks at the body and is like "yup, that's a murder" and yet doesn't tell anyone. And then there's the scene where the heroine visits the mortician and asks him about it. All these three happen in the first 15% of the book, and the first 2 are pointless. But then we get the same revelation AGAIN at about 75% into the book. Like, they know he was killed, but then they are *shocked*, SHOCKED I tell you, when Conkling says "I think I saw someone coming up behind him that night" and everyone is like "MURDER??? That's IMPOSSIBLE???" Like...what the fuck, people. You've known this all along.
Another example is over the father's death. The reader finds out the death is murder, who the killer is, and how it was done, very early on, through an omniscient POV. This sucks any tension out of the investigation. AND makes the heroine look stupid, when she YET AGAIN, has to be told like three separate times that her father was murdered and it's treated as a revelation each time. Was she just...not listening for half the book? It was frustrating as a reader, because there was NO REASON we had to know that he was murdered, who did it, and how that early in the book. It would have been far more interesting to watch it unfold as the heroine learned the depth of her stepmother's betrayal. But because the reader knows everything upfront, there's really no reason to keep reading. And I don't get why that choice was made.
The final issue I had with the book is that it completely lacked emotion. Nobody reacted to anything. Any emotion (which wasn't a lot, considering all the death that happened) was all told and not shown. This is particularly egregious between the heroine and her love interest. Like, I wouldn't think that she thought about him in any particular way, and then about halfway through she's hinting she's in love with him. Like, WHAT??? That is not a thing. I don't believe it for a second. At best they were friendly colleagues.
Oh wait, one more thing. The heroine is described as having a brilliant mind/upbringing, particularly for a woman. But that's really not shown on the page. Like, she doesn't really do a lot in this investigation, except tag along places and lie to her stepmother (without any consequences, despite the threats). I didn't buy it.
Honestly, the more I think about this book, the more frustrated and baffled I am by it. It had a lot of potential! I think if it had been written solely from the heroine's POV, so the reader got the revelations as she did (and not repeated 20 times) it would have actually been a compelling, twisty narrative. Not knowing what the stepmother's plans are, whether people were murdered, what might happen next, would have been far more entertaining. Instead, we got an author that seemed determined to sabotage her own book for absolutely no reason and I just...don't get it.
Anyway. The only reason this is a two-star read is because I did finish it and I didn't entirely hate it. I made it to the end, at least, and wouldn't have called it hate-reading. But I just wanted it to be a lot better than it was, I guess.