2-3-4 Challenge Book Discussions #1 discussion

What did you think of the resolution of this case where there were three murderers? Were any of them on your suspect list? Did you pair the right victims with their killers? Was anyone a surprise?

I never figured any of it out. I was too busy just trying to keep up with the politics to expend any brain power on solving the murders, lol.

The best I could do was hone in on possible perpetrators. Madame Champagne never left my list. I didn't know her motives but I knew she was involved. Hyde Foley was another one but not for the reasons I initially thought, nor did I pair him with the right victims.

I never really suspected Chernishav. I only realized it when Hyde admitted to going to see Alexander at midnight, the same time Sebastian figured it out.

This is one of the few mysteries where I decided to just give in, give up and enjoy the story. It was about the 60% mark where I realized I'd never guess the killer(s). It worked out well for me, too.

I gave up trying to work it out too. I just sat back and enjoyed the story.

It was just too convoluted to try and figure it all out and this led to me being surprised by some of the revelations. That said, I was always suspicious of Madame Champagne. There was just something off about her.

Yeah, I couldn't define what that something was but it was there.

Foley was the only one I fingered as a killer. I didn't get any victims paired with any killers. I thought the Turkish guy was a bad guy.

I did not realize that diplomatic immunity was in place in Britain that far back. More historical information that would be interesting to track.

According to Wikipedia, "The British Parliament first guaranteed diplomatic immunity to foreign ambassadors in 1709" and "Modern diplomatic immunity evolved parallel to the development of modern diplomacy. In the 17th century, European diplomats realized that protection from prosecution was essential to doing their jobs and a set of rules evolved guaranteeing the rights of diplomats. These were still confined to Western Europe and were closely tied to the prerogatives of nobility."

Apparently though, diplomats visiting areas outside of western Europe were not so protected.

Thanks for the research, Veronica!

Charlene prompted me. I hadn't even thought about it until she mentioned it. The practice of diplomatic immunity is such a given in my mind that I hadn't given any thought to the fact that it was not always in place.

Very interesting.
While I understand the need for diplomatic immunity, I also think that it is abused at times.

I agree, Lauren. All I have to remember is the past year or so when someone claimed diplomatic immunity in NYC when a hotel maid accused him of improper advances, or acts. I think the outcome was muddied (was she truthful?), but that is hardly a diplomat pursing his/her career objectives while posted to foreign soil.

Charlene wrote: "All I have to remember is the past year or so when someone claimed diplomatic immunity in NYC when a hotel maid accused him of improper advances, or acts. "

It was Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the IMF. His diplomatic immunity did not apply and he was charged with sexual abuse. Charges were dropped though because there were too many discrepancies and falsehoods in the maid's accounts.

Right, Lauren!

I thought Mrs. Foley and her sister might have killed Yasmina, Sabrina might have killed Ross, and Peter may have killed the others. Obviously I was wrong. What I do find funny and wonder if it is going to be an occurrence in every book, is when Hero asks Jarvis if he is the killer.

Oh, I think she's gonna have to pose that question often!