2-3-4 Challenge Book Discussions #2 discussion

Max is contacted by her ex-boyfriend from college, John Caldwell, to help prove his wife’s innocence. She’s standing trial for killing their son, Peter, but John has uncovered three other unsolved murders that look similar to his abduction and murder. Max was very clear that she was seeking the truth, not whether Blair was innocent or guilty. Did you understand the distinction at that time?

I did. It was the first clue for me to keep an eye on Blair. I wasn't sure if it was jealousy or something more sinister.

I did too, but I was more fixed on the fact that there were now four boys murdered with similar circumstances and that would make for the greater ability to pinpoint the murderer. I gave a passing thought to Blair being guilty because Max wasn't gung ho to prove she wasn't.

I must admit I didn’t get the importance of that distinction right away. My fleeting thought was, “Okay, what’s the big deal?”

It wasn’t until later that I was forced to get clarity.

I can see that Jonetta, because we all thought of course she's innocent. Then when it became clear she may not be, we have to decide which is more important: justice or probing Blair innocent. They weren't the same thing at that point.

Exactly, Anita!

Max was very clear that she wanted to find the truth, even if the truth is that Blair killed her son. That made me wonder if Blair really did kill Peter.

For some reason, I did see the distinction from the first but wondered whether it was a red herring.

I did and I thought it was smart of her to make that distinction.