Following the discovery of the first three bodies in this case, the deaths come thick and fast. It's not as tight as the first mystery in this series and the author does a real no-no in the introduction of one of her villaims but it is fair to say that she definitely gave hints that there was another one skulking around.

The introduction of Diane Fallon as also a knot expert allowed some different forensic techniques to be discussed, add to that the mummy inherited by the museum and the contents of the Victorian pickle jar that came with it, and there's lots here to keep the biggest forensic mystery junkie interested.

While you don't have to have read the first book in the series I would definitely suggest it. Connor has a habit of continuing small threads from book to book. Besides the first book is also a good read.

Someone should buy the rights to this book and plan to turn it into a movie. Diane Fallon, forensic anthropologist, gets out of her car at a crime scene and presents her credentials to a patrolman, who says (nodding toward the two men who reported the crime) "They say it's not normal." Diane muses "Not normal. The kind of death they called her out for usually wasn't." If you like CSI, complete with the forensic analysis, study of bugs, and yes, evidence in the form of knots, you'll be fascinated. There's even a subplot with a mummy. If you're looking for a nice, cozy, "everyone-snowed-in-at-the-manor-house" story, this is probably not for you. I've become a big fan of this series and will eagerly look forward to more works from this writer.

For such great reviews I was pretty let down. Like another reviewer, I found too much info about stuff that has nothing to do with the crime or story. And ALOT and WAY too much info about knots. If you buy it you'll know what I mean. Started out very Promising....got half way thru and it fell apart. I can assure Patricia Cornwell she has NOTHING to worry about!!

The explanations which bring to light the forensic process are excellent in this book, but the mystery surrounding them relies on hyperbole of several forms. First, the lead character is a superwoman who seems determined to beat us over the head with feminist and liberal attitudes of the author in such a ham-handed way that even if you agree with her you wish she'd stop being so obviously manipulative. It's like a terrible kindergarten teacher. I don't like propaganda of any form in my literature, and while it's present in most of the genre in varying degrees, this book was truly horrible in this regard. While I like Ms. Fallon, the lead character, she is a collection of traits with no unifying concept to her; I end up feeling like I've interviewed an actor and seen only what they were trained to show me. Finally, the mystery is slightly weak. The responsible parties are not introduced through a chain of clues, but are mentioned incidentally, and hidden, then brought out suddenly. This requires that their personalities be as outrageously, one-dimensionally "bad" as Fallon's is "good." Clearly the author has talent in the forensics area, as I was fascinated by these details, but the rest of the book is frothily vapid attempts at mind control. I would not recommend this book to anyone I like.

I (finally) finished this book. I struggled through to the end, each page an investment of time I didn't want to go totally to waste.

I'm disappointed. Plain and simple, it could have been better.

So what did I like and what did I not like? Let's start with the positive:

First, the murders which kick off the story are interesting, and the investigation that follows was well-described.

Second, like Dick Francis, Connor includes lots of information about subjects not directly related to the crimes being committed.

Sadly, that second item leads into the list of things I did not like:

Where Francis wove other subjects into his mysteries, Connor grafts her digressions onto the story in a ham-handed fashion. In addition, she goes on at great length, almost like a textbook, as if she wants to impress the reader with her research. Not very artful.

Second, the writing is clumsy and needs editing. Chapters end in the middle of conversations; people do NOT talk the way she writes dialog; and she repeats conversations between the main character and others at the expense of pages of worthless rambling.

Third, the murders start to pile up beyond all reason. Just not realistic, sorry.

Fourth, there is a holdover subplot from the first novel in the series, about why-people-hate-Diane, which just gets stale. Enough!

Finally, the villain is introduced right at the end, out of the blue. Not fair! Nuff said.

I gave it three stars because it kept me wanting to know what happened, but this writer needs an editor who can chop a 380+ page book into the 220 pages it deserved.