<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<GoodreadsResponse>
	<Request>
		<authentication>false</authentication>
		    <method><![CDATA[]]></method>
	</Request>
	<review id="36021753">
    <user id="694124">
    <name><![CDATA[Julie]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[The United States]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/694124-julie]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>3</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Thu Oct 23 00:00:00 -0700 2008</read_at>
  <date_added>Thu Oct 23 08:49:39 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Thu Oct 23 09:02:04 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[It's okay.  Faye K is another one of my standard authors and this one, her newest Peter Decker mystery, just showed up on the &quot;new-books-you-can-only-check-out-for-seven-days&quot; table at my library.  So I checked it out.<br/><br/>It's fine, very much like her others.  No interesting new characters, and none of her standard cast of characters changes or evolves much.  She brings in Chris Donetti again, peripherally, which is a shame because he's my favorite villain.  <br/><br/>The mystery was not terribly gripping either.  I didn't figure it out ahead of time...mostly because I didn't care.  And Kellerman left some ambiguity in the end.  In real life, you'd be pleased to have so many answers.  But in a mystery novel, where you the Reader expect some concreteness, it was odd.  I mean, lots of time mystery novel characters don't get resolution but the Reader should.  In my imagination I think Faye K got bored there, towards the end, and just kind of pushed herself away from the computer and wandered into the kitchen for a snack.  (Or maybe that's just me.)  <br/><br/>Still, if you are a fan of these Decker mysteries, this one is just fine.  Maybe a bit ordinary, but there's nothing wrong with it.<br/><br/>Now, back to the library with it.<br/>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/36021753]]></url>
</review>

</GoodreadsResponse>