Ridley Pearson has a reputation as a thinking reader's author for good reason. He does an incredible amount of research for his books, making technical detail key to his plots. Even as technology changes, his writing is strong enough that his books hold up well over time and rarely feel anachronistic. Chain of Evidence, for example, although about 20 years old, makes it easy for the reader to feel like it takes place today. The problem at the heart of the plot still exists and the technology that makes the climactic scene work still rings true. For readers new to Pearson's work, this is not the book with which to start. It's a solid effort and quite readable, but it does not showcase Pearson's true abilities. Despite a complex and likeable protagonist and a hot-button social topic, it's hard to invest emotionally in the story. It's a tribute to Pearson's skill that I found myself leaning towards sympathy for the apparent bad guy even before I had a justifiable reason to do so, but even as I knew all the reasons I should feel for Dart, the protagonist, I was never able to overcome a sense of detachment from him. Looking back, I can identify two reasons for this distance: 1. Pearson jumps over weeks at a time in his narrative. While this may be accurate to police work, in which nothing may happen on a case and other cases demand attention, the complete disappearance of those days in the protagonists life draws the reader's attention to the fact that this is fiction. For comparison, look at John Sandford's work, in which the reader may learn more than he ever wanted to know about muskie fishing, but at the same time, is never ejected from the protagonist's life for more than a few hours, which is a much easier gap to span. By omitting most of the mundane parts of Dart's life, Pearson makes him less of a person. 2. Pearson's protagonist makes decisions, including the most important one in the novel, for which the reader cannot understand the rationale. While readers can sometimes pass off unclear motivations as simply cases of "it's not what I'd do, but people are different," in this case, there is absolutely no conceivable reason why Dart would go where he goes, when he goes, in the manner he goes. Chain of Evidence is certainly worth the time to read, but don't judge the author by this book alone. He's written far better. Just the same, Chain of Evidence is still better than a lot of the crime fiction out there. It will make you think and it will certainly entertain.
This was an ok book. A basic crime drama with a few cool twists and what not.what really got me, though, was the fact that its based in Hartford, CT. I live in CT and know the city well. All the streets in the book are real, and according to Pearson, very VERY dangerous. But....its not as bad as he makes it out to be. Either he has never been to Hartford, or hes just going off of rumors and stereotypes. Either way, the picture of The Beat he paints is overly exaggerated. Over all, this was an alright mystery. Good for a quick weekend read.
