Reading the Detectives discussion

Welcome to our buddy read of the sixth book in the Chief Inspector Barnaby series.

When Lionel Lawrence opens his rambling rectory to rehabilitate young offenders he has no idea of the consequences, least of all that they will include blackmail and murder. Chief Inspector Barnaby has a good idea of the identity of the violent individual responsible, now all he needs is evidence.

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

I had my suspicions early, but Graham worked like a killdeer leading me away from them.

I did think the story pointed to one person being the culprit, but I also had the feeling that the drowning was fake. I couldn't make up my mind if two people were in cahoots or not.

Yes, I thought the drowning was fake. Not initially, but it didn't take too many pages to come to that conclusion.

But there was a lot more going on in this novel than just the murder.

Aside from solving the murders, I loved the whole 25th Anniversary secondary plot. I loved how Barnaby began to wonder about the appropriateness of the silver mirror, and how he couldn't imagine the big box being a silver lawn mower.

Yes, it had a lovely ending, didn't it? Especially with Barnaby not really enjoying the day - as so often happens, with these special days - and then the lawn mower :)

I loved the ending too. Wonder if Barnaby will be using the mower in the next book?

It's my silver anniversary next year. Perhaps I should get my husband one - I'm sure he'd love it!

Sounds like a perfect gift, Susan - though I do wonder how quickly the silver would come off! :)

Did the somewhat graphic homosexual relationship surprise you in this? And with the Lionel taking in delinquents, there was more social commentary than I anticipated.

Val and Jax's relationship didn't strike me as graphic but I didn't find it very believable. But then I found Jax a rather unconvincing character in general because he is such an obvious villain - he's supposed to be attractive and charismatic but obviously "evil" at the same time and I found that a bit hard to visualise.

Discussing Jax reminds me, an interview with Caroline Graham that I posted a link to a little while back says: "Incidentally 'A Place of Safety' has not been adapted for TV as Caroline feels that the murderer is obvious from the outset and wouldn't fit into the 'who dunnit' format of the series."

I don't think I found it obvious from the start that Jax had done it - did others?

Here is the link again:
http://midsomermurders.org/cgrahaminc...

Not from the beginning, certainly, but he was definitely my strongest contender as things went along. I did not have a suspect for who the 2nd blackmail note came from.

What I absolutely did not guess was that Carlotta was not Carlotta at all.

As I said earlier the story pointed to the murderer. I hadn't guessed the girl in the flat was Carlotta . I assumed it was Carlotta hiding in the cupboard.

Jill wrote: "As I said earlier the story pointed to the murderer. I hadn't guessed the girl in the flat was Carlotta . I assumed it was Carlotta hiding in the cupboard."

Exactly what I thought.

I was pleased that the scenes of violent homosexuality were quite brief, and realised that they had to be included to complete that part of the story

Jill wrote: "As I said earlier the story pointed to the murderer. I hadn't guessed the girl in the flat was Carlotta . I assumed it was Carlotta hiding in the cupboard."

I thought the same.

There are a lot of unhappy relationships in this novel - I think 'Barnaby and Joyce are just about the only happy couple!

I was pleased that Ann splits up with Lionel, as he is so domineering and they are completely unsuited - but I was rather surprised that she can apparently keep the house and savings accounts because they were hers originally.

Surely as they have been married for many years he would be bound to get a share? Although I know there have been changes to the law on this over the years.

Still with Lionel, I did think the novel is rather dismissive of his work with offenders. I don't think we see anyone he has actually managed to help?

There were conflicting views on Lionel, weren't there? Some saw him as Saintly and others very sniffy about his efforts. I do agree that Lionel would be entitled to part of the properly, legally, but never mind the facts, this is fiction :)

We don't know what the terms of the will were. I think the money was in a trust fund.

Susan, you're right that there's no point in me worrying too much about what would happen on this in real life!

Aside from the legalities, though, I also felt rather sorry for him (even though I don't like him!) being left with nothing, and this put me off Ann slightly.

I wasn't very impressed by her anyway because of her behaviour over the fake drowning - if it had been a real one, her delaying would have had tragic consequences.

It was said that the money was in a trust fund and they had been living off of the dividends from that. The house was left to Ann by her father so at 1999 when the book was written I don't see why her husband should have any claim on it. Her solicitors would have kept it in her name and probably made the arrangements

I felt as though Ann was having a breakdown, so I didn't judge her so harshly.

In legal terms, as I'm married to a lawyer, then with a house that anyone has contributed to, they would have a claim. So, if a couple get divorced, then usually the woman keeps the house until the children are grown, and then it is sold and the proceeds split. The issue that Lionel had, presumably, was that he had paid nothing in monetary terms, but, if he could claim that he provided to the upkeep - such as the horrible driver/workman who helped to maintain the property - then he would have legal right to part of the sale of the house. As there were no children, this could be after the divorce.

Not that it matters, but it isn't necessary to pay mortgages, or bills, to have a share in a marital property after divorce. Even if a house is in one person's name, rather than both, the Court will take all kinds of factors into account, including how long the couple have lived there, been married, etc.

Susan wrote: "I felt as though Ann was having a breakdown, so I didn't judge her so harshly. "

I think you are probably right there - I was a bit shocked early on by her attitude after Carlotta's supposed drowning, so that put me off her really.

Thanks for explaining the legalities of the divorce settlements, that is pretty much what I thought but I wasn't sure of it all. Aside from the legal position, though, I found it off-putting that Ann is once again mainly thinking about herself, just as she did after the "drowning". Not my favourite character, but I am probably being a bit harsh.

Should say though, I was really scared for Ann in the scene where she is attacked - the tension builds there incredibly as you can feel it is going to happen. Great writing by Graham.

Oh yes. She looked in the back seat too! He was a really scary baddie, wasn't he? You always felt the danger, when he loitered in a doorway!

Judy wrote: "Should say though, I was really scared for Ann in the scene where she is attacked - the tension builds there incredibly as you can feel it is going to happen. Great writing by Graham."

Yes, the build up was excellent.