Oct 24, 2007 10:27 AM
2703 Views
(Updated Jun 18, 2011 12:02 PM)
If imitation is the best form of flattery, would an imitation murder qualify as such? Murders by notorious serial killers are one thing. But when another seeks to imitate the murders of famous serial killers, (no, killing is not art) it still is murder in the cruelest form. The murderer might want to display his talents or killing repertoire. But if a murderer seeks to imitate one particular killer's style, then there is a chance that he might get away, while the blame, rest assured would be thrown on the killer.
Detective* by Arthur Hailey is not exactly a novel I would recco. But for people interested in fiction, crime, this is a good read. Let me go straight into the story.
The Story – The story is presented in flashbacks through detective Ainslie on his way to meet a serial killer. Looking forward to a vacation, he is intent on wrapping his cases at the office and then he receives a phone call. Doil, a serial killer, Ainslie had caught earlier wants to confess about the murders he has committed. While Ainslie is not exactly looking forward to it, Doil is one of the killers who constantly refused to accept any of his killings in court. It was only the overwhelming evidence against him which made the judge’s decision. A confession now would convince all the critics and would be testimony to the verdict.
As Ainslie makes his way to hear Doyle’s confession, the writer gives us the flashbacks detailing how Doil has committed 14 murders (7 couples). Half the book details the murder investigations and how he was caught.
Once Ainslie meets up with Doil, Doil confesses to 14 murders, allright, but one of the murders is not the one he is suspected off. Another unsolved murder is the one he claims to have done. Ainslie is puzzled and does not believe him. But why would a dying man to be electrocuted in a few minutes lie about it? Doil even proceeds to give him evidence of the murder tools used and where he had buried it clinching the other unsolved one. Doil, in effect seeks forgiveness for the murder he hasn’t committed.
That gets him to reopen the case of the unsolved murder. He realizes that the murderer had imitated Doil’s style so that Doil could take the blame. Now the only question arises, who?
It’s no whodunit, as the murderer is revealed sometime immediately after Doil’s execution. Ofcourse there are also innumerable reasons why the murdered chose to imitate a serial killer. There is the comments section for you to guess.
The initial half of the book is quite good. You begin to loose interest after Doil is electrocuted. The rest of the story is in patches, at times told through the murderer's eyes. The way the serial killer is caught is good detective fiction. However the writer hits the block during the latter half. Two personalities get to play the first person as the read progresses though it is a good read at times. Doil’s version is narrated through the detective’s work.
That leaves me thinking. Why does it have to be that a murderer or a serial killer always has to leave behind a clue? Is it impossible to catch them otherwise? Any murder/ fiction novel you read and the gist is the same – A murder, clue, a circuitous plotline and the suspects. For once, I’d like to read about a detective who solved a murder without any clues, motives or otherwise. Just plodding by any of the police and negating most of the options has solved a few real life murders too. So what exactly is holding them back?
Worth a dekko ...
ISBN 0-385-40964-8
Publish year -1997, 461 pages
Purchase year price -2000/80 bucks
