Spoilers, spoilers, everywhere

I read Cry Blue Murder by Kim Kane & Marion Roberts (UQP, 2013) four years later – nothing new there. I have so many questions and my brain is in pieces after the discombobulation of that ending. WTF!? I do love, more than words itself, an unexpected unreliable narrator. And that narrator certainly sucker-punched us all.

“And the truth lies in none but in all.”

As I read I thought, this is a fun story, but why was it shortlisted for the Inky Awards 2013? It all became as clear as a bottomless pool of depravity at approximately “Have You Seen This Man?”

Exhibit 34 seriously freaked me out. While reading I thought a few of the names were old fashioned, but I never wondered why. With the authors wanting anagrams, they had to take names where they found them. It’s a clever plot device. Does this mean he exchanged emails with the other girls? Cornelia and Esther’s computers would have become evidence and any emails found. If he emailed with Hallie, he would have known she didn’t have a boyfriend. And I didn’t realise until the Reader’s Note that the emails are part of the Brief. I guess this means Celia’s dead and the trial is her murder.

“God might feel real and all, but so did my feelings for Edward Cullen.”

When I came upon the newly minted socks in Hallie’s statement, I was flumoxed. After wondering how he could possibly know about them, they floated right out of my head. If I’d stopped reading and thought more about the only possible way he could have known, might I have worked out the twist? Probably not, it seems too impossible despite all the evidence laid out for my perusal.

When Adeline was abducted, I remembered something about Esther, Adeline and a babysitter. I went back looking for it, but couldn’t find it. And the angst Alice had for her sister’s “sluttiness” really got to me – who says that? The same person who doesn’t kill a girl because she has a boyfriend. So many clues, so little insight. A fellow Goodreads reviewer worked it out.

My most important question: is the killer Hot Rod? I was confused when Celia was abducted. (Weren’t we all!?) I thought Rod Weaver was under arrest during his later interviews. Especially since the car was photographed and Hallie recognized the shack as the site of her incarceration. Isn’t that reason enough for arrest? And do people who are just being interviewed have a lawyer present? I guess if they’re guilty they do.

“Gotta say, it’s amazing how popular you become when you suddenly have the technology to melt cheese.”

Why did the killer have a two year break between victims? Was doing lighting fullfilling all his needs during that time? More importantly, why did Rod Weaver not have a Working With Children Check? It doesn’t matter if you’re an employee or a consultant, if you’re working with children, a school will require it. Ashbourne would have got in a whole lot of shit for stuffing that up. Of course, Rod would have passed the check because he had no convictions. It would have been more realistic if he had it and was useless due to his lack of convictions.

I kept returning to the witness list while reading and realised early on Cleo discovered something in her investigations. But why is Bridget Wang not being called up in the trial? She’s not exactly important. And why didn’t I notice Hot Rod isn’t on the list?? Rod is younger than the man posing as Alice’s dad who police are looking for. Accomplices anyone?

I can’t work out who Grahame Beazley is. Celia’s Dad is called Peter and she had no brothers. So basically, that’s my final question:

“Who is Grahame Beazley?”

Also, why do I care so much?