Negative Positive
Title: A ridiculous tale of a detective that ignores the evidence
Review: Monk, a supposedly superb detective, creates a theory early on about what happens and spends half the book finding supporting evidence for his theory rather than looking for easily obtained contradicting evidence. He shares the circumstantial evidence he has with others who all become absolutely convinced he's right, despite, in the case of the police investigator, having knowledge of contradicting evidence. It all comes out in final climactic scene where the reader should say "well finally the idiots see reason!"If this were a story about detective work gone wrong, people being wrongly accused, and what can happen when anger blinds people so much they just want a guilty party instead of the truth, this could be decent. As a story about a detective who is supposed to be the best in the district it's immensely frustrating.
Is the review positive or negative? 