No Witnesses is the first Ridley Pearson novel that I’ve read. It’s obviously part of a series and not the first one in the series so it took me a few chapters to get a feel for the characters. I think this would have been easier if I had started with book one.The story centers around a person who is tampering with food in the Seattle area. People die from his tampering and it seems like he will continue to increase the amount of food that he tampers with.Lou Boldt, a Seattle homicide detective, and Daphne Matthews, a psychologist who works with the police, are the main characters in the series and they undertake the investigation.Things get complicated when it becomes apparent that Matthews boyfriend’s food company is the target of the person doing the tampering.Once I got into the book, it really seemed to move at a nice pace. My problem was that it took me awhile to reach that point. The book is also 11 years old at this point and believe it or not, some of the technology used in it struck me as a little dated. I read historical novels, too, so this wasn’t a big point for me to get past, though it might be for some people.Other than Boldt and Matthews, I really didn’t feel much of a connection with any of the other characters. Boldt reminds me of Harry Bosch in Michael Connelly’s books.
In this genre, for me, there is John Sandford and there is everybody else. Ridley Pearson's Lou Boldt/Daphne Matthews series is really the only one that truly stands along side the Prey books. I've recently given the series a re-read and if you have the chance, I highly recommend them. Pearson creates a very human, very likable cop in his main character Lou Boldt. He's not the badass hero who always saves the day. He's the tireless worker who plugs away at a case until it submits to him. The interplay between him and Daphne Matthews is flawless. Add in some other great characters like LaMoia, Bobbie Gaynes and Showswitz and you've always got some fun in store. The best part of these books is the combination of the case in conjunction with the humanity of the characters. They are real, flawed and doing their best in a world and setting where that's not always enough. I highly recommend starting at the beginning of this series and reading it though. The series starts in the days when a fax machine was a big deal and cell phones were unheard of and advances along with the times. Once you put that aside, it's great reading though. Check them out.
What do You think about No Witnesses (2001)?
Mystery/Thriller. Lou Boldt #3. Lou and Daphne investigate a product tampering case. Daphne seems to be getting more and more helpless as the series progresses. At one point she chides herself for always thinking like a cop and never a victim, which is ridiculous because she usually ends up being a victim and not a cop. Meanwhile, Lou's still emo.Secret confession: I've cast David Hewlett as Lou Boldt. It's pretty much his only redeeming feature right now. Lou, that is. He's such a sad sack. Though he's very good at his job.Pearson's writing is still uneven here. He's good at the cop stuff, but his interpersonal dialogue comes off as stilted and improbable; POV continues to waffle, but at least this book focuses on Lou and Daphne and doesn't give us any psycho!pov like the last. You win some; you lose some.Two and a half stars rounded up to three because it's better than Angel Maker and the tension gets really good at the end.
—Punk
I was pretty disappointed in this one. Why is Matthews still in Seattle? Who knows?! How did Bear wriggle away from the IRS? Who knows?! How does Boldt still have time to play piano at the bar when he is an active homicide detective? Who knows?! Ack! If there are continuous characters, I desire a continuous story line. Anyhow, the mystery itself was not so thrilling. Poisoned food, extortion, revenge. Eh. It went way too far into technical things about ATM machines, and not enough into motives of the killer or picking up on our beloved characters' lives.
—Kaye
