Death Goes Overboard by David S. Pederson

Death Goes Overboard
by David S. Pederson
Pages: ?
Date: April 1 2017
Publisher: Bold Strokes Books
Series: Detective Heath Barrington Mystery (2nd in series)

Review
Rating: 3.65 to 3.85
Read: March 3-4 2017

*I received this book from NetGalley, and Bold Strokes Books in return for a fair review.*

Like the prior book in this series, and as expected, this book here stars Detective Heath Barrington of the Milwaukee Police Department. Unlike the prior book in this series, some part of the police work in this book actually occurs in Milwaukee. Though, despite jurisdiction issues, some of it also occurs outside Milwaukee’s city borders – like on a boat on one of the Great Lakes (Lake Michigan).

There are several plot lines but two main ones of importance: 1) Everyone, including literally an aunt, let Heath know that being a single man of his age is super risky and leads to talk of a certain nature (like, say, ‘it’s obvious that he is gay’; there’s an additional ‘especially the way he is so neat and how he dresses’ but I’ll let that pass) – as in: being a gay man in post WWII America is difficult and certain things are needed to be done to cover that up which can lead to a bunch of lying, deception, and the like (to be fair – without some level of lying, a gay man will find themselves out of work (at least with the police, and possibly in a mental institution somewhere getting electric shocks to their balls); 2) police work occurs.

Heath continues to date Officer Alan Keyes, though is having two issues in regards to that – 1) both are men and it is 1947; 2) does he actually want a steady relationship with anyone? That plot-line is followed throughout the book. Of major importance in the book. Regarding that ‘gay issue’, I have two things that came to mind while reading this book – 1) Heath seemed a lot more naïve than I would have expected for a man of his ‘advanced’ age (his exact age might have been given at some point, though he is somewhere in his 30s, and some comments would lead one to suspect him to be in the latter half of his thirties; the concept of a beard, of marrying a woman and having fun with men – with or without the wives knowledge, was something Heath never realized could happen; also something he had never heard of was a lavender marriage – gay man, lesbian woman, marry as each other’s ‘cover’ – granted, the first time I saw reference to that type of arrangement was in Ann Bannon’s book of the 1950s/60s – and I doubt she came up with the idea completely on her own (Bannon had both types of marriages in her series) and yes, I know 1959 is not 1947, and Heath seemed so naïve regarding gay issues, that I doubt he read gay fiction, much less lesbian pulp); 2) he and another gay man in the book seem to fall into a particular gay stereotype I didn’t expect to see – both him and Riker (another police officer in the book, more on him later), seem to be rather ‘causal’ about sex – more so Riker (Heath is more tempted by the idea and keeps being inches from falling into that type of lifestyle) – as in, all the sex they can get, with men, as much as they can get, regardless of the man or the circumstances (it was so much of a gay stereotype that I actually began to believe that Riker was actually bait – either from some higher ups in the police force trying to trick/trap Heath; or someone Alan Keyes got to ‘check on’ Heath since Heath was acting a little ‘pulling-away-ish’). So that story line flows through the book as well – that ‘should Heath, while eyeballing every man around him as a sexual object, decide that Alan is really ‘his’? Should Heath get a ‘beard’, get himself into a marriage? *proceeds to eyeball every woman around him as a means to an end – marriage cover*.

The other major plot being followed is a different type of mystery (what, there’s a kind of mystery involved in ‘will Heath chose some woman to marry? Stay with Alan? Stray?’). Gregor Slavinsky is taking a great lake cruise – and he is being followed by a man named Ballentine and his lackey George. Slavinsky has been in and out of prison – and has just recently gotten out. And has secured $25,000 of Ballentine’s money as a loan. And Slavinsky is beginning to miss payments. Not something criminals like to hear.

The police have wanted to ‘get’ Ballentine for a while now and believe that this is a perfect opportunity to catch him doing something illegal. So Heath is sent undercover on the Great Lake voyage as an insurance man. A new-to-the-series officer also is undercover as a steward – that would be the previously mentioned Riker.

There is a mystery, and plot A does lead to b, c, d, and the police are shown to use their brains to follow along. With the introduction of certain elements, I immediately knew ‘something’ was occurring, though it took a body going over the side of the boat for me to ‘know’ what was going on. And, while it took the rest of the book for the characters to catch up, I was correct. Mind you, despite that last sentence, the cops weren’t made to look too inexperienced/naïve/stupid – they followed logically along, including a few wrong guesses (real life isn’t ‘Cop: x occurred, didn’t it? Criminal: how did you know!!!’). I did have a problem with one element, maybe minor, maybe not important, but . . . well. As can occur in mystery novels – there comes the time when the brilliant detective reveals the plot points, or I mean, how he figured it out. One slight issue I had here is that the author went one step too far. He had his detective ‘know’ and ‘reveal’ why that whiskey bottle was in the cabin. But, while there is a logical explanation, and while he can logically come to the conclusion that ‘this’ is the reason for the whiskey bottle, he can’t ‘know’ that this is the reason – for everyone who could confirm the matter is dead – died before he put the facts together. Hence my ‘one step too far’ – one step too far in trying to make the police detective look brilliant. Now, all that needs to happen is a few word changes. Something like ‘it is likely that’ instead of ‘it was there because’. Semantics. Logically the steps, pieces, were laid for that specific clue to be found – except for the part where it had to remain speculation (’I also thought the bottle of whiskey in Gregor’s cabin was strange, as he drank martinis. [X] was the one who liked whiskey, but of course [x] didn’t’ want to risk [y] finding [x]’s bottle and getting smashed, so [x] kept it in Gregor’s cabin and used the connecting door . . . .’ - lot of speculation going on in that ‘reveal everything’ being treated as fact .

The time on the ship was quite interesting, the mystery, despite several things I’ve stated, was also well enough crafted (a little heavy handed, but well enough crafted). The wandering eye is a character issue, not exactly one I wished to read, but feasible. As is those several talks about marriage (lavender or not). Overall a good book. I liked the first book more than the second, but second was good enough.

Rating: 3.65 to 3.85

March 6 2017