DNF - rating it a 3 since I didn’t finish the book.

The book cover & description sounded so interesting, but once I started to read the book I realized that it was not what I thought it would be. The flow of the book was a bit confusing as well. For now it is a DNF, but I might give it another chance another day.

Thank you NetGalley for this ARC in exchange for an honest review!

This was a really well done murder novel, it uses the historical setting perfectly and was hooked from the first page. I enjoyed getting to figure out what was happening and what the characters were up to. The plot was everything that I was expecting and was written well from Roger Ede.

2 stars

Based solely on the fact someone took the time and love to get their idea on paper. It just didn’t work for me. I dnf.
That is an extreme rarity for me, but the grammar (as others have mentioned), was too hard to get through. It was kind of a slog as well.

**ARC Review
PUB Date: Jan 28th 2025

I found Poisonous to be underwhelming. The plot felt predictable, lacking the twists and originality that could have elevated the story. The narrative was often disjointed, making it difficult to stay engaged or connect with the characters. Many elements of the story felt overly familiar, as if pieced together from tropes we've seen countless times before. Unfortunately, it didn’t leave a lasting impression, and I wouldn’t count it among my favorites.

Thank you to Netgalley for the gifted copy. I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.

Poisonous follows a story in 1572 where a man killed his daughter with a poisonous apple meant for his wife. By the legal doctrine of transferred malice, the intent to murder the wife, so that he could be with his mistress, was transferred to the daughter, and he was executed. Fast forward to the present day with a high-end call that leads to his trial for murder.

This was absolutely a very different kind of read for me. Truthfully, I enjoyed the premise and plot of the story. I liked the story because it is different from what I've read before. I personally like the modern take of taking something from the past and using it in the present. However, there were a few parts that I found were a bit hard to understand. The issues were all grammatical errors, and I know that for some this can really make or break a story for them. Overall, those details didn't deterred me from reading the book. I don't think that it ruined the premise or plot, at least not for me. I just find that this story is intriguing when lawyers can take one case and use it for another and use it to convince the guilt or innocence of a man. It's insane how one case can affect another if someone can really pick up on it. Anyway, this really did keep me glued til the end.

Roger Ede's Poisonous, which appears to be his fiction debut, focuses primarily on a corrupt cop's get-rich-quick scheme, but it's not nearly that neat and tidy. Ede bases his story around the legal doctrine of transferred malice. This age-old principle holds that if someone intends to harm a particular person but instead injures another, they are still held accountable. It's a neat idea for a contemporary crime novel, and while I enjoyed my time with it, I can't help but feel like there are a few too many flaws to earn an enthusiastic recommendation from me.

More than anything, Ede's novel suffers from bloating. While I wouldn't call it dense in the same way that something like Dune is dense, it is surprisingly jam-packed with tiny details, and although a large chunk of these details end up being relevant, some of them seem to read more like unnecessary tangents. There are several subplots that ultimately end up being completely irrelevant to the rest of the story, and unfortunately, they're just not interesting enough for me to give them a pass.

That's probably my biggest gripe, but I also agree with other reviewers who have called out the occasional grammar and formatting issue. I teach middle schoolers for a living, so these grammatical errors are hardly comparable to the stuff I see on a day-to-day basis, but it's discouraging to catch so many tiny mistakes. I can't imagine it would ruin the average reader's experience, but it's still feedback that should be addressed in the future.

Regardless of the cons, Ede knows how to weave an exciting tale. The characters, particularly Stella and Kate, feel very human. The legal tidbits are fascinating, especially to an American who doesn't fully grasp the ins and outs of the UK's legal system. You get the idea; there is a lot to like about this novel. It just needed an editor.

Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for this ARC!

I was definitely expecting something a little better than this book. The initial premise seemed fascinating - the modernised concept of transferred malice passing into the records of modern law in a risky case held together on a wing and a prayer. Unfortunately, the execution was less than what I would have expected from this book. The book itself is dedicated to a range of 'he said, she said' sort of material, with significantly more dialogue than action, and it gets tied up and hampered by the modern day far too much to justify comparisons to the case from the 1500's.

The characters are unremarkable and unlikable, and the whole case seemed put together around the actions of the characters, as opposed to being something that happened to them. The story did not have a good flow, and the trial itself was clunky, with very little content dedicated to the actual workings of the courtroom. It makes for something that is less so a legal drama and more so a soap opera, and I'm afraid I didn't enjoy it at all.

I would love to see a version of this that pulls in more from the original case and has a somewhat more comparable case, but this just did not gel with me, I'm afraid.

Thank you to NetGalley and Troubador Publishing Ltd. for the advanced reader copy. All opinions are my own:

In 1572 John Saunders killed his daughter with a poisoned apple intended for his wife. By the legal doctrine of transferred malice, the intent to murder the wife so that he could be with his mistress, was transferred to the daughter and he was executed. We're given the story of a crooked justice system and a shoddy investigation.

This was good, but nothing super captivating. The flow of the book just made it feel like it was written on the fly at times. The synopsis and beginning of the book captured my attention well, but it just fell off for me with so many details about the investigation and all the characters' maneuvers to rig things their way.

It’s a fun enough book that I’d recommend it if someone asked about it, but not one that I would necessarily bring into conversation myself.

The Prologue made me want to read this book. What a neat way to write a story!

In the Second Chapter, I had to wonder what I was reading. I understand malice murder, but what in the world did I just attempt to read? I never DNF a book; I refuse. But in this case, I did. The grammar was awful. I lost my way in trying to keep up.

If the book would have only been like the prologue, I would have been okay.

Thank you Netgalley and Troubador Publishing Ltd. for this ARC in exchange for an honest review.

"Precedent refers to a legal principle or rule established in a previous court decision that is used as a benchmark for deciding subsequent cases with similar facts or issues."

In 1573, the legal principle of transferred malice was applied "by which the intent to kill a wife was transferred to (the daughter). The poisoned apple meant for the wife was instead ingested by the daughter. The husband/father, with intent to poison his wife, was executed. His accomplice who provided the poison was set free.

Criminal law defense practitioner Roger Ede has written a fascinating read of a fictitious case demonstrating the miscarriage of justice.

DCI Victor Shadwell- "A good police force is one that catches more crooks than it employs". Shadwell is "shady".

Kate-Studies for a Degree in Forensics and Crime Investigation. She currently runs a PI business with the help of her employee, Chi. They have been hired to determine whether prominent lawyer, Ian Blake is having an affair.

Ian Blake-Mesmerized by high-end call girl, Stella. His marriage, broken and potential appointment to the bench, probably compromised.

Annie Blake-Her insistence upon a PI investigation into Ian's activities set an upcoming crime in motion; a murder would be committed.

Soon, a flawed police investigation under the auspices of DCI Victor Shadwell is undertaken. Compromised tactics would cause some evidence to be withheld, other evidence destroyed. Photos secretly snapped create blackmail opportunities. Pin the murder on an entrapped individual? Why not. Create a betting ring to cash in on the outcome of the trial? Sure. Manipulate the jury? For certain.

"Poisonous" is an eye-opening legal thriller with many crusaders for justice butting heads with those willing to corrupt the legality and fairness of the justice system in this legal novel.

Thank you Troubador Publishing Ltd. and Net Galley for the ARC in exchange for an honest review.

This modern day story is based on a real 16th century trial and I for one was intrigued.

Obsession, love affairs and murder are the name of the game and both incidences collide to bring a courtroom drama to life in the most dramatic way.
A lawyer uses a case from the past to help himself set free from murder. His barrister compares both cases and hopes for the same outcome where a man who killed his daughter escape the gallows.
I really enjoyed this book and hopefully the book will be edited and ironed out before the publication. At the moment it is a little messy with grammar and dialogue but that said it is an interesting and brilliant tale..

I really enjoyed this book I found it flowed well and hooked me right from the start and kept me hooked all the way through. There were some grammatical errors that were noticed as I was reading but that didn't distract me from the story which had such an exciting premise and for me lived up to that.

I’ll he honest, it was very difficult to get through this book. The lack of grammar, run on sentences and paragraphs, made it very hard to follow along with the story.

It has great potential to be a good book… but someone like me who needs those things to truly follow along, it made it very difficult and dropped my rating.

I’m not going to share a review online because I don’t want to deter anyone from reading that can get past those things and follow along. I hope the book does great!