Ben begins by instructing his client that he will defend him to the best of his ability, but Beale must not withhold any information he has about the case. Even if the facts seem damaging, Ben has to be told in order to provide a legitimate case. Beale allows that many of his flock are at odds with his method of ministry. In fact, the weekly vestry meetings have lately deteriorated into little more than shouting matches, with Beale admitting that his temper often gets the best of him. He does not deny that he quarreled with the murdered woman shortly before her death, but states that she was already dead when he entered his office for a planned meeting with her.

Beale is no stranger to the criminal justice system. He admits to having been arrested on two previous occasions for protesting against a nuclear power plant and in support of ERA. He vows, however, that he could never physically harm another person, and Ben believes him.

In Criminal Intent, William Bernhardt has written a masterful novel. It is successful on many levels. The plot itself, based on circumstances from an actual case, is frightening, yet totally believable. Kincaid’s almost passionate desire to defend Beale is not only because of an incident that occurred when he was a youngster, but because he believes he knows Beale well enough to swear he would not physically another human being. Though Beale subsequently reveals himself to be someone repugnant to Kincaid in many respects, he still fundamentally believes in the man’s innocence of the crime of which he has been accused.

The revelation of unseen aspects of Beale’s personality is just the first of several surprises that the author has in store for his readers. In fact, the final resolution of the dilemma does not unfold until the last page. It is, indeed, a clever reader who correctly deduces the final outcome before Kincaid, yet the clues are basically there.

Additionally, Mr. Bernhardt employs several unusual methods to increase the depth of the story. While the action is primarily described in the third person, there are brief soliloquies by Daniel Beale which give insight into his character. He is not a typical parish priest, a fact of which he is quite proud, but it takes information garnered from his thoughts to prevent the reader from losing sympathy from such a radical thinking man. The reason for Ben’s feeling of gratitude toward Beale is only revealed through a series of flashbacks to Ben’s youth when he only grudgingly interacted with his peers. The reader can also see how Ben evolved from the youth that he was, yet he still retains some of his basic character traits.

Although a considerable portion of the book is devoted to courtroom scenes, the text is not overburdened with the legalistic jargon that makes non-lawyer types’ eyes fog over. It is easy to appreciate the importance of lawyers using just the right word. Having inadvertently used a word which connotes or implies something contrary to what the attorney is trying to achieve can literally destroy a case, and, of course, once that word has been uttered it cannot be retracted. Several interesting dilemmas arise through slight variation in the meanings of words. Mr. Bernhardt leaves the reader with at least as many questions as he does answers.

--Andy Plonka