What do you think?
Rate this book
Stone Maidens #1
Stone Maidens
As the chief forensic anthropologist for the FBI’s Chicago field office, Christine Prusik has worked her fair share of bizarre cases. Yet this one trumps them all: a serial killer is strangling young women and dumping their bodies in the steep, forested ravines of southern Indiana.
With each victim, the killer leaves a calling card: a stone figurine carved like the spirit stones found among the primitive tribes of Papua New Guinea — the same tribes from whom Prusik narrowly escaped a decade earlier while doing field research. The similarity is eerie and, frankly, terrifying; Prusik still carries the scars from the tribesmen’s attack. But is the connection real? Or have the dark details of Prusik’s nightmares finally wormed their way into her waking life?
Displaying the expertise of a veteran writer, debut novelist Lloyd Devereux Richards skillfully builds layers of psychological suspense and terror into a compulsively readable whodunit.
With each victim, the killer leaves a calling card: a stone figurine carved like the spirit stones found among the primitive tribes of Papua New Guinea — the same tribes from whom Prusik narrowly escaped a decade earlier while doing field research. The similarity is eerie and, frankly, terrifying; Prusik still carries the scars from the tribesmen’s attack. But is the connection real? Or have the dark details of Prusik’s nightmares finally wormed their way into her waking life?
Displaying the expertise of a veteran writer, debut novelist Lloyd Devereux Richards skillfully builds layers of psychological suspense and terror into a compulsively readable whodunit.
343 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 1, 2012
About the author
Lloyd Devereux Richards
4 books627 followersLloyd Devereux Richards was born in New York City and traveled extensively in Europe, Africa, and Central America before attending law school. He previously served as a senior law clerk for an Indiana Court of Appeals judge, researching and writing drafts for dozens of published opinions, including the appeal of a serial killer sentenced to death. A father of three, he lives with his wife, Cameron O’Connor, and their two dogs in Montpelier, Vermont. Stone Maidens is his first novel.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,214 reviews
February 10, 2023
I found this book through tik tok. It seems I've been finding a lot of books that way. The writing itself was amazing. Extremely descriptive, which usually is not a great thing, but with this one, it's perfect. The details were extremely gruesome, so if you have a weak stomach, this is not the book for you. Going through all the procedures of police work got a little tedious, but it was informative. I really like Christine, and she never gave up. I wasn't sure honestly if it would all work out, but the journey made it so incredibly interesting. The one thing I really hated was how horribly her bosses treated her. I got so irritated, but it's accurate to how women in the criminal field are treated. Loved the accuracy.
February 20, 2013
I heard about this book from a friend in Vermont. Though i do not normally read thrillers, i could not put this book down. the author's evocative description of the midwest landscape and his unusual characters provide a complex framework out of which the story unfolds. for his first novel mr richards has shown a keen grasp of the genre and i look forward to reading more of his work.
August 11, 2013
I'll start by saying that I gave this book 1.5 stars because Richards is actually a really good writer and I can tell that he has the ability to write a suspenseful thriller. I'll say I ONLY gave this book 1.5 stars because this book was an absolute disaster and Richards skills as a writer are the only thing that save this book from having NO stars. Richards set out to write a book that is heavy in the forensic sciences and it becomes obvious very early on that he did no research in actual forensic science.
The lead character is a forensic anthropologist, but Richards has her not only functioning as the FBI Supervisory Special Agent in Charge, which she's not, she's a forensic scientist, that is made clear multiple times, but he also has her functioning as the forensic pathologist. All of the victims are more or less fully intact. The particular skill set possessed by a forensic anthropologist would not have been called upon unless the bodies were mostly skeletonized, fragmented or otherwise extremely damaged, such as in an explosion or burning.
Another problem is the other forensic experts on the FBI team, they discuss aspects of the case with each other jumping back and forth in the same sentence between professional jargon and layman translations of that jargon. Additionally, they give explanations to each other for things, that the others, also being experts in forensics, should already know. And what's more, the explanations are wrong. Not to mention the main character popping Xanax like no body's business. Maybe most people don't realize this, but Xanax is in the same family as Valium, it's not only in the same family, it's like the bigger stronger brother of Valium. No one popping Xanax like the main character is going to be thinking clear headed enough to being doing this particular job. You can't even legally drive for 8 hours after taking Xanax.
Then there is this other character with the visions. He is introduced as he is going to see his PSYCHIATRIST, not psychologist, psychiatrist. I don't know who is in more denial about what is going on with this character. The guy or the psychiatrist. The guy is taken to the psychiatrist with what are essentially vivid descriptions of what, by all accounts are very vivid visual, auditory and olfactory hallucinations and the psychiatrists response is to label these hallucinations "Day Dreams" and to wax on about how everyone dreams and dreams are just dreams, nothing to worry about, just need to learn to focus better. And then gives him a prescription for Amitriptyline (which is an antidepressant and not recommended for use in patients with schizophrenia or Bi-polar) and a prescription for Mellaril to treat his insomnia (Mellaril is a strong antipsychotic that is rarely prescribed because of the extreme and potentially lethal side effects)it is not given for insomnia. When the patient complains that he is having difficulty waking up in the morning the psychiatrist recommends backing off on how much he is taking of the Mellaril until he no longer has difficulty waking up in the morning. Holy Cow! Anyone who knows anything about antipsychotic medications knows you DO NOT play fast and loose with the dosage and you most certainly don't play loose with the dosage of an antipsychotic like Mellaril.
Estimating time of death by stating that green bottle fly's wouldn't have laid eggs on an exposed body in the middle of July in Indiana for at least 24 hours? Try less than an hour. And further estimating time of death with the explanation that the eggs would have taken 9-10 days to hatch? Uhm...did you do ANY kind of research? Seriously, in warm conditions, like Indiana in July, those eggs would have hatched in as little as 10 hours and if it were a chilly fall they may have taken as much as 3 days to hatch. In 10 days in the middle of July those eggs not only would have hatched, the larvae would have gone through all 3 instars and been a pupal stage.
Now we get to ridiculous characterizations. Why on earth would the police DISPATCHER be wearing a gun and gun belt while she sat in the station functioning as a dispatcher? Police/Sheriff office dispatchers are not generally officers. And from the way this one was described, she was not pulling double duty as both a dispatcher and an officer. Which means she was filling the function of your typical small town dispacher, which is essentially a secretary.
And the Sheriff. He's been given a tip about what may have happened to a girl who has been reported missing, he goes to investigate, he finds evidence that supports the eye witness account. He finds blood next to the side walk that runs along the road next to the woods in the vicinity where the eye witness says he saw a man splattered with "red polka dots" shoving something into his truck bed. He calls the town coroner to take a sample of the blood. They are going to send the blood off to be analyzed for DNA and Blood typing (which incidentally the coroner said the blood typing would take at least a day, seriously? When I was in high school almost 20 years ago, in my biology class we did a blood typing activity with these little kits that gave us the results in a matter of minutes.) Where this scenario really runs off the rails is after they gather a blood sample and look around noting that they don't see disturbed leaves along the edge of the woods to suggest a struggle. Also they note the blood was in drops not smeared, so they speculate about how it got there and throw out this gem "it's looks like arterial splatter". And then they walk away. Really, they walk away and decide they will look around a little more in a week or so if the DNA results come back positive for the missing girl. I realize that this is a small town sheriff, but seriously, I can't believe he is really that much of an idiot. Come on, picture yourself as the Sheriff, as the sheriff you've received a report of a girl missing, you have also received a report of a suspicious looking man with red spatters over his clothes and face stuffing something under a paint tarp in his truck bed in the exact location that the missing girl was supposed to have been located, you go to the location of the eye witness account and you find blood on the ground next to the woods, that is still fresh enough that it is tacky. And then you, as the Sheriff, come to the conclusion that you DON'T think that is sufficient reason to go looking around a bit in the nearby woods? Supposedly, the rational for this reasoning is that if the girls parents hear about you looking around in the woods after finding fresh blood they may jump to the worst conclusions. Seriously, come on.
At that point I was so mad at all of the stupid lapses in common sense and glaring lack of even basic Wikipedia level research into the contents of the book that I threw it in a drawer. I had to really convince myself to finish the book, because I hate not finishing books.
Even if you can get past all of THAT, the main character as another reviewer mentioned "is a hot mess". Her boss, the man she is still swooning over at the same time she is resenting and hating him is a jack ass. Everyone who is supposed to be in positions of authority and supervision are absolute disasters at being team leaders and supervisors while at the same time they are chewing everyone out on their teams for essentially not being psychic magicians who can magically materialize evidence and read their supervisors minds. And then you have this whole other paranormal thing and cannibal thing and they just don't really fit, they feel like they are being thrown in from left field to give it more drama but it feels artificial.
Like I said in the beginning, the writing itself is very good. I think given different content I would really like Richards as an author, but seriously, how did this get past his editors to actually get published?
The lead character is a forensic anthropologist, but Richards has her not only functioning as the FBI Supervisory Special Agent in Charge, which she's not, she's a forensic scientist, that is made clear multiple times, but he also has her functioning as the forensic pathologist. All of the victims are more or less fully intact. The particular skill set possessed by a forensic anthropologist would not have been called upon unless the bodies were mostly skeletonized, fragmented or otherwise extremely damaged, such as in an explosion or burning.
Another problem is the other forensic experts on the FBI team, they discuss aspects of the case with each other jumping back and forth in the same sentence between professional jargon and layman translations of that jargon. Additionally, they give explanations to each other for things, that the others, also being experts in forensics, should already know. And what's more, the explanations are wrong. Not to mention the main character popping Xanax like no body's business. Maybe most people don't realize this, but Xanax is in the same family as Valium, it's not only in the same family, it's like the bigger stronger brother of Valium. No one popping Xanax like the main character is going to be thinking clear headed enough to being doing this particular job. You can't even legally drive for 8 hours after taking Xanax.
Then there is this other character with the visions. He is introduced as he is going to see his PSYCHIATRIST, not psychologist, psychiatrist. I don't know who is in more denial about what is going on with this character. The guy or the psychiatrist. The guy is taken to the psychiatrist with what are essentially vivid descriptions of what, by all accounts are very vivid visual, auditory and olfactory hallucinations and the psychiatrists response is to label these hallucinations "Day Dreams" and to wax on about how everyone dreams and dreams are just dreams, nothing to worry about, just need to learn to focus better. And then gives him a prescription for Amitriptyline (which is an antidepressant and not recommended for use in patients with schizophrenia or Bi-polar) and a prescription for Mellaril to treat his insomnia (Mellaril is a strong antipsychotic that is rarely prescribed because of the extreme and potentially lethal side effects)it is not given for insomnia. When the patient complains that he is having difficulty waking up in the morning the psychiatrist recommends backing off on how much he is taking of the Mellaril until he no longer has difficulty waking up in the morning. Holy Cow! Anyone who knows anything about antipsychotic medications knows you DO NOT play fast and loose with the dosage and you most certainly don't play loose with the dosage of an antipsychotic like Mellaril.
Estimating time of death by stating that green bottle fly's wouldn't have laid eggs on an exposed body in the middle of July in Indiana for at least 24 hours? Try less than an hour. And further estimating time of death with the explanation that the eggs would have taken 9-10 days to hatch? Uhm...did you do ANY kind of research? Seriously, in warm conditions, like Indiana in July, those eggs would have hatched in as little as 10 hours and if it were a chilly fall they may have taken as much as 3 days to hatch. In 10 days in the middle of July those eggs not only would have hatched, the larvae would have gone through all 3 instars and been a pupal stage.
Now we get to ridiculous characterizations. Why on earth would the police DISPATCHER be wearing a gun and gun belt while she sat in the station functioning as a dispatcher? Police/Sheriff office dispatchers are not generally officers. And from the way this one was described, she was not pulling double duty as both a dispatcher and an officer. Which means she was filling the function of your typical small town dispacher, which is essentially a secretary.
And the Sheriff. He's been given a tip about what may have happened to a girl who has been reported missing, he goes to investigate, he finds evidence that supports the eye witness account. He finds blood next to the side walk that runs along the road next to the woods in the vicinity where the eye witness says he saw a man splattered with "red polka dots" shoving something into his truck bed. He calls the town coroner to take a sample of the blood. They are going to send the blood off to be analyzed for DNA and Blood typing (which incidentally the coroner said the blood typing would take at least a day, seriously? When I was in high school almost 20 years ago, in my biology class we did a blood typing activity with these little kits that gave us the results in a matter of minutes.) Where this scenario really runs off the rails is after they gather a blood sample and look around noting that they don't see disturbed leaves along the edge of the woods to suggest a struggle. Also they note the blood was in drops not smeared, so they speculate about how it got there and throw out this gem "it's looks like arterial splatter". And then they walk away. Really, they walk away and decide they will look around a little more in a week or so if the DNA results come back positive for the missing girl. I realize that this is a small town sheriff, but seriously, I can't believe he is really that much of an idiot. Come on, picture yourself as the Sheriff, as the sheriff you've received a report of a girl missing, you have also received a report of a suspicious looking man with red spatters over his clothes and face stuffing something under a paint tarp in his truck bed in the exact location that the missing girl was supposed to have been located, you go to the location of the eye witness account and you find blood on the ground next to the woods, that is still fresh enough that it is tacky. And then you, as the Sheriff, come to the conclusion that you DON'T think that is sufficient reason to go looking around a bit in the nearby woods? Supposedly, the rational for this reasoning is that if the girls parents hear about you looking around in the woods after finding fresh blood they may jump to the worst conclusions. Seriously, come on.
At that point I was so mad at all of the stupid lapses in common sense and glaring lack of even basic Wikipedia level research into the contents of the book that I threw it in a drawer. I had to really convince myself to finish the book, because I hate not finishing books.
Even if you can get past all of THAT, the main character as another reviewer mentioned "is a hot mess". Her boss, the man she is still swooning over at the same time she is resenting and hating him is a jack ass. Everyone who is supposed to be in positions of authority and supervision are absolute disasters at being team leaders and supervisors while at the same time they are chewing everyone out on their teams for essentially not being psychic magicians who can magically materialize evidence and read their supervisors minds. And then you have this whole other paranormal thing and cannibal thing and they just don't really fit, they feel like they are being thrown in from left field to give it more drama but it feels artificial.
Like I said in the beginning, the writing itself is very good. I think given different content I would really like Richards as an author, but seriously, how did this get past his editors to actually get published?
March 14, 2023
I could not put this one down it was so wonderfully written
February 12, 2023
the main protagonist swallows pills dry. shes badass
March 9, 2023
3.5 out of 5 stars.
I came across this book on TikTok, and I was so touched by the TikTok videos that the author's daughter had made that I simply had to buy the book on my Kindle!
And now, after having finished the book, it's not a decision I regret hehe
I know I only gave this book 3.5 stars, but for a thriller that is a pretty high rating for me! I only give thrillers four stars or higher if I feel like they really broke the mold and blew my mind away..
Stone Maidens is a solid serial killer thriller — it just wasn't extraordinary in my opinion, and that's okay. Reading thrillers like this sometimes is a nice break from routine, and it kind of made me feel nostalgic for some reason. I used to read a lot of thrillers in my teens so I think this book inadvertently transported me back to those times :')
If you're looking for a well-paced thriller with an interesting serial killer, I would recommend checking this book out!
❝He could hang back no longer — the hunger had rooted in him.❞
I came across this book on TikTok, and I was so touched by the TikTok videos that the author's daughter had made that I simply had to buy the book on my Kindle!
And now, after having finished the book, it's not a decision I regret hehe
I know I only gave this book 3.5 stars, but for a thriller that is a pretty high rating for me! I only give thrillers four stars or higher if I feel like they really broke the mold and blew my mind away..
Stone Maidens is a solid serial killer thriller — it just wasn't extraordinary in my opinion, and that's okay. Reading thrillers like this sometimes is a nice break from routine, and it kind of made me feel nostalgic for some reason. I used to read a lot of thrillers in my teens so I think this book inadvertently transported me back to those times :')
If you're looking for a well-paced thriller with an interesting serial killer, I would recommend checking this book out!
❝She had found the man she'd been hunting for. Or he had found her.❞
February 21, 2023
2.5 stars, rounded down. I have many mixed feelings about this book. I came across it in a story on social media about a daughter who made a TikTok to promote a book her father had written 10 years ago and with which he had little success. The video went viral, and all of the sudden, Stone Maidens was at the top of a bunch of book lists. What a story! Well, it’s interesting to compare the other reviews here; most of the recent ones are raves, but many of the ones from 9-10 years ago are poor. Let me tell you, I agree with the early reviews!
The plot was intriguing enough that I could not DNF this book, but the writing was a real issue for me. I’m no FBI or forensics expert, but I’m fairly certain that the procedures described were based on very little, if any, actual research. And the writing of the female protagonist? It brings to mind a scene from the movie As Good As It Gets - when asked how he writes women so well, Melvin replies, “I think of a man, and then I take away reason and accountability.” *Insert eye roll here.* I also take issue with the use of too many words, frequently ones that “fancy” when the story would be better served with plain language. Over all, it felt like the author was trying to make us realize how smart he is instead of just writing an interesting story.
The plot was intriguing enough that I could not DNF this book, but the writing was a real issue for me. I’m no FBI or forensics expert, but I’m fairly certain that the procedures described were based on very little, if any, actual research. And the writing of the female protagonist? It brings to mind a scene from the movie As Good As It Gets - when asked how he writes women so well, Melvin replies, “I think of a man, and then I take away reason and accountability.” *Insert eye roll here.* I also take issue with the use of too many words, frequently ones that “fancy” when the story would be better served with plain language. Over all, it felt like the author was trying to make us realize how smart he is instead of just writing an interesting story.
November 13, 2012
Right off the bat, I will tell you what cost this book a star: the protagonist is a forensic anthropologist (my major), but I didn't see her conduct any actual osteologic investigations during this story. It was her profession that caused me to pick up this book; I like well-written forensic anthro fiction.
So, there's that. All the same, this is a tightly conducted murder mystery. FBI Special Agent Christine Prusik is the SAC (special agent in charge) of an investigation into a series of murders in southern Indiana. Her antagonist is not so much the murderer as it is a subordinate member of her staff: a man for whom reporting to a woman rankles so much that he tries to subvert her at every turn. As more and more young women go missing, each of them turning up with a significant clue upon autopsy, we see both the anti-Prusik attitude and Prusik's anxiety about the case ratchet up.
It's a good whodunnit, although I began to suspect how it would come out about halfway into the book. I blame this on having read many mysteries over the course of my life; it's pretty difficult to get one past me. That said, I really think that the author made his protagonist a forensic anthropologist to try to take advantage of what people in the field have referred to for years as the "CSI effect." He could just as easily have given her a different discipline and would have made no difference to the story given the lack of forensic anthro contained therein.
(Review based on uncorrected advance proof.)
So, there's that. All the same, this is a tightly conducted murder mystery. FBI Special Agent Christine Prusik is the SAC (special agent in charge) of an investigation into a series of murders in southern Indiana. Her antagonist is not so much the murderer as it is a subordinate member of her staff: a man for whom reporting to a woman rankles so much that he tries to subvert her at every turn. As more and more young women go missing, each of them turning up with a significant clue upon autopsy, we see both the anti-Prusik attitude and Prusik's anxiety about the case ratchet up.
It's a good whodunnit, although I began to suspect how it would come out about halfway into the book. I blame this on having read many mysteries over the course of my life; it's pretty difficult to get one past me. That said, I really think that the author made his protagonist a forensic anthropologist to try to take advantage of what people in the field have referred to for years as the "CSI effect." He could just as easily have given her a different discipline and would have made no difference to the story given the lack of forensic anthro contained therein.
(Review based on uncorrected advance proof.)
February 22, 2023
This was really not good. It is free to read with Kindle Unlimited, so if you want to give it a shot don't let my opinion dissuade you.
March 4, 2023
the glaring anti-indigenous racism is a big no-no for me
March 21, 2024
As a Criminal Justice major, I’m naturally drawn to crime and suspense thrillers and I will say that if you are a huge fan of Criminal Minds, you will be intrigued by Stone Maidens.
Synopsis: Several young women have gone missing, their lifeless bodies found with a deep cut in their abdomen and dumped in the forest ravines of Indiana. Each body leaves not only a massive cut to the abdomen but a significant piece of evidence, a “calling card”: stone figurines lodged inside the base of each victim’s larynx. Law Enforcement has never seen this before, but forensic anthropologist for the FBI, Special Agent Christine Prusik has. Christine knows all too well what it’s like to escape with her life as she, too, embodies the same type of scar on her abdomen. She must determine if this is simply a coincidence or if someone is deliberately sending her a message...and the manhunt is underway for the Southern Indiana serial killer.
Several aspects of this book reeled me in from the start. My admiration, respect, and inspiration for females in the Criminal Justice realm and working in Law Enforcement is extremely unfathomable, and the fact the main protagonist is a female forensic anthropologist had me thrilled and inspired to say the least. I sincerely enjoyed reading about how Christine battled through the ongoing struggle of being a female superior in the forensic field, surrounded by males, several of whom do not respect a woman in an authoritative role. Her determination for this career was notable, especially while she was undergoing symptoms of PTSD from past traumas; another significant topic that was accurately included and addressed as it is very prevalent for Law Enforcement professionals to struggle with PTSD and other mental complications due to the extreme circumstances and stressors of the job. This made the story feel even more real.
Another highlight of Richards’ writing was the inclusion of different points of view from the characters. As the reader, you were enveloped not only in Christine’s world, mind, and thought processes but you were also encased in the killer’s. With an extreme interest in criminal psychology, I found it interesting to pick up on ticks from the killer’s perspective or note the different childhood experiences and traumas that relate to and influence the crimes he was committing or envisioning. It was interesting to see when the different pressures or situations from the outside world would begin to absolve into his “blackouts” or visions of disturbing scenes that would make him question himself, and this also left you, as the reader, wondering if this individual was dealing with a type of dissociative identity disorder. This was also a gripping concept that made you feel like you were inside a complex Criminal Minds episode and thoroughly made you want to keep reading to find out what was physically occurring for this person.
There are not many criticisms for Stone Maidens on my part other than the overuse of names when it comes to dialogue between individuals. It is not necessary to end every sentence dialogue with the name of the person they are speaking to, and I felt that this book held too much of that. We know who the character is speaking to if it is mentioned once at the beginning of the paragraph or scene. I also noted a few grammatical errors, misspellings, or misprints with a few words. While he described the midwest landscape so thoroughly, I also wished that he had maybe used real small towns for reference besides the FBI base in Chicago, but I am a reader who gets intrigued by real places and historical elements and loves researching them after reading (it makes me cheer loudly for the vast research that the author did and credibility it adds). This book however only held imaginary Indiana and midwest towns as well as geographical locations.
Overall, Stone Maidens was so enthralling I did not want to put it down. Richards leaves you yearning to find out the truth and excited to root for Christine's case. Law Enforcement heroines leave a big smile on this girl’s face, no doubt about it. Would highly recommend it for thriller lovers and fans of Criminal Minds. Four-stars.
Synopsis: Several young women have gone missing, their lifeless bodies found with a deep cut in their abdomen and dumped in the forest ravines of Indiana. Each body leaves not only a massive cut to the abdomen but a significant piece of evidence, a “calling card”: stone figurines lodged inside the base of each victim’s larynx. Law Enforcement has never seen this before, but forensic anthropologist for the FBI, Special Agent Christine Prusik has. Christine knows all too well what it’s like to escape with her life as she, too, embodies the same type of scar on her abdomen. She must determine if this is simply a coincidence or if someone is deliberately sending her a message...and the manhunt is underway for the Southern Indiana serial killer.
Several aspects of this book reeled me in from the start. My admiration, respect, and inspiration for females in the Criminal Justice realm and working in Law Enforcement is extremely unfathomable, and the fact the main protagonist is a female forensic anthropologist had me thrilled and inspired to say the least. I sincerely enjoyed reading about how Christine battled through the ongoing struggle of being a female superior in the forensic field, surrounded by males, several of whom do not respect a woman in an authoritative role. Her determination for this career was notable, especially while she was undergoing symptoms of PTSD from past traumas; another significant topic that was accurately included and addressed as it is very prevalent for Law Enforcement professionals to struggle with PTSD and other mental complications due to the extreme circumstances and stressors of the job. This made the story feel even more real.
Another highlight of Richards’ writing was the inclusion of different points of view from the characters. As the reader, you were enveloped not only in Christine’s world, mind, and thought processes but you were also encased in the killer’s. With an extreme interest in criminal psychology, I found it interesting to pick up on ticks from the killer’s perspective or note the different childhood experiences and traumas that relate to and influence the crimes he was committing or envisioning. It was interesting to see when the different pressures or situations from the outside world would begin to absolve into his “blackouts” or visions of disturbing scenes that would make him question himself, and this also left you, as the reader, wondering if this individual was dealing with a type of dissociative identity disorder. This was also a gripping concept that made you feel like you were inside a complex Criminal Minds episode and thoroughly made you want to keep reading to find out what was physically occurring for this person.
There are not many criticisms for Stone Maidens on my part other than the overuse of names when it comes to dialogue between individuals. It is not necessary to end every sentence dialogue with the name of the person they are speaking to, and I felt that this book held too much of that. We know who the character is speaking to if it is mentioned once at the beginning of the paragraph or scene. I also noted a few grammatical errors, misspellings, or misprints with a few words. While he described the midwest landscape so thoroughly, I also wished that he had maybe used real small towns for reference besides the FBI base in Chicago, but I am a reader who gets intrigued by real places and historical elements and loves researching them after reading (it makes me cheer loudly for the vast research that the author did and credibility it adds). This book however only held imaginary Indiana and midwest towns as well as geographical locations.
Overall, Stone Maidens was so enthralling I did not want to put it down. Richards leaves you yearning to find out the truth and excited to root for Christine's case. Law Enforcement heroines leave a big smile on this girl’s face, no doubt about it. Would highly recommend it for thriller lovers and fans of Criminal Minds. Four-stars.
February 15, 2023
Like a lot of people, I came across this on Tik Tok. I didn't even really think to look into it but boy am I so glad I did. The writing. THE PLOT. Lloyd deserves every piece of recognition he is getting!
February 9, 2023
I read this book in one sitting, that’s how good it was.
February 20, 2023
This book is genuinely so bad I could not even finish it lmfao. The fact it’s even gone viral is beyond me… however the actual writing itself is pretty decent apart from some really odd metaphors and the start when he described earrings as “female hardware”…??
February 25, 2023
I wanted to like it, but man I just didn’t. On a human to human level I’m glad this author’s hard work is paying off and all, but from a strictly business standpoint this book is not good. It had a lot of potential but was poorly written, poorly researched, and by 70% I was desperate to finish just so I didn’t have to read any more. The main character was unbearable and her backstory made me roll my eyes so hard I didn’t think they’d come back around to the front. There were some good bits, but they were few and far between and overshadowed by bad dialogue and inconsistencies. No more, please no more.
October 28, 2013
Actually gave this book more patience than I thought I would, but in the end it got to me. Pastiche heroine, angsty belaboured and oh why do we have to hear about this again. Then the whole, oh, the serial killer wears a mask, and I just happen to be an anthropologist who did research in the tribe that wears these masks and oh wait, I was an anthropologist, but really I'm a forensic scientist, but oh no, I am heading a criminal investigation. Sorry.
February 18, 2023
Bought this book bc of TikTok. There’s nothing like a child’s love of a parent and wanting them to be happy and succeed. So I gave it a shot. The book was better than I anticipated. Classic FBI/police procedural with serial killer on the loose. Lots going on, but interesting and entertaining.
February 27, 2023
2.5 rounded down for GR.
Stone Maidens came to me through a book bestie, and then I read it with her and a few other wonderful ladies. Having discussions through the read was really helpful and helped me enjoy it just that little bit more. Without them and their conversations, I probably wouldn't have kept reading. I did have some issues with the lack of research, or knowledge of some basic forensic and medical information and the inconsistencies of our main characters role throughout the story. I do have to say, this book is the exact reason that I usually avoid books written from a female POV by a male. I really wish I could have loved it more, I really wanted to.
Stone Maidens came to me through a book bestie, and then I read it with her and a few other wonderful ladies. Having discussions through the read was really helpful and helped me enjoy it just that little bit more. Without them and their conversations, I probably wouldn't have kept reading. I did have some issues with the lack of research, or knowledge of some basic forensic and medical information and the inconsistencies of our main characters role throughout the story. I do have to say, this book is the exact reason that I usually avoid books written from a female POV by a male. I really wish I could have loved it more, I really wanted to.
February 27, 2023
SPOILER ALERT -
You know what's an unfair plot twist? Twins.
You know what is worse than twins? Identical twins.
You know what is worse than identical twins? Schizophrenic identical twins.
You know what is worse than identical twins with Schizophrenia? Twins who have been separated at birth.
You know what's an unfair plot twist? Twins.
You know what is worse than twins? Identical twins.
You know what is worse than identical twins? Schizophrenic identical twins.
You know what is worse than identical twins with Schizophrenia? Twins who have been separated at birth.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 19, 2023
Sorry my first purchase from a TikTok recommendation and I have to say til Tok is stupid and so was this book
March 6, 2023
A police procedural and psychological thriller, this book has an interesting plot and some twists.
One critique I have is the way the main lead, Christine, is being written. She is both brusque and vulnerable to her colleagues, which to me just doesn't compute with the overall character development. I find the chapters with her POV to be overexplained, so I skim through them. On the other hand, there are other parts in the story that need more details.
Like most people on GR, I found out about this book from social media. Overall, it is a good debut novel and I enjoyed it.
One critique I have is the way the main lead, Christine, is being written. She is both brusque and vulnerable to her colleagues, which to me just doesn't compute with the overall character development. I find the chapters with her POV to be overexplained, so I skim through them. On the other hand, there are other parts in the story that need more details.
Like most people on GR, I found out about this book from social media. Overall, it is a good debut novel and I enjoyed it.
February 23, 2023
This book was sitting at a solid 4 for me until after the halfway point. It ended with a 3.
As someone in the criminal justice field, I felt the author didn't do any real research with the technical and forensic aspects. Then, about halfway to 3/4 point, it all kind of went to hell, and it was difficult for me to get past it.
I also couldn't connect with the fmc. I did not like her, and (again, probably because of my profession) I couldn't get past all the reasons she shouldn't be working the case, be in the field, or still be employed by the end of it all. Also, based on her being a forensic anthropologist, she wouldn't have been doing anything with this case really. Additionally, the inclusion of the romance seemed forced and was entirely unnecessary- the past history between her and her direct supervisor also included.
As for the parts about the red herring, the killer, and the reality of everything, it was going well enough, but got to be confusing towards the end- but maybe that was on purpose due to the mindset/pov. I felt the prologue and epilogue were a bit unnecessary as well, but for those that might have wanted a non-relevant question answered- it answered it, I guess.
Overall, it was pretty decently written, I just personally/professionally have issues with some of the content - even trying to suspend belief due to it being a work of fiction. It's hard to get past when the author goes into such detail- which can be a blessing and a curse in this case.
As someone in the criminal justice field, I felt the author didn't do any real research with the technical and forensic aspects. Then, about halfway to 3/4 point, it all kind of went to hell, and it was difficult for me to get past it.
I also couldn't connect with the fmc. I did not like her, and (again, probably because of my profession) I couldn't get past all the reasons she shouldn't be working the case, be in the field, or still be employed by the end of it all. Also, based on her being a forensic anthropologist, she wouldn't have been doing anything with this case really. Additionally, the inclusion of the romance seemed forced and was entirely unnecessary- the past history between her and her direct supervisor also included.
As for the parts about the red herring, the killer, and the reality of everything, it was going well enough, but got to be confusing towards the end- but maybe that was on purpose due to the mindset/pov. I felt the prologue and epilogue were a bit unnecessary as well, but for those that might have wanted a non-relevant question answered- it answered it, I guess.
Overall, it was pretty decently written, I just personally/professionally have issues with some of the content - even trying to suspend belief due to it being a work of fiction. It's hard to get past when the author goes into such detail- which can be a blessing and a curse in this case.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 25, 2023
TikTok made me do it!
Saw the vid about this book, saw the many reviews, saw it was available on KU, and thought, hey, why not.
Yeah. Mixed bag.
Read my status updates for more info. This was good in parts, and dumb in others, and practically unbelievable in others still.
Great writing, for sure. Vivid, descriptive, engaging.
Stupid heroine, misogynistic FBI agents, with lots of what seems to be false information. Are forensic anthropologists also FBI field agents? Do we really want to believe that said special agent routinely pops Xanax while on a case? What self-respecting special agent leaves her service weapon at home while hunting down a serial killer without a real plan? And why the hell is there a budding romance included while hunting down a serial killer? Is that because the special agent is female and just broke up with her previous boyfriend/boss? And thus desperate, I assume?
Presumably this book had a fact checker? Perhaps not.
Haven't read a thriller in years, so maybe my expectations were way off. 3 stars, generously.
Saw the vid about this book, saw the many reviews, saw it was available on KU, and thought, hey, why not.
Yeah. Mixed bag.
Read my status updates for more info. This was good in parts, and dumb in others, and practically unbelievable in others still.
Great writing, for sure. Vivid, descriptive, engaging.
Stupid heroine, misogynistic FBI agents, with lots of what seems to be false information. Are forensic anthropologists also FBI field agents? Do we really want to believe that said special agent routinely pops Xanax while on a case? What self-respecting special agent leaves her service weapon at home while hunting down a serial killer without a real plan? And why the hell is there a budding romance included while hunting down a serial killer? Is that because the special agent is female and just broke up with her previous boyfriend/boss? And thus desperate, I assume?
Presumably this book had a fact checker? Perhaps not.
Haven't read a thriller in years, so maybe my expectations were way off. 3 stars, generously.
May 21, 2016
Stone Maidens
By: Lloyd Devereux Richards
Genre(s): Mystery, Thriller, Detective, Horror & (maybe even a little) Paranormal
I read this book months ago; I’m just now realizing I never reviewed it. This makes me feel badly because I actually liked the book and the author needs to know it. Reviews are bread and butter to writers!
So, Mr. Richards, let me tell you what I liked about your book:
1. The main character, Christine Prusik, "the chief forensic anthropologist for the FBI’s Chicago field office", is neurotic, anxiety ridden and comes complete with a devastating history. And yet, she’s also strong, smart and capable. The problem is, her co-workers don’t see her that way. That got my ire up—for both her and me. I hate being dismissed by men who think women are only important in kitchen’s and birthing rooms. So, you go Christine!
2. The story line is both entertaining and chilling. Not only is the killer cruel and monstrous he seems to be somehow linked—maybe on a psychic level to Christine’s history. Every move he makes is reminiscent of what she herself went through in New Guinea. (No spoilers from me!)
3. Joe, the local Sheriff Christine partners with to hunt this killer down, is a sweetheart…maybe to his detriment. I liked him very much. He’s very well written and makes the perfect yin to Christine’s yang.
4. Christine’s co-workers (including the boss she had an affair with) are jerks and misogynistic creeps. However, I liked how well they were written. I’ve known jerks just like them and these characters reminded me of my own personal cavemen experiences. When an author can make his characters so real you want to punch them…he’s a really good writer!
Here’s what I didn’t like, Mr. Richards:
1. While the story-line was entertaining, it wasn’t unique; not in its entirety. (The New Guinea side story was fairly different, however.) At times, I almost felt as if I were watching an episode of Law and Order, SVU. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the story-line, I did. I like Law and Order and I liked this book. I’m just saying it was a little predictable. Just a little.
That’s it. My only “criticism” and the reason I would rate this book a 4.5. But, Amazon doesn’t have ½ star ratings so I had to make it a four. But, I really liked this book and would recommend it to anyone who likes mystery, intrigue, detective stories and paranormal touches. It’s a good read!
By: Lloyd Devereux Richards
Genre(s): Mystery, Thriller, Detective, Horror & (maybe even a little) Paranormal
I read this book months ago; I’m just now realizing I never reviewed it. This makes me feel badly because I actually liked the book and the author needs to know it. Reviews are bread and butter to writers!
So, Mr. Richards, let me tell you what I liked about your book:
1. The main character, Christine Prusik, "the chief forensic anthropologist for the FBI’s Chicago field office", is neurotic, anxiety ridden and comes complete with a devastating history. And yet, she’s also strong, smart and capable. The problem is, her co-workers don’t see her that way. That got my ire up—for both her and me. I hate being dismissed by men who think women are only important in kitchen’s and birthing rooms. So, you go Christine!
2. The story line is both entertaining and chilling. Not only is the killer cruel and monstrous he seems to be somehow linked—maybe on a psychic level to Christine’s history. Every move he makes is reminiscent of what she herself went through in New Guinea. (No spoilers from me!)
3. Joe, the local Sheriff Christine partners with to hunt this killer down, is a sweetheart…maybe to his detriment. I liked him very much. He’s very well written and makes the perfect yin to Christine’s yang.
4. Christine’s co-workers (including the boss she had an affair with) are jerks and misogynistic creeps. However, I liked how well they were written. I’ve known jerks just like them and these characters reminded me of my own personal cavemen experiences. When an author can make his characters so real you want to punch them…he’s a really good writer!
Here’s what I didn’t like, Mr. Richards:
1. While the story-line was entertaining, it wasn’t unique; not in its entirety. (The New Guinea side story was fairly different, however.) At times, I almost felt as if I were watching an episode of Law and Order, SVU. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the story-line, I did. I like Law and Order and I liked this book. I’m just saying it was a little predictable. Just a little.
That’s it. My only “criticism” and the reason I would rate this book a 4.5. But, Amazon doesn’t have ½ star ratings so I had to make it a four. But, I really liked this book and would recommend it to anyone who likes mystery, intrigue, detective stories and paranormal touches. It’s a good read!
March 7, 2023
3.75 stars
This was written in 2012 and recently gained popularity through TikTok. I thought I would give it a go.
I am a pretty critical mystery/ murder reader and this kept me intrigued early on. There was a particular part that I found interesting but can’t disclose it without giving away spoilers. I did find other parts of this a bit far-fetched and be forewarned in was gruesome in parts. Cannibalism for example.
Regardless, I think it was well worth the time spent for a book that maybe never received the attention it deserved when it was first published.
This was written in 2012 and recently gained popularity through TikTok. I thought I would give it a go.
I am a pretty critical mystery/ murder reader and this kept me intrigued early on. There was a particular part that I found interesting but can’t disclose it without giving away spoilers. I did find other parts of this a bit far-fetched and be forewarned in was gruesome in parts. Cannibalism for example.
Regardless, I think it was well worth the time spent for a book that maybe never received the attention it deserved when it was first published.
December 31, 2016
Read this one a while back and so it's not very fresh in my mind but I do remember enjoying it. It was about a forensic anthropologist who gets wrapped up in a crime that reminds her of a very bad time in her life when she was almost killed by a sadistic killer kind of like the one they are after.
It was a good crime novel and I will be checking out more from this author in the future. :)
It was a good crime novel and I will be checking out more from this author in the future. :)
November 28, 2014
I did not enjoy this book. It was very farfetched for me.
February 14, 2023
I found this book through tiktok and I'm glad that I did.
February 28, 2023
Sorry to say that i didn’t enjoy this book at all, and it’s only getting 1 ⭐️ because I listened to the audiobook version and the narration was awful so it’s a pity star from me 😕
July 31, 2023
The Good -- Let me begin with the shortest category because I like to at least appear positive and there actually are some good things about Lloyd Devereux Richards Stone Maidens.
Cinematic Qualities -- Stone Maidens will make a pretty good movie (and there are rumours that a screen adaptation is in the works), or if Richards were to go on and turn FBI Special Agent Christine Prusik I could see it slot into TV as a less good but interesting ongoing series. The chase for the cannibal serial killer and even Stone Maidens' ridiculous "twist" offer the nuts and bolts of a decent thriller, and I could even see myself shelling out the price of a ticket if the casting were handled well. That said, though, I won't hold my breath. It could still end up being a poor finished product.
Devereux's Journey -- The languishing of Stone Maidens since its release in 2012, and the way Devereux's TikTok daughter suddenly made it a #1 hit in 2023 with an appeal to her followers (hell, her stunt is what brought even me to the book, and I've never even been on TIkTok), is a fun story. It's full of love and determination and perseverance, and that's rarely a bad thing, and even a little bit inspiring, and for this alone I gave it an extra star.
Unfortunately, It's all downhill from here.
The Bad -- Here's where I get a little mean.
The Story -- When it comes down to it the story is mostly crap. Some of that has to do with Devereux's poor characterizations -- especially his heroine, some of that has to do with the uneven pacing of the novel, some of that has to do with the ridiculous "twist," some of that has to do with the unrealistic actions characters take, but all of that really has to do with Devereux not being quite "there" yet. A good editor could have made a world of difference, and may still in a future tale, but Stone Maidens just isn't all that good. A better author would have done better. Here's hoping he improves.
The Ridiculous Twist -- Not wanting to hide a spoiler here, let me just say that if Christine Pusic was a colleague of Mulder and Scully, the "twist" would have been just fine, and all the pseudo-science would have been cheesy fun, but Devereux seemed to want us to take Stone Maidens very seriously, and to consider the "twist" to be both possible and realistic. In the right "universe" it could be both, but the "universe" he created doesn't jibe with his implied intentions.
& The Ugly -- Yeah. There is some ugly happening here.
The Protagonist -- Christine Prusic, our amazing Forensic Anthropologist and FBI Special agent, is neither likeable nor capable and never amazing. Oh we are told she is, both in her inner monologue and by those "nice and good people" who praise her, but we are rarely shown that she is actually good at her job. In fact, she is just your classic, half-assed investigator, breaking rules, being reckless, looking down her nose at everyone, getting people killed and being heralded as a hero for her awesomeness with barely a tip of the hat to her supposed skill set. She is more bush league Sherlock Holmes than Major League Quincey. Add that to her relentless whining that every person (always male) who disagrees with her is a chauvinist, that every mistake is someone else's fault, her shitty behaviour towards everyone and her PTSD drug dependence, and what we have is a rather poor detective who gets lucky in the extreme.
If cast well, her screen manifestation could become quite loved, but a healthy dose of heavy screen adaptation to show us more instead of telling us will make the job easier for any actress who lands the role.
The Antagonists -- Every one of them, and there are more than a few, are mere caricatures. From the cannibal in the South Pacific to the cannibal in Indiana, from the dickhead FBI head to the dickhead FBI field man, from the old bastard who sired a killer to the old bitch who tortured the killer after birthing the killer, the antagonists on display are piss poor. And while that will make things very easy to cast and enrich in a film adaptation, they are a distinct failure on the page.
One last thought ... I am glad that Stone Maidens is finished because, at best, it was barely okay, but somehow I don't feel like my time was wasted because I actually had a little fun reading it, if even just because of the occasional snort or eye-roll it conjured. Kinda like watching some terrible TV from the 70s or 80s. You know ... something like Hello, Larry.
Cinematic Qualities -- Stone Maidens will make a pretty good movie (and there are rumours that a screen adaptation is in the works), or if Richards were to go on and turn FBI Special Agent Christine Prusik I could see it slot into TV as a less good but interesting ongoing series. The chase for the cannibal serial killer and even Stone Maidens' ridiculous "twist" offer the nuts and bolts of a decent thriller, and I could even see myself shelling out the price of a ticket if the casting were handled well. That said, though, I won't hold my breath. It could still end up being a poor finished product.
Devereux's Journey -- The languishing of Stone Maidens since its release in 2012, and the way Devereux's TikTok daughter suddenly made it a #1 hit in 2023 with an appeal to her followers (hell, her stunt is what brought even me to the book, and I've never even been on TIkTok), is a fun story. It's full of love and determination and perseverance, and that's rarely a bad thing, and even a little bit inspiring, and for this alone I gave it an extra star.
Unfortunately, It's all downhill from here.
The Bad -- Here's where I get a little mean.
The Story -- When it comes down to it the story is mostly crap. Some of that has to do with Devereux's poor characterizations -- especially his heroine, some of that has to do with the uneven pacing of the novel, some of that has to do with the ridiculous "twist," some of that has to do with the unrealistic actions characters take, but all of that really has to do with Devereux not being quite "there" yet. A good editor could have made a world of difference, and may still in a future tale, but Stone Maidens just isn't all that good. A better author would have done better. Here's hoping he improves.
The Ridiculous Twist -- Not wanting to hide a spoiler here, let me just say that if Christine Pusic was a colleague of Mulder and Scully, the "twist" would have been just fine, and all the pseudo-science would have been cheesy fun, but Devereux seemed to want us to take Stone Maidens very seriously, and to consider the "twist" to be both possible and realistic. In the right "universe" it could be both, but the "universe" he created doesn't jibe with his implied intentions.
& The Ugly -- Yeah. There is some ugly happening here.
The Protagonist -- Christine Prusic, our amazing Forensic Anthropologist and FBI Special agent, is neither likeable nor capable and never amazing. Oh we are told she is, both in her inner monologue and by those "nice and good people" who praise her, but we are rarely shown that she is actually good at her job. In fact, she is just your classic, half-assed investigator, breaking rules, being reckless, looking down her nose at everyone, getting people killed and being heralded as a hero for her awesomeness with barely a tip of the hat to her supposed skill set. She is more bush league Sherlock Holmes than Major League Quincey. Add that to her relentless whining that every person (always male) who disagrees with her is a chauvinist, that every mistake is someone else's fault, her shitty behaviour towards everyone and her PTSD drug dependence, and what we have is a rather poor detective who gets lucky in the extreme.
If cast well, her screen manifestation could become quite loved, but a healthy dose of heavy screen adaptation to show us more instead of telling us will make the job easier for any actress who lands the role.
The Antagonists -- Every one of them, and there are more than a few, are mere caricatures. From the cannibal in the South Pacific to the cannibal in Indiana, from the dickhead FBI head to the dickhead FBI field man, from the old bastard who sired a killer to the old bitch who tortured the killer after birthing the killer, the antagonists on display are piss poor. And while that will make things very easy to cast and enrich in a film adaptation, they are a distinct failure on the page.
One last thought ... I am glad that Stone Maidens is finished because, at best, it was barely okay, but somehow I don't feel like my time was wasted because I actually had a little fun reading it, if even just because of the occasional snort or eye-roll it conjured. Kinda like watching some terrible TV from the 70s or 80s. You know ... something like Hello, Larry.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,214 reviews