You have finished a year of college. You don't like the introductory course in your major. You decide you want to make a difference in the world, so you change your major to forensic science. The rewarding career of a crime scene investigator gives you the opportunity to do things in the lab undetected, to point guilt in a definite direction.

Enter Bernard Cushman, forensic scientist for Oregon State Crime Lab, a place where a fingerprint can mean the difference in life or death. This is no spoiler, as Phillip Margolin shows early in the novel that something is not quite right about Cushman. The reader's introduction comes after the execution of one of four men his forensic science put on death row. He celebrates with champagne and caviar. "He wished others were here to celebrate with him, but he knew many people would find his celebration inappropriate, peculiar, or both" (14).

Margolin uses the omniscient viewpoint of entering every character whose thought processes are revealed. One way of writing a thriller is to write omnisciently, keeping the reader current with all hidden stuff, knowing what each character's connection with it is as it happens. The other way allows the reader to follow the story through the viewpoint of only the main character, usually the detective or surgeon or criminalist, allowing the reader to learn information only as the character finds it. Margolin mostly does a good job with the former technique, but halfway through the novel, it does become wearing. First, character in dialog, then writer gives character's thought process behind dialog, then dialog, then thoughts, and so on.

The story has multiple characters, including two sets of attorneys working with two sets of clients. The crime lab makes the defining difference. Then inexplicable murders begin, coicidental and not. The reader knows exactly what is going on and just waits for the characters to figure it out. To prevent spoilers, here's what happens in generic terms. Crime scene evidence shows up. Suspects are arrested, but not the right ones. Trial dates arrive. Finally, someone figures out what is going on. Revelation. Trial. Arrest. Terror.

This thriller is recommended.

So what happens when a forensics expert decides to become the judge and jury instead of just reporting the facts? That's the premise of Phillip Margolin's latest novel, Proof Positive. Definitely makes you think...

A homeless person, suffering from mental issues, is accused of a rather gruesome murder that nearly appears to be an open-and-shut case. His attorney has that small voice that says she believes that he didn't do it, but the evidence is overwhelming. Meanwhile, her father is defending a crime boss's muscle who's been accused of murdering a junkie tied to a rival. Again, the evidence points directly to the accused, but there's still the insistence that he didn't do it. When they start comparing notes and poking at the few open issues, they discover a common thread... the same forensic expert for the State is involved in all the cases. When an additional lawyer brings in a case that bears the same characteristics, the pressure starts to build and people start dying to cover up the truth... whatever it may be.

I like Margolin's writing a lot... The pacing in Proof was good, and the premise was a bit different than stories I've read of late. What *would* happen if a criminologist went bad and started determining who should and shouldn't be innocent or guilty? I'll also confess to a certain bias towards his novels because they are all set in my home town of Portland Oregon. Reading a story and visualizing each location exactly as it exists always adds an element of enjoyment for me...

A great summer read, and one that should appeal to anyone who is hooked on the CSI-style shows currently in vogue on network TV.

Fans of the TV series "CSI," where the characters use cutting-edge forensic tools to examine evidence to solve murder cases, will definitely enjoy Phillip Margolin's latest thriller, "Proof Positive." Here the devil is in the forensic details....quite literally.

Bernard Cashman, a respected forensic expert who works for the Oregon State Crime Laboratory, has set himself up as judge and jury in certain criminal cases where he has been the lead crime scene investigator. Cashman, with almost godlike power, has manipulated critical evidence to send innocent people suspected of heinous crimes to jail and, at times, to their state sanctioned deaths.

Jacob Cohen, a mentally ill homeless man with a prior rape conviction stands accused of brutally murdering a woman. His lawyer, Doug Weaver, is convinced his client is innocent. Confused in Bigtime!

This is Ms. Jaffe's third appearance in a Margolin crime thriller, and while she makes a credible heroine, she is not the strongest of characters. She serves the purpose of competent investigator, but I would not read a Margolin mystery just because it features Amanda Jaffe. There are authors whose characters are so developed and appealing that I would and do read their series novels on the strength of the lead personae they create, i.e., Andrew Vachss "Burke," and Peter Robinson's Detective Chief Inspector Banks.

However, this is a legal thriller that provides a riveting and entertaining read - even though the reader knows whodunit almost from the beginning. The author, Phillip Margolin, worked for 25 years as a criminal defense attorney, representing 30 homicide cases, 12 of which involved the death penalty. His knowledge of the subject, as well as his psychological portraits, make for a rich narrative.

JANA