This was an excellent debut from Kathleen Hale. 
 Kippy Bushman's best friend Ruth was murdered but the town's incompetent law enforcement has the wrong guy in custody. And Kippy wants to change that. But a long the way she finds out that Friendship is not so friendly and the people she knows aren't what she thought they were. 
 I'm not going to lie, at first the book was slow. Kippy's best friend just died and it's set in a small town so I can understand why there is a lot of grief going on, but I'm not really a fan of grief (who is?) so that made it go on for a while. But then it got good when Davey, Ruth's brother, entered the picture. 
 Now, I give this book 5 stars because as a whole and how it ends in total were all very good. But there were a lot of things I hated that made the book what it was and made it so good. The majority of the people Kippy came in contact with were excruciatingly annoying. And I think this was the point. They were so fake in their friendliness and they were so set in their own ways that they wouldn't give Kippy the time of day. Being that the book was written from Kippy's point of view, I understood what Kippy was thinking and I was irritated when people brushed her off. I've always found that a book is a good book when you start hating the characters who make the main character's life hell. When you start getting almost personally offended by the secondary character's actions, you know the author has done a good job of making the main character relateable. 
 Overall, although some of the quirks of the characters were really annoying, they really made the story. The one thing I just could not stand though, was the use of "gah." I really just hate even having to write it. It annoyed me when that Libby girl called Kippy "Katie," but not as much as when she through around "gah" every time she was in a part of the book. I get that she is trying not to take the Lord's name in vain, but you defeat the purpose of using "gah" for reasons in vain when you then say "Gah bless" instead of "God." Although I was infuriated when all those people betrayed and abused Kippy at the end (not abused but treated her very wrongly), I think the "gah" part is what really got me. I almost gave this book 4 stars just for that. 
 But I realize that without that annoying bit, Libby wouldn't have been the character she needed to be. If Sheriff Staake had believed Kippy, he wouldn't be the character he is and quite frankly there'd be no book. And a good book is one you end up really enjoying and don't stop reading even though at times it frustrates you. The book was satire with a mystery spin and it accomplished that. 
 Now I don't usually read reviews, but since some drama that I will discuss later caught my eye, I read some. 
 Apparently people don't like how this treats certain subjects such as mental illness. As someone who has suffered such illness, I really don't see any problem with it. It just slightly reminded me of Silver Linings Playbook with how it didn't take such a serious depressing look at mental illness. I'm sorry but as someone who has mental illness, I really don't want a book to depress me further and make me feel sorry for the characters and ultimately myself. That's not very productive. 
 Someone said this book had an "ableist" outlook and I just want to say a really mean word to that person. I don't think Hale was dismissive at all. What I garnered from this book is how frustrating it is when people don't believe you and won't take you seriously because of an episode in your past. I think it accurately describes how the world will just take your past and let it stick to you forever and sometimes you just have to keep fighting and show them that you shouldn't be dismissed and that sometimes they should listen to you because you're right and they're wrong. Sending Kippy to the rehabilitation center wasn't a cheap twist. It really put you in her shoes and made you feel how frustrating it is to not have people listen to you when you're right about something because they think you're crazy. 
 Sometimes people think they are trying to help a "community"/group of people by saying "that was a horrible way to portray the so-and-so community/this-type-of-people and it was really stereotypical" but it really doesn't help. Treating our condition like it's something that should be handled with kid gloves doesn't help. Treat people like normal people, not like they're special and need to be handled delicately. We don't need books to portray us specially and have the characters treat everyone specially. We know people in the outside world are mean. We don't need to be protected from that. 
 Anyway, in closing that part of my now rant, the author doesn't have a dismissive attitude towards mental illness. She writes the characters as having a dismissive attitude towards Kippy and her concerns for a reason. Even if people don't believe you, you have to go on and be strong and show them how wrong they are. 
 Moving on, apparently Kippy also slut shames. All I'm going to say is that I'm with Kippy. Although I really don't think it's slut shaming to point out the obvious. 
 Now, I'd like to apologize to the author and anyone who reads this for letting this become a rant. But some of the things said in reviews just really irked me. It's one of the reasons I don't read reviews. 
 Which brings me to the "offensive" comments Hale made. 
 I don't think some reviewers realize how much of a kill joy their reviews can be. I never read reviews about books on Goodreads. I use Goodreads to keep a list of my to-reads, to find out what a book is about, and to keep track on when it's being released. Sooooooo many of the reviews on here are negative reviews from the same people over and over and over and over again. There are two or three people whose names and pictures I see in the review section of every single YA book I've read/want to read. I have seen dozens and dozens of reviews by those people and they're always less than 2 or 3 stars. I've never seen anything positive. 
 I would think that I just like crappy books, but the books always have 4-5 stars. What I have noticed is that people tend to write negative reviews more than positive reviews. I guess when you don't like something you just want to complain about it. I know this because I usually have more negative things to say than positive because I'm just not the kind of person who goes on about what they love (except for pizza). But with books I'm not that person. If I don't like a book, I just don't finish it. And if I don't finish it, I don't waste the time I saved by not finishing by writing something negative. Unless a book has offended me to the ends of the universe and back, if I don't like it, I put it down and forget about it. But usually I pick out books that end up being awesome and 5 star worthy. 
 The author said about Goodreads: "I limit my Goodreads ratings to 5 stars, or give no rating at all. Basically, I know when I am extremely effusive about something, but have trouble differentiating numerically between less enthusiastic reactions." 
 Apparently Hale is evil for this opinion. I guess I am evil too. The thing is, if a book isn't 5 or sometimes 4 star worthy, I just don't even spend the time debating whether it should get 2 stars or 3 stars or sometimes 4 stars. Because usually I didn't finish. 
 I guess it just baffles me that people spend so much time on something they don't like. I did that once with a boyfriend. It sucked so much that now I don't do it with anything. Life is too short to spend on things you don't love. Except for work. Gotta pay for books and internet somehow. 
 And I spent the time writing this review (more like rant) because I really enjoyed this book. I resonated with the character and the author. I look forward to reading what Hale comes out with next.