ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL really is what its title says it is: an anatomy, or analysis, of a scandal. The story is told from the viewpoints of the various people who are involved in the scandal, directly or indirectly, although the actual scandal is not dealt with until about page 200. You might say, then, up until that point is setup that goes too long. You would be only partially correct. If this is to be an anatomy of a scandal, analyses of these people and their backgrounds are necessary.

James is a handsome, charismatic politician in England. His is the scandal to be analyzed. So we go back to his college days and those of his future wife, Sophie, and some of the people they went to school with. These are people in the 1990s who will be directly or indirectly involved in the scandal about 20 years later.

In 2016 James is accused of rape by a woman he had been having an affair with. The case goes to trial, and the viewpoints of various characters, including the prosecutor, Kate, are given postscandal as well.

I was surprised by Kate. I feel like I shouldn’t have been, though. You may catch it before I did.

I enjoyed this book, although perhaps the word really shouldn’t be “enjoyed.” The subject matter wasn’t exactly happy.

My only criticism of ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL is its punctuation. Semicolons are misused all over the place. I am a retired editor, and these errors glared at me.