(This takes place in Buxton and Longnor, which is down the valley from Flash, so you should appreciate it for that, plus it's a ripping good yarn involving the sort of Derbyshire rednecks you probably have encountered.)
The plotting is brilliant, although it doesn't tread ground that's never been trodden before -- the remote and self-governing village, child molestation, the repercussions of an old crime 35 years later. The first two-thirds of the book are a good, but standard 'true crime' novel, ostensibly written by a journalist; the final third (35 years later) is the revealing of what really happened, and there is enough detection in it to classify the book as a detective story, with fair if well-hidden clues some of which are cleverly dropped in in the first section, where one is not reading it as much more than a good procedural novel. The prose is excellent, the early 1960s milieu very accurate as to policing of the period and nostalgic backdrops, the trial scene suspenseful and well-done. Best is the characterization on all levels, important and secondary people. And what I particularly liked was the setting in the 'backwoods', as I know from experience, being familiar with towns in the mountains of eastern Tennessee (not featured in this book, but no different really, from what is) and with the Peak District of Derbyshire and Staffordshire (my brother lives in Leek and I know the places described pretty well).
Val McDermid is a member of the Scottish McMafia of crime writers along with Rankin, McIlvaney, etc. but actually lives in Manchester and sets her stories in that area usually. I haven't quite figured her out yet, since I haven't read more than one book of each of her various series heroes/heroines. "Place" was a one-off, supposedly, though I'd like to see Catherine the investigative-reporter lady and ex-cop now bird-watcher Tommy in another book. Just finished some Internet checking-out, and find that along with her standard 1960s nostaligic set-up (Beatles and other pop singers, JFK assassination and his connection with Buxton, Profumo, etc.) what seemed to be irrelevant connections between missing children interspersed in the book -- to mislead us into thinking a serial killer? -- are actual victims of the once notorious Moors Murderers in the real life of the time.
Don't read this bit until you have read the book:
<<<<< SPOILER >>>>>
As detection this book violates one of Knox's rules: that "The detective must not light on any clues which are not instantly produced for the inspection of the reader." There are lots of items that turn up later that were just not told to us, or hardly more than hinted at, especially in regard to the thoughts of the 'second detective' (DS Tommy Clough, a great character by the way) who turns out to be so important in the end-game, even though he is not used as a point-of-view person. Also, the layers of the 'extended family' with only 3 surnames leaves out the most important -- something only hinted at very indirectly in a distracting but moving sub-plot. The clue is there in a vague sense, but hardly anyone would ever spot it on a first reading. It is a corollary of another of Knox's rules ("The criminal must be someone mentioned in the early part of the story") that it should also apply to any other key persons.
I have a bad habit dating back to school days (writing comments in the margins of my books, underlining, etc.), which undermines the value of my book collection for the resale market -- but my point has always been "I own this book and I can do anything I want with it," not caring about the antiquities aspect. In any case, I did that with this book, as I've done with all my Carr books. In most cases comments like 'But wouldn't the neighbors have known that the daughter was dead' were fixed up with an 'Ah, so, they had moved to another town where nobody knew them' at the denouement (one gets the suspicion that the author inserted these tie-ups at galley-proof stage, given her acknowledgements in the preface about 'gratitude to so-and-so for pointing out major errors'). We were never told this, in fact never told about these major characters at all. Also a blunder in the courtroom scene when the prosecution forensic specialist goes on about blood from a virgin's hymenal rupture when the whole point of the case was that she was not one. It is a rape charge as well as murder, but photographs taken by the accused murderer and used in evidence prove that he did that long before he supposedly 'ravished' and killed her. (That may be a clue, but it's not a very good one!) In fact, the production of these nasty photos in court is never described in the transcript we get, only hinted at as having been produced in evidence. There were a few items like this that rang gongs even when the flaws were covered over at the end.
As great a character as the witch-like matriarch Ma Lomas is -- in fact the most marvellous creation in this book, a true classic figure -- it is hard to believe that she was able to manipulate the interbred degenerates of her village so skillfully or be so crafty at villainy and clever psychological manipulation of outsiders like the police. [But, no, she is NOT the murderer! In fact the murderer is ... well, read the Crispin story about Baker.] I actually felt sorry for the man executed until the final revelation, where the whole point of this clever plot is made perfectly clear and satisfactory.
<<<< END SPOILER >>>>