This is an excellent, convoluted tale involving several characters who are up to no good and others who appear to be suspicious but who aren't.
It also contains what must be one of the earliest fictional inclusions of DNA 'fingerprinting' as a plot point. Much is made of McNight having planted the letter claiming his son was really the missing heir to the fortune several years beforehand, but the existence of DNA testing means his scheme fell apart almost immediately. Was he scamming his son too, knowing the police would be able to disprove the story straightaway? Or was he hoping to string it out and that they really would be able to claim the fortune eventually, not anticipating (because who could back then?) the development of an easy method of proof?
There are several scenes in the story in which young people either do refuse to spend Christmas with their parents, or try to. In all instances, you can't help thinking the parents should just let the kids go. They're not creating any sort of Happy Christmas by forcing attendance!
Poor Janie the social worker turns out to have been a case of wrong place, wrong time (more or less). Her game playing friends seemed a bit suspicious but turned out not to be. Her rebellion against her parents goes further than most, and at the age of 26 is a bit pathetic. Just move out FFS!
There are a fair few young actors in the story who went on to be relatively well known. Duncan Bell, Michael Nardone and Robert Cavanah among them.
Anyway, it's an entertaining story, not least because of Taggart's bah, humbug approach to the festive season.
It also contains what must be one of the earliest fictional inclusions of DNA 'fingerprinting' as a plot point. Much is made of McNight having planted the letter claiming his son was really the missing heir to the fortune several years beforehand, but the existence of DNA testing means his scheme fell apart almost immediately. Was he scamming his son too, knowing the police would be able to disprove the story straightaway? Or was he hoping to string it out and that they really would be able to claim the fortune eventually, not anticipating (because who could back then?) the development of an easy method of proof?
There are several scenes in the story in which young people either do refuse to spend Christmas with their parents, or try to. In all instances, you can't help thinking the parents should just let the kids go. They're not creating any sort of Happy Christmas by forcing attendance!
Poor Janie the social worker turns out to have been a case of wrong place, wrong time (more or less). Her game playing friends seemed a bit suspicious but turned out not to be. Her rebellion against her parents goes further than most, and at the age of 26 is a bit pathetic. Just move out FFS!
There are a fair few young actors in the story who went on to be relatively well known. Duncan Bell, Michael Nardone and Robert Cavanah among them.
Anyway, it's an entertaining story, not least because of Taggart's bah, humbug approach to the festive season.
Tell Your Friends