This book is pretty good as far as your basic crime novels go, but there is a gaping hole in the plot that I couldn't get past.
The premise is that a serial killer is targeting women, but not sexually assaulting them as would be expected. All of the victims are noted to have had no signs of having sexual contact within 72 hours of the attack in order to make it clear that this is not part of the killer's MO. But in order to frame other suspects, it is also said that the killer specifically makes his move *right after* the women have been with other men that they were intimate with, usually within the hour. So they absolutely would have shown signs of sexual activity and the detectives wouldn't have been able to say until the truth came out that it wasn't with the killer.
You can't have it both ways! Not sure if the author didn't put this together or was just hoping no one else would just because it served different aspects of the story for both contradictory ideas to be true.
So the book was good for mindless entertainment, but I get annoyed when there are glaring inconsistencies like this.