The Lemonade Crime

memoiloveit - I rate this book as fair since even though the protagonist, Evan Treski, is given his stolen $208 back, the mystery is too easy for me to have to think deeply for. The author made the criminal too blatant and nobody else can be blamed. Jacqueline Davies made the criminal, Scott Spencer, take too long to be found guilty of stealing Evan’s money since everybody knows Scott stole it, but nobody has proof that will convince the judge of Evan’s class’s court system. I appreciate that the author made one of Evan’s trusted classmates, Megan Moriarty, betray him. Megan reveals how Scott should be innocent, which surprises Evan and his younger sister, Jessie, since Megan is Jessie’s best friend. Also, Jessie and Evan are in the same class, so they don’t fight with Megan. It surprised me that Megan helps Scott instead of Evan, only since Scott lets Megan try his new Xbox 20/20, which Evan and Jessie think Scott spends the stolen $208 on. Scott let everybody in the class try it, which could have made everybody want to defend Scott, otherwise, they will not be able to play with it anymore. I also appreciate that the author made a jury of Evan’s class and keep it a secret. I think this is a childish way to end the book since Evan and Scott act as friends again when Evan blames himself and Scott on breaking Scott’s dad’s TV, when only Scott broke it. To repay him, Scott gives Evan the stolen $208 back, and Evan, Jessie, and Scott signed a pact, which has them swear that they will never tell any adult about what actually happened to Evan’s money. I don’t appreciate that in the resolution, everything is solved then since it isn’t interesting. The author has Evan defend Scott, and Scott apologizes for stealing Evan’s money by returning it. When Evan asks Scott why he stole it in the first place, Scott doesn't have an answer and he doesn't even use it. Scott doesn't buy the Xbox 20/20 with the stolen money, but his parents did.