I have finished a first draft of a story. Third person, close point of view. The main character is an assassin who is highly sought after in certain circles because she's known to be an honest dealer and always completes a job once she has taken it on. In fact, she has cultivated such a reputation that she can ask for, and receive, payment for a job in advance. About a decade prior to this story, she took a job that turned out to be not as she'd quite assumed once it got underway. More specifically, it turns out that innocent people around the target will be killed. Having taken the job, she carries it out, but she vows to go after the employer who withheld the details from her. He's one step ahead of her, and she ends up having to flee the area. When the story starts, she's back in town and she's trying to take out the former employer. Some old contacts feed her information about the target, who has not been seen publicly for the last ten years and is hard to get close to. During the course of her surveillance, she learns that the person masquerading as her former employer is really her original target of ten years ago. He knows she's back, and he has set a trap to get his revenge. Her old employer is dead. The assassin decides to move ahead anyway, because she always finishes a job, and hey, this guy is still alive. Here is where the question comes in: The character learns about midway through the story who this guy really is. But it isn't stated overtly, so the reader may not know. In fact, my intent is that the reader isn't likely to figure it out at this point. So there are two revelations as the story comes to an end: 1) the guy pretending to be the old employer is really the old target from ten years ago. The reader doesn't know that the main character knows, and it looks like the tables have been turned; BUT: 2) Shortly thereafter it is revealed that in fact the main character does know and she was ready for it and has come to take this guy down. At no point is false information given to the reader. In fact, I don't really even withhold information, it's just that the information given is ambiguous, and the natural reading of it up until the end is that the old employer is still alive and the assassin is after him. Once the end of the story is reached, however, suddenly all of that prior information takes on a new slant and the reader will, I think, be able to pinpoint the time and place where the assassin realized this was really her original target, the one long thought dead, and the reader will also find clues along the way that she knows who this guy really is, that she's walking into a trap, and that she is ready for it . As a reader, if you're in a close point of view, how do you feel about information that is selective in its presentation, and that, while truthful, is ambiguous so that the reader is likely (and intended) to draw the wrong conclusions until the end of the story?