- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
Posted July 8, 2002
The premise of the book is intrigueing: take a highly educated young man and stick him in a New York jury on a murder trial and see what happens. What the prosecutor was likely hoping for when he selected the author for the jury was the same thing the reader has the right to expect: a well reason analysis of the facts of the case and the juror's role in the trial of a sordid murder. The prosecutor was likely as disappointed as this reader. The narrative wonders and loses its focus early. The author does draw some interesting analogies and does offer some interesting analysis within the context of his life's work. His discussion of jury nullification was intriguing but frustrating. It was cut short long before it should have been. The climax of the book, when the author and his fellow jurors realize that the law can only be cautious, not perfect is truly captivating but not for the reasons the author intends. In the end the author drafts a note to the judge shrinking from his true responsibilities blaming the system at large for his own inability to make a truly difficult decision. The book reflects the denial the author lives with, and the delusions the jury created to escape their responsiblity-- its form and substance are just as diaphenous.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted February 11, 2002
It's so true and on time!
I never did like the jury system, it's a good system on paper but terrible by execution. Jury of my peers-give me a break! Any way this book does VERY accurately dislpay what goes on in jury rooms; the attitudes, the preconceived notions, the watered down and hidden racism and (oh yeah) the facts. The fact is none of us are close to perfect. There we are 12 very imperfect people in a place none of them want to be chrarged with deciding the fate of a life they probably could care less about. READ THIS BOOK!Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted October 4, 2001
'Perils of citizenship'
For years I have supported the 'fully informed jury' efforts. And, strongly believe a jury must judge not only the accused, but the law. This story documents jury incompetence because local authorities can control their access to information and knowledge. Here in California, I belong to an organization that is currently promoting a change in law that would strengthen the State Grand Jury process. Over and above criminal grand juries, our local grand jury processes are also impacted by local politics. For information on our proposal, go to: http://caag.state.ca.us/initiatives/index.htm Would appreciate any input from the author or others regarding the efficiency of their local state grand juries. Yes, there are 'perils' at every level in government and particularly the judicial. Ann Klink Vacaville, CAWas this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted April 26, 2011
No text was provided for this review.