Enemy Combatant

( 3 )

Overview

A man charged with the brutal act of terrorism...

A lawyer sworn to defend him...

A courtroom spinning wildly out of control...

In the trial of the decade, attorney Tom Carpenter was just a spectator. Until, to his own astonishment, Tom finds himself thrust into a case primed to explode…

The whole world thinks Tom’s new client is guilty of the worst act of terrorism since ...

See more details below
Available through our Marketplace sellers.
Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (16) from $1.99   
  • New (1) from $2.49   
  • Used (15) from $1.99   
Close
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any BN.com coupons and promotions
$2.49
Seller since 2010

Feedback rating:

(1858)

Condition:

New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

New
0440243742 Has some shelf wear to dust jacket. We are a tested and proven company with over 900,000 satisfied customers since 1997. We ship daily M-F. Choose expedited shipping ... (if available) for much faster delivery. Delivery confirmation on all US orders. Read more Show Less

Ships from: Nashua, NH

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • International
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Close
Sort by
Sending request ...

Overview

A man charged with the brutal act of terrorism...

A lawyer sworn to defend him...

A courtroom spinning wildly out of control...

In the trial of the decade, attorney Tom Carpenter was just a spectator. Until, to his own astonishment, Tom finds himself thrust into a case primed to explode…

The whole world thinks Tom’s new client is guilty of the worst act of terrorism since 9/11—except for one shadowy figure, who feeds Tom astounding inside information. But just as the trial is about to break wide open, Tom receives a chilling threat. Suddenly Tom cannot trust anyone, and his family must run for their lives. The only way to survive—and the only hope for justice—is for Tom to crack a terrifying conspiracy so vast and so powerful that anyone who believes it has already been marked to die….

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

Publishers Weekly

Gaffney's latest gut-grabbing legal thriller turns up the heat on attorney Tom Carpenter by stacking the deck against him and his new client, Hispanic Muslim Juan Gomez, who is accused of being a mass-murdering terrorist. In a nice opening gambit from Gaffney (Diary of a Serial Killer), Carpenter gets the case thrust upon him when Gomez's appointed public defender fails very publicly to defend Gomez during jury selection, and Carpenter becomes a very vocal witness in the gallery. It's not far into the trial before Carpenter is threatened in the men's room of the Phoenix, Ariz., courthouse by a hooded assailant, who claims to want to warn Carpenter of a conspiracy to target him and his family-while holding a gun to his head. When the masked stranger appears to play a role in bolstering the prosecution, Carpenter knows he must find out who he is, what he knows and who, if anyone, is behind his actions. The secondaries are stick figures at best, but Carpenter's first-person narration carries the story, with plenty of thrills and chuckles along the way. (Feb.)

Copyright 2007 Reed Business Information
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780440243748
  • Publisher: Random House Publishing Group
  • Publication date: 2/26/2008
  • Format: Mass Market Paperback
  • Pages: 368
  • Product dimensions: 4.17 (w) x 6.82 (h) x 1.01 (d)

Meet the Author

Ed Gaffney took ten years of work as a criminal lawyer, added an overactive imagination, and came up with a new career as a novelist. This has led to an unexpected number of requests from his softball teammates to appear with Terry and Zack in future books. Ed lives west of Boston with his wife, New York Times bestselling author Suzanne Brockmann, their two children, and their anxious, but ever-loyal dogs, Sugar and Spice. He is the author of Premeditated Murder and Suffering Fools, both featuring Zack Walker and Terry Tallach, and is currently at work on his next legal thriller.
Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt

Chapter One

It was a fluke that I was in the courtroom at all.

The Juan Gomez trial was sensational by any standard, but for the scandal-starved Southwest, this trial was a thrill-seeker's ambrosia, and the good folks of Arizona were dying for a taste. Phoenix Superior Courtroom Number One-B was jammed with the curious and the vengeful as the trial opened on that fateful June 5. The defendant was being prosecuted for plotting two attacks: one in Houston, which, thank God, had been thwarted in the planning stage, and the one in Denver on that terrible May morning that killed one hundred thirteen people, and injured three hundred twenty-eight more. Gomez was the biggest terrorist suspect to be tried in the U.S. since Timothy McVeigh and Zacarias Moussaoui.

The only reason I got to see the trial in the first place was because Sarge, the chief court officer, had saved a seat for me.

Sarge was a former Marine, and the most physically intimidating sixty-five-year-old man I knew. He had started as a court officer at around the same time my dad began his career as an A.D.A. As a child, whenever I accompanied my father to the courthouse, I would always spend a considerable amount of time staring at Sarge's terrifying but mesmerizing flattop haircut. It didn't hurt that he'd sneak me some Reese's Pieces every time he saw me.

My weakness for junk food dried up around the time I became a lawyer myself, but Sarge's affection for my family never did. And he knew that on the fifth day of every June–except for 1995, when my mother's appendix demanded an immediate detour to Phoenix General–my parents, my older brother, Dale, and I would attend whatever criminal trial was taking place at the superior courthouse.
It is the one family ritual I continue to honor even after everything that happened. But more about that later.

At the time of the Gomez trial, Sarge was well aware that my mom and Dale were no longer alive, so it was a real long shot that my father would have the energy to endure the wall-to-wall mob sure to make life in the wheelchair even harder than it already was. But that didn't stop the big court officer from saving a place for us anyway, just in case.

And so the stage was set for my spectacular and ill-advised pratfall into the unique limelight reserved for mass murderers.

I was in the third row, shoehorned between reporters from USA Today on my left and The New York Times on my right. All the big press outlets had swept into town like an Old Testament plague when it was announced that Gomez would be tried here in Phoenix. Fifty of the nearly three hundred seats in the gallery were reserved for them. They complained–hundreds of them were shut out–but they weren't the only ones clamoring for a firsthand view of terrorist justice, Arizona-style. Thousands of ordinary citizens competed for the remaining opportunities to witness what Governor–and current senatorial candidate–Atlee Hamilton had promised would be a demonstration of "good old-fashioned American West jurisprudence," whatever that was supposed to mean. And in a particularly opportunistic move, even for someone as publicity-hungry as Hamilton, he had pledged to attend a portion of every day of the trial.

One thing that was definitely not old-fashioned, however, was the trial's television coverage. That entire aspect of the case was being managed by the new, federally run Judicial Broadcasting System. The idea was to balance the public's right to view criminal trials with the limitations of space by setting up a single camera in the courtroom. That source would then provide a live video and audio feed of the proceedings to any television network or station that requested it.

And according to what I've heard, the system worked very well. Tens of millions watched as Judge Rhonda Klay presided over jury selection on that historic opening day of the trial.

I was sorry to see that Judge Klay had been assigned to the case–not because she was one of the meanest judges in Arizona, but because she was one of the worst.

The trouble was not that the small, lizardlike woman lacked the brains for the job. It was, instead, that Rhonda Klay used her considerable intelligence to twist the rules to make it almost impossible for any defendant to get a fair trial.

I realize that last statement sounds like it was written by a defense attorney, and, well, it was. But for several years before the Gomez fiasco, aside from a handful of very mediocre trial performances, I had made my living almost exclusively as a court-appointed criminal appeals attorney. It was my duty to review trial transcripts, and to spot judges who didn't follow the rules. I was pretty good at it, too. Usually, when I found a problem, it was because a judge didn't know or understand the relevant legal principle.

What made Judge Klay unique was that she knew and understood all the relevant legal principles. She just slithered her way around and through them so that virtually all her criminal trials ended in guilty verdicts. Often in ways that were not ethical.

Or at least they seemed not ethical. No one could prove anything, of course.

For example, the pool of potential jurors for the Gomez trial looked almost exclusively Anglo. Considering that the defendant was Hispanic, and that about one quarter of the population of Arizona is Hispanic, anyone in Gomez's position might well have wondered how twelve individuals culled from an all-white group of people could comprise a jury of his peers.

And anyone in Judge Klay's position might well have been concerned, or at least puzzled, at the unusual racial composition of the jury pool.

But the woman with the slicked-back hair and the skinny nose seated at the head of the courtroom looked like everything was just dandy. She knew that potential jurors were supposed to be randomly divided into different groups for different cases behind closed doors, by officials sworn to act in accordance with evenhanded rules. So she also knew that it was virtually impossible to prove that she'd tampered with the selection process to ensure a racial imbalance favorable to the prosecution.
Why was I so sure that Judge Klay had stacked the deck? Because in every one of the major criminal cases that she presided over where the defendant was Hispanic, the jury pool was always disproportionately Anglo. You do the math.

From her perch behind the bench, the judge glanced at the assistant district attorney. Then she turned and smiled in the direction of the defense table, and said in her pinched soprano, "There being no objections to the jury pool, the defendant may exercise his first round of peremptory challenges."

It was a classic Rhonda Klay move–cheat, and dare anyone to call her on it. What was a lawyer supposed to do? Accuse her of manipulating the composition of the jury without any proof?
And then, a surprise. This defendant did.

Or at least he tried to. At the judge's words, the short, brown-skinned man with the curly beard and the wire-rimmed glasses began whispering intently to his lawyer, stabbing his finger at the potential juror pool, then pointing to himself, then shaking his head. Finally he motioned to his lawyer with both hands, as if urging him to stand up and say something.

But Gomez's lawyer did neither. Which, sadly, was not a surprise. Because Gomez was being represented by Silent Steve Temilow, another disgrace to the criminal bar. Temilow didn't belong in the courtroom for any number of reasons, high on the list being that he couldn't lawyer himself out of a bad parking ticket. But Judge Klay had appointed Temilow to the case because Gomez had complained twice during the five months he'd awaited trial that he wasn't being represented adequately.

It wasn't particularly unusual for indigent defendants in capital cases to doubt that the same government that was trying to have them executed was going to provide them with an attorney who was really going to do battle for them. And Gomez was not exactly your run-of-the-mill indigent defendant in a capital case. Because he was suspected of a terrorist attack, he was treated by the government when he was first arrested as an "enemy combatant," which is another way of saying that he was held for the better part of six months without the most basic of civil rights, and regularly tortured for information about future terrorist attacks.

So it was hardly a shock when it was reported that after meeting his first lawyer, Gomez couldn't bring himself to trust the man, and promptly requested another one.

Gomez's complaint about Attorney Number Two–a decent lawyer named Bruno Smithson–was that after months on the case, the attorney refused to do anything except advise Gomez to plead guilty and thereby hope to avoid execution. Bruno actually called me twice while he was on the case. The first time, it was because he couldn't figure out a way to convince his client Gomez that they needed a lot of time to prepare. Gomez thought they should go to trial four days after Bruno was appointed.

The second call, several weeks later, was much more serious. Gomez was insisting that he was innocent, and refused to plead guilty. The problem with that was Bruno had never seen such an airtight case. Gomez had clear connections to the man who actually detonated the Denver bomb, as well as file cabinets full of other thoroughly damning evidence found when the government had searched Gomez's home. Bruno couldn't accept that it was in Gomez's best interests to force a trial, and their inability to get over that disagreement led to his dismissal.

Enter Silent Steve Temilow, the human doormat.

Now Gomez's gesticulations were getting more exaggerated, so the lawyer with the thinning hair and the prominent Adam's apple appeared to take yet another tack–to pretend that the heated whispers and the flailing arms of the man on his left were nothing more than the products of a curious phantasm, best ignored. Stiffly, Steve shuffled through some papers on the table before him, ignoring his client and clearly stalling.

Judge Klay preferred a more direct approach to the situation. "Mr. Gomez, kindly control yourself–this is a court of law. And Mr. Temilow? Is there a problem? May we have the defendant's first set of peremptory challenges, please?"

There would, however, be no denying Juan Gomez. As Temilow rose to address the judge, the defendant rose, too, unwilling to let his attorney off the hook. His increasingly insistent body language demanded eye contact. But Silent Steve soldiered on, bravely disregarding his client's sleeve-tugging and table-banging by repeatedly adjusting his glasses, and by adopting a robotic posture. His neck, shoulders, and upper body were so rigidly held he seemed almost physically incapable of turning and acknowledging the desperate pantomime taking place to his left.

Staring ahead at Judge Klay, he finally spoke. "Um, Your Honor, I'd first like to personally apologize, and to apologize on behalf of the defendant as well, both to you and to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury pool for, well, for any impropriety that may have taken place over the last few minutes at the defense table."

Gomez looked dumbfounded. Could this get any worse? The answer, incredibly, was yes.
"And with further apologies for any delay, and for any inconvenience caused by such delay, I would like now to address the court's inquiry regarding the composition of the jury."

As he realized that his attorney was finally, finally going to confront the extremely non-Hispanic-looking elephant in the room, Gomez seemed to relax a bit. The expression on his face became somewhat expectant. That expression would soon disappear.

Temilow continued. "First, Your Honor, the defense specifically waives any objection to the composition of the jury pool, it being well understood that the process by which these candidates were selected as potential jurors for this case was a random one."

When Gomez processed this capitulation, he began shaking his head back and forth, looking at the judge, and pointing at Temilow, in silent, negative commentary.

The lawyer twisted his body so that although he was still facing the judge, his back was now fully to his client. He seemed to hope that by maneuvering Gomez out of his field of view he might make the distracting little man disappear from the courtroom entirely. "And further, Your Honor, the defendant will also waive all peremptory challenges. The defendant is confident that any member of the community will render a fair and just verdict in this case."

It was at that point that Gomez could no longer restrain himself. "Oh, no," he said, continuing to shake his head, but now raising his shackled hands above his head as if Temilow had just scored a touchdown for the wrong team. "No, no, no. I am not waiving anything. And I am not apologizing for nothing, neither. I am firing this man. Right now. I want a new lawyer, Judge. This one is not working for me. He is waiving everything, and apologizing, and he is not listening to me at all. I ain't waiving nothing. I want a new lawyer."

With the exception of the frenetic scratching of reporters' pens and pencils against paper, the courtroom became deathly silent. Gomez lowered his hands, and just stood there, as if not quite sure what to do next. Then, abruptly, he sat down, and declared, "That's it. I'm done, Your Honor. I need a new lawyer."

Apparently, it was time for someone else to talk.

Yet it was not clear that poor Steve Temilow was up to the task. He had managed to keep his back to the defendant for the entire tirade, but Gomez had failed to dematerialize. Worse, the unpleasant fellow had added a sound track to his heretofore silent performance.

So Temilow did what he did best–he hoisted a white flag.

"Um, Your Honor, if I might attempt to address the court. With deepest personal apologies, of course, for the unusual nature of this situation. . . ."

However, Judge Klay was not so easily assuaged. "Your apology is not accepted, Mr. Temilow," she snapped, glaring at the defendant. "I rather think that it is Mr. Gomez who needs to address this court. Mr. Gomez?"

The defendant rose from his seat before speaking. "Yes, Judge?"

"Am I to understand that despite the fact you stand trial for multiple counts of murder and for conspiracy to commit murder as well as a number of other extremely serious crimes, you wish for me to discharge Mr. Temilow from the case?"

"Well, Your Honor, I don't know about no discharge. All I want is a new lawyer. This one ain't doing nothing for me. He sounds like all he wants to do is give up, but I didn't do nothing wrong, so I don't want him representing me."

The judge took a deep breath. She glanced over the defendant's head at the courtroom crowded with people, reporters, a television camera, the governor and his wife, even those members of the victims' families who had made the trip down to see this fiend get what was coming to him. Then she looked at the prosecutor. Of course I don't know exactly what was going on in Rhonda Klay's mind at that moment, but I would have bet you a stack of pancakes that she was thinking there was no way in the world she was going to be shown up in her courtroom, in front of millions of Americans, on the first day of the slam-dunk trial of a mass-murdering terrorist.

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Average Rating 4.5
( 3 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(2)

4 Star

(1)

3 Star

(0)

2 Star

(0)

1 Star

(0)

Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation

Reminder:

  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

 
Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing 1 – 5 of 3 Customer Reviews
  • Posted December 9, 2008

    more from this reviewer

    interesting legal thriller

    In Phoenix, the jury selection in the case against Hispanic Muslim Juan Gomez accused of being a terrorist mass murderer is an injustice as the public defender appointed to represent the indicted does nothing. In the gallery watching the proceedings, a disgusted attorney Tom Carpenter opens his mouth that the proceedings are a travesty as no objections to obviously biased people have occurred. The judge assigns Carpenter to represent the seemingly already convicted Gomez. During the trial Carpenter finds justice is not blind it is dead in this case as everything is set for the prosecution to gain a conviction. In the courthouse bathroom a hooded attacker holding a gun to his head warns Carpenter that if he is overly zealous in his defense, meaning acquittal, his family will pay the price. When he sees the same person working for the defense, Carpenter realizes he needs to learn who his adversary is and what he really knows as he begins to believe that the bathroom incident was a warning to protect his family not a threat. --- This interesting legal thriller raises the question whether justice in American can be blind when it comes to a radical fundamentalist Muslim. The story line is fast-paced from the moment that Carpenter opens his mouth in court and never slows down as the audience is captivated by his defense of his client, who fascinatingly he does not like. Although the support cast on all sides of the courtroom and elsewhere seem more caricature than developed, readers will appreciate this entertaining thriller in which entitlement to a lawyer is not entitlement to a reasonably good defense. --- Harriet Klausner

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted December 25, 2009

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted January 28, 2010

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted January 15, 2011

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted May 22, 2010

    No text was provided for this review.

Sort by: Showing 1 – 5 of 3 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)