Reversible Errors

( 23 )

Overview

Corporate lawyer Arthur Raven is the court-appointed attorney for a Death Row inmate. Convinced his client is innocent thanks to new evidence, Raven is a fervent crusader—and also a rookie in the vicious world of criminal law.

Read More Show Less
... See more details below
Paperback (Mass Market Paperback)
$6.99
BN.com price
(Save 30%)$9.99 List Price

Pick Up In Store

Reserve and pick up in 60 minutes at your local store

Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (24) from $1.99   
  • New (3) from $1.99   
  • Used (21) from $1.99   
Reversible Errors: A Novel

Available on NOOK devices and apps  
  • NOOK Devices
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK
  • NOOK HD/HD+ Tablet
  • NOOK
  • NOOK Color
  • NOOK Tablet
  • Tablet/Phone
  • NOOK for Windows 8 Tablet
  • NOOK for iOS
  • NOOK for Android
  • NOOK Kids for iPad
  • PC/Mac
  • NOOK for Windows 8
  • NOOK for PC
  • NOOK for Mac
  • NOOK for Web

Want a NOOK? Explore Now

NOOK Book (eBook - First Edition)
$7.99
BN.com price
Marketplace
BN.com

All Available Formats & Editions

Overview

Corporate lawyer Arthur Raven is the court-appointed attorney for a Death Row inmate. Convinced his client is innocent thanks to new evidence, Raven is a fervent crusader—and also a rookie in the vicious world of criminal law.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

From Barnes & Noble
The Barnes & Noble Review
The verdict is in: Popular fiction rarely gets any better, or more involving, than Reversible Errors, Scott Turow’s profoundly satisfying legal thriller, which takes on the charged subject of death penalty litigation.

Set in Turow's familiar fictional venue of Kindle County, Illinois, the story concerns a pathetic, hard-luck career criminal named Rommy Gandolph, a.k.a. Squirrel. Convicted of a particularly vicious triple homicide, Rommy is 33 days away from certain execution. When a convicted criminal with terminal cancer comes forward with a story that casts doubt on Rommy's guilt, it soon becomes clear that more than Squirrel's life is at stake. On one side of the legal line stand ambitious deputy prosecutor Muriel Wynn and veteran homicide detective Larry Starczek, former lovers who were responsible for Rommy's original conviction and whose lives seem seem inextricably connected to this case. On the other side stands Arthur Raven, Rommy's plodding, colorless court-appointed defender. His work is complicated by an evolving friendship with Gillian Sullivan, the disgraced judge who presided over Rommy's initial trial. These four figures -- together with a brilliantly delineated gallery of supporting characters -- form the human center of a fiercely contested legal battle that will alter the destinies of everyone involved.

Turow's knack for convoluted plotting, ability to find drama in the most minute points of law, lively, observant prose, and flawless sense of character lift him into a league of his own when it comes to legal fiction. Reversible Errors -- a wonderfully resonant title -- is a account of love and redemption, crime and punishment, the intricacies of the legal system, the high cost of ambition, and the primal importance of our most basic human connections. Bill Sheehan

The New York Times Book Review
What Turow has done, in book after book, is to give us page turners that are also pleasing literary artifacts, mysteries that are also investigations into complicated social questions and complex human emotions.
Bill Blum
No one on the contemporary scene writes better mystery-suspense novels than Scott Turow.
Los Angeles Times Book Review
Publishers Weekly
The sixth novel from bestseller Turow is a big book about little people in big trouble, involving the death penalty (one of the author's real-life legal specialties), procedural foul-ups and a cast of characters who exemplify the adage about good intentions paving the road to hell. Arthur Raven (a middle-aged, undistinguished lawyer taking care of a schizophrenic sister in a suburb of Chicago) lands a career-making case: the 11th-hour appeal of a quasi-retarded death row inmate, Rommy "Squirrel" Gandolph (accused of triple homicide a decade earlier), on new testimony by a terminally ill convict. Muriel Wynn, an ambitious prosecutor, and Larry Starczek, the detective who originally worked the case, are Raven's adversaries. Plot thickener: Wynn and Starczek are engaged in a longstanding, tortuous, off-again, on-again affair (both being unhappily married) that predates the crime, and which may have indirectly influenced the course of the original investigation. Arthur pulls in the original presiding judge from the case, Gillian Sullivan, just emerging from her own prison stretch for bribery (which masks an even darker secret) to assist him on the case, which leads to another tortuous affair on the defense's side. On top of this (Turow is well known for his many-layered narratives) is the dynamic among the criminals themselves: the dying con may be covering up for his wayward nephew, further muddying the legal waters. The first part of the book, which flips back and forth between the original investigation (1991) and the new trial (2001), is structurally the most demanding, but it is vital to the way in which Turow makes Rommy's case (as well as Arthur's and Muriel's). No character in this novel is entirely likable; all seek to undo some past wrong, with results that get progressively worse. Turow fans should not be disappointed; nor should his publisher.
Library Journal
Turow (Personal Injuries) has said that once he acquired a computer, he stopped developing stories in a linear fashion. His latest novel not only bears out that statement but provides a good example of using a nonlinear structure to build suspense and develop characters. Kindle County defense attorney Arthur Raven is appointed by the court to look into a case that was tried more than a decade ago. In the process, he is forced to revisit not only his client's past but his own. To portray the ever-shifting balance of legal issues in the case in tandem with changes in the characters' emotional and philosophical states during the intervening years, Turow moves skillfully between past and present, revealing tidbits of fact, circumstance, and motive as he goes and leaving it up to the reader not only to construct the story's linear progression but to understand the significance of the book's title as both a legal entity within its plot and a personal reality for its characters. Turow's work once again extends beyond the genre he helped create. Highly recommended.-Nancy McNicol, Whitneyville Branch Lib., Hamden, CT Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information.
Kirkus Reviews
A final appeal from Death Row reopens a decade-old murder case as the world's preeminent legal novelist (Personal Injuries, 1999, etc.) proves once again why his grasp of the moral dimensions of legal problems sets the gold standard for the genre. The cops in Turow's home turf of Kindle County had no trouble solving the Fourth of July Massacre ten years ago because Romeo Gandolph "confessed to everybody but the Daily Planet," as his court-appointed appellate attorney Arthur Raven tells his junior associate Pamela Towns. But now, weeks from execution, Rommy's changed his story. Instead of pleading insanity to the shooting of popular restaurant owner Gus Leonidis and two customers, the acknowledged thief and fence suddenly insists he didn't do it. And improbable, nearly imperceptible cracks begin to appear in the mountain of evidence that aggressive prosecutor Muriel Wynn and her lover Larry Starczek, the lead detective on the case, amassed against Rommy. The DA's office, eager to keep their files tidy, never questioned key witnesses, came up with questionable forensics of one of the victims, and overlooked the possibility that Rommy may already have been in custody when the gun went off. This time around, as Arthur realizes, there's another defendant besides Rommy: Gillian Sullivan, the judge who found him guilty and sentenced him to death before her own conviction and sentence for bribery. Working with Gillian's unwilling help, Arthur manages to get a confession from a long-unsuspected source. Fans of Turow, however, will see this second confession as no more reliable than the first-except as a device to strip away still more layers of deception from troubled characters desperate to breakthe fragile alliances they were desperate to form. No car chases, explosions, threats against the detective, movie-star locations, or gourmet meals: just a deeply satisfying novel about deeply human people who just happen to be victims, schemers, counselors-at-law, or all three at once.
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780446584166
  • Publisher: Grand Central Publishing
  • Publication date: 4/5/2011
  • Format: Mass Market Paperback
  • Pages: 608
  • Sales rank: 358,751
  • Product dimensions: 7.32 (w) x 4.26 (h) x 1.20 (d)

Meet the Author

Scott Turow is a writer and attorney. He is the author of seven best-selling novels: Presumed Innocent (1987), The Burden of Proof (1990), Pleading Guilty (1993), The Laws of Our Fathers (1996), Personal Injuries (1999), Reversible Errors (2002) and Ordinary Heroes (2005). A novella, Limitations, was published as a paperback original in November 2006 by Picador following its serialization in The New York Times Magazine. His works of non-fiction include One L (1977) about his experience as a law student, and Ultimate Punishment (2003), a reflection on the death penalty. He frequently contributes essays and op-ed pieces to publications such as The New York Times, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, Playboy and The Atlantic. Mr. Turow's books have won a number of literary awards, including the Heartland Prize in 2003 for Reversible Errors and the Robert F. Kennedy Book Award in 2004 for Ultimate Punishment and Time Magazine's Best Work of Fiction, 1999 for Personal Injuries. His books have been translated into more than 25 languages, sold more than 25 million copies world-wide and have been adapted into one full length film and two television miniseries.

Biography

In addition to writing cinematic legal thrillers like Presumed Innocent (1987), Reversible Errors (2002), and Limitations (2006), lawyer Scott Turow has also drawn upon his personal and professional experience for thought-provoking nonfiction that includes One L (1977), an account of his freshman year at Harvard Law, and Ultimate Punishment (2003), a reflection on capital punishment. His essays and op-ed pieces have appeared in the Washington Post, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, and other distinguished publications. In 2005, he forayed into historical fiction with Ordinary Heroes, an emotionally resonant novel inspired by his father's experiences in World War II. A practicing attorney with experience in both civil and criminal law, Turow has become involved in extensive pro bono work on death penalty cases.

Good To Know

Turow rarely writes his novels in a linear fashion from beginning to end. Instead, he sketches out individual scenes and then figures out where they fit into the grand scheme of a story.

Turow may be a bestselling author who has sold roughly 25 million books worldwide, but this crusading attorney has yet to give up his day job!

Don't let that "F" on your report card deter you from a writing career; just look at Turow, who flunked freshman English in high school, but whose shelves are currently lined with literary awards.

Read More Show Less
    1. Hometown:
      Chicago, Illinois
    1. Date of Birth:
      April 12, 1949
    2. Place of Birth:
      Chicago, Illinois
    1. Education:
      B.A. in English, Amherst College, 1970; M.A., Stanford University, 1974; J.D., Harvard University, 1978
    2. Website:

Read an Excerpt

Reversible Errors


By Scott Turow

Farrar, Straus and Giroux

Copyright © 2002 Scott Turow
All right reserved.

ISBN: 0374281602


Chapter One

APRIL 20, 2001

Attorney and Client

The client, like most clients, said he was innocent. He was scheduled to die in thirty-three days.

Arthur Raven, his lawyer, was determined not to worry. After all, Arthur reasoned, he was not even a volunteer. Instead, he'd been drafted by the federal appellate court to ensure that after ten years of litigation, no sound arguments remained to save Rommy Gandolph's life. Worrying was not part of the job.

He was worried anyway.

"I'm sorry?" asked Pamela Towns, his young associate, from the passenger's seat. A gurgle of anguish had escaped Arthur as he had come, once again, face-to-face with himself.

"Nothing," said Arthur. "I just hate being the designated loser."

"Then we shouldn't lose." Pamela, with rosy good looks fit for TV news, flashed a bright coast-to-coast grin.

They were far from the city now, doing eighty on cruise control in Arthur's new German sedan. In these parts, the road was so flat and straight, he did not even have to touch the wheel. The prairie farmlands raced by, corn stubble and loam, silent and eternal in the wan light of morning. They had left Center City at seven to beat the traffic. Arthur hoped to hold a brief introductory meeting with their new client, Rommy Gandolph, at the state penitentiary atRudyard and to be back at his desk by two o'clock - or three, if be decided to risk asking Pamela to lunch. He remained intensely conscious of the young woman nearby, of the tawny hair falling softly on her shoulders and of the hand that crept to her thigh every several miles to retract the hiking of her tartan skirt.

Eager as he was to please her, Arthur could offer little hope for the case.

"At this stage," he said, "under the law, the only thing that could possibly amount to reversible error would be new evidence of actual innocence. And we're not going to find that."

"How do you know?" asked Pamela.

"How do I know? Because the man confessed to everybody but the Daily Planet." Ten years ago, Gandolph had copped to the police, then gave a handwritten statement to the prosecutor, Muriel Wynn and finally repeated his admissions on videotape. On each occasion, he had acknowledged he was the person who'd shot two men and a woman and left them in a restaurant food locker in a case still referred to, in the tempered words of the press, as 'the Fourth of July Massacre.'

"Well, he kept saying on the phone he's innocent," said Pamela. "It's possible, isn't it?"

For Arthur, who had been a Deputy Prosecuting Attorney before coming to work seven years ago at O'Grady, Steinberg, Marconi and Horgan, there was no possibility of that at all. But Pamela, at twenty-five or twenty-six, had just started practice. Saving an innocent client was the sort of adventure she'd imagined in law school, riding like Joan of Arc toward radiant justice. Instead, she'd settled for a big law firm and $120,000 a year. But why not have everything? Well, you couldn't blame people for their fantasies. God knows, Arthur Raven realized that.

"Listen to what I found in Rommy's probation records," said Pamela. "On July 5, 1991, he was sentenced to time served for a violation of probation. The murders were early on July 4th. So 'time served' would mean he was in jail, wouldn't it?"

"It would mean he was in jail at some point. Not necessarily on July 4th. Does his rap sheet show he was in jail on July 4th?"

"No. But it's something to investigate, isn't it?"

It would have been something to investigate a decade ago, when the records to prove it was nonsense still existed. Yet even at that, the federal appeals court was likely to grant Gandolph a brief stay of execution, during which Arthur and Pamela would be obliged to scramble in dogged - and futile - pursuit of this phantom theory.

Rankled by the prospect of more wasted time, Arthur nudged the cruise control wand a bit higher and felt some dim satisfaction in the big auto's response. He had purchased the car two months ago as a trophy of sorts after he became a full partner in his law firm. It was one of the few luxuries he'd ever permitted himself, but he had barely turned the key when he began to feel he was disrespecting the memory of his father, who had recently passed, a loving man, but one whose eccentricities had included a cramped frugality.

"And listen to this," Pamela was saying. She had withdrawn Rommy Gandolph's rap sheet from the thick folder on her lap and read out the entries. Gandolph was a thief and a fence. He'd had half a dozen convictions - burglary, theft, possession of stolen property several times. "But nothing with a gun," said Pamela. "No violence. No female victims. How does he suddenly become a rapist and a murderer?"

"Practice, practice, practice," answered Arthur.

From the corner of his eye, he saw Pamela's full mouth turn briefly downward. He was screwing this up. As always. Arthur did not know exactly what he had done wrong with women to leave him single at the age of thirty-eight. Appearance was one issue, he realized. He'd had the droop and pallor of middle age since his teens. In law school, he'd had a brief, hurtful marriage to Marjya, a Romanian immigrant. After that, for a period he'd seemed to have neither the inclination nor the time to start again. He had given so much to the law - so much fury and passion in every case, so many nights and weekends where he actually felt pleasure in having solitary time to concentrate. And his father's declining health, and the question of what would become of his sister, Susan, had also been draining preoccupations for years. But now, seeking even the faintest sign that Pamela had some interest in him, he felt humbled by his foolishness. His hopes with her were as unlikely as hers for Gandolph. He felt the need to chasten them both.

"Look," said Arthur, "our client, Gandolph. 'Rommy'? Not only did Rommy confess early and often, but when he went to trial, his defense was insanity. Which requires his lawyer to admit Rommy committed the crime. Then we have ten more years of appeals, and post-conviction petitions, and habeas corpus proceedings, with two different sets of new attorneys, and none of them happens to mention that Rommy is the wrong man. Let alone Rommy, who only remembered that he didn't do it when he was about forty-five days away from getting the needle. Really, Pamela. Do you think he told the lawyers before us he was innocent? Every con knows this game - new lawyers, new story."

Arthur smiled, attempting to appear worldly-wise, but the truth was he'd never really accommodated himself to criminal defendants' shenanigans. Since leaving the Prosecuting Attorney's Office, Arthur had played defense lawyer infrequently, only when one of the firm's corporate clients or its bosses was suspected of some financial manipulation. The law he lived most days as a civil litigator was a tidier, happier law, where both sides fudged and the issues raised were minuscule matters of economic policy. His years as a prosecutor seemed to be a time when he'd been assigned each day to clean out a flooded basement where coliform bacteria and sewer stink rotted almost everything. Someone had said that power corrupted. But the saying applied equally to evil. Evil corrupted. A single twisted act, some piece of gross psychopathology that went beyond the boundaries of what almost anybody else could envision - father who tossed his infant out a tenth-floor window; a former student who forced lye down the throat of a teacher; or someone like Arthur's new client who not only killed but then sodomized one of the corpses - the backflow from such acts polluted everyone who came near. Cops. Prosecutors. Defense lawyers. Judges. No one in the face of these horrors reacted with the dispassion the law supposed. There was a single lesson: things fall apart. Arthur had harbored no desire to return to that realm where chaos was always imminent.

In another fifteen minutes they had arrived there. Rudyard was a small town like many others in the Middle West, its core a few dark buildings, still smudged with coal soot, and several tin hangars with corrugated plastic roofs that housed various farm services. At the outskirts, a kind of mini-suburbanization was under way, with strip malls and tract homes, the result of the economic security afforded by an unusual anchor industry - the prison.

When they turned a corner on a movie-set neighborhood of maple trees and small frame houses, the facility suddenly loomed at the end of the block, like a horror-flick monster jumping out of a closet, a half-mile continuum of randomly connected yellow-brick buildings, notable for the narrowness of the few windows. Those structures in turn surrounded an old stone edifice stout enough to have survived from the Middle Ages. Toward the perimeter lay not only a ten-foot brick wall, but a graveled moat of projecting stainless steel spikes, and beyond that a boundary of cyclone fencing supporting five-foot spirals of razor wire, brilliant in the sun.

In the prison guardhouse, they signed in, then were directed to a worn bench for the long wait while Rommy was brought down. In the interval, Arthur reviewed Rommy's letter, which had arrived via various intermediate hands at the Court of Appeals. It was composed in a hodgepodge scrawl, with multicolored markings and other features too irregular even to be called childish. Just looking at the letter, you knew that Rommy Gandolph was both desperate and crazy.



Excerpted from Reversible Errors by Scott Turow Copyright © 2002 by Scott Turow
Excerpted by permission. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Average Rating 3
( 23 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(7)

4 Star

(5)

3 Star

(2)

2 Star

(3)

1 Star

(6)

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
See All Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 23 Customer Reviews
  • Posted April 23, 2012

    Highly recommend

    If you are a Turo fan you will really like this book. Just imagine your favorite defense lawyer turning into a prosecuter. Keeps you going.

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

    Posted April 14, 2005

    This is a great book by a truly great writer.

    This is a great book. I could not put tyhis sansational book down at all. Please buy a copy and 'READ IT!' I liked the beginning and what a bang up ending this is. Turow is truly in a class all by himself.

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

    Posted July 23, 2004

    Not worth the 'hype'

    I bought this book because I had heard so much about it! The book was very disappointing, slow, bland characters, and never fully explained what was going on during the whole story. And the ending was terrrible.

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

    Posted April 13, 2004

    Very slow start

    Gave up after 60 pages. BORING. Turow has gotten too soft. Seems to write without passion and appears to be getting paid by the word. I'm through with his works. Moving on.

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

    Posted March 2, 2004

    Another Turrow trimph

    Scott Turrow's books aren't of the 'quick airport' sort. His characters are complex and flawed, as are we all. What seems 'obvious' - isn't. Yes, I found myself flipping back to the 'cast' of characters at the front of the book, and yes, it was a difficult book to get into initially; however, it was well worth the read. 'Reversible Errors' is yet another Turrow triumph.

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

    Posted December 30, 2003

    Awfull !!!

    Awfull, Awfull, Awfull. This has been the worst book I've ever read. It took me a month to read it. Characters meant nothing and the plot was dead. The list of characters were listed at the beginning of the book. I had to refer to it all the time to understand who's who. I gave it one star because i read it, but I'll never buy another book by this author. Again , the worst book I've ever read. Don't buy it, you will be disappointed!!!!

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

    Posted July 23, 2003

    Disappointing

    The story only gets interesting at the end, and by then you've figured it all out on your own. Characters aren't that likeable, not sure who you should be rooting for--it's like they're all the 'bad guys'. The plot and the characters are not well developed. Certainly not Turow's best effort. Glad I received as a gift and did not have to pay for it!

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

    Posted April 23, 2003

    Will keep you guessing till the end...

    Scott Turrow's Reversible Errors is a classic example of a legal thriller every reader should get their hands on. It keeps the reader guessing till the very end making it extremely difficult to close the book without starting yet another chapter. It involves its readers in many ways. Most importantly, it motivates the reader to continue on with the legal battle to ensure that the truth comes out and that justice prevails. Arthur's personal struggles involving his schizophrenic sister and ex-convict, ex-judge girlfriend post interesting twists to the plot making the story even more common and easy to relate with. Nothing like an exciting legal thriller that'll keep you wanting and asking for more.

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

    Posted March 30, 2003

    A big disappointment

    This is certainly not Turow's best. None of the characters are likable or involving. The plot took too long to develop, and I disliked the ambiguous ending. I'm glad I didn't pay full price for this.

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

    Posted January 2, 2003

    Not my favorite

    In depth,with strong characters...but give me John Grisham any day of the week!

    0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

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

    Posted February 15, 2003

    An idea that needed telling

    Excellent argument, non-conclusive, but a good argument on the death penalty. I thought the character development was excellent. The court room dialog is some of the best.

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

    Posted November 18, 2002

    Disappointed

    I was not impressed....

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

    Posted November 26, 2002

    Page 167 and I dont think I can make it through

    Well, I started the book abt a week ago if it is good i stay up all nite reading it but man o man i just cant get into. I put it back on the shelf and starting Four blind mice by patterson

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

    Posted November 26, 2002

    great characterization

    Scott Turow writes a legal thriller as well as anyone with unpredictable twists and turns that leave the reader guessing. What Turow does better than anyone in the genre is write about people. The parallel relationships depicted in this book between Arthur and Jillian and Larry and Muriel were masterful. All four characters were flawed, all four had their strengths. All four were unashamedly human. I enjoyed this book a lot, but I recognize it is not for the person looking for a quick, mindless read. There is a lot of depth and a lot of human understanding in this Turow effort.

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

    Posted December 13, 2002

    Not his Best Work

    I literally forced myself to plod through this latest book by Scott Turow. His well-intentioned plot just never hit the mark!

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

    Posted December 17, 2002

    For what it's worth here's a review

    I started this book right after finishing Personal Injuries (also by Turow). I think both books are good reads. As an attorney, I like the way Turow uses his keen intellect to intertwine his legal knowledge into such thrillers.

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

    Posted December 9, 2002

    Excellent, intelligent thriller

    What a great book! Turow's books are the best technical legal thrillers out there. This book may not have the general appeal of John Grisham's books, but it is so much better!

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

    Posted December 6, 2002

    Irreversibly Entertaining

    Good premise, good characters, good story. Makes good points about death penalty. Turow has it all over John Grisham, who gets progressively worse with each book he writes.

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

    Posted November 13, 2002

    TOM BENIGNO AUTHOR OF THE CONFESSION

    TUROW, NOT GRISHAM, STARTED IT ALL FOR LEGAL THRILLER WRITERS. HE IS THE KING AND PROVES IT RIGHT HERE. SUSPENSE AT ITS BEST. TOM BENIGNO, AUTHOR OF THE CONFESSION

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

    Posted November 8, 2002

    Worth The Wait!

    Plain and simple, Reversible Errors is worth the wait. Compelling, intriguing, and a great thriller. I loved it.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
See All Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 23 Customer Reviews

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