I will not review the book myself. However, I do want to say that the "cross-examination episode" that perhaps forms the heart of the book is masterfully done.
But what about the non-legal aspects of the book? Do you think it's a good thriller (if thriller it is) or psychodrama (if psychodrama it is)? Do you think the new book follows an old formula (too much)? Yes? No?
It's here: the law of evidence on Spindle Law. See also this post and this post.
3 comments:
N.B. The last chapter of the book shows that the (anti-)hero of the book has committed a grave crime, one that Scott Turow does not mention. Does Turow need a refresher course in substantive criminal law -- or was he (or the speaker) just being sly?
Hmm, haven't read it, but might be persuaded to after reading the articles you posted.
The book made me lose a night's sleep -- because I wanted to know how things turn out. I won't reveal my guesses about why the book grabbed my attention -- because I don't want to spoil anyone's fun. But I do wonder what other people think of the book.
Post a Comment