A Trial By Jury

Rating:
Summary: An important examination of civic duty
Review: Right up with filing your taxes and waiting in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles, jury duty can often seem as one of the major unavoidable annoyances of living in modern democratic society. D. Graham Burnett details a true account of his experience as a foreman of a jury that bypasses the bureaucratic inconveniences of this common civic duty and goes to core of what it means to sit in judgment of your fellow citizens.

While Burnett's account begins with the crime-a murder case involving stabbing, cross-dressing, and prostitution-it quickly evolves into a story of the jury deliberation process itself. The nature of his peers on the jury, the differing conceptions of the role of a jury, the politics that arise in the jury room, form a real-life drama that is quite engaging.

More intriguing, however, is Burnett's thoughts on the justice system itself. From the division of labor in a modern criminal trial, to the standards of proof and reasonableness, to oppressive power of even a modern democratic state, to the nature and duty of justice itself, Burnett grapples with many of the troubling features of America's judicial process and seems to come to an uneasy peace with our system.

While readers may not agree with all of Burnett's conclusions, they will certainly think more deeply about the competing duties of civic life and of justice. And perhaps what once was seen as an inconvenience will be reinvigorated with a sense of meaning and purpose...

Rating:
Summary: A Trial By Jury
Review: To all the naysayers about this book, you're right: Dr. Burnett is a pedantic, condescending, and often tiresome intellectual snob. And he admits it. It's an occupational hazard for most professors: in a university setting, as Burnett himself writes, "too often, one feels compelled to affect familiarity with whatever subject comes up."

But if you can get past his know-it-all tone and smug metaphysical posturing, or better yet see it as an integral part of the story, which it is, this is a fascinating and compelling book. Fast paced and occasionally lyrical, the book describes in occasionally overwhelming detail the bizarre emotional crucible that lies at the heart of our criminal justice system: the jury deliberation room.

What we learn in this book is that a jury of your peers doesn't mean your family or your friends or your neighbors; it means a wildly divergent group of characters drawn randomly from society -- a group that very well may include a certain creepy professor with weird eating habits who is so closed-minded that he implicitly and unthinkingly believes that anyone who fails to see things as he does must be mental.

And yet he and his jury come up with what seems to be the right answer. Inept police work, inept prosecutor, inept judge: they could do nothing but acquit. The jury system works, not just despite its flaws, but in part because of them -- including, in this case, a foreman you wouldn't want to invite to dinner, but would be lucky to have in that secret room if you were the defendant.

Rating:
Summary: The Burnett Show
Review: The entertainment value of this book is greatly blunted, as he states the verdict at the very beginning of the book. Even so, the pace of the book is so slow (in the first half he seems to write everything indiscriminately, from the birds in the trees to his thoughts about the appearances of the jury). Fortunately, he starts to gain relevance in the second half, as he breaks down the crime scene and the sentencing. By this time you should get used to his conscending know-it-all attitude or you will demand a refund. Remember, this is HIS show, and prepare to accept his assumptions of what other people are thinking. Buy this book if your chances of serving a jury is slim to none, and would like to read the diary of an individual juror. Otherwise, this book is nothing new or groundbreaking. Even so, one would wish he'd talked more about the crimes committed and less of himself, now that he's summarized what happened at the very beginning. To be fair, though the jury's (or to be more precise, Burnett's enforced view on the rest of the jurors) arrival at the conclusion is not brilliant, at least he stated a convincing way out.

Rating:
Summary: A view inside the jury room
Review: This book offers a glimpse into the workings of a jury: something that the public rarely sees. As a law enforcement officer myself, I found this book very interesting.

This is a factual account of the author's jury service in a murder trial in New York City. The defendant is accused of murdering a cross-dresser with which he allegedly was having an affair. The defendant, however, claims self-defense.

The author's focus in this book is not the trial itself; rather, it is the deliberations of the jury, which drag on for sixty-six hours, before they agree on a verdict of "not guilty."

(Now, don't think I've spoiled the book for you by telling you beforehand what the verdict was. The author does that himself in the first few pages.)

Overall a good book, especially for anyone who is interested in the workings of the Criminal Justice system. In describing the forensic evidence, Burnett goes into graphic detail; thus, I wouldn't recommend this book for those with aversions to that type of thing.

Rating:
Summary: An important book
Review: I have recently, for some reason, become very interested in the legal system and its vicissitudes. 'A Trial by Jury' is a well-written book, of that there is no doubt. I will agree with the criticism directed against the author's overly pedantic view of things but the reader is given enough warning of this by the author himself in the first few pages. I especially thought his 'apples, blood oranges and almonds' bit was a little too bewildering for my tastes. All this however, should not stand in the way of digesting this work as it is a very credible point-of-view of the inner workings of a trial by jury (in New York, anyway). The reader will be particularly impressed by the well-reasoned and similarly well-stated conclusion about the awesome power of the state as it goes about the business of keeping it's citizens in check. A very good read and highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: An outstanding exploration of the jury system.
Review: A book that I will certainly re-read in the future, A Trial By Jury was a gripping read. Detailing the author's experience as a juror in a second-degree murder case, it touches on most of the aspects of being a jury in today's society, both positive and negative. Some reviewers have blasted the author for his purported pretension, but I did not take his writing that way. He is an academic, yes, but understands the weaknesses in both himself and this country's jury system.

Fans of true crime, sociology or even any non-fiction would enjoy this book.

Rating:
Summary: C'mon, he's not that bad
Review: Like most reviewers, I found this a mixed bag but, overall, an enjoyable one. I am amused by the anger many reviewers directed toward Mr. Burnett for being what used to be called an "egghead," and for not evincing the sort of "common man" false humility we demand of public figures. I found his candor refreshing and his willingness to portray himself in a harsh light to be very compelling.
A small victory over the false and the bland.

Rating:
Summary: Trapped in the jury room
Review: This book accurately portrays the intensity and emotions which develop during jury deliberations. The author is quite critical of his fellow jurors (they all seem to be a bit strange and not overly bright) but admits his own confusion and frustration. The judge was certainly not very helpful and seemed actually hostile to the jury. I think that I would have voted to acquit also (not giving anything away since the author tells you the verdict in the beginning) based on the evidence presented. The crime itself was lurid, the witnesses a parade of weird characters, and the defendant not the type you'd want in your neighborhood, yet the jury tried to be fair and objective. I'd rate this as realistic in its depiction of a typical jury, a fast read.

Rating:
Summary: Candid to a fault.
Review: I am already ahead of the everyone else here. I saw this book in the library and picked it up for a quick read that would remind me, as the cover states, of "12 angry men". That isn't exactly what I got. But, I'll be honest and say that I liked this book a great deal more than most of the readers seem to have (and I didn't have to buy it).

I did fined the author both silly and condescending. He used his power and position as Forman to harangue the jury until he got his verdict. He tells of his fellow-jurors and their lower mental abilities. He is exasperated that people can still have an opinion different from his even after he explains the truth to them, He speaks openly of how he tries to get the jury to hang and how he initially saw his role as prolonging the talking and thinking. Hoping never to reach a verdict but simply to keep the talking going on forever and ever. However he seems to find that the time for talking ends just about the time that he is running out of his own private stash of vegetarian food. This plays a large part in the book but really it isn't surprising since most people who are forced to be somewhere (prison, college, the hospital) seem to get a little obsessive on the subject of meals.

Burnett tries to present, to the members of the jury, and impassive and impartial façade. Or so he thinks. He admits to stopping conversations that he feels are leading towards a conviction, he prepares a statement to be read in court to make sure that the judge understands the jury's (i.e. Burnett's) view on Law as opposed to Justice, and he gives a long lecture on the same subject to the rest of the jury under the guise of deliberations.

In his book Burnett admits that he knows little about the subject of jurisprudence and that some of the facts were fudged. But it was OK as he was trying to make a point. How nice. Nothing likes throwing around your weight as an academic and then making it all up (this reminded me of the Professor on "Gilligan's Island").

Now then how could I like the book? Because this is real and this is how things really can and do happen. This was a jury this was a case and this was a verdict. People are fooling themselves if they think that each of the 11 other members of the jury were not just as self-absorbed as the author in some way or another. I can't get 12 people in a room for an hour to agree on where to call for take-out lunch four days in a jury would kill most people I know. This book was not a pretty picture of how justice is given or denied, but that does not mean it is inaccurate.

Rating:
Summary: Horrible
Review: As another reviewer also noted, I looked forward to this book as an opportunity to learn more about what happens inside a jury room. Unfortunately, this book was instead the self-serving vehicle for a pretentious, obtuse, and socially challenged individual. I must admit, I could not even finish this book due in large part to my ever increasing disgust with the author and the "tone" of the book.
The author was at least honest enough to admit that he had a heavy bias towards defendants in our judicial system, and that the prosecution stood little chance of ever swaying him. Our jury system is in serious peril when members of our society, such as this author, decide to treat their civic responsibility as nothing more than an academic exercise.
Do not read this book! It is not about the process, it is not about our judicial system, it is not even about a jury. This book is all about Mr. Burnett and how wonderful he is, how his superior intellect saved the day, and how he persevered through having to spend time with people not up to his own level of education and refinement.
The author admits at one point that his initial goal was to have the jury be deadlocked. This was due to his own cowardice and inability to follow the law or his own conscience. He must have thought he would sell more books if they could reach a verdict.