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: A Refreshing Insight
Review: Many of us can think the thoughts, but few of us can put into words the experience of sitting on a jury and interacting with our fellow man in order to attain a "just" verdict. D. Graham Burnett has taken this mandatory life experience and shed a new light on it and now shares it with the world. Having been associated with the legal process, as a court reporter, for 30 years, and having, for the most part, taken it for granted, it was very refreshing for me to see, through his eyes, its shortcomings and its strengths. He asks tough questions. What is the law? What is a just verdict? How powerful is the state? Do we need protection from it? And, he demonstrates just how the jury process can and does work, even with all of the personalities, the loss of patience, the bickering of strong-willed people, and how even the quiet and withdrawn have something to say: eventually. Well worth your time.
Rating: 
Summary: An exercise in poor jury selection
Review: Mr. Burnett waxes eloquent as to his intellectual prowess, devastating insights, etc. But as he admits, he made up his mind not to vote for conviction before any real deliberations began. In my view, therefore, he "failed to deliberate" and violated his first and most important duty as a juror. As a trial lawyer, this sort of self important doofus is exactly what we seek to exclude from jury panels. The judge had it right at the end; a jury's service is valuable, but is by no means as rigorous, dangerous or important as that of many others in this society. Mr. Burnett felt that being cooped up on a jury for a few weeks merited a book -- he should grow up.
Rating: 
Summary: a surprising account
Review: My Book Club decided on A Trial by Jury as a major selection -- a book I would not have chosen. I was surprised by the quality of the writing and the many insights, both frightening and amazing, Burnett brought to his experience as juror. His account was objective/journalistic, even regarding his own behavior. The reader gets to know good and bad about the jurors, the criminals, and even the judge. This is a fine commentary of individuals and the system.
Brown Cardwell, author of JERICHO
Rating:
Summary: Good Insight-Well Written
Review: Okay, so here is a book about a very real practical subject written by an academic. But it can work. Burnett doesn't have much credibility. He is a holier than thou, pretentious snot. But he has succeeded in capturing an enigma not many people have seen. He has captured the REAL issue of the criminal justice system during his stint as a juror in a murder trial. Flash by Burnett's snide remarks about his peers [remember they ARE peers] and his digs about how he even eats better than the others and listen to his discussion of law vs. justice. It is honest, in depth and well layed out. If you are involved in the criminal justice system in any way or are interested in some of the frustrations of those who are involved in it try reading this book. It is worthwhile. And even if you hate it, it's pretty short so the pain won't last long!
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: Author does justice to the justice system
Review: The author writes well (you might need your dictionary)and does an admirable job of discussing one trial and one jury decision. The book is a quick read and well worth it. It wouldn't hurt more people to know what it might be like to serve on a jury. According to the National Center for State Courts, only 1% of us has to pull jury duty each year. The book should stimulate some personal thought on the justice system - not a bad thing no matter which side of the "lock 'em all up and throw away the key" debate you might land on.
Rating:
Summary: Do not waste your money
Review: The concept of the book is appealing--an educated insider reveals the secret world of jury deliberations. The problem is that the author is a pompous academic. The book is written in extremely cumbersome prose that fails to appeal to the average reader. The author goes to great lengths to show us how smart he is but the ivy league vocabulary comes across as pretentiousness. I will not get into to specifics but the author also employs flawed logic in his characterization of the deliberation process. The author had the opportunity to write an insightful and meaningful piece but he let his ego get in the way of good writing.
Rating:
Summary: Must Read for Lawyers - laymen, watch the movie
Review: The concept of this book is wonderful. Unfortunately, the vantage of the author isn't all that much different than the views of attorneys whose egos arrive long before they do. The condesending tone throughout the book leads me to suspect that the viewpoint may also be biased and tainted. I've worked with just enough lawyers to know which ones should read this book! However, if you truly want a good look at the jury during dilberations, run out and get your paws on "12 Angry Men", a movie from 1997 starting John Lennon, Tony Danza, Will Patterson, and George C. Scott, among others.
Rating:
Summary: Must Read for Lawyers - laymen, watch the movie
Review: The concept of this book is wonderful. Unfortunately, the vantage of the author isn't all that much different than the views of attorneys whose egos arrive long before they do. The condesending tone throughout the book leads me to suspect that the viewpoint may also be biased and tainted. I've worked with just enough lawyers to know which ones should read this book! However, if you truly want a good look at the jury during dilberations, run out and get your paws on "12 Angry Men", a movie from 1997 starting John Lennon, Tony Danza, Will Patterson, and George C. Scott, among others.
|
