Ultimate Punishment : A Lawyer's Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty

Rating:
Summary: Valuable Insights for Those Who Oppose the Death Penalty
Review: If you are like me, you mostly know Scott Turow from his many best-selling legal thrillers, including Reversible Errors which death with a death penalty case. Although his book jackets point out that he is lawyer, I haven't gotten a strong sense of that part of his life since his first book, One-L, in which he described life as a new Harvard Law School student.

In his legal career, Mr. Turow has had some exposure to capital punishment cases both as a prosecutor and as a defendant's attorney. From these experiences, he learned that the law doesn't operate as smoothly as advertised in death penalty cases.

I picked up the book because I had read a little about Illinois Governor George Ryan's commutation of 167 death sentences on the last day of his term in office, and wanted to know more about how they came about. The book more than fulfilled my interest, because Mr. Turow was a member of a commission looking into reforming the application of the death penalty for Governor Ryan. The findings of that commission and the subsequent foot dragging by the legislature caused Governor Ryan to act.

Although I have been opposed to the death penalty for as long as I can remember, I was shocked to find out how poorly the sentence had been applied in Illinois. Prosecutors overlooked police torture to obtain confessions, judges overlooked obvious procedural errors, defense attorneys were expected to defend their clients at trial for a total payment of $300, defendants to the same crime often didn't receive the same sentence even when their acts were worse, AND many innocent defendants spent years awaiting death. If you want to understand all the gruesome details, this book provides them in a reasonably dispassionate way.

When he started with the commission, Mr. Turow described himself as an agnostic on capital punishment. By the end of the commission, he was an opponent. Most will agree with him that it's unlikely that the death penalty can be applied in a fair and rigorous way.

Although the book's subtitle was "A Lawyer's Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty," I was ultimately disappointed that Mr. Turow didn't deal more with the moral and spiritual sides of the question.

To me, the most gut-wrenching part of the book involved the description of the most currently dangerous multiple murderers in Illinois and what their life is like in maximum security prison for 23 hours a day under lockdown. It's not much of a life.

The most revealing information came in Mr. Turow's description of what happened after the commutations. The electorate was evenly split on the point, and only prosecutors were uniformly negative. The new governor indicated that he will also probably defer having any executions until reforms suggested by the commission are in place.

Anyone who cherishes their person freedom will be very upset at reading how truly innocent people are railroaded into false confessions, are betrayed by lying witnesses, and abused by prosecutors who know better. It could happen to you!

Rating:
Summary: Valuable Insights for Those Who Oppose the Death Penalty
Review: If you are like me, you mostly know Scott Turow from his many best-selling legal thrillers, including Reversible Errors which death with a death penalty case. Although his book jackets point out that he is lawyer, I haven't gotten a strong sense of that part of his life since his first book, One-L, in which he described life as a new Harvard Law School student.

In his legal career, Mr. Turow has had some exposure to capital punishment cases both as a prosecutor and as a defendant's attorney. From these experiences, he learned that the law doesn't operate as smoothly as advertised in death penalty cases.

I picked up the book because I had read a little about Illinois Governor George Ryan's commutation of 167 death sentences on the last day of his term in office, and wanted to know more about how they came about. The book more than fulfilled my interest, because Mr. Turow was a member of a commission looking into reforming the application of the death penalty for Governor Ryan. The findings of that commission and the subsequent foot dragging by the legislature caused Governor Ryan to act.

Although I have been opposed to the death penalty for as long as I can remember, I was shocked to find out how poorly the sentence had been applied in Illinois. Prosecutors overlooked police torture to obtain confessions, judges overlooked obvious procedural errors, defense attorneys were expected to defend their clients at trial for a total payment of $300, defendants to the same crime often didn't receive the same sentence even when their acts were worse, AND many innocent defendants spent years awaiting death. If you want to understand all the gruesome details, this book provides them in a reasonably dispassionate way.

When he started with the commission, Mr. Turow described himself as an agnostic on capital punishment. By the end of the commission, he was an opponent. Most will agree with him that it's unlikely that the death penalty can be applied in a fair and rigorous way.

Although the book's subtitle was "A Lawyer's Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty," I was ultimately disappointed that Mr. Turow didn't deal more with the moral and spiritual sides of the question.

To me, the most gut-wrenching part of the book involved the description of the most currently dangerous multiple murderers in Illinois and what their life is like in maximum security prison for 23 hours a day under lockdown. It's not much of a life.

The most revealing information came in Mr. Turow's description of what happened after the commutations. The electorate was evenly split on the point, and only prosecutors were uniformly negative. The new governor indicated that he will also probably defer having any executions until reforms suggested by the commission are in place.

Anyone who cherishes their person freedom will be very upset at reading how truly innocent people are railroaded into false confessions, are betrayed by lying witnesses, and abused by prosecutors who know better. It could happen to you!

Rating:
Summary: A Thought-Provoking Book and a Valuable Reference Source
Review: In January of 2003, Illinois Governor George Ryan commuted the death sentences of every resident of death row in his state. As a result, 167 prisoners were spared from possible execution by lethal injection. The decision, made during the last week of Ryan's term as governor, was the culminating event in a four-year journey through the labyrinth-like issue that is capital punishment. Ryan, a strong proponent of the death penalty in 1999, became an equally strong proponent for its abolition in the span of four years. Along the way he converted many others to his viewpoint. When told by an accomplished writer such as Scott Turow, the story of that conversion has the ring of a classic and suspenseful novel.

Turow's ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT: A Lawyers Reflection on Dealing with the Death Penalty is the author's personal reflection on his service on Ryan's Commission, created to examine the Illinois Death Penalty Law. Upon election to Governor in 1999, Ryan faced a capital punishment process in Illinois that had run amuck. Like many states, Illinois had reinstated the death penalty in the late 1970s. During the 22 years that the law had been in force, 12 men had been put to death in the state. In that same time period, 13 men had been released from death row because their innocence and wrongful convictions had been established. Governor Ryan became convinced that serious flaws existed in a criminal justice system that convicted innocent people. In January of 2000 he took two important actions. First, he imposed a moratorium on further executions in his state. Then, he established a commission of lawyers, criminal justice experts and others to examine the Illinois law and recommend procedures that would fix a fatally flawed system. Turow was a member of the commission.

Although most readers are aware of Turow's work as a writer of courtroom fiction, many may not know that he continues to toil as a practicing attorney. Turow's career as an attorney began as a federal prosecutor in Chicago. During his legal career he appeared in court as both a supporter and opponent of capital punishment. At the time of his appointment to the Ryan Commission he considered himself a "death penalty agnostic."

ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT is not a lengthy study of capital punishment in America. As public opinion on the issue has careened wildly from opposition in the 1960s to strong support in the 1980s and 1990s and now serious doubt in the 21st century, there have been many exhaustive treatises on the issue. Turow seeks to examine the issue from a very narrow, less legalistic perspective. Accepting that there are circumstances when the death penalty is appropriate, he ponders whether the criminal justice system can decide those cases correctly and still make certain that the innocent or otherwise undeserving remain protected. After serious introspection and consideration, Turow's answer is no. Because of the serious manner by which he confronts the question, his answer is entitled to substantial weight.

Turow has documented his position with a plethora of footnotes and supporting material. ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT is therefore not only thought-provoking writing but also a potentially valuable reference source for anyone interested in this subject. America has not yet resolved the criminal justice system dilemma of capital punishment. As the debate intensifies, the viewpoint of men like Turow will be of great value to those who view the debate on capital punishment as an important comment not only on the criminal justice system but on our society as well.

--- Reviewed by Stuart Shiffman

Rating:
Summary: YEA PRETTY GOOD
Review: Not a bad read...pretty good really. Reasonably thought proving in a moderate way. It might not be a bad idea to have a read of this book yourself. All in all, it's possible to do other things with your time rather than read this book but if you were to decide to read this book instead of doing the other things, then I can't see that the decsion would be a particularly bad one.It might be a good decision especially if after reading the book yu decide that you were glad you had read it. That would then have been a good choice decision, and I congratulate you for taking it.

Well done.

Rating:
Summary: Death Penalty agnostic falls off the fence
Review: Rendered with his fictional writing flair, Turow has tackled a subject matter that literarily deals with life and death. In this short though thorough essay, the novelist reflects on the many arguments surrounding the death penalty. In March 2000, a Moratorium on executions was declared by the then Governor of Illinois, George Ryan. Turow, along with many distinguished lawyers and academics, after two years of deliberation, submitted their recommendations. As a result of these findings, Ryan made international news by commuting the sentences of 167 persons left on death row. (This made headline news in Australia as the death penalty here was abolished over forty years ago) It should go without saying that this was a bold move by the Governor and potential political suicide. However he was at the end of his tenure and decided to make a choice and act on that choice. This book summarizes the many aspects of the Moratorium's deliberations, which makes fascinating reading.

Before the Moratorium, Turow admits that he was a "Death Penalty Agnostic". In other words, the man was a fence sitter, refusing to make a stand either way. However, after two years on the committee, and by the end of the essay, if asked whether Illinois should retain Capital Punishment, his answer is a certain, no. After reading the many reasons for and against the debate, I found it understandable why he fell off the fence. That the system is fallible and the fact that, for the most part, we seem to be hard wired for revenge, it has been all too easy, in our zealousness for justice or retribution, to execute innocent people. This has occurred far too many times for any government to be comfortable executing its citizens. But of course, as Turow plainly points out, this issue is a complex one, which begs to be further unpacked, potently analysed, in order to make it law, either way, across the boards.

From my reading, the actual recommendations from the committee are reasonable and fair. For example, ensuring the videotaping of all questioning of a capital suspect conducted on a police facility; that the eligibility criteria for the death penalty is narrowed to five points; that the death penalty is not available when a conviction is based only on the testimony of a single eyewitness. (p. 122) The Moratorium did not want the death penalty abolished entirely, however, these recommendations are designed to ensure an innocent defendant stands a lesser chance of wrongful execution.

Turow writes great novels about the law. In this case, he has approached a subject that absolutely requires further debate. And he has done it with honesty and enthusiasm with a novelist's flair and elegance. Good reading.




Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: Scott Turow delivers yet another great read. This book gives you an insight into our so called Justice System, its a MUST READ for anyone who is pro or anti-death penalty.

Rating:
Summary: We should all care about what this book has to say.
Review: Scott Turow shows us the illogicality of the death penalty by telling of his own experiences as both a prosecutor and as a member of a task force assembled to inform the governor of Illinois on death penalty policy. Contrary to what many people may think, the book does not condemn the death penalty for moral reasons but on the basis of the ambiguity with which it is exercised in America. It would be too absolutist to say every American should read this book, so I will limit it only to those Americans who feel the death penalty has a place in our society and legal system. I doubt they will come away so staunchly in support of capital punishment and all that it entails.

Rating:
Summary: A Well-researched, Well-written Book
Review: Scott Turow was one of 14 members of a Commission named by the then Governor of Illinois, George Ryan to study and make recommendations on the state's death penalty law. This book is a result of that study. Turow discusses the usual arguments for and against this ultimate penalty. Some of his findings conclusions are expected; others were surprising, at least to me. The usual conclusions are here-- the vast majority of individuals convicted of crimes are guilty. Whether you get the death penalty or not depends on where you live. You are much more likely to get the death penalty in rural areas than in large urban areas. To quote Turow, other factors are ". . . race, gender, geography, who the lawyers and jurors are, and the sheer serendipity of circumstances. . ." Some people are guilty of the crime of having the wrong defense lawyers, and, of course, of being poor. Turow discusses the case of Chris Thomas, a death row inmate, who had been defended by two private attorneys under contract with the local public defender's office that paid them $30,000 per year to defend 103 cases, one of which had to be a capital case. The two attorneys worked together on Thomas' case. One of them had never had any role in a death penalty case; the other had been standby counsel for a defendant, already under a death sentence in Ohio, who had represented himself. The attorneys therefore mounted a six hundred dollar defense for their client. I had always thought that black people are more likely to get the death penalty than whites. Not so, according to Turow; black people just get convicted more. In Illinois 70% of all persons convicted and sentence for first-degree murder are black; their victims have been 60% black. Once convicted, however, white murderers are sentenced to death at a rate two and one half times that for black murderers. Turow's conclusion is that white people tend to kill other whites and that "choosing a white victim--turns out to be the controlling variable." Turow also points out though that because wealth, power and status for the most part still is in the hands of white people, that race of course is a factor.

Some of Turow's chapters are "Convicting the Innocent","Bad Faith", "The Victims","Deterrence", "Redemption", "Will They Murder Again." I was blown away to learn that some death penalty advocates can live with the notion of occasionally executing the innocent and make the comparison of childhood inoculations and driving an automobile. The overall good outweighs the risks. Turow disagrees with this logic, saying that the prospect of executing someone who is "blameless cases a special pall over the death penalty." Turow discusses with great compassion the plight of victims' families and loved ones. "What made the deepest impression on me was my eventual recognition that losing a loved one to a murder is unlike any other blow delivered in our often-cruel lives." He concludes, however, that the expressed desires of survivors should not be permitted in deciding who gets the death penalty.

Turow, who described himself as a "death penalty agnostic" when he began this study ultimately became a believer against the death penalty although he respects the judgment of the greater number of U. S. citizens who believe the death penalty should be given for the most horrific of crimes. Turow's conversion certainly came not for religious reasons. Unlike Sister Helen Prejean, he maintains if his job called for it, he could "push the botton" if the crime were heinous enough. Even though Turow comes down ultimately against the death penalty, he says "I admit I am still attracted to a death penalty that would be available for the crimes of unimaginable dimensions. . . The pivotal question. . . is whether a system of justice can be constructed that reaches over the rare, right cases, without also occasionally condemning the innocent or the undeserving." It is Turow's belief that the answer to that question is "no."

As you would expect from someone who is also a novelist, Turow writes with a great deal of flair in this insightful, well-reasoned book. Whether it will change anyone's opinion, who's to say? Everybody has opinions on abortion, gun control, gay marriage, the death penalty, etc. although people cannot express any logical reason their their views. Regardless of whether this book changes the way you think about the death penalty, you will come away from it better informed and should have an opinion you can back up with facts.

Rating:
Summary: A challenge to the Justice System in the U.S.
Review: Scott Turow's ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT: A Lawyers Reflection on Dealing with the Death Penalty is his reflection on the work he did on Gov. Ryan's Illinois Commission to examine the Illinois Death Penalty Law. The commission's purpose was to study and determine the justice of how the Death Penalty was administered in the state of Illinois.
Turow, in addition to being an accomplished author, is a practicing attorney in Chicago. Turow's began his career as an attorney as a federal prosecutor in Chicago. Turow also prior to writing this book was involved Pro Bono as an attorney for two separate cases involving the Death Penalty.
ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT is not a detailed, lengthy study of the Death Penalty in Illinois or the United State. Turow admits that at the start of the commission he was an agnostic of the Death Penalty. Rather the book is an examination of how the Death Penalty is applied and if it can be used as a just punishment for crimes. Turow accepts that there are circumstances when the death penalty could be appropriate, he then examines if the criminal justice system can judicate those cases correctly. Turow examines how the Death Penalty was applied when it was reinstated (under 5 specific conditions,) and the slow evolution of that application to greater than 21 possible conditions. Turow also briefly mentions on the political basis for the Death penalty, which could have been touched on in greater detail.
ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT has extensive footnotes and supporting material in addition to the discussion. Turow also provides the opening statement from the Illinois' Commissions report for the reader.
The Death Penalty is a one of the most serious issues facing the Justice system in the U.S.A. and Turow gives a good and detailed, in brief, discussion of many of the issues involved in the Death Penalty. Turow's ultimate conclusion that the Death Penalty is not fairly administered and cannot be without serious, and politically risky, changes is important and should be strongly considered by the reader.

Rating:
Summary: Thoughtful and intriguing
Review: Turow has always been a superior writer, since ONE L, in fact. This short essay is enlightening and thoughtful. It did not change my own position on the death penalty, but did indeed, deepen my understanding of this most controversial subject. It is fascinating to trace Turow's own education on the subject. You won't look at this issue as black and white again. However, there is one subtle flaw--Eddie Murphy did not play Alex Foley in 48 Hours as Turow claims--it was in Beverly Hills Cop that Alex Foley was found. Simple error, but certainly a reversible one.