Rating: 
Summary: What About the Commission?
Review: Before proffering a review for a book like "Ultimate Punishment" it is advisable for the reviewer to let the reader know where he stands on the issue covered in the book. Before reading this book I was firmly against capital punishment. It is no surprise that Scott Turow's book did not shake me from that position since he himself, in the final analysis, comes down on my side of the issue albeit likely for a different reason than I.
"Ultimate Punishment: A Lawyer's Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty" essentially resulted from Turow's work on the Illinois Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment. The commission was formed in 2000 by then Illinois governor George Ryan to investigate that state's capital punishment system and to recommend changes that would prevent the system from condemning "innocents".
The need for this commission was plain to most, especially the governor, as Illinois had a troubling history of death row inmates being vindicated, some having nearly exhausted all appeals when DNA evidence or the recantation of eye witnesses or the uncovering of prosecutorial misconduct either completely exonerated the accused or at least brought their guilt back within a reasonable doubt. Of course, this is not just an Illinoisan problem. As Turow points out, as of May 2003, the Death Penalty Information Center states that 108 people condemned to death have been exonerated in America since the reinstitution of capital punishment in 1976.
That being stated, I had expected this work would be a memoir of the commission's work. This is not what Turow has given here. What he has done instead is to give a few pros and cons of capital punishment and then sets down to refute them by discussing cases that he has been involved in or that have been given much publicity in Illinois. What results is an amorphous hodgepodge that reminds me of cotton candy: when you look at it there seems to be a lot there but when you bite into it, it just disappears in your mouth.
I stated before, while Turow and I seem now to be on the same side of this issue, we likely are there for differing reasons. He appears to decide on abolition simply because the system is too prone to error. He believes that you can never fashion a system that is foolproof and that will only execute the deserving. The one man he seems to feel is the poster-boy for the deserving is John Wayne Gacy. As for myself, I don't believe that any government should have the power of death over its citizens.
If you are interested in Scott Turow's personal views on the death penalty and his self-professed pinball-like journey from one side to the other, then "Ultimate Punishment" is for you. If you are looking for an account of the work of the Illinois Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment, then keep looking.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Reckoning on Ultimate Penalty
Review: Famous novelist Scott Turow, an attorney by training, wrote a very sensitive, honest and well-thought out book on capital punishment. As a member of Illinois Capital Punishment Commission he had ample opportunity to think about the pro's and con's of the issue.His bottom line is this: there are indeed those cases (mostly in the cases of pathological serial killers) that might warrant the death penalty. However, there are so many cases of capital punishment dished out erronously or delivered to those defendants too poor to hire top-notch legal representation, that it does more harm than good in the name of justice. The pivotal question, as he puts it, "is whether a system of justice can be constructed that reaches only the rare, right cases, without also occasionally condemning the innocent or the undeserving." Capital punishment, in Turow's judgement, does not satify these conditions. He supports his argument by giving appropriate examples like the case of Chris Thomas who is "condemned to die because he is poor and belligerent, while the likes of the Menendez brothers, who shotgunned their parents for their millions, or the Unabomber ... get life." Only 115 pages but a very good and seminal read. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Governor Ryan's unprecedented commutation death row inmates
Review: Heard ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT, written and read by novelist Scott
Turow . . . it is a sobering, nonfiction account of Turow's service on the Illinois commission that investigated the administration of the death penalty and influenced Governor George Ryan's unprecedented commutation of the sentences of 164 death row inmates on his last day in office. I remember in 2003 when I read about the above how I wondered,
"What gives?" . . . although not a strong supporter of the death
penalty (then), I still believed that it did serve a useful purpose in certain instances--and it was a definite deterrent to future crimes of a heinous nature. Now, after reading Turow's latest effort, I'm not at all sure . . . I've become convinced that there are serious flaws in the criminal justice system . . . furthermore, I realize now that too many innocent people have been wrongly convicted of murder with race or lack of income often being the only reason this happens. The author provides many examples, supporting his analysis
of the issue . . . this one really struck home: [Chris Thomas is]
"condemned to die because he is poor and belligerent, while
the likes of the Menendez brothers, who shotgunned their
parents for their millions, or the Unabomber . . . get life."
Rating:
Summary: REQUIRED READING
Review: I am not the type to offer a verbose review. Suffice it to say that this is an exceptional work of non-fiction that offers arguably the most balanced view to date of the U.S. system of capital punishment. I am a reformed death penalty proponent who went through a period of Turow-esque "agnosticism" before settling firmly on the side of opposition. I am no longer ambivalent. The death penalty should be abolished--period. Though Turow's book had no effect on my change, it did help solidify my current stance. This book should be required reading in any course of study dealing with the criminal justice system, and I do plan to use it in the future in the college criminal justice courses that I teach, along with Scheck, Neufeld, and Dwyer's "Actual Innocence." Perhaps the powers that be will eventually wake up and smell the stench of injustice . . . but I'm not holding my breath. . . .
Rating:
Summary: A Very Valuable Book on a Controversial Subject
Review: I have been a fan of Scott Turow's fiction for a number of years. So, when I was asked to read and review his latest work, a nonfiction book dealing with one of the most controversial topics in America today, that of capital punishment, I eagerly anticipated the opportunity to find out what this bestselling author-lawyer had to say on the subject. I was not disappointed. Turow's very short treatise on the "ultimate punishment" (only about 120 pages of actual discussion) immediately brings the controversy into focus and lays out the arguments on both sides of the issue.
Admitting that initially he was an "agnostic" regarding the death penalty, Turow was appointed to serve on the Illinois Commission on Capital Punishment by then-Governor George Ryan, who had declared a moratorium on further executions in Illinois on January 31, 2000, a decision that was heavily criticized by many both in his own state and also nationwide. Ryan's justification for his action was that the Illinois' capital justice system was "fraught with error." Shortly after he issued the moratorium, Governor Ryan put together a fourteen-member Commission to look into the matter of reforming the system. Former prosecutor and now-defense attorney Scott Turow has used his experience serving on the Commission to examine the very serious debate over the death penalty in "Ultimate Punishment."
Turow's examination of capital punishment is not merely theoretical. He has been directly involved in death penalty cases, including successfully representing two different individuals convicted in death-penalty prosecutions. In other words, he can speak from practical experience and not just from the ivory tower of academic debate. Along the way, the reader will get a brief overview of the history of the capital punishment debate in America as well as insights into the pros and cons that have divided those in favor of the death penalty and those opposed to it. To his credit, I found Turow to be profoundly fair in his analysis of both sides of the argument.
One senses in this book that for the author this has been a very personal quest for wisdom regarding the matter of capital punishment. One can sense a continuing wrestling with the issue over a lengthy period of time. This book seems to be no "rush to judgment" on the part of Scott Turow. His writing at times is very introspective and at points, one might say, it is a clinical study in self-analysis involving very private ethical conflicts over a matter of supreme importance. He discusses the ordinary elements in the debate -- conviction of the innocent, deterrence, recidivism, and redemption -- but he also pays attention to the victims and their concerns, and how these concerns should be addressed in the calculus of the debate.
The death penalty as a form of punishment is not a subject one should take lightly. For decades, I have publicly debated the issue, written about it, and agonized over my position regarding it. Ultimately, I decided that capital punishment as a punitive practice should be discarded by society, not because it was cruel and unusual, and not because it didn't really deter, but simply because, since the right to life as a natural right is not derived from the State, the State had no right to take a human life. While Turow does not address the natural right argument in his book, he does discuss one aspect of the controversy to which I had not in the past given serious thought, namely the matter of "moral proportion" or "moral order." If nothing else, I thank him for bringing this matter to my attention for further thought.
After the Commission finished its task of investigation and discussion, Turow says in the final pages of the text, "when...called upon...to offer a definitive judgment on the death penalty, a number of my fellow commissioners revised their positions. But I appear to have finally come to rest on the issue. Today, I would still do as I did when...asked whether Illinois should retain capital punishment." How did novelist-lawyer Scott Turow vote on the issue? Well, you'll just have to read the book to find out. I'm not going to tell you.
At the end of the book, Turow includes a copy of the Preamble to the Report of the Illinois Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment, issued in April of 2002, with the suggested recommendations of the Commission. If capital punishment is to remain the policy of the day, then the recommendations made by the Commission demand everyone's attention, no matter what state they reside in, simply because the ultimate punishment, if it is to be fairly and rationally applied, needs to meet the highest standards of justice possible. Also, for those who want to go beyond Turow's brief discussion of the subject, the book includes thirty-eight pages of notes with citations to legal cases and text references, many of them available on the Internet.
In summary, this is a book to be recommended to all Americans because the issue is timely and very important. Turow has made a significant contribution to the subject of criminal justice and he is to be commended on his sober and impartial presentation.
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: 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 in both prosecution 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 condem the death penalty for moral reasons but on the basis of the ambiguity with which it is exercised in America. It would be too excessive 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.
|
