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.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, readable, persuasive argument
Review: Turow takes his skills as a story teller and lawyer and fuses them to make clear and convincing arguments against the death penalty, both moral and practial. I'd recommend this book to people that already have some legal knowledge.
|
