This is a well written mystery published in 2002 by an expert observer of the criminal justice system. The author spent several years of his professional career as a prosecuting state’s attorney in Chicago, and then became a lawyer at a Chicago law firm. Turow has valuable insights into the trial process, and describes legal procedures in an understandable way for nonprofessionals.

Turow’s fictional Kindle County and Center City bear a strong resemblance to Cook County and Chicago, Illinois. This makes it more fun to read if you are from that area, because there are many references to places a native Chicagoan would recognize.

The story is told through the eyes of four main characters. Arthur Raven, a partner at a large, prosperous law firm, is enlisted by a federal appellate court to represent a black man scheduled to be executed in 33 days for a heinous murder of three people in a popular Greek restaurant near DuSable Field (read “Midway Airport”). The suspect's guilt comes into question when another inmate makes a deathbed confession to the crimes. The lawyer, the (female) judge who tries the case, the chief detective who obtained a confession from the suspect, and the young (female) prosecutor who was involved in the original trial all interact in interesting and carnal ways. Incidentally, the sex scenes, which involve only middle-aged lawyers and a middle-aged, overweight detective, are sensitive and well wrought.

The reader learns of the “facts” of the case not through the usual investigations of the police or a private eye (that information was all collected a decade before the appeal), but through the legal process known as (post trial) discovery. [It is unusual to allow much post trial discovery, but this is a capital case. Even more unusual is for depositions taken a decade after the crime to elicit important information, but it is all plausible in this narration.] Turow’s knowledge of criminal procedure comes in handy here.

I found myself racing to find out if the final habeas corpus action would be successful. [A writ of habeas corpus challenges the legality of imprisonment.] The plot includes several guest appearances of a black civil rights leader. He disrupts the normal appellate procedure and ruins the opportunity of the white appellate lawyer to make a financial killing on the inevitable civil damages action. But the conclusion of the book is not so much about the fate of the accused, whose guilt is put in doubt, but never resolved. The ultimate denouement is the closure of the relationships among the narrators—cop, judge, trial prosecutor, and appellate counsel. I won’t give that away.

Evaluation: The plot is more complicated than my summary suggests—you’ll enjoy the twists. The prison scenes are artfully crafted and (I can’t speak from personal experience) seemingly realistic. I liked this book very much, but since the last two fiction books I reviewed were Moby Dick and The Road, I can’t give it the highest possible grade. Instead, a well-earned 4 stars out of 5. ( )

3879. Reversible Errors, by Scott Turow (read 15 Apr 2004) I was much impressed by the author's One L (read 20 May 1982) and his Presumed Innocent (read 28 Nov 1992). This lawyer novel has some account of legal work of high interest, though very bizarre and unlikely. The book is marred by foul language and entirely gratuitous anatomically explicit repelling sexual scenes. Though Turow is more famous than Coughlin, I thought Death Penalty, supra, was a better book. ( )

A detective and prosecutor put a man on death row for a multiple murder; years later, a defense attorney and the judge who originally sentenced the accused try one last time to exonerate him as his execution nears. Turow knows the moral issues surrounding capital punishment and really delves into his characters. A powerful book. ( )

Tedious plot (though perhaps more comprehensible for a lawyer), confusing characters (the book acknowledges this up front by supplying a chart of characters), gratuitous profanity, predictable ending. I finished it but only to finish it. ( )

#2, 2004

I've read most of Turow's books - legal dramas - and have enjoyed most of them. I enjoyed this book better than most. The book is about a man on death row who says he is innocent, and his court-appointed lawyer finds a witness who claims to corroborate this innocence. I don't really want to say anything more than that, or risk seriously giving away the plot.

It was a good read - I found myself really wanting to keep reading and find out what was happening. I didn't solve the mystery myself (in other words, guess the ending ::grin::), but that was okay. There were several great plot twists - and not just at the end. So, it was an enjoyable read; however, I did leave the book with a bit of a sense of disappointment - not at the ending, exactly, but because a few of the characters did things that really disappointed me at the end. Since the book is about the death penalty (to which I personally am opposed), I found it interesting to see how the characters dealt with this aspect of the story. And one character in particular, really disappointed me - he seemed unwilling to even consider that the death-row inmate might be innocent (even when confronted with evidence that he was); I kept waiting for him to realise - "hey, we're going to kill this guy if I'm wrong, so let's do the right thing here." Well, there were several characters who really never seemed to grasp that concept - that a man's *life* was at stake, in contrast to the careers that they might have lost should the case go against them. Very interesting, and in the end, I'm really not sure just where Turow himself stands on this, as he didn't make it as much of an issue as I would have liked him to do.

Anyhow, I liked it. A good read. ( )