Customer Reviews

The Jury

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Stephen Adler has provided a great inside look at how juries really decide cases. I am a state court trial judge and have an opportunity most people don't get -- talking to jurors after they have decided a case to learn how they came to their decision. Adler has reconstructed the deliberation process in several, varied cases. The descriptions are compelling and surprising, but they certainly lead any reader to a much better understanding of the jury system. Adler also provides a good overview of the possible reform measures that might help -- and a good set of citations for further reference.

I submitted these comments because another person had provided a highly critical review of the book. I cannot account for his strong reaction against every facet of the book, from writing style to content. I can say that I highly recommend this book to anyone who cares about our justice system.

Steve Leben, District Judge Olathe, Kansas

The Jury: Disorder in the Court by Stephen Adler Wriiten at a fifth grade reading level, this book reveals the legal system's contempt of juries, the courts' contempt of ordinary people, and the author's contempt of his readers. This book reveals the worst aspects of modern journalism: its insipidness, its superificiality, and its addiction to the trivial. I read so many comments about jurors' dress, make-up, and demeanor that I thought the the book was written by the fashion editor of Ms. magazine instead of the legal editor of the Wall Street Journal. The end was the only bright spot of the book, if only because the ordeal was almost over. Here finally Adler decides to end his blathering about taste and come to a conclusion -- any conclusion. The most radical change is his proposal to eliminate peremptory challenges of potential jurors: no more kicking a juror off a panel for no reason at all. As a matter of fact, Adler would forbid questioning of potential jurors: lawyers will have to settle for juries composed of average citizens picked at random. He also proposes making jury duty more pleasant in order to reduce the number of jury-duty shirkers. Again it seems so obvious that any idiot could have written it, and anyone did.