What’s it about?

This most impressive of first novels concerns the trials (literally!) of Rusty Sabich, a chief deputy prosecuting attorney who is asked to investigate the murder of a colleague, as it turns out a former lover, the sensuous Carolyn Polhemus. Rusty is the narrator of the story, which makes for an interesting literary dilemma given that he also becomes the prime suspect. If he really did it, wouldn’t the narrator reveal it to the reader of the novel? – we’re certainly not telling.

There is a cavalcade of raucous, sparkling characters - his boss, up for re-election and for whom the murder is much more than another criminal case; his best friend the cop, a diamond in the very rough; his wife Barbara who is wounded to her soul. And Rusty himself is far from your typical hard-boiled D.A. – he is wholly vulnerable, and not beyond a heartbreaking glimpse into his haunted childhood.

The pluses

There are many good things about this novel. As opposed to most legal thrillers (and let’s not get carried away, that’s what "Presumed Innocent" is) this is supremely well written. And the author is clearly a real life lawyer with some real life court room experience. There is a little more on the philosophical side than we’re used to in the genre, an elegant presentation, some serious suspense, and presto, you have one of the best legal thrillers of all time. Check out the style: lawyers work in "Dickensian grimness"; a policeman is a "scholar of the underlife"; Rusty tells us "I am gone already" in his obsessive passion for the soon to be murdered Carolyn.

The minuses

Perhaps this is stretching it, but here at Law in the Lounge we weren’t too sure about the first-person, present tense, point of view – maybe we’re all so used to third person, past tense, that anything else is annoying. Anyway, to be fair, it adds to the locomotive-style immediacy of the narrative. Otherwise, there’s nothing negative to say about this tour de force (though one of our team complained about the ending – there’s no pleasing some people!).

The legal point

How did Carolyn die? Rape, murder, a crime of passion, or a premeditated deed? Does the evidence at the crime scene lead us to or from our search for the truth? How do judges decide which facts are relevant? How are ambiguous facts tested in a criminal trial?

A criminal trial is not just what we usually see on the TV or read about in legal thrillers. It includes all the boring stuff that happens beforehand and in-between, the arguments about everything from the swapping of documents to the number of witnesses that can be called.

Following jury selection (check out our review "The Runaway Jury" by John Grisham if you want to learn more about this) we get the opening statements, which are usually not a compulsory part of the trial. The prosecutor tells the judge what they intend to prove during the trial, and why the facts will support the prosecution case. The defendant’s attorney goes next, and not surprisingly says the opposite with just as much passion!

Next the prosecution has to put its money where its mouth is! This is where "Presumed Innocent" gets interesting – it’s not enough to say someone committed murder, you also have to prove it. And that requires an "onus of proof" (or "burden of proof", depending on which law school you went to). This means the prosecution must prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt – in other words, the jury in "Presumed Innocent" have to be pretty sure that Rusty did it.

The first questions that are put to witnesses in American cases are called direct examination – in Australia we call this examination in chief. Then the other lawyer has a go, which is called cross-examination.

At the end of the case the lawyers make their summations, which is their chance to remind the jury or the judge why their stories should be preferred. Usually the defendant’s lawyer goes first. Often the lawyers will canvass the testimony of various witnesses, and explain why it is logical to come to the conclusion they propose.

Then the judge "charges" the jury - no, he doesn’t present them with a bill. Instead he tells them what the law is, and gives them a bit of guidance. For instance, in this murder case, he will tell them to decide whether Rusty had the intention to kill Carolyn, and whether the crime was planned. If he killed her but didn’t mean to do it, he might be guilty of manslaughter, a lesser charge. Most U.S criminal codes have "degrees" of murder – for example, murder in the first degree means it is intentional and planned; in the second degree there might be intention without the planning (you come home and find your wife in bed with the plumber…); and so on.

Of course, we finish the drama with a verdict. Here at Law in the Lounge, we love to second guess the jury.

About author

Scott Turow started his first published novel, "Presumed Innocent", on the commuter train, jotting in a notebook, to and from his job as a prosecutor in Chicago (although he now swears by the wonders of a computer and a decent word processing program). This is not surprising, given his previous career as a writing instructor at Stanford University. And he wrote his first book ten years before the publication of "Presumed Innocent" – only it wasn’t a novel, but the story of his experiences as a law student at Harvard Law School, called "One L".

Turow was an Assistant United States Attorney before he went into private practice at a Chicago law firm. It wasn’t long before the publishing firm of Straus & Giroux bought the manuscript for "Presumed Innocent" for $200,000, not bad for a first novel. And that’s just the hardcover rights – the paperback sales would have boosted that well past the million mark, not to speak of the movie rights that went for a million on their own. Turow claims that he did not set out to write a blockbuster best-seller, but he’s not complaining! To be fair to Turow, "Presumed Innocent" was not his first crack at a novel – that effort was turned down by 25 publishers, and the experience left him devastated. So what did he do? Easy – he got himself accepted into the world’s most prestigious law school and became a top-notch lawyer – for all us mere mortals, this is clearly a star turn.

Turow is what is known in the trade as a "litigator" – a lawyer who plans and executes a court room battle, inventing strategies like a Commander in the War Room. He describes himself as a classic workaholic, which might explain how he is able to write complex novels whilst working full time in a demanding job. Clearly there is cross-pollination - he admits to the benefits of legal training to the budding writer, and the parallels between the stories that are told to readers and juries alike.

Our verdict

This novel has one great thing going for it – as the plot thickens, the net of prospective murderers is cast wider, and the mind reels with every revelation. Carolyn, like the best thriller victims, is an enigma that must be solved. And as the novel progresses we discover that Carolyn knew more than she let on – who could get hurt by this information? Someone who needed her dead?

This is compelling stuff, brilliantly drawn characters who keep a taut hold on the reins till the shocking end. Let there be no doubt – this is a moral tale of the first order, where the worlds of law and politics become indistinguishable, both unethical and corrupt, feeding off each other like sharks at the gullet of an injured companion.

But be warned – if you are looking for a typical, fast paced thriller that keeps you turning the pages long after bedtime, you might be better off with another selection from Law in the Lounge. The pace sometimes slows to allow the author to develop the characters and enlighten the past, and sometimes the reader has to draw a breath and think it through a little.

"Presumed Innocent" deftly demonstrates what lawyers know in their hearts – that to many participants in the legal process, it’s all a game and heroes are scarce on the ground. It's clearly the reason that Rusty is an ambiguous character, capable of the very immorality that plagues him in his darkest hour.

Want us to tell you when we review another book ?

Read this: The legal information contained above is intended to be general information about the law. It is not a substitute for legal and other professional advice. Lawscape Communications P/L does not accept responsibility for loss to any person, who either acts or does not act because of this information.