Category: Reviews

  • Wild Bill’ rides again: A life of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

    Wild Bill’ rides again: A life of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

    ‘Wild Bill: The Legend and Life of William O. Douglas’

    by Bruce Allen Murphy

    Random House, $35

    William O. Douglas served on the U.S. Supreme Court for 36 years, longer than any other justice in American history. He wrote the most opinions for the court, issued the most dissents, wrote more books, married more women, endured more divorces and was threatened with impeachment more often than any other justice before or since. Douglas left a legacy that is difficult to imagine, let alone catalog.

    Bruce Allen Murphy’s magnificent new biography, “Wild Bill: The Legend and Life of William O. Douglas,” rises to the formidable challenge posed to anyone who would attempt the task. Fifteen years in the making, it is the first truly comprehensive biography of the justice – and one well worth waiting for.

    Douglas’ life, as he told it, was a stirring victory against the odds. According to Douglas, he suffered polio as a child and regained his ability to walk only through the dedication of his mother and his own steel-eyed grit in hiking the Yakima foothills. He claimed to have been raised in a poor family, to have ridden the rails east to law school at Yale, to have served in World War I, and to have graduated second in his class from law school.

    Unfortunately, much of the story isn’t exactly accurate, as Murphy’s biography points out, backed up by hundreds of interviews and a close review of voluminous papers only recently made public.

    Douglas did suffer a mysterious illness as a child, but it was never diagnosed as polio then or later. Douglas’ early years in Yakima were challenging, but his widowed mother was hardly destitute. He did ride a “sheep train” to law school, but it was a comfortable passage and hardly counts as riding the rails. Douglas served his country well and long on the court, but he never served in the military, apart from a few weeks of volunteer service in the Students’ Army Training Corps. And, brilliant as he was, he was not second in his class at Yale Law School.

    And the sad part is this: None of this myth-making is necessary to recognize Douglas’ extraordinary achievements. Douglas was plainly a brilliant man who succeeded against daunting odds, rising from an obscure (if not entirely poor) upbringing in Yakima. He gained fame teaching at Yale Law School and was appointed by then-President Franklin Roosevelt to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Widely praised by New Deal liberals for his dramatic work in challenging securities fraud, he became an FDR favorite, playing a regular game of poker with the president. Twice he was nearly nominated for the vice presidency. His record hardly needs exaggeration.

    He was barely more than 40 years old when he was appointed to the Supreme Court. His service on the court was remarkable by any measure, and his opinions and dissents identified issues that even today continue to resonate – the right to privacy (and later abortion) was founded almost entirely on Douglas’ reasoning in early cases. He broke ground in environmental cases, in free-speech cases, and in search-and-seizure cases. But he chaffed on the court, never entirely happy to be so far from the fray, and frustrated that his hidden presidential ambitions had never been satisfied.

    Although Douglas gained fame on the East Coast, he always considered Yakima his true home. He spent his summers at his Goose Prairie cabin, roaming far and wide among his beloved Cascade Mountains. Douglas held hearings in the Yakima County courthouse and once even heard out lawyers with an emergency petition beside a campfire at a high-mountain camp (making them return the following day for the ruling). His spirit still roams the Cascades, with his name often inscribed in trail registers by hikers as an informal tribute to “The Judge.”

    Despite his remarkable professional achievements, Douglas’ personal life was a disaster. Douglas had two children to whom he was a cold and distant father. Worse, he relentlessly cheated on his wife and chased women constantly, which ultimately led to his first divorce. He married and divorced two other women before his fourth, and last, marriage to Cathy Douglas. She was 23 and he was 67, leading one Goose Prairie observer to comment that the justice just might have “overstocked his pasture this time.” He was also brutal on his office staff, famous for his harsh criticism of their work.

    Douglas was threatened with impeachment four times, most seriously by President Nixon. Informed by the attorney general of the impending impeachment effort, Douglas responded: “Well, Mr. Attorney General, you’d better saddle your horses.” Both efforts ended in failure.

    Even trimmed down to a more historically accurate portrait, William O. Douglas’ accomplishments were staggering. “Wild Bill” is an outstanding review of Douglas’ life, legacy, and legend. It’s likely to remain the definitive Douglas biography for years to come and is, indeed, a fitting tribute to Washington’s most famous son.

  • Grisham’s ‘The King of Torts’ action-packed but thin on plot

    Grisham’s ‘The King of Torts’ action-packed but thin on plot

    ‘The King of Torts’

    by John Grisham

    Doubleday, $27.95

    After venturing into other forms of fiction, John Grisham returned to the courtroom with last year’s thriller, “The Summons.” He re-enters the fray with his latest courtroom thriller, “The King of Torts.”

    In his new novel, Grisham takes on the sleazy world of mass-tort lawyers who specialize in suing large corporations in enormous class-action lawsuits, securing huge fees in return for relatively small recoveries for their clients. “The King of Torts” offers everything one expects from Grisham: fast and suspenseful action, a thin and extremely implausible plot and a stunningly predictable conclusion.

    Clay Carter is an overworked, underpaid public defender in Washington, D.C., representing a motley collection of junkies, repeat offenders and violent criminals. Stuffed in a dismal, cramped office, he is burned out and disheartened. When his longtime girlfriend walks out on him, egged on by her preening and socially ambitious parents, Carter finds himself at the end of his rope. But suddenly, as so often seems to happen in Grisham novels, a well-dressed stranger appears, offering Carter a deal too good to resist. Max Pace is a legal “fireman” hired by big corporations to deal with potential legal troubles before they explode. Pace’s client is a big pharmaceutical company whose drug experiments went dangerously awry, leading to a string of deaths. The offer? Represent the victims, broker quiet settlements and releases, and earn a fee of $15 million in return.

    Carter wrestles with the decision, but ultimately accepts the offer. He quits his job, recruits several colleagues, and opens shop in a posh law office set up by Pace virtually overnight. Bankrolled by the $15 million windfall, Carter gets down to work quickly.

    With Pace providing a series of inside tips, Carter files a series of mass-tort suits, using expensive nationwide television advertising to drum up thousands of clients. He is soon hailed as the “King of Torts,” a boy wonder of the mass-tort bar, and is initiated into the small network of big shot, self-proclaimed fighters for the underdogs.

    At first repulsed at his colleagues, who seem more interested in buying the biggest jet, the fanciest sports car or the most palatial mountain retreat, Carter’s resistance is slowly overcome as he slips ever deeper into the lifestyle of the rich and ostentatious mass-tort lawyer. Along the way, he engages in blatant insider trading in the stocks of the corporations he is suing, betrays virtually all of his clients and their interests, files lawsuits with little or no evidence to support them, and accepts advice from and invests millions on the word of people he barely knows. The ethical violations and assorted criminal behavior in just the first 100 pages would make an outstanding law-school ethics exam.

    Of course, the entire plot strains the patience of even the most credulous readers. Why would a lawyer, who has heretofore suffered on a public-defender salary (despite a sparkling law-school career at Georgetown Law School) in the interests of the public good, abandon everything on the improbable word of an unknown stranger and suddenly launch himself on a whirlwind of shady deals and ethical violations? Why would a “fireman” like Pace risk disclosure by involving unknown lawyers and particularly obscure criminal lawyers who, of all people, know better than most the costs of shady deals? And what corporation – no matter how deranged – would risk this sort of open manipulation of the civil-justice system? Far from helping to insulate the company, such tactics would enormously magnify the problem and expose those involved to serious criminal charges.

    Class-action litigation in the United States is certainly long overdue for reform, and Grisham’s portrayal of self-righteous and hypocritical leaders of the mass-tort bar, with their expensive Colorado ranches, Gulfstream jets and sports cars, may be apt and well-deserved. But Grisham offers little beyond parody. He offers no credible examination of the issues raised by the explosion of class suits, nor even a hint of how we might as a society properly balance the need for compensation in large-scale litigation against the danger of windfall attorneys’ fees that dwarf the recovery for the clients.

    Of course, neither Grisham nor his fans will likely pause long to consider any of this a flaw in the book. To the contrary, Grisham sells suspense, not thoughtful plot development, social commentary or even interesting character sketches.

    And on this level, “The King of Torts” delivers with a vengeance. If only out of morbid curiosity, the reader is dragged through the sordid tale to its all-too-predictable conclusion. Ill-gotten gains evaporate with a change in fortunes. The FBI begins to investigate. And Carter learns what he knew all along: that some things are too good to be true.

  • A shocking tale of Edison’s sleazy side

    A shocking tale of Edison’s sleazy side

    ‘Executioner’s Current: Thomas Edison, George Westinghouse, and the Invention of the Electric Chair’

    by Richard Moran

    Alfred A. Knopf, $25

    On Aug. 6, 1890, William Kemmler became the first person to be executed in the newly invented electric chair. At a time when electricity was poorly understood and not widely available to the general public, the introduction of the electric chair was announced as an advancement over hanging as a more humane method of execution. Whether death in the chair is actually less painful or more humane has been debated ever since, starting with Kemmler’s own botched execution.
    But there’s a story behind the electric chair. At the end of the 19th century, two emerging power companies were grappling over the emerging market for electrical power.

    Thomas Edison’s direct current took an early lead but was rapidly overtaken by the advantages of alternating current offered by his competitor, Westinghouse.

    In “Executioner’s Current,” Richard Moran carefully details Edison’s remarkably sleazy efforts to discredit alternating current (and Westinghouse) by developing the electric chair, covertly lobbying New York to embrace the new technology and – most important – utilizing alternating current to operate the chair. Edison then sought to disparage alternating current by dubbing it the “executioner’s current,” far too dangerous for common use.

    Westinghouse took up the challenge, funding death-penalty litigation to challenge the new method of execution as unconstitutionally cruel and unusual. Both sides cloaked their less-appealing commercial interests.
    Although Edison won the legal battle and the electric chair was adopted by numerous states, he lost the commercial fight as alternating current overtook direct current and became the U.S. standard for electricity. Edison’s underhanded efforts and his role as the father of the electric chair have largely been overshadowed by his contributions as the classic American entrepreneurial inventor.

    “Executioner’s Current” aims to set the record straight. As this thoughtful volume attests, Edison left behind a deadly legacy: More than 4,300 people have been executed in the electric chair in the United States, more than all other methods of execution combined. And the debate over the mechanics of the death penalty still rages.

  • Another legal page turner from Scott Turow

    Another legal page turner from Scott Turow

    ‘Reversible Errors’

    by Scott Turow

    Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $28

    Even those most committed to the death penalty usually recognize that no system is perfect and, despite all our efforts, that mistakes can be made. Scott Turow’s dazzling new courtroom thriller, “Reversible Errors,” tackles the nation’s ultimate sanction and the fallibility of our justice system.

    The novel, set in Turow’s fictional Kindle County, revolves around a triple murder in a county diner for which a street weasel named Rommy “Squirrel” Gandolf has confessed after a rather difficult interrogation session. Ambitious prosecutor Muriel Wynn and gritty street detective Larry Starczek secure a conviction, and death sentence, for Gandolf.

    Ten years later, as Gandolf sweats out the last few weeks before his execution date, the federal Court of Appeals appoints Arthur Raven to represent Gandolf on his last-ditch habeas corpus petition. Raven, a polished corporate litigator unfamiliar with criminal defense (much less death-penalty litigation), reluctantly takes on the case and struggles to gain vindication for what he believes is an innocent man, boxed in by seemingly insurmountable odds.

    Evidence soon surfaces that might demonstrate Gandolf’s innocence, in the form of another inmate, Erno Erdai, who chillingly confesses to the crime and provides convincing evidence of his guilt just before he dies of lung cancer. The stage thus set, Raven and Wynn struggle over Erdai’s testimony, with Gandolf’s life hanging in the balance.

    Raven, now fully committed to saving an innocent man from death, meets his match with Wynn, equally set on demonstrating the validity of her original prosecution, particularly in light of her ongoing campaign to become the new county prosecutor. The lightning crackles as the two clash in the courtroom, each convinced of the moral righteousness of his or her cause.

    Turow unfolds a typically twisted plot, complete with bombshell developments and stunning revelations spattered across the pages. With his own death-penalty litigation experience, Turow captures that rare balance between accurate legal details and arresting plot development. Turow skillfully weaves past and present, avoiding a linear narrative and forcing the reader to continually revise the events, motives and actions that occurred on the night of the murder.

    But Turow’s real strength lies behind the story, as he develops the protagonists into real people, carrying real burdens and making real choices that they sometimes live to regret. Everyone in this book has made mistakes, but only some are willing to confront them. Indeed, the novel’s central theme of redemption addresses the very line between errors that are recoverable – legal and emotional – and those that are not.

    Raven, a career bachelor with no likely prospects, becomes involved with Gillian Sullivan, the judge who presided over the original Gandolf trial but was herself subsequently convicted of taking bribes and has only just been released from prison. Beaten and defeated, she struggles with her disgrace and disbelief that her crimes can ever be truly put behind her. Raven, touched by her vulnerability, struggles to build a relationship with her, uncertain how to reach her and all too aware that she could become a witness in the case.

    On the prosecution side, Wynn has problems of her own. She sacrificed a once-promising relationship with Detective Starczek and married a wealthy, powerful man, only to realize as she is forced back into a working relationship with Starczek that the compromise she made may have been less to her advantage than she realized. Starczek, in turn, harbors a bitter recognition that he is “just a cop” unlikely to capture the attention of an ambitious and beautiful prosecutor like Wynn.

    Erdai himself struggles to recast the past, atone for his sins and protect his own interests.

    It’s a compelling mixture of carefully drawn characters that add immeasurable depth to the novel. Unfortunately, though, Turow leavens the book with unnecessarily graphic sex scenes, which actually detract from the development of the characters, add nothing to the plot, and are almost laughably drawn from an awkward male perspective. They are neither substantial (or subtle) enough to be erotic, nor passing enough to be colorful background. A stronger editor could surely have improved this text with judicious use of a red pen.

    But then, why quibble? Turow is so far above the pack that, even freighted with this minor flaw, the book nonetheless easily rises above it. Turow has, by this point, plainly laid claim to the title of Master of the Courtroom Thriller. And he deserves it.

  • Benjamin Franklin: An electrifying intellect

    Benjamin Franklin: An electrifying intellect

    ‘Benjamin Franklin’

    by Edmund S. Morgan

    Yale University Press, $24.95

    Benjamin Franklin is perhaps the best known, and least understood, of the American founding fathers.

    To the popular imagination, Franklin is remembered as a portly man who shook the world with a novel electrical experiment and authored numerous witty aphorisms. But his contributions to the political, social and scientific history of America can scarcely be overstated.

    Franklin played a pivotal role in our nation’s birth – he represented the colonies in London in the stormy years leading to the American Revolution. He returned to America to sign the Declaration of Independence. He negotiated a critical alliance with the French, and even negotiated the terms of American independence.

    Edmund S. Morgan brings Franklin’s larger accomplishments alive in his new biography, “Benjamin Franklin,” a thoughtful and imaginative volume that vividly recounts Franklin’s astonishing achievements.

    Morgan, who was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2000, is chairman of the voluminous Franklin Papers. He describes the book as “a character sketch that got out of control.”

    It’s an apt description. Unlike the popular recent biographies of Lyndon Johnson or John Adams, Morgan doesn’t comprehensively catalogue Franklin’s life. He omits almost entirely any examination of Franklin’s personal life, mentioning only in passing Franklin’s illegitimate son (whose mother has never been identified) and his wife who stayed behind in Pennsylvania during the long years that Franklin spent abroad.

    Rather, Morgan draws almost entirely from Franklin’s own writings to weave a comparatively brief (314 pages) essay on his most important contributions to his city, nation and world. It’s a refreshing focus on Franklin’s larger contributions. Morgan’s writing, fluid and thoughtful, narrates Franklin’s life in the present tense, which brings a compelling immediacy to the text.

    Franklin was a printer by trade. His immense curiosity led him to constantly experiment on the world around him. He experimented with the effect of oil on water, demonstrated how the temperature of the Atlantic revealed the course of the Gulf Stream, mapped the movement of storms and redesigned common stoves.

    Franklin’s experiments with electricity, conducted from 1748-50, were his most famous. Begun at age 40, the experiments explained the fundamental nature of lightning and electricity to a world that barely understood it. He proposed an experiment to demonstrate that lightning was actually an electrical charge, similar to static electricity (the only kind known at the time). This one experiment alone brought Franklin worldwide fame.

    Sent to England to represent Pennsylvania in 1757, he was later appointed by other colonies and served, for practical purposes, as the “American” ambassador. In London, he earned fast friends, enormous respect and severe British approbation as the point of contact between restless colonies yearning for freedom and an angry imperial government determined to teach the colonials a lesson. Franklin sarcastically published in response a pamphlet entitled “Rules by Which a Great Empire May be Reduced to a Small One.”

    Franklin was convinced that American growth would lead to power and wealth. A reluctant revolutionary, he argued that the colonies should be allowed to legislate for themselves as a co-equal to the British Parliament, both subject to one sovereign. British Parliamentary rule was futile, in his view, and would lead only to alienation and, ultimately, to the exclusion of England from America’s unlimited potential. But as the tension inexorably ratcheted both countries toward war, Franklin was unable to persuade an unyielding Parliament to compromise.

    Franklin returned to Philadelphia in 1775. Resigned to the necessity for war, he signed a Declaration of Independence drafted largely by Thomas Jefferson, and was appointed to negotiate a critical alliance with the French. He playfully wrote to an English friend early in the war to consider that “Britain, at the expense of three million pounds, has killed 150 Yankies this campaign, which is 20,000 a head; and at Bunker’s Hill she gained a mile of ground. … During the same time, 60,000 children have been born in America. From these data [you] will easily calculate the time and expence necessary to kill us all, and conquer our whole territory.”

    In October 1776, Franklin, now 69, returned to the Continent to represent the new American government in France, borrow money and purchase supplies for General Washington’s army. He was treated with awe and respect by the French, courted by intellectuals, royalty and a seemingly endless supply of beautiful French women.

    In 1782, Franklin helped negotiate the end of a war. He returned to Philadelphia in 1785, sat in the 1787 convention that framed the U.S. Constitution (replacing the Articles of Confederation), and died three years later in 1790.

    From start to finish, he played one of the most central roles in creating modern America of any of the founding fathers. As Morgan concludes “We can know what many of his contemporaries came to recognize, that he did as much as any man ever has to shape the world he and they lived in. We can also know what they must have known, that the world was not quite what he would have liked.

  • La Catastrophe’: Dramatic history of a volcanic disaster

    La Catastrophe’: Dramatic history of a volcanic disaster

    ‘La Catastrophe: The Eruption of Mount Pele, the Worst Volcanic Disaster of the 20th Century’

    by Alwyn Scarth

    Oxford University Press, $22

    One hundred years ago, on May 8, 1902, Mount Pel

  • Adventure-filled life of a local climber merits better book

    Adventure-filled life of a local climber merits better book

    ‘Fatal Mountaineer: The High-Altitude Life and Death of Willi Unsoeld, American Himalayan Legend’

    by Robert Roper

    St. Martin’s Press, $25.95

    Willi Unsoeld, the Washington state mountaineer and climbing legend, lived a life of astonishing conquests and staggering loss. It is a terrific story and one that should easily dwarf the drama of the Everest climbing fiasco recounted in the best seller “Into Thin Air.” Unfortunately, Robert Roper falls woefully short of the mark, and his thin, meandering writing all but destroys this compelling drama.

    Unsoeld, one of the most accomplished American climbers of his generation, sealed his fame in 1963 with a first ascent of Mount Everest’s west ridge. He and a partner climbed over the summit with the audacious plan to cross the mountaintop and descend the opposite face, where they could meet the remainder of their party and replenish their supplies. They reached the summit at 6 p.m. Unable to descend before nightfall, they were forced to spend the night at 28,000 feet, an almost certain death sentence given their lack of equipment.

    Only a freakish calm allowed their survival, and even with that, Unsoeld lost nine toes to frostbite. But he came back an undisputed American climbing hero.

    Unsoeld, husband of former U.S. Rep. Jolene Unsoeld, had a lifelong fascination with the Himalayas. Indeed, he named his daughter after Nanda Devi, a spectacular Himalayan peak surrounded by a ring of forbidding and daunting mountains and cliffs.

    His daughter was, by all accounts, a remarkable mountaineer in her own right. At 23, she formed a team that included her father to climb the peak for which she was named.

    In “Fatal Mountaineer,” Roper recounts Devi Unsoeld’s 1976 attempt to climb her namesake. The climb from the outset was badly fractured by competing egos, by resentment from one of the team leaders that a woman was included on the climb, and by an almost reckless inattention to safety.

    Notwithstanding all the obstacles, Devi Unsoeld almost realized her dream of reaching the summit. But on a precarious ledge in her tent at 23,000 feet, she became ill. After several days of battling the illness, weather and altitude, she died in the midst of a ferocious snowstorm.

    Stricken, Willi Unsoeld committed his daughter’s body to the mountain and descended into a swirl of controversy over his actions, which some believe endangered his daughter.

    Unsoeld, a professor at The Evergreen State College in Olympia at the time, buried his grief in his work and in teaching others his gift for mountaineering.

    In 1979, he died in an avalanche on Mount Rainier’s Cadaver Gap while leading a group of novice climbers in a winter climb in treacherous conditions.

    Almost any one of these elements – Unsoeld’s stunning first ascent of the west ridge of Everest, Devi Unsoeld’s tragic death climbing the mountain for which she was named or the avalanche that killed Willi Unsoeld – could have formed the basis of a compelling book.

    But Roper falls short by almost any measure. The writing itself veers from pedantic to awkward, and the pacing is even worse. To Roper, almost any tangent is worth exploring, but only in superficial detail, from Himalayan religious traditions to Unsoeld’s psychological theories to mini-reviews of other accounts of Unsoeld’s climbs.

    Stripped of this superfluous padding, what remains is at best a poorly written extended magazine-length recounting of the Devi climb, with a brief and incomplete summary of Unsoeld’s life appended. Some day Unsoeld’s life and death will be the stuff of a great book. Unfortunately, this book is not it.

  • Grisham makes disappointing return to courtroom

    Grisham makes disappointing return to courtroom

    ‘The Summons’

    by John Grisham

    Doubleday, $27.95

    John Grisham, the master of legal thrillers, is back with another. With no fewer than 13 astoundingly popular novels under his belt, his new offering, “The Summons,” features much of what made him so popular: clever hooks, characters under pressure and endearing Southern settings. Unfortunately, Grisham’s new novel (in bookstores today) lacks the most important elements of his past success: suspense, drama and novel plot twists. Without it, what remains is a bland and tasteless “Grisham Lite” not worth the time and effort to read to its plodding and all-too-obvious denouement.

    “The Summons” revolves around the death of a prominent, but retired, small-town judge, Reuben Atlee. Atlee, who lives in the family’s decaying mansion in Clanton, Miss., is famously crusty and demanding. Dying of cancer, he summons his two sons to discuss his estate. One, Ray Atlee, is a law professor in Virginia who has disappointed his father by teaching rather than returning to Clanton to join his father’s law office. Forrest, the other son, is even worse: a drunkard and drug addict who alternates between expensive rehab, embarrassing drunken frolics and failed efforts to remain clean.

    Ray reluctantly returns to Clanton as directed. When he arrives, he discovers his father, dead, apparently from either the cancer or an overdose of morphine. Among his papers is a new will, completed by his father moments before his death, leaving his estate to his sons.

    But as Ray recovers from the shock of his death, he finds something even more surprising: a little more than $3 million in cash stuffed neatly into 27 boxes on the bookshelf of the silent, dark mansion. The cash – far more than the judge could possibly have earned in his working life – raises provoking questions as to its origins.

    Ray struggles with how to respond: If he reports the cash, it would inevitably tarnish his father’s reputation and, because of estate taxes, would be subject to crushing taxation. And, if Forrest receives half, he is likely to self-destruct.

    Ray decides to keep the horde of cash secret – and safe – while he tries to unravel the mystery of its origin. But Ray is not the only one aware of the cash, a fact that becomes painfully clear as Ray receives a variety of anonymous and threatening notes and letters.

    The bulk of the action in the book is devoted to Ray’s sometimes frantic efforts to protect the cash, determine its source and do the right thing while sorely tempted by the apparent windfall. Unable to bank the cash – because of the paper trail it would create and questions it would raise – he attempts a variety of sometimes-comical protective efforts.

    In a resolution that is almost painfully obvious from early in the novel, Ray’s dilemma is ultimately solved for him. But there’s no need to worry about staying up late for this one. As the final page turns, you are more likely to be agitated not by the suspense, but at the lack of it.

    “The Summons” represents a return to the world of law for Grisham. After 11 best-selling courtroom thrillers, his last two novels (“A Painted House” and “Skipping Christmas”) had nothing to do with law or lawyers.

    But it is, in many ways, a disappointing return. Grisham’s wildly popular earlier novels often featured lawyers, witnesses or jurors caught in a tangle of dangerous crosscurrents, running from death or worse, with the entire morass suddenly clearing with a surprising and plot-twisting finale.

    No such luck here. This novel plods along at a slow and wobbly pace to a conclusion so plainly foretold that the only suspense is how long we have to wait to get there.

    To his credit, Grisham’s writing is more evocative than his past efforts. Although most of the characters are Grisham’s standard cardboard cutouts, Ray Atlee, at least, is developed. The careful drawing of the decaying Atlee mansion, too, is worth noting, with its creaking floorboards and dominating oil paintings coming to life as almost a character in its own right.

    But this hardly saves the book from itself. Almost everything that might otherwise make the book worth reading is missing: suspense, a spine-tingling surprise ending or even a larger point about law, money or the moral dilemmas we all confront every day. Grisham diehards will no doubt snap it up in record numbers, but most will finish it with the same question: That’s it?

  • More power to the people: Judge William Dwyer finds juries not guilty of damaging the U.S. justice system

    More power to the people: Judge William Dwyer finds juries not guilty of damaging the U.S. justice system

    ‘In the Hands of the People: The Trial Jury’s Origins, Triumphs, Troubles, and Future in American Democracy’

    by William L. Dwyer

    Thomas Dunne Books, $24.95

    The trial jury, the hallmark of the American justice system, is increasingly under attack as out of control, dangerously vulnerable to manipulative trial lawyers, and, all too often, the source of skyrocketing damage awards. Commentators from across the political spectrum have demanded, with increasing urgency, various reforms to eliminate or limit the role of a jury.

    U.S. District Judge William Dwyer begs to differ.

    In the just-published “In the Hands of the People,” he offers a spirited defense of the jury-trial system.

    The book surveys the history and purpose of the jury system, addresses the principal arguments for its demise and offers thoughtful proposals to strengthen, not abolish, the role of the trial jury.

    Dwyer is no stranger to the process. As a Seattle trial lawyer, he handled some of the Northwest’s most significant cases – including the lawsuit against Major League Baseball that resulted in the creation of the Mariners. He gained a reputation as one of the best trial attorneys in the state.

    Appointed to the federal bench in 1987, Dwyer has since handled some of the most significant cases of the past 15 years: protecting spotted-owl habitat and restricting logging on a public lands; ruling that Metro’s political structure was unconstitutional; and striking down Washington’s term-limits restrictions. And he has presided over hundreds of jury trials and worked with thousands of jurors, witnesses and lawyers, and earned an unparalleled reputation as one of the most outstanding federal judges in the nation.

    Dwyer begins with a review of the origins of the jury as an alternative to earlier methods for resolving disputes, such as trial by battle, torture, oath-swearing contests, or other medieval forms of dispute resolution.

    From its English common-law origins, the jury slowly gained independent power and, when transplanted to the American Colonies, became a key check against governmental tyranny and an important and unique aspect of the American participatory democracy.

    The latter half of the book surveys the principal objections to the jury system and, point by point, dismantles them as largely unsupported by evidence, contradicted by the actual record in specific cases, or hinged primarily on isolated, but highly publicized, aberrations.

    There are significant problems with the American justice system, Dwyer acknowledges, quoting Ambrose Bierce’s famous definition of litigation as a process into which one enters as a pig and exits as a sausage.

    These include long delays until trial, unimaginable expense, overloaded courts and endlessly contentious counsel – but not one of these faults can be blamed on the jury and most can, and should, be addressed by reforms elsewhere.

    Still, the judge concedes reforms should be taken, not to limit juries, but to strengthen them. His proposals range from modest to striking.

    To increase the diversity of juries, Dwyer would increase compensation for jury service and restrict opportunities to evade service (thus increasing participation of the poor and the well off).

    To streamline jury selection, he would have most questioning conducted by the trial judge, with only limited follow-up questions by the lawyers.

    He would eliminate notoriously disruptive midtrial sidebar conferences between the judge and lawyers, strictly budget and control the length of trials, increase the use of court-appointed experts, encourage juror participation through questions of witnesses and note-taking and translate arcane “legalese” favored by obtuse lawyers into plain English more readily comprehensible to the average juror.

    Perhaps most controversially, he would limit or eliminate the peremptory challenge, the right of a party to eliminate a certain number of potential jurors without cause or explanation.

    Dwyer’s proposals are not all new or novel and don’t purport to be. But, built on a solid foundation of history and experience, his suggestions offer thoughtful suggestions to strengthen the role of the jury. Some of these proposals might, and perhaps should, be debated, but it would be a foolish lawyer, judge or litigant who ignored this set of proposals.

    In 1670, as Quaker leader William Penn was dragged from the courtroom by the king’s forces and the jury was threatened with prosecution if it did not convict him, Penn called out to the jurors not to “give away your right(s).” From the jury box came the reply: “Nor will we ever do it!”

    As Dwyer closes this volume, he urges, “Our response should be the same.

  • A ‘bully’ biography: Morris’ second installment of Roosevelt’s life has the potential for another Pulitzer Prize

    A ‘bully’ biography: Morris’ second installment of Roosevelt’s life has the potential for another Pulitzer Prize

    ‘Theodore Rex’

    by Edmund Morris

    Random House, $35

    A bit more than one century ago, on Sept. 21, 1901, Theodore Roosevelt assumed the presidency after the death of his predecessor, William McKinley, by an assassin’s bullet. At 42, he was – and remains – the youngest president to hold the office.

    Over the next eight years, he towered over the political landscape, built an American empire, and through sheer force of personality bent the political world to his will.

    The second in a three-volume biography of Roosevelt’s life, “Theodore Rex” begins with Roosevelt’s ascent to office in 1901 and ends with his departure from the White House in 1908.

    The title, bestowed by Henry James, pays tribute to Roosevelt’s power during his presidency. Edmund Morris won the Pulitzer Prize for the first volume of the biography and, with this dazzling effort, could easily win another.

    Carefully drawing from Roosevelt’s private papers and those of his contemporaries, Morris compiles a vivid portrait of Roosevelt’s ferocious zest for life, keen intelligence and unerring political judgment.

    Roosevelt all but leaps from the pages, flashing smiles, snapping off crisp sentences and, above all, commanding attention.

    Roosevelt’s achievements can scarcely be overstated – building the Panama Canal, personally negotiating the end of the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 (for which he won the Nobel Peace Prize), and arm-twisting both labor and railroad tycoons into an improbable settlement of the violent 1902 coal miners’ strike in Pennsylvania that threatened to disrupt the economy and leave millions without heat as winter approached.

    Roosevelt built up the Navy (his infamous “big stick”), extending American naval power throughout the world, and introduced conservation to the American public – single-handedly tripling the size of the national forests (including national forests in the Washington Cascades and Olympics) and creating 51 national wildlife refuges, thus preserving the nearly extinct “Roosevelt” elk and laying the groundwork for the creation in 1938 of Olympic National Park.

    On race relations, Roosevelt invited Booker T. Washington to the White House for dinner, a groundbreaking move, but later unfairly discharged 160 African-American soldiers accused without proof of a murderous rebellion against local racism in Brownsville, Texas.

    Roosevelt aggressively challenged the powerful corporate trusts, enacting landmark antitrust legislation and launching trust-busting prosecutions of some of the most infamous trusts and industrialists of the time.

    J.P. Morgan, still bitter from Roosevelt’s treatment of him, is said to have once raised his glass at dinner, as Roosevelt left on a post-presidential safari, to the toast: “America expects that every lion will do his duty.”

    Roosevelt’s White House crackled with energy, noise and bustling confusion as his six beloved children swarmed throughout the grounds. Adored by his children, he was an honorary member of the White House gang of rebellious boys.

    But Roosevelt himself had something of the bumptious boy in him. He adored physical challenge, constantly pushing himself to the limit in climbing, hiking, galloping on horseback through Washington’s Rock Creek Park, or leading puzzled European diplomats through the muddy park.

    His infamous “walks” often included waist-high wading through water still half-frozen from winter’s chill, or rock-climbing up dangerous outcroppings, his guests struggling to keep up with Roosevelt as he surged ahead.

    He was a committed hunter and often returned from his outings with a limp, hiding huge bruises or pulled muscles. Roosevelt once famously refused to shoot a bear, captured by his hosts during a hunting trip in Mississippi and tied to a tree for his convenience. His sportsmanship was noted in editorial cartoons, and the bear later became a symbol, his name forever attached to millions of “Teddy bears.”

    Roosevelt was re-elected in 1904 by a landslide, upon which he promptly announced that he would not seek re-election to another term. He was acutely aware of the dangers of overstaying his welcome and felt that, once made, his promise could not be forsaken. He remained true to his commitment and declined the 1908 nomination in favor of William Howard Taft, his chosen successor.

    Morris deftly closes this volume with Roosevelt’s departure from Washington to his cherished New York estate, Sagamore Hills, “the image of his receding grin and wave” fading into history.

    Morris’ first volume of this biography was acclaimed as a singular triumph. His more recent fictionalized “biography” of Ronald Reagan (“Dutch”) was far more controversial, derided by many as bizarre and self-indulgent.

    In “Theodore Rex,” Morris returns to form and produces a rare blend of superb research, engaging writing and a fascinating portrait of one of America’s most interesting presidents. Roosevelt would surely have declared it “bully.