Andy
takes on the Rifkin murder as usual in his 1st ADA position. It is
not a wise decision. With his son attending school with the victim and Andy
personally knowing the Rifkin family he should have stepped back.
Initially
there is no suspect. Though the murder happened in a public park just before
8:30 in the morning there are no eye witnesses and the forensic evidence is
limited.
Andy
wants to focus on Leonard Patz, a local pedophile, though Patz has never been
violent in encounters with boys. Andy wonders:
I studied the mug shot. I had a feeling about Patz right
from the start. Of course, I was desperate – I wanted to feel that feeling, I badly needed a suspect, I needed to
produce something finally – so I distrusted my suspicion. But I could not
ignore it all together. You have to follow your intuition.”
His
concentration on Patz appears intended to draw attention away from Jacob when
evidence is found directly implicating Jacob.
Jacob’s
fingerprint is found in blood on Rifkin’s clothing and a friend of Jacob, Derek
Yoo, posts on social media that Jacob has a knife.
Jacob
is swiftly indicted and the Barber family is thrust into the agony of defending
Jacob in a highly public American murder case.
Overnight
Andy moves from highly respected ADA to the tainted father of a murder suspect.
He does not handle the transformation well. He has spent his life prosecuting
“scumbags”. Now his son is the accused.
Every
legal tactic and stratagem will be used in the defence of Jacob:
Most of the judges in Cambridge had the same reputation:
soft, unrealistic, liberal. Now it seemed perfectly appropriate to load the
dice that way. A liberal, it turns out, is a conservative who’s been indicted.
I love
the last sentence. It reflects many conservatives I have known.
The
family hires Jonathan Klein, a solid well prepared realistic defence counsel,
who will guide them through the case.
Neal
Logiudice, 2nd ADA, whose ambitions range far beyond replacing Andy as 1st
ADA, is assigned the prosecution. Logiudice is competent but far too personal
in his prosecution.
Andy,
knowing his family’s life will be laid bare, shocks Laurie and Jacob with
revelations concerning Andy’s father.
As the
case proceeds there is an ambiguity concerning Jacob that reminded me of the
uncertainty with regard to Rusty Sabich in Presumed
Innocent and Innocent by Scott
Turow. Landay does not provide the reader with the easy certainty of guilt or
innocence. Readers are left to weigh the evidence.
It is
a thoughtful book that was an uncomfortable for book for me both as a lawyer
who is a parent and as a defence lawyer.
Having
raised two sons, reading of parents coping with a son charged with a major
crime, reminded me of every father’s secret fears that his teenage boys will
get in trouble. I am grateful my sons have done well in life. For a lawyer
parent there is a special discomfort as every trial lawyer sees young people
who have committed crimes their parents cannot fathom.
As a
defence counsel there is a heavier burden to defending teenagers. Families are
closely involved in the cases. A life future is at stake.
I was
glad I read the book. I cannot say I enjoyed a book that made me so
uncomfortable. I regretted the ending. It veered away from the challenging
conclusions of Turow’s books. I will read Landay again. (Apr. 27/14)