Monday, January 02, 2012
The 13th Juror - John LescroartFinally done reading it :))) It's an interesting read. The plot starts to get intense and even compelling after Jennifer (she's the suspect) was found guilty for 2 counts of murder with special circumstances after the 1st phase.
Though the first 30 odd chapters progressed at a relatively slower pace than the last 20 odd chapters, it was still engaging enough for me to read on. I appreciate how the author actually explored a bit on other characters in the story, instead of focusing entirely on the suspect and the attorney. Cause at the end of the day, we aren't some law undergraduate that wish to look up for case studies and ace our examinations/ careers, some of the legal proceedings will definitely bore us out. :))))
The main characters in the story are Jennifer Witt (I hope I didn't spell her surname wrongly) and Hardy (he's the defense attorney)
Jennifer Witts -
Poor girl. She married twice, and was subjected to domestic violence in both marriages. However, she was actually exposed to domestic violence at a young age. Nancy, her mom, was also a battered wife. Somehow, both women think it's their fault and endured it.
Hardy -
Okay, he's in his 2nd marriage too. He's fine, somewhat industrious. Has a great sense of humour for a lawyer.
Oh, there's David Freeman. He's an experienced lawyer described as an abrasive old man. He's not clad in suit, but he knows his stuff well. Okay, he gets a bit over-confident at some point, and totally lost his footing at the end of the first phase.
+++ Thank god Singapore abolish the jury system. (Is this sentence considered blasphemy? Hope not :) I am actually really thankful) Imagine persuading a group of random individuals, who are supposedly rational, informed and pragmatic [and all those characteristics the judge/ legal system is looking for]. On what grounds can one argue that decisions made by the jury are as substantiated and impartial as those made by a skilled judge. Just saying... +++
3:26 PM By jov
