Robert B. Parker has a Blog

[pecunium]

I like his work. I have some minor annoyances with the way the subplots in the individual books mirror the arc of continuing story, but hey, that's something which is a painful aspect of dramatic fiction in the modern age (The Closer is awful for this; then again, I dislike aspects of it on a professional level. Her interrogation strategy bothers me. Cops' interrogation strategies bother me, and hers are cop strategies on steroids, but I digress).

His books are hard-boiled detective stories, in the mold of wisecracking; but intelligent (one can also say sensitive). Spenser ("like the poet") cooks, reads, is a baseball fan (and basketball, but he has his priorities, in the season, Baseball takes precedence), enjoys poetry and is tolerant (which doesn't mean he isn't jugemental; there's a difference).

His blog is much the same. Erratic, but readable (add a dose of working writer stuff. Not so process oriented as matociquala, but some interesting insight to the life).

Robert B. Parker

Comments

Re: Not disagreeing with your advice here - of course the dance is a formal one.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

It doesn't suit, mostly because I disagree with the fundamental premise: that the system has no temptation to railroad the innocent. Mas Ayoob has an advantage in his depiction of how the system works for the not-guilty.

He's an expert witness. He gets to pick and choose whom he works for. He is also an expert witness in a very narrow field; justifiable shootings. His experience with the innocent is that they are usually acquitted.

For a different take; with a better tone, if a less pleasant conclusion: Mean Justice.

Part of the problem with the exposition is I don't trust the speaker: He's either painfully ignorant, or willing to lie to the audience, "Only the USA still has juries, is just plain wrong.

The structural comments about the attorney, "jumping at the deal" isn't really true either. A good defense att'y (which he posits) will know how to look at the case the state has, and predict; with some degree of accuracy, the odds of it convincing a jury. Since studies show juries are, contrary to hope; but in keeping with expectation, inclined to give greater weight to the state's case (and give cops the benefit of the doubt) even a haf-assed case is likely to be persuasive.

The tone of this piece, actually, supports that: he presumes the, vast, majority of defendants are guilty. Odds are, unless the case tickles his biases, he's a prosecution juror.

But even with that, the lawyer doesn't make the call, the client does. The guiltiest of clients can insist on a a trial even with the most compelling of prosecution cases.

The most important piece of that is actually at the end... credible experts, because that is what Mas Ayoob is selling; his credibility.