The Color of Law, Mark Gimenez’s first novel, follows in the style of John Grisham. Gimenez has the same grasp of the law and the moral dilemmas faced by lawyers. Gimenez is grittier than Grisham and tends to be a little preachy, yet he has a readable style that balances vivid detail with action and suspense.
Scott Fenny is a wealthy lawyer in the biggest law firm in Dallas. Scott has succeeded by being creative with the law, doing whatever he has to in order to win. He is living the perfect life, living in a $3 million mansion, drives a $200,000 Ferrari, wears thousand dollar suits, dines at the most exclusive dinner clubs, and is envied by many. But Scott is selfish, self-centered, arrogant, uncaring and shallow, just like all the other successful people around him, but he doesn’t know it.
Then into his perfect life falls a bomb. The federal judge appoints him as a public defender for a heroin-addicted prostitute charged in the murder of senator McCall’s son. Senator McCall is one of the most powerful men in Texas and is running for president, and he pressures Scott’s boss to keep his son’s wild and violent past out of the trial. Scott chafes at being told to lose the case and refuses to withhold the evidence.
Within days his perfect life has been completely unraveled. He loses his Ferrari, his mansion, his exclusive club memberships, and his wife, who walks out on him. Finally, he loses his main client and then his job. Completely devastated, Scott is forced to search his soul to find out what is most important. He chooses to defend the prostitute to the best of his ability; to discover the truth and not simply win. As a result, his life is completely changed and Scott becomes a caring, compassionate, man who thinks of other’s needs and not just his own.
Several quotes from the story are profound:
First, Scott’s boss tells him, “The color of the law is not black and white; it’s not about race. The color of law is green; money is what the law is all about. The law is for making and protecting rich men’s money.”
Second, Scott’s boss recounts what his first boss told him about success as a lawyer, in order to convince Scott to lose the case and move on. He said, “Early in your career you must decide whether you want to do ‘good’ or do ‘well.’ If you do ‘good’ you will never do ‘well’; you’ll never be successful. How does a lawyer become successful? By doing his job. Which is making rich people richer. And we get paid very well for doing our job. You have to ask yourself, ‘Do you want to make money or do you want to make the world a better place? Do you want to drive a Cadillac or a Chevrolet? Do you want to send your kids to private schools or public schools? Do you want to be a rich lawyer or a poor lawyer?’ If you want to do good, go work for the legal aid and help the little people battle their landlords, the utility companies and the police, and feel good about it. But don’t have regrets twenty years later when your classmates are driving new cars and taking vacations in Europe. And you will have to tell your kids that they can’t go to an Ivy League school because you did ‘good’.”
Gimenez is very cynical about lawyers and clearly shows the moral dilemma a lawyer must face. A lawyer, according to Gimenez, is merely someone who gets paid to lie. And the better you are at lying the more successful you will be as a lawyer. A lawyer will never be successful if he is concerned about truth and justice. While this may be hyperbole, anyone who desires to become a lawyer should wrestle with this dilemma before he even considers going to law school. For the rest of us, it is important to remember that a lawyer doesn’t have your best interest in mind; all he cares about is the bottom line.
Third, when Scott’s main client drops him, Scott asks him why he isn’t being loyal to him as a friend, since he took him on as a client eleven years ago when he was just a struggling land developer. The client retorts, “I am only loyal to my friends. All you wanted was my money, so that is all I ever gave you. You over billed me and took as much money from me as you could, and I didn’t complain; that was my payment to you in full. You are not my friend because you didn’t want to be my friend. And because you are not my friend, you don’t deserve my loyalty.”
Gimenez portrays the loneliness of a life lived only for success, money, status and all the things that go with it. There is no love, no intimacy, no transparency, no friendship between anyone, not even his wife. The only person Scott even gets close to is his nine-year old daughter. Everyone else is using him and being used by him, making love and true friendship impossible. Everyone needs to consider the cost of such a life and determine if it is truly “success.”
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
The Innocent Man
The Innocent Man, by John Grisham, is an excellent book based on a true story. This is Grisham’s first non-fiction work, and it is on the same level as his novels. I have greatly enjoyed every Grisham novel I have read, and this true life tale is no exception. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in the criminal justice system in general and the death penalty in particular. Grisham has done extensive research and it shows on every page.
The Innocent Man chronicles the life and trial of Ron Williamson, accused of raping and murdering a young woman in Ada, Oklahoma. Ron signed with the Oakland A’s in 1971 and dreamed of making it in the big leagues. But an arm injury and bad habits destroyed his dreams and he returned home to live with his mother in Ada, depressed and isolated. His life consisted of drinking, bar-hopping, womanizing and sleeping twenty hours a day.
When Debra Sue Carter was raped in murdered in 1982, the police eventually put Ron on the top of their suspect list. For five years they looked for evidence against Ron and his friend Dennis Fritz, and ended up putting together a case against them based on bad forensic science, lazy police work, forced confessions, and questionable testimony from jailhouse snitches. Since Ron and Dennis were poor, they could not afford counsel and were assigned public defenders who were incompetent, overworked, underpaid, and unconcerned. As a result, Dennis received life in prison and Ron was given the death sentence.
Ron constantly professed his innocence and couldn’t understand why the police and the prosecutor were out to get him. Hard drinking, drugs and the stress of the trial and life on death row slowly eroded Ron’s sanity and his health. Just days before his execution he received a stay of execution and a new trial. His and Dennis’ convictions were overturned based upon new DNA evidence that clearly excluded them from the crime. The real criminal was finally brought to justice nearly twenty years after the crime.
Ron lost over a decade of his life by being falsely accused and condemned, along with his sanity and health. After being exonerated, Ron was so scarred that it was nearly impossible for him to live a normal life. He finally died in 2004.
This book challenged me in several ways. First, it made the problems in our judicial system real and tangible. It is one thing to see corruption and incompetence portrayed in movies and on TV, but it is quite another to see it in real life. It makes me pause and consider how widespread corruption and incompetence have infiltrated our judicial system. While I believe there are a lot of good people in the system doing incredible work, there needs to be some major changes made to weed out the bad and repair the damaged systems that do exist.
Second, one statement made in the book summarizes one of these problems: “Once a poor person gets sucked into the judicial system, it is almost impossible for him to get out.” [Not an exact quote.] Wealthy people rarely get the death penalty, and race probably has a large influence, though this book didn’t address it since most of the characters were white. The main factor is poverty, since those who can’t afford a lawyer tend are at the mercy of the system, which has very little mercy. When police and prosecutors are pressured to “solve” high profile cases, the poor often can’t defend themselves against false accusations and bad police work. And once a poor person is “marked” as a criminal, he will always be a criminal in the law’s eyes.
Third, the problems with the death penalty are powerfully portrayed in this story and they must be dealt with. Many death row inmates are mistreated, as Ron was, often in the form of taunting from guards, denial of medical services, and poor living conditions. One might have little sympathy for the suffering of hardened criminals, most of them murderers, but when innocent people get sent to death row, then it becomes massive injustice. Christians should be deeply concerned about these issues and not let prejudice and fear keep us from seeking and demanding justice.
Finally, some of the key characters in this real life story relied upon their Christian faith to make it through this ordeal. While many view “jailhouse conversions” with suspicion, we can’t rule out all professions of faith as spurious. While Ron’s faith was weak and insincere in his early life, the testing of his faith made it real and sincere. The faith of his sisters was also instrumental in their ability to weather the many ordeals and continue to be a source of help and support for Ron. Ron also had support from other Christians and he was able to help and support other prisoners as well. When Ron was exonerated, the church in which he grew up refused to acknowledge and support him. While it is understandable that many in the community and the church still felt Ron was guilty, it was unchristian to snub him and refuse to support him.
I highly recommend that you read this book and think about its implications. You can also check out a lot of this information on the web by searching for “Ron Williamson”, “The Innocence Project”, and “Dennis Fritz”. Check out this website: http://www.innocenceproject.org/.
The Innocent Man chronicles the life and trial of Ron Williamson, accused of raping and murdering a young woman in Ada, Oklahoma. Ron signed with the Oakland A’s in 1971 and dreamed of making it in the big leagues. But an arm injury and bad habits destroyed his dreams and he returned home to live with his mother in Ada, depressed and isolated. His life consisted of drinking, bar-hopping, womanizing and sleeping twenty hours a day.
When Debra Sue Carter was raped in murdered in 1982, the police eventually put Ron on the top of their suspect list. For five years they looked for evidence against Ron and his friend Dennis Fritz, and ended up putting together a case against them based on bad forensic science, lazy police work, forced confessions, and questionable testimony from jailhouse snitches. Since Ron and Dennis were poor, they could not afford counsel and were assigned public defenders who were incompetent, overworked, underpaid, and unconcerned. As a result, Dennis received life in prison and Ron was given the death sentence.
Ron constantly professed his innocence and couldn’t understand why the police and the prosecutor were out to get him. Hard drinking, drugs and the stress of the trial and life on death row slowly eroded Ron’s sanity and his health. Just days before his execution he received a stay of execution and a new trial. His and Dennis’ convictions were overturned based upon new DNA evidence that clearly excluded them from the crime. The real criminal was finally brought to justice nearly twenty years after the crime.
Ron lost over a decade of his life by being falsely accused and condemned, along with his sanity and health. After being exonerated, Ron was so scarred that it was nearly impossible for him to live a normal life. He finally died in 2004.
This book challenged me in several ways. First, it made the problems in our judicial system real and tangible. It is one thing to see corruption and incompetence portrayed in movies and on TV, but it is quite another to see it in real life. It makes me pause and consider how widespread corruption and incompetence have infiltrated our judicial system. While I believe there are a lot of good people in the system doing incredible work, there needs to be some major changes made to weed out the bad and repair the damaged systems that do exist.
Second, one statement made in the book summarizes one of these problems: “Once a poor person gets sucked into the judicial system, it is almost impossible for him to get out.” [Not an exact quote.] Wealthy people rarely get the death penalty, and race probably has a large influence, though this book didn’t address it since most of the characters were white. The main factor is poverty, since those who can’t afford a lawyer tend are at the mercy of the system, which has very little mercy. When police and prosecutors are pressured to “solve” high profile cases, the poor often can’t defend themselves against false accusations and bad police work. And once a poor person is “marked” as a criminal, he will always be a criminal in the law’s eyes.
Third, the problems with the death penalty are powerfully portrayed in this story and they must be dealt with. Many death row inmates are mistreated, as Ron was, often in the form of taunting from guards, denial of medical services, and poor living conditions. One might have little sympathy for the suffering of hardened criminals, most of them murderers, but when innocent people get sent to death row, then it becomes massive injustice. Christians should be deeply concerned about these issues and not let prejudice and fear keep us from seeking and demanding justice.
Finally, some of the key characters in this real life story relied upon their Christian faith to make it through this ordeal. While many view “jailhouse conversions” with suspicion, we can’t rule out all professions of faith as spurious. While Ron’s faith was weak and insincere in his early life, the testing of his faith made it real and sincere. The faith of his sisters was also instrumental in their ability to weather the many ordeals and continue to be a source of help and support for Ron. Ron also had support from other Christians and he was able to help and support other prisoners as well. When Ron was exonerated, the church in which he grew up refused to acknowledge and support him. While it is understandable that many in the community and the church still felt Ron was guilty, it was unchristian to snub him and refuse to support him.
I highly recommend that you read this book and think about its implications. You can also check out a lot of this information on the web by searching for “Ron Williamson”, “The Innocence Project”, and “Dennis Fritz”. Check out this website: http://www.innocenceproject.org/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)