We, the Jury

Pub Date:   |   Archive Date: 01 Nov 2018

Member Reviews

An Exceptional & Unique Legal Thriller 

Nothing is more exciting than reading a well written legal thriller. Combining suspense and drama, with lawyers battling it out in court and jury arguing back & forth to reach a verdict is simply thrilling.

We, The Jury is unique because it starts when the lawyers’ arguments end and jury deliberations begin. In a theme similar to 12 Angry Men, the story is focused more on the drama that plays out in the jury room than the actual legal arguments. Deciding a case of domestic murder, the jurors must now decide on whether the defendant is guilty or not. The story is however is not limited to the murder or the case. Beyond the case, there is a parallel drama playing out between the jurors as they battle to reach a unanimous verdict. 

A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer ~ Robert Frost.

The story is narrated from multiple perspectives (the jurors, the judge, bailiff, the lawyers, and a blogger covering the case). Every chapter is narrated from the POV of a different person, we learn something new, either about the case or about the jurors. The character development is top notch, even for the minor characters, which helps you understand their biases and motivations. Despite so many POVs involved, the narrative remains never gets confusing. We also hear the testimony of certain witnesses that shapes your own verdict about the case. I felt the POV of some of the characters never really added to the main story. There could have been more debate among the jurors rather than these story tracks that go nowhere but overall the story never lets you down at any point. 

Overall, Robert Rotstein has put together the most unique & entertaining legal thrillers, I‘ve ever read. Rotstein forces the readers to take a critical look at the jury system and the judicial system as a whole. With an engaging storyline, some great character development and incredible narration, We, the Jury is a Winner. If you enjoy reading legal thrillers & crime fiction, this is a Must Read!

Many Thanks to NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing, and the author Robert Rotstein for the ARC
Was this review helpful?
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the NetGalley  book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255  : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

  This was one long Book, but it does not take away from the excitement of this case.  This case follows Judge Natalie Gilbert following the death of her husband.  I have thoroughly enjoyed this book. I couldn't figure out if David Sullinger actually killed his wife in cold-blood or if it was self-defense.

I definitely would like to read more books from this author, especially the one he co wrote with James Patterson.
Was this review helpful?
There are some books that grab you as soon as you start the first chapter and you can’t break away, then there are the ones that have a slow start but gain momentum and you become completely engrossed, and then there are ones like this one, mediocre speed all the way through. I can’t say this was a bad book, it wasn’t, it is written very well, maybe too much detail sometimes, but it just never grabbed my full attention. 
It is a court room drama telling each jury members perspective as if you are sitting in the jury and going thru each person’s thoughts. If you like this type of book, it may be a great read for you. Sadly it was not one of my favorites. I will give this 3***’s because the premise of the story is good, it gives you a clear vision of a jury trial that is not only affected by the lawyers, judges, the family members testifying or the accused, but it is also affected by who you are sitting by in the jury or what you really want other people to think of you or your past experiences. We are given the ability to think freely, and sometimes basing our thoughts on happenings by our own thought limitations, not always conforming to what they want us to believe. Really kind of scary, I hope I am not in this situation ever. 
I want to thank Blackstone Publishing through NetGalley. The opinions expressed in this review are completely my own. This one gets 3***’s.
Was this review helpful?
A trial procedural told in a very different manner.  The story progresses through the eyes and voices of individual members of the jury and court staff.  The storyline itself is good, the writing style elevates it to the level of a great mystery.  I kept reading long after I should have turned off the light.  Truly a great read!
Was this review helpful?
I was not familiar with the novels by Robert Rotstein prior to reading We, The Jury (thanks to Blackstone Publishing and NetGalley for a copy in exchange for my honest review). He has a series of legal mystery/thrillers featuring trial attorney Parker Stern (a field he knows well, as he has thirty years’ experience as an entertainment attorney), and I just might find those, because I really enjoyed this one.

The book revolves around the murder trial of David Sullinger, whose defense is that of a battered spouse who finally broke and fought back. David’s wife, Amanda, was a successful real estate broker in fictional Sepulveda County, CA – while Davide seems to have been somewhat of a dilettante/employment failure. There is no question that David is in fact an axe murderer, the only question is why and whether it was justified. 

Testimony is given by the Sullinger children, Dillon and Lacey. Dillon is an unreliable witness, being a drug addict who says it was actually David who was the abusive monster, while Daddy’s girl Lacey is not only testifying for her father, she is paying his legal bills, having hired a hotshot out-of-town attorney, using her inheritance. 

The awesome thing about this, and what sets it apart from other legal mystery/thrillers is that it is told from alternating points of view from the eight jurors, judge, bailiff, court clerk, defense attorney, paralegal, and court reporter. As if that isn’t enough, the jury is quite diverse, including a housewife, an architect, a student, a clergyman, a jury consultant, a former high school principal, an express messenger and the foreperson. Tons of perspectives, and it could have gone completely wrong, but somehow it works in this book, with the transitions between chapters being smooth throughout.

Because Lacey’s testimony is so credible and she is such a great witness, one might think that David was in fact justified in his actions…but of course things aren’t as straightforward as they might appear on the surface.
 Perhaps Rotstein’s extensive experience provided the basis for this well-plotted, juicy story with characters who are interesting throughout. I look forward to reading more from Mr. Rotstein! Four stars.
Was this review helpful?
Well written absorbing story. I've been on juries and always wondered how people think. This was fun for me in several ways because of that. Good book.
Was this review helpful?
We, the Jury is an intriguing, well-written courtroom drama.  But wait, it is so much more!  It is the story of a murder trial told from the perspectives of the jurors, the judge, her clerk and courtroom reporter, the defendant’s attorney…. 

In other words, it is a multi-perspective story that is mesmerizing and non-stop.  The characters are interesting and believable.  The dialogue is sharp and the question of guilt or innocence shifts almost constantly.  It’s a book that makes you pay attention. 

Some reviewers have called it razor-sharp and I can only agree whole heartedly.  In the class of legal thrillers, Robert Rotstein’s We, the Jury is a total standout. This is a book that mystery lovers will enjoy as well as anyone who likes courtroom procedurals.  I highly recommend this book. Mr Rotstein is an author I will look for in the future.

Many thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for providing a copy of this book for review.
Was this review helpful?
"We, the jury" is about the opposite of its name--it is about a fragmentation of voices, vs. a union. These are the voices of the criminal justice system--the lawyers, the jurors, the judge, the court staff, even the Net gossiper--telling the story of a murder trial and its outcome. What's good: We have the ability to consider a mystery while navigating the story of the modern jury trial. We can feel the author's point, that within a trial stories we'll find a billion smaller stories. We have as well a personal saga of the grief and decline of a main court figure. (Again, note, a coming apart, not a moment of a single voice.) What's not as effective: While I liked several of the characters, I don't think I felt for any of them other than the tragic figure at the center. 

So, all in all, an intriguing idea, but not one of the greats. For this, I'm using the literal definition of GoodRead's star system--3 being I liked it.

Note: This book was provided to me for an unbiased review by NetGalley.
Was this review helpful?
I enjoyed this book. Reading different perspectives of each juror was very interesting. It was slow in certain places and the ending want completely satisfying to me but I do not think this could  have been handled any better.
Was this review helpful?
Mirror Mirror On The Wall....Who’s the FAIRIST of them all? 

It is said that juries have something that machines still lack-a sense of moral responsibility. 

But, do they really? 

When each juror is bringing their personal animosities and biases to the deliberation room, can a just verdict really be reached? 

Is winning more important than justice? Would you rather convince  your fellow jurors to see things your way, than admit that perhaps your initial thoughts may have been wrong and change whether you will vote to convict or acquit?

David Sullinger has been accused of murdering his wife in self defense, just before their 21st wedding anniversary. His wife, Amanda was once his 11th grade history teacher. They first slept together when he was 16 or 17 years old....their children disagree on which parent was “Satan”. 

The judge has just instructed the jury that David Sullinger just killed Amanda with malice aforethought. She left out the words, “It is for you to decide whether,” (David Sullinger just killed his wife Amanda with malice aforethought.) 

Do you think this jury or any, would not already have some strong opinions just based on these facts alone? 

Do you? 

Meet your jurors:

Juror #1   A records manager in an insurance company
Juror #6.  An architect 
Juror #17  A Housewife with 3 young children
Juror #11. A college student
Juror # 29. A jury consultant 
Juror #33. A grandmother who wears hearing aids...
Juror # 43 A clergyman
Juror #52 An express messenger/actor

This is a unique legal drama that shares with the reader, not only your jurors perspectives, but also those of the Honorable Natalie Quinn Gilbert, her clerk, Mick, the bailiff- Bradley Kobashigawa, both lawyers, and even a blogger whose job is to entertain..not to be objective. 

I loved hearing from them all, but it’s TERRIFYING to realize how much the personal lives, bias, and personal agendas, can affect the outcome of a trial! 

Who will prevail?

Will justice be served? 

I would thank to thank Netgalley, Blackstone Publishing and Robert Rotstein for the ARC I received in exchange for a candid review! This title was just released on Oct. 23rd 2018 and I highly recommend it for readers who enjoy legal dramas!
Was this review helpful?
I've never really been a fan of courtroom dramas, but this one caught my eye as its written from the perspectives of eight different people, some are jurors, some are staff that work within the court room - this is something I enjoyed as it gives you background info from one character that you wouldn't have taken from another.

One of the things I really enjoyed about this book is that it wasn't afraid to explore the idea of a battered husband - something that isn't discussed very often, I understand that it can also be difficult to write about this theme when it's usually the other way around. Nonetheless, I think the author did a great job of this.
I also like that Robert Rotstein isn't afraid to be descriptive of some scenes within the story (note: the tuna casserole scene) and does a great job of making you wince during some of the descriptions.

One of the things I wasn't so keen on is that it touched on current affairs that didn't really need mentioning i.e racism, feminism etc - that's a personal preference however, so I get that that's not something that every reader feels too. 
The only other thing that I wasn't super keen on was that some of the characters were a little typical in that their personalities were too obvious, i.e the elderly lady being hard of hearing and finding it difficult to move around, and the clergyman spitting out religious references - obviously that's a big part of who they are, but I think parts of their ideas could have been thought of outside of the box.

All in all, this was an enjoyable book to read and I highly recommend this to anyone that likes the multiple perspective style of writing. I would be more than happy to read more of this author's work!

Thank you netgalley for giving me the chance to read this in exchange for an open and honest review.
Was this review helpful?
#67 We, The Jury, by Robert Rotstein, is a riveting courtroom drama written from the perspective of the judge and each of the jurors, as well as employees. A domestic violence murder trial, the twist is that the husband/defendant is claiming spousal abuse and self-defense. Released October 23. Rated it 4 stars.
Was this review helpful?
I have to admit, I'm concerned. Did I get super into this because of my job, or because of its own merits? 

I work in a courthouse. I don't have anything to do with trials and juries, but I'm surrounded by judges, lawyers, district attorneys, court reporters. I nod pleasantly at jurors when I have reason to be around them, and I crack jokes with clerks and bailiffs all the live long day. This is my world represented here. 

On the other hand, I've only ever served on one jury. And it was for something comparatively minor. Certainly not for a husband smashing his wife in the head with an axe.

This book is really cool, one way or the other. It's the story of a murder trial, told from the perspective of a lot of different people. From the judge to the bailiff to the court reporter, and all eight jurors individually. This is the story of David and Amanda Sullinger, a toxic marriage that ended in a gruesome murder. But was it self defense of a battered spouse, or the cold blooded murder by an abusive spouse?

I was worried the multiple POVs were going to be a problem, but far from it. Because this was POVs of one very controlled circumstance, the multiple views worked, and they worked brilliantly. I found myself alternately sympathizing with David and finding him innocent, then thinking he was a piece of shit and hoping they threw the book at his lying ass. 

The twist is good. The twist is so good, so delicious. But it's a gentle twist, just the right amount, to make the story all the richer.
Was this review helpful?
I think I am going to be in the minority here and say that this book just was not for me. At all.

 It took everything I had in me to finish We, The Jury. I honestly considered not finishing it at all but I really wanted to give it my best possible attempt to see it through to the end.

I absolutely loved the uniqueness of this book and how well written it was. Rotstein took such an interesting approach to breaking down a criminal trial by focusing on the members of the court and the jury during the deliberation process rather than by putting the focus on the accused and the prosecution/defense itself. I thought that was a brilliant way of writing and it’s what piqued my interest in this book in the first place. 

So…if I loved the idea and the writing was so well done, why was this book not for me? Well the answer’s in the question itself, isn’t it? It turns out this book just wasn’t for me. While I was immediately drawn in by the idea of a courtroom drama that largely focuses on the jury members, as it turns out, I just didn’t care. The different points of view throughout the book didn’t bother me as much as the fact that I just wasn’t interested in what their view actually was. Turns out I really am more interested in the lawyers presenting their evidence and hashing it out in the courtroom. This was pretty early on in the book for me too so there’s a reason why I struggled to finish.

While I wasn’t interested in the Judge’s late husband or the guard’s obsession with working out, I did find the Sullivan case intriguing and did enjoy parts of the deliberation process. I’ve never been in for Jury Duty so it was interesting to get that perspective.

Though this book was definitely not for me, I’m still going to rate it at 3 stars because Rotstein really did such a great job that I know so many legal junkies will absolutely fall in love with this book.  

I’d like to thank NetGalley and the publisher for providing me with an early copy of this book to read and provide my honest opinion.
Was this review helpful?
I thorough enjoyed We the Jury by Robert Rotstein. 
David Sullinger is on trial for the murder of his wife. Instead of the usual legal thriller the author has given us a unique view into the legal system. The story is told by many different narrators - members of the jury, the court reporter. The prosecutor, the defence lawyer and more. And we get an insight into the judge who has recently lost her husband, is suffering emotionally and doubting her mental acuity.  Rotstein writes very well - each character was fully developed to the extent I felt I was in the jury room with the annoying foreperson and in the heads of the jury as they deliberated. I would certainly recommend this book to anybody who loves legal thrillers. 

Many thanks to NetGalley for a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review
Was this review helpful?
My rating 3.5 stars
Release date: 10/23/18

Not your traditional legal-drama novel. This reminded me more of a "Bull" TV episode as it focuses on the jury and others in the courtroom, the judge, bailiff, court reporter, etc. It gives us insight into what they're thinking as they move along in the courtroom, and in the deliberation quarters. I give the author a 4-star rating for originality, but a 3-star for entertainment -- therefore my 3.5 rating. 

This legal drama is sometimes a comedy-drama, although the crime itself is not comedic in any way. A man is accused of murdering his wife with a pick-axe, which turns out actually to be a mattock. He claims to be an abused husband who feared for his life. HIs daughter vouches for him, his son claims he is the abuser. 

This brings to light what a jury really does have to go through when trying to reach the truth of a matter, how difficult this can be when all the jurors have different takes on a what they've heard or not heard. Not an easy task, but also makes us wonder (as stated in the novel) why the decision of innocence or guilt of an alleged crime is not decided by professionals in law, the attorneys, judges and so on, that have studied and know the law, as opposed to a jury of non-professionals, a jury of the defendants "peers,"  simple people that are janitors, teachers, actors, housewives, plumbers, who don't know anything about the law. It certainly does make one think. We are certainly reminded that even those versed in the law are not exempt from life's unexpected twists, they are people too, just like us. 

My thanks to NetGalley for the opportunity to read a pre-release copy and post an unbiased review of this work.
Was this review helpful?
"On the day before his twenty-first wedding anniversary, David Sullinger buried an ax in his wife’s skull. Now, eight jurors must retire to the deliberation room and decide whether David committed premeditated murder—or whether he was a battered spouse who killed his wife in self-defense."

If you like thrilling courtroom drama, then you’ll like this book. The trial is told through multiple point of view’s. Not just the Jurors, which I thought it would only be through the POV of the jurors but also the Judge, the Court Clerk, the Bailiff, The Defense Counsel, and a few others. It sounds like a lot of people to be reading through the eyes of but it was so well written that it doesn't get jumbled or confusing. I loved how thought provoking and original this story was.

Thanks to #NetGalley for this ARC of #WetheJury
Pub Date: 23 Oct 2018
Was this review helpful?
I gav this novel a chance and read it all the  way through even though it is my least favorite kind of narration.  It presents with a jury trial of a man accused of killing his wife and pleading self-defense.  The author then uses the technique of allowing each juror to be the narrator and includes the court clerk, the bailiff, and the judge to have their turn also.   When the jury finally makes their decision the author throws in a twist to conclude the book.
Was this review helpful?
This book was very well written. Rotstein shows his story instead of just telling it. He writes the feelings of each of the characters, and explains them with great detail. A provocative journey into situational ethics. This novel captures the frustration and internal struggles of right and wrong in addition to providing the technical aspects of jury selection, emotional limitations of the legal system and behind the bench insights that leave the reader with a clearer, if somewhat
tainted view of the lady justice. 

Thank you NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing and Robert Rotstein for the opportunity to read this book in exchange for an impartial review; all opinions are my own.

#WetheJury #NetGalley
Was this review helpful?
This is a story about a murder trial. The defendant murdered his wife. Those are the facts of the matter and are uncontested. It is up to the jury to decide whether it was a premeditated murder or a justifiable homicide because the defendant was a battered spouse. Rotstein starts the book just before the jury is given the case to deliberate.

This is a very interesting book because Rotstein tells it from the perspective of the jurors and the court’s personnel – judge, bailiff, the court’s clerk, and the court stenographer. Each of these individuals gets a chapter (or more) of his/her own, and the book is told in the first person. The reader gets to see what each juror thinks of the case, the opinions each juror has of their fellow jurors, and problems each has. Each chapter is fairly short – two or three pages for the most part – so it is a fast and fascinating read. The reader can easily discern the difficulties of a jury trying to decide who to believe among the witnesses, how to weigh the opinions of their fellow jurors, and whether to believe the defense team or the prosecutor.

If you like courtroom drama, you’ll be sure to enjoy this book.
Was this review helpful?