Review of "We, The Jury: A Novel" by Robert Rotstein

As the book opens, Sepulveda County Superior Court Judge Natalie Quinn-Gilbert is giving jury instructions in the trial of David Sullinger. Sullinger, who split open the head of his wife Amanda with an axe, claims he was a battered husband who killed in self-defense.

The judge - recently widowed and consumed with grief - hasn't been her best self lately. Nevertheless, she oversaw the proceedings; the prosecution and defense have rested their cases; and the jury has its job to do.

The bulk of the story is about jury deliberations, told from the jurors' rotating points of view. But we also get glimpses into what's going on in the heads of the judge; court clerk; bailiff; prosecuting attorney; paralegal; and sensation-seeking journalist/blogger.

The eight jurors are a diverse group of individuals, including:

- The foreperson - an anxious, coffee-loving, middle-aged woman who works in an office.
- The clergyman - a sizable man who doesn't have much to say.
- The grandmother - a former high school Vice-Principal who has hearing problems.
- The student - the youngest member of the jury, a young lady concerned about doing the right thing.
- The express messenger/actor - an observant young man with a flippant attitude.
- The architect - a fashionable woman who's worried about her business.
- The housewife - a pushy homebody with a strong opinion about everything.
- The jury consultant - a stylish professional woman who's had experience with trials and witnesses.

When deliberations begin, all the jurors seem to have a similar opinion about whether David Sullinger acted in self-defense or whether he murdered his wife in cold blood. Great! The jury foreperson can just 'push the red button' (which signals a decision) and they can go home.

Not so fast though! A couple of the jurors want to talk about specific bits of evidence such as: an incident with a hot tuna casserole; the contradictory testimony of the Sullingers' teenage children; a troubling occurrence in culinary school; the axe that killed Amanda Sullinger; a certain letter; and more. It turns out things aren't so cut and dried after all.

As the jurors debate, some become less certain about their original judgment and others refuse to budge. In fact two or three seem to have an agenda. But who and why might surprise you.



Other characters add depth and interest to the story. These are:

- The courtroom clerk who bakes cupcakes with Judge Quinn-Gilbert and worries about the jurist's health.
- The bailiff who got tossed off the 'real' police force.
- The journalist/blogger who's not too ethical about getting a story.
- The prosecutor who should have done his homework better.
- The CSR (Certified Shorthand Reporter) who reads back evidence in the required monotone.
- The defense attorney who supposedly never loses a trial.....but may be about to lose her husband.
- The presiding judge of the Superior Court (the big boss), who's concerned about Judge Quinn-Gilbert's behavior.

The book strongly reminded me of the excellent 1957 film "12 Angry Men", about a jury of 12 white men who must decide the fate of a slum dweller - probably Hispanic - accused of killing his father. Both Rotstein's book and the film examine people's preconceived notions, prejudices, and biases.



I enjoyed the novel, and thought the 'slightly addled judge' angle was a creative departure from the usual books set in courtrooms. I'd recommend the book to readers who like mysteries and courtroom dramas.

Thanks to Netgalley, the author (Robert Rotstein), and the publisher (Blackstone Publishing) for a copy of the book.

Rating: 3.5 stars