What do you think?
Rate this book
Scott Fenney #3
The Absence of Guilt
An ISIS attack on America is narrowly averted when the FBI uncovers a plot to detonate a weapon of mass destruction in Cowboys Stadium during the Super Bowl. A federal grand jury indicts twenty-four co-conspirators, including the most dangerous man in Dallas, Omar al Mustafa. He is a notorious and charismatic Muslim cleric known for his incendiary anti-American diatribes on YouTube and Fox News. His mosque is a veritable breeding ground for Islamic jihadists. His arrest is greeted with cheers around the world and relief at home. The plot was thwarted, the terrorists are in jail, and the Super Bowl is safe. The president goes on national television and proclaims: "We won!"
There is only one problem: there is no evidence against Mustafa. That problem falls to the presiding judge, newly appointed U.S. District Judge A. Scott Fenney. If Mustafa is innocent, Scott must set the most dangerous man in Dallas free. But does the absence of guilt mean Mustafa is innocent? And if he is innocent, who is guilty?
The Super Bowl is just three weeks away. And the game clock is ticking.
AUTHOR'S NOTE
Back in the late 1980s, while I was a young partner in a large Dallas law firm, I met a terrorist. I didn't know it at the time. At a senior partner's request, I met with a potential client who wanted to invest $100 million in U.S. real estate. He was an older Arab gentleman. When I asked for his contact details, he gave me several locations in London and Europe; and then he said, "But there are times when I will be unavailable as I will be in the desert of Libya with Muammar Gaddafi." I asked what he did for Gaddafi. "Consult." On what? "Construction." Of what? "Projects." He declined to be more specific. After escorting him to the elevators, I went to the senior partner and convinced him that the firm didn't need this client. We declined to represent him. End of story.
Or so I thought.
About a year later, I read an article in a national news magazine that reported of his death—and that he was the man who had built Gaddafi's chemical weapons plant. Sarin was reportedly produced at that plant. Twenty-five years later, ISIS captured Libya's cache of sarin.
I met the man who made that possible.
There is only one problem: there is no evidence against Mustafa. That problem falls to the presiding judge, newly appointed U.S. District Judge A. Scott Fenney. If Mustafa is innocent, Scott must set the most dangerous man in Dallas free. But does the absence of guilt mean Mustafa is innocent? And if he is innocent, who is guilty?
The Super Bowl is just three weeks away. And the game clock is ticking.
AUTHOR'S NOTE
Back in the late 1980s, while I was a young partner in a large Dallas law firm, I met a terrorist. I didn't know it at the time. At a senior partner's request, I met with a potential client who wanted to invest $100 million in U.S. real estate. He was an older Arab gentleman. When I asked for his contact details, he gave me several locations in London and Europe; and then he said, "But there are times when I will be unavailable as I will be in the desert of Libya with Muammar Gaddafi." I asked what he did for Gaddafi. "Consult." On what? "Construction." Of what? "Projects." He declined to be more specific. After escorting him to the elevators, I went to the senior partner and convinced him that the firm didn't need this client. We declined to represent him. End of story.
Or so I thought.
About a year later, I read an article in a national news magazine that reported of his death—and that he was the man who had built Gaddafi's chemical weapons plant. Sarin was reportedly produced at that plant. Twenty-five years later, ISIS captured Libya's cache of sarin.
I met the man who made that possible.
469 pages, Paperback
First published January 3, 2017
285 people are currently reading
612 people want to read
About the author
Mark Gimenez
19 books498 followersMark Gimenez grew up in Galveston County, Texas, and attended Texas State University and Notre Dame Law School. He practiced law and was a partner in a large Dallas firm. He is the author of ten novels—The Color of Law, The Abduction, The Perk, The Common Lawyer, Accused, The Governor's Wife, Con Law, The Case Against William, The Absence of Guilt, and End of Days (Con Law II)—as well as a children's novel, Parts & Labor: The Adventures of Max Dugan. His books have received critical acclaim around the world. They have been bestsellers in the UK, Ireland, Australia, India, and South Africa and have been translated into fifteen foreign languages. The Perk won a spot in Books to Die For: The World's Greatest Mystery Writers on the World's Greatest Mystery Novels, edited by John Connolly and Declan Burke.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 153 reviews
September 15, 2021
This was a bit slow for the first half, and I almost wanted to quit reading, but it got better. It spent a lot of time establishing Scott Finney as an honest judge who needed to judge on the law, not what he thought was right or wrong. He was an advocate for the constitution, as a federal judge. There were many references to his past two books, where he went from a rich, Ferrari-driving defense lawyer to a middle-class judge.
His downfall was caused by defending a black drug addict in a highly political case, and later, after she died of an overdose, adopting her daughter who was the same age as his daughter. And speaking of his daughter, she was the product of his former gold-digging trophy wife who ran off with a golf pro after his downfall. He later defended his wife for murdering said golf pro, but she disappeared afterwards, so he's left with two teen daughters. There's a lot of good entertainment just in that situation, a black girl in a rich white school and a precocious daughter who asks questions no father wants to answer - like "What is oral sex?"
Anyway, there are a couple of hard issues in the story. The main case is a group of Muslims, including the imam of the Muslim church, who are accused of planning to bomb the super bowl. One guy was shot, and a group arrested, all on an anonymous tip to the FBI. Problem is, they can't find any evidence at all, but still want to hold them (at least until after the super bowl). The Muslims are outspoken in their hatred of America, Christians, and Jews, and feel beheading is a perfectly acceptable method of showing this. The imam says a lot about why he feels this way; he says the US drones kill innocent Muslims as collateral damage, and wonders why that is more acceptable than beheading. He thinks we are not innocent because we elect our leaders who do this to them. Many of his arguments are hard to argue with, except nobody ever points out that close to half the country did not vote for any of the leaders, but are still blown up or otherwise killed by Muslim retaliations.
The story does present both sides of the issues, but the overall takeaway for me is that the Muslim extremists are less than human, and were not considered when the constitution was written. However, in spite of some of the FBI and government officials, they really do deserve to have actual proof of their guilt before being imprisoned, and not be considered guilty simply because of their beliefs. At least, that was what I got from the story.
His downfall was caused by defending a black drug addict in a highly political case, and later, after she died of an overdose, adopting her daughter who was the same age as his daughter. And speaking of his daughter, she was the product of his former gold-digging trophy wife who ran off with a golf pro after his downfall. He later defended his wife for murdering said golf pro, but she disappeared afterwards, so he's left with two teen daughters. There's a lot of good entertainment just in that situation, a black girl in a rich white school and a precocious daughter who asks questions no father wants to answer - like "What is oral sex?"
Anyway, there are a couple of hard issues in the story. The main case is a group of Muslims, including the imam of the Muslim church, who are accused of planning to bomb the super bowl. One guy was shot, and a group arrested, all on an anonymous tip to the FBI. Problem is, they can't find any evidence at all, but still want to hold them (at least until after the super bowl). The Muslims are outspoken in their hatred of America, Christians, and Jews, and feel beheading is a perfectly acceptable method of showing this. The imam says a lot about why he feels this way; he says the US drones kill innocent Muslims as collateral damage, and wonders why that is more acceptable than beheading. He thinks we are not innocent because we elect our leaders who do this to them. Many of his arguments are hard to argue with, except nobody ever points out that close to half the country did not vote for any of the leaders, but are still blown up or otherwise killed by Muslim retaliations.
The story does present both sides of the issues, but the overall takeaway for me is that the Muslim extremists are less than human, and were not considered when the constitution was written. However, in spite of some of the FBI and government officials, they really do deserve to have actual proof of their guilt before being imprisoned, and not be considered guilty simply because of their beliefs. At least, that was what I got from the story.
April 1, 2016
This is the third book in the Scott Fenney series by author Mark Gimenez.
I have read all of the Mark Gimenez novels including the two previous one's in this series and generally find him a very enjoyable and under rated author. But unfortunately I found this latest novel fell a little short of the high standard previously set and now expected. The main characters are familiar to me and I enjoyed the sections that featured the home life but some of the other parts were a little tiresome.
An ISIS attack on America is thwarted when the FBI discovers a plot to blow up the Cowboys stadium at the Super Bowl. Omar al Mustafa is a Muslim cleric known for his anti-American speeches and his mosque is a breeding ground for Islamic jihadists. When he is arrested there is a sigh of relief and a general feeling that the right man is in custody but there is no evidence against Mustafa other than his reputation.
U.S. District Judge Scott Fenney is appointed to judge the case and fears he will have to set Mustafa free if no evidence is submitted. The Super bowl is three weeks away and the prime suspect could be set free.
The book had lots of promise and did succeed in large parts but I feel that the author lost his way a little and failed to hold my attention and excitement throughout. That said I remain a Mark Gimenez fan and will have no hesitation reading his next novel.
I have read all of the Mark Gimenez novels including the two previous one's in this series and generally find him a very enjoyable and under rated author. But unfortunately I found this latest novel fell a little short of the high standard previously set and now expected. The main characters are familiar to me and I enjoyed the sections that featured the home life but some of the other parts were a little tiresome.
An ISIS attack on America is thwarted when the FBI discovers a plot to blow up the Cowboys stadium at the Super Bowl. Omar al Mustafa is a Muslim cleric known for his anti-American speeches and his mosque is a breeding ground for Islamic jihadists. When he is arrested there is a sigh of relief and a general feeling that the right man is in custody but there is no evidence against Mustafa other than his reputation.
U.S. District Judge Scott Fenney is appointed to judge the case and fears he will have to set Mustafa free if no evidence is submitted. The Super bowl is three weeks away and the prime suspect could be set free.
The book had lots of promise and did succeed in large parts but I feel that the author lost his way a little and failed to hold my attention and excitement throughout. That said I remain a Mark Gimenez fan and will have no hesitation reading his next novel.
October 27, 2023
Apabullante.
Mejor que los otros dos y eso que me encantaron ambos ... los secundarios, fundamentalmente las niñas son para mearte de risa, el resto en su perfecto sitio y medida, la trama valiente, tal vez utópica en la vida real, pero el libro es valiente.
En resumen, que me quedo esperando ansiosamente el siguiente del Juez ;)
Mejor que los otros dos y eso que me encantaron ambos ... los secundarios, fundamentalmente las niñas son para mearte de risa, el resto en su perfecto sitio y medida, la trama valiente, tal vez utópica en la vida real, pero el libro es valiente.
En resumen, que me quedo esperando ansiosamente el siguiente del Juez ;)
April 19, 2019
Right, this was my first ever Mark Gimenez and Scott Fenney novel, and I admit, while it was a decent read as an entertainer, I was a little disappointed in the way certain elements were portrayed. On the onset, this was one of those Hollywood blockbuster-esque clichéd thrillers where Islamic terrorists wage their death-to-America campaigns, targeting one of the world's most watched sporting events - the Super Bowl. I don't have a problem per se with plots involving Islamic terrorists on American soil, it's mostly entertaining and is always a recipe for a fast paced thriller with America, the land of the free and the home of the brave, prevailing at the end. There's no other way this can end, can it!
The thing is, when you're using a recipe tried, tested, and almost buried, unless you add something new to the plot, you're just asking for trouble. Mark Gimenez, unfortunately adds nothing new to this kind of a storyline, which results in a whole lot of cringeworthy moments in the book.
Anyway, here's where my beef lies. There are parts in the book which appear to me a little too Islamophobic for my liking; as though the author wants to portray Muslims as the scum of the earth! Even if the author doesn't, the characters do! It's one thing to describe a sentiment "just right" and it's entirely different when the sentiment is kind of rubbed all the way in. That really didn't go down too well with me. "You better be wary of that head of yours," warns Mustafa. "Is that a threat?!" Oh, please!
Another issue I have is with the psychology of the terrorists. Right, so, towards the end, there's this part where one of them's saying something on the lines of, "people are going to take my name in the same breath as bin Laden, Hitler, and Stalin." Now to me, that's just poor writing. The activities of all three of them cannot be compared and categorized into one. Neither Hitler nor Stalin spit vengeance against America. Yes, they were all mass murderers, but their motivations and objectives were completely different. It felt as though bin Laden was the only Islamic terrorist the author could recall and filled in random mass murderers while he was at it! He could have very well put in Ted Bundy or Charles Manson, and it wouldn't have made a difference! And for this very reason, that line made me grimmace!
Another instance was the relationship between Fenney and the Hispanic cop, the daughter of Mexican illegal immigrants. Fenney, being the no nonsense judge that he is, uses his advanced understanding of the law to issue a final ruling that went against the President's stance on immigration, which affected his relationship with his partner, who ends up walking away at the end of it all. Not what I saw coming! The judge was doing his job, carrying out his duties to the country, and what happens? His girlfriends walks away from him! Well, I suppose you can't always have happy endings. It just pissed me off that that was not something that should have happened to someone doing his job right.
Anyway, I did enjoy his relationship with his kids, the way their characters were sketched, and the way the author depicted the different facets of a single dad to two teenage daughters! Apart from this, the overall feel I got was that of one written for a few salivating patriots who just want to kill a whole lot of Muslims! Rather jingoistic, I'd dare say!
But hey, if you're stuck with one book on a two day train ride, I guess this would do!
The thing is, when you're using a recipe tried, tested, and almost buried, unless you add something new to the plot, you're just asking for trouble. Mark Gimenez, unfortunately adds nothing new to this kind of a storyline, which results in a whole lot of cringeworthy moments in the book.
Anyway, here's where my beef lies. There are parts in the book which appear to me a little too Islamophobic for my liking; as though the author wants to portray Muslims as the scum of the earth! Even if the author doesn't, the characters do! It's one thing to describe a sentiment "just right" and it's entirely different when the sentiment is kind of rubbed all the way in. That really didn't go down too well with me. "You better be wary of that head of yours," warns Mustafa. "Is that a threat?!" Oh, please!
Another issue I have is with the psychology of the terrorists. Right, so, towards the end, there's this part where one of them's saying something on the lines of, "people are going to take my name in the same breath as bin Laden, Hitler, and Stalin." Now to me, that's just poor writing. The activities of all three of them cannot be compared and categorized into one. Neither Hitler nor Stalin spit vengeance against America. Yes, they were all mass murderers, but their motivations and objectives were completely different. It felt as though bin Laden was the only Islamic terrorist the author could recall and filled in random mass murderers while he was at it! He could have very well put in Ted Bundy or Charles Manson, and it wouldn't have made a difference! And for this very reason, that line made me grimmace!
Another instance was the relationship between Fenney and the Hispanic cop, the daughter of Mexican illegal immigrants. Fenney, being the no nonsense judge that he is, uses his advanced understanding of the law to issue a final ruling that went against the President's stance on immigration, which affected his relationship with his partner, who ends up walking away at the end of it all. Not what I saw coming! The judge was doing his job, carrying out his duties to the country, and what happens? His girlfriends walks away from him! Well, I suppose you can't always have happy endings. It just pissed me off that that was not something that should have happened to someone doing his job right.
Anyway, I did enjoy his relationship with his kids, the way their characters were sketched, and the way the author depicted the different facets of a single dad to two teenage daughters! Apart from this, the overall feel I got was that of one written for a few salivating patriots who just want to kill a whole lot of Muslims! Rather jingoistic, I'd dare say!
But hey, if you're stuck with one book on a two day train ride, I guess this would do!
April 25, 2019
3.75 stars
I'm a fan of this author and love the series on A. Scott Fenney. In former books he was a lawyer, now he is a new federal judge. He is single, has two daughters that are 13 y/o called "Boo" a redheaded spitfire, and Pajamae (pronounced Pash-a-may) an adopted black girl, daughter of a deceased former client.
There is a rumor that ISIS is setting up an attack on Super Bowl Sunday, at Cowboys stadium, which seats 100,000 threatening all lives. An arrest has been made and a grand jury has indicted a Muslim cleric and 23 followers, who have publicly denounced America, however there is no tangible proof to sustain that they are behind the threat at the Super Bowl. Judge Fenney is assigned the case. Also on his docket is a case against the President of the US ~ whether or not in his capacity as President he can change the law regarding immigration issues. I found this part very informative in the light of what we are witnessing today.
This novel bring into account the clarity of the law, and how it should be processed. It has some politics involved and gives the reader glimpses of reality, how things have been handled in the past and how procedures are or should be handled in relation to immigration, terrorism and the rights of of citizens to free speech. Giménez gives us all civics lessons in the process of entertaining us.
While a fan of his previous works, this one is not a favorite. It started off well enough, albeit a bit slow, but then something changed. It got repetitive at times. Disruptive and silly character lines coupled with comedic situations in his personal life didn't seem appropriate with the seriousness of the subject matter. I imagine he was trying to lighten up the tension of the subject of terrorism. I enjoy the antics of his two girls, and their dialogue, but the scenes of Scott with a woman and their comments to one another did not come across as natural or believable behavior for the Scott Fenney we know and love. It just didn't sit well.
When Gimenez is in legal mode, he is a master in the court room. I loved his ruling in the two cases that are issues in this novel, the potential terrorists and a lawsuit against the President, which he significantly and impressively addressed. He explained this to the letter of the law and the constitution so that we could understand how significant it is to us as a nation. That was my favorite part - his decisions in these two cases. That was the save for this novel. Even though this novel was not one of his best I do hope Gimenez plans to continue the series and give us more about Scott Fenney and his daughters. You can't help but love them.
I'm a fan of this author and love the series on A. Scott Fenney. In former books he was a lawyer, now he is a new federal judge. He is single, has two daughters that are 13 y/o called "Boo" a redheaded spitfire, and Pajamae (pronounced Pash-a-may) an adopted black girl, daughter of a deceased former client.
There is a rumor that ISIS is setting up an attack on Super Bowl Sunday, at Cowboys stadium, which seats 100,000 threatening all lives. An arrest has been made and a grand jury has indicted a Muslim cleric and 23 followers, who have publicly denounced America, however there is no tangible proof to sustain that they are behind the threat at the Super Bowl. Judge Fenney is assigned the case. Also on his docket is a case against the President of the US ~ whether or not in his capacity as President he can change the law regarding immigration issues. I found this part very informative in the light of what we are witnessing today.
This novel bring into account the clarity of the law, and how it should be processed. It has some politics involved and gives the reader glimpses of reality, how things have been handled in the past and how procedures are or should be handled in relation to immigration, terrorism and the rights of of citizens to free speech. Giménez gives us all civics lessons in the process of entertaining us.
While a fan of his previous works, this one is not a favorite. It started off well enough, albeit a bit slow, but then something changed. It got repetitive at times. Disruptive and silly character lines coupled with comedic situations in his personal life didn't seem appropriate with the seriousness of the subject matter. I imagine he was trying to lighten up the tension of the subject of terrorism. I enjoy the antics of his two girls, and their dialogue, but the scenes of Scott with a woman and their comments to one another did not come across as natural or believable behavior for the Scott Fenney we know and love. It just didn't sit well.
When Gimenez is in legal mode, he is a master in the court room. I loved his ruling in the two cases that are issues in this novel, the potential terrorists and a lawsuit against the President, which he significantly and impressively addressed. He explained this to the letter of the law and the constitution so that we could understand how significant it is to us as a nation. That was my favorite part - his decisions in these two cases. That was the save for this novel. Even though this novel was not one of his best I do hope Gimenez plans to continue the series and give us more about Scott Fenney and his daughters. You can't help but love them.
February 15, 2019
Super!
Super , as in Super Bowl, as in a super-exciting book.
I read Absence of Guilt in the Kindle format. That was good because I could not easily flip to the back of the book to see what was going to happen as the tension rose. I did not want to cheat, but if this was a print book I might have succumbed to temptation....maybe. Naah. That would be against the good reader's code of conduct. Still, it was that kind of book.
Scott Fenney was once a hot lawyer making nearly a million a year. He had a hot foreign sports car and a hot , blonde trophy wife he loved deeply . He lived in a fabulous house in an exclusive Dallas suburb.
Then one day he is called on to defend, pro bono, a black , crack-addict prostitute charged in the killing the son of a powerful US Senator from Texas. Fenney won his case and lost his career. Clients who had ties to the senator and other big time politicos changed lawyers. His wife left him as the income dried up to fly off with the country club pro.
Nowadays, Scott is a federal judge who tries to live a low-profile life. New appointed by the new President because of his record in defending minorities. He enjoys a quiet life with his two daughters, living small in modest house in a quiet suburb.
A quiet life that suddenly changes when he is handed the job of presiding over a trial of a group of Islamic terrorist's accused of plotting to set off a bomb at the Super Bowl to be played in Dallas.
The President wants a conviction, the FBI wants one, Scott wants one, too. The only problem is that there is no evidence of a conspiracy, a plot or a plan. None. All the FBI has are the inflammatory preachings of the Imam, and Scott, as judge, knows that the accused cannot be held for speech, however hateful.
Quite a dilemma which the author develops very well, laying out the Constitutional protections for the bad guys weighed against the very real intentions of the Imam to incite the true believers
Absence of Guilt is far from a dry courtroom drama.The tension builds as the plot against the Super Bowl proceeds even as the defendants are in jail. For there are other players, men quietly who,place Scott and his family in danger, while moving forward with the intention of killing a hundred thousand spectators.
I have read all Mr .Gimenez novels with enjoyment . They are entertaining, sometimes funny and informative. The plotting is good and the cast of characters come alive.
Notes: some romantic sex, some cursing and crude male humor but you will enjoy a greatnovel
Super , as in Super Bowl, as in a super-exciting book.
I read Absence of Guilt in the Kindle format. That was good because I could not easily flip to the back of the book to see what was going to happen as the tension rose. I did not want to cheat, but if this was a print book I might have succumbed to temptation....maybe. Naah. That would be against the good reader's code of conduct. Still, it was that kind of book.
Scott Fenney was once a hot lawyer making nearly a million a year. He had a hot foreign sports car and a hot , blonde trophy wife he loved deeply . He lived in a fabulous house in an exclusive Dallas suburb.
Then one day he is called on to defend, pro bono, a black , crack-addict prostitute charged in the killing the son of a powerful US Senator from Texas. Fenney won his case and lost his career. Clients who had ties to the senator and other big time politicos changed lawyers. His wife left him as the income dried up to fly off with the country club pro.
Nowadays, Scott is a federal judge who tries to live a low-profile life. New appointed by the new President because of his record in defending minorities. He enjoys a quiet life with his two daughters, living small in modest house in a quiet suburb.
A quiet life that suddenly changes when he is handed the job of presiding over a trial of a group of Islamic terrorist's accused of plotting to set off a bomb at the Super Bowl to be played in Dallas.
The President wants a conviction, the FBI wants one, Scott wants one, too. The only problem is that there is no evidence of a conspiracy, a plot or a plan. None. All the FBI has are the inflammatory preachings of the Imam, and Scott, as judge, knows that the accused cannot be held for speech, however hateful.
Quite a dilemma which the author develops very well, laying out the Constitutional protections for the bad guys weighed against the very real intentions of the Imam to incite the true believers
Absence of Guilt is far from a dry courtroom drama.The tension builds as the plot against the Super Bowl proceeds even as the defendants are in jail. For there are other players, men quietly who,place Scott and his family in danger, while moving forward with the intention of killing a hundred thousand spectators.
I have read all Mr .Gimenez novels with enjoyment . They are entertaining, sometimes funny and informative. The plotting is good and the cast of characters come alive.
Notes: some romantic sex, some cursing and crude male humor but you will enjoy a greatnovel
May 3, 2020
3.5 ⭐️
I enjoyed the story and the characters, but i felt like the author was trying to tie too many different pieces together - terrorism, immigration, law, ex-wives, new romance, etc. it was a lot to keep track of and consequently I think some things didn’t get the depth they could have. It sometimes got confusing following the dialogue and being clear on who was speaking. And while I like police and legal procedurals, there were parts that made me feel like I was reading a textbook on constitutional law.
I enjoyed the story and the characters, but i felt like the author was trying to tie too many different pieces together - terrorism, immigration, law, ex-wives, new romance, etc. it was a lot to keep track of and consequently I think some things didn’t get the depth they could have. It sometimes got confusing following the dialogue and being clear on who was speaking. And while I like police and legal procedurals, there were parts that made me feel like I was reading a textbook on constitutional law.
February 6, 2017
Gimenez gives extended civics lessons in his books. This lesson was on Constitutional Law as it concerns terrorism and immigration. It was an ambitious undertaking. Once again Federal Judge A. Scott Fenney presides. We are already attached to the characters. His thirteen year old girls play a prominent role in this third book. It is a good story.
June 14, 2020
Easily one of my favorite writers. This was the most recent in the A. Scott Fenney series, I will definitely need to check some of his other books. His style, pacing and character development is some of the best I've read, personally speaking, of course. This one did make me a little sad, Scott is a good man, but always seems to get the short end of the stick. I hope to see more of this character and his world.
November 22, 2024
May be the best of books 1-3
January 6, 2024
This was the first Mark Gimenez book I've ever read - and may I say, this guy can write. A riveting plot and awesome story. Couldn't put the book down!
Yes, it's a bit flag-waving and pro-US but who cares?
It was a thrilling story and, me being a lawyer, found the whole legal stuff just as thrilling as the "chasing the terrorist" climax at the end.
I will read the rest of his stuff!
Yes, it's a bit flag-waving and pro-US but who cares?
It was a thrilling story and, me being a lawyer, found the whole legal stuff just as thrilling as the "chasing the terrorist" climax at the end.
I will read the rest of his stuff!
October 4, 2023
I highly enjoyed this book, as I have the other 2 books in the series. I stayed up until 3am to finish it because I couldn't make myself stop! My heart pounded as I really got in to the action. He did a great job incorporating action and mystery that for the most part seemed fairly believable and realistic. I had to keep guessing the whole time what the ending would be, it wasn't super obvious. The book seemed to highlight the America/capitalism and Islamic extremism tensions very well, but as a white American I would be super curious to hear the perspectives of a Muslim. I'm sure that it would be an enlightening conversation for me.
May 7, 2017
Mark Gimenez has officially taken over as my favorite courtroom drama author. I've read the other two books about A. Scott Fenney. This one is just as good.
Scott Fenney lives with his daughter Boo and his adopted daughter Pajamae, the African American daughter of the woman he defended against murder charges in book one. They live in the Highland Park neighborhood near SMU in Dallas. Fenney is now a federal judge.
He is presented with two cases on which to rule. One of them involves whether or not an Executive Order signed by the President to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants is Constitutional. This becomes complicated when he becomes involved with a woman whose parents will be affected if he rules against the Order.
The other case is about an Imam and his Muslim followers who are accused of setting up an elaborate plot to bomb Cowboy Stadium in Dallas on the day of the Superbowl. Due to circumstances that happen after these 23 offenders are in prison, the FBI realizes they don't have all of the jihadists. There are two more at large. The FBI, Judge Fenney, and his friends must find them in time to avoid killing thousands of Americans, not to mention those that he holds dearest.
There is a lot of suspense in this book! Twists and turns will keep the reader guessing all the way to the end. And in the end, the reader is rewarded with finding out what happened to Rebecca, Fenney's former wife who he represented at her trial for the murder of the golf pro she ran off with. It has a complex and intriguing plot that proves Giminez is becoming the master of the courtroom thrillers.
Scott Fenney lives with his daughter Boo and his adopted daughter Pajamae, the African American daughter of the woman he defended against murder charges in book one. They live in the Highland Park neighborhood near SMU in Dallas. Fenney is now a federal judge.
He is presented with two cases on which to rule. One of them involves whether or not an Executive Order signed by the President to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants is Constitutional. This becomes complicated when he becomes involved with a woman whose parents will be affected if he rules against the Order.
The other case is about an Imam and his Muslim followers who are accused of setting up an elaborate plot to bomb Cowboy Stadium in Dallas on the day of the Superbowl. Due to circumstances that happen after these 23 offenders are in prison, the FBI realizes they don't have all of the jihadists. There are two more at large. The FBI, Judge Fenney, and his friends must find them in time to avoid killing thousands of Americans, not to mention those that he holds dearest.
There is a lot of suspense in this book! Twists and turns will keep the reader guessing all the way to the end. And in the end, the reader is rewarded with finding out what happened to Rebecca, Fenney's former wife who he represented at her trial for the murder of the golf pro she ran off with. It has a complex and intriguing plot that proves Giminez is becoming the master of the courtroom thrillers.
January 13, 2018
In the Color of Law, the Author set a very high bar, which this book does not manage to reach. Nevertheless Gimenez even not at his best is still unputdownable. Fenney has become a Federal Judge, a single father bringing up two feisty teenagers. A generally dull life is suddenly enlivened by two high profile cases put in his docket. The first is an immigration case, where the President has taken a legislative decision by legalising 10 million illegal immigrants in the US. Fenney knows that whichever way he rules, a large segment would be unhappy. In case he rules in favour of the President, his road to the Supreme Court would be that much clear. The second case is potentially more lethal. An Islamic terrorist plan to detonate a weapon of mass destruction at Cowboy Dome in Dallas during the Super Bowl has the potential for killing 100,000 people seems to have been foiled by the FBI. In the euphoria of this success one realises all is not what it seems. The book opens with 24 days to go for the Super Bowl and the pressure on Fenney mounts, not the least from the President, who is made into a caricature which does less than justice to the most powerful man in the world. The FBI is made to look like bigoted bunglers. Though the Author tries to be fair, the American bias and fear of Islamic Terrorism comes across in the book. The last few chapters are nail biting though the last couple of pages were needless, an attempt to tie up loose ends. One looks forward to hear more of Judge Fenney and his daughters
February 14, 2018
I know someone who does not like Mr. Gimenez’s writing style, but when he picks the two issues that has the Americans going (currently), it makes for a page turner. Islamic terrorism and Mexican immigrants.
Set in Dallas, Texas (where else would the author choose?) the protagonist Judge Scott Fenney has mixed race staff, and the story is all American.
I could not put it down.
Set in Dallas, Texas (where else would the author choose?) the protagonist Judge Scott Fenney has mixed race staff, and the story is all American.
I could not put it down.
October 20, 2021
I do like the incidental social commentary in Gimenez's books. Delicately done, but there is a lot of information there about how the justice and political system works (too much). I adore Scott Fenney's two daughters. They help make the book.
March 24, 2020
Of the three books in Gimenez's Scott Fenney series, this is easily the weakest. But I continue to like the central characters, who form a core group that is strong enough to carry the book despite a story line that's almost overwhelmed by the cases Judge Fenney is handling.
As a reformed lawyer, I appreciated that provocative balancing of individual rights against perceived societal needs and the arguments advanced by those on either side of the arguments. But I suspect that that puts me in a relatively small niche of Gimenez's readership One of the two cases was close to a minor player in the book, and the connection to Scott was so coincidental that it felt as if it was a reason demanded in editing. That said, Cat Peña, typical of the rest of Gimenez's cast, is well-drawn, believable, and appealing.
The second case dominates the book, and I think that's what weakened the novel. In each of the first two books in the series, Scott has been far stronger and in control of his own fate. Sure, he faced what seemed like insurmountable forces in The Color of Law, but he sucked it up, persevered, and triumphed. He was proactive. Here, he was reactive instead. When Scott finally began to stand up, he tried to act wholly alone, resisting the efforts of his backup players to help. And by the time he abandoned his go-it-alone approach, he was either out of control and held back by one of the other characters or was pushed into action by another.
I could probably excuse Scott's erratic conduct in the book by the overall insanity of the position in which he found himself, but one of the most appealing things about Scott is his consistency, not that I'm suggesting that he's predictable, but he's previously been steadfast in his core values. Straying from the central qualities of his character weakened Scott as a protagonist.
And then we get to the lengthy passage at the end when Scott delivers his rulings in the two cases pending in his court. While I might have found the rulings interesting as an intellectual and/or legal exercise (and I did), and while they would have been equally interesting had Scott ruled the reverse in each case, that section was too long and too legalistic (even if well written), and while pretty realistic, veered toward boring. My guess is that if you put anyone in a federal courtroom who wasn't working for the court, a litigant, or counsel (and possibly even some people who were interested parties) and forced them to sit through the judge's reading of his decision that person would start pounding their forehead against the back of the bench in front of them.
I suspect that the problem here is that federal district judges just aren't awesome protagonists in legal thrillers. I mean, if we really want to get all realistic about the way this all works, Scott had irreconcilable conflicts in both cases driving the action in the book, significant enough that they would have presented the appearance of impropriety at the very least, and any judge with the ethical standards that he has shown previously would have recused himself. Scott not only did not, there was never even any mention of recusal as a possibility.
I will still eagerly await a fourth book in this series, but let's get Scott off the bench and back into private practice!
3.75 stars, rounded up to 4 on the basis of the writing and the still-appealing characters.
As a reformed lawyer, I appreciated that provocative balancing of individual rights against perceived societal needs and the arguments advanced by those on either side of the arguments. But I suspect that that puts me in a relatively small niche of Gimenez's readership One of the two cases was close to a minor player in the book, and the connection to Scott was so coincidental that it felt as if it was a reason demanded in editing. That said, Cat Peña, typical of the rest of Gimenez's cast, is well-drawn, believable, and appealing.
The second case dominates the book, and I think that's what weakened the novel. In each of the first two books in the series, Scott has been far stronger and in control of his own fate. Sure, he faced what seemed like insurmountable forces in The Color of Law, but he sucked it up, persevered, and triumphed. He was proactive. Here, he was reactive instead. When Scott finally began to stand up, he tried to act wholly alone, resisting the efforts of his backup players to help. And by the time he abandoned his go-it-alone approach, he was either out of control and held back by one of the other characters or was pushed into action by another.
I could probably excuse Scott's erratic conduct in the book by the overall insanity of the position in which he found himself, but one of the most appealing things about Scott is his consistency, not that I'm suggesting that he's predictable, but he's previously been steadfast in his core values. Straying from the central qualities of his character weakened Scott as a protagonist.
And then we get to the lengthy passage at the end when Scott delivers his rulings in the two cases pending in his court. While I might have found the rulings interesting as an intellectual and/or legal exercise (and I did), and while they would have been equally interesting had Scott ruled the reverse in each case, that section was too long and too legalistic (even if well written), and while pretty realistic, veered toward boring. My guess is that if you put anyone in a federal courtroom who wasn't working for the court, a litigant, or counsel (and possibly even some people who were interested parties) and forced them to sit through the judge's reading of his decision that person would start pounding their forehead against the back of the bench in front of them.
I suspect that the problem here is that federal district judges just aren't awesome protagonists in legal thrillers. I mean, if we really want to get all realistic about the way this all works, Scott had irreconcilable conflicts in both cases driving the action in the book, significant enough that they would have presented the appearance of impropriety at the very least, and any judge with the ethical standards that he has shown previously would have recused himself. Scott not only did not, there was never even any mention of recusal as a possibility.
I will still eagerly await a fourth book in this series, but let's get Scott off the bench and back into private practice!
3.75 stars, rounded up to 4 on the basis of the writing and the still-appealing characters.
June 20, 2020
I haven't read any prior Mark Gimenez books, and this is apparently part of a series, but it is not written requiring any prior knowledge of the books world or characters, so that is a positive.
My problem with this novel is I really can't stand bad dialogue, and this book is packed full of it. Everything reads like a single voice, and not even like it's the authors voice but more like a narrator saying what is happening. The sections of internal thought processes are fine (mostly) but then other people talk and they speak like their telling the audience behind the fourth wall the story. There's no subtle development of ideas and lore, it's reads like bad amateur theatre.
For instance in chapter 1 alone: if someone is imparting a story to an audience about the famous law case between the hooker and a son of a famous senator and everyone knows the story, then he would JUST SAY THE NAME OF THE SENATOR OR HIS SON AND THEY'D KNOW IT. And he wouldn't keep referring to her as "the hooker" if HE KNEW HIS FRIEND HE WAS INTRODUCING HAS ADOPTED HER DAUGHTER. The mother of his friends son reaches the lofty naming heights of "the hooker" in his story.
It does, however read fine as the voice of a narrator telling a story, if a bland one. The real problem is this is not the only character that does so. I'm giving up 5 chapters in because its just jumping from character to character saying the subtext and context to what should dialogue.
2 stars because I didn't come across any obvious spelling mistakes. Although this is a sentence: "Which thought depressed the hell out of him." I gather an edit has changed or removed a word so it doesn't quite make sense, but I can't for the life of me work out what it could have been prior... Other than "the thought", but who'd change a "the" like that?
Anyway, read something else.
My problem with this novel is I really can't stand bad dialogue, and this book is packed full of it. Everything reads like a single voice, and not even like it's the authors voice but more like a narrator saying what is happening. The sections of internal thought processes are fine (mostly) but then other people talk and they speak like their telling the audience behind the fourth wall the story. There's no subtle development of ideas and lore, it's reads like bad amateur theatre.
For instance in chapter 1 alone: if someone is imparting a story to an audience about the famous law case between the hooker and a son of a famous senator and everyone knows the story, then he would JUST SAY THE NAME OF THE SENATOR OR HIS SON AND THEY'D KNOW IT. And he wouldn't keep referring to her as "the hooker" if HE KNEW HIS FRIEND HE WAS INTRODUCING HAS ADOPTED HER DAUGHTER. The mother of his friends son reaches the lofty naming heights of "the hooker" in his story.
It does, however read fine as the voice of a narrator telling a story, if a bland one. The real problem is this is not the only character that does so. I'm giving up 5 chapters in because its just jumping from character to character saying the subtext and context to what should dialogue.
2 stars because I didn't come across any obvious spelling mistakes. Although this is a sentence: "Which thought depressed the hell out of him." I gather an edit has changed or removed a word so it doesn't quite make sense, but I can't for the life of me work out what it could have been prior... Other than "the thought", but who'd change a "the" like that?
Anyway, read something else.
February 3, 2017
'The Absence of Guilt' heralds the return of the character of A. Scott Fenney, former lawyer turned federal judge, last seen defending his ex wife who was charged with the murder of the golf pro she left A. Scott for. This time, Mr Fenney has a much more important case, national security wise, to deal with: a plot to blow up the Dallas Cowboys stadium on the day it is due to host the Superbowl. But are the would be terrorists guilty and how much of America's own freedoms can be sacrificed in order to stop them? I found this novel quite a compelling one, and extremely topical, considering the current state of global politics. Gimenez goes into a lot of detail regarding jihadist ideology, a subject many authors steer clear of, and thus he provides a very solid foundation for the plot to move along. He also builds up a good amount of suspense for the final part of the book concerning the fate of Fenney's daughters. My only criticism of the story is that it took a while to get going and there was a bit of padding with the constant references to A. Scott's lack of a sex life and general hopelessness regarding romance. Other than that, I really enjoyed 'The Absence of Guilt'.
September 25, 2020
OMG! The 3rd in the A. Scott Fenney series and the most nail-biting, heart-stopping, What the Hell is happening? in the series yet! I am undone! Scott is now a Federal Judge and 2 cases are before him. An immigration case (controversial!). The 2nd case is even more controversial. The FBI foiled a terrorism plot to blow up the Dallas Cowboys Stadium during the Superbowl. The only problem is there is absolutely no Evidence against the man deemed to be the most dangerous man in Dallas, Omar al Mustafa! And it's 3 weeks till the Superbowl. Scott Fenney seems to be a magnet for Controversy and this is the biggest one yet! If there is no evidence against Mustafa, he must let him go, but even if he is innocent of this crime, it doesn't necessarily mean that there is an Absence of Guilt! I was on the edge right up until the last word!!!
February 10, 2024
This is a thick book and I took three days to read it! That says two things… this a compulsive read, plus I had time on my hands. Yes I was stuck at home with COVID! And what a perfect way to pass through the laboured days! Filling them up with with a roller coaster of an adventure! This writer could do it all… make you feel for the characters, keep the plot twisting and turning, educate you about radicalisation of youth, and the plight Mexicans in the USA, (Yes, they are the good guys for once!) and show you the machinations of The Law. Yes, a couple of things were a little far fetched (more than a couple, but hey, who’s counting?) but you gloss over them as you are so there inside the action in “The a fight against Terror.” Well done Mark Gimenez, and thank you for getting me through COVID!
January 29, 2018
A. Scott Fenney, a federal judge has two meaningful cases to give an opinion on as to their legality according to the constitution of the United States. One is in regard to illegal immigrants trying to stay in the country through an executive order from the president and the other the holding of Muslims for terrorist activities without any proof provided by the District Attorney that they did it. In the meantime he takes care of his two daughters and is trying to find a woman to love him again after his wife left him. This novel has a great deal of explanation in it regarding the law and its application which slows down the story a little, otherwise I would have made it 5 stars. Really enjoyed the parts dealing with his family and co-workers.
February 28, 2021
A 3.5 rounded off to 4. Mark Gimenez writes very good legal fiction. In this book the plot is to prevent a terrorist attack by Muslim ISIS agents from trying to attack at super Bowl in Texas and kill a hundred thousand spectators.
As a Muslim radical preacher is arrested federal judge Scott fenney has to decide whether evidence is sufficient to hold him in custody. A lot of arguments about constitutional rights follow and make for interesting reading.
However the book is repetitive about many points especially about the jihadist history. The pressure on the judge by the attorney general and the president is unbelievable.
Unlike the other crisp books by the author this one is flawed in many ways.
As a Muslim radical preacher is arrested federal judge Scott fenney has to decide whether evidence is sufficient to hold him in custody. A lot of arguments about constitutional rights follow and make for interesting reading.
However the book is repetitive about many points especially about the jihadist history. The pressure on the judge by the attorney general and the president is unbelievable.
Unlike the other crisp books by the author this one is flawed in many ways.
August 27, 2022
A welcome return of A.Scott, Carlos, Louis, Bobby and Karen. In book 3, they face two emotive cases; terrorism and immigration. Both are compulsively argued from a judicial point of view, perfectly illustrating the incongruity of fairness and the law and the grassroots impact that such rulings have.
As always, doing the right thing professionally will inevitably come at a cost to A. Scott personally. Amongst all the tension there is also some great domestic interplay between A. Scott, Boo and Pajamae as A. Scott continues to learn that single-parenting is no easy job either.
A riveting series so far, I hope there’s more to come.
As always, doing the right thing professionally will inevitably come at a cost to A. Scott personally. Amongst all the tension there is also some great domestic interplay between A. Scott, Boo and Pajamae as A. Scott continues to learn that single-parenting is no easy job either.
A riveting series so far, I hope there’s more to come.
May 8, 2017
I've read and enjoyed most of Mr. Gimenez's books, but I felt this gripping thriller was one of his best works. The timely topics of immigration and terrorism were developed with much realism and truth. Also, bits of history and/or explanations of Highland Park, other areas of Dallas, and especially Cowboy Stadium made the novel even more vivid and interesting. And I especially liked Judge A. Scott Fenney because of his convictions and integrity. I found this book an excellent and worthwhile read!
May 18, 2017
Through Gimez's books I generally learn something new last time it was fracking, this time how complex the law is. This book tried to explain the idealism behind the jihadists mind set. At some parts of the book I got a bit bored especially the preaching about Allah. The book takes a while to bring up the plot and then in like 20 pages it's all sorted just like A Scott's love life. At 465 pages it could have been trimmed. Hopefully the next book will be on the professor who travels taking up a better case
December 29, 2018
The second Scott feeney book found him being nominated for a federal judgeship. This book finds him as a sitting judge with his old crew all around him presiding over a case about Isis plotting to blow up the Super Bowl which is coming to town. Lots of different parts and some were enjoyable and others were left a bit lacking. Since he is no longer a lawyer it probably will be a little tough to consider the series as he got way to involved in the weeds of this case which he shouldn’t have done as the presiding judge. It’s a decent read but not as good as the first two.
February 10, 2019
Scott Fenney through 3 books has gone from an obnoxious rich attorney to a Federal Judge who believes in the Constitution and the letter of the law. He lives with his two daughters in a small house in Highland Park, an extremely rich area of Dallas. Scott's life is pretty straight forward until inherits cases, terrorists and immigration. His judicial decisions will be unpopular both locally and with the President. I really like the writing and there were a few twists that I did not expect. I hope we see more of Scatt and his daughters Boo and Pajamae.
May 14, 2019
Another fantastic story by a truly great and talented author
After reading other Mark Gimenez books I wanted decided to read more, and once again he doesn't disappoint
The absence of guilt continues the A Scott Feeney series and this time he is the judge during a terrorist plot to kill thousands of Americans during super bowl Sunday
Brilliantly written to keep the reader wanting more and intrigued with brilliant plots, twists, surprises and more throughout, Mark Gimenez truly is a writer well deserved to be among the greats such as Grisham, and other great authors.
After reading other Mark Gimenez books I wanted decided to read more, and once again he doesn't disappoint
The absence of guilt continues the A Scott Feeney series and this time he is the judge during a terrorist plot to kill thousands of Americans during super bowl Sunday
Brilliantly written to keep the reader wanting more and intrigued with brilliant plots, twists, surprises and more throughout, Mark Gimenez truly is a writer well deserved to be among the greats such as Grisham, and other great authors.
January 6, 2020
After reading the second book in this series, I couldn't wait to read the third. Talk about changes in A. Scott Fenney's life. I wondered if the Judge's life would be less crazy once he became a Federal Judge, and that question was answered for me pretty quickly! Many twists and turns in this book, lots of scares, and what I appreciate with Mr. Gimenez's writing is not every ending is a happy one. Satisfying for the reader, yes, but for the characters? You'll have to decide that for yourself. The ending of this book was super satisfying to me! Is there a #4??????
Displaying 1 - 30 of 153 reviews