What do you think?
Rate this book
Kindle County Legal Thriller #5
Personal Injuries
An ambitious personal injury lawyer, Robbie Feaver finds his less-than-ethical practices coming back to haunt him when, in exchange for leniency from prosecution, he is forced into an uneasy alliance with an enigmatic female FBI agent, in a story of greed, human weakness, love, and unexpected heroism.
528 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
1368 people are currently reading
3711 people want to read
About the author
Scott Turow
110 books2,578 followersScott Turow is the author of ten bestselling works of fiction, including IDENTICAL, INNOCENT, PRESUMED INNOCENT, and THE BURDEN OF PROOF, and two nonfiction books, including ONE L, about his experience as a law student. His books have been translated into more than forty languages, sold more than thirty million copies worldwide, and have been adapted into movies and television projects. He has frequently contributed essays and op-ed pieces to publications such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and The Atlantic.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 358 reviews
March 27, 2022
Oh man, this book was good. The audiobook was 17 hours long & i looked forward to it every single time i picked it up. No slow parts, not for me.. The legal aspects were spot on, but to me the book was really about people & relationships, & love- the good, bad & the complicated. But the characters were so well done. I just finished it 2 minutes ago.. & usually i give myself time to reflect before i review.. But this time i purposely didn't want to do that. I felt it was appropriate to gush! The story had me so hooked.. The last hour so good that i literally rewound & listened again just to truly absorb every word. I couldn't even sit still while i listened, that's how worked up i was! I've enjoyed this whole series so far.. But man this 1 was special.
August 3, 2009
I know Robbie Feaver.
Maybe you do, too — if you’re lucky.
In my opinion, Robbie is among the most brilliantly — and lovingly — created characters in fiction.
Robbie is a lawyer, a nice Jewish boy, handsome, sexy, funny, and a complex human being.
“You could never count on him for honesty, assuming he even knew what it was. He was unruly and incorrigible. But if she stumbled, he’d come running. She couldn’t even say for sure she’d be able to reach out when he extended a hand. But he’d be there. she wasn’t going to forgive him, really. But she had to stop pretending with herself. Nine hundred people had just turned out, all there to buoy Robbie Feaver in his grief, nearly every one a friend who’d experienced his openness and the soothing warmth of his care. And she was one, too. You couldn’t fight facts.”
There have been at least two Robbie Feavers in my life, and as much as I love men, I loved these two most of all. It was an extraordinary delight to find such a beloved character in a novel.
Robbie shows us what love truly is — unconditional love, the kind of love you would be both blessed and unlikely to find in your lifetime. The man is deeply flawed: dishonest, irresponsible, undependable. Unfaithful, yet faithful: he strays, but always comes back to you.
In PERSONAL INJURIES, Mr. Turow tests Robbie Feaver (pronounce it “favor”) beyond all limits of physical and emotional endurance. Robbie’s wife has a fatal illness. She is slowly dying throughout the novel. The course of her illness is graphic and heartbreaking. The strength of courage of this woman and her husband are beyond the meaning of courage and strength.
In PERSONAL INJURIES, Mr. Turow explores love in all its forms: Robbie and his wife, Robbie and a lesbian woman, Robbie and his law partner and lifelong friend, Mort Dinnerstein.
“There is deep feeling between these men,” one of the lawyers says, though Robbie and Mort are not homosexual.
In PERSONAL INJURIES, love transcends sex.
Scott Turow is a brilliant writer. He unfailingly delivers a great story, a roller coaster ride, and a page-turning cliffhanger. Sometimes the writing bogs down just a little bit. Forget and forgive that. The book is superb.
And don’t pigeonhole this author as a “genre writer” of law thrillers. He is far, far better than that and getting better all the time. PRESUMED INNOCENT is a great read, and in the opinion of many reviewers, his best book. But I think his skill with characterization—making his characters real and complex and exciting for us—is, in PERSONAL INJURIES, superior to his other works.
Arlene Sanders
Blue Ridge Mountains, Virginia
www.ArleneSanders.com
September 21, 2018
The fifth volume in Turow's Kindle County returns the series to the excellent form of the first two volumes, Presumed Innocent and The Burden of Proof. The story of an FBI sting operation investigating judicial malfeasance features shocking plot twists all the way to the final few pages, and as usual Turow's characters are surprisingly well drawn. Turow's faults are still evident as well, especially lengthy passages of exposition and description (the first time we visit any room there will be a descriptive note of every single item of furniture along with any mementos or pictures that might be present) that slow the plot unnecessarily.
December 18, 2020
There is trouble afoot in the author‘s fictional Kindle County - specifically judiciary corruption. So the IRS, the “Feebs” and the local authorities place a compromised attorney - Robbie Feaver - undercover to flush out the gavel wielding crooks in black robes. Our narrator of this convoluted tale with a cast of many many characters is Mr. Feaver’s not so willing attorney.
Being a Turow novel there is some wonderful writing and very poignant descriptions/observations on life, death and being true to oneself. Unfortunately for this reader the storyline never gained any traction and simply plodded along - hence the low rating.
May 7, 2009
Robbie is a lawyer who got caught passing bribes to judges. They make a deal with him to wear a wire so they can convict the judges. Things get more and more dangerous-- but the story is more about Robbie's philosophy of life and his impact on those around him.. his own lawyer and the beautiful F.B.I. agent posing as his new legal secretary and his wife, who is suffering from Lou Gehrig's disease.
This is a tough book to read. Robbie's philosophy is to love those around him, though he does it through a hard shell. He thinks life is a play and everyone is pretending to be something. He is a thorough scoundrel that slowly wins over the people closest to him.
In the meantime, the young FBI chick is having her own inner conflict and this story is about inner conflict more than anything else.
Turow can build some decent characters and insert some good lawyerly jokes and legal wrangling. However, this one spent too much time dealing with character issue and not nearly enough time advancing the plot. Not my favcrite, but worth forcing through.
This is a tough book to read. Robbie's philosophy is to love those around him, though he does it through a hard shell. He thinks life is a play and everyone is pretending to be something. He is a thorough scoundrel that slowly wins over the people closest to him.
In the meantime, the young FBI chick is having her own inner conflict and this story is about inner conflict more than anything else.
Turow can build some decent characters and insert some good lawyerly jokes and legal wrangling. However, this one spent too much time dealing with character issue and not nearly enough time advancing the plot. Not my favcrite, but worth forcing through.
November 20, 2012
The events in this novel are narrated by Defense Attorney George Mason who tells us from the start that this is a "lawyer's story, the kind attorneys like to hear and tell. About a case. About a client." So we should already know that this isn't going to be the run-of-the-mill courtroom drama.
The case at first appears to be about tax evasion. The IRS Criminal Intelligence unit has found a non-interest bearing checking account that has millions in it and large sums of money withdrawn from it. No taxes have been paid on any of this money. The real case, though, is about where this money is going; US Attorney Stan Sennett wants to use this fraud to get at the whole corrupt judicial system existing within Kindle County since the days of Mayor Bolcarro.
The client is Robbie Feaver. Feaver & Dinnerstein are personal injury lawyers and have been best friends since childhood. Dinnnerstein's uncle happens to be Brendan Tuohey, Chief of the entire Kindle County Superior Court. It's suspected that they use this account to pay off judges to sway decisions in their favor. US Attorney Sennett has made it quite clear that it's jail or cooperation. Cooperation always means ratting out; either choice is tough on Robby. Jail means that he won't be able to be with his wife during her final year - she has A.L.S. (Lou Gehrig's disease). Ratting out, well, he's not a rat. Yet, he can't go to jail, he must take care of Lorraine. So he agrees to help with the sting as long as his partner, Dinnerstein, is protected. He claims that Dinnerstein knows nothing about what the money is really used for. Thus George Mason helps Robbie Feaver go undercover with the FBI.
Turow's strength is that he always tells a good lawyer story. The whole FBI undercover sting is incredible from a technical as well as a personal perspective. However, it his character handling that is the most impressive. Robby Feaver is one of those people that most would find offensive. Too good looking and knows it, wears tailored Italian suits with lots of gold jewelry and too much cologne. He speaks too loudly and talks too much. Everything is a play. Look at his profession, he's an ambulance chaser! His one redeeming virtue is that he knows this about himself. Turow manages to keep Robbie true right up through the end, without him feeling like a stereotype. We learn most about Feaver through his interactions with undercover FBI agent Evon. She is acting as a paralegal clerk to keep an eye on Robbie. Our empathy for Robbie is absolutely necessary to the story line. A lesser writer would not be able to pull off the extra meaning behind the title. Turow's skill can be compared to that of a method actor. Not once does the reader have to worry about motivation - we are with these people. And the book certainly has it share of suspense and twists.
To Turow's credit he also handles Robbie's wife's A.L.S. well, bringing to light the "Cruelest Disease," but not by making the book read like a tear jerk. By the way, this is the same disease that Stephen Hawking has been miraculously surviving for so long.
The case at first appears to be about tax evasion. The IRS Criminal Intelligence unit has found a non-interest bearing checking account that has millions in it and large sums of money withdrawn from it. No taxes have been paid on any of this money. The real case, though, is about where this money is going; US Attorney Stan Sennett wants to use this fraud to get at the whole corrupt judicial system existing within Kindle County since the days of Mayor Bolcarro.
The client is Robbie Feaver. Feaver & Dinnerstein are personal injury lawyers and have been best friends since childhood. Dinnnerstein's uncle happens to be Brendan Tuohey, Chief of the entire Kindle County Superior Court. It's suspected that they use this account to pay off judges to sway decisions in their favor. US Attorney Sennett has made it quite clear that it's jail or cooperation. Cooperation always means ratting out; either choice is tough on Robby. Jail means that he won't be able to be with his wife during her final year - she has A.L.S. (Lou Gehrig's disease). Ratting out, well, he's not a rat. Yet, he can't go to jail, he must take care of Lorraine. So he agrees to help with the sting as long as his partner, Dinnerstein, is protected. He claims that Dinnerstein knows nothing about what the money is really used for. Thus George Mason helps Robbie Feaver go undercover with the FBI.
Turow's strength is that he always tells a good lawyer story. The whole FBI undercover sting is incredible from a technical as well as a personal perspective. However, it his character handling that is the most impressive. Robby Feaver is one of those people that most would find offensive. Too good looking and knows it, wears tailored Italian suits with lots of gold jewelry and too much cologne. He speaks too loudly and talks too much. Everything is a play. Look at his profession, he's an ambulance chaser! His one redeeming virtue is that he knows this about himself. Turow manages to keep Robbie true right up through the end, without him feeling like a stereotype. We learn most about Feaver through his interactions with undercover FBI agent Evon. She is acting as a paralegal clerk to keep an eye on Robbie. Our empathy for Robbie is absolutely necessary to the story line. A lesser writer would not be able to pull off the extra meaning behind the title. Turow's skill can be compared to that of a method actor. Not once does the reader have to worry about motivation - we are with these people. And the book certainly has it share of suspense and twists.
To Turow's credit he also handles Robbie's wife's A.L.S. well, bringing to light the "Cruelest Disease," but not by making the book read like a tear jerk. By the way, this is the same disease that Stephen Hawking has been miraculously surviving for so long.
August 18, 2017
Personal Injuries takes readers once again to Kindle County, USA (somewhere in flyover country) and, in my view, back to the standard of Presumed Innocent. Within the first 1,000 words the Feds + IRS have turned a rich, successful, charming, womanizing personal injury lawyer, whom they wire up and employ to entrap a cohort of judges and various minions of the court, all similarly on the take. As the investigation lumbers forward over six months, through a thicket of legal, logistical, and electronic challenges, the G-men’s best laid plans seem often to go awry and by the end some readers may be left dissatisfied by who does or does not get nabbed by the long arm of justice. Given Turow’s interest in lingering over his characters, the plot does not rattle along at the pace of the latest TV or silver screen shoot-em-up sequel. Here, increases in tension often seem to result from governmental screw-ups or bad guys' craftiness, which leave our anti-hero to improvise as best he can. Characters’ personal dramas often eclipse the slow progress of The Sting, which may appeal to readers interested as much in whozzit about as whatzit about. Turow once again introduces a fair share of Others (the African-American, the lesbian, the Jew, the Mormon) without lapsing deeply into stereotype and allows them equal opportunity to behave nobly, ignobly, or both. Character flaws give Turow lots to talk about and by the end good guys can offer less to admire than some bad guys. As one might expect, there are also inconvenient and unattractive truths of life, death, and society for readers to confront, shrug off, or simply not like.
May 6, 2014
With a review of a 1999 copyrighted book I've obviously come across it in a second-hand shop. As a writer, I know this does the author out of a royalty (and regret that) but it's the best I can afford. And second-hand sales at least get an author additional readers. It's also a fact that I find myself more comfortable with traditional fiction writing from last century than some of its more modern forms.
One way to judge a book is by how well it measures up to its cover blurbs.
I agree with the "Guardian" reviewer that "Turow succeeds in bringing his characters to life and in exquisite and moving detail". They are a colourful lot, though I found the narrator, who appears occasionally in the first person, rather unnecessary to the story.
However, I would not have used the superlatives of other reviewers quoted on the back cover. I did not find it "spectacular" (though I appreciate the amount of effort the author put into research), nor all that much of "a humdinger of a plot", nor particularly "gripping".
For me, judged against other thrillers I've read, it was not a page-turner, so I read it doggedly in small doses. The very small font size of this edition also made it more difficult to read easily.
After trying Turow, I still prefer Grisham.
One way to judge a book is by how well it measures up to its cover blurbs.
I agree with the "Guardian" reviewer that "Turow succeeds in bringing his characters to life and in exquisite and moving detail". They are a colourful lot, though I found the narrator, who appears occasionally in the first person, rather unnecessary to the story.
However, I would not have used the superlatives of other reviewers quoted on the back cover. I did not find it "spectacular" (though I appreciate the amount of effort the author put into research), nor all that much of "a humdinger of a plot", nor particularly "gripping".
For me, judged against other thrillers I've read, it was not a page-turner, so I read it doggedly in small doses. The very small font size of this edition also made it more difficult to read easily.
After trying Turow, I still prefer Grisham.
October 28, 2013
I did not like this book. From little thinks like Turow's insistence on shifting from referring to characters by first name then last name, even in the same paragraph. Really? Why?? Purely annoying to the reader having to keep track of what's going on in two character name-spaces. It would have been one thing if certain characters referred to each other by last name for effect, but that wasn't the case. This book is in the third person -
I suspect I was supposed to care about the main character Feaver by the end of the book - perhaps because I was anticipating such a manipulation I was immune to it. Nonetheless, I found no favor in Feavor and actually only finished the book out of curiosity: what would Turow do to this character?
In the end, there were no monumental triumphs and no spectacular defeats. The really bad guy never comes to justice, and the really good guy doesn't get his man. A whole book of buildup and no climax.
I suspect I was supposed to care about the main character Feaver by the end of the book - perhaps because I was anticipating such a manipulation I was immune to it. Nonetheless, I found no favor in Feavor and actually only finished the book out of curiosity: what would Turow do to this character?
In the end, there were no monumental triumphs and no spectacular defeats. The really bad guy never comes to justice, and the really good guy doesn't get his man. A whole book of buildup and no climax.
February 22, 2023
This is a story of depressing incidents, one after another, unrelenting ... the backdrop of judicial corruption in personal injury cases is frighteningly believable ... the cases are all about big money and rarely about crime, except for the crimes of judges who demand bribes and attorneys who pay them
And yet, it seems that each such incident also generates a sense of feeling and caring and sometimes love ... even among the slimeballs you are invited to despise
And yet, it seems that each such incident also generates a sense of feeling and caring and sometimes love ... even among the slimeballs you are invited to despise
June 21, 2022
I haven't read 2 Scott Turow's so close together before. But this is what I have realized. His mastery is the character. The people take shape and puff air and form words and walk right off the page. Not at first. They are two dimensional just like most characters in most books. They are well described. Nicely dressed. But with each page the book gets fatter. There is suddenly meat on the bone. There is body odor. There is depth, width, height, hopes, dreams, stumbles. He is a craftsman, a master craftsman at this character development thing. The story line is great. I need to say that. But the main thing these master developed characters seem to be marching toward is to deliver, (usually in just one or two sentences) the most perfect endings. This book is an example of both. Robbie and Evon are complex. The ending is just what it needs to be.
June 20, 2020
Maybe I’m done with Scott Turrow and maybe it’s lawyer procedural that I’m done with. Maybe it’s because I just read a phenomenal debut novel and then a YA fantasy and then this. This one dragged on for me.
The title seemed to have nothing to do with the story. The only character that got any kind of depth was the main shady lawyer. The narration was first person which did not seem to have any reason attached to it as the narrator was a mere silhouette of a person. Good like a plain bread and American sandwich is good in that it highlights how well written some books are. (Pardon my dangling...)
The title seemed to have nothing to do with the story. The only character that got any kind of depth was the main shady lawyer. The narration was first person which did not seem to have any reason attached to it as the narrator was a mere silhouette of a person. Good like a plain bread and American sandwich is good in that it highlights how well written some books are. (Pardon my dangling...)
June 19, 2022
Robbie is an attorney who's about to get caught in an IRS/FBI sting. The prevalent malfeasance in the good-ol-boy network of local judges and attorneys has drawn the full attention of a U S Attorney General. Throw in an undercover investigation of 6 months to 2 years, along with great character development, and it's a fun ride.
March 8, 2024
This is possibly one of the least deserved five star ratings that I have given in my Goodreads review Career, which has been a reasonable number of years. One star is due to the fact that I ended the book with tears. Some of you may know that when a book provokes tears, it gets an extra star and maybe even five stars.
I experienced this book in the audible format. I have read other books by this author, and am kindly disposed to seeing him as a good writer and storyteller. This book does not change those thoughts for me. I struggled through possibly the first half of this book thinking that it was , maybe three stars. And then I remembered some thing that I once learned about some books, but have evidently forgotten. Lots of good books spend a whole lot of time at the beginning, setting the scene and giving you information that will help you appreciate the second half of the book. I remember having this experience with some books in the past and not really appreciating it until I finally got through the entire book. That happened to me in spades with this book.
You will spend a lot of time in this book getting to know a couple of characters. You might be tempted to call them lovers although the man is married, and the woman is a lesbian. They are each fascinating. The fact that they are characters created by a writer might make you wonder if they could ever be real people. I kind of think they couldn’t be, but that didn’t keep me from being fully drawn into each character.
The main character is extraordinarily complex. He might play a leadership role in the tendency in the last couple of decades for the main characters in crime novels to be a strange mixture of good and bad. Or maybe it is just that fictional characters who have a mix of good and bad characteristics are particularly fascinating to me.
I stuck with this novel, partly, because that is easier to do with an audible book for me, then with a print book. I also had enough experience with the author, to be willing to give him more than a fair chance to intrigue me. This might even be the kind of book that you might enjoy even more the second time, when you know the ending and you can watch it develop in the skillful hands of the author. That might make the first half of the book more interesting even to me. But I have to say that the somewhat surprising end allows a lot of things to come to what seem to be very reasonable conclusions. I have to say that being manipulated by a full writer and storyteller can wind up being a mostly positive experience. You can even learn some things about yourself and your view of the world in the process.
I experienced this book in the audible format. I have read other books by this author, and am kindly disposed to seeing him as a good writer and storyteller. This book does not change those thoughts for me. I struggled through possibly the first half of this book thinking that it was , maybe three stars. And then I remembered some thing that I once learned about some books, but have evidently forgotten. Lots of good books spend a whole lot of time at the beginning, setting the scene and giving you information that will help you appreciate the second half of the book. I remember having this experience with some books in the past and not really appreciating it until I finally got through the entire book. That happened to me in spades with this book.
You will spend a lot of time in this book getting to know a couple of characters. You might be tempted to call them lovers although the man is married, and the woman is a lesbian. They are each fascinating. The fact that they are characters created by a writer might make you wonder if they could ever be real people. I kind of think they couldn’t be, but that didn’t keep me from being fully drawn into each character.
The main character is extraordinarily complex. He might play a leadership role in the tendency in the last couple of decades for the main characters in crime novels to be a strange mixture of good and bad. Or maybe it is just that fictional characters who have a mix of good and bad characteristics are particularly fascinating to me.
I stuck with this novel, partly, because that is easier to do with an audible book for me, then with a print book. I also had enough experience with the author, to be willing to give him more than a fair chance to intrigue me. This might even be the kind of book that you might enjoy even more the second time, when you know the ending and you can watch it develop in the skillful hands of the author. That might make the first half of the book more interesting even to me. But I have to say that the somewhat surprising end allows a lot of things to come to what seem to be very reasonable conclusions. I have to say that being manipulated by a full writer and storyteller can wind up being a mostly positive experience. You can even learn some things about yourself and your view of the world in the process.
June 3, 2024
Why are there so few one-star ratings? If I really dislike a book I would normally abandon it at page 50 at the latest. And never rate it at all. In this case I had to continue reading it for the very silly reason that I did not bring along enough books to my vacation (and the book store of the village has closed down.)
It started quite promising actually. A lawyer tells the tale about the 90s “when the dot has not yet been introduced to the com”. About a client called Feaver. A first person singular story. Only it is Feaver who is the main character and our narrator speaks about things happening that he cannot possibly know.
“Yet I’ve imagined it in the same detail as so much else I’ve described but never witnessed.” He says at the very end. But why? There are rules in storytelling. And a lawyer should know that you do not break rules. Unless you are James Joyce.
So there go two stars flying out of the window.
Now what is it about? They get Feaver for some tax issues and he agrees to become an informer. Turns out he had bribed judges. Also, he practices law but never received his liscence. A fraud. And then the book goes on and on with our hero fully wired to get the bad judges to admit their crime. For good measure Turow puts an undercover agent at his side. Who turns out to be a lesbian and her story is described endlessly and utterly boringly. The main reason for her existence seems to be that Turow wants to establish that Feaver is actually not a bad guy at all. Or as one of the dozens of admirers put it in the praise section of the book: not one dimensional. (Among the praising people is one of my heroes, John Mortimer, which saddened me immensely.)
And then Feaver has a wife dying of ALS. If I had some sympathy left for the book I might have found the scenes with her well done. As it is I’ve found them repulsive. Especially the very last one.
There is some kind of action going on for about 20 pages at page 400 or so.
It is not that I dislike thrillers or legal thrillers. On the contrary. I have read more than 20 Grishams and have never bean disappointed. They are one-dimensional? Yes. But honest works of well crafted fiction. This is just humbug.
It started quite promising actually. A lawyer tells the tale about the 90s “when the dot has not yet been introduced to the com”. About a client called Feaver. A first person singular story. Only it is Feaver who is the main character and our narrator speaks about things happening that he cannot possibly know.
“Yet I’ve imagined it in the same detail as so much else I’ve described but never witnessed.” He says at the very end. But why? There are rules in storytelling. And a lawyer should know that you do not break rules. Unless you are James Joyce.
So there go two stars flying out of the window.
Now what is it about? They get Feaver for some tax issues and he agrees to become an informer. Turns out he had bribed judges. Also, he practices law but never received his liscence. A fraud. And then the book goes on and on with our hero fully wired to get the bad judges to admit their crime. For good measure Turow puts an undercover agent at his side. Who turns out to be a lesbian and her story is described endlessly and utterly boringly. The main reason for her existence seems to be that Turow wants to establish that Feaver is actually not a bad guy at all. Or as one of the dozens of admirers put it in the praise section of the book: not one dimensional. (Among the praising people is one of my heroes, John Mortimer, which saddened me immensely.)
And then Feaver has a wife dying of ALS. If I had some sympathy left for the book I might have found the scenes with her well done. As it is I’ve found them repulsive. Especially the very last one.
There is some kind of action going on for about 20 pages at page 400 or so.
It is not that I dislike thrillers or legal thrillers. On the contrary. I have read more than 20 Grishams and have never bean disappointed. They are one-dimensional? Yes. But honest works of well crafted fiction. This is just humbug.
October 5, 2012
I liked this one better than Pleading Guilty, the other Turow novel I've read dealing with a financial crime rather than a murder. The character depth in this book was amazing. I found myself hating Robbie Feaver and then, by the end of the book, forgiving him for all his indiscretions. Evon Miller was the other character I really felt attached to by the end of the book. I thought Turow did an incredible job filling out her character, which left me feeling like I didn't really know her until near the end of the book. Miller's story was really what drove the book for me. I found myself turning pages more to find out what was going to be revealed about her next rather than what was happening with the larger plot. Turow did a great job of developing reader empathy for these character's and their struggles of self-discovery. I believe even Robbie, as deceitful and self-centered as he was, didn't know everything about himself before he met Evon Miller. And Evon Miller discovered herself along the way too, which I suppose was to be expected since the jacket summary pretty much gave us that much. The way their stories worked to complement each other and blend together was real literary genius in my opinion. I only rate this one four stars because there were still some places I found myself trudging through.
August 20, 2012
I had hopes that this book would be better than the one I just read – I was still charged from the plot turn and rather hopeful to read a true page turner. Nope – didn't happen. This book did not hold my interest. It was overly descriptive, slow and drawn out. It was actually painful to read. I continued through the book hoping as Pleading Guilty, it would suddenly be good – it never happened. I would not recommend this book.
July 30, 2022
Sadly, I think this one aged really poorly compared to other Kindle County Turow books. A convoluted cast of lawyers and judges that just blend together, discussions about homosexuality that really don't hold up to the test of time, and just no real characters to stand behind. I also found the legal piece, which is where Turow typically excels, to be obscured by the cop/FBI procedural elements, which is not he's sweet spot. I just found this one dragging on and on.
March 1, 2010
I hadn't read a Scott Turow book since probably the late 80s. I think my reading taste has advanced since those days. This book had complex legal machinations and intricately woven character parts, but was hard for me to follow - hard to remember all the characters' names. I just wasn't that impressed. Interesting story, but too long and too much intricate info for me.
September 13, 2017
Never read a book by this guy, and don't really read legal thrillers at all. Still, I think Turow has a real knack for character building and even the side characters are all fleshed out enough to be interesting. The plot itself is a little much, but I stuck around just to see the interactions between the players. I listened to the audiobook which was brilliantly narrated and overall I found it quite enjoyable.
August 5, 2021
Although this ranks lower to his other books I’ve read, it is still very good. A few things: 1. the story is a good one and keeps its pace as much as a thriller as a legal drama, 2. The narrator is a character you kind of know the least about although he is present throughout the book (an interesting technique), 3. Almost all the characters are in one way or another damaged and really not all that likable (some are less so than others but on the whole...). Turow’ so titles are always so good in that they are almost always double meaning. This one is no exception in that the main protagonist is a personal injury attorney but also the book is rife with people being “personally” injured throughout the book and across multiple fault lines (family, friends, partners, professional colleagues, etc.). Also the protagonists wife suffers from ALS which is also in a way a VERY personal injury. A still have a few of Turow’s I haven’t read but after having read three so far this year (one was a re-read), I think I’ll take a break from binging and pace myself to savor what’s left with a little distance of time.
May 13, 2010
Seeking mysteries I happened upon this work and having read Presumed Innocent long ago, and 4-5 years ago I had read a well written non-fiction documentary by Turow of a noted miscarriage of justice. So I decided to give it a try.
The story starts off with what portends to be an intersting plot. But then for the technically picky reader like me (scientist) it becomes contrived nonsense. For example, the author asks us to believe the anti-hero, a crooked personal injury attorney, has been practicing law for decades taking insurance companies to the cleaners, GET THIS, without a license to practice law. Progressing from details like this the book descends in the end to utterly contrived nonsense.
I asked a couple of lawyer friends who are Turow fans whhat they thought of it and they said "great." Go figure.
The story starts off with what portends to be an intersting plot. But then for the technically picky reader like me (scientist) it becomes contrived nonsense. For example, the author asks us to believe the anti-hero, a crooked personal injury attorney, has been practicing law for decades taking insurance companies to the cleaners, GET THIS, without a license to practice law. Progressing from details like this the book descends in the end to utterly contrived nonsense.
I asked a couple of lawyer friends who are Turow fans whhat they thought of it and they said "great." Go figure.
August 24, 2012
I liked this book. As hard as it was to get into at first with all the legal jargon and long paragraphs, this book really is a story about a confused, lost, idealist human being. While Robbie made mistakes and lied constantly, he was a deep character that Turow wrote incredibly well. The plot wasn't the most exciting, but I think the story was more about building the characters. (It was strange that we knew less about the narrator than any of the other people.) The depiction of Rainey and ALS was depressing though, but the way Robbie treated her and his mom showed another side of his personality that made you realize while he was a huge liar, he also deeply cared about the people around him.
August 15, 2013
Well, lately I've been giving a lot of fours that should have been a little higher, so this one gets rounded up.
He is so deft with plot, with characters, with dialog. The bad guys have good traits and the good guys have their shortcomings -- in other words, his characters are real human being. Handles many characters from their POVs in a very realistic way.
IANAL, but all the legal stuff sounds very authentic to me as does that sad decline of a character's wife because of ALS. His brave and cheery face with her, his barely hidden despair other times.
One plot jolt after another along the way. All in all a great read! (I know I'd read it before, but didn't remember enough to spoil a thing!)
He is so deft with plot, with characters, with dialog. The bad guys have good traits and the good guys have their shortcomings -- in other words, his characters are real human being. Handles many characters from their POVs in a very realistic way.
IANAL, but all the legal stuff sounds very authentic to me as does that sad decline of a character's wife because of ALS. His brave and cheery face with her, his barely hidden despair other times.
One plot jolt after another along the way. All in all a great read! (I know I'd read it before, but didn't remember enough to spoil a thing!)
September 11, 2014
Wow! What a great read. Scott Turow's writing is ourstanding: storyline, dialogue and character development are all first-rate. I didn't see the ending coming the way it came. Made perfect sense but still a real suprise. This story also resonated with me on a personal level. The description of one of the character's struggle with ALS, with it's slow and hideous progression, was painfully accurate. Having watched ALS slowly take my father's life in 1999 (but not his dignity) I can attest to both the accuracy of Turow's description of this progressive disease and the abject fear it produces for the alert mind of an ALS patient trapped inside their own body.
April 22, 2018
This book does not hold up well. The womanizing main character, the way homosexuality is approached, and pretty much all mentions of race in this book made me cringe. It felt like it was written much longer than 20 years ago. Or maybe our culture has just shifted that much in the past 20 years (which is a good thing).
The book is also just not that interesting a read. The story dragged, the characters didn't feel real, and it stretched credibility.
The book is also just not that interesting a read. The story dragged, the characters didn't feel real, and it stretched credibility.
May 18, 2020
Meh. Too many words to just get to an ending I didn't even really like. I liked Robbie (sometimes) Rainey (sad) and Evon ok but the rest not so much. Maybe the next Turow book I have on my shelf will be better.
April 20, 2010
Well written, tedious story of a PI attorney who flips for the FBI,
after having been exposed himself by the IRS, to gather evidence
on judges guilty of taking bribes.
after having been exposed himself by the IRS, to gather evidence
on judges guilty of taking bribes.
September 14, 2021
I can't believe this book got published, not due to the content or story, but because of the ignorance of basic grammar rules. Let's begin with characters, the ESSENTIAL makeup of a novel. A competent author makes characters easy to follow as they mature through the story. This book doesn’t do that at all.
One of my biggest pet peeves in this book is the alternating of character names. It got real confusing and was knawing me on the inside. Here's an example of a single character being referred to by his first name and last name in the same sentence. "For all his lapses and deceptions, Robbie was committed to Morty's well-being, and Dinnerstein knew it." Mort Dinnerstein is one character. Stop using both first and last names interchangeably. It seems like you're talking about two people but you aren't.
It doesn't help that there are a lot of characters. In any book, once you reach the last couple of chapters you should have an easy understanding on who is who. In Personal Injuries' final few chapters, I had no idea who the fuck was who. My brain can only handle so much, not two dozen characters who are referenced by their first, last, and sometimes even their sobriquet names. Some of them have not been seen since the beginning of the book. Mr. Turow throws in “extras” into the cast during the conclusion. These are very minor characters who are significantly unimportant to the overall story. For example, someone's lawyer or the mayor of the city. I had to look up that last one because I did not recognize the name and it turned out he is the mayor of the fictional city. I understand long time readers of the series might chuckle as they remember these guys, but for a first book it is too much especially if they have no part of the story whatsoever.
I really wish there was a playbill of characters in the beginning pages. I wrote down one myself, but then stopped after six or so characters with minor descriptions. Afterwards it was websites that provided me with descriptions. These websites are maintained by devoted fans. I appreciated their organization because this novel was such an unorganized mess!
Another major grammatical error is in the transitions. The transitions flowed haphazardly from past to present and not in a good way. At the height of the book when Feaver is showing his former friend that he is wired and he recorded the transaction for the federal government, Mr. Turow bounces back to earlier in the day. Literally I was fast forwarding this part, WE ARE AT THE BEGINNING STAGES OF THE CLIMAX AND WE ARE GOING BACK TO BEFORE? This was a terrible transition and spoiled the moment for me.
The action parts were ruined with jumps between the present and the future. Like I'm in the middle of an escalation and then there's a sentence about how the character felt later in the night. Ruins the suspense of not knowing what was going to happen, especially since the targets are high ranking people with connections. Here is an example of such a disappointment, I capitalized the frustrating time-shift text.
This quote also points out another major complaint. Reading this quote as a whole it sounds like it's from one person. In reality, it is from two different characters' points of view. Asides from a new paragraph there's nothing to indicate that you are reading from a different character's perspective. I thought it was from one person since there was no indication of a character change. If an indication was included, the book would have been SO MUCH easier to read. There are sections where I had to reread them to figure out which character witnessed a major plot twist (a ploy by Feaver). Going back to previous chapters to find out which character witnessed something is not that fun.
If this book didn't have interesting plot-twists, then I would have not finished it. It was nice to see how much the world has changed since 1999. This novel was written Pre-9/11 and some parts stuck out on how much the world has changed. "Federal law provides that before the government records anybody, there must be either an interception order, signed by a judge, or consent by one party to the conversation." The PATRIOT ACT changed this. In addition, I enjoyed the false court cases presented in front of the judges to decide on (along with the bribe). These pretend cases remind me of a scheme which Saul Goodman would concoct. The novel also positively details the loneliness that an undercover lifestyle brings. Especially if you are spending 15+ hours daily with the informant, it's only human nature that desire can arise. However holding yourself to professionalism can bring can torment you. Go ahead girl, it allright to do it while thinking about human contact. I've been there and done that.
This output is a shame because there were at least two points in the book where references from previous novels were mentioned. I would be up to read the novels but am afraid that since they are previous ones, they will be even worse grammatically.
Turning to the final page of the book, there is an advertisement from the publisher. Looking at who the publishing company is puts the nail on the coffin on why such an obstrosity was published in the first place. Time Warner published it in 1999, the time period when they were in negotiations to merge with AOL. This merger led to AOL-Time Warner, who would soon kill WCW. Bewarned literate wrestling fans if you want to read this book, you will end up like WCW.
Final Rating: 20%
PARTS of the story were interesting and kept me on my toes. However transitional issues and jumbling of characters name disengaged me from further enjoyment
One of my biggest pet peeves in this book is the alternating of character names. It got real confusing and was knawing me on the inside. Here's an example of a single character being referred to by his first name and last name in the same sentence. "For all his lapses and deceptions, Robbie was committed to Morty's well-being, and Dinnerstein knew it." Mort Dinnerstein is one character. Stop using both first and last names interchangeably. It seems like you're talking about two people but you aren't.
It doesn't help that there are a lot of characters. In any book, once you reach the last couple of chapters you should have an easy understanding on who is who. In Personal Injuries' final few chapters, I had no idea who the fuck was who. My brain can only handle so much, not two dozen characters who are referenced by their first, last, and sometimes even their sobriquet names. Some of them have not been seen since the beginning of the book. Mr. Turow throws in “extras” into the cast during the conclusion. These are very minor characters who are significantly unimportant to the overall story. For example, someone's lawyer or the mayor of the city. I had to look up that last one because I did not recognize the name and it turned out he is the mayor of the fictional city. I understand long time readers of the series might chuckle as they remember these guys, but for a first book it is too much especially if they have no part of the story whatsoever.
I really wish there was a playbill of characters in the beginning pages. I wrote down one myself, but then stopped after six or so characters with minor descriptions. Afterwards it was websites that provided me with descriptions. These websites are maintained by devoted fans. I appreciated their organization because this novel was such an unorganized mess!
Another major grammatical error is in the transitions. The transitions flowed haphazardly from past to present and not in a good way. At the height of the book when Feaver is showing his former friend that he is wired and he recorded the transaction for the federal government, Mr. Turow bounces back to earlier in the day. Literally I was fast forwarding this part, WE ARE AT THE BEGINNING STAGES OF THE CLIMAX AND WE ARE GOING BACK TO BEFORE? This was a terrible transition and spoiled the moment for me.
The action parts were ruined with jumps between the present and the future. Like I'm in the middle of an escalation and then there's a sentence about how the character felt later in the night. Ruins the suspense of not knowing what was going to happen, especially since the targets are high ranking people with connections. Here is an example of such a disappointment, I capitalized the frustrating time-shift text.
"He'd struck Tuohey dumb with that, much as intended. A victor of kinds, Feaver sprinted the twenty or so yards to Skolnick's Lincoln in a metered space at the curb. Klecker had not recovered the key from him, and Robbie slid inside. HE WAS NOT THINKING ABOUT MUCH, HE TOLD ME LATER, BESIDES GETTING OUT OF THE COLD AND TURNING ON THE HEATER FULL BLAST.
Evon approached Klecker on the other side of the fountain. 'Whoa,' Alf suddenly said. Wheeling, she caught sight of Tuohey, hiking rapidly back toward Robbie and the Lincoln. She began running, but Tuohey was already motioning for Robbie to roll down the window.
This quote also points out another major complaint. Reading this quote as a whole it sounds like it's from one person. In reality, it is from two different characters' points of view. Asides from a new paragraph there's nothing to indicate that you are reading from a different character's perspective. I thought it was from one person since there was no indication of a character change. If an indication was included, the book would have been SO MUCH easier to read. There are sections where I had to reread them to figure out which character witnessed a major plot twist (a ploy by Feaver). Going back to previous chapters to find out which character witnessed something is not that fun.
If this book didn't have interesting plot-twists, then I would have not finished it. It was nice to see how much the world has changed since 1999. This novel was written Pre-9/11 and some parts stuck out on how much the world has changed. "Federal law provides that before the government records anybody, there must be either an interception order, signed by a judge, or consent by one party to the conversation." The PATRIOT ACT changed this. In addition, I enjoyed the false court cases presented in front of the judges to decide on (along with the bribe). These pretend cases remind me of a scheme which Saul Goodman would concoct. The novel also positively details the loneliness that an undercover lifestyle brings. Especially if you are spending 15+ hours daily with the informant, it's only human nature that desire can arise. However holding yourself to professionalism can bring can torment you. Go ahead girl, it allright to do it while thinking about human contact. I've been there and done that.
This output is a shame because there were at least two points in the book where references from previous novels were mentioned. I would be up to read the novels but am afraid that since they are previous ones, they will be even worse grammatically.
Turning to the final page of the book, there is an advertisement from the publisher. Looking at who the publishing company is puts the nail on the coffin on why such an obstrosity was published in the first place. Time Warner published it in 1999, the time period when they were in negotiations to merge with AOL. This merger led to AOL-Time Warner, who would soon kill WCW. Bewarned literate wrestling fans if you want to read this book, you will end up like WCW.
Final Rating: 20%
PARTS of the story were interesting and kept me on my toes. However transitional issues and jumbling of characters name disengaged me from further enjoyment
December 30, 2024
3.5 stars rounded up. Turow’s writing was as brilliant as always but the plot in this one just kinda dragged and the usual twist I expected was pretty subdued. I also didn’t like the ending, it wasn’t what I hoped for, however, overall this was a great read from a great author. I also loved recognizing all the characters from prior books (Sennett, Touhey, Klonsky, Stern, Horgan, Mel (forgot last name, etc)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 358 reviews