What do you think?
Rate this book
Ultimate Punishment: A Lawyer's Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty
A gripping examination of the case for and against capital punishment by a respected criminal lawyer and celebrated novelist. In the words of Harvard Law Professor, Laurence H. Tribe--"Ultimate Punishment is the ultimate statement about the death penalty: to read it is to understand why law alone cannot make us whole."
As a respected criminal lawyer, Scott Turow has been involved with the death penalty for more than a decade, including successfully representing two different men convicted in death-penalty prosecutions. In this vivid account of how his views on the death penalty have evolved, Turow describes his own experiences with capital punishment from his days as an impassioned young prosecutor to his recent service on the Illinois commission which investigated the administration of the death penalty and influenced Governor George Ryan’s unprecedented commutation of the sentences of 164 death row inmates on his last day in office. Telling the powerful stories behind the statistics, as he moves from the Governor’s Mansion to Illinois’s state-of-the art “super-max†prison and the execution chamber, Ultimate Punishment has all the drama and intellectual substance of Turow’s bestselling fiction.
As a respected criminal lawyer, Scott Turow has been involved with the death penalty for more than a decade, including successfully representing two different men convicted in death-penalty prosecutions. In this vivid account of how his views on the death penalty have evolved, Turow describes his own experiences with capital punishment from his days as an impassioned young prosecutor to his recent service on the Illinois commission which investigated the administration of the death penalty and influenced Governor George Ryan’s unprecedented commutation of the sentences of 164 death row inmates on his last day in office. Telling the powerful stories behind the statistics, as he moves from the Governor’s Mansion to Illinois’s state-of-the art “super-max†prison and the execution chamber, Ultimate Punishment has all the drama and intellectual substance of Turow’s bestselling fiction.
164 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
57 people are currently reading
988 people want to read
About the author
Scott Turow
110 books2,579 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 87 reviews
June 10, 2013
I am on the thin book rampage, a revolution against thick books. I have these thin books. Why shouldn’t I read them? This particular is not only thin (164 pages) but is a spin off from my last book that was also about the death penalty, A Saint on Death Row. That one left me feeling a little flat so I am hoping Scott Turow’s Ultimate Punishment will perk me up.
When I start a new book I very often read several GR reviews just to get a lay of the land. And sometimes I need help to get it. In reading reviews for this book, some people think that Turow did what few succeed at, that is giving a balanced and thoughtful assessment of the pros and cons of capital punishment. All I can say is, thank goodness he ultimately came down on the correct side of the issue: capital punishment should be abolished in the U.S. Now I can relax and read the book without fear that one of my long term beliefs, opposition to capital punishment, is going to suffer a setback. However, some points of view in the book helped me understand why some support the death penalty.
As many of the other GR reviews suggest, this book is well thought out and well written. This is the non-fiction side of Scott Terow. He certainly comes across as thorough and incisive. He fits a lot of thinking into a short book. Some of his inside stories of the workings (and non-workings) of the legal system made me question the ethics of this field. But, sadly, that didn’t surprise me. He calmly observes that corruption is part of the political landscape in his state of Illinois.
This is a summary of what happened in Illinois:
There are 38 pages of detailed Notes at the end of the book that are offered by the author with this caveat:
When this book was published in 2003, Scott Turow reported that a majority of people in the U.S. supported the death penalty. Now it is ten years later.
Goodreads was founded in December 2006. Ultimate Punishment was published in 2003. As a result there are only 280 GR ratings suggesting that by 2007 this book had lost whatever immediate post publication popularity it had. It has not been a book with an extended life. Two-thirds of the GR raters gave it four or five stars. Reversible Errors , a fiction book by Turow about the death penalty, was also published in 2003. It has nearly 2100 GR ratings. It is interesting that Turow was working on this novel while he was serving on the Illinois Governor’s Commission on the death penalty. Turow withheld publication of Reversible Errors because the proceedings of the Commission were not public until its final recommendations were made in 2002. The Commission proceedings and the writing of the book overlapped and Turow “was convinced that the two enterprises did not intersect.” He later acknowledged “I think I was settling some insights that would contribute to my ultimate conclusions” on the Commission. How could he say with a straight face that the book and the Commission did not intersect? I guess maybe it turns out that he is just a crafty lawyer. He can’t help it!
Can you have a spoiler in a non-fiction book? Turow says, “Eventually, I expect the Court to conclude the capital punishment and the promise of the process of law are incompatible.” He was part of the slim majority on the Commission, when informally polled, thought that the death penalty should be abolished In Illinois.
I like Scott Turow even if he is a lawyer. He wrote a good book and I am going to give it four stars. It is ten years old and therefore somewhat dated but the main debate points still apply and Turow tried to balance the scales of justice, something you don’t see that often on controversial topics. If you agree with Turow that the death penalty should be abolished, you should know that more people are thinking that too. You might enjoy reading this book.
When I start a new book I very often read several GR reviews just to get a lay of the land. And sometimes I need help to get it. In reading reviews for this book, some people think that Turow did what few succeed at, that is giving a balanced and thoughtful assessment of the pros and cons of capital punishment. All I can say is, thank goodness he ultimately came down on the correct side of the issue: capital punishment should be abolished in the U.S. Now I can relax and read the book without fear that one of my long term beliefs, opposition to capital punishment, is going to suffer a setback. However, some points of view in the book helped me understand why some support the death penalty.
As many of the other GR reviews suggest, this book is well thought out and well written. This is the non-fiction side of Scott Terow. He certainly comes across as thorough and incisive. He fits a lot of thinking into a short book. Some of his inside stories of the workings (and non-workings) of the legal system made me question the ethics of this field. But, sadly, that didn’t surprise me. He calmly observes that corruption is part of the political landscape in his state of Illinois.
This is a summary of what happened in Illinois:
Jan 31, 2000 ... CHICAGO -- Governor George H. Ryan today declared a moratorium on
executions of any more Illinois Death Row inmates.
On May 4th, 2000 Illinois Governor George Ryan created the Commission to study Illinois' Capital Punishment law.
Jan 12, 2003 ... Condemning the capital punishment system as fundamentally flawed and unfair,
Gov. George Ryan commuted all Illinois death sentences .
Mar 9, 2011 ... George Ryan and makes Illinois the 16th state to end the death penalty.
There are 38 pages of detailed Notes at the end of the book that are offered by the author with this caveat:
This book is a personal reflection, informed more by experience than study, and, as such, is not to be mistaken for a work of scholarship. The following notes are offered solely for the curious, to substantiate the many assertions of fact in the text.
When this book was published in 2003, Scott Turow reported that a majority of people in the U.S. supported the death penalty. Now it is ten years later.
May 2, 2013 ... WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Maryland became the 18th U.S. state to abolish the death penalty on Thursday when Governor Martin O'Malley signed a bill outlawing capital punishment in the state.
Five other states - Connecticut, Illinois, New Mexico, New York and New Jersey - have repealed capital punishment since 2007, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
The number of U.S. executions has fallen from a peak of 98 in 1999 to 43 each in 2011 and 2012, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The pace has slowed even more in 2013, with 10 so far this year.
Texas has by far the highest number of executions since the U.S. Supreme Court restored the death penalty in 1976, at 496, according to the center. It is trailed by Virginia at 110.
Dieter said the death penalty had fallen out of favor largely because lawmakers and the public more and more feared that innocent people could be executed. He noted that lengthy legal appeals made it an expensive proposition.
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/0...
Goodreads was founded in December 2006. Ultimate Punishment was published in 2003. As a result there are only 280 GR ratings suggesting that by 2007 this book had lost whatever immediate post publication popularity it had. It has not been a book with an extended life. Two-thirds of the GR raters gave it four or five stars. Reversible Errors , a fiction book by Turow about the death penalty, was also published in 2003. It has nearly 2100 GR ratings. It is interesting that Turow was working on this novel while he was serving on the Illinois Governor’s Commission on the death penalty. Turow withheld publication of Reversible Errors because the proceedings of the Commission were not public until its final recommendations were made in 2002. The Commission proceedings and the writing of the book overlapped and Turow “was convinced that the two enterprises did not intersect.” He later acknowledged “I think I was settling some insights that would contribute to my ultimate conclusions” on the Commission. How could he say with a straight face that the book and the Commission did not intersect? I guess maybe it turns out that he is just a crafty lawyer. He can’t help it!
Can you have a spoiler in a non-fiction book? Turow says, “Eventually, I expect the Court to conclude the capital punishment and the promise of the process of law are incompatible.” He was part of the slim majority on the Commission, when informally polled, thought that the death penalty should be abolished In Illinois.
I like Scott Turow even if he is a lawyer. He wrote a good book and I am going to give it four stars. It is ten years old and therefore somewhat dated but the main debate points still apply and Turow tried to balance the scales of justice, something you don’t see that often on controversial topics. If you agree with Turow that the death penalty should be abolished, you should know that more people are thinking that too. You might enjoy reading this book.
September 2, 2018
A fine short book, well worth a couple hours of your time. Turow has spent a lot of time and effort thinking through the death penalty, talking to murderers, their victims, wardens, lawyers... He's a good writer, and concludes that the death penalty is, practically speaking, impossible to apply fairly and should be done away with. Even though there are monsters in our prisons who really should be executed, and he cites some particularly gruesome killings. My thought: figure out a way to execute just the monsters. Hire Turow to do it? You certainly don't want to parole them!
November 11, 2018
4 STARS
"A gripping examination of the case for and against capital punishment by a respected criminal lawyer and celebrated novelist. In the words of Harvard Law Professor, Laurence H. Tribe--"Ultimate Punishment is the ultimate statement about the death penalty: to read it is to understand why law alone cannot make us whole." (From Amazon)
I quite liked Turow's views on capital punishment and it makes you think of your own opinions.
"A gripping examination of the case for and against capital punishment by a respected criminal lawyer and celebrated novelist. In the words of Harvard Law Professor, Laurence H. Tribe--"Ultimate Punishment is the ultimate statement about the death penalty: to read it is to understand why law alone cannot make us whole." (From Amazon)
I quite liked Turow's views on capital punishment and it makes you think of your own opinions.
November 7, 2024
See things from many sides on this difficult question
Think you're for the death penalty? Read this book and you may not be.
Think you're against the death penalty? Read this book and you may not be.
This is a difficult question with many sides - and Scott Turow tries to find them all. From mistaken identity, to bias, to the fact that not all crimes are considered the same by juries - to criminals whom this world would be better without.
There are a lot of questions in this book - and though Scott Turow gives his own definitive answer, it might not be yours.
He was put on a force to give an answer to the government on this - and he explored it well. But though he has his own answer - this book brings up many questions. But however you feel about this topic - I recommend it.
Think you're for the death penalty? Read this book and you may not be.
Think you're against the death penalty? Read this book and you may not be.
This is a difficult question with many sides - and Scott Turow tries to find them all. From mistaken identity, to bias, to the fact that not all crimes are considered the same by juries - to criminals whom this world would be better without.
There are a lot of questions in this book - and though Scott Turow gives his own definitive answer, it might not be yours.
He was put on a force to give an answer to the government on this - and he explored it well. But though he has his own answer - this book brings up many questions. But however you feel about this topic - I recommend it.
February 19, 2009
It's OK. This is a lawyer's contemplation. It should not be confused with philosophical contemplation. As a lawyer, Turow is excellent. He spots issues. He sees different points of view. He even persuasively puts on arguments on both sides, and convincingly reaches his own conclusions using his political and prosecutorial experiences. But don't expect any profound insight and meditative breakthroughs. His use of examples is sparse and a little confusing.
The book raises more subjects than it resolves.
Recommended for readers who want to say they've at least thought about the subject.
The book raises more subjects than it resolves.
Recommended for readers who want to say they've at least thought about the subject.
May 27, 2010
Strong argument for monitoring of cases where the defendant has been remanded to death. Actual factual examples of cases before the Illinois Commission on the Death Penalty that were overturned due to several improper criminanl procedures, including suppression of evidence, trumped up charges, lies, deliberate with holding of information, filing of false reports and includes issues that the victims have to contend with. Recommended.
November 23, 2010
Scott Turow was part of a committee appointed by then-Illinois governor George Ryan to examine capital punishment and how it can be improved, or if should be abolished altogether. Ultimate Punishment is Turow’s experience on this panel, which spent 2 years investigating capital punishment, coupled with his other experiences as a lawyer.
Luckily, Turow is not just another extremist advocating only one side. He approaches the issue by carefully examining the consequences of having a death penalty and the reasons for its existence. He seems to sympathize with the idea that governments should not be allowed to kill its citizens. However, he also recognizes that in extreme cases, like John Wayne Gacy or Henry Brisbon, capital punishment can be justified.
Turow’s most compelling points come from a legal standpoint. For one thing, there seems to be no relevancy between sentences. How can one man who committed grisly, pre-meditated murders get a life sentence when another man who shot a store clerk gets the death penalty? Additionally, the number of death sentences that have been overturned due to new evidence proving a convict’s innocence is quite astounding. Defendants on trial for their life have often been underrepresented or misrepresented by state appointed lawyers. In several cases, convictions were based on the testimony of only one eyewitness. In other cases, convictions were based on confessions that were given under torture by law enforcement.
Turow looks at the issue from different angles, and in each case reviews it with succinct analysis. Some readers may wish for more data or sociological analysis, and in that case this book may be more of a starting point for understanding this complex issue. As for myself, I felt that Turow presented the facts quite clearly, and his hesitation to land firmly on either side leads me to believe that he is a reasonable person. His years of research on the matter were quite interesting, and there is a lot to learn from his experience.
I listened to the audio book version, narrated by Scott Turow. My only complaint is that his voice is so flat and monotonous that it took a lot of concentration not to drift away while listening.
Luckily, Turow is not just another extremist advocating only one side. He approaches the issue by carefully examining the consequences of having a death penalty and the reasons for its existence. He seems to sympathize with the idea that governments should not be allowed to kill its citizens. However, he also recognizes that in extreme cases, like John Wayne Gacy or Henry Brisbon, capital punishment can be justified.
Turow’s most compelling points come from a legal standpoint. For one thing, there seems to be no relevancy between sentences. How can one man who committed grisly, pre-meditated murders get a life sentence when another man who shot a store clerk gets the death penalty? Additionally, the number of death sentences that have been overturned due to new evidence proving a convict’s innocence is quite astounding. Defendants on trial for their life have often been underrepresented or misrepresented by state appointed lawyers. In several cases, convictions were based on the testimony of only one eyewitness. In other cases, convictions were based on confessions that were given under torture by law enforcement.
Turow looks at the issue from different angles, and in each case reviews it with succinct analysis. Some readers may wish for more data or sociological analysis, and in that case this book may be more of a starting point for understanding this complex issue. As for myself, I felt that Turow presented the facts quite clearly, and his hesitation to land firmly on either side leads me to believe that he is a reasonable person. His years of research on the matter were quite interesting, and there is a lot to learn from his experience.
I listened to the audio book version, narrated by Scott Turow. My only complaint is that his voice is so flat and monotonous that it took a lot of concentration not to drift away while listening.
August 3, 2008
Turow was asked by the Governor of Illinois to participate in a commission to review and recommend reforms for capital punishment. I liked his self-label of being a death penalty agnostic and can probably apply it to myself. He addressed many facets of the capital punishment system including the investigation, eligibility, the prosecutions decision to seek the death penalty, the trial, and review of the sentencing.
At the end of the book I was no more certain about my stance on the death penalty until he revealed a profound truth about the real problem. "There will always be cases that cry out to me for ultimate punishment. That is not the true issue. The pivotal question instead is whether a system of justice can be constructed that reaches only the rare, right cases, without also occasionally condemning the innocent or the undeserving." I agree with capital punishment, what I don't agree with is its application in our court system.
At the end of the book I was no more certain about my stance on the death penalty until he revealed a profound truth about the real problem. "There will always be cases that cry out to me for ultimate punishment. That is not the true issue. The pivotal question instead is whether a system of justice can be constructed that reaches only the rare, right cases, without also occasionally condemning the innocent or the undeserving." I agree with capital punishment, what I don't agree with is its application in our court system.
April 28, 2009
A very thought-provoking book on the death penalty. Turow is best known for his legal novels, but he is also an accomplished and well-respected lawyer. This book recounts his time on a commission in Illinois reviewing the death penalty both philosophically and in practical application. While it did not change my mind as far as supporting the death penalty in theory, it did enlighten me to flaws in the system that need to be corrected as we go forward.
March 23, 2011
Really interesting stuff. I listened to the audio version. One point that Turow makes is that our founding fathers recognized slavery and capital punishment. While we no longer agree with slavery, has our opinion on capital punishment changed as well?
March 19, 2021
I read all I can get my hands on when it comes to the death penalty, I don't know why, but I do. Many of these books are harrowing, but this one is rather technical. The author was part of a commission created in Illinois to analyze the situation of death penalty due to many irregularities. They proposed some measures, some were applied, lessons were learned and at the end, we still don't have all the answers.
Most books on the topic either support the abolish or the maintain cause. The author does neither. He sure as hell would pull the switch on Gacy. And yet he has rescued people sentenced to die when they weren't supposed to. I like the structured arguments for and against the death penalty - there are gruesome descriptions of murder and there are terrifying descriptions of people saved days away from execution for something they did not commit. Plenty to think about, as well as an analysis of how such decisions are made politically. A rather technical, but very good examination of the topic.
Most books on the topic either support the abolish or the maintain cause. The author does neither. He sure as hell would pull the switch on Gacy. And yet he has rescued people sentenced to die when they weren't supposed to. I like the structured arguments for and against the death penalty - there are gruesome descriptions of murder and there are terrifying descriptions of people saved days away from execution for something they did not commit. Plenty to think about, as well as an analysis of how such decisions are made politically. A rather technical, but very good examination of the topic.
September 20, 2025
had to read for my philosophy of law class. so interesting and learning a lot about different opinions of the death penalty
May 27, 2015
A strangely insubstantial, wafer-thin book, as though any real sentiment the author might have possessed was washed down with a pressure hose. The death penalty isn't a topic I would consider to inspire apathy, and the author indeed indicates that he shares this opinion. I'm not all that clear on why, then, this text is so subdued. I'm not necessarily looking for a diatribe, and I certainly believe in the wisdom of acknowledging the nuances and facets of a debate like this. I also appreciate the candor involved in admitting that you share opinions with the opponents of your position. But this text doesn't really seem to acknowledge so much as flutter blithely from one contradictory position to the next as the wind takes it, all the while never concretely finding a foothold. Effectively, it's a glorified pros and cons list predicated almost entirely on the author's emotions with no legitimate reference to criminological research or consensus. I applaud giving reasoned take on an issue, but this book seems to mistake a complete lack of passion for making a thoughtful and pensive argument.
The points that Turow makes in support of either position are not especially substantial, and cannot carry the weight of the page length, even despite its brevity. If you're going to author such a short text, then you need to make those words count. Turow doesn't. Instead, he spends far more time fussing about the personal ideology and demeanor of a politician who appointed him to a committee to discuss the issue, and making half-baked references to two defendants he's represented in cases where capital punishment was on the table without really delving into the implications of his experiences with any conviction. Just weirdly flimsy, perfunctory, and impalpable.
As a last thought, this text is one that really could only have been written, and find any purchase in the US. This debate is almost entirely a uniquely American one; no other western liberal democratic state carries out capital punishment, or seems to struggle with this issue. This text is very much a product of the society in which it was written, which probably accounts for many of the problems I had with it.
The points that Turow makes in support of either position are not especially substantial, and cannot carry the weight of the page length, even despite its brevity. If you're going to author such a short text, then you need to make those words count. Turow doesn't. Instead, he spends far more time fussing about the personal ideology and demeanor of a politician who appointed him to a committee to discuss the issue, and making half-baked references to two defendants he's represented in cases where capital punishment was on the table without really delving into the implications of his experiences with any conviction. Just weirdly flimsy, perfunctory, and impalpable.
As a last thought, this text is one that really could only have been written, and find any purchase in the US. This debate is almost entirely a uniquely American one; no other western liberal democratic state carries out capital punishment, or seems to struggle with this issue. This text is very much a product of the society in which it was written, which probably accounts for many of the problems I had with it.
February 26, 2011
Many years ago I read a couple of Scott Turow's legal mystery's and a couple of years ago I read "One L" about his experience in law school a wonderful perceptive and descriptive non-fiction piece. I picked up Ultimate Punishment to see what this smart guy has to say about Capital Punishment. Turns out he has a ton to say.
In 2001 or 2002 Turow was appointed by the governor of Illinois to a blue ribbon committee to examine capital punishment in the state. In this book Turow recounts his two year intensive and extensive examination of the issue. He looked into capital cases, talked to defense and prosecution lawyers, victim's families, judges, police, criminals and citizens at large. He gives the broadest and most nuanced discussion of the issues I have ever heard or read. His final conclusion is that he opposes capital punishment not because it is wrong for the state to kill a killer, he believes that there are people on death row that deserve to die for their crimes, but because it is impossible to set up a system of justice that metes out this sentence fairly and impossible to eliminate the possibility executing innocent people.
Very interesting and convincing book.
In 2001 or 2002 Turow was appointed by the governor of Illinois to a blue ribbon committee to examine capital punishment in the state. In this book Turow recounts his two year intensive and extensive examination of the issue. He looked into capital cases, talked to defense and prosecution lawyers, victim's families, judges, police, criminals and citizens at large. He gives the broadest and most nuanced discussion of the issues I have ever heard or read. His final conclusion is that he opposes capital punishment not because it is wrong for the state to kill a killer, he believes that there are people on death row that deserve to die for their crimes, but because it is impossible to set up a system of justice that metes out this sentence fairly and impossible to eliminate the possibility executing innocent people.
Very interesting and convincing book.
November 15, 2015
A truly interesting book. Mr Turow reflects on the Illinois death penalty and his investigation as part of a panel to recommend reforms to the death penalty in the early 2000's.
Mr Turow considers all kinds of angles, is the death penalty just? is it practical (he notes that the cost of a death penalty trial outweighs the cost of incarcerating a convict for life and that there aren't enough death penalty cases each year for abolition to show appreciable savings, both points I found fascinating)? does it deter violent crime? and a host of other approaches.
For each of these angles, Mr Turow presents related statistical and anecdotal evidence, both favoring and opposing the death penalty with citations in the back.
Reading this book, I think I changed my mind on the death penalty every other page. On the one hand, the justice system is fallible and plenty of death row inmates have been exonerated. On the other hand, you have those people who truly deserve to be shot and left to rot in a hole.
Ultimately, Mr Turow asks if a process can be implemented that will reliably weed out only those criminals who truly deserve the death penalty and protects the innocent from being put to death.
Mr Turow considers all kinds of angles, is the death penalty just? is it practical (he notes that the cost of a death penalty trial outweighs the cost of incarcerating a convict for life and that there aren't enough death penalty cases each year for abolition to show appreciable savings, both points I found fascinating)? does it deter violent crime? and a host of other approaches.
For each of these angles, Mr Turow presents related statistical and anecdotal evidence, both favoring and opposing the death penalty with citations in the back.
Reading this book, I think I changed my mind on the death penalty every other page. On the one hand, the justice system is fallible and plenty of death row inmates have been exonerated. On the other hand, you have those people who truly deserve to be shot and left to rot in a hole.
Ultimately, Mr Turow asks if a process can be implemented that will reliably weed out only those criminals who truly deserve the death penalty and protects the innocent from being put to death.
December 20, 2007
Mr. Turow was on the committee in Illinois that looked into the way the death penalty has been applied, to see if there should be a moratorium on it, as the governor has suggested after a large number of capitol cases were found, upon appeal, to have been in error (DNA proven in 50% of the cases). This brief book is the result. It is fair look at the system, from people on many sides of the argument, investigating everything from the financial costs to the racial makeup of the convictions, and it was an interesting look into democracy at work in one state in one arena, as doesn't happen often, but highlights one of the coolest things about this country - that everyone's opinion matters.
June 26, 2009
Read this book if you haven't already made up your mind about the death penalty, or if you're pro-death penalty and willing to have your thoughts challenged. As an opponent of the death penalty, I wasn't particularly moved. Still, Turow's a great writer (if needlessly self-promoting) and I share many of his views. Plus, at 120 pages, it's a quick read.
May 13, 2010
I've always enjoyed Turow's legal thrillers, so seeing him put his formidable intelligence to the question of the death penalty was enjoyable as well. I was already inclined to agree with his opinion (the death penalty is wrong) but I was appreciated the exploration of different concerns. But would this book change the mind of a death penalty supporter? I'm not so sure.
July 27, 2009
This book didn't change my mind because I was already firmly opposed to the death penalty, but I did appreciate the close examination of the issues by a lawyer who has examined them closely and thoughtfully.
February 7, 2014
Scott Turow writes very clearly.I tried to keep an open mind,and was pleased that Turow presented a fair,balanced argument.I've read One L(non-fiction)as well as several of his novels.He's writing is vastly superior to that of John Grisham.
December 5, 2008
This book forced me to challenge all preconceptions I had about the death penalty and ask myself if I could pull the lever. I could not.
August 8, 2009
A compassionate and logical book of essays about the death penalty, one which examines the issue from many, perhaps all, sides.
October 25, 2009
This book definitely opened my eyes to many issues surrounding the death penalty.
March 2, 2020
Ultimate Punishment, A Lawyer’s Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty, by Scott Turow. (pp 164) Published 2003. As the title suggests, this book is about the author’s ruminations about the death penalty, specifically about the state laws, law enforcement actions, and judicial practices in the state of Illinois. The framework is his participation on a Governor-appointed commission investigating the death penalty arising from a belief that there were flaws in all levels of the Illinois system that imposed death penalties on a small fraction of convicted criminals. Not being a reader of the author’s bestselling novels about the law, my only exposure to Turow the lawyer was his book One L., a book about the first year of law school which I read months before entering law school. To bring the factual and procedural issues addressed in the book to life, Turow weaved into them several death penalty cases on which he worked, including some to exonerate prisoners whose convictions were overturned, either because of their innocence and/or gross breeches of proper procedures that were found to result in inequitable application of the law. Because of the specifics of Illinois laws, the findings and recommendations of the Commission (the preamble of which is included in the text) are specific to that state, but the broader principles of equality under the law; sometimes capricious application of laws; police and prosecutorial misconduct; poor judicial oversight,; morality; the issues of retribution, redemption, and deterrence; fundamental problems with eye witness testimony; unreliable or uncorroborated testimony; emotion-driven decision-making; and other consequential factors are applicable everywhere. This is a compact, well-thought out consideration of these issues, presented in ways that offer the viewpoints of both pro- and anti- death penalty advocates. Turow states that the seminal question is “whether a system of justice can be constructed that reaches only the rare, right cases, without also occasionally condemning the innocent or the undeserving.” Great book for those interested in the subject matter.
November 28, 2022
Readers know Scott Turow as the writer of mystery novels with a legal setting. Ultimate Punishment is a non-fiction exploration of the questions he and 13 others considered as members of a “blue-ribbon” Commission appointed to tell the Governor how to reform capital punishment in Illinois. Its report concludes by explaining why the Commission could not come up with the ultimate solution to the problems inherent in the ultimate punishment: “All members of the Commission have emerged from our deliberations with a renewed sense of the extraordinary complexities presented by the question of capital punishment.” It notes both that “The horror of a cool, contemplated end to the life of another human being, especially in the name of the law, is profound.” and that “it is essential to recognize that our adherence to the death penalty arises not because it provides proven tangible benefits like deterrence but rather from our belief that capital punishment makes an unequivocal moral statement.” Without stating its writer’s own view Turow’s book quotes from the official report, saying “Because capital punishment is presently lawful in Illinois and because it appears to have the support of a majority of Illinois citizens, our deliberations have concentrated primarily on these reforms and other proposals, rather than on the merits of capital punishment. Only at the close of our work did we consider that question. A narrow majority of the Commission would favor that the death penalty be abolished in Illinois. Those favoring abolition did so either because of moral concerns, because of a conclusion that no system can or will be constructed which sufficiently guarantees that the death penalty will be applied without arbitrariness or error, or because of a determination that the social resources expended on capital punishment outrun its benefits."
Scott Turow’s Ultimate Punishment is Highly Recommended. It doesn’t provide answers, but it examines the questions more clearly and rationally than most readers have done on their own.
Scott Turow’s Ultimate Punishment is Highly Recommended. It doesn’t provide answers, but it examines the questions more clearly and rationally than most readers have done on their own.
December 20, 2023
This is my second time reading this book (audibly this time). As someone well immersed in the legal field now, more of the content stuck with me. Growing up, I was against the death penalty, but still understood the logic of its supporters and wavered at times. Turow’s early self reflection as a death penalty agnostic must resonate with a lot of readers. That’s why this book is so good. He also grappled with the complexities of the human experience and figured out his position based on evidence overtime. If only everyone did this level of intellectual reflection and research.
Today, I am anti-death penalty like my school papers suggest. However, I now have stronger reasoning and am more confident about explaining it to others. I am wondering if Turow still agrees with much of what he wrote in this early 2000s book.
Below are my favorite quotes from the book:
(semi-spoiler)
“There will always be cases that cry out to me for ultimate punishment. That is not the true issue. The pivotal question instead is whether a system of justice can be constructed that reaches only the rare right cases without also occasionally condemning the innocent or the undeserving.”
“Jurors are unwilling to take the chance to put a monster into our midst and thus will not always require proof beyond reasonable doubt.”
“The fact that capital cases are uniquely prone to error causes call for safeguards we have yet to institutionalize or even fully conceive of… or for renewed reflection over whether to proceed with capital punishment at all.”
“I revere the enterprise of the law, but it does not function flawlessly. It neither finds the truth nor dispenses judgement with the reliability it is obliged to claim. The laws sharp edged rules never cut through the murk of moral ambiguity nor do they fully comprehend or address the complexities of human motivation and intention.”
“Sentencing should look solely to the character of the defendant and his crime, not to the tears of the bereaved”
Today, I am anti-death penalty like my school papers suggest. However, I now have stronger reasoning and am more confident about explaining it to others. I am wondering if Turow still agrees with much of what he wrote in this early 2000s book.
Below are my favorite quotes from the book:
(semi-spoiler)
“There will always be cases that cry out to me for ultimate punishment. That is not the true issue. The pivotal question instead is whether a system of justice can be constructed that reaches only the rare right cases without also occasionally condemning the innocent or the undeserving.”
“Jurors are unwilling to take the chance to put a monster into our midst and thus will not always require proof beyond reasonable doubt.”
“The fact that capital cases are uniquely prone to error causes call for safeguards we have yet to institutionalize or even fully conceive of… or for renewed reflection over whether to proceed with capital punishment at all.”
“I revere the enterprise of the law, but it does not function flawlessly. It neither finds the truth nor dispenses judgement with the reliability it is obliged to claim. The laws sharp edged rules never cut through the murk of moral ambiguity nor do they fully comprehend or address the complexities of human motivation and intention.”
“Sentencing should look solely to the character of the defendant and his crime, not to the tears of the bereaved”
September 10, 2021
Scott Turow attempts to do the impossible: write his views albeit pros & cons of capital punishment. And decide which is right, moral and pleasing in following the law as written.
Today’s system is so convoluted, its difficult to walk the straight line and say no capital punishment. Prisons are huge financial drain. Folks running prisons under immense strain. There are way too many prisoners as it is. Then walk the other direction and say yes. What if the wrong person is convicted & is put to death?
This book is out dated.
Today (2021) there’s a lot more to conviction: better DNA kits, video recordings, and smarter detectives. I am not a lawyer. I haven’t experienced a murder. I can tell you that every human is destined to die anyway. If a person has clearly committed a horrific crime, to me, the death penalty is better than being locked up forever behind bars. Being locked in cages, that to me, is barbaric and cruel to both the guarded and guardee.
There has to be a better plan. Perhaps the Egyptians had it right, using convicts for forced manpower? Better to use the convict to build, and leave a good legacy behind. Yes?
Turow writes thoughtful compelling arguments in this thin book, its well worth the time to peak inside his head. Meet his cohorts, people he interacted with and come out the other side with well researched, educated thought process.
I vote semi-yes for capital punishment as long as it truly unequivocally the right answer for the heinous crime committed by the actual perpetrator(s). I would prefer that perpetrators worked instead, ie, road crew, farming, etc., anything that needs to help America do better for its law abiding citizens.
Thanks for reading!
Today’s system is so convoluted, its difficult to walk the straight line and say no capital punishment. Prisons are huge financial drain. Folks running prisons under immense strain. There are way too many prisoners as it is. Then walk the other direction and say yes. What if the wrong person is convicted & is put to death?
This book is out dated.
Today (2021) there’s a lot more to conviction: better DNA kits, video recordings, and smarter detectives. I am not a lawyer. I haven’t experienced a murder. I can tell you that every human is destined to die anyway. If a person has clearly committed a horrific crime, to me, the death penalty is better than being locked up forever behind bars. Being locked in cages, that to me, is barbaric and cruel to both the guarded and guardee.
There has to be a better plan. Perhaps the Egyptians had it right, using convicts for forced manpower? Better to use the convict to build, and leave a good legacy behind. Yes?
Turow writes thoughtful compelling arguments in this thin book, its well worth the time to peak inside his head. Meet his cohorts, people he interacted with and come out the other side with well researched, educated thought process.
I vote semi-yes for capital punishment as long as it truly unequivocally the right answer for the heinous crime committed by the actual perpetrator(s). I would prefer that perpetrators worked instead, ie, road crew, farming, etc., anything that needs to help America do better for its law abiding citizens.
Thanks for reading!
November 15, 2019
In Ultimate Punishment, Scott Turow presents his reflections on the Death Penalty in the United States. Turow’s vantage point was his position on the Commission into the Death Penalty formed by Governor Ryan in the wake of a series of miscarriages of justice in Illinois. Turow was also a lawyer with a prodigious talent as a best-selling novelist. Needless to say, this is a book that reads very well, which compensates for its concision.
As in all good plots, Turow works through the arguments for and against the Death Penalty without showing his hand until the very end. Ultimate Punishment is therefore a more balanced book on this subject than almost any other I have read and works as a useful primer for understanding the issues. Some might argue that Turow could have developed his thoughts further with more examples and judicial debate, but there are many other books that do that and Turow does not make any special claims to scholarship. Indeed, that his musings are based in Turow’s experiences on the commission add to their potency and the brevity of this book was quite enough to understand Turow’s dilemma. I found myself nodding in agreement with much of Turow’s conclusions; the death penalty corrupts the system and those who have to operate within it, and it ultimately it is a stain on the soul of America. If you want to know the basics of the Death Penalty in the US, this is a great place to start.
As in all good plots, Turow works through the arguments for and against the Death Penalty without showing his hand until the very end. Ultimate Punishment is therefore a more balanced book on this subject than almost any other I have read and works as a useful primer for understanding the issues. Some might argue that Turow could have developed his thoughts further with more examples and judicial debate, but there are many other books that do that and Turow does not make any special claims to scholarship. Indeed, that his musings are based in Turow’s experiences on the commission add to their potency and the brevity of this book was quite enough to understand Turow’s dilemma. I found myself nodding in agreement with much of Turow’s conclusions; the death penalty corrupts the system and those who have to operate within it, and it ultimately it is a stain on the soul of America. If you want to know the basics of the Death Penalty in the US, this is a great place to start.
November 13, 2025
Ok I had to read this for one of my classes & I didn’t have high expectations... but I really did like it. Such a fascinating approach to the death penalty, seeking to answer the question of whether capital punishment is compatible with democratic governance. I love all of the empirical data points about the intricacies & facets of our criminal justice system - super insightful. As Turow puts it, which mistake to we (America) want to make? One that lets a man who has committed an atrocity & is potentially incapable of change live, or one that unjustly punishes the innocent? Turow advocates for the innocent, saying that, while capital punishment may quench some’s thirst for vengeance, the law will never fully satisfy at the end of the day.
"The law's sharp-edged rules never cut through the murk of moral ambiguity, nor do they fully comprehend or address the complexities of human motivation and intention. And just punishment alone does not render the world one we want to live in. Murder takes us to the Land's End of the law. Our horror and revulsion undermine our capacity to reason—and prove that justice alone will not make us whole."
"The law's sharp-edged rules never cut through the murk of moral ambiguity, nor do they fully comprehend or address the complexities of human motivation and intention. And just punishment alone does not render the world one we want to live in. Murder takes us to the Land's End of the law. Our horror and revulsion undermine our capacity to reason—and prove that justice alone will not make us whole."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews