What do you think?
Rate this book
John Adams Under Fire: The Founding Father's Fight for Justice in the Boston Massacre Murder Trial
An eye-opening story of America on the edge of revolution, revealing the life of young John Adams and his key role in the trial of the Boston Massacre.
History remembers John Adams as a Founding Father and our country’s second president. But in the tense years before the American Revolution, he was still just a lawyer, fighting for justice in one of the most explosive murder trials of the era.
On the night of March 5, 1770, shots were fired by British soldiers on the streets of Boston, killing five civilians. The Boston Massacre has often been called the first shots of the American Revolution. As John Adams would later remember, “On that night the formation of American independence was born.” Yet when the British soldiers faced trial, the young lawyer Adams was determined that they receive a fair one. He volunteered to represent them, keeping the peace in a powder keg of a colony, and in the process created some of the foundations of what would become United States law.
In this book, New York Times bestselling authors Dan Abrams and David Fisher draw on the trial transcript, using Adams’s own words to transport readers to colonial Boston, a city roiling with rebellion, where British military forces and American colonists lived side by side, waiting for the spark that would start a war.
History remembers John Adams as a Founding Father and our country’s second president. But in the tense years before the American Revolution, he was still just a lawyer, fighting for justice in one of the most explosive murder trials of the era.
On the night of March 5, 1770, shots were fired by British soldiers on the streets of Boston, killing five civilians. The Boston Massacre has often been called the first shots of the American Revolution. As John Adams would later remember, “On that night the formation of American independence was born.” Yet when the British soldiers faced trial, the young lawyer Adams was determined that they receive a fair one. He volunteered to represent them, keeping the peace in a powder keg of a colony, and in the process created some of the foundations of what would become United States law.
In this book, New York Times bestselling authors Dan Abrams and David Fisher draw on the trial transcript, using Adams’s own words to transport readers to colonial Boston, a city roiling with rebellion, where British military forces and American colonists lived side by side, waiting for the spark that would start a war.
320 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 3, 2020
335 people are currently reading
2061 people want to read
About the author
Dan Abrams
9 books201 followersDan Abrams is an attorney, author, Legal Analyst for ABC News, and substitute anchor for Good Morning America.
Early Years
Before joining NBC News, Dan worked as a reporter for Court TV where he became well known for his coverage of the OJ Simpson case. He covered most of the high profile trials of that decade including the International War Crimes Tribunal from The Netherlands, and the assisted-suicide trials of Dr. Jack Kevorkian from Michigan. Dan’s first job was working as an intern for the Manhattan Borough president.
Career Highlights
Dan is probably best known for hosting the programs Verdict with Dan Abrams and The Abrams Report as well as his coverage of the Bush v. Gore Supreme Court battles (where he was one of the first reporters to correctly interpret the opinion). He was also the Chief Legal Analyst for MSNBC before leaving to be an analyst for ABC News in March 2011. He is currently the Chief Legal Analyst for ABC News.
Author
Dan has published articles in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The American Lawyer, Yale Law & Policy Review, and is a regular contributor to Men’s Health magazine. His first book, “Man Down: Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt That Women Are Better Cops, Drivers, Gamblers, Spies, World Leaders, Beer Tasters, Hedge Fund Managers, And Just About Everything Else” was published in March 2011.
Personal Life
Dan was born in Manhattan.
Dan’s father is Floyd Abrams, the renowned First Amendment attorney (read his bio). Read the article about the Abrams family in the New York Observer
Books by Floyd Abrams
Speaking Freely: Trials of the First Amendment – 2005
Kampuchea After the Worst: A Report on Current – 1985
The Right to Know – 1985
Early Years
Before joining NBC News, Dan worked as a reporter for Court TV where he became well known for his coverage of the OJ Simpson case. He covered most of the high profile trials of that decade including the International War Crimes Tribunal from The Netherlands, and the assisted-suicide trials of Dr. Jack Kevorkian from Michigan. Dan’s first job was working as an intern for the Manhattan Borough president.
Career Highlights
Dan is probably best known for hosting the programs Verdict with Dan Abrams and The Abrams Report as well as his coverage of the Bush v. Gore Supreme Court battles (where he was one of the first reporters to correctly interpret the opinion). He was also the Chief Legal Analyst for MSNBC before leaving to be an analyst for ABC News in March 2011. He is currently the Chief Legal Analyst for ABC News.
Author
Dan has published articles in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The American Lawyer, Yale Law & Policy Review, and is a regular contributor to Men’s Health magazine. His first book, “Man Down: Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt That Women Are Better Cops, Drivers, Gamblers, Spies, World Leaders, Beer Tasters, Hedge Fund Managers, And Just About Everything Else” was published in March 2011.
Personal Life
Dan was born in Manhattan.
Dan’s father is Floyd Abrams, the renowned First Amendment attorney (read his bio). Read the article about the Abrams family in the New York Observer
Books by Floyd Abrams
Speaking Freely: Trials of the First Amendment – 2005
Kampuchea After the Worst: A Report on Current – 1985
The Right to Know – 1985
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 194 reviews
April 23, 2020
I have read a number of Dan Abram’s legal history books starting with “Lincoln’s Last Trial”. I have enjoyed them all. Therefore, I could hardly wait to read Abram’s latest book.
The book is well written and researched. Maybe a bit more legal detailed for a layperson, but interesting. The story covers the March 5, 1770 event in Boston known as the Boston Massacre. A mob started throwing snowballs at a squad of British soldiers. The soldiers opened fire killing five and injuring six. They were put on trial and John Adams was the defense attorney. Adams stood by his convictions and ethics, but his actions hurt him for years politically and financially.
I found this story most interesting but was familiar with most of the key points. Abrams went into more details than most authors covering this subject. Abrams called this event “John Adams finest hour.” I highly recommend this book for those interested in American history and legal history.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is nine hours and fifty-three minutes. Roger Wayne does a good job narrating the book. Wayne is an actor, voice-over artist and audiobook narrator.
The book is well written and researched. Maybe a bit more legal detailed for a layperson, but interesting. The story covers the March 5, 1770 event in Boston known as the Boston Massacre. A mob started throwing snowballs at a squad of British soldiers. The soldiers opened fire killing five and injuring six. They were put on trial and John Adams was the defense attorney. Adams stood by his convictions and ethics, but his actions hurt him for years politically and financially.
I found this story most interesting but was familiar with most of the key points. Abrams went into more details than most authors covering this subject. Abrams called this event “John Adams finest hour.” I highly recommend this book for those interested in American history and legal history.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is nine hours and fifty-three minutes. Roger Wayne does a good job narrating the book. Wayne is an actor, voice-over artist and audiobook narrator.
September 12, 2022
I like reading about history, even legal history. Many readers might find this a bit of a chore to get through. I was personally invested in this tale as it featured a number of my ancestors. First John Adams was a much better lawyer than I am. His cousin Sam was being typically revolutionary. John Hancock is mentioned more than once, as is one of the Greenleafs. I have to check his relationship. That branch of the family tree produced famed American Anti-slavery poet and activist John Greenleaf Whittier. That relationship led to lots of questions by me to my great grandmother. I wish she had mentioned the others to me instead of discussing them with my sister.
I have two more books by the author, featuring Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt. Not related to either of those guys as far as I know.
I have two more books by the author, featuring Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt. Not related to either of those guys as far as I know.
December 9, 2020
On the evening of March 5, 1770, a tragic event happened that would spark a war that would eventually topple an Empire and have resounding consequences for the United States of America.
Angered by recent British laws taxing books, stamps, and other items, as well as the encampment of roughly 2,000 soldiers, colonists in Boston, Massachusetts were starting to feel the frustration and desperation brought on by a distant ruling body that seemingly no longer cared for them. In fact, the King that sat “across the pond” was almost capriciously and viciously enacting laws that were purposely meant to hurt them. After decades of loyalty, the King had inexplicably gone mad.
What started as angry words and threats by one or two patriots against loyalists (or loyalists against patriots; it’s murky, although in the end, it doesn’t matter all that much), resulted in a crowd of 50 to 100 colonists pelting a small group of British soldiers with snowballs, rocks, and other heavy items. The colonists had cornered the men on King’s Street in front of the Custom House. It’s somewhat unclear on who fired the first musket shot, but more gunfire erupted, and when the dust cleared, five colonists were dead, and many more were wounded.
A young John Adams (34 years old) was practicing law in Boston at the time. Adams had patriot leanings, but when asked to defend the British soldiers in the subsequent murder trial, he accepted gladly. He believed in the Law, as well as things like Justice and Truth, so he felt it was important to provide the soldiers with the fairness that everyone---patriot or loyalist---deserved. Adams also believed in the axiom that one was innocent until proven guilty, a concept that was not shared at the time by many of his peers, even in the legal community.
As they did in “Lincoln’s Last Trial” and “Theodore Roosevelt for the Defense”, Dan Abrams and David Fisher have fleshed out a little-known footnote in history in “John Adams Under Fire” in a series of historical nonfiction that I have dubbed the “Presidents and the Law” trilogy. Each book takes a distinct focus on legal issues as they pertained to the particular historical event---and president---in question and subtly relates it to issues of the day.
In “John Adams Under Fire”, the legal issues of peaceful vs. non-peaceful protest, the use of force by law enforcement, and self-defense are all, sadly, issues that still resonate today.
Sadly, the levelheadedness and the belief in equal treatment under the law that ruled Adams seems to be missing from many of our government leaders today.
Angered by recent British laws taxing books, stamps, and other items, as well as the encampment of roughly 2,000 soldiers, colonists in Boston, Massachusetts were starting to feel the frustration and desperation brought on by a distant ruling body that seemingly no longer cared for them. In fact, the King that sat “across the pond” was almost capriciously and viciously enacting laws that were purposely meant to hurt them. After decades of loyalty, the King had inexplicably gone mad.
What started as angry words and threats by one or two patriots against loyalists (or loyalists against patriots; it’s murky, although in the end, it doesn’t matter all that much), resulted in a crowd of 50 to 100 colonists pelting a small group of British soldiers with snowballs, rocks, and other heavy items. The colonists had cornered the men on King’s Street in front of the Custom House. It’s somewhat unclear on who fired the first musket shot, but more gunfire erupted, and when the dust cleared, five colonists were dead, and many more were wounded.
A young John Adams (34 years old) was practicing law in Boston at the time. Adams had patriot leanings, but when asked to defend the British soldiers in the subsequent murder trial, he accepted gladly. He believed in the Law, as well as things like Justice and Truth, so he felt it was important to provide the soldiers with the fairness that everyone---patriot or loyalist---deserved. Adams also believed in the axiom that one was innocent until proven guilty, a concept that was not shared at the time by many of his peers, even in the legal community.
As they did in “Lincoln’s Last Trial” and “Theodore Roosevelt for the Defense”, Dan Abrams and David Fisher have fleshed out a little-known footnote in history in “John Adams Under Fire” in a series of historical nonfiction that I have dubbed the “Presidents and the Law” trilogy. Each book takes a distinct focus on legal issues as they pertained to the particular historical event---and president---in question and subtly relates it to issues of the day.
In “John Adams Under Fire”, the legal issues of peaceful vs. non-peaceful protest, the use of force by law enforcement, and self-defense are all, sadly, issues that still resonate today.
Sadly, the levelheadedness and the belief in equal treatment under the law that ruled Adams seems to be missing from many of our government leaders today.
February 19, 2025
In another great novel that explores a person of history and a legal matter in which they were involved, Dan Abrams and David Fisher deliver a stellar recounting of events. John Adams, America’s second president, had quite the life before serving as a Founding Father or Commander-in-Chief, especially in the colonial courtroom. The authors provide a rich storytelling ability to depict the great career Adams had before arriving on the political scene, which was a highly enjoyable read.
While many remember John Adams as one of the core Founding Father and America’s second president, he did a great deal more. In the years before the American Revolution, Adams was a prominent defender of the accused, fighting for justice, no matter who was brought before the court. Adams made a name for himself and curried no favour when he was tasked with defending British soldiers during an explosive murder trial. While many sought to vilify, Adams wanted to do his job and defend those who were innocent, no matter their uniform.
March 5, 1770 saw a number of British soldiers fire on the streets of Boston. A handful of men were killed in the fracas, an event labelled the Boston Massacre. While some would call it the opening salvo of the American Revolutionary War, the authors felt it was more the launching point of John Adams’ public career. This was at a time when Adams was quite well-known in Boston for his legal work and count be counted upon to deliver sound legal advice.
While he had little hope of winning over the support of his fellow colonials, Adams sought to defend the British soldiers when they were arrested and went to trial. Adams delves deeply into the characters of these men, their orders, and the element of self-defence the court would need to hear before reaching a verdict.
In the longest trial held to that point, Adams thoroughly explored the aspects of the case while trying to effectively shape the narrative and convince colonial men of his clients’ innocence, as well as shed light on the nuances of the crime and how it should be interpreted. It would have been a struggle and Adams would be painted as a traitor by many, but the lawyer’s determination surely helped pave the way to ensure he would be revered when politics became central in the revolution’s progress. The discussions of legal situations and outcomes offer a great addition to the determination John Adams undertook in serving his clients well.
Dan Abrams and David Fisher deliver a stunning book that depicts a person of history in ways other than many know him. John Adams did well as a politician, but his previous career as a passionate lawyer cannot be dismissed. In a well-established book that has easy to comprehend chapters, the authors offer up great legal and historical analysis to support the argument that John Adams was a man of many talents and whose views ought to be explored in a new way. Paced in such a way that the reader can digest all that is taking place, the authors should be praised for their work. I have read another of their explorations and have one more to go, which has me excited to keep learning.
Kudos, Messrs. Abrams and Fisher, for shedding light on the man and all his wonderful abilities!
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
While many remember John Adams as one of the core Founding Father and America’s second president, he did a great deal more. In the years before the American Revolution, Adams was a prominent defender of the accused, fighting for justice, no matter who was brought before the court. Adams made a name for himself and curried no favour when he was tasked with defending British soldiers during an explosive murder trial. While many sought to vilify, Adams wanted to do his job and defend those who were innocent, no matter their uniform.
March 5, 1770 saw a number of British soldiers fire on the streets of Boston. A handful of men were killed in the fracas, an event labelled the Boston Massacre. While some would call it the opening salvo of the American Revolutionary War, the authors felt it was more the launching point of John Adams’ public career. This was at a time when Adams was quite well-known in Boston for his legal work and count be counted upon to deliver sound legal advice.
While he had little hope of winning over the support of his fellow colonials, Adams sought to defend the British soldiers when they were arrested and went to trial. Adams delves deeply into the characters of these men, their orders, and the element of self-defence the court would need to hear before reaching a verdict.
In the longest trial held to that point, Adams thoroughly explored the aspects of the case while trying to effectively shape the narrative and convince colonial men of his clients’ innocence, as well as shed light on the nuances of the crime and how it should be interpreted. It would have been a struggle and Adams would be painted as a traitor by many, but the lawyer’s determination surely helped pave the way to ensure he would be revered when politics became central in the revolution’s progress. The discussions of legal situations and outcomes offer a great addition to the determination John Adams undertook in serving his clients well.
Dan Abrams and David Fisher deliver a stunning book that depicts a person of history in ways other than many know him. John Adams did well as a politician, but his previous career as a passionate lawyer cannot be dismissed. In a well-established book that has easy to comprehend chapters, the authors offer up great legal and historical analysis to support the argument that John Adams was a man of many talents and whose views ought to be explored in a new way. Paced in such a way that the reader can digest all that is taking place, the authors should be praised for their work. I have read another of their explorations and have one more to go, which has me excited to keep learning.
Kudos, Messrs. Abrams and Fisher, for shedding light on the man and all his wonderful abilities!
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
December 9, 2024
5 stars for scholarship and information
3 stars for a challenging read
250 years ago the Boston Massacre marked the beginning of the American Revolution. The mythos handed down tells how British Redcoats fired into a crowd of Americans, resulting in the death of freeman Crispus Attucks and other men.
The soldiers and their superior were put on trial separately. Samuel Adams wanted to capitalize on the incident to inflame anti-British sentiment and support the Sons of Liberty.
John Adams was part of the team to defend the Redcoats. He wanted to keep politics out of it and to prove the fairness and impartiality of American justice.
I knew it was a pivotal trial in American judicial history and I thought it would be interesting to learn more.
Dan Abrams' book John Adams Under Fire follows the incident and the testimonies at the trials in meticulous detail. The trials set new precedents in the length of the trials, extending over days, and with the judge's warning of 'reasonable' doubt' tending toward a verdict of not guilty.
I have to admit that with pages and pages of testimony reproduced in the book I scanned over many pages without a thorough reading. It was...frankly, boring...
But I am not a scholar or a lawyer.
I appreciated many aspects of the book including a deeper understanding of the roots of the riot.
British soldiers stationed were in Boston, one lobsterback to every three citizens. Bostonians resented their presence and their conduct toward citizens. Some soldiers took jobs to supplement their meager income, and some courted young women, but others pushed their weight around and raped young women.
Young Bostonian men decided to give the sentries a hard time, taunting them to lash back and fire their guns. The youth threw ice balls and carried clubs and struck the guns. They knew the soldiers could not fire in anger.
Until they did.
Since Americans did in the end sent the Brits back across the pond, our history is biased. Paul Revere's picture of soldiers firing and citizens dying shows Americans as victims. Crispus has become a hero, even if he was likely one of the men out to stir up trouble in the first place.
A book not for the reader who prefers narrative nonfiction that reads like a novel, I am still pleased to have increases my understanding of this pivotal moment in America history.
I was given access to a free ebook by the publisher through NetGalley in exchange for a fair and unbiased review.
3 stars for a challenging read
250 years ago the Boston Massacre marked the beginning of the American Revolution. The mythos handed down tells how British Redcoats fired into a crowd of Americans, resulting in the death of freeman Crispus Attucks and other men.
The soldiers and their superior were put on trial separately. Samuel Adams wanted to capitalize on the incident to inflame anti-British sentiment and support the Sons of Liberty.
John Adams was part of the team to defend the Redcoats. He wanted to keep politics out of it and to prove the fairness and impartiality of American justice.
I knew it was a pivotal trial in American judicial history and I thought it would be interesting to learn more.
Dan Abrams' book John Adams Under Fire follows the incident and the testimonies at the trials in meticulous detail. The trials set new precedents in the length of the trials, extending over days, and with the judge's warning of 'reasonable' doubt' tending toward a verdict of not guilty.
I have to admit that with pages and pages of testimony reproduced in the book I scanned over many pages without a thorough reading. It was...frankly, boring...
But I am not a scholar or a lawyer.
I appreciated many aspects of the book including a deeper understanding of the roots of the riot.
British soldiers stationed were in Boston, one lobsterback to every three citizens. Bostonians resented their presence and their conduct toward citizens. Some soldiers took jobs to supplement their meager income, and some courted young women, but others pushed their weight around and raped young women.
Young Bostonian men decided to give the sentries a hard time, taunting them to lash back and fire their guns. The youth threw ice balls and carried clubs and struck the guns. They knew the soldiers could not fire in anger.
Until they did.
Since Americans did in the end sent the Brits back across the pond, our history is biased. Paul Revere's picture of soldiers firing and citizens dying shows Americans as victims. Crispus has become a hero, even if he was likely one of the men out to stir up trouble in the first place.
A book not for the reader who prefers narrative nonfiction that reads like a novel, I am still pleased to have increases my understanding of this pivotal moment in America history.
I was given access to a free ebook by the publisher through NetGalley in exchange for a fair and unbiased review.
May 19, 2020
Audio review
I love history, and particularly US history, and even more I love learning facts about said history. Curiosity made me read this and I have no regrets. This was VERY interesting. I would assume this was researched thoroughly and adeptly and that the facts are accurate.
I will say I usually have a problem with historical non-fiction because it doesn't start in the right place for me. And this book is no exception. I wanted more BEGINNING. I wanted more facts about the state of affairs leading up to the event. There is some of that, but I means years of data, not months or weeks. That would make the story longer, but I am not asking for every little minutia of data, just an overall timeline of events and emotions and tension.
Aside from that, once the story is off and running it was good. I like hearing about these historical figures and what they did before they became "the name" in history books.
Narration was so good! The tone and sound, the inflection and I'll say passion were spot on for every aspect of the story. He paced himself well and I never had trouble understanding him, which I've experienced with other narrators.
Epilogue is a nice wrap up and summary of players future.
Overall I enjoyed this and plan to look up other books by this duo.
Story 4.25 stars (because I wanted more BEGINNING)
Narration 5 stars
I love history, and particularly US history, and even more I love learning facts about said history. Curiosity made me read this and I have no regrets. This was VERY interesting. I would assume this was researched thoroughly and adeptly and that the facts are accurate.
I will say I usually have a problem with historical non-fiction because it doesn't start in the right place for me. And this book is no exception. I wanted more BEGINNING. I wanted more facts about the state of affairs leading up to the event. There is some of that, but I means years of data, not months or weeks. That would make the story longer, but I am not asking for every little minutia of data, just an overall timeline of events and emotions and tension.
Aside from that, once the story is off and running it was good. I like hearing about these historical figures and what they did before they became "the name" in history books.
Narration was so good! The tone and sound, the inflection and I'll say passion were spot on for every aspect of the story. He paced himself well and I never had trouble understanding him, which I've experienced with other narrators.
Epilogue is a nice wrap up and summary of players future.
Overall I enjoyed this and plan to look up other books by this duo.
Story 4.25 stars (because I wanted more BEGINNING)
Narration 5 stars
September 25, 2020
I'm always amazed by how certain authors can take us through time and report back on events that happened decades or even centuries ago. This was one of those books. The authors detail what occurred leading up to the Boston Massacre and the trials that followed. The trials are detailed here, but with a lively narrative. This book should be read by all students of American history as well as anyone interested in John Adams' legal career. A very good read.
April 28, 2020
Absolutely fascinating ... a must-read for any criminal defense lawyer.
I am not a history buff and cared very little for the subject while in school. So if you asked me before reading this book about the events preceding this event I would have had no idea. If you asked me to tell you 3 things about John Adams I would have told you that he was the 2nd president, he was Washington's Vice President, and he preceded Jefferson. Although this book didn't give a ton of information about Adams's life growing up it was enough to give context to his training as a lawyer. If you had asked me prior to reading this book how many people died during the Boston Massacre I would have guessed around 300. Boy, was I nowhere close to the truth or what the event actually entailed. So this was a really good historical analysis that simply and concisely put the conflict into perspective.
Quite frankly, it didn't seem like the authors had a ton of actual writing to do since large parts of the book are direct quotes from witnesses and lawyers as transcribed during the trial. But it is amazing to see legal principles in play. It is wild to see the faults of eyewitness testimony from 250 years ago. Witness after witness recounting the same event and there was little consistency in what people saw or remembered. It really shows how perspectives or biases or prejudices cloud how we view the same event. How what we know today about the fallibility of eyewitness testimony was rampant during the most important criminal trial of the 18th century.
The language used by the attorneys and their ability to recite laws, treatises, statutes, and writings from others always blows me away. Their oratory skills, their ability to recollect on short notice without having the internet to look things up quickly, their eloquence and command of the language, the ability to convey these legal concepts to jurors and expecting jurors to understand without dumbing it down.
And most impressive of all: John Adams is clearly the embodiment of a Public Defender. He is described as a patriot and is tasked with representing British soldiers for nominal pay. He is asked to represent the people who he seeks freedom from. And he does not hesitate. He does it because he believes in the rule of law. He does it because he understands that our society will cease to function if the most hated of the accused does not receive adequate representation or a fair trial. He does this in the exact city where the victims, essentially his neighbors, were killed by the very people he abhors and now he has to advocate for their innocence. And he does it without qualms or complaint. This is like when someone poses the question to a criminal defense attorney, "How can you represent someone charged with _____?" The Public Defender does not choose his/her client; the Public Defender does not view their client as a murderer or arsonist or whatever title society wants to place on them; the Public Defender accepts the assignment without judgment; the Public Defender advocates to ensure that the principles of justice can continue to operate and that each client receives competent and vigorous representation.
I am not a history buff and cared very little for the subject while in school. So if you asked me before reading this book about the events preceding this event I would have had no idea. If you asked me to tell you 3 things about John Adams I would have told you that he was the 2nd president, he was Washington's Vice President, and he preceded Jefferson. Although this book didn't give a ton of information about Adams's life growing up it was enough to give context to his training as a lawyer. If you had asked me prior to reading this book how many people died during the Boston Massacre I would have guessed around 300. Boy, was I nowhere close to the truth or what the event actually entailed. So this was a really good historical analysis that simply and concisely put the conflict into perspective.
Quite frankly, it didn't seem like the authors had a ton of actual writing to do since large parts of the book are direct quotes from witnesses and lawyers as transcribed during the trial. But it is amazing to see legal principles in play. It is wild to see the faults of eyewitness testimony from 250 years ago. Witness after witness recounting the same event and there was little consistency in what people saw or remembered. It really shows how perspectives or biases or prejudices cloud how we view the same event. How what we know today about the fallibility of eyewitness testimony was rampant during the most important criminal trial of the 18th century.
The language used by the attorneys and their ability to recite laws, treatises, statutes, and writings from others always blows me away. Their oratory skills, their ability to recollect on short notice without having the internet to look things up quickly, their eloquence and command of the language, the ability to convey these legal concepts to jurors and expecting jurors to understand without dumbing it down.
And most impressive of all: John Adams is clearly the embodiment of a Public Defender. He is described as a patriot and is tasked with representing British soldiers for nominal pay. He is asked to represent the people who he seeks freedom from. And he does not hesitate. He does it because he believes in the rule of law. He does it because he understands that our society will cease to function if the most hated of the accused does not receive adequate representation or a fair trial. He does this in the exact city where the victims, essentially his neighbors, were killed by the very people he abhors and now he has to advocate for their innocence. And he does it without qualms or complaint. This is like when someone poses the question to a criminal defense attorney, "How can you represent someone charged with _____?" The Public Defender does not choose his/her client; the Public Defender does not view their client as a murderer or arsonist or whatever title society wants to place on them; the Public Defender accepts the assignment without judgment; the Public Defender advocates to ensure that the principles of justice can continue to operate and that each client receives competent and vigorous representation.
January 21, 2023
A decent work of the accounting of the Boston Massacre trial, for the English Captain and 8 soldiers who were accused of murdering civilians.
Did the soldiers fire without orders? Did they fire their weapons needlessly, into a growing crowd, or were they defending themselves? These are some of the questions that arose and each was a part of the defense and prosecution's case. As you may suspect it was a very "hot" case and finding someone to represent the English proved to be difficult. John Adams, a local lawyer stepped up, firmly believing everyone deserved to be innocent until proven guilty. Undoubtedly, his popularity within the colony took a dive.
Dan Abrams research and his account of the incident is good. However parts of the book involved repetitious accounts of the trial that dragged and I lost interest frequently.
Only those interested in the time period should read this book.
Did the soldiers fire without orders? Did they fire their weapons needlessly, into a growing crowd, or were they defending themselves? These are some of the questions that arose and each was a part of the defense and prosecution's case. As you may suspect it was a very "hot" case and finding someone to represent the English proved to be difficult. John Adams, a local lawyer stepped up, firmly believing everyone deserved to be innocent until proven guilty. Undoubtedly, his popularity within the colony took a dive.
Dan Abrams research and his account of the incident is good. However parts of the book involved repetitious accounts of the trial that dragged and I lost interest frequently.
Only those interested in the time period should read this book.
June 6, 2021
“Counsel ought to be the very last thing that an accused person should want in a free country... The bar ought...to be independent and impartial at all times and in every circumstance.” JA
A dry, over-detailed analysis of a trial 250 years ago. What possible relevance or interest might it have to Americans today? Lot.
“It was a love of universal liberty, and a hatred, a dread, a horror of the infernal confederacy...that projected, conducted and accomplished the settlement of America.” JA
In 1770 John Adams defended nine British soldiers accused of killing five men during the so-called Boston Massacre. No one doubted the lethal shots came from the soldiers’ muskets; Sam Adams, leading Boston patriot, wanted ‘blood for blood’; If Young John Adams took the defense he’d ruin his budding law career and jeopardize his place among those leaning ever more toward independence. He did anyway. And he won.
“Representative government and trial by jury are the heart and lungs of liberty.” JA
Adams and Fisher meticulously documents how John Adams and Boston got to that point. In the process the reader learns how common law and English law became American law. And how the least-likeable Founder become a beacon for justice for all, and “reasonable doubt” appeared as a judicial standard.
“Adams had proved his fidelity to a much greater cause: in the words of the Roman statesman and philosopher Cicero, ‘We are all servants of the laws in order to be free.’”
Modern parallels abound. Hypocrisy, interfering governments, biased media reporting, conspiracy theories, public outcry and pressure. History matters.
“Yet John Adams took the defense, even though he knew it would cost him business and stature among the growing independence movement. It the short term it did, but his careful and successful defense started him on the road to leadership in the nation that was birthing.”
A dry, over-detailed analysis of a trial 250 years ago. What possible relevance or interest might it have to Americans today? Lot.
“It was a love of universal liberty, and a hatred, a dread, a horror of the infernal confederacy...that projected, conducted and accomplished the settlement of America.” JA
In 1770 John Adams defended nine British soldiers accused of killing five men during the so-called Boston Massacre. No one doubted the lethal shots came from the soldiers’ muskets; Sam Adams, leading Boston patriot, wanted ‘blood for blood’; If Young John Adams took the defense he’d ruin his budding law career and jeopardize his place among those leaning ever more toward independence. He did anyway. And he won.
“Representative government and trial by jury are the heart and lungs of liberty.” JA
Adams and Fisher meticulously documents how John Adams and Boston got to that point. In the process the reader learns how common law and English law became American law. And how the least-likeable Founder become a beacon for justice for all, and “reasonable doubt” appeared as a judicial standard.
“Adams had proved his fidelity to a much greater cause: in the words of the Roman statesman and philosopher Cicero, ‘We are all servants of the laws in order to be free.’”
Modern parallels abound. Hypocrisy, interfering governments, biased media reporting, conspiracy theories, public outcry and pressure. History matters.
“Yet John Adams took the defense, even though he knew it would cost him business and stature among the growing independence movement. It the short term it did, but his careful and successful defense started him on the road to leadership in the nation that was birthing.”
December 3, 2024
Prior to being America’s second president, John Adams defended British soldiers in a murder case against 5 murdered American patriots, fundamentally shaping trial law and the rights of the accused.
On the night of March 5, 1770, shots were fired by British soldiers on the streets of Boston, killing five civilians. This you’ve come to know as the Boston Massacre, and it gave birth to the American Revolution a few years later.
Despite being an American Patriot, John Adams was determined to give the British soldiers a fair trial, and volunteered to represent them (for practically nothing-Especially Preston).
The trial transcripts helped shape those most of those involved with a great deal more detail than i had known about in the past. i was surprised to learn most of the 8 British soldiers were Irish (although since i think only one of them was Catholic, it’s likely most of them were, in-fact, actually Scotch-Irish).
The details surrounding the enigmatic Crispus Attucks (Michael Johnson) were a bit light but, there’s so little about him to be found, i think (for the most part) Abrams and Fisher did as good of a job as i’ve found anywhere else.
Modern American trial procedure seems to have really been influenced by this case, and it’s likely that it helped solidify legal concepts like ‘reasonable doubt’ firmly in our modern practice of law. The historical significance of this trial can’t be overstated.
4.25
On the night of March 5, 1770, shots were fired by British soldiers on the streets of Boston, killing five civilians. This you’ve come to know as the Boston Massacre, and it gave birth to the American Revolution a few years later.
Despite being an American Patriot, John Adams was determined to give the British soldiers a fair trial, and volunteered to represent them (for practically nothing-Especially Preston).
The trial transcripts helped shape those most of those involved with a great deal more detail than i had known about in the past. i was surprised to learn most of the 8 British soldiers were Irish (although since i think only one of them was Catholic, it’s likely most of them were, in-fact, actually Scotch-Irish).
The details surrounding the enigmatic Crispus Attucks (Michael Johnson) were a bit light but, there’s so little about him to be found, i think (for the most part) Abrams and Fisher did as good of a job as i’ve found anywhere else.
Modern American trial procedure seems to have really been influenced by this case, and it’s likely that it helped solidify legal concepts like ‘reasonable doubt’ firmly in our modern practice of law. The historical significance of this trial can’t be overstated.
4.25
April 4, 2020
Dan Abrams retelling of the trial of 5 Bostonian civilians murdered in 1770, famously known as the Boston Massacre and sparking what was historically coined the first shots of the American Revolution. Although a very accurate account of the trial and well narrated, I found myself losing interest and parts of the trial itself were often tedious, so kind of a bummer.
June 13, 2020
I really wanted to like this book. The first few chapters were great, establishing the historical context that ultimately led to the violent encounter known as the Boston Massacre. Furthermore, given what is going on in our country right now, with people in the streets protesting the murder of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor by the police, the parallels between Boston in the 1760s and the images of militarized police combating protesters in the streets today was eerie. However, once we get into the actual trial, the book becomes a chore. The authors present witness testimony without drawing an interesting narrative or providing the proper context. Instead, they bludgeon the reader over and over with different witnesses giving slight variations on the same story. Perhaps I'm not the right audience for this book, but it seems like it tries to split the difference between a popular history and academic case review and fails at both.
June 24, 2020
I've been reading quite a bit about the time period of the American Revolution. I've also been reading a biography on the Presidents in order of election. John Adams and John Quincy Adams have become my favorite Presidents so far (I'm up to Polk) outside of Washington. Seriously, George Washington is legendary. I enjoyed learning more about the Boston Massacre and also really the beginning of our legal/criminal justice system. I did listen to this and there are times that my attention did stray so that is why I did not rank it higher. I am walking away liking Adams as much if not more than I did after the McCullough biography.
March 9, 2021
While this book is well-written, informative, and complete, it only directly lays out the events of the trial and falls a little short on providing context for the future. Abrams could've been well served to devote some time to writing about how this trial shaped the foundation of laws in America and how intent, self-defense, and man slaughter would come to be defined after the founding of the country.
December 5, 2021
A Satisfactory Book
“John Adams Under Fire…” was a book written for those who are interested in the back and forth banter in the courtroom and the underlying strategies.
Thus, it became a bit confusing for me, a history buff. My interest is not in the minute details of the situation.
I learned quite a bit about the surrounding facts of the story but in the end it was too technical.
“John Adams Under Fire…” was a book written for those who are interested in the back and forth banter in the courtroom and the underlying strategies.
Thus, it became a bit confusing for me, a history buff. My interest is not in the minute details of the situation.
I learned quite a bit about the surrounding facts of the story but in the end it was too technical.
November 23, 2024
John Adams Under Fire is detailed look at the chaotic night of the Boston Massacre, and the equally chaotic trials that followed in its wake.
The title may be a bit misleading, as it’s the Boston crowd that was literally under fire, then the British soldiers in the courtroom. While Adams saw an adverse effect on his law business for his defense of the troops, he was much more “under fire” later in his life. Comparatively, the trials were fairly easy.
Dan Abrams does what he (probably) does in his other presidential legal retellings (I haven’t read those): Present the highlights of the cases while attempting to dumb-it-down for the reader without a law degree. Still, this one gets a little tedious at times, with some unnecessary repetition of information on top of some that is necessary, as told over and over by different witnesses.
Fortunately for the story, most of those witnesses had entirely different versions of the truth, by their own observations, assumptions, or outright lies. That left the weight of the decision for the jury to fall more on legal precedence and history than on reliability of the people speaking for the prosecution.
The revealing look at eighteenth-century jurisprudence is quite fascinating, when one compares it to standard procedures today. The book presents the unfairness of the times, in its references to the gentlemen (only) of the jury, and the value of the testimony of a slave (with assurances from his master). There is some interesting side-trivia in the early part of the book and the epilogue. What’s missing in the latter is mention of the Alien and Sedition acts, which sank Adams’s legacy much better than his defense of the enemy ever could.
A quick read, but not the best examination of the event, perhaps. Co-author David Fisher likely make the book more readable, with Abrams sorting through the transcripts and writings of the lawyers and judges.
If you doubt that history repeats itself, see if January 6, 2021 doesn’t come to mind as you read what the law has to say about mobs and illegal and legal assemblies. It certainly did for me. Adams would have been appalled.
The title may be a bit misleading, as it’s the Boston crowd that was literally under fire, then the British soldiers in the courtroom. While Adams saw an adverse effect on his law business for his defense of the troops, he was much more “under fire” later in his life. Comparatively, the trials were fairly easy.
Dan Abrams does what he (probably) does in his other presidential legal retellings (I haven’t read those): Present the highlights of the cases while attempting to dumb-it-down for the reader without a law degree. Still, this one gets a little tedious at times, with some unnecessary repetition of information on top of some that is necessary, as told over and over by different witnesses.
Fortunately for the story, most of those witnesses had entirely different versions of the truth, by their own observations, assumptions, or outright lies. That left the weight of the decision for the jury to fall more on legal precedence and history than on reliability of the people speaking for the prosecution.
The revealing look at eighteenth-century jurisprudence is quite fascinating, when one compares it to standard procedures today. The book presents the unfairness of the times, in its references to the gentlemen (only) of the jury, and the value of the testimony of a slave (with assurances from his master). There is some interesting side-trivia in the early part of the book and the epilogue. What’s missing in the latter is mention of the Alien and Sedition acts, which sank Adams’s legacy much better than his defense of the enemy ever could.
A quick read, but not the best examination of the event, perhaps. Co-author David Fisher likely make the book more readable, with Abrams sorting through the transcripts and writings of the lawyers and judges.
If you doubt that history repeats itself, see if January 6, 2021 doesn’t come to mind as you read what the law has to say about mobs and illegal and legal assemblies. It certainly did for me. Adams would have been appalled.
June 22, 2020
3.5. The beginning of the book took me a while to get through, otherwise I would have given this a 4. This confusing event is taught very cursorily in history classes and this book was a very thorough covering of the topic. If you enjoy American history, you will enjoy this book.
January 25, 2021
Just not the right topic for yours truly.
June 16, 2022
I found this book to be quite heavy on legal history and theory, often to the point of being tedious. This is a better read for legal nerds rather than American history enthusiasts. I would’ve preferred this have been about half of its length, as too much detail sometimes can lose the reader’s interest. Although for a thorough examination of the events, this probably is successful. I was excited to finish this book, as it was a month long slog for sure.
March 5, 2021
After absolutely hating "George Washington's Secret Six" (which was also written by a journalist), I was nervous to read another history book written by a journalist. I was so pleasantly surprised that I enjoyed this as much as I did! It read very much like a courtroom drama like "Law and Order," and it made the trial easy to follow. I think the fact that I read "American Rebels" first stole a little bit of this book's thunder, but it was still a great read providing a closer look at the people involved in the Boston Massacre. Now I'm interested to read some of Abrams other trial books.
October 7, 2020
The residents of late 18th Century Boston packed the court room to follow the lengthy trials dealing with the Boston Massacre. I doubt that folks today would have the patience to sit through the long legal arguments and seemingly endless stream of witnesses and, I must admit, I occasionally skimmed through some of the testimony. Still, even though this book is not an easy read, the violent events in Boston in March 1770 were harbingers of the American Revolution and, as such, deserve our attention.
September 10, 2024
I went into this skeptically, because I didn’t feel confident that a book by the host of “On Patrol Live” would be a serious history book. I don’t know that I got fully past my skepticism, but I was happily surprised. Not perfect, but a lot of useful information about a topic I am very interested in. Abrams blanket cites the original trial documents in the introduction; I would have preferred more specific citations, but was glad to learn about the source(s) as it was. At times the book felt like “play by play analysis” but the trials were periodically interrupted for some background information. I must admit that, even after reading, I still feel confused about what actually happened. And also, surprised that certain points of evidence didn’t seem to exist at the trial. For example, did Kilroy bayonet Grey after shooting him? An examination of the body would have shown whether there were bayonet wounds, but it was left mysterious and contradictory.
Overall I feel like my understanding of the events surrounding, or at least the moods of both the British soldiers and the Boston town-people, has grown and been filled in. I still have many questions and my specific interest in Crispus Attucks has not been satiated. I would love to read the primary sources, I wonder if any of them are published and available to regular folks. I’ll have to check on that.
I listened to this by Harlequin audio, read by Roger Wayne. Production good, reading good but I never got used to certain aspects of the accents (particularly the way he pronounces ‘solemn’).
Overall I feel like my understanding of the events surrounding, or at least the moods of both the British soldiers and the Boston town-people, has grown and been filled in. I still have many questions and my specific interest in Crispus Attucks has not been satiated. I would love to read the primary sources, I wonder if any of them are published and available to regular folks. I’ll have to check on that.
I listened to this by Harlequin audio, read by Roger Wayne. Production good, reading good but I never got used to certain aspects of the accents (particularly the way he pronounces ‘solemn’).
February 11, 2024
Having transcripts from a trial in the 1700's in practically unheard of, yet a transcript of the trial against the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre exists. This is certainly evidence that time travel exists and Sam Beckett must have had to fulfill making such transcript before he could leap again.
And it's fascinating! This has as much intrigue as any JFK conspiracy. There was a tall man in a red cloak with a white wig who is never mentioned by name, but seems like almost like a CIA plant put there to stir up trouble. There is tons of conflicting testimony. And, of course, there's our hero, John Adams, who always put doing right ahead of what was politic or would win him friends.
And I never knew that a couple of the soldiers were convicted of lesser crimes! - specifically, manslaughter - but back then there was a legal trick where basically everybody got one free manslaughter rap per lifetime.
Every Abrams book about a historical law case is thoroughly worth reading. Seek this one out.
And it's fascinating! This has as much intrigue as any JFK conspiracy. There was a tall man in a red cloak with a white wig who is never mentioned by name, but seems like almost like a CIA plant put there to stir up trouble. There is tons of conflicting testimony. And, of course, there's our hero, John Adams, who always put doing right ahead of what was politic or would win him friends.
And I never knew that a couple of the soldiers were convicted of lesser crimes! - specifically, manslaughter - but back then there was a legal trick where basically everybody got one free manslaughter rap per lifetime.
Every Abrams book about a historical law case is thoroughly worth reading. Seek this one out.
March 1, 2020
John Adams has always been known for being one of the most impassioned and eloquent of our Founding Fathers, and as our second president. But he had a life before his well-deserved fame, and this book tells of part of it. The Boston Massacre is well-known, but the part which Adams played in the aftermath is not.
Adams was a thirty-four-year-old Boston attorney when he agreed to defend the British soldiers who either committed an unprovoked massacre of peaceful Boston citizens, or were defending themselves from a mob. The officer in charge was tried separately from the rest of the soldiers. By sheer good fortune a transcript still exists from the second trial.
Dan Abrams, the author of this book, also wrote a fabulous book to which I gave a glowing review, called “Lincoln’s Last Trial.” It was a trial in which Abraham Lincoln was the defense attorney, and a transcript in shorthand still existed from it. How Abrams finds these marvelous documents is beyond me, but I am super-grateful that he does because the books he writes are fascinating.
I enjoyed this book very much. Some people apparently thought that the details of the trials were tedious; I must be a legal nerd, I thought they were interesting. I was interested in the effects of the trials on the local citizenry, as well as on American jurisprudence. I admit, my husband and son-in-law are lawyers, so I may be inured to legal talk!
I can happily recommend this book to anyone interested in American history (or British history, come to that), or American jurisprudence, or anyone interested in reading a true account of a well-known but little understood pivotal moment in the run-up to the American War for Independence. I hope that the author has another historical work in mind.
Thanks to the publisher and NetGalley for the ARC. The opinions are my own.
Adams was a thirty-four-year-old Boston attorney when he agreed to defend the British soldiers who either committed an unprovoked massacre of peaceful Boston citizens, or were defending themselves from a mob. The officer in charge was tried separately from the rest of the soldiers. By sheer good fortune a transcript still exists from the second trial.
Dan Abrams, the author of this book, also wrote a fabulous book to which I gave a glowing review, called “Lincoln’s Last Trial.” It was a trial in which Abraham Lincoln was the defense attorney, and a transcript in shorthand still existed from it. How Abrams finds these marvelous documents is beyond me, but I am super-grateful that he does because the books he writes are fascinating.
I enjoyed this book very much. Some people apparently thought that the details of the trials were tedious; I must be a legal nerd, I thought they were interesting. I was interested in the effects of the trials on the local citizenry, as well as on American jurisprudence. I admit, my husband and son-in-law are lawyers, so I may be inured to legal talk!
I can happily recommend this book to anyone interested in American history (or British history, come to that), or American jurisprudence, or anyone interested in reading a true account of a well-known but little understood pivotal moment in the run-up to the American War for Independence. I hope that the author has another historical work in mind.
Thanks to the publisher and NetGalley for the ARC. The opinions are my own.
March 15, 2020
Most all of us know the story of the "Boston Massacre" or do we? The short two paragraphs in 8th grade history or perhaps the longer full page review in a High School text book gave us everything we needed to know. Let's move on to the war and independence. John Adams Under Fire gives us a truthful story of what actually happened that fateful night of March 5th, in 1770. Using a court transcription, notes from the lawyers and judges and a smattering of person letters a more truthful and believable history is revealed. More importantly the impact of this trial on American Law is demonstrated. I am not in the legal profession, but I found this book fascinating. I learned about things I have heard about in trials on TV, in political legislative battles and alluded to in fiction. I found this book easy to read and compelling.
September 30, 2021
I don't think a learned enough about John Adams, his thoughts or philosophies in this book. I learned a lot about the case in general though. So many witness statements, very little insight on the individuals involved. I understand that there may not be many really personal feelings of John Adams around in regards to this case and those involved, but the title should probably reflect that. This book is much more a chronicle of the case than about John Adams.
March 24, 2020
This was an interesting book. It contains a very detailed, witness by witness account of the trial which followed the so-called Boston Massacre. While some of the detail seemed a bit much at times, it really shines a bright light on this famous incident in the country's history. As a lawyer, I was interested in the approach of the attorneys in the case and the way closing arguments were structured.
April 30, 2020
I thought the book was quite decent, and covered a much-overlooked part of the cause of Boston's sparking the American Revolution. Some of the dialogue was needlessly hard to follow. Overall worth reading, though hardly a classic. It took a while to read because I was "switch-reading" with another book.
May 19, 2021
Book's Thesis - that John Adam's defense of the men charged in the Boston Massacre not only helped launch his career but was a defining moment in American jurisprudence, when the young nation's embryonic legal system took a giant leap forward.
Interesting in places, but Abrams is prone to meandering, not really sticking to the point.
Made it 14% of the way through the book.
Interesting in places, but Abrams is prone to meandering, not really sticking to the point.
Made it 14% of the way through the book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 194 reviews