What do you think?
Rate this book
We, the Jury
On the day before his twenty-first wedding anniversary, David Sullinger buried an ax in his wife's skull. Now, eight jurors must retire to the deliberation room and decide whether David committed premeditated murder-or whether he was a battered spouse who killed his wife in self-defense.
Told from the perspective of over a dozen participants in a murder trial, We, the Jury examines how public perception can mask the ghastliest nightmares. As the jurors stagger toward a verdict, they must sift through contradictory testimony from the Sullingers' children, who disagree on which parent was Satan; sort out conflicting allegations of severe physical abuse, adultery, and incest; and overcome personal animosities and biases that threaten a fair and just verdict. Ultimately, the central figures in We, the Jury must navigate the blurred boundaries between bias and objectivity, fiction and truth.
Told from the perspective of over a dozen participants in a murder trial, We, the Jury examines how public perception can mask the ghastliest nightmares. As the jurors stagger toward a verdict, they must sift through contradictory testimony from the Sullingers' children, who disagree on which parent was Satan; sort out conflicting allegations of severe physical abuse, adultery, and incest; and overcome personal animosities and biases that threaten a fair and just verdict. Ultimately, the central figures in We, the Jury must navigate the blurred boundaries between bias and objectivity, fiction and truth.
304 pages, Hardcover
First published October 23, 2018
564 people are currently reading
2597 people want to read
About the author
Robert Rotstein
9 books120 followersRobert Rotstein is an entertainment attorney with over thirty years experience in the industry. He’s represented all of the major motion picture studios and many well-known writers, producers, directors, and musicians. He lives in Los Angeles, California.
Member:
International Thriller Writers
Mystery Writers of America
Member:
International Thriller Writers
Mystery Writers of America
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 320 reviews
October 17, 2018
4.5*
WOW! How refreshing! A completely innovative and original twist on a courtroom drama.
A case study revealing all the pieces of the puzzle that make up the judicial system.
For those of us who read legal thrillers - we’ve all been accustomed to the courtroom drama told from the perspective of lawyers and defendants. This book turns things sideways with a unique approach to covering a major trial.
This trial is dissected and told from the point of view of everyone involved. The judge, the bailiffs, the attorneys and every member of the jury.
So captivating in fact, that the actual crime itself becomes secondary to those who follow its journey through the judicial system
David Sullinger is on trial for the murder of his wife Amanda.
He put an ax through her head, claiming it was self-defense. Gruesome.
His claim - He was the battered spouse, and Amanda was trying to kill him! Fighting for his life, he’s hired one of the most elite defense lawyers in California and is fully prepared for trial.
Fans of any of the legal drama shows such as Law and Order or even Dateline will surely love this book! Unputdownable says it all!
With so many characters and views involved, I was concerned that keeping track and staying focused might prove to be difficult. Well...I didn’t have a single problem! In fact, I grew rather fond of both the judge and her bailiff, with all their behind-the-scenes struggles.
The Judge, wrestling with serious personal issues, and the bailiff caught between his courtroom duties and respect for the judge he works so closely with. It rang so believably true that it touched a deep sympathetic chord for me. Just the kind of insider information we’re never privy to!
Now the Jury - how fascinating (and frightening) to see what everyone brings into that jury room. Their past history of personal demons and hardships. Biases and tolerances. Each jury member had their own story and unfortunately, their own agenda. All flawed, all very human characteristics.
Robert Rotstein has put together the most unique legal thriller I‘ve ever read. Both the characters and story-line had a vast amount of credible depth, drawing you in completely. Right there within the courthouse. A fly on the wall taking in every single nuance of the courtroom drama!
If legal thrillers and crime fiction are your thing then this is a must read!
A profoundly enjoyable buddy read with Susanne!
And a thank you to Matt. Without your outstanding review I would never have come across this novel.
Thank you to Blackstone Publishing via NetGalley & Edelweiss and Robert Rotstein for an ARC to read in exchange for an honest review.
WOW! How refreshing! A completely innovative and original twist on a courtroom drama.
A case study revealing all the pieces of the puzzle that make up the judicial system.
For those of us who read legal thrillers - we’ve all been accustomed to the courtroom drama told from the perspective of lawyers and defendants. This book turns things sideways with a unique approach to covering a major trial.
This trial is dissected and told from the point of view of everyone involved. The judge, the bailiffs, the attorneys and every member of the jury.
So captivating in fact, that the actual crime itself becomes secondary to those who follow its journey through the judicial system
David Sullinger is on trial for the murder of his wife Amanda.
He put an ax through her head, claiming it was self-defense. Gruesome.
His claim - He was the battered spouse, and Amanda was trying to kill him! Fighting for his life, he’s hired one of the most elite defense lawyers in California and is fully prepared for trial.
Fans of any of the legal drama shows such as Law and Order or even Dateline will surely love this book! Unputdownable says it all!
With so many characters and views involved, I was concerned that keeping track and staying focused might prove to be difficult. Well...I didn’t have a single problem! In fact, I grew rather fond of both the judge and her bailiff, with all their behind-the-scenes struggles.
The Judge, wrestling with serious personal issues, and the bailiff caught between his courtroom duties and respect for the judge he works so closely with. It rang so believably true that it touched a deep sympathetic chord for me. Just the kind of insider information we’re never privy to!
Now the Jury - how fascinating (and frightening) to see what everyone brings into that jury room. Their past history of personal demons and hardships. Biases and tolerances. Each jury member had their own story and unfortunately, their own agenda. All flawed, all very human characteristics.
Robert Rotstein has put together the most unique legal thriller I‘ve ever read. Both the characters and story-line had a vast amount of credible depth, drawing you in completely. Right there within the courthouse. A fly on the wall taking in every single nuance of the courtroom drama!
If legal thrillers and crime fiction are your thing then this is a must read!
A profoundly enjoyable buddy read with Susanne!
And a thank you to Matt. Without your outstanding review I would never have come across this novel.
Thank you to Blackstone Publishing via NetGalley & Edelweiss and Robert Rotstein for an ARC to read in exchange for an honest review.
May 7, 2019
We the Jury by Robert Rotstein is a 2018 Blackstone publishing publication.
Wow! What a unique look at the legal process as witnessed from every person involved in a high -profile murder case.
I absolutely love legal thrillers, but over the past several years I’ve found them lacking. Usually, the lawyers have turned into amateur sleuths and there is little or no legal wrangling or even an appearance in a courtroom. I’d become a little frustrated with the genre, but recently, I've seen a small, but promising, resurgence in the more traditional legal thriller/ courtroom drama.
This book, however, takes the usual courtroom drama to a new level by allowing the reader to review the entire process through the eyes of the judge, the bailiff, the court clerk, both lawyers, and of course-as the title suggests- the jury.
On trial is a man who admits to killing his wife, but swears it was in self- defense, claiming the battered spouse defense. After weighing the evidence presented, the jurors begin deliberations. Usually, I’m utterly enthralled by the legal jockeying between the opposing lawyers.
But, the most riveting part of this novel, for me, was the journey the jurors took in finally arriving at a unanimous verdict.
This novel was so realistic, I sometimes had to remind myself it was a work of fiction. The difficulties with a likeable judge, who may no longer be fit to do her job was at once terrifying and very poignant.
The lawyers were in many ways typical, but the prosecutor, even though he had political aspirations, was tolerable, especially when compared to the big city lawyer for the defense. The other courtroom mainstays who are often looked upon as minor players, like the court stenographer, for example, got their props a little in this story, too, and that was a nice touch, I thought.
But, again, the real drama took place during jury deliberations. Each of the jurors, which ranged from a member of the clergy, to a housewife, to a retired school principal, all have a voice, some more than others, which is also realistic. I’m not sure I liked the majority of them, but as someone who served on a jury once, this jury was uncannily familiar. My case was a civil trial, not a criminal one, but the diversity on the jury was quite similar, and the case exposed some hidden truths about the people I’d come to know in the week we were shut up together in the courtroom.
There was an ‘insider’ on the jury, someone who worked in the court system, but our foreman was much more suited to the role. Still, I was amazed that after listening to and viewing all the evidence together, that there were so many different opinions when we took that first vote. Then, slowly, and sometimes heatedly, we eventually agreed to a verdict. Since it was a civil trial, however, it did not have to be unanimous and we did still have one hold out. It was a fascinating learning experience, but not one I’m especially keen on repeating.
The story is deeply absorbing, and certainly paints the process in a such a way that it will give readers a lot to think about. It is a very different approach to the legal thriller, but a thriller, it certainly is, with a few curveballs thrown you won’t see coming.
The author did a terrific job with this one. I’m impressed!!
*I have a hard time remembering how a book popped up on my radar because I pick up recommendations from so many different places. However, this time I remember Kaceey and Susanne, two of my friends on Goodreads, both wrote glowing reviews for this book and convinced me to give this one a try. Thanks, ladies!!
Wow! What a unique look at the legal process as witnessed from every person involved in a high -profile murder case.
I absolutely love legal thrillers, but over the past several years I’ve found them lacking. Usually, the lawyers have turned into amateur sleuths and there is little or no legal wrangling or even an appearance in a courtroom. I’d become a little frustrated with the genre, but recently, I've seen a small, but promising, resurgence in the more traditional legal thriller/ courtroom drama.
This book, however, takes the usual courtroom drama to a new level by allowing the reader to review the entire process through the eyes of the judge, the bailiff, the court clerk, both lawyers, and of course-as the title suggests- the jury.
On trial is a man who admits to killing his wife, but swears it was in self- defense, claiming the battered spouse defense. After weighing the evidence presented, the jurors begin deliberations. Usually, I’m utterly enthralled by the legal jockeying between the opposing lawyers.
But, the most riveting part of this novel, for me, was the journey the jurors took in finally arriving at a unanimous verdict.
This novel was so realistic, I sometimes had to remind myself it was a work of fiction. The difficulties with a likeable judge, who may no longer be fit to do her job was at once terrifying and very poignant.
The lawyers were in many ways typical, but the prosecutor, even though he had political aspirations, was tolerable, especially when compared to the big city lawyer for the defense. The other courtroom mainstays who are often looked upon as minor players, like the court stenographer, for example, got their props a little in this story, too, and that was a nice touch, I thought.
But, again, the real drama took place during jury deliberations. Each of the jurors, which ranged from a member of the clergy, to a housewife, to a retired school principal, all have a voice, some more than others, which is also realistic. I’m not sure I liked the majority of them, but as someone who served on a jury once, this jury was uncannily familiar. My case was a civil trial, not a criminal one, but the diversity on the jury was quite similar, and the case exposed some hidden truths about the people I’d come to know in the week we were shut up together in the courtroom.
There was an ‘insider’ on the jury, someone who worked in the court system, but our foreman was much more suited to the role. Still, I was amazed that after listening to and viewing all the evidence together, that there were so many different opinions when we took that first vote. Then, slowly, and sometimes heatedly, we eventually agreed to a verdict. Since it was a civil trial, however, it did not have to be unanimous and we did still have one hold out. It was a fascinating learning experience, but not one I’m especially keen on repeating.
The story is deeply absorbing, and certainly paints the process in a such a way that it will give readers a lot to think about. It is a very different approach to the legal thriller, but a thriller, it certainly is, with a few curveballs thrown you won’t see coming.
The author did a terrific job with this one. I’m impressed!!
*I have a hard time remembering how a book popped up on my radar because I pick up recommendations from so many different places. However, this time I remember Kaceey and Susanne, two of my friends on Goodreads, both wrote glowing reviews for this book and convinced me to give this one a try. Thanks, ladies!!
October 12, 2018
4 Thrilling Stars!
David Sullinger is on trial in Sepulveda County, California for murdering his wife, Amanda. He claims that he was a battered spouse and that it was in self-defense.
It is up to eight jurors to decide if he is guilty. The Jurors include: a housewife, an architect, a student, a clergyman, a jury consultant, a former high school principal, an express messenger and the foreperson.
During the trial, testimony is given by David’s daughter Lacey and his son Dillon. The testimony given by David and Lacey Sullinger are nearly identical. Therefore, if you believe Lacey Sullinger, do you automatically believe her father? Dillon’s testimony is contradictory to Lacey’s but he is also unreliable. Who do you believe? Was David Sullinger credible?
It is up to the Jurors to decide:
“The truth is, it’s very difficult to tell through observation whether someone is lying.”
The Trial is told via multiple POV’s: that of the Jurors, the Judge, the Court Clerk, the Bailiff, The Defense Counsel, The Paralegal, the Prosecutor, the Tabloid Journalist and the Court Reporter. Believe it or not, the story being told through so many viewpoints is done seamlessly and kept me on my toes from the first. It is about how those individuals interact that makes “We, the Jury” different from other Courtroom Dramas.
I can attest to the fact that:
“Cases are won by spinning facts, appealing to prejudices…. when possible quibble, deflect, distract. Challenge the credibility of the most credible witnesses..”
Simply put, I had insight into this novel that perhaps others might not. I have worked in the legal field for twenty-three years, specifically in the area of Litigation and have attended quite a few Jury (and courtside) trials in the course of my career. I was analyzing this book left and right and have a few thoughts about what coulda, shoulda, woulda (but they will be left unsaid). Regardless of that, seeing this from all angles is absolutely fascinating and I commend Robert Rotstein for making “We, the Jury” such a fabulous and intriguing read. His character development is spot on and I was completely enthralled from start to finish. This is one book that I highly recommend for those who like courtroom dramas and well written thrillers!
This was a buddy read with Kaceey. Kaceey picked this one and boy am I glad she did!
Thank you to Edelweiss, NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing and Robert Rotstein for a complimentary copy of this novel in exchange for an honest review.
Published on Edelweiss, NetGalley, Goodreads, Twitter and Instagram on 10.11.18.
David Sullinger is on trial in Sepulveda County, California for murdering his wife, Amanda. He claims that he was a battered spouse and that it was in self-defense.
It is up to eight jurors to decide if he is guilty. The Jurors include: a housewife, an architect, a student, a clergyman, a jury consultant, a former high school principal, an express messenger and the foreperson.
During the trial, testimony is given by David’s daughter Lacey and his son Dillon. The testimony given by David and Lacey Sullinger are nearly identical. Therefore, if you believe Lacey Sullinger, do you automatically believe her father? Dillon’s testimony is contradictory to Lacey’s but he is also unreliable. Who do you believe? Was David Sullinger credible?
It is up to the Jurors to decide:
“The truth is, it’s very difficult to tell through observation whether someone is lying.”
The Trial is told via multiple POV’s: that of the Jurors, the Judge, the Court Clerk, the Bailiff, The Defense Counsel, The Paralegal, the Prosecutor, the Tabloid Journalist and the Court Reporter. Believe it or not, the story being told through so many viewpoints is done seamlessly and kept me on my toes from the first. It is about how those individuals interact that makes “We, the Jury” different from other Courtroom Dramas.
I can attest to the fact that:
“Cases are won by spinning facts, appealing to prejudices…. when possible quibble, deflect, distract. Challenge the credibility of the most credible witnesses..”
Simply put, I had insight into this novel that perhaps others might not. I have worked in the legal field for twenty-three years, specifically in the area of Litigation and have attended quite a few Jury (and courtside) trials in the course of my career. I was analyzing this book left and right and have a few thoughts about what coulda, shoulda, woulda (but they will be left unsaid). Regardless of that, seeing this from all angles is absolutely fascinating and I commend Robert Rotstein for making “We, the Jury” such a fabulous and intriguing read. His character development is spot on and I was completely enthralled from start to finish. This is one book that I highly recommend for those who like courtroom dramas and well written thrillers!
This was a buddy read with Kaceey. Kaceey picked this one and boy am I glad she did!
Thank you to Edelweiss, NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing and Robert Rotstein for a complimentary copy of this novel in exchange for an honest review.
Published on Edelweiss, NetGalley, Goodreads, Twitter and Instagram on 10.11.18.
December 4, 2018
An Exceptional & Unique Legal Thriller
Nothing is more exciting than reading a well written legal thriller. Combining suspense and drama, with lawyers battling it out in court and jury arguing back & forth to reach a verdict is simply thrilling.
We, The Jury is unique because it starts when the lawyers’ arguments end and jury deliberations begin. In a theme similar to 12 Angry Men, the story is focused more on the drama that plays out in the jury room than the actual legal arguments. Deciding a case of domestic murder, the jurors must now decide on whether the defendant is guilty or not. The story is however is not limited to the murder or the case. Beyond the case, there is a parallel drama playing out between the jurors as they battle to reach a unanimous verdict.
A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer ~ Robert Frost.
The story is narrated from multiple perspectives (the jurors, the judge, bailiff, the lawyers, and a blogger covering the case). Every chapter is narrated from the POV of a different person, we learn something new, either about the case or about the jurors. The character development is top notch, even for the minor characters, which helps you understand their biases and motivations. Despite so many POVs involved, the narrative remains never gets confusing. We also hear the testimony of certain witnesses that shapes your own verdict about the case. I felt the POV of some of the characters never really added to the main story. There could have been more debate among the jurors rather than these story tracks that go nowhere but overall the story never lets you down at any point.
Overall, Robert Rotstein has put together the most unique & entertaining legal thrillers, I‘ve ever read. Rotstein forces the readers to take a critical look at the jury system and the judicial system as a whole. With an engaging storyline, some great character development and incredible narration, We, the Jury is a Winner. If you enjoy reading legal thrillers & crime fiction, this is a Must Read!
Many Thanks to NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing, and the author Robert Rotstein for the ARC.
Nothing is more exciting than reading a well written legal thriller. Combining suspense and drama, with lawyers battling it out in court and jury arguing back & forth to reach a verdict is simply thrilling.
We, The Jury is unique because it starts when the lawyers’ arguments end and jury deliberations begin. In a theme similar to 12 Angry Men, the story is focused more on the drama that plays out in the jury room than the actual legal arguments. Deciding a case of domestic murder, the jurors must now decide on whether the defendant is guilty or not. The story is however is not limited to the murder or the case. Beyond the case, there is a parallel drama playing out between the jurors as they battle to reach a unanimous verdict.
A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer ~ Robert Frost.
The story is narrated from multiple perspectives (the jurors, the judge, bailiff, the lawyers, and a blogger covering the case). Every chapter is narrated from the POV of a different person, we learn something new, either about the case or about the jurors. The character development is top notch, even for the minor characters, which helps you understand their biases and motivations. Despite so many POVs involved, the narrative remains never gets confusing. We also hear the testimony of certain witnesses that shapes your own verdict about the case. I felt the POV of some of the characters never really added to the main story. There could have been more debate among the jurors rather than these story tracks that go nowhere but overall the story never lets you down at any point.
Overall, Robert Rotstein has put together the most unique & entertaining legal thrillers, I‘ve ever read. Rotstein forces the readers to take a critical look at the jury system and the judicial system as a whole. With an engaging storyline, some great character development and incredible narration, We, the Jury is a Winner. If you enjoy reading legal thrillers & crime fiction, this is a Must Read!
Many Thanks to NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing, and the author Robert Rotstein for the ARC.
September 13, 2018
First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Rotstein, and Blackstone Publishing for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.
Robert Rotstein has developed this unique legal thriller, told from the perspective of the other side of the courtroom. Rather than putting the reader in the middle of a courtroom drama, the story unfolds as the legal banter is wrapping up and the case is sent to the jury. David Sullinger is accused of having murdered his wife, Amanda, the day before their 21st wedding anniversary. According to David, he was subjected to significant and ongoing spousal abuse, which led him to act in self-defence at the time he plunged a pickaxe into her skull. Told from multiple perspectives, the book opens with the judge offering jury instructions, which are bumbled, and proceeds to the deliberations in the case. In a narrative that offers the jury members’ own perspectives on the case, as well as other officers of the court (judge, bailiff, lawyers) and even some outsiders, the reader learns more about what supposedly happened through recollections of evidence presented. Additionally, Rotstein offers some outside information on the judge, who is showing signs of mental distress due to personal matters, trying to hold it all together. With tidbits of testimony added within various chapters, the reader becomes a juror themselves, as they see the arguments made in deliberation, before a decision is made. Quite the story and highly unique! Rotstein is sure to impress those who enjoy legal thrillers with a different perspective, especially the reader who likes to be the thick of a courtroom drama.
I thoroughly enjoy legal thrillers and courtroom dramas, as they are not only entertaining, but highly educational. Rotstein peppers a little of everything in this case, which sees a man’s freedom hang in the balance. Spousal abuse against men remains a new defence, though it is one that has been rolled out here. Taking the perspectives of the jurors provides the reader with a unique glimpse into what they know, how they feel, and what influences their voting. The banter between these individuals—the least legally trained but with the most legal power in a case—is amazing and Rotstein infers a great deal throughout. The characters are plentiful and each has their own perspective, which allows the reader to watch as development and flavour mix to create the most entertaining set of individuals. The story is quite well done, offering great insight into how the same set of facts can be interpreted so many ways by a group of eight (see an early explanation in the story about how eight can serve on a jury in California) common citizens. With short chapters and a variety of perspectives, the reader will not get bogged down in the legal or personal minutiae of the characters, but will seek to see how things end up when the foreperson presses the red button, indicating a decision has been reached.
Kudos, Mr. Rotstein, for such a great book. I will recommend it to anyone who enjoys legal pieces, as you have a wonderful handle on the genre.
Like/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
Robert Rotstein has developed this unique legal thriller, told from the perspective of the other side of the courtroom. Rather than putting the reader in the middle of a courtroom drama, the story unfolds as the legal banter is wrapping up and the case is sent to the jury. David Sullinger is accused of having murdered his wife, Amanda, the day before their 21st wedding anniversary. According to David, he was subjected to significant and ongoing spousal abuse, which led him to act in self-defence at the time he plunged a pickaxe into her skull. Told from multiple perspectives, the book opens with the judge offering jury instructions, which are bumbled, and proceeds to the deliberations in the case. In a narrative that offers the jury members’ own perspectives on the case, as well as other officers of the court (judge, bailiff, lawyers) and even some outsiders, the reader learns more about what supposedly happened through recollections of evidence presented. Additionally, Rotstein offers some outside information on the judge, who is showing signs of mental distress due to personal matters, trying to hold it all together. With tidbits of testimony added within various chapters, the reader becomes a juror themselves, as they see the arguments made in deliberation, before a decision is made. Quite the story and highly unique! Rotstein is sure to impress those who enjoy legal thrillers with a different perspective, especially the reader who likes to be the thick of a courtroom drama.
I thoroughly enjoy legal thrillers and courtroom dramas, as they are not only entertaining, but highly educational. Rotstein peppers a little of everything in this case, which sees a man’s freedom hang in the balance. Spousal abuse against men remains a new defence, though it is one that has been rolled out here. Taking the perspectives of the jurors provides the reader with a unique glimpse into what they know, how they feel, and what influences their voting. The banter between these individuals—the least legally trained but with the most legal power in a case—is amazing and Rotstein infers a great deal throughout. The characters are plentiful and each has their own perspective, which allows the reader to watch as development and flavour mix to create the most entertaining set of individuals. The story is quite well done, offering great insight into how the same set of facts can be interpreted so many ways by a group of eight (see an early explanation in the story about how eight can serve on a jury in California) common citizens. With short chapters and a variety of perspectives, the reader will not get bogged down in the legal or personal minutiae of the characters, but will seek to see how things end up when the foreperson presses the red button, indicating a decision has been reached.
Kudos, Mr. Rotstein, for such a great book. I will recommend it to anyone who enjoys legal pieces, as you have a wonderful handle on the genre.
Like/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
August 6, 2021
3.5 stars
As the book opens, Sepulveda County Superior Court Judge Natalie Quinn-Gilbert is giving jury instructions in the trial of David Sullinger. Sullinger, who split open the head of his wife Amanda with an axe, claims he was a battered husband who killed in self-defense.
The judge - recently widowed and consumed with grief - hasn't been her best self lately. Nevertheless, she oversaw the proceedings; the prosecution and defense have rested their cases; and the jury has its job to do.
The bulk of the story is about jury deliberations, told from the jurors' rotating points of view. But we also get glimpses into what's going on in the heads of the judge; court clerk; bailiff; prosecuting attorney; paralegal; and sensation-seeking journalist/blogger.
The eight jurors are a diverse group of individuals, including:
- The foreperson - an anxious, coffee-loving, middle-aged woman who works in an office.
- The clergyman - a sizable man who doesn't have much to say.
- The grandmother - a former high school Vice-Principal who has hearing problems.
- The student - the youngest member of the jury, a young lady concerned about doing the right thing.
- The express messenger/actor - an observant young man with a flippant attitude.
- The architect - a fashionable woman who's worried about her business.
- The housewife - a pushy homebody with a strong opinion about everything.
- The jury consultant - a stylish professional woman who's had experience with trials and witnesses.
When deliberations begin, all the jurors seem to have a similar opinion about whether David Sullinger acted in self-defense or whether he murdered his wife in cold blood. Great! The jury foreperson can just 'push the red button' (which signals a decision) and they can go home.
Not so fast though! A couple of the jurors want to talk about specific bits of evidence such as: an incident with a hot tuna casserole; the contradictory testimony of the Sullingers' teenage children; a troubling occurrence in culinary school; the axe that killed Amanda Sullinger; a certain letter; and more. It turns out things aren't so cut and dried after all.
As the jurors debate, some become less certain about their original judgment and others refuse to budge. In fact two or three seem to have an agenda. But who and why might surprise you.
Other characters add depth and interest to the story. These are:
- The courtroom clerk who bakes cupcakes with Judge Quinn-Gilbert and worries about the jurist's health.
- The bailiff who got tossed off the 'real' police force.
- The journalist/blogger who's not too ethical about getting a story.
- The prosecutor who should have done his homework better.
- The CSR (Certified Shorthand Reporter) who reads back evidence in the required monotone.
- The defense attorney who supposedly never loses a trial.....but may be about to lose her husband.
- The presiding judge of the Superior Court (the big boss), who's concerned about Judge Quinn-Gilbert's behavior.
The book strongly reminded me of the excellent 1957 film "12 Angry Men", about a jury of 12 white men who must decide the fate of a slum dweller - probably Hispanic - accused of killing his father. Both Rotstein's book and the film examine people's preconceived notions, prejudices, and biases.
I enjoyed the novel, and thought the 'slightly addled judge' angle was a creative departure from the usual books set in courtrooms. I'd recommend the book to readers who like mysteries and courtroom dramas.
Thanks to Netgalley, the author (Robert Rotstein), and the publisher (Blackstone Publishing) for a copy of the book.
You can follow my reviews at https://reviewsbybarbsaffer.blogspot....
August 30, 2018
We, the Jury was such an enjoyable read. The book follows the trial of David Sullinger who has been charged with murdering his wife. David claims that his wife has been physically abusing him for years and he killed her in self-defence. This version of the story is supported by David's daughter, however, David's son provides a contradictory testimony claiming that the monster in the relationship was not the murdered mother, but the father. The problem is that the son is a drug addict and no one seems to believe his side of the story. Seemingly straight forward court case for the jury turns out to be more complicated than originally anticipated. As the jurors start deliberating, more and more doubt and questions creep in. Is David guilty or innocent??
Probably the main reason why I enjoyed the book so much was the different points of view we are exposed to as readers. Each chapter is told by a different participant of the trial - 8 members of the jury, judge, bailiff, prosecutor..., which was very refreshing and enable us understand each character's perspective. This book lets us behind the closed doors of jury deliberation which I find very intriguing. It was fascinating to see the impossible task of the jurors of finding the truth and to ensure justice has been served. Sometimes it can take only one person with excellent persuasion skills to sway others to change their opinion.
My only minor complaint would be that for some reason I expected some kind of a twist at the end of the book or perhaps just a more satisfactory ending. I probably shouldn't have done as the book is gripping enough as it is and I would highly recommend it.
Many thanks to NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for my ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Probably the main reason why I enjoyed the book so much was the different points of view we are exposed to as readers. Each chapter is told by a different participant of the trial - 8 members of the jury, judge, bailiff, prosecutor..., which was very refreshing and enable us understand each character's perspective. This book lets us behind the closed doors of jury deliberation which I find very intriguing. It was fascinating to see the impossible task of the jurors of finding the truth and to ensure justice has been served. Sometimes it can take only one person with excellent persuasion skills to sway others to change their opinion.
My only minor complaint would be that for some reason I expected some kind of a twist at the end of the book or perhaps just a more satisfactory ending. I probably shouldn't have done as the book is gripping enough as it is and I would highly recommend it.
Many thanks to NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for my ARC in exchange for an honest review.
September 21, 2018
I’m a bit of a law junkie. I love legal thrillers and anything to do with the criminal justice system. In fact, I even volunteer every year to be the defendant in a first degree murder case in a mock trial for a criminal law class at a local law school (not to brag, but I have been found “Not Guilty” twice). This fiction book We, the Jury was so much fun. Unlike a typical legal thriller, the book alternates perspectives between many participants in the trial from members of the jury to the judge to the court reporter and bailiff and legal teams. It’s better than being a fly on the wall in the jury room because you’re inside the head of the jurors and other participants. The format showcases the effects of issues like the impact of witnesses in person vs. the court transcription read back, jury interpretations, and jury interactions. I would not want to be a defendant for real because of all of these factors that could impact the jury’s decision.
Thanks to NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing, and the author Robert Rotstein for an advanced electronic reading copy.
Thanks to NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing, and the author Robert Rotstein for an advanced electronic reading copy.
October 27, 2018
Mirror Mirror On The Wall....Who’s the FAIRIST of them all?
It is said that juries have something that machines still lack-a sense of moral responsibility.
But, do they really?
When each juror is bringing their personal animosities and biases to the deliberation room, can a just verdict really be reached?
Is winning more important than justice? Would you rather convince your fellow jurors to see things your way, than admit that perhaps your initial thoughts may have been wrong and change whether you will vote to convict or acquit?
David Sullinger has been accused of murdering his wife in self defense, just before their 21st wedding anniversary. His wife, Amanda was once his 11th grade history teacher. They first slept together when he was 16 or 17 years old....their children disagree on which parent was “Satan”.
The judge has just instructed the jury that David Sullinger just killed Amanda with malice aforethought. She left out the words, “It is for you to decide whether,” (David Sullinger just killed his wife Amanda with malice aforethought.)
Do you think this jury or any, would not already have some strong opinions just based on these facts alone?
Do you?
Meet your jurors:
Juror #1 A records manager in an insurance company
Juror #6. An architect
Juror #17 A Housewife with 3 young children
Juror #11. A college student
Juror # 29. A jury consultant
Juror #33. A grandmother who wears hearing aids...
Juror # 43 A clergyman
Juror #52 An express messenger/actor
This is a unique legal drama that shares with the reader, not only your jurors perspectives, but also those of the Honorable Natalie Quinn Gilbert, her clerk, Mick, the bailiff- Bradley Kobashigawa, both lawyers, and even a blogger whose job is to entertain..not to be objective.
I loved hearing from them all, but it’s TERRIFYING to realize how much the personal lives, bias, and personal agendas, can affect the outcome of a trial!
Who will prevail?
Will justice be served?
I would thank to thank Netgalley, Blackstone Publishing and Robert Rotstein for the ARC I received in exchange for a candid review! This title was just released on Oct. 23rd 2018 and I highly recommend it for readers who enjoy legal dramas!
It is said that juries have something that machines still lack-a sense of moral responsibility.
But, do they really?
When each juror is bringing their personal animosities and biases to the deliberation room, can a just verdict really be reached?
Is winning more important than justice? Would you rather convince your fellow jurors to see things your way, than admit that perhaps your initial thoughts may have been wrong and change whether you will vote to convict or acquit?
David Sullinger has been accused of murdering his wife in self defense, just before their 21st wedding anniversary. His wife, Amanda was once his 11th grade history teacher. They first slept together when he was 16 or 17 years old....their children disagree on which parent was “Satan”.
The judge has just instructed the jury that David Sullinger just killed Amanda with malice aforethought. She left out the words, “It is for you to decide whether,” (David Sullinger just killed his wife Amanda with malice aforethought.)
Do you think this jury or any, would not already have some strong opinions just based on these facts alone?
Do you?
Meet your jurors:
Juror #1 A records manager in an insurance company
Juror #6. An architect
Juror #17 A Housewife with 3 young children
Juror #11. A college student
Juror # 29. A jury consultant
Juror #33. A grandmother who wears hearing aids...
Juror # 43 A clergyman
Juror #52 An express messenger/actor
This is a unique legal drama that shares with the reader, not only your jurors perspectives, but also those of the Honorable Natalie Quinn Gilbert, her clerk, Mick, the bailiff- Bradley Kobashigawa, both lawyers, and even a blogger whose job is to entertain..not to be objective.
I loved hearing from them all, but it’s TERRIFYING to realize how much the personal lives, bias, and personal agendas, can affect the outcome of a trial!
Who will prevail?
Will justice be served?
I would thank to thank Netgalley, Blackstone Publishing and Robert Rotstein for the ARC I received in exchange for a candid review! This title was just released on Oct. 23rd 2018 and I highly recommend it for readers who enjoy legal dramas!
August 12, 2025
Legal thrillers are one of my favourites though I have not been reading that many lately. I found this to be good, though it could have been better.
David Sullinger has killed his wife Amanda Sullinger. It was brutal and tragic; he hit her with an axe. Amanda, at 28 years, was much older than David who was 19. Amanda was previously his history teacher. Amanda was the sole earner, and had got a real estate license. David tried various things, and was unemployed when the homicide happened. They have children - daughter Lacey and son Dillon. The defence argues that David was abused, and possibly acting in self defence. Judge Natalie Quinn-Gilbert presides over the court. She is going through a challenging period having lost her husband Jonathan 4 months ago. The story is told through various perspectives.
The circumstances prevalent at the time the homicide occurred is laid out well and evokes interest. The varied perspectives adds multiple viewpoints, though it does not reveal as many new aspects as I would have expected. The characters are the right mix, though their character building could have had more depth. I liked the last sections and how the jury reaches its final decision.
Overall, an interesting read though it fell a little short of my expectations.
My rating: 3.5 / 5.
David Sullinger has killed his wife Amanda Sullinger. It was brutal and tragic; he hit her with an axe. Amanda, at 28 years, was much older than David who was 19. Amanda was previously his history teacher. Amanda was the sole earner, and had got a real estate license. David tried various things, and was unemployed when the homicide happened. They have children - daughter Lacey and son Dillon. The defence argues that David was abused, and possibly acting in self defence. Judge Natalie Quinn-Gilbert presides over the court. She is going through a challenging period having lost her husband Jonathan 4 months ago. The story is told through various perspectives.
The circumstances prevalent at the time the homicide occurred is laid out well and evokes interest. The varied perspectives adds multiple viewpoints, though it does not reveal as many new aspects as I would have expected. The characters are the right mix, though their character building could have had more depth. I liked the last sections and how the jury reaches its final decision.
Overall, an interesting read though it fell a little short of my expectations.
My rating: 3.5 / 5.
August 20, 2018
I really enjoyed this book told from the point of views of the jury, bailiff, clerk, judge , prosecutor and defending lawyer etc. We get to see their state of mind, their personal bias and insecurities, the cultural context and the filters through which their verdict will come. One aspect I’m not sure I really grasped was the motivation behind the twist -can’t say more because I don’t want to spoil it for anyone!
Thanks to Netgalley for an arc of this book.
Thanks to Netgalley for an arc of this book.
January 21, 2019
When I first saw the description pf We, the Jury on NetGalley I was reminded of 12 Angry Men. While this novel is on par with that great classic, We, the Jury stands on its own. Woven into a fabric of a sensational trial where an alleged battered husband kills his former high school teacher come wife are threads of socioeconomic, gender and race issues. A diverse jury is used to illuminate how past experiences color perception. The impact of the judge's mental state on the direction of the trial is examined. The reliability of witness statements, credibility of expert testimony, counsel perfomance -- in Rotstein's deft hand all the players in the process of justice are given due attention.
For these reasons We, the Jury was not only suspenseful but thought provoking as well.
Special thanks to NetGalley, Blackstone publishing and Robert Rotstein for access to this book in exchange for an honest review.
For these reasons We, the Jury was not only suspenseful but thought provoking as well.
Special thanks to NetGalley, Blackstone publishing and Robert Rotstein for access to this book in exchange for an honest review.
May 23, 2019
4.5 Rounded to 5
After reading Matt's Review of this book I knew I had to pick it up from Netgalley. I don’t typically read legal thrillers, but the premise of this was just too ‘Twelve Angry Men’ for me to pass on. Ultimately, it does have some of the feel of the old black and white movie, but it is also brought full force into the now.
A man is on trial for killing his wife. Did he kill her out of self-defense, due to ongoing abuse and humiliation at the hands of his wife? Or, is he just trying to get away with murder? I don’t want to spoil any of this story for anyone, so I’ll just say that for a legal thriller, this one really had me flipping the pages as fast as I could. Every time I thought I knew the ‘real’ truth, something happened, or a piece of evidence was discussed, that made me question my beliefs. Ultimately, I’m not jealous of anyone that served on that jury. Having been on a murder trial before, I could definitely feel the pressure of having to make the right decision based on the evidence, and it was extremely difficult to be the heads of the some of the jurors that weren’t taking the situation seriously enough. We do end up getting the POV of each of the jurors, as well as other key players within the story, and all have very unique voices and personalities. Of course, we don’t get any POV from the husband or his kids, which makes the whole story that much more realistic. You really feel like you are part of the jury trying to figure out this man’s fate.
Highly recommended to anyone that enjoys legal thrillers, or the courtroom process in general. This was very realistic.
Received via Netgalley and reviewed of my own accord.
After reading Matt's Review of this book I knew I had to pick it up from Netgalley. I don’t typically read legal thrillers, but the premise of this was just too ‘Twelve Angry Men’ for me to pass on. Ultimately, it does have some of the feel of the old black and white movie, but it is also brought full force into the now.
A man is on trial for killing his wife. Did he kill her out of self-defense, due to ongoing abuse and humiliation at the hands of his wife? Or, is he just trying to get away with murder? I don’t want to spoil any of this story for anyone, so I’ll just say that for a legal thriller, this one really had me flipping the pages as fast as I could. Every time I thought I knew the ‘real’ truth, something happened, or a piece of evidence was discussed, that made me question my beliefs. Ultimately, I’m not jealous of anyone that served on that jury. Having been on a murder trial before, I could definitely feel the pressure of having to make the right decision based on the evidence, and it was extremely difficult to be the heads of the some of the jurors that weren’t taking the situation seriously enough. We do end up getting the POV of each of the jurors, as well as other key players within the story, and all have very unique voices and personalities. Of course, we don’t get any POV from the husband or his kids, which makes the whole story that much more realistic. You really feel like you are part of the jury trying to figure out this man’s fate.
Highly recommended to anyone that enjoys legal thrillers, or the courtroom process in general. This was very realistic.
Received via Netgalley and reviewed of my own accord.
![Profile Image for Terence M [on a brief semi-hiatus].](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.gr-assets.com%2Fimages%2FS%2Fcompressed.photo.goodreads.com%2Fusers%2F1712357414i%2F6658001._UY200_CR4%2C0%2C200%2C200_.jpg&w=128&q=75)
May 9, 2019
Audiobook - 08:20 Hours - Multiple Narrators
3.5 Stars of 5.0 - I liked it (3.0) and the author's contrivance was interesting (0.5), but I did not think it is was worthy enough to be rounded up.
From my activity notes:
Listened to: 06:00 Hours, Balance: 02:20 Hours
I was really excited about this audiobook. An excellent review from Matt first and a little later an equally positive one from Julie got me excited enough to buy the book and load it to my iPhone immediately! However, I have listened to 6:00 hours in two sittings and I am impressed, but unfortunately, not excited.
I regret to say that the last two hours did not improve my enjoyment of the book.
I enjoy most legal thrillers, legal procedurals and courtroom dramas. "We, the Jury" promised something different, taking the unusual approach of speaking from the perspective of the various participants, including the judge, the prosecutor, the defence, the members of the jury and various other court room players. This procedure was an interesting experiment and really suited to being produced as an audiobook, but generally the characters, particularly the jury members, were pretty lifeless and the actual story about the crime and the person on trial was nothing to get excited about. The way the final verdict was achieved, and its aftermath, showed that the plot was fairly shallow, although the writing was reasonably good. However, I was disappointed because of my probably unrealistically high hopes based on a couple of very positive reviews, one 4 Stars and the other 5 Stars.
3.5 Stars of 5.0 - I liked it (3.0) and the author's contrivance was interesting (0.5), but I did not think it is was worthy enough to be rounded up.
From my activity notes:
Listened to: 06:00 Hours, Balance: 02:20 Hours
I was really excited about this audiobook. An excellent review from Matt first and a little later an equally positive one from Julie got me excited enough to buy the book and load it to my iPhone immediately! However, I have listened to 6:00 hours in two sittings and I am impressed, but unfortunately, not excited.
I regret to say that the last two hours did not improve my enjoyment of the book.
I enjoy most legal thrillers, legal procedurals and courtroom dramas. "We, the Jury" promised something different, taking the unusual approach of speaking from the perspective of the various participants, including the judge, the prosecutor, the defence, the members of the jury and various other court room players. This procedure was an interesting experiment and really suited to being produced as an audiobook, but generally the characters, particularly the jury members, were pretty lifeless and the actual story about the crime and the person on trial was nothing to get excited about. The way the final verdict was achieved, and its aftermath, showed that the plot was fairly shallow, although the writing was reasonably good. However, I was disappointed because of my probably unrealistically high hopes based on a couple of very positive reviews, one 4 Stars and the other 5 Stars.
November 14, 2018
There was a period of about 50 pages towards the end of this book that just dragged for me. Every other book in my pile pulled me toward "the other" direction. And that always loses an entire star for me. But I read every word.
It was the bickering and the snotty quotients. They just went over my low tolerance bars. I don't like reading manipulative sarcasm and low life background material that long- it's negative time. And it was, at times in this book, about 5 or 6 sets of "eyes" playing double face for too many pages.
The case was a case that was worth the premises of the jury form as it was posited here. The lawyers' characterizations- they were well done. (Thank God I always ignored every career aptitude test I ever took because Lawyer was always #1 or #2). Not for me the kind of duplicitous convoluted defining of nearly every aspect and entity. The defense lawyer being a prime example.
This book did structure the form criteria and the experience of juries fairly accurately. And yet I found that the jury itself was extremely atypical. Not only in gender, but in vocations and economics. Most juries in my own life experiences are far less educated and almost universally people who are far less busy. Busy people and smart people always by necessity or reveal intelligence get themselves "out" of jury duty on homicide cases. It's a dirty secret, IMHO. Kept from most of the citizens who never spend any time watching jury duty show counts or choices or their procedures for those chosen. I had to see this process time and again for some volunteer work I did in several different decades. It hasn't changed either. It's not hard to get yourself recused or conflicted.
The last 1/2 of the book was barely a 3 star for me. I don't believe it is that easy (as portrayed here) to change the "reasoning" behind those switches for verdict and obtaining the eventual outcome. I've never seen it play out like that- not to that result and not even with a reduced number of jurors. And I've been around the courts for this enough to know outlier. This was outlier too for the numbers of jurors who didn't keep to the "rules" for jurors. Those internet searches!!
The only true to the bone part? For me anyway. It was the Judge's story. It does happen just like that. And to doctors too and to surgeons. One wonderful woman GYN/OB who is a dear friend. Far more often than you'd believe that the people who work with them every day (not family) note the most dire signs. Some of us tell the truth and get those people out of the loop, regardless of how it definitely does hurt them emotionally (economically too, of course). It's not fair and it does feel cruel. But necessary. It makes you feel terrible but they are dangerous. So I felt truly sorry for Mick.
Take this review with a grain of salt though- because I don't think jury trials are a clear path to justice served at all. I'm prejudiced. They are at best, a "group think" on the whole. And humans are entirely fallible in exactly those kinds of "group think" judgments.
It was the bickering and the snotty quotients. They just went over my low tolerance bars. I don't like reading manipulative sarcasm and low life background material that long- it's negative time. And it was, at times in this book, about 5 or 6 sets of "eyes" playing double face for too many pages.
The case was a case that was worth the premises of the jury form as it was posited here. The lawyers' characterizations- they were well done. (Thank God I always ignored every career aptitude test I ever took because Lawyer was always #1 or #2). Not for me the kind of duplicitous convoluted defining of nearly every aspect and entity. The defense lawyer being a prime example.
This book did structure the form criteria and the experience of juries fairly accurately. And yet I found that the jury itself was extremely atypical. Not only in gender, but in vocations and economics. Most juries in my own life experiences are far less educated and almost universally people who are far less busy. Busy people and smart people always by necessity or reveal intelligence get themselves "out" of jury duty on homicide cases. It's a dirty secret, IMHO. Kept from most of the citizens who never spend any time watching jury duty show counts or choices or their procedures for those chosen. I had to see this process time and again for some volunteer work I did in several different decades. It hasn't changed either. It's not hard to get yourself recused or conflicted.
The last 1/2 of the book was barely a 3 star for me. I don't believe it is that easy (as portrayed here) to change the "reasoning" behind those switches for verdict and obtaining the eventual outcome. I've never seen it play out like that- not to that result and not even with a reduced number of jurors. And I've been around the courts for this enough to know outlier. This was outlier too for the numbers of jurors who didn't keep to the "rules" for jurors. Those internet searches!!
The only true to the bone part? For me anyway. It was the Judge's story. It does happen just like that. And to doctors too and to surgeons. One wonderful woman GYN/OB who is a dear friend. Far more often than you'd believe that the people who work with them every day (not family) note the most dire signs. Some of us tell the truth and get those people out of the loop, regardless of how it definitely does hurt them emotionally (economically too, of course). It's not fair and it does feel cruel. But necessary. It makes you feel terrible but they are dangerous. So I felt truly sorry for Mick.
Take this review with a grain of salt though- because I don't think jury trials are a clear path to justice served at all. I'm prejudiced. They are at best, a "group think" on the whole. And humans are entirely fallible in exactly those kinds of "group think" judgments.
February 14, 2025
3.8 stars
I was really skeptical to listen to this audio. I have a copy of the book on my Kindle Fire, that I could have reverted to, but I really wanted to listen to this if possible. My drawback in listening was from when I heard that there were 15 - yes that is not a misprint - 15 narrators for this audio. Now it is only 7 discs - just over 8 hrs long - so 15 narrators - I was skeptical!
However I thought Rotstein did a great job with this audio. Each character had their own narrator, but you did not have to differentiate by voice. Each character was introduced prior to them speaking. Now you might think that would be distracting, but it was not - it was helpful - you knew exactly who was speaking and this method did not distract you from the story being told. Ingenious way to tell a story from each characters point of view, as they went thru a trial - judge, prosecutor, defending attorney, bailiff, guard, court reporter and witnesses - and then you heard the deliberations of the 6 man jury.
Quite unique. I enjoyed this audio very much. Much moreso than one awful narrator blandly trying to voice all the parts. Skepticism overridden...lol!
I was really skeptical to listen to this audio. I have a copy of the book on my Kindle Fire, that I could have reverted to, but I really wanted to listen to this if possible. My drawback in listening was from when I heard that there were 15 - yes that is not a misprint - 15 narrators for this audio. Now it is only 7 discs - just over 8 hrs long - so 15 narrators - I was skeptical!
However I thought Rotstein did a great job with this audio. Each character had their own narrator, but you did not have to differentiate by voice. Each character was introduced prior to them speaking. Now you might think that would be distracting, but it was not - it was helpful - you knew exactly who was speaking and this method did not distract you from the story being told. Ingenious way to tell a story from each characters point of view, as they went thru a trial - judge, prosecutor, defending attorney, bailiff, guard, court reporter and witnesses - and then you heard the deliberations of the 6 man jury.
Quite unique. I enjoyed this audio very much. Much moreso than one awful narrator blandly trying to voice all the parts. Skepticism overridden...lol!
October 20, 2018
David Sullinger is on trial for the murder of his wife of 21 years. His wife happened to be one of his high school teachers. She left teaching and went into high-end real estate and made a great living while David for some reason couldn't hold a job to save his life.
They have two children, one Lacy who is a very poised young woman who supports her father throughout the trial and as soon as she becomes of age, she uses her inheritance to hire a high profile attorney who has adopted the defense of a "battered husband syndrome" for David and has turned this trial into a media frenzy. The youngest child, Dillion is on the side of the prosecution which has a totally different POV regarding his parent's marriage and turns out to be just another blight for the bumbling prosecutor.
The judge is suffering from personal issues that have caused her to make some colossal mistakes during the trial.
This trial was only supposed to last a few weeks and it ends up lasting a month, the jury, of course, has started forming alliances during the trail.
When the jury finally gets the case, the battle is on.
Mr. Rotstein has done a great job of giving the POV of this trial from everyone who is involved in the case from the Judge to the Court Reporter. The diversity of the jury makes this even more enticing. He gives you a bit of background of each jurist without giving too much away.
I could totally relate to the happenings in the Jury room having served on a week-long jury, it can get pretty brutal in there. The nice little old lady that is polite during the trial turns into a virtual tiger when deliberations start. I found myself getting upset with several of the jurists.
This book was very cleverly written and if you like legal thrillers this is a great read. It's different from any legal thriller I've ever read; this book stays inside the courtroom. The mystery is solved, it's the verdict and the personal agendas of the jurists that is the basis driving this book. As I stated above this book is very well written and I look forward to reading more from this author.
Disclosure: I would like to thank the publisher and NetGalley for providing me with an e-galley of this book in exchange for my honest opinion, the opinions I expressed above are my own.
They have two children, one Lacy who is a very poised young woman who supports her father throughout the trial and as soon as she becomes of age, she uses her inheritance to hire a high profile attorney who has adopted the defense of a "battered husband syndrome" for David and has turned this trial into a media frenzy. The youngest child, Dillion is on the side of the prosecution which has a totally different POV regarding his parent's marriage and turns out to be just another blight for the bumbling prosecutor.
The judge is suffering from personal issues that have caused her to make some colossal mistakes during the trial.
This trial was only supposed to last a few weeks and it ends up lasting a month, the jury, of course, has started forming alliances during the trail.
When the jury finally gets the case, the battle is on.
Mr. Rotstein has done a great job of giving the POV of this trial from everyone who is involved in the case from the Judge to the Court Reporter. The diversity of the jury makes this even more enticing. He gives you a bit of background of each jurist without giving too much away.
I could totally relate to the happenings in the Jury room having served on a week-long jury, it can get pretty brutal in there. The nice little old lady that is polite during the trial turns into a virtual tiger when deliberations start. I found myself getting upset with several of the jurists.
This book was very cleverly written and if you like legal thrillers this is a great read. It's different from any legal thriller I've ever read; this book stays inside the courtroom. The mystery is solved, it's the verdict and the personal agendas of the jurists that is the basis driving this book. As I stated above this book is very well written and I look forward to reading more from this author.
Disclosure: I would like to thank the publisher and NetGalley for providing me with an e-galley of this book in exchange for my honest opinion, the opinions I expressed above are my own.
January 3, 2023
This is miles different from the usual courtroom fiction novels in that it allows the reader to be a witness to the entire process. We see it through the eyes of the judge, the bailiff, the court clerk, both lawyers, and of course, as the title suggests...the jury. A man is on trial who admits that he did indeed kill his wife, but he swears it was in self- defense, so his case is totally based on the battered spouse defense. Some of the jurors of course had trouble believing that a man would dare offer this as a defense, so I knew that he was more than likely going to have more trouble getting out the trouble he was already in. After weighing the evidence presented, the jurors begin deliberations. I really like court room dramas...ate up Perry Mason and >i> Matlock episodes. I find that I am engrossed in the legal jockeying between the lawyers. However, the most interesting and exciting part of this book, at least for me, was the deliberations and the careful journey that the jurors took in finally arriving at a unanimous verdict. The book is so realistic, that I sometimes had to check again to be sure that it wasn't based on reality and remind myself it was an actual work of fiction. More difficulties came in yet another form that could have greatly affected the case when we learned that even though the judge was likeable, circumstances may have caused her to no longer be fit to do her job. That was at once terrifying and very poignant. The real drama takes place during jury deliberations. The jurors came from all walks of life. One was a member of the clergy, another a housewife, a retired school principal...all had a voice, all went in with an opinion, some more than others, that was also realistic. I liked the majority of them, but as someone who has served on a jury, I found that this jury was extremely realistic. One comment from the book that has stuck with me sums it up pretty well..."Sometimes when the law tries for fair, it misses right". The author did a terrific job with this one.
July 12, 2018
Thank you NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for the chance to read this clever, compelling legal novel. The mystery and suspense builds up based on how the jury members will vote and the outcome and repercussions of the trial.
David Sullinger killed his wife with an axe blow to the head the day before their 21st wedding anniversary. Was it premeditated murder or the result of years of both physical and psychological abuse by his wife, Amanda? The characters were well developed and interesting. I enjoyed the different perspectives of everyone involved in the trial, from the judge,the defense and prosecution, the eight jury members, the bailiff, a tabloid reporter,etc. The story brings insight into their assorted personalities and exposes their weaknesses and flaws, as well as the jury’s struggle to reach a verdict. There is tension within the jury as the members clash with one another over the evidence and some manipulation taking place.
This was an enthralling legal drama and I was left uncertain to whether justice had been served. I am thankful to be introduced to the author’s book and hope to read more of his novels.
David Sullinger killed his wife with an axe blow to the head the day before their 21st wedding anniversary. Was it premeditated murder or the result of years of both physical and psychological abuse by his wife, Amanda? The characters were well developed and interesting. I enjoyed the different perspectives of everyone involved in the trial, from the judge,the defense and prosecution, the eight jury members, the bailiff, a tabloid reporter,etc. The story brings insight into their assorted personalities and exposes their weaknesses and flaws, as well as the jury’s struggle to reach a verdict. There is tension within the jury as the members clash with one another over the evidence and some manipulation taking place.
This was an enthralling legal drama and I was left uncertain to whether justice had been served. I am thankful to be introduced to the author’s book and hope to read more of his novels.
June 22, 2019
Liked the format of the book where the commentary kept switching between each of the jurors. However the ending was not as impressive so reduced a star.
January 12, 2023
We, the Jury has been lingering on my TBR for way too long because as soon as I started reading, it was very difficult to set this one down. Reminiscent of Twelve Angry Men, readers see the story through the perspective of over a dozen participants in the trial, including court officials and yes, the jury.
I felt it was a fast-paced courtroom drama with an eclectic cast of characters. I cannot remember who exactly on my friend list recommended this book to me, but I greatly enjoyed it.
Goodreads Review Published 11/01/23
I felt it was a fast-paced courtroom drama with an eclectic cast of characters. I cannot remember who exactly on my friend list recommended this book to me, but I greatly enjoyed it.
Goodreads Review Published 11/01/23
July 19, 2018
We The Jury, a fascinating work of fiction with a real twist, follows the deliberations 8 members of a jury who are expected to rule on a particularly gruesome murder. The protagonists are jury members from the community with highly varied backgrounds, which ultimately steer their decisions. We the Jury is a departure for Robert Rotstein from his immensely popular Parker Stern series of 3 books.
The fact that David Sullinger has killed his wife Amanda is undisputed. When the police arrive Mrs. Sullinger is dead, killed by a blow to head with an axe. Mr. Sullinger claims self-defense and indicates that his wife had been abusing him for years. Mr. Sullinger has a high-powered lawyer who has never lost a trial. Meanwhile the public defender Jack Cranston is considered to be a bumbling fool. The Jury’s choice seems obvious, but is it? This story centers on the jury and how they reach their conclusions. All is not what it seems.
Robert Rotstein is a master at character development. Everything we learn about the people in that room relates to the conclusions they finally reach. I particularly like the interactions between the jurors. Their relationships deteriorate because they are stuck together trying to solve a difficult issue.
The messenger says it best: “I know I have no friends in this room. I know you think I’m just a momma’s boy, . . . We don’t have to like each other. A jury is supposed to be a cross-section of the community and that’s what we are. Maybe it’s better if we don’t like each other, because maybe that means we’re diverse like we’re supposed to be. I say let’s do the best we can to cooperate, so we can reach a verdict.”
I am a bit confused by all the time spent on the judge and her health issues. I am not sure I understand whether or not her issues contribute to the final result. Regardless, as with the other characters, Rotstein helps us really get to know her.
I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in human behavior and what drives people. I give it a 5 on 5. I want to thank NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for providing me with a copy of this book in exchange for a fair review.
The fact that David Sullinger has killed his wife Amanda is undisputed. When the police arrive Mrs. Sullinger is dead, killed by a blow to head with an axe. Mr. Sullinger claims self-defense and indicates that his wife had been abusing him for years. Mr. Sullinger has a high-powered lawyer who has never lost a trial. Meanwhile the public defender Jack Cranston is considered to be a bumbling fool. The Jury’s choice seems obvious, but is it? This story centers on the jury and how they reach their conclusions. All is not what it seems.
Robert Rotstein is a master at character development. Everything we learn about the people in that room relates to the conclusions they finally reach. I particularly like the interactions between the jurors. Their relationships deteriorate because they are stuck together trying to solve a difficult issue.
The messenger says it best: “I know I have no friends in this room. I know you think I’m just a momma’s boy, . . . We don’t have to like each other. A jury is supposed to be a cross-section of the community and that’s what we are. Maybe it’s better if we don’t like each other, because maybe that means we’re diverse like we’re supposed to be. I say let’s do the best we can to cooperate, so we can reach a verdict.”
I am a bit confused by all the time spent on the judge and her health issues. I am not sure I understand whether or not her issues contribute to the final result. Regardless, as with the other characters, Rotstein helps us really get to know her.
I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in human behavior and what drives people. I give it a 5 on 5. I want to thank NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for providing me with a copy of this book in exchange for a fair review.
January 7, 2019
We The Jury was an interesting read. It’s about what goes on behind the scenes in a court house after the trial. A man was accused of murdering his wife.
October 27, 2018
Mirror Mirror On The Wall....Who’s the FAIRIST of them all?
It is said that juries have something that machines still lack-a sense of moral responsibility.
But, do they really?
When each juror is bringing their personal animosities and biases to the deliberation room, can a just verdict really be reached?
Is winning more important than justice? Would you rather convince your fellow jurors to see things your way, than admit that perhaps your initial thoughts may have been wrong and change whether you will vote to convict or acquit?
David Sullinger has been accused of murdering his wife in self defense, just before their 21st wedding anniversary. His wife, Amanda was once his 11th grade history teacher. They first slept together when he was 16 or 17 years old....their children disagree on which parent was “Satan”.
The judge has just instructed the jury that David Sullinger just killed Amanda with malice aforethought. She left out the words, “It is for you to decide whether,” (David Sullinger just killed his wife Amanda with malice aforethought.)
Do you think this jury or any, would not already have some strong opinions just based on these facts alone?
Do you?
Meet your jurors:
Juror #1 A records manager in an insurance company
Juror #6. An architect
Juror #17 A Housewife with 3 young children
Juror #11. A college student
Juror # 29. A jury consultant
Juror #33. A grandmother who wears hearing aids...
Juror # 43 A clergyman
Juror #52 An express messenger/actor
This is a unique legal drama that shares with the reader, not only the perspectives of the jurors, but also those of the Honorable Natalie Quinn Gilbert, her clerk Mick, the bailiff Bradley, both lawyers, and even that of a tabloid blogger, whose job it is to entertain-not be objective.
I loved hearing from them all, but it is TERRIFYING to realize how much the personal lives, bias, and even personal agendas can affect the outcome of a trial!
Who will prevail?
Will justice be served?
I would like to thank NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing, and Robert Rotstein for the ARC I received in exchange for a candid review. This title has been released, and I would highly recommend it for readers who enjoy character driven, legal dramas!!
It is said that juries have something that machines still lack-a sense of moral responsibility.
But, do they really?
When each juror is bringing their personal animosities and biases to the deliberation room, can a just verdict really be reached?
Is winning more important than justice? Would you rather convince your fellow jurors to see things your way, than admit that perhaps your initial thoughts may have been wrong and change whether you will vote to convict or acquit?
David Sullinger has been accused of murdering his wife in self defense, just before their 21st wedding anniversary. His wife, Amanda was once his 11th grade history teacher. They first slept together when he was 16 or 17 years old....their children disagree on which parent was “Satan”.
The judge has just instructed the jury that David Sullinger just killed Amanda with malice aforethought. She left out the words, “It is for you to decide whether,” (David Sullinger just killed his wife Amanda with malice aforethought.)
Do you think this jury or any, would not already have some strong opinions just based on these facts alone?
Do you?
Meet your jurors:
Juror #1 A records manager in an insurance company
Juror #6. An architect
Juror #17 A Housewife with 3 young children
Juror #11. A college student
Juror # 29. A jury consultant
Juror #33. A grandmother who wears hearing aids...
Juror # 43 A clergyman
Juror #52 An express messenger/actor
This is a unique legal drama that shares with the reader, not only the perspectives of the jurors, but also those of the Honorable Natalie Quinn Gilbert, her clerk Mick, the bailiff Bradley, both lawyers, and even that of a tabloid blogger, whose job it is to entertain-not be objective.
I loved hearing from them all, but it is TERRIFYING to realize how much the personal lives, bias, and even personal agendas can affect the outcome of a trial!
Who will prevail?
Will justice be served?
I would like to thank NetGalley, Blackstone Publishing, and Robert Rotstein for the ARC I received in exchange for a candid review. This title has been released, and I would highly recommend it for readers who enjoy character driven, legal dramas!!
October 22, 2018
My rating 3.5 stars
Release date: 10/23/18
Not your traditional legal-drama novel. This reminded me more of a "Bull" TV episode as it focuses on the jury and others in the courtroom, the judge, bailiff, court reporter, etc. It gives us insight into what they're thinking as they move along in the courtroom, and in the deliberation quarters. I give the author a 4-star rating for originality, but a 3-star for entertainment - therefore my 3.5 rating.
This legal drama is sometimes a comedy-drama, although the crime itself is not comedic in any way. The dialogue sometimes prompts a welcome chuckle at a tense moment. A man is accused of murdering his wife with a pick-axe, which turns out actually to be a mattock. He claims to be an abused husband who feared for his life. His daughter vouches for him, his son claims he is the abuser.
This brings to light what a jury really does have to go through when trying to reach the truth of a matter, how difficult this can be when all the jurors have different takes on a what they've heard or not heard. Not an easy task, but also makes us wonder (as stated in the novel) why the decision of innocence or guilt of an alleged crime is not decided by professionals in law, the attorneys, judges and so on, that have studied and know the law, as opposed to a jury of non-professionals, a jury of the defendants "peers," simple people that are janitors, teachers, actors, housewives, plumbers, who don't know anything about the law. It does make one think. We are certainly reminded that even those versed in the law are not exempt from life's unexpected twists. They are people too, just like us.
My thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for the opportunity to read a pre-release copy and post an unbiased review of this work.
Release date: 10/23/18
Not your traditional legal-drama novel. This reminded me more of a "Bull" TV episode as it focuses on the jury and others in the courtroom, the judge, bailiff, court reporter, etc. It gives us insight into what they're thinking as they move along in the courtroom, and in the deliberation quarters. I give the author a 4-star rating for originality, but a 3-star for entertainment - therefore my 3.5 rating.
This legal drama is sometimes a comedy-drama, although the crime itself is not comedic in any way. The dialogue sometimes prompts a welcome chuckle at a tense moment. A man is accused of murdering his wife with a pick-axe, which turns out actually to be a mattock. He claims to be an abused husband who feared for his life. His daughter vouches for him, his son claims he is the abuser.
This brings to light what a jury really does have to go through when trying to reach the truth of a matter, how difficult this can be when all the jurors have different takes on a what they've heard or not heard. Not an easy task, but also makes us wonder (as stated in the novel) why the decision of innocence or guilt of an alleged crime is not decided by professionals in law, the attorneys, judges and so on, that have studied and know the law, as opposed to a jury of non-professionals, a jury of the defendants "peers," simple people that are janitors, teachers, actors, housewives, plumbers, who don't know anything about the law. It does make one think. We are certainly reminded that even those versed in the law are not exempt from life's unexpected twists. They are people too, just like us.
My thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for the opportunity to read a pre-release copy and post an unbiased review of this work.
November 17, 2018
An interesting approach to a murder trial, We, the Jury, draws the reader in immediately with his approach of showing the story through the eyes of the eight jurors, the trial judge and others associated with the court.
Human nature is on trial via the author's eyes, more central to the plot than the alleged murder they jury is deliberating. A social commentary? It left me with fresh thoughts about the justice system.
Human nature is on trial via the author's eyes, more central to the plot than the alleged murder they jury is deliberating. A social commentary? It left me with fresh thoughts about the justice system.
November 28, 2024
This has been on my TBR since it was published. Not sure why I waited so long to read it except that the list seems to grow faster than I can keep up.
3.5 stars
Anyway… this was a rather different approach to a legal thriller! This court room mystery took up far more space in the jury room than the court room.
Eight jurors were chosen to decide the fate of husband David who axed his wife Amanda in the head and killed her. Oh … he did it, but was it self defense or…..premeditated??
The story starts in the courtroom with snippets of the court drama and a variety of witnesses. The chapters are each from a different perspective ranging from the Judge, the bailiff, the court recorder, the clerk, the prosecutor, the defense counsel, the two children of the deceased and the accused, and each of the eight jurors, as well as a few others. We get insight into everyone’s thought process and their perception of the evidence presented, and a bit of their background, perhaps being insight to both their thought process and perception. And we get it multiple times through as each new chapter shifts the perspective.
It’s quite a unique approach, and although at times it seems to slow the story down, it has a layering effect to the mystery.
The jury members were a real cross section of the community. As a group they had interesting discussions and were portrayed as realistic “peers” of the accused.
While I enjoyed the writing, I’m not sure I enjoyed the presentation, with each chapter having a different narrator. It seemed to trip up the flow of the story and as a result I didn’t enjoy the story as much as I had hoped to. The story did continue to remain a mystery until the very end. Even once the jury came to decision, there was more to the story, yet again unraveling the mystery. But it was a little too flat. There was never a big build up before the reveal. Nonetheless, it was an interesting approach.
3.5 stars
Anyway… this was a rather different approach to a legal thriller! This court room mystery took up far more space in the jury room than the court room.
Eight jurors were chosen to decide the fate of husband David who axed his wife Amanda in the head and killed her. Oh … he did it, but was it self defense or…..premeditated??
The story starts in the courtroom with snippets of the court drama and a variety of witnesses. The chapters are each from a different perspective ranging from the Judge, the bailiff, the court recorder, the clerk, the prosecutor, the defense counsel, the two children of the deceased and the accused, and each of the eight jurors, as well as a few others. We get insight into everyone’s thought process and their perception of the evidence presented, and a bit of their background, perhaps being insight to both their thought process and perception. And we get it multiple times through as each new chapter shifts the perspective.
It’s quite a unique approach, and although at times it seems to slow the story down, it has a layering effect to the mystery.
The jury members were a real cross section of the community. As a group they had interesting discussions and were portrayed as realistic “peers” of the accused.
While I enjoyed the writing, I’m not sure I enjoyed the presentation, with each chapter having a different narrator. It seemed to trip up the flow of the story and as a result I didn’t enjoy the story as much as I had hoped to. The story did continue to remain a mystery until the very end. Even once the jury came to decision, there was more to the story, yet again unraveling the mystery. But it was a little too flat. There was never a big build up before the reveal. Nonetheless, it was an interesting approach.
September 25, 2025
"What is the truth, anyway, except what the decision makers say it is?"
Most definitely an interesting twist on the legal thriller/courtroom drama, told from the perspective of multiple people involved in the trial, it is a scary look at what can happen in a jury room where everyone shows up with their own personal baggage and sometimes their scary agendas. My first novel by the author and I really enjoyed it, definitely will pick up more of his work.
Most definitely an interesting twist on the legal thriller/courtroom drama, told from the perspective of multiple people involved in the trial, it is a scary look at what can happen in a jury room where everyone shows up with their own personal baggage and sometimes their scary agendas. My first novel by the author and I really enjoyed it, definitely will pick up more of his work.
July 18, 2018
5 stars
David Sullinger admitted to killing his wife on the day prior to his twenty-first wedding anniversary. He says he did it in self-defense. His wife Amanda was abusive to him and the children, a boy and a girl, and came after him with weapons that day.
His daughter, then eighteen, hires a very smart and manipulative attorney named Jenna Blaylock who makes the prosecutor look like a buffoon. The defense attorney is very confident and is celebrating a victory just as the jury retired for their verdict. But the story is not over yet. The jury must deliberate first.
This book is told from the points of view of several people, more than a dozen, who have their own problems, agendas, feelings and perspectives. The jurors are a cross-section of the public; some tried to get out of jury duty, some welcomed it. They come with a whole truckload of opinions. They try to determine who was telling the truth on the witness stand – not as easy as they first assumed. They plod on and in spite of the dismissal of one of the eight jurors, they finally reach a verdict.
This is a great book. It is well written and plotted. It was interesting. I kept wondering how I would react in such a situation. Would I go all wishy-washy or stick to my principals? Could I deal with the pressure? While I’ve been summoned to jury duty several times, I’ve never been chosen to serve for one reason or another. I found the psychological insights of Mr. Rotstein very valuable and perceptive. I think this is a book that all people should read as a primer of what may happen if they are chosen to serve.
I want to thank NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for forwarding to me a copy of this very insightful and interesting book for me to read, enjoy and review.
David Sullinger admitted to killing his wife on the day prior to his twenty-first wedding anniversary. He says he did it in self-defense. His wife Amanda was abusive to him and the children, a boy and a girl, and came after him with weapons that day.
His daughter, then eighteen, hires a very smart and manipulative attorney named Jenna Blaylock who makes the prosecutor look like a buffoon. The defense attorney is very confident and is celebrating a victory just as the jury retired for their verdict. But the story is not over yet. The jury must deliberate first.
This book is told from the points of view of several people, more than a dozen, who have their own problems, agendas, feelings and perspectives. The jurors are a cross-section of the public; some tried to get out of jury duty, some welcomed it. They come with a whole truckload of opinions. They try to determine who was telling the truth on the witness stand – not as easy as they first assumed. They plod on and in spite of the dismissal of one of the eight jurors, they finally reach a verdict.
This is a great book. It is well written and plotted. It was interesting. I kept wondering how I would react in such a situation. Would I go all wishy-washy or stick to my principals? Could I deal with the pressure? While I’ve been summoned to jury duty several times, I’ve never been chosen to serve for one reason or another. I found the psychological insights of Mr. Rotstein very valuable and perceptive. I think this is a book that all people should read as a primer of what may happen if they are chosen to serve.
I want to thank NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for forwarding to me a copy of this very insightful and interesting book for me to read, enjoy and review.
December 3, 2019
Great story telling of otherwise “regular” legal thriller, told from each juror, judge, courtroom employees and a blogger. The audiobook is quite entertaining with different narrator for each character. Well done!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 320 reviews