What do you think?
Rate this book
El diablo del abogado
Joe Cambell, un carismático jugador de baloncesto, es acusado de violación. La mujer que lo acusa lo invitó a subir a su habitación y dio pie a los prolegómenos de una relación sexual entre ambos. Pero afirma que en un momento dado quiso poner fin a lo que estaba apenas empezando. Abe Ringel, el abogado escogido por el deportista, sabe que todas las apariencias están a su favor. La reputación de su defendido es intachable, hay testigos de que ella lo invitó a su habitación... sin embargo, en el desarrollo de esa investigación aparecen indicios que ponen fin a la seguridad. A partir de ese momento, Abe se enfrenta a un trágico dilema: el código moral de su profesión le obliga a defender a su cliente por encima de cualquier duda; el código ético de la vida le enfrenta a la posibilidad de dejar en la calle a un hipotético violador.
Alan M. Dershowitz participó en la defensa de los casos de Mike Tyson, O. J. Simpson y Claus von Bulow y la experiencia en ellos le avala como el más indicado para escribir una novela centrada en la gran duda que rodea a la justicia: si todo acusado merece la mejor defensa, pero todo acusado puede ser culpable...
Alan M. Dershowitz participó en la defensa de los casos de Mike Tyson, O. J. Simpson y Claus von Bulow y la experiencia en ellos le avala como el más indicado para escribir una novela centrada en la gran duda que rodea a la justicia: si todo acusado merece la mejor defensa, pero todo acusado puede ser culpable...
388 pages, Hardcover
Published November 1, 1995
16 people are currently reading
212 people want to read
About the author
Alan M. Dershowitz
146 books318 followersAlan Morton Dershowitz is an American lawyer, jurist, and political commentator. He is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. He is known for his career as an attorney in several high-profile law cases and commentary on the Arab-Israeli conflict.
He has spent most of his career at Harvard, where, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor in its history, until Noam Elkies took the record. Dershowitz still holds the record as the youngest person to become a professor of law there.
As a criminal appellate lawyer, Dershowitz has won thirteen out of the fifteen murder and attempted murder cases he has handled. He successfully argued to overturn the conviction of Claus von Bülow for the attempted murder of Bülow's wife, Sunny. Dershowitz was the appellate advisor for the defense in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman.
He has spent most of his career at Harvard, where, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor in its history, until Noam Elkies took the record. Dershowitz still holds the record as the youngest person to become a professor of law there.
As a criminal appellate lawyer, Dershowitz has won thirteen out of the fifteen murder and attempted murder cases he has handled. He successfully argued to overturn the conviction of Claus von Bülow for the attempted murder of Bülow's wife, Sunny. Dershowitz was the appellate advisor for the defense in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
May 18, 2017
Everything about this book is not easy to grasp. When one reads it you feel like you are in a law lecture. Of course, you will learn a lot, and that is all there is learning. If and when you decide to read this book, please do not expect a great story because it is not.
I said everything about the book is hard for an average mind. Now let me explain:-
The author's name and title of the book. Of course, Alan Morton Dershowitz is a household name in America and as easily, around the world. From O. J. Simpson's case, to Harvard, and most of all in the Federal Supreme Court of the united States. Still, his name is not very easy for us to pronounce.
The title of the book. What does it even mean? That is just like Dershowitz, making even the simplest sound very difficult. "The Advocate's Devil" and not "The Devil's Advocate". I know, it is not very interesting. You must be into Dershowitz to be amused. I will let you figure that one out for yourself.
The theme. Jurisprudence! Jurisprudence! Jurisprudence! We get to learn about some of the most interesting court decisions. Moreover, we get to be with Abe as he traverses and searches what is relevant and important to free his client who is being accused of rape. Should tge truth be disclosed? Does the defence advocate has an obligation to disclose everything that he knows to the court? What about his duty of confidentiality to his client? How does one balance the two sides?
The answers. They come in form of parables which are not easy to understand. Haskel is the one Abe goes to for answers. He is an old consevative attorney who suffers from Alzheimer. He uses talmudic wisdom to reconcile the various ethical dilemas which his friend faces from time to time during the trial. It is this unconventional method of solving problems that gets the work done.
I said everything about the book is hard for an average mind. Now let me explain:-
The author's name and title of the book. Of course, Alan Morton Dershowitz is a household name in America and as easily, around the world. From O. J. Simpson's case, to Harvard, and most of all in the Federal Supreme Court of the united States. Still, his name is not very easy for us to pronounce.
The title of the book. What does it even mean? That is just like Dershowitz, making even the simplest sound very difficult. "The Advocate's Devil" and not "The Devil's Advocate". I know, it is not very interesting. You must be into Dershowitz to be amused. I will let you figure that one out for yourself.
The theme. Jurisprudence! Jurisprudence! Jurisprudence! We get to learn about some of the most interesting court decisions. Moreover, we get to be with Abe as he traverses and searches what is relevant and important to free his client who is being accused of rape. Should tge truth be disclosed? Does the defence advocate has an obligation to disclose everything that he knows to the court? What about his duty of confidentiality to his client? How does one balance the two sides?
The answers. They come in form of parables which are not easy to understand. Haskel is the one Abe goes to for answers. He is an old consevative attorney who suffers from Alzheimer. He uses talmudic wisdom to reconcile the various ethical dilemas which his friend faces from time to time during the trial. It is this unconventional method of solving problems that gets the work done.
February 22, 2020
Alan Dershowitz is a law professor, and this book feels like it is written by a law professor. It reminds me of professors when they used to give examples of murders and the like to clarify something in criminal law. It was so much fun in class! But it still doesn’t work as a novel.
This book is the same. I enjoyed it a little but it still is weird. It feels like an outline, it doesn’t have the usual layers of complexity that you find in a novel. And the dialogue was horrible, felt robotic and it made it hard to relate to the characters.
I think I enjoyed it a bit cause I like the profession and the subject matter, but for those looking for a good novel, I don’t think they’d like this one so much.
Also, this is The Lincoln Lawyer. This is the EXACT story of The Lincoln Lawyer. Lawyer, single parent, has a daughter, has a client accused of rape, the client is suspicious and has a pattern of being accused of rape and a probability it'll happen again in the future, ethical lawyer dilemma of whether to stop him or uphold confidentiality, also there’s a subplot of a guy in jail facing the death penalty that the lawyer tries to help.
That is the synopsis of both the Lincoln lawyer and this one. It is the exact same story. The Advocate’s Devil feels like a general idea of a story, like a vague outline, but The Lincoln Lawyer is the layered complex novel.
This book is the same. I enjoyed it a little but it still is weird. It feels like an outline, it doesn’t have the usual layers of complexity that you find in a novel. And the dialogue was horrible, felt robotic and it made it hard to relate to the characters.
I think I enjoyed it a bit cause I like the profession and the subject matter, but for those looking for a good novel, I don’t think they’d like this one so much.
Also, this is The Lincoln Lawyer. This is the EXACT story of The Lincoln Lawyer. Lawyer, single parent, has a daughter, has a client accused of rape, the client is suspicious and has a pattern of being accused of rape and a probability it'll happen again in the future, ethical lawyer dilemma of whether to stop him or uphold confidentiality, also there’s a subplot of a guy in jail facing the death penalty that the lawyer tries to help.
That is the synopsis of both the Lincoln lawyer and this one. It is the exact same story. The Advocate’s Devil feels like a general idea of a story, like a vague outline, but The Lincoln Lawyer is the layered complex novel.
October 4, 2018
Timely , because it deals with rape , and judicial ethics . Written in 1994 , so technology references are way dated , but still is highly readable and edgy . I think I may try one of his non-fictions too .
August 16, 2019
The Advocate’s Devil initially sounds like a typographical or copying error called anastrophe where words are out of place. Of course, the title is a carefully crafted clue that the lawyer-protagonist (when one of the most respected attorneys in the United States writes a thriller, it would almost have to be a lawyer-protagonist) is going to have to struggle with a bad client, perverse judge, addictive proclivity, or infuriating colleague. I suppose there could be other options, but the “devil” that endangers Abe Ringel and all that he cares about happens to be one of those listed.
The author, Alan M. Dershowitz, is almost synonymous with some high-profile cases in which he served on the defense team. If O.J. Simpson, Mike Tyson, and Michael Milken sound familiar, you know what Dershowitz’ real-life qualifications for writing about an attorney representing clients in both a seeming unwinnable capital case and an athletic superstar in a rape case that sounds like it could come out of today’s headlines. That this novel was published in 1994 reminds me that some things never change.
Both of the cases mentioned in the preceding paragraph require torturous ethical decisions to be made. Indeed, both of these cases are personal reminders to me of why I am thankful that my high school dream of becoming a defense attorney was redirected as a senior in high school. Over the years, I’ve discovered over and over how I couldn’t have lived within the demands of that profession. The Advocate’s Devil was a profound reminder of that personal bullet I dodged. Dershowitz’ Jewish background comes heavily into play when the protagonist is struggling with these ethical decisions and I really appreciated some of the ambiguity implied in the Talmudic counsel on which he occasionally relies. For example, as the book nears its climax, there is an obscure reference to Haman, the persecutor of Mordecai in the Book of Esther. When Esther is hesitant to confront the king because she fears for her own life, Mordecai reminds her that it isn’t just those in immediate danger who will be affected and that this will affect her (and her descendants) as well (p. 337).
In one of the ethical dilemmas in the book, a character calls upon a Talmudic reference where a tyrant besieging a city demanded that the leaders of the town surrender one individual to be killed so that the tyrant would accept the tribute and allow the rest of the city’s population to live. The ancient rabbis debated and decided that if the tyrant had called for an individual by name to be sacrificed that it would be the right thing to do in giving up the one to save the many, but if the leaders of the town had to select someone, it would be wrong. Though the result would be the same, saving the rest by sacrificing the one, the former would be the tyrant’s responsibility because he selected the victim while in the latter, it would be the leaders’ responsibility because they selected the victim (p. 169). And yes, the story with all of its implications has direct bearing on protagonist Abe Ringel’s ethical/legal dilemma!
Another aspect I enjoyed (especially knowing that Dershowitz himself has taught in the academic world) was when various characters would comment on the teaching profession and the crop of students they were teaching. “We are architects of ideas,” insists one such character rather than call himself a teacher/professor (p. 43). The same professor insisted, “I don’t answer questions, I question answers.” (p. 51) In other words, he asserts, “My job is to deepen the level of your confusion. Your job is to find answers that work for you.” (p. 51)
As a character is dying in this book, he asks to be buried with his glasses on. He knew that people would think it foolish, but he makes Ringel promise not to forget not to let them take his glasses off. In a bizarre twist of conversation, Abe says that he feels that way too, since: “I would be afraid I’d get bored and not be able to read.” (p. 188) Regardless of what believes about the afterlife and how nonsensical that may be, it is incredibly quaint and cute for people with a mindset such as I have. And in another discussion of glasses, Abe breaks a glass during an office celebration, explaining the Jewish tradition. “There is a Jewish tradition of breaking a glass at even joyous events such as weddings. It reminds us that no joy is ever without some sorrow.” (p. 284)
The Advocate’s Devil is not a mystery; it is a thriller wrapped in a labyrinth of legal maneuvers. I found it absolutely fascinating to read. For example, the protagonist creates a shadow jury (an unofficial jury of similar demographics and opinions to monitor the case and give an indicator of what was working and not working) to be polled every day and check the progress of the case. On page 213, Dershowitz reveals that the prosecution had set up a shadow jury to test their case in the O. J. Simpson trial. What happened in that real-life experiment? The jury acquitted Simpson just as the actual jury did. The prosecution should have known their case was in trouble. I also appreciated the wishful distinction made between the “not guilty” verdicts required in most states other than the less decisive (and truer to the “reasonable doubt” idea) “not proven” for which many advocates wish (p. 258).
There are some twists at the end of The Advocate’s Devil, but they are so obviously telegraphed that I refuse to call this novel a “mystery.” However, as a “thriller” wrapped in legal maneuvers, it succeeds at the highest level. I read it in less than 24 hours.
The author, Alan M. Dershowitz, is almost synonymous with some high-profile cases in which he served on the defense team. If O.J. Simpson, Mike Tyson, and Michael Milken sound familiar, you know what Dershowitz’ real-life qualifications for writing about an attorney representing clients in both a seeming unwinnable capital case and an athletic superstar in a rape case that sounds like it could come out of today’s headlines. That this novel was published in 1994 reminds me that some things never change.
Both of the cases mentioned in the preceding paragraph require torturous ethical decisions to be made. Indeed, both of these cases are personal reminders to me of why I am thankful that my high school dream of becoming a defense attorney was redirected as a senior in high school. Over the years, I’ve discovered over and over how I couldn’t have lived within the demands of that profession. The Advocate’s Devil was a profound reminder of that personal bullet I dodged. Dershowitz’ Jewish background comes heavily into play when the protagonist is struggling with these ethical decisions and I really appreciated some of the ambiguity implied in the Talmudic counsel on which he occasionally relies. For example, as the book nears its climax, there is an obscure reference to Haman, the persecutor of Mordecai in the Book of Esther. When Esther is hesitant to confront the king because she fears for her own life, Mordecai reminds her that it isn’t just those in immediate danger who will be affected and that this will affect her (and her descendants) as well (p. 337).
In one of the ethical dilemmas in the book, a character calls upon a Talmudic reference where a tyrant besieging a city demanded that the leaders of the town surrender one individual to be killed so that the tyrant would accept the tribute and allow the rest of the city’s population to live. The ancient rabbis debated and decided that if the tyrant had called for an individual by name to be sacrificed that it would be the right thing to do in giving up the one to save the many, but if the leaders of the town had to select someone, it would be wrong. Though the result would be the same, saving the rest by sacrificing the one, the former would be the tyrant’s responsibility because he selected the victim while in the latter, it would be the leaders’ responsibility because they selected the victim (p. 169). And yes, the story with all of its implications has direct bearing on protagonist Abe Ringel’s ethical/legal dilemma!
Another aspect I enjoyed (especially knowing that Dershowitz himself has taught in the academic world) was when various characters would comment on the teaching profession and the crop of students they were teaching. “We are architects of ideas,” insists one such character rather than call himself a teacher/professor (p. 43). The same professor insisted, “I don’t answer questions, I question answers.” (p. 51) In other words, he asserts, “My job is to deepen the level of your confusion. Your job is to find answers that work for you.” (p. 51)
As a character is dying in this book, he asks to be buried with his glasses on. He knew that people would think it foolish, but he makes Ringel promise not to forget not to let them take his glasses off. In a bizarre twist of conversation, Abe says that he feels that way too, since: “I would be afraid I’d get bored and not be able to read.” (p. 188) Regardless of what believes about the afterlife and how nonsensical that may be, it is incredibly quaint and cute for people with a mindset such as I have. And in another discussion of glasses, Abe breaks a glass during an office celebration, explaining the Jewish tradition. “There is a Jewish tradition of breaking a glass at even joyous events such as weddings. It reminds us that no joy is ever without some sorrow.” (p. 284)
The Advocate’s Devil is not a mystery; it is a thriller wrapped in a labyrinth of legal maneuvers. I found it absolutely fascinating to read. For example, the protagonist creates a shadow jury (an unofficial jury of similar demographics and opinions to monitor the case and give an indicator of what was working and not working) to be polled every day and check the progress of the case. On page 213, Dershowitz reveals that the prosecution had set up a shadow jury to test their case in the O. J. Simpson trial. What happened in that real-life experiment? The jury acquitted Simpson just as the actual jury did. The prosecution should have known their case was in trouble. I also appreciated the wishful distinction made between the “not guilty” verdicts required in most states other than the less decisive (and truer to the “reasonable doubt” idea) “not proven” for which many advocates wish (p. 258).
There are some twists at the end of The Advocate’s Devil, but they are so obviously telegraphed that I refuse to call this novel a “mystery.” However, as a “thriller” wrapped in legal maneuvers, it succeeds at the highest level. I read it in less than 24 hours.
April 11, 2024
As a lawyer how do you defend a client you believe is guilty of the crime he charged with?
This book gave me an insight into the rules a lawyer must follow when defending a client.
The story and characters were well defined.
I enjoyed the book and learned a lot.
This book gave me an insight into the rules a lawyer must follow when defending a client.
The story and characters were well defined.
I enjoyed the book and learned a lot.
November 9, 2008
Arriving at the number of stars to award this book was a lose/lose proposition. Story line is strong; characters are interesting, convincing and well drawn; my emotional involvement was significant -- but from the standpoint of fiction technique, particularly dialogue (often not grounded and too prolix)and pacing, the writing was sometimes somewhat deficient.
Yet, it was a real treat to spend some hours in the presence of a first-class mind, Dershowitz. He is an articulate and clever writer who knows well the theory and practice of criminal law of which he writes.
I loved the book, actually, and the modest three-star rating is only because others may not share my interest in the subject. I liked the book so much that I plan to read his other fiction.
Yet, it was a real treat to spend some hours in the presence of a first-class mind, Dershowitz. He is an articulate and clever writer who knows well the theory and practice of criminal law of which he writes.
I loved the book, actually, and the modest three-star rating is only because others may not share my interest in the subject. I liked the book so much that I plan to read his other fiction.
October 25, 2015
I own this book and read it a long time ago but I still remember the book and its a great legal mystery book.
January 7, 2024
The Advocates Devil engages the reader in a deeply troubling ethical dilemma. Dershowitz truly puts the reader in the complex mind of protagonist Abe Ringer. Much like Dershowitz himself, the book follows a lawyer who desperately attempts to keep separate his personal and professional personas. In many ways, I feel this book was some level of insight into the personal and professional struggle Dershowitz may find within himself.
On that same note, I feel this book at times cut too close to reality. I found it very difficult to disassociate my feelings while reading the book from the reality of the evidence of Dershowitz's connection to Jefferey Epstein. Many of the descriptions and lines of reasoning in the novel felt too blunt knowing this piece of Dershowitz's personal life.
Dershowitz pushes the reader to feel uneasy, to take her own stand in a case so ethically troubling. I was [perturbed, however, by the uneasiness I felt in light of the disturbing news of Dershowtiz.
On that same note, I feel this book at times cut too close to reality. I found it very difficult to disassociate my feelings while reading the book from the reality of the evidence of Dershowitz's connection to Jefferey Epstein. Many of the descriptions and lines of reasoning in the novel felt too blunt knowing this piece of Dershowitz's personal life.
Dershowitz pushes the reader to feel uneasy, to take her own stand in a case so ethically troubling. I was [perturbed, however, by the uneasiness I felt in light of the disturbing news of Dershowtiz.
February 18, 2022
The premise of this book was intriguing - have you ever wondered how defense lawyers might deal with the conundrum of defending a client who is guilty? The is the basic quandary the author addresses in this novel by the renowned defense lawyer, Alan M. Dershowitz, who has defended such well-known clients as O.J. Simpson and Mike Tyson among others.
I gave this novel 4 stars because the storyline is not particularly unusual and once the reader gets into it the outcome is fairly predictable. However, Abe Ringel, the lawyer at the center wrestles with the very question as to what to do when the evidence shows that his client is guilty. Be aware that the copyright date is 1994 thus much of the tech is very outdated, but the ultimate question posed is is aiways timely.
I gave this novel 4 stars because the storyline is not particularly unusual and once the reader gets into it the outcome is fairly predictable. However, Abe Ringel, the lawyer at the center wrestles with the very question as to what to do when the evidence shows that his client is guilty. Be aware that the copyright date is 1994 thus much of the tech is very outdated, but the ultimate question posed is is aiways timely.
August 20, 2018
I thought this book had promise, but in the end I struggled to get even halfway through. I thought the characters were unconvincing, the dialog was wooden, and the perspective jumped around in a disconcerting way. I was hoping to get some insight into the legal system, but I just couldn't finish it.
September 23, 2021
Aside from a protagonist who isn't likeable, this is a pretty decent book. I was disappointed that Abe didn't come up with some clever strategy to trap the rapist ala Grisham or Connelly. Perhaps a little unrealistic that a teenage girl put a six-foot-plus athlete in the hospital, but nice to think it could happen.
October 12, 2025
Spectacular as usual
I seek out anything by Dershowitz . I find him visionary in his fictional stories which speak to our times and current societal challenges.
He never disappoints and always brings perspective on challenging topics. Truly one of my favorite writers.
I seek out anything by Dershowitz . I find him visionary in his fictional stories which speak to our times and current societal challenges.
He never disappoints and always brings perspective on challenging topics. Truly one of my favorite writers.
January 3, 2020
Read this more 25 years ago and it still haunts me.
July 25, 2023
The main character is a lawyer. The author is a lawyer. He gets tangled in a moral dilemma and then when his own family gets in trouble he gets it!!
August 13, 2015
At times these days I pick up a book, get 100 pages in and think "I read this before". This is a unique situation cause I'm back around a large set of books I had access to 15-20 years prior, so it's happening a bit frequently. This was one of those.
And I didn't stop reading cause this is a pretty good legal novel. Dershowitz essentially writes it somewhat autobiographically as the main lawyer may as well be him, and it's got a whiff of his early career of trying to keep his morals while chasing high profile cases. The subject matter of the main case though is really interesting and still very topical as it's "how much does fame allow one to get away with, particularly if he's pretty unique in his criminal ways". Hard not to think of Cosby and Darren Sharper these days in terms of the crime and the way the legal system worked.
A bit dated to some extent but for those that enjoy the personal legal novels, definitely one to pick up.
And I didn't stop reading cause this is a pretty good legal novel. Dershowitz essentially writes it somewhat autobiographically as the main lawyer may as well be him, and it's got a whiff of his early career of trying to keep his morals while chasing high profile cases. The subject matter of the main case though is really interesting and still very topical as it's "how much does fame allow one to get away with, particularly if he's pretty unique in his criminal ways". Hard not to think of Cosby and Darren Sharper these days in terms of the crime and the way the legal system worked.
A bit dated to some extent but for those that enjoy the personal legal novels, definitely one to pick up.
July 3, 2016
I loved the book, it is a short direct and factually based (not the story line, but the legal process and requirements of the adversarial justice system) examination of a hypothetical set of ethical dilemmas and unintended consequence.
April 11, 2007
questioning the limits of civil liberties - by one of its advocates
October 9, 2008
excellent suspense. learned a lot about law.
Read
October 10, 2008M Der
September 10, 2010
Intriguing, finished, good book. Ending could be better.
Will read another book from the same author.
Will read another book from the same author.
November 11, 2010
Disappointing. Predictable.
March 14, 2015
A bit too much lecturing. And I love courtroom books. Somehow this was all too pedantic.
December 1, 2015
Got this as an audio book trying to get some more reading in. The story was ok but a little predictable, but nonetheless an interesting read.
April 2, 2021
Un libro que me ha sorprendido con creces. No me esperaba que fuera a engancharme tanto la historia. Sin duda alguna, un 10 🤩
May 18, 2017
Engaging plotline that encompasses conflicts encountered by a defense attorney. Story ending was obvious though.
July 24, 2018
He's no John Grisham, I'll say that.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews