The Jury Returns

by Louis Nizer

Book by Louis Nizer

Genres: Nonfiction, Law, Memoir

Paperback

First published January 1, 1966

Reviews

[Sandie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Louis Nizer was one of the greatest lawyers of the twentieth century. He started his law firm in 1924 and when he died in 1994, he was still working there, a career spanning seven decades. He was extremely successful and represented many famous clients such as Mae West, Julius Erving, Johnny Carson and others. His work was credited with breaking the back of Hollywood and television blacklisting during the witchhunts of the 50's and 60's. The Jury Returns is Nizer's account of several of his more memorable cases.

The book starts with a murder case. Paul Crump had been sentenced to die for his part in a murder during a robbery. Nizer knew he was guilty but believed that his role had not deserved the death penalty and that his rehabilitation during his time in prison was worthy of another chance. This section details the procedures and strategies that Nizer used to defend his client and get his sentence changed from a death sentence to a more reasonable one of imprisonment with an eventual chance of parole.

In the second case, a divorce case is studied in depth. This will be the most difficult for readers to follow as the law around divorces has changed significantly from the 1950's and 1960's. In those times, divorce was a difficult thing to achieve with only a few reasons available that would lead the court to grant one. There was no such thing as a no-fault divorce and many couples stayed together for decades in a loveless marriage. Women were often left penniless in divorce actions when no or insufficient alimony and child support were granted and this was in the era when many women did not have a career of their own to fall back on. This section follows the case of two couples where the husband of one couple fell in love with the wife in the other. Nizer represented the wronged wife and it took several years to win her justice and the support she was entitled to.

The third case Nizer discusses was more serious. Roy Fruehauf, owner of the Fruehauf truck shipping line, was accused of making bribes to the Teamsters Union. This was in the time of James Hoffa and corruption was an everyday affair. Nizer definitely proved that Fruehauf was not involved in this corruption and that there was no reason for his firm to be disciplined.

The last case in this book is the longest. It discusses the blacklisting common in the movie and television industries in the era of McCarthyism. John Henry Faulk was an up and coming star on television. He had a successful radio career and was in the process of transitioning to television when he ran afoul of some right-wing organization. They retaliated by naming Faulk as a Communist and then his career stalled. Within a year, his work dried up and he could find nothing anywhere. Networks that had been clamouring for his services mysteriously decided they no longer needed him as they cut him in fear of being associated with Communism. It took several years, but Nizer managed to vindicate Faulk and in the process, end the rampant blacklisting that crippled the lives of many actors in this time period.

This is an interesting historical look back at law in prior decades. It is difficult for modern readers to sometimes relate to the attitudes and laws that were in play fifty to seventy years ago. But that is one of the benefits of reading this book; the realization of how attitudes on various things have changed and the role that the law has played in changing society. Nizer was one of the giants of the legal field and a study of his cases is interesting to those willing to case their minds back. This book is recommended for nonfiction readers interested in legal theory and decisions.

[Tom Schulte · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this large tome, Nizer gives us book-length legal considerations on these subjects:

Paul Crump author of Burn, Killer, Burn!: Twice-convicted of murder during a botched burglary and given the death sentence. Can rehabilitation be proved and does it merit commutation in such a case? Does society owe even death row's inmates opportunity for rehabilitation and thus some level of legal redemption? This case is thought-provoking.

Divorce: This is the shortest part and the names are obscured. Parking lot adultery photographed by private investigators.

Roy Fruehauf: In 1959, Fruehauf Trailer Corporation, Roy Fruehauf, Teamsters Union President Dave Beck, and others were indicted on charges that the company had illegally lent $200,000 to Beck in 1954. The Teamsters had previously lent $1.5 million to Roy Fruehauf to finance a proxy fight against his elder brother, Harvey, and Roy Fruehauf was alleged to have returned the favor by making the loan to Beck. As the Teamsters represented some Fruehauf employees, the loan was alleged to be an illegal gift or bribe, in violation of the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the indictment in 1961, but the case was subsequently dismissed. At this point, Nizer's involvement makes it appear more than RFK was bullying the Teamsters rather than that any illegal collusion was going on.

John Henry Faulk: Last, but certainly not least. John Henry Faulk from Austin, Texas, was a storyteller and radio show host. The successful lawsuit covered here helped to bring an end to the Hollywood blacklist. That blacklist always makes me cringe to think such witch hunting happened here. The House Un-American Activities Committee and its California counterpart figure in notoriously here. More new to me is a pamphlet entitled Red Channels focused on the field of broadcasting. It identified entertainment industry professionals in the context of "Red Fascists and their sympathizers." Soon, most of those named, along with a host of other artists, were barred from employment in most of the entertainment field. Even more obscure to me but essential to this case is the role of Laurence A. Johnson, an owner of four supermarkets in Syracuse, New York. The elderly patriot involved the American Legion Post in Syracuse (a single post!) to become a force felt throughout radio and television. His one-man "Syracuse Crusade" in the 1950s to force television advertisers to cancel sponsorship of programs in which "suspect" actors appeared. Johnson's pressure tactics were a manifestation of McCarthyism and the Hollywood Blacklist and the end of the trial may have brought the fraud to be a suicide.

(I see from the inscription that my copy found wended its way into my hands from the estate of recently deceased Michigan lawyer Karl Vasiloff.)

[E Wilson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an old paperback that was sitting on my bookshelf along time before I finally picked
it up to read. The first account was not a trial, but a clemency hearing for Illinois death row
inmate, Paul Crump. Mr Crump's lawyer, Donald Moore, asked for Mr Nizer's assistance in trying to get
the death sentence commuted to life in prison. Mr Crump had become a model inmate and had numerous
people attesting to his good works and changed life. Nizer and Moore did not deny that Paul Crump
had committed the crime of murder during a robbery. They argued that Crump was a changed man and
no longer deserved to be put to death. It was interesting that the only reason that Paul Crump could
do all the good deeds that he was credited with was because he was in the general prison population.
Mr Nizer notes that most death row inmates are held in solitary confinement with only about 1 hour
out of their cell. They won the case and Crump's sentence was changed to 199 years. He was paroled
in 1993 but went back to prison for violating an order of protection that was filed by one of his
family members. He died in 2002. While I was reading, I thought " This is such an old book with
old cases". Then I was watching TV and there was the documentary "The Chair" about this very case.The whole story came alive with Donald Moore with his skinny 1960's necktie chain smoking surrounded by books and paperwork. I missed all but the tail end of Mr Nizer's part in the movie. At the end, there was Paul Crump himself as he was given the news of his reprieve. As a sidelight Illinois abolished capital punishment last month March 2011.

The other case I found significant was the case of John Henry Faulk, a radio and TV personality who was blacklisted during the anti-communist frenzy in the entertainment industry during the 1950's.
He filed a libel suit against Vincent Hartnett, Aware,Inc, and Laurence Johnson. They had accused
Mr Faulk of communist sympathies after he won election to office in the American Federation of
Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) and opposed Aware, Inc blacklisting tactics. Mr Hartnett contacted radio and television companies as well as advertisers and advertising agencies to vet actors and actress for a fee. He would advise if the person was OK'd as a loyal citizen or suspected of
communist sympathies. He and Mr Johnson would threaten producers, companies and advertisers with
adverse publicity if they hired someone not approved by them. Mr Faulk was out of work for years and although he won his case I don't think he recovered much of the money that was awarded to him. It
is alarming how fear can trample people's rights.
they

[Joshua · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not quite as good as "My Life in Court", but still a good read.

Louis Nizer wrote "The Jury Returns" in the style of his first, most famous book, "My Life in Court". However, it does seem like he tried a little bit too hard to replicate its success. For instance, one of the things that made "My Life in Court" great was Nizer's constant insights into human nature. He wove them into the story perfectly. In "The Jury Returns", I got the feeling that he was trying a bit too hard to come up with new insights, even when they were somewhat obvious or didn't fit well in the story. If I recall correctly, there was a part in the book where Nizer discusses the importance of demonstrative evidence, ending with "indeed, you have to see to believe", and then, completely out of the blue, "unless, of course, you are in church, in which case the reverse is true, you have to believe in order to see." This is not to say that there isn't lots of good insights, I just think he tried too much.

This book's greatest strength, in my opinion, is how Nizer lovingly portrays the procedures and the strategies with apply to litigation. In this book, he takes up an appeal for clemency on behalf of a death row inmate (who, although completely rehabilitated, was certainly guilty), the criminal defense in a bribery case where the defendant would have probably served no time, and a civil suit on behalf of a blacklisted radio host. I don't think it is much of a suprise to say he won these cases because (with the exception of Marcia Clark) who writes about the cases they lost? However, assuming you are interested in the law, Nizer makes each of these cases very interesting and very readable.

I recommend this book to anyone interested in the law, as well as anyone who enjoyed "My Life in Court".

P.S. - Oh, and if anyone is curious as to what became of the death row inmate, according to here* he was paroled in 1993. There is a wikipedia article on what happened to the radio host, John Henry Faulk. And of course, the bribery defendant died before the book was published.

* - http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/...

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was truly amazing how little the practice of law has changed in fifty years, from sound courtroom strategy and tactics to the importance of pre-trial procedural maneuvering.