Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free: And Other Paradoxes of Our Broken Legal System

by Jed S. Rakoff

A senior federal judge's incisive, unsettling exploration of some of the paradoxes that define the judiciary today, Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free features essays examining why innocent people plead guilty, why high-level executives aren't prosecuted, why you won't get your day in court, and why the judiciary is curtailing its own constitutionally mandated power.


How can we be proud of a system of justice that often pressures the innocent to plead guilty? How can we claim that justice is equal when we imprison thousands of poor Black men for relatively modest crimes but rarely prosecute rich white executives who commit crimes having far greater impact? How can we applaud the Supreme Court's ever-more-limited view of its duty to combat excesses by the president?

The federal judge Jed S. Rakoff, a leading authority on white-collar crime, explores these and other puzzles in Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free, a startling account of our broken legal system. Grounded in Rakoff's twenty-four years as a federal trial judge in New York in addition to the many years he worked as a federal prosecutor and criminal defense lawyer, Rakoff 's assessment of our justice system illuminates some of our most urgent legal, social, and political issues: plea deals and class-action lawsuits, corporate impunity and the death penalty, the perils
of eyewitness testimony and forensic science, the war on terror and the expanding reach of the executive branch. A fundamental problem, he reveals, is that the judiciary is constraining its own constitutional powers.

Like few others, Rakoff understands the values that animate the best aspects of our legal system--and has a close-up view of our failure to live up to these ideals. But he sees within this gap great opportunities for practical reform, and a public mandate to make our justice system truly just.

Genres: Nonfiction, Law, Politics, Crime, Legal, Social Justice, Public Policy

208 pages, Hardcover

First published February 16, 2021

Reviews

[David Wineberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

In so many instances, when a company is rotten, the people at the top don’t see or simply refuse to see it, and then claim they know best and everyone below is wrong. Employees who work there are frustrated with the pointless rules, bureaucracy and hypocrisy.

In the monolithic justice system, the US attorney general certainly seems in no hurry to improve – anything. And yet, there are judges lower in the system, like whistleblowers in other firms, who see the mess for what it is. They see the damage it does to citizens, as well as to the institution and the constitution. In this case, Judge Jed Rakoff, Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York continues his efforts to show his understanding of what isn’t working, from his perspective and intensive knowledge of why. It boils down to the Department of Justice is an oxymoron. And don’t blame the judges.

In his book Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free, Rakoff expands on essays he wrote for the New York Review of Books over the past few years. Before becoming a judge, he was a criminal defense lawyer and federal prosecutor, so he has worked the system from every angle. He is less than pleased with the way it functions and the harm it does.

Justice is divided into two, criminal and civil, and both are blocked and inaccessible to the average American, but for very different reasons. The criminal justice system is held in a strangulating chokehold by prosecutors. They have the resources, the legal expertise, and choice of charges to bring. These weapons allow them to threaten the accused with very long prison terms – unless they accept a plea bargain. Plead guilty to a lesser charge and take the five year sentence instead of fighting and losing the case that results in a 20-year sentence.

It works. Rakoff says 97% of federal defendants take the plea, and 95% at the state level do as well. Doesn’t matter if they are totally innocent. Facing the monolith of the justice system and its seemingly bottomless resources, compared to the defendant’s zero dollars and court-appointed lawyer, the choice becomes obvious – and unfair. In this structure, the judge has nothing to judge. The prosecutor is judge, trial and jury all in one. Few cases ever make it to actual trial. And nowhere is it written that prosecutors should have this power.

Rakoff says 1.5 out of 2.2 million Americans in prison are there thanks to plea bargains. Most of the other 700 thousand are in jail waiting for prosecutors to offer plea bargains. The plea bargain is not an offer but a threat. Sadly, 9-10% of the innocent also take the plea, rather than risk the longer sentence and all the cash it would cost to even try. This is in no way justice.

Then on the hypocrisy front, white collar crime is barely handled at all. There is no need for plea bargaining here. The accused can simply pay a large fine, promise not to do anything like this (while not even having to admit they did it at all) and are on their way. The Justice Department claims it costs too much, takes too long, and enfolds too many issues like whether a company can be appropriately punished without harming the shareholders instead. The result is no justice. Rakoff gives the example of the drugmaker Pfizer, which continually gets nailed for huge fines, but keeps on being a very bad actor. It just seems to be a cost of doing business for Pfizer.

If that weren’t bad enough, the laws, especially recreational drug laws, have pushed prosecutors to focus on minorities. “By locking up, sooner or later, one out of every three African American males, we send a message that our society has no better cure for racial disparities than brutal force.” Rakoff points to Congress as the source of completely unfair laws that discriminate and force police and prosecutors to ride minorities in the USA.

Worse still, Congress has seen fit to tie judges’ hands in sentencing. No longer can a judge look the defendant in the eye, assess his or her background and prospects and adjust the sentence accordingly. Today, judges are required to sentence according to a menu, often far worse than s/he would have ruled given the chance. This additional frustration for judges fills prisons for far longer.

And on top of that, In 37 states judges are elected, so they must never appear to be “soft on crime.” Or they would lose their jobs. For Rakoff, trying to ensure just outcomes in this straightjacket of an environment is an unnecessary challenge. And certainly not what the constitution envisioned.

But there’s more still. The world of evidence is corrupt too. For years, “experts” have run roughshod over the courts, making unsubstantiated claims, sending all kinds of people to prison or death. Far too often, the accuseds are innocent, but condemned by false forensic experts. The experts bamboozle the judges with technojargon, and courts rarely challenge them, despite their history of failure. Judges do not have the necessary knowledge or skills to make those accusations in their courts. Rather, the judges are the victims of ploys by prosecutors to overwhelm them.

Rakoff says that of 2400 false convictions since 1989 that were recorded by the National Registry of Exonerations, nearly 600, or 35%, involved false or misleading forensic evidence. A more in depth example: the DOJ and the FBI looked at 3000 criminal cases involving microscopic hair analysis. They found that in 95% of the cases, testimony was “scientifically invalid and detrimental to the defendant.” But the court and the jury bought it.

With all of these negative forces pressuring defendants, it is little wonder the USA has the highest rate of incarceration in the world. Taxpayers host 2.2 million people in institutions that do nothing to treat or rehabilitate, and everything to make prisoners dysfunctional both inside and when they finally re-enter society. For a large percentage, they exit the justice system deeper in debt.

On the civil side, money talks. Companies provide biased arbitrators who are simply not allowed to make large awards like juries can. They force employees and customers to accept arbitration as binding, and to give up any right to a real trial, including, if not especially, class actions, where customers or employees might be able to pool their resources. In the arbitration system, it’s divide and conquer. No one is allowed to know what others have experienced. There are no precedents to leverage. Law is at the pleasure of the arbitrator, who is paid by the defendant firm.

The expense of suing has become a near total barrier for most Americans. While always expensive, Rakoff shows that lawyer’s fees have gone from the high double digits to over 500 dollars an hour in the past 35 years, far in excess of the increase in the average American’s income increase. The experts the case would require, the tests, the investigations and the points of law to be employed have all grown more complex, making the effort an enormously expensive exercise the average plaintiff likely won’t even understand as it unfolds. Here again, settlements keep nearly 100% of suits from actually coming to trial. And for those who choose to represent themselves, the failure rate is nearly total.

Here’s how Rakoff sums up the failure of civil court efforts, in his usual direct, compact and revealing style:
There are many reasons for this, including (1) the ever-greater cost of hiring a lawyer; (2) the increased expense, apart from legal fees, that a litigant must pay to pursue a lawsuit to conclusion; (3) the increased unwillingness of lawyers to take a case on a contingent-fee basis when the anticipated monetary award is modest; (4) the decline of unions and other institutions that provide their members with free legal representation; (5) the imposition of mandatory arbitration; (6) judicial hostility to class action suits; and (7) the increasing diversion of legal disputes to regulatory agencies. (In criminal cases, there is an eighth factor, already discussed in previous chapters, which is the vastly increased risk of a heavy penalty in going to trial.)
Into this flawed scenario, the judge sits and attempts to clear a path for truth, for a solution, for satisfactory compromise, for fairness and for justice. Good luck with that.

But there’s actually more to it than criminal and civil actions. Rakoff delves into the very checkered history of the Supreme Court (“Consistency is not the Court’s strong point,” he says). Justices have and continue to set society’s tone, for their own era and into the future, as they misinterpret laws, their predecessors’ opinions, the will of Congress and the intentions of the president. They do it in spite of the facts, and often to simply to avoid conflict with the wishes of the Executive Branch. The independence of the Supreme Court is constantly called into question, with today’s court a textbook example of not interpreting the law, but slanting it to favor an ideology, from Second Amendment issues to deciding the 2000 presidential election by itself.

Rakoff has long been an active voice criticizing the justice system, but perhaps surprisingly, he does not have an equally long list of solutions. The book actually ends weakly, with his wish that American ingenuity will implement innovations to make the system work better. So while the book is straightforward and fast paced, it is less than satisfying. Rakoff does not have the answers, just a lot of observations and frustrations, expressed with dignified, neutral resignation. This is his work environment.

Throughout the book, there is the occasional idea that could make a difference. Rakoff thinks a pretrial magistrate could meet with both sides separately, go over the case and their strategies, and keep it all under seal. This could give both sides realistic visions as to potential outcomes before they commit the big bucks and long efforts.

He also thinks prosecutors should spend six months of every three years to act as defense attorneys for the indigent outside their territory. This might change their severe attacks on defendants and the plea bargain threat that hangs over them.

I would have expected Rakoff to have a lot more in the way of brilliant suggestions and solutions than he does. I am left with the impression that he is a keen observer, but little more. From this book, I would have to say he is a whistleblower, but not an innovator.

David Wineberg

[Ginni · Rating 3 out of 5]

Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free is a tricky book to rate. It's five-star content for sure. Federal judge Jed Rakoff knows his stuff, and he makes some really compelling points about the failings of the US legal system. The presentation could have used some polish, though. The book started as a series of essays published in the New York Review of Books, and despite the straightforward attempts to stitch them into a coherent piece, it still reads like a book of loosely related essays. And Rakoff's first-person experience is interesting and valuable, but it enters the narrative so rarely that it's a bit jarring.

Still. Be a good citizen and read it. If a book can be a bit dry and a bit scattered and still get you fired up about the injustice of it all, it's probably worth reading.

(I received this book for free through a Goodreads giveaway.)

[Jeff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent Examination Of US Judicial System. This is an excellent examination of the US Judicial system, from a former US District Court judge. Indeed, the *singular* outright flaw in the ARC copy I read was its lack of bibliography and citations, which I expect will be corrected in the published edition. For the most part, Judge Rakoff's examinations and explanations ring true and he cites several well known works in the field, including Michelle Alexander's The New Jim Crow during the discussion of the problem of mass incarceration. My only quibble - and it is just a quibble, just as the comments I am about to refer to are almost asides themselves - are a couple of points where the Judge makes comments about a couple of cases of a more political nature. (Including Bush v Gore and Citizens United, among perhaps a handful of others.) Overall one of the better examinations of the breadth of the US Judicial system, and even its acknowledged origins as a set of essays isn't really obvious or noticeable. Very much recommended.

[Anna Marie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Audio version, written at a level for anyone to understand.

Federal Judge Rakoff gives you some staggering statistics about how the entire judicial system has been morphed by processes that have little or no scientific basis, like mandatory minimums or three strikes laws. Get tough on crime because of rising crime rates by locking more and more people up for longer and longer terms. But does this solve the underlying societal problems? The chapters cover different aspects of the judiciary like forensics, which has more guesswork than science besides DNA. This has been used by the Innocent Project to free over 300 prisoners. Of course this only works for crimes that still has DNA evidence after many years. His conclusion is that the USA people need to elect legislators at all levels that will work to improve/remove laws because both the judicial and executive can't or won't do it.

[Ketevan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Should be required reading in American Government classes.

[Spellsies · Rating 3 out of 5]

The information that Rakoff offers in this book is extremely important and interesting, but the book itself doesn’t read as cohesively as I would have liked. We start off with a series of essays that are loosely related (they are all about problems of the US legal system), but because the central theme is so broad, they ultimately feel a little bit disjointed as Rakoff attempts to weave them together.

Rakoff’s personal experiences and expertise add a lot to this book because it is not a perspective I have explored in depth. I do wish that his first-person experiences were weaved into the book more frequently because they added nice touches of personality and intrigue that made those parts more interesting. Rakoff’s personal experiences also tie together the more disjointed topics he aims to cover.

I rarely say this, but I do think that the book could have been a little bit longer. The critiques and suggestions that Rakoff mentions could be made stronger by more details from his perspective as a federal judge.

Throughout this book Rakoff offers interesting insight into the US criminal justice system as someone who has worked from within the system and understands its flaws. While I don’t think the book is as comprehensive as it hopes to be, it is a great starting point for further personal research and reading.

[Andréa]

Note: I accessed a digital review copy of this book through Edelweiss.

[J Earl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free... by Jed S Rakoff is a book that needs to be read by everyone with any opinion about our legal system. Whether you think it is working (in which case explain away the facts presented) or think it is broken (in which case there will be plenty of backing information here) this book should make you think about what we should want, and not want, from a legal system.

Each chapter tackles a specific issue, based on essays Rakoff had already written. While the basic flaws are largely well known, the ways we have arrived at these places is often ignored or considered unimportant. But they aren't, because if we have made this into the system it is, then we can make it into a better system, even if it means dismantling all or some of it.

My main complaint with the book is that I would have liked it to be more prescriptive. A few ideas are fleshed out a bit more than others (often when based on what other countries do such as the UK) but many ideas are presented as just that, ideas. Not plans, not first steps, just ideas. While they will help since others can develop plans, a person with experience as a defense lawyer, a prosecutor, and a federal judge would seem like a good person to offer more thorough solution ideas.

I would recommend this to readers who know the names of the problems but don't know the details or extent. Ignore reviewers who pretend this is just the same old same old, it isn't, it is more detailed than what most laypeople have read. Read this, figure out where you might be able to make a difference, then take action.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.

[Rebecca · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great high level survey of some of the biggest concerns in our justice system today. Rakoff brings a lot of credibility to this subject as a current US District Judge, a former AUSA (federal prosecutor), and a former criminal defense attorney (who accepted both private and CJA Panel cases, ie, defendants not able to afford to retain counsel on their own). He also is obviously a true scholar of the law, its history, and other related topics including forensic science. Ideologically, it seems like his heart is generally with the prosecution, but this doesn't stop him from highlighting the many, many, many egregious flaws of the average prosecutor and out system more broadly. Rakoff does cite to some examples, and some statistics, but if you want lots of either, then you should look elsewhere.

As someone who is pretty picky about criminal justice books, this is one I could recommend, especially to people who are curious about this "mass incarceration" they've heard so much about, and willing to engage in good faith, but not sold on some of the moral arguments around abolition. The writing is very clear, and I think this book is fully accessible to an educated (formally or otherwise) non-lawyer audience.

Further suggested reading: "The New Jim Crow" by Michelle Alexander for more statistics and more historical context, "Presumed Guilty" by Erwin Chemerinsky for more details about how legal precedent on many different issues has eroded the presumption of innocence and emboldened police misconduct, and "Usual Curelty" by Alec Karakatsanis for some poignant illustrations of some of the awful yet ordinary failures of our system.

[Diane · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jed Rakoff, from his long-time vantage point inside the judicial system, describes in an even-handed way serious legal problems in our system on all levels, and lays out in clear terms, with examples, how our current legal system falls short in the administration of justice for all parties involved: the innocent, the guilty and the victims--both victims of crime and we victims in society at large. He remains hopeful that pressure from voters can move legislatures to modernize our approaches to the problems he describes. And he offers other doable solutions at various points along his narrative as well.

Notable insights include Rakoff's descriptions of how prosecutors came to wield such unfettered power over the accused and their sentences. Likewise, Rakoff's descriptions of how legislatures have commandeered sentencing discretion and how courts have severely limited their own constitutional oversight powers aid the reader in grasping additional dysfunctions in our justice system. And I loved learning about John Marshall in a chapter beginning with his extended biography

I consider this a very readable and useful 200-page guide to the critical third branch of our government and its current impactful shortcomings. Recommended for citizens of every interest.

[Micah Winters · Rating 3 out of 5]

An effective and informative survey of the US legal system's numerous corruptions and failures. Rakoff writes from long experience as a federal judge, but if anything errs on the side of over-explaining, rather than presuming his readers possess the familiarity with the courts that he does. Adapted from essays originally published in the New York Review of Books, Rakoff's critiques, and prescribed remedies, move from the obvious inferences of the title -- mass incarceration and plea bargains, corporate executives' practical exemption from prosecution, etc. -- to comments on the Supreme Court and its long, progressively compounded subservience to the executive branch.

A book this brief, touching on this many subjects, is prone to certain limitations, but it's on the whole a well-managed overview of a plethora of interconnected concerns: and Rakoff's job of making this entanglement evident, and of portioning out detail, is admirably done. Whether his critiques adequately justify the drama of the book's title and subtitle is probably arguable -- that is, I'm not entirely convinced that his relatively moderately-made case fully supports the strong claim of a "broken" system -- there's certainly a pile of noteworthy (and legislation-worthy!) issues presented, and convincingly so.

[Robyn Stewart · Rating 4 out of 5]

+ :

- very unique perspective: Rakoff is a well-regarded, prominent federal judge and, as such, has a very unique perspective to offer when it comes to the US legal system. Scattered throughout the text are nuggets of his experience with our flawed criminal justice system as someone serving on the bench, which to me are the best bits of the book.
- Rakoff strikes a good tone — it is approachable and accessible without being too simplistic, I thought

- :

- While I liked that the book took on a variety of different issues (i.e., undue reliance on forensic evidence, the rise of plea deals, the use of deferred prosecution agreements in the context of white collar crime), the book does come off as a bit disjointed, especially by the end
- I wish Rakoff shared more insights from his time on ‘the bench’, that is, serving as a judge. As a reader generally familiar with most of the problems with the criminal justice system that he points out in the text, I think more focus on what his work has shown him could have made for a more interesting read.
- the last chapter or two delve into the early history of the Supreme Court which was less interesting to me

[dangaskill1 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting Read

I really liked the portions of the book that discussed problems with the criminal law aspects our legal system. I would have liked to have had a deeper dive into that area. Towards the end, the author discusses generally, the historical precedents that led to some of the current issues. I found that interesting.

When reading this type of book, in my opinion, the reader should not be able to tell the writer*s political leanings. Throughout the middle chapters the book lost focus and discussed topics that might belong in a different book - such as thoughts on Congress' passing of Anti terrorism and death penalty laws, and view points on the Patriot Act. It just seemed like filler and detracted from the discussion on problems with a access to the courts and the administration of justice.

Overall - well written, easy to read, interesting thoughts from the perspective of a federal judge. It's worth it read.

[Deedi Brown (DeediReads) · Rating 4 out of 5]

All my reviews live at https://deedispeaking.com/reads/.

I’ve long known that our judiciary system has a lot of loopholes and flaws, but I didn’t know much about what they are. So when I heard about this book, written by a senior federal judge, I immediately wanted to read it. I’m glad I did. It felt like the perfect introduction into this topic — enough information and data to help you understand the situation and how it came to be, but not so much detail as to feel overwhelming or slow.

While it does read a little bit academically (I mean, the guy’s a judge), it’s also broken into very short chapters, and it’s a short book overall, which helps make it feel more approachable. I learned a lot of things I didn’t know before, especially about plea deals and forensics and eyewitness testimony. And while I did feel more engaged with the first eight chapters (which were more about how the system fails people) and a little less with the last five (which were about how the system has failed itself and its purpose), I still learned something new from all of them.

If you don’t know much about the shortcomings of our current judiciary system in the US and want to learn more, this is a good place to start.

[Stephen Watt · Rating 2 out of 5]

Let me start off by affirming that I enjoyed the popular NYRB articles by Jed Rakoff upon which this book was based. They worked well... as articles. But the book is of the form of an essay or polemic, and h0lds very few substantive arguments backed by statistics or a compendium of example cases. When the book finally hits its only deeper dive, it's a tangential one at best into Justice John Marshall and Marbury vs. Madison - a case of dubious value to anybody interested chiefly in why the innocent plead guilty and the guilty go free. And a certain part of the book is also prescriptive in nature, containing Rakoff's ideas for enacting judicial reform. Cool opinions, bro.

In summary, you won't learn much or leave with any great revelation about American law unless you're an absolute newcomer to the subject matter.

[Maggie Holmes · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a call to action for everyone, not just people concerned with racial justice. The lack of access to jury trials for everyday people and the deference given to corporations and the executive branch has led to a legal gap that echoes the wealth gap in our country. Most people -- since they do not usually have a need for legal action -- would not even know how difficult it would be for them to get a "fair trial." This would make a good starting off point for a book discussion on our legal system. My only critique is that it lacks the personal stories that some of the more narrowly focused books can provide.
Thank you Farrar, Straus and Giroux and Edelweiss Plus for the prepub version of this book.

[Sara Broad · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free" by Jed Rakoff is an important look at the justice system in America. Rakoff explains how those who are most targeted by America's legacy of oppression are those who become the victims of the criminal justice system regardless of whether or not they actually committed a crime. On the other hand, he explains the reasons why corrupt executives often face no consequences for defrauding the public and how the average worker is losing ways to take legal action when they are actually wronged. Some of the chapters in this book reminded me of the "Justice in America" podcast, which I really enjoyed, so if this podcast piqued your interest then this book probably will too.

[Veronica Ross · Rating 5 out of 5]

Definitely a book that just skims the surface of the issues of the legal system. however, despite being well versed in the topic i still learned from it and marked it up with notes and highlights! would highly recommend this as a starting place or intro to the topic for anyone less familiar. it also serves as a call to action for all of the become more vocal and involved in justice system reform! i appreciate that Judge Rakoff ends the book by reminding us that ultimately legislators hold many of the keys to solving these issues but they won’t feel inclined to do anything about it unless we, their constituents, push them to do so.

[Ben Kruskal · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an important book though disheartening. Federal district court judge Jed Rakoff illustrates serious deficiencies in our current legal system in a series of short, very well-written chapter-essays, providing appropriate historical context for the evolution of each problem and how those problems are interrelated. He discusses both criminal and civil issues in clear and concise prose. I rarely award a book 5 stars. This is a book everyone should read, because the content is vitally important and presented in a fashion that should make it accessible to most.

[M. · Rating 4 out of 5]

A compelling argument is proposed by Judge Rakoff, which may be summarized to say that the American Legal System promotes injustice at every level as a result of institutional control over the judicial branch of (specifically Federal) government, most notably the institution of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government, emboldened by interests political rather than jurisprudential. Rakoff located redemption of the system in the erection, presumably, of independent federally-established agencies to enumerate and enforce a number of judicial operating standards that Rakoff identifies are root causes of present errors. Thought-provoking, upsetting, and lively book that demands an answer.

[Margaret · Rating 5 out of 5]

I grew interested in this book after reading an essay by Rakoff in the New York Review of Books. Written in an accessible and engaging style, Justice Jed Rakoff reviews not only the shortcomings of the US judicial system but suggests a number of solutions to our systemic injustice. A must-read for anyone with an even casual interest in the weaknesses in the American criminal justice system.

[Louise Gray · Rating 4 out of 5]

Absolutely fascinating. A new perspective on crime and the law, this is the book true crime fans have been waiting for, There are no answers but can anyone really be surprised? At least this brings an important perspective in professional insights to the argument.

[Marcelo Gonzalez · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clear and concise essays on the shortcomings and intentional injustices of the US legal system. Would serve as a fantastic introduction to anyone who still believes the legal system dolls justice in equal measure to the poor and the rich.

[Matthew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent review of the current state of our judicial system, with clear reasons why it has evolved that way and legitimate recommendations for how to fix, all from a legal professional who has served in every capacity from lawyer to judge. A must read for anyone with interests in this area.

[Clara · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was very informative and the author is clearly very knowledgeable but some parts were repetitive. Other parts were hard to understand, which is concerning for a book which has an aim of changing the perspectives of the general public.

[Hilcia · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5.0.

[Thaddeus Bradley · Rating 2 out of 5]

Concise, if a bit dry. There's nothing here you don't already know about the "justice" system in America.

[Cath · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very dry, but important and thought-provoking.

[TC · Rating 4 out of 5]

Recommended.

Review posted at Tzer Island book blog:

https://www.tzerisland.com/bookblog/2...

[Tim Schannauer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Burn it all to the ground