Ladies And Gentlemen Of The Jury: Greatest Closing Arguments In Modern Law

by Michael S. Lief, Ben Bycel, H. Mitchell Caldwell

The closing arguments from ten noteworthy cases—“lawyers and nonlawyers will enjoy the passion and eloquence of these counselors; practitioners of law will find much to learn from them” ( Los Angeles Times Book Review ).

Until now, only the twelve jurors who sat in judgment were able to appreciate these virtuoso performances, where weeks of testimony were boiled down and presented with flair, wit, and high drama. For five years the authors researched every archive, and readers can now lose themselves in the summations of America’s finest litigators.

Clarence Darrow saves Leopold and Loeb from the gallows in the Roaring Twenties. Gerry Spence takes on the nuclear power industry for the death of Karen Silkwood in a modern-day David and Goliath struggle. Vincent Bugliosi squares off against the madness of Charles Manson and his murderous “family” in the aftermath of their bloody spree. Clara Foltz, the first woman to practice law in California, argues passionately to an all-male jury, defending her place in the courtroom. Bobby DeLaughter brings the killer of civil-rights leader Medgar Evers to justice after thirty years and two mistrials. Aubrey Daniel brings Lt. William Calley, Jr., to justice for the My Lai massacre. William Kunstler challenges the establishment after the 1968 Chicago riots in his defense of yippie leaders known as the Chicago Seven.

Each closing argument is put into context by the authors, who provide historical background, a brief biography of each attorney, and commentary, pointing out the trial tactics used to great effect by the lawyers, all in accessible, reader-friendly language.

Genres: Law, Nonfiction, History, Legal, Professional Development, Self Help, Politics

400 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1998

Reviews

[Kaleb · Rating 2 out of 5]

Can't give this book more than 3 stars. It's an interesting concept for a good book and these are clearly great speeches, but tbh, it doesn't really work to have a book of closing arguments. The speeches were about summarizing evidence that came up at trial and obv, I haven't heard of any of that evidence, so tbh, lots of the speeches came off as dry. Speeches that stood out; Clarence Darrow's defense in the Leopold and Loeb murder trial, Gerry Spence's plaintiff close in the Silkwood v Kerr-McGee case, and the prosecution close in the Medgar Evans murder trial.

Quotes

Your Honor may be as strict in the enforcement of the law as you please and you cannot hang these boys. You can only hang them because back of the law and back of justice and back of the common instincts of man, and back of the human feeling for the young, is the hoarse voice of the mob which says, “Kill.”

When a new truth comes upon the earth, or a great idea necessary for mankind is born, where does it come from? Not from the police force, or the prosecuting attorneys, or the judges, or the lawyers, or the doctors. Not there. It comes from the despised and the outcasts, and it comes perhaps from jails and prisons. It comes from men who have dared to be rebels and think their thoughts, and their faith has been the faith of rebels.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book showcases interesting examples of the powerful impact persuasion can have in people's lives, though the choice of some of these arguments seems suspect. Because of the nature of trials and of lawyers' quirks, many run on far too long to hold the average reader's attention. Repeating information from myriad sources to emphasize that each corroborates the lawyer's story, that each element of the case has been proven or refuted, and that the jury should now reach the desired verdict quickly grows dull. Though I am ordinarily a completist, having read such whole arguments I wish they'd undergone brutal editing.

Each closing argument was to represent the very best of the American legal profession's history and capabilities. Though limited to 20th century cases by reliance on the availability of complete transcripts, I am unconvinced that Charles Manson and excerpts from an unremarkable case featuring America's first woman lawyer belong alongside the importance of Nuremberg and My Lai, the surprising reversal of United States v Delorean and the uncanny eloquence and shocking impact of Clarence Darrow. Introducing me to Darrow was by itself well worth the price of the book.

Brief analysis of the context and approach of each closing helps aspiring orators and attorneys apply lessons drawn from these examples. That was my original motivation for buying this book, and my reason to push through the annoyingly drawn out and sometimes boring parts.

[Colleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Different oratory styles, different stories, very different cases - What constitutes a good oral argument? And how to present it? From war crimes to plutonium to the Charles Mansion trial, the book spans history, time and all kinds of crimes from various point of views. And in the end there is no right or wrong answer. Make your case, ladies and gentlemen.

[Kristy Miller · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting, but dense. Even for me.

[Jason Kinn · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was a nice try, but closing arguments don't really work in the absence of evidence for the reader to look at. Closing arguments don't exist in the vacuum that this book presents them in. And most of these arguments seem like either slam dunks (e.g., the prosecutor's closing argument in the Manson trial) or egregious miscarriages of justice (e.g., the closing argument of the criminal defense lawyer for John DeLorean, who was clearly guilty of drug trafficking).

[Carlos Villarreal · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a fun read tbh.

[John Nelson · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was disappointed with this book. I expected it to contain an analysis of some of the great closing arguments in legal history, along with the text of the arguments themselves. As a lawyer myself, I anticipated being able to study the rhetorical method of some of the great lawyers in detail, and perhaps learn something to add to my own technique.

Instead, the book begins with a hackneyed discussion of the historical background of each case and lawyer, followed by the text of the argument. The background materials do not contain enough information on the evidence to enable the reader to determine the effectiveness of the argument - perhaps the lawyers were referring to points clearly made by the witnesses, which the jury could be expected to understand and remember, and perhaps they were rambling on at times, losing the jury in the process.

The authors also do not address obvious legal questions raised raised by the material. For example, one of the cases covered was the famous Silkwood wrongful death case, which later inspired a Hollywood movie. Silkwood's estate sued her employer, claiming she had been poisoned by plutonium leaks. However, Silkwood actually died in an automobile accident not long after she allegedly was poisoned. Since plutonium poisoning was not the cause of death, the employer ordinarily would not have been liable for wrongful death. However, no such argument was raised in closing. Most likely, this issue was resolved in a preliminary ruling, but the book does not discuss it. Questions such as this one probably would not occur to the great majority of readers, but detract from the book's credibility in the eyes of more knowledgeable readers.

The book does contain some interesting information of which I was not previously aware. One of the cases involved was the famous trial attorney Clarence Darrow's defense of himself on jury tampering charges. The authors make it clear that Darrow attempted to bribe jurors, and had no defense based on either the law or the facts. (Darrow instead managed to win acquittal with an impassioned appeal to emotion.) I never knew that Darrow had been charged with jury tampering, and it is dismaying to learn that one of the legends of American law did such a thing.

The underlying case involved union violence in Los Angeles. The Bridge and Structural Iron Workers Union sought to compel business to submit to unionization in Los Angeles. Unions were not popular with either employers or workers in Southern California. The local head of the union thereupon contacted the union's national secretary-treasurer and asked that he send the union's "top dynamite expert" to California. (The top man wasn't available and the secretary-treasurer instead sent his brother, who apparently also had experience with with dynamiting buildings.) A spate of bombings followed, one of which destroyed the Los Angeles Times' production plant and killed 23 innocent workers. I was aware of the Los Angeles Times bombing, which was mentioned somewhere in my previous reading. Nevertheless, it was shocking to read a matter-of-fact description of these events. It was even more shocking to realize that the authors - two law professors and a practicing attorney - retained complete sympathy for the union organizers despite their murderous acts. It takes more than a small degree of depravity not only to excuse mass murder and terrorism, but also to insist that the criminals retained justice in their corner.

My other observations are perhaps less profound. The arguments from the early 20th century in the book focused much more on appeals to emotion and matters obviously not in evidence than would be permitted today. The famously folksy Wyoming lawyer Gerry Spence peppered his delivery with the verbal crutch "you know," which likely would have been considered unartful in an earlier age, but in today's society, where people have less patience and less exposure to refined rhetoric, it obviously is not a problem (at least not for Spence). The American prosecutor at Nuremberg, Justice Robert H. Jackson, not only vilified the defendants, which was an understandable part of his case given the circumstances, but also did things such as mock Nazi Air Marshal Goering for his pudgy physique, which ordinarily not only would detract from the prosecutor's credibility but likely would earn a reprimand from the court. The extraordinary nature of the case no doubt accounted for this oddity. Jackson also provided a detailed bill of particulars on the crimes of the Nazi regime, but paid almost no attention to the key question of what each defendant knew and when. This knowledge seems simply to have been presumed, but in at least some cases the basis for this presumption is not clear, at least to a modern reader. It also is shocking to realize that the Soviet Union appointed judges to the Nuremberg tribunal, who demanded the death sentence in every case, even though the Soviet regime was every bit as murderous as the Nazis.

[David Cook · Rating 5 out of 5]

Book Review – Ladies And Gentlemen Of The Jury: Greatest Closing Arguments In Modern Law (Michael S. Lief)

My wife gave this book to me years ago just before my first jury trial. I took it to the office with the idea of chipping away a little at a time. Well, that never happened. But during COVID-19 with no commute I finished it off in short order. The book is the closing arguments of some of the most celebrated trials in modern times. They are all masterpieces in legal advocacy. Most are criminal trials where lives not dollars hang in the balance. The compilers include the following:

• Clarence Darrow's impassioned plea to spare Leopold and Loeb the death penalty for a senseless and despicable murder.
• Robert Jackson's (Jamestown, New York boy made good) condemnation of Hitler's officers at Nuremberg who claimed they were not responsible for just following orders
• Gerry Spence's folksy and effective explanation of strict liability relating to the Kerr-McGee nuclear power plant on behalf of Karen Silkwood.
• Vincent Bugliosi's detailed devastation of the Manson family. This was the hardest to read due to the absolute depravity of Charles Manson and his sick influence on his acolytes.
• Donald Re's close in the DeLorean trial that destroyed the government’s weak and seemingly misplaced drug prosecution of John DeLorean.
• William Kunstler's social justice argument in the Chicago 7 trial in the midst of society seemingly coming apart at the seams.
• Thurgood Marshall in the seminal Brown v. Board of Education.
• Clara Foltz, the first woman to practice law in California who had to defend her right to be in the courtroom where she was not legally eligible for jury service.
• Bobby DeLaughter brings the killer of civil-rights leader Medgar Evers to justice after thirty years and two mistrials.
• Aubrey Daniel in arguing that even in the midst of the chaos of war evil must not be allowed against innocent civilians and for the conviction of Lt. William Calley, Jr. for the My Lai massacre.

Reading good oral arguments will not make one a great trial lawyer any more than watching lawyer shows. But learning the techniques of presentation and properly deployed passion sure will help.

[Emily · Rating 4 out of 5]

In Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, Michael S. Lief, Mitchell Caldwell, and Ben Bycel provide commentary and history on some of the greatest closing arguments in modern law, in addition to a transcript of the argument itself. Through each chapter, the reader is taken into a monumental court case with a superb example of how successful lawyers have been able to the captivate the courtroom and sway the jury to see things to their benefit, despite the matter they may be discussing. In a matter or four hundred pages, the reader is able to develop his/her own insight as to how closing arguments may function as the make or break of court cases, with these famous ten as examples.
In order for the reader to understand the matter of the argument, they must first understand the history and facts of the court case. Prior to the transcripts of each of these closing arguments, the authors provide a history of the case, and how the alleged incident unraveled, from first intentions of the defendant to the final verdict. Following this, a short biography of the particular lawyer whom is presenting the argument is given, stating their law credentials and track record. Finally, the authors provide a brief commentary on their views of the closing argument, and what methods were used to sway the jury. Opinionative matter is kept brief and is not obviously biased, allowing the reader to feel as though he/she may develop their own opinion in regard to the argument. Nonetheless, there are certain excerpts and persuasive methods that suggest to what the reader should pay close attention.
The objectives of the writer to make the material accessible for the average abled reader, and to share the most intriguing and entertaining moments occurring in the courtroom, is achieved thoroughly. The authors chose popular court cases, with which the average American is familiar, such as the Manson family sentencing and the Leopold and Loeb trials. The authors are clearly well-versed in the law, as they understand the logistics of the courtroom as well as the methods used by the famous attorneys. The novel reinforces the idea that the practice of law can be very exciting, and much of the material present in a courtroom is not for the faint of heart.
The authors choose not to include too much commentary in regard to specific laws or articles. This is understandable, as this novel is intended to be read for enjoyment and information on landmark cases as opposed to a lecture about law itself. As one who is interested in practicing law at some point, I felt informed enough to understand the content of the cases without feeling as though I was reading a historical textbook.
Despite my enjoyment of this novel, I felt as though some very important court cases that should have been included were scarcely mentioned, let alone analyzed. I personally expected to see a chapter on The People vs. O.J. Simpson or the Ted Bundy trials. However, I am not the author, and the chosen content is left to authors to decide. Nonetheless, I imagine I am not the only one that felt as though some cases were missing.
The language of the novel is quite professional, but still has a degree of conversationalist writing. I did not feel as though the authors were focused on themselves and their opinions as much as they were attempting the inform the reader of these cases, which I felt they completed quite wonderfully, and it is greatly appreciated.
In Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, Michael S. Lief, Mitchell Caldwell, and Ben Bycel take the readers on a journey through famous landmark cases, with an emphasis on the importance of a strong, confident closing argument. This novel is an excellent read for someone interested in, or involved in, the practice of law as well as some simply searching for a captivating non-fiction read. This book would be a solid addition to a law classroom curriculum, as well as a personal library.

[Raymond · Rating 5 out of 5]

Devil in the details

Until you actually sit and read a closing argument, or a series of them, it is impossible to understand why some lawyers rise to the top of their profession and some wash out like discarded debris. The collection of closing arguments here show how these women and men not only encouraged justice but actually represented justice. Their tools were their words, their swords of logic and reason cutting through to the heart of the matter to make a complicated issue seem like common sense. These lawyers have a commitment to their profession and to their clients that should redeem what many would see as the irredeemable reputation of lawyers everywhere. If we have covered these closing arguments in law school I might have actually gone to practice. And the authors do a fantastic job of providing the context necessary to conceptualize the importance of these cases, what was at stake, and how each represented critical moments in American history. This was a fascinating book, equal to any prose on the best seller list right now.

[Deborah Cleaves · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting read.

[Ampersand · Rating 4 out of 5]

By grace alone I finished this book. Some arguments are so so fascinating but others were incredibly dull. (As such is law) still fascinating though.

[Taryn Miskowiec]

Not rating this just because it feels so hard to rate pure history and speeches that had so much impact in the courtroom and on history!

[Beth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty interesting look at the art of the closing argument, including the context of the cases. Some of the closes picked were better than others (Darrow's were standouts, needless to say, as was Justice Jackson's closing argument at Nuremberg), and those I was less intrigued by took some imagination since these texts are meant to be heard and not read, but still an interesting read even if you're not a lawyer.

[Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

What an interesting concept for a book-and it was pulled off beautifully. Oratory is a dwindling art form, only kept alive these days by lawyers, and this is a wonderful example of some of the best from the last century. It's also a fascinating look at history.

[Kevin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Overall not a bad book. There are a few gems in there. I think the others would be more impressive to hear rather than read.

[Eva · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very interesting. Dad should definitely read this book.

[Anne Homeschooling-Mama · Rating 1 out of 5]

Looked interesting.
It wasn't.

[Holly · Rating 5 out of 5]

Life changing.