Inadmissible Evidence

by Phillip Friedman

For Manhattan ADA Joe Estrada, retrying community hero Roberto Morales for the brutal murder of his colleague and lover looks like a prosecutor’s dream come true. Soon enough, though, it’s beginning to seem more like a nightmare... Missing witnesses, a smart, tough defense lawyer, pressure from his bosses, and a hostile press and public… and then Estrada begins to believe that Morales may actually be innocent.

When he’s assigned to retry the homicide case against real estate developer Roberto Morales, accused of the brutal slashing murder of his colleague and lover Mariah Dodge, Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Joe Estrada doesn’t know whether to celebrate or mourn. People v Morales is as high-profile and career-making a case as any prosecutor could dream of, but Morales is a hero to New York’s Puerto Rican community, so the case is potentially a keg of dynamite. And retrials are always an uphill battle – the defense knows your strategy, witnesses are gone or forgetful. Worse, Estrada can’t know if he was picked to retry Morales for his courtroom skills or –as Morales’s supporters claim – for his Latino-sounding name.

Estrada’s sweat, pain, and emotional investment lead him to a gut-wrenching possibility – the man he is trying so hard to convict may, in fact, be innocent. Under increasing pressure to produce a conviction, his career and his very identity on the line, Estrada struggles toward the truth. What he finds is… inadmissible evidence.

Genres: Fiction, Thriller, Mystery, Legal Thriller, Crime, Legal

640 pages, Mass Market Paperback

First published January 1, 1993

About the author

Philip Friedman’s novels Reasonable Doubt, Inadmissible Evidence and Grand Jury spent a total of 26 weeks on The New York Times’ bestseller lists, and appeared on bestseller lists around the world. His cold war thriller, Termination Order, called “one of the best of the year,” was a New York Times Notable Book. He is also the co-author of The Pilates Method of Physical and Mental Conditioning, the book that first brought Pilates to a wide audience. Vogue called it “one of our favorite exercise books.”

Writing as Philip Chase, he has written four thrillers about Bill Kendall and Ron Eisenberg and their team, top secret military investigators for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Mr. Friedman has also written for The New York Times, Elle, and The Forward, among others. He is a former member of the National Board of Mystery Writers of America and is a member of the Authors Guild and the Dramatists Guild. He served on the Board of Directors of Learning in Focus, producer of the award-winning American Short Story series. He studied mathematics (and lots of other things) at Princeton University and holds a law degree from NYU.

Reviews

[Paul Gaya Ochieng Simeon Juma · Rating 5 out of 5]

Inadmissible Evidence by Philip Friedman is my surprise-favorite novel so far. It is a legal drama that is so engrossing to the point of forgetting your obligations. The book tells the story of Joseph Estrada a District Attorney in charge of the re-trial of Robert Morales. The accused is charged with the murder of his lover, Mariah Dodges. Joe has to aim towards conviction without repeating the mistakes of his earlier predecessor, Lawrence Khan. The case spirals to the point of nearly getting the former prosecution counsel being charged with misconduct. Also, the court drama is insightful and well crafted. A very beautiful book.

[Phil · Rating 5 out of 5]

Surprisingly fresh and current despite the fact it was written almost 20years ago. This is a very interesting courtroom/criminal trial drama with the main character a prosecuting attorney. Nothing original about that except the story realistically reveals the technical obsticals (Inadmissable Evidence) with which the Prosecutor must cope...even when clearly the defendant is guilty. If only the jury could have access to the same information as the Police and the Prosecutors...

[Curlyhair · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this way back, but loved it at the time. I might look it up and re-read one of these days.

[Morgen · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interminable! legal thriller, as an ADA has to retry a tabloid splashed case that has been overturned due to...inadmissable evidence. As he reviews the remaining evidence, he is befriended by the victims sister, who is eager to make sure this time the guy gets put away for good. For a while, he's not even convinced this is the guilty party as we spend hundreds of pages on complicated real estate deals, and his own debates with himself about fine legal points I don't fully understand and don't care about. In the end he gets his conviction, but we're left uncertain this is even the killer. Dissatisfying all around.

[Deb White · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a grewling 638 pages long! It is about a NYC prosecutor and his trial involving a woman being slashed in the throat and murdered. It reads like a legal document, in minute detail of the preparation and trial of a man accused of rape and murder.
If you like such detail, this book is for you. A student of the law would love it.

[Mikki · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'd have given this 4.8 stars if possible - the only thing hindering a 5-star rating was its length! This is an excellent courtroom/legal procedural novel, with lots of twists and turns and with admirably well thought-out plot and courtroom argument to-and-fro between prosecution and defense teams. The final result was always up in the air until it was finally given.

BUT - so many words threatened to send me into snooze mode on occasion. Although I read all the 'Investigation' section (and THAT was long but necessary), I skipped a few chapters of the 'Trial' phase - mostly the defense arguments - and caught up with their contents later in the book. I read the prosecution's argument in its entirity as it was exceedingly well thought-out and written (almost like the author had been transcribing from an actual court case) and understood the final verdict and why it was given.

Yep - probably 4.8 stars.

[Hans Brienesse · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another reason to declare the author one of my favourite legal thriller authors. The plot is impeccably set with as many twists and frustrating turns as the real thing. At no time did any of the characters seem implausible and the story ground on and on relentlessly towards its end. At 780 pages not a quick read but damn near impossible to put down at times. Read it, and be impressed.

[Cheryl · Rating 3 out of 5]

Engaging

[Mike]

March-1999

[Donald Trump · Rating 2 out of 5]

Low Energy!
** 2 Stars.

[Joshua · Rating 4 out of 5]

Community hero Roberto Morales, found guilty of killing his mistress, has his conviction reversed due to the judge's botched jury instructions. We follow prosecutor Joe Estrada, brought in for the retrial, as he juggles reluctant witnesses, new evidence, troubles at home, doubts about the defendants guilt, and a legal timebomb left by his predecessor.

That summary sort of has the effect, at least to me, of implying that the book is cliche, schlocky, a potboiler, etc. Although there are some cliche/schlocky moments, I think that on the whole this is an excellent legal novel. Like most of Friedman's readers, I'm not a lawyer, but this book has a certain ring of authenticity to it.

The universe is indifferent to Estrada; I never got the sense that the writer "had his finger on the scales." For instance, there is a suprise witness found on the eve of trial, but we knew he existed from early in the novel, and Estrada spent half the novel, on and off, trying to locate him. None of the witnesses are paper cut-outs; they have their own lives and somewhat resent being bothered with the case a second time. And of course, like in real life, you still go home at the end of the day, and the issues there don't go into suspended animation until the trial is done.

Friedman also does a great job on making the matter ambigous. The evidence of Morales' guilt rides mostly on opinions: witnesses to the victim's demeanor on the day she was killed, witnesses who think they saw Morales leave the hotel. And they all have their biases and reasons to question their veracity. This is opposed to Morales who, in a private interview, gives his side of it with an honest and forthright demeanor. This ambiguity also extends to the lawyers. The defense attorney believes in her client's cause, but doesn't come off as being above the stereotypical "cheap lawyer's tricks." Estrada is honest and decent, however he's still a lawyer representing a client, and tries to get the other side's evidence suppressed, and introduce evidence of murky admissibility.

Perhaps the novel is too complex; witnesses pop in and out by name, without qualifiers such as "X, the motive witness" or so forth. One definitely has to pay attention. Also, the dialogue struck me as a bit shoddy at times. Finally, I think it went on too long.

But all in all, I think this is a solid legal thriller and I recommend it to all fan of the genre.

[Kay · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was absorbing and though dated, full of information and you-are-there about how trials work but in a story that is a page-turner. Seems this is it, though, for there is not more about Joe Estrada--yes, there is another book, but it does not attract from the reviews. Here we learn about how evidence works, and when you know what happened and need to prove it. The people are very alive and I felt like I knew them and moved among them. And a winner in the "this lawyer is a real person you'd like to have coffee with" polls for me.

[Jenna · Rating 3 out of 5]

I would've given this book 3 1/2 stars if I had that option. Although the book was fast paced; it was too long. It seemed like I read the evidence over and over again ... good read but should've been cut by a couple hundred pages.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

this took me forever to read, but i really enjoyed it. it reminded me of being back in college and sitting in criminal justice classes learning about law. it was written from a great law perspective with a strong police presence. thoroughly enjoyed!

[Shirley · Rating 5 out of 5]

First time that I caught this author. Equal to Grisham and Turow in the lawyer genre. The story was complex, truly did not know until the end how it was going to finish. I'll be looking for more from Friedman

[Caroline Mcphail-Lambert · Rating 3 out of 5]

Little long, seems to go over some of the same stuff over & over & over . . . which I blame on the editor, for I think that's the editor's job, but enjoyed the story nonetheless. If a fan of legal thrillers, then this would be a good read!

[Michael Matson · Rating 2 out of 5]

A book only a lawyer could write, overlong, meandering and muzzy. Full of enough holes to allow all the false leads, red herrings and irrelevant inclusions to escape. Friedman's protagonist is a weakwilled and ultimately unlikable character. The conclusion is completely unacceptable.

[Katherine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly enjoyed this book....interesting trial.....evidence galore, but the jury did the right thing.
Good characters.....nice writing although some was very over written and could have used an editor.

[Kelly · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fast paced. Typical legal thriller with a big shot murdering his mistress. Good interaction between the prosecutor and the victim's sister.

[Cws]

A Fri

[Valynda]

sold

[Laurie Stoll · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good suspense.

[Vixen201 · Rating 1 out of 5]

it was terrible book. I couldn't finish reading.

[Jim Moffett · Rating 5 out of 5]

03-97

[T.M.]

Great book. Learned a lot about the court process.

[Ellen · Rating 2 out of 5]

Got a bit boring

[Jackie Simons]

Read 8/94

[Charlene Gordon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good book. Read this in 1999.

[Bonnie Lynn · Rating 2 out of 5]

Author knows his stuff and many fans of legal fiction will probably enjoy this book. The story was interesting but, for my taste, the characters...not so much. Also, I thought the book too long and would have found it to be more enjoyable if it had been edited. For these reasons, In my opinion, this is how it sometimes happens that the movie is better than the book.