Doing Justice: A Prosecutor's Thoughts on Crime, Punishment, and the Rule of Law

What Our Readers Are Saying

Share your thoughts on this title!

Average customer rating 5 (2 comments)

---

`

Here is a comment from "Book Shark" at Amazon. Doing Justice: A Prosecutor's Thoughts on Crime, Punishment, and the Rule of Law by Preet Bharara “Doing Justice” is an excellent book that examines the four key steps of the legal system. Former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara provides readers with an insightful an accessible look at the legal system with an emphasis on a humanity-based approach. This insightful 333-page is broken out by the following four parts: I. Inquiry, II. Accusation, III. Judgment, and IV. Punishment. Positives: 1. Well-written and well-reasoned book. 2. An interesting topic, a former U.S. Attorney’s view on crime, punishment and the rule of law. “This is not a book just about the law. It is a book about integrity, leadership, decision making, and moral reasoning.” 3. Great use of his vast experience to provide clear analogies and interesting examples. Great command of the topic. “Kenny’s job was “to help topple godfathers.” That he did. He helped put away the boss of the Bonanno family and the acting boss of the Lucchese family. He personally arrested the Gambino boss, Paul Castellano, who was later assassinated outside Sparks Steak House in 1985. And then Kenny arrested the man who ordered that assassination, John Gotti Jr. Kenny McCabe was responsible for locking up more murderous, terrorizing, racketeering mobsters than anyone else in modern times. You don’t do that without a steel spine and an iron stomach.” 4. Examines inquiry. “But to begin an inquiry, when justice is the goal, you must not be wedded to any result, must not have a thesis in advance. To be open-minded means proceeding without a theory. You develop a thesis from the facts, not vice versa.” 5. Bharara provides judicial wisdom. “The key is to make sure that prudent hesitation does not turn into paralysis and that responsible aggressiveness does not turn into recklessness.” 6. Justice in the right perspective. “Despite the portrayals in film, TV, and popular fiction, cops and prosecutors do not exist to put people in prison. They certainly exist to hold people accountable as appropriate, and to protect the public, but their job is to make sure that justice is done.” 7. Provides an interesting look on cases. “A case is more likely to be harmed by suppressed questions than by suppressed evidence. This is true in all important endeavors involving truth.” 8. Leadership philosophy. “Self-doubt in moderation is animating and motivating, not paralyzing. Leaders who have purged themselves of all self-doubt will not be leaders for long and, in my view, are dangerous while in command. I learned, over time, that self-doubt is my friend, and arrogance my enemy.” 9. Keys to sound investigations. “Scharff’s general principles have been endorsed and ratified by every good investigator whom I have ever met, spoken to, or overseen. Beatings and bluster seldom yield sustained, truthful answering of questions. Strategy beats savagery, and patience outperforms force.” “The best evidence shows that nothing useful comes from torture.” 10. Key elements of our judicial system. “Our system has decided it wants murderers to flip on other murderers, and as in all things you don’t expect people to give something for nothing. It is transactional. It is utilitarian. It is also justice.” 11. Justification for wiretaps. “As a general legal matter, any argument that wiretaps should not be used in insider-trading cases was meritless. Insider trading is a species of securities fraud and has for decades been a permissible basis for a wiretap.” 12. Explores the fundamental decision on when it’s appropriate to make an allegation. “Justice, as I keep repeating, is done by human beings. Decisions about what to do (or not do) with the fruits of a good-faith inquiry are made by real people who are not omniscient, who are often flawed or biased, and who are always operating in imperfect systems and bureaucracies.” “In most cases, the decision to make an accusation is discretionary, and so future harm must properly be in the calculus.” 13. Interesting cases discussed throughout the book. “Most shocking of all, Mangan saw emails written by her own husband, salivating at the thought of torturing, killing, and cannibalizing her.” 14. The use of discretion over-criminalization. “A decision not to go after turnstile jumpers is more than just about resources; it is also a considered judgment about racial unfairness and disproportionate punishment for certain communities. A policy of not prosecuting sex workers but only traffickers may also reflect a suspension of moral judgment about the conduct of the former group.” 15. The fear of confronting power. “Here is a disturbing truth: In the shadow of most massive frauds and cover-ups are lurking all manner of enablers—people who were helpful either to the perpetration of the crimes or to their concealment. Think Enron. Think WorldCom. Think Madoff. Think Theranos. Think also Penn State and Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby. Think of the doping scandals in baseball and cycling. Think of the sexual abuse scandals in Olympic gymnastics and in the Roman Catholic Church. People are too often afraid to confront power.” 16. Integrity discussed. “Whether one runs a U.S. Attorney’s Office or a giant corporation or an investment bank or a university, everyone—from the mail room to the boardroom—needs to understand and feel in their bones that the institution and its leaders care about integrity. That is the best way to protect against all manner of accusations, criminal or otherwise.” 17. The concept of judgment. “This phase—judgment—is the adjudication of the allegations or accusations. It is the settling of the ultimate question. The possibilities are not infinite. There are only four basic outcomes: charges admitted (guilty plea), charges withdrawn (dismissal), charges proved (guilty verdict), or charges defeated (not-guilty verdict). There is also the chance, I suppose, of a mixed verdict or the accused becoming a fugitive and escaping reckoning altogether, but essentially those are the four potential outcomes. There is, notably, no such thing as a verdict of innocence in our system.” “One reason there is no satisfying judgment in any congressional inquiry is that there is no neutral arbiter. No one is in charge. Conclusions are based on political power, rather than on detached rulings by disinterested outsiders.” 18. Discusses the role of the judge in their role of doing justice. “A judge’s role is to allow the truth to be discovered, without bias, favoritism, or a thumb on the scale, while treating both sides with dignity and respect.” 19. Keys to the courtroom. “Preparation, command, eloquence, sure. Those all matter. But the key to the courtroom is credibility. Credibility is what makes your story believable. Concessions are a sign of strength, not weakness, because they enhance your credibility. It’s always better to volunteer a weakness than to have your adversary point it out. I would always advise this: If you have an incriminating conversation but no tape, say so. If there are discrepancies in the testimony of your witnesses, say so. If your cooperator is likely to come off like a jerk, say so.” 20. Being a good lawyer. “I have often said this to young lawyers: Much of the time, your most important job as a lawyer is not to talk; it is to listen. You want to be a good lawyer? Work on how you speak. You want to be a great lawyer? Work on how you listen.” 21. Fair punishment. “The judge’s grave duty is to impose just punishment where punishment is called for. A federal judge is guided by all manner of scores and set numbers based on criminal history, nature of the offense, aggravating factors, and mitigating facts, but ultimately the law requires only that a judge impose a sentence that is “sufficient but not greater than necessary.”” 22. A just and fair society. “In a just and fair society, the healthy should care about the sick; the rich should care about the poor; the mighty should care about the weak; and the prosecutor should care about the prisoner.” Negatives: 1. No supplementary visual material. No charts, graphs or photos. 2. No formal bibliography. 3. No notes or links. 4. Disappointed in how the judicial system handles financial cases. 5. There will always be a degree of self-aggrandizement. 6. Limited commentary on the failure of the judicial system and what we can do to improve. In summary, this is a very interesting and worthwhile book to read particularly for laypersons who are in interested in the legal system. Bharara provides readers with plenty of fascinating cases that illustrate how the judicial system works. My biggest complaint is the lack of supplementary material and very little on the systematic failures. That said, I recommend this book! I want to read more on this topic. Further suggestions: “Mistrial” by Mark Keragos, “Win Your Case” by Gerry Spence, “Unfair: The New Science of Criminal Injustice, “Blind Injustice” by Mark Godsey, “You Have the Right to Remain Innocent” by James Duane, “The New Jim Crow” by Michelle Alexander, “A Higher Loyalty” by James Comey, and “America’s Original Sin” by Jim Wallis.

`

This book should be required reading for all citizens. It was fascinating to get a glimpse into the author's amazing mind and see the careful thought that goes into his decisions. Also fascinating was the information about prisons - especially the harm done by solitary confinement and how being quiet, calm, and kind can elicit the information needed from suspects without the use of force. We could all take a lesson from this author and hope that he continues to work for justice for ALL.