Conviction

Richard North Patterson dealt with the very controversial subject of mentally ill people and the death penalty in Conviction. Mr Patterson's credentials as trial lawyer, assistant attorney general and advocacy group board member were evident in this novel. Legal terms which I didn't comprehend flew back and forth throughout the book... Habeas corpus, AEDPA, Ninth Circuit, Eight Circuit, clemency petition, freestanding innocence, Herrera, Atkins.... (Ok, so maybe not all legal terms).

The legal battles were the most interesting - when both sets of lawyers faced the Ninth Court, Supreme Court and District Court. However, 'lawyer speak' was used most of the time (although I'm sure lawyers would tell me that's simple layman-speak!) so the dramatics were sometimes lost on me. This seemed to be a book more for lawyers. I'll need to ask a professional in the legal field this, but comparing Mr Patterson with Mr Grisham, I'd say the latter appeals more to non-lawyers because of the real layman speak in his novels (hence why most lawyers don't like him, I guess! You can't win every battle!).

Conviction did make me think about the death penalty more. I used to think there was a clear answer - don't commit a crime - clear and simple. But this novel threw in some grey areas - what if justice was not served properly, if the person was led to commit a crime (s)he didn't understand due to lack of mental capacity? Mr Patterson allowed some glimmer of emotion through, which when he did, was very touching. It certainly forced me to re-think my initial thoughts on death penalty.

I'll have to read the book again and really make it a point to understand the legal terms to fully appreciate the story. Or get one of my brilliant lawyer friends to explain it to me (I'm looking at you, Yen!) ;)