Reviews

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

evamadera1's review against another edition

3.5

Disclaimer to start: I listened to most of this while also playing Hogwarts Legacy. Even though I knew the story in the game and did not pay specific attention to it, this book did not hold my attention, mainly because of what it says on the tin aka the subtitle. I have learned that topically organized books such as this one do not work well for me. Bharara has an engaging writing style and clearly cares about the things he writes about here. Another thing that didn't really work for me were the parts he addressed to the reader because sometimes he imagined the audience as fellow prosecutors and other times as people like me. This is a decent book, must not the one for me.

siena_j_p's review against another edition

informative reflective medium-paced

3.5

This book was SO FRUSTRATING. In many ways I agreed with elements, at least, of the author’s arguments (for what it’s worth I am an aspiring human rights/defense attorney, so it is conceivable elements of my worldview are fundamentally incompatible with this author’s perspective). But he seemed uninterested in interrogating some of his assumptions. Two of the ones that I found particularly frustrating: the idea that people overblow the importance of Miranda Rights (I don’t know, maybe federal crime is different, but there are a whole lot of people out there who don’t know their constitutional rights by heart and it is NOT overblown to say that they should know that). The problem was, he seemed to be focused on the legal perspective – whether it matters to have evidence obtained without Miranda Rights thrown out – as opposed to the part where the reason that evidence gets thrown out is because to ignore Miranda Rights is to fundamentally undermine the Constitutional right to not incriminate oneself, which is confusing because supposedly justice is the entire point of this book?? Similarly, he discussed how one could connect with cooperating witnesses by giving them food corresponding to their ethnic identity, and then use that connection to convince them to testify or cooperate. Which like. Really, really rubbed me the wrong way. I suppose yes, from a consequentialist standpoint, maybe you get more people thrown in prison that way. But from a deontological system – and keep in mind that Constitutional law is VERY deontological in nature, that’s exactly why an entire verdict can be thrown out because of a relatively small infraction – that is an incredibly unjust thing to do to an individual, weaponizing racial and ethnic identities in an effort to essentially trick them into cooperating. This is especially exacerbated by the fact that in many of these cases, the person is already in prison, where they are certainly not being provided with food from home. I don’t know, maybe I’m overblowing this, but it really bothered me that in a book that is supposedly all about justice, the author seemed to completely gloss over some very serious issues of justice. So I don’t know, I just spent the whole book being like “Well that’s a fascinating story and an interesting observation” and then turning the page and thinking “Dude, seriously?”

danakaddd123's review against another edition

5.0

I loved Doing Justice, easily one of my favorite books of the year so far. I felt chills countless times. Bharara's commitment to justice and loving respect for his colleagues is admirable. It is also not a memoir in the strictest sense of the word. More lessons from stories, usually not his own. But I do have one problem with this book, when Bharara is talking about arresting sex traffickers, he talks about how his office does not arrest either "prostitutes" or "Johns" even though he could. I am wondering whether his word choice was improper because surely he is not suggesting that women who were forced into sexual slavery would be considered criminals by the law. He said that he considered them "victims," to be fair, but you simply cannot pat yourself on the back for not arresting victims of sex trafficking. While I do not think that he meant to sound so callous and insensitive, I VERY strongly believe that he should have made a statement of support for these women and maybe mentioned what happened to them after the traffickers were arrested (rehabilitation hopefully but really anything would be better than "well... we didn't arrest them"), especially considering his words in a later chapter about victims being disregarded by members of law enforcement.

amtgrg's review against another edition

informative reflective fast-paced

4.0

A really well written book on the process of doing justice, the challenges and moral issues along the way. Replete with almost unbelievable real life stories, this is an easy to read and very informative book

kristen_proz's review against another edition

4.0

I really enjoyed this one - one of my online book clubs had a non-fiction prompt for February, and this one has been sitting on my BOTM shelf for awhile, so I took the plunge. This one touches on some really important topics, and a lawyer’s viewpoint is interesting to me. That being said, it was a bit dry and dense in parts, and I can see how someone that isn’t interested in this topic would find it challenging to read. I enjoyed it!

twilhelmsen's review against another edition

5.0

I love Preet Bharara - he is thoughtful, intelligent, and principled. The book provides an overview of the workings of our justice system and Preet's narration is engaging. He includes many examples and stories, which make the subject matter that much more interesting and thought provoking.

__karen__'s review against another edition

4.0

Interesting observations and anecdotes about law and justice, largely based on Bharara's legal career. My favorite chapter was about the value of asking questions.... even "dumb" questions are useful.

mhmatus's review against another edition

Preet's eloquence came as no surprise but his humility was refreshing.

cherylcheng00's review against another edition

4.0

When people talk about bias, it is generally negative bias. It's a concern -- a righteous concern -- that people might have bias against someone of a certain race, ethnicity, or gender that might cause them to unduly suspect a particular person of committing a crime. But the Menendez brothers case, like so many other cases, reminds us of the need for wariness of positive bias too: the belief that an outwardly upstanding citizen or externally successful and wealthy person could not engage in deceit, fraud, assault -- or parricide. Positive bias not only causes law enforcement to overlook suspects but, perhaps even more important, causes otherwise thoughtful people to become victims. 13

The hope is that no man is above the law; that power and privilege do not immunize you from accountability and punishment; that corruption can be fought. And that there are people brave enough to fight it. It shows the universal craving for honest government and the rule of law. Because as it turns out, the dream of honest government, where no one is above the law and the oath of the office matters, is the dream of civilized people everywhere. Bringing the powerful and corrupt to justice gives people faith in all cases, big and small. 213

A crisis persists in public discourse and political debate. It is coarse and vicious and tone-deaf. Truth is a victim of self-interest and extreme tribalism, as are decorum and respect. The very notion of civility -- and even the need for it -- are hotly debated. Meanwhile, political tribes insulate themselves more than ever. More than ever, people seek out only like-minded voices, only comfortable viewpoints, avoiding challenge, debate, and inconvenient facts. They stick to their side no matter what the evidence; openness to changing your mind is not only rare but seen as weak and disloyal somehow. Fewer people than ever adhere to Cromwell's admonition -- think ye may be wrong. Meanwhile, when debates are joined -- on cable television or the internet -- name-calling, innuendo, and character assassination are more favored tactics than logic and reason. 251

mkmcelroy's review against another edition

4.0

Mr Bharara presents an interesting perspective on our judicial system. His descriptions are self reflective and he approaches topics from his own moral point of view. I appreciated the level of consideration he gave to each story he told, including attempts at empathy and understanding towards adversarial parties. 

His frank, open discussion style was enjoyable to read. And I think it brought an honesty to the book I wasn’t expecting. There were opinions I agreed with, disagreed with, and ones I hadn’t encountered before. Overall, his goal, both in the book and in his described career, was to respect the dignity of others and further justice in the ways he thought were best. While even he admitted to certain decisions that might have fallen short of that goal, it was heartening to know that there are attorneys such as him, contributing to our system and actively considering these important questions.

I would recommend this book to anyone interested in public service. While the book does focus on our judicial system specifically, the questions it poses about how our actions contribute to a greater societal good and how our experiences can blind us from considering a situation from all angles, are vital to every system. This sort of reflection and conscious empathy is, in my opinion, foundational to building a better world. And I am happy to see people like Mr Bharara writing books that further that sort of discussion and introspection.