Official Review: Junk Justice by Gerry Rising

Erin Painter Baker · Post by **Erin Painter Baker** » 06 Dec 2019, 14:17

[Following is an official OnlineBookClub.org review of "Junk Justice" by Gerry Rising.]

2 out of 4 stars

Share This Review

I was hesitant about picking up Gerry Rising’s Junk Justice, not because I was not interested in the topic but because I was not sure if I was the right reviewer for this book. Why would I not be the right reviewer? Honestly, because my family has been through something incredibly similar to what Rising went through. It meant that with me, Rising would be preaching to the choir. And with a reviewer who is already part of the choir, it can make it hard to tell if the book is as persuasive as the author hopes.

The basic story of Junk Justice is that Rising was accused of complex financial crimes. Rising claims complete innocence. He was railroaded by the US Attorneys, and his own defense attorney, into a terrible plea deal. He spent almost five years in prison, more time in community custody (similar to being on parole), appealed his case, and filed a number of complaints against the justice system as a whole. He talks a little about the different people he met in prison, but for the most part, this book is the story of how the system is stacked against individuals, and how Rising himself was specifically mistreated.

Let me start by stating what may be obvious. Given my own family’s experience with the criminal justice system, I agree with the arguments Rising is making. And it turns out that maybe, as a member of the choir, I am actually a great person to review this book. Because instead of simply reacting to what happened to Rising, I can actually sit back a bit and evaluate the way he makes his argument.

Rising includes a number of appendices at the end of his book. These appendices are his different appeals and complaints as well as what he claims is some of the exculpatory evidence proving his innocence. The problem is, most readers, myself included, do not understand the law well enough to know if Rising’s arguments and assertions are legally factual. Nor will most of us understand the complex financial situation enough for the “evidence” to mean anything.

Sadly, because Junk Justice reads more like a laundry list of slights against Rising, it is not as persuasive as I think Rising would like it to be. Rising himself comes off as believing he is smarter and knows the law better than anyone else involved in his case, including the judges. And while I can completely sympathize, I wonder how well that attitude would come off with people who had not had their own experiences with the courts. I think the book could have been more powerful if it had been written more about Rising’s emotional journey through this process.

Because the emotional connection is not there, I would have a hard time recommending this book to those who have not had their own experiences with the justice system. I fear it would make them less sympathetic to the issues currently faced by people caught in the system. I think if someone has a strong interest in white-collar or financial crimes, they might find parts of this book interesting. In addition, if you have your own experiences fighting against the justice system and just want validation, then this book might be for you.

I give Junk Justice by Gerry Rising two out of four stars. In order for the book to have the impact I think Rising wants, he needs to focus more on emotionally connecting with his readers, instead of spending so much time attacking those he feels wronged him. I fear that his apparent arrogance will turn more people away from the truth of his experience than bring over to his side.

On an editorial note, the book could use another round of copyediting. Most of the issues I found were along the lines of missing commas or poor formatting. The editing issues did not play into my rating; that was all about the persuasiveness of the argument being made.

******
Junk Justice
View: on Bookshelves

LinaMueller · Post by **LinaMueller** » 30 Dec 2019, 19:19

I cannot think of anyone better for the job of reviewing this book than you. My impression as an outsider is that the US judicial system is increasingly punishing wealthy people. As if making money had become something evil (at least for some judges) and that you should be punished at any cost for the crime of being rich. This book seems the classic case of a great idea that was not well executed. Thanks for your great review, my dear.

Kanda_theGreat · Post by **Kanda_theGreat** » 31 Dec 2019, 05:00

After reading this review, I emphathize with the author especially because I have experienced some of the highlighted issues.
Thank you for the review.

Prisallen · Post by **Prisallen** » 31 Dec 2019, 13:53

I always find it depressing to hear about how the justice system fails some people. It's unfortunate that the author did not connect with the readers emotionally. Thank you for the great review!

Erin Painter Baker · Post by **Erin Painter Baker** » 31 Dec 2019, 15:26

@LinaMueller - Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I may be disappearing again after this week, as classes are back in session and I am always busier when students and faculty are around.
I think the biggest problem, in this case, is that the US system of healthcare is broken, and instead of fixing it, we have decided to scapegoat people who have made money off of it, as long as they remain individual people (vs large healthcare organizations).

@Kanda_theGreat - I also empathize with the author. I just did not feel like he quite understood how systemic and endemic the problems are, and really felt this was more of a "woe is me" vs a "woe is the system".

@Prisallen - Thanks for stopping by. Yes, I really do wish I felt that the author fostered an emotional connection instead of the one I brought with me, having experienced some of the same issues.

nicole-adrianne · Post by **nicole-adrianne** » 31 Dec 2019, 19:17

Wonderful review! I appreciate your evaluation of the content and tone, as well as the formatting. I think I'm content to skip this piece.

Stephanie Runyon · Post by **Stephanie Runyon** » 03 Jan 2020, 02:27

I understand how the author feels but I also agree his persuasion would be more effective like you stated. I have been on both sides of the courtroom. I now live by the statement of "you are guilty until proven innocent" as that is what I have seen and experienced.

Erin Painter Baker · Post by **Erin Painter Baker** » 06 Jan 2020, 14:42

@nicole-adrianne - Thank you. This book is not for everyone, so I completely understand deciding to skip it.

@Mounce574 - Sadly, I agree that in many cases, it definitely feels like the attitude of our courts is "guilty until proven innocent". And I think it would be great if books like this could get more people who have never had to interact with the justice system to understand it better. I just don't know if this author is the one to really bring about that sympathy.

Mszymonik · Post by **Mszymonik** » 26 Jan 2020, 12:16

Having been through extreme injustice in the Family Court system, and now working as a digital course creator for parents who want to rebuild their lives after having their parental rights stripped in divorce, a "woe is me" attitude is almost always a side effect of legal abuse syndrome. Legal abuse syndrome is a form of PTSD. Almost all of my clients who've had prolonged, manifest injustice has this sort of tone in the way they write and speak. It took me many years to break out of that pattern and now I'm helping others. I can't blame the author at all for having a certain attitude in the book. Hopefully the book has the reach he intends for it to have!

Ekta Swarnkar · Post by **Ekta Swarnkar** » 26 Jan 2020, 12:33

Honestly, I can't stand books with cruel themes so I don't think this is for me but I really do appreciate your reviewing the book. Thank you!

Erin Painter Baker · Post by **Erin Painter Baker** » 31 Jan 2020, 11:41

@Mszymonik - I could understand a "woe is me" attitude. I've definitely been there. No, it was more an attitude that he was smarter/better than everyone else involved in the case - lawyers, judges, corrections officers - that got to me. I'm not saying there aren't some awful people out there, and it is good to expose them, but the overall attitude here actually turned me off, and I am completely predisposed to be on this guy's side.

@Ekta Swarnkar - I wouldn't call this a cruel theme. It is about miscarriage of justice, and that can be hard to read about, but it is also important to realize that it happens, not just letting some people go who should not be, but also punishing people who should not be.