Official Review: Junk Justice by Gerry Rising
Posted: 06 Dec 2019, 14:17
[Following is an official OnlineBookClub.org review of "Junk Justice" by Gerry Rising.]
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
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
