George Mason, once a trail lawyer in one of Turow’s former novels (Personal Injuries 1999), is now an appellate court judge. He is confronted by a difficult challenge as the senior member of the three judge panel crafting a decision in which the judges have differing views. The case involves four young men who 18 months ago were convicted of criminal sexual assault and given the mandatory minimum sentence of six years. Mindy Deboyer was only fifteen years old when she attended a rowdy house party for the Glen Brae high school ice hockey team. Drunk on booze and a pill Jacob Warnovits gave her, Mindy ended up passed out in his room. Jacob interpreted this as an invitation for sex and he asked three team members to join him. The entire event was recorded on videotape.Mindy awoke at 5 AM in the living room, having no idea what had happened to her. Her skirt was on backwards and she thought that there had been some rough sex. But she did not want to involve her parents who did not know where she had been, and so she did nothing. The four boys and later Mindy, all graduated high school and life continued. Jacob however, feeling safe, could not resist occasionally entertaining his frat brothers with the tape. One freshman pledge, a friend of the DeBoyer family, tipped off the police who arrived at Jacob's door with a search warrant and the boys were later indicted.There is a complex legal question embedded in the case. The statute of limitations would normally bar Mindy from bringing charges more than three years after the crime. The other issue is a social one. Mindy is black and her parents are well educated. The DeBoyer family wonders publically if she would have been treated differently if she were white. The boys’ supporters feel that the four young men, now in their mid-twenties, will be ruined for a crime they committed long ago from which the victim never really suffered. But in the public arena the DeBoyer view has prevailed and many feel the young men are spoiled rich boys who have escaped punishment after a night of fun.As the three judges on the bench discuss the case among themselves, they express three separate opinions. George as the senior, is expected to craft a compromise and come out with a majority ruling. While pondering the case, Mason is upset by other events in his life. His wife has cancer and is receiving radioactive treatment in hospital. And he has also been receiving some jarring e mail messages. Someone is trying to unsettle him. It could be a stalker or a prankster, but whoever it is, simply refers to himself as number 1. Mason has received the usual hate mail from disaffected or cantankerous clients before, but none of it usually amounted to much. So he has simply been ignoring them. But after a recent case in Cincinnati where a state court judge and his family were murdered, security is taking it all very seriously. Mason usually enjoys his job. He hears arguments, reflects on briefs and precedents and writes opinions. The life suits him. But he is having trouble with this case. An event buried in his past keeps rearing its ugly head, confronting him with important questions that he must resolve to his satisfaction before can go ahead with the decision.This story was initially written as part of a serial in the Sunday New York Times magazine, a fact which accounts for its brevity (only 197 pages). Despite that, it is not disappointing. It clearly outlines the moral complexity that underlies any judicial question and the psychological weight that burdens every judge who must make difficult decisions. The characters are well drawn and despite the fact the reader can guess the “who” about halfway through, it does not detract from enjoying the read.
Set in an imaginative Kindle County in the backdrop of a rape case, “Limitations” by Scott Turow is good but not as gripping as some of John Grisham’s legal thrillers.Elderly judge is perhaps facing the most trying case in his entire career. On the dock are four young men being tried for allegedly raping a teenage girl. This would have been quite an ordinary case for a seasoned judge. But the trial emotionally rattles George Mason as the nature of the rape confronts him with his dark past.He is thereby led to question not just the limitations of the law but that of human beings as well.Meanwhile, George Mason has been getting threats on his email potentially from a member of his own team. Even as this line of the novel keeps the tension alive, the biggest let down of the novel is the mystery surrounding the culprit who is behind those emails.The book is fast paced and can be consumed in a jiffy. But read it only if someone tells you that the person prefers Scott Turow over John Grisham. As for me I am a Grisham loyalist when it comes to legal thrillers.
What do You think about Limitations (2006)?
For a good audio book, try Limitations. It is a fast paced, thriller, with several sub plots, about the courts and the basis for its decisions, as well as what influences those legal decisions. The personalities of criminals and lawyers are explored. The plot unwinds slowly with many twists and turns and will hold your interest. It would be a good book for a plane flight, beach read or vacation and possibly for a book club since there are topics covered that would lend themselves to discussion: what causes criminality, is it rape if the woman is complicit but abused, are all punishments meted out fairly, how does personal life affect the decisions of judge, jury, lawyer, criminal? A philosophical discussion could really be even more interesting than the book itself which is interesting but not rocket science.
—thewanderingjew
Limitations served as my intro to the writing of Scott Turow, and it's made a very favorable impression. As expected, it contains The story of an appellate court judge who recognizes striking personal elements within his latest case, it contains, as expected, absorbing courtroom scenes interspersed danger and action. Turow goes further, however, taking his readers inside the heart and head of his protagonist. Judge George Mason must decide the appeal of a high profile case of multiple rape, based upon challenges to the statute of limitations and the admissibility of a horrific video tape of the incident. He's preoccupied with worry over his wife's life threatening illness, at the same time receiving anonymous death threats via the internet.But the crux of the plot rests upon the ethical dilemma of Mason's life; this explosive case reminds him of an incident that occurred thirty years ago in his college dorm. Turow takes his readers inside Mason's heart and mind as he struggles with memories and guilt that he believed long buried. It's the humanity with which this character is presented that raises Limitations above the run of the mill among legal thrillers.
—Linda
I probably should not have read this book. I read Presumed Innocent when I was 14 or 15 and fell in absolute love with it. However, for some reason I never read another Scott Turow book. So, after many years of remembering my love for the one book of his I read, I picked up another one. Of course, it was bound to disappoint.If Presumed Innocent was anything like this book, I cannot believe that I loved it as a teenager. I got bored early on with this one. The case was interesting enough, about a
—Lena
