Mark Gimenez

This was a bit slow for the first half, and I almost wanted to quit reading, but it got better. It spent a lot of time establishing Scott Finney as an honest judge who needed to judge on the law, not what he thought was right or wrong. He was an advocate for the constitution, as a federal judge. There were many references to his past two books, where he went from a rich, Ferrari-driving defense lawyer to a middle-class judge.

His downfall was caused by defending a black drug addict in a highly political case, and later, after she died of an overdose, adopting her daughter who was the same age as his daughter. And speaking of his daughter, she was the product of his former gold-digging trophy wife who ran off with a golf pro after his downfall. He later defended his wife for murdering said golf pro, but she disappeared afterwards, so he's left with two teen daughters. There's a lot of good entertainment just in that situation, a black girl in a rich white school and a precocious daughter who asks questions no father wants to answer - like "What is oral sex?"

Anyway, there are a couple of hard issues in the story. The main case is a group of Muslims, including the imam of the Muslim church, who are accused of planning to bomb the super bowl. One guy was shot, and a group arrested, all on an anonymous tip to the FBI. Problem is, they can't find any evidence at all, but still want to hold them (at least until after the super bowl). The Muslims are outspoken in their hatred of America, Christians, and Jews, and feel beheading is a perfectly acceptable method of showing this. The imam says a lot about why he feels this way; he says the US drones kill innocent Muslims as collateral damage, and wonders why that is more acceptable than beheading. He thinks we are not innocent because we elect our leaders who do this to them. Many of his arguments are hard to argue with, except nobody ever points out that close to half the country did not vote for any of the leaders, but are still blown up or otherwise killed by Muslim retaliations.

The story does present both sides of the issues, but the overall takeaway for me is that the Muslim extremists are less than human, and were not considered when the constitution was written. However, in spite of some of the FBI and government officials, they really do deserve to have actual proof of their guilt before being imprisoned, and not be considered guilty simply because of their beliefs. At least, that was what I got from the story.

… (mais)

This is the third book I've read by Mark Gimenez in the past couple of weeks, and I've loved each of them. I'm amazed at some of the criticism I see (some, not all) where people seem to take it too seriously while missing the underlying lessons that actually are serious. I think they must get confused by the mix of humor and serious issues, and don't know how to follow.

The overall tone is humorous, light-hearted satire, mostly political, left-leaning I think, but not too much so. All sides are fair game in this book. But there are some serious issues illustrated in the book, and some interesting history about Mexico, Texas, and the US that I think is probably accurate; I was raised in Alabama, and we didn't learn a whole lot about the history of that area. In fact, I'm sad to say, I didn't learn a lot about history at all, since it seemed to be mostly memorizing dates of important events without really learning why they were important. Like, I learned that the Battle of Hastings of in 1066, but I didn't even know where it was or why it mattered.

This book had something for everyone - humor, action, history, and even romance. There was a lot going one, and it never got boring to me. I look forward to reading more from this author.

The audiobook was very well done, I thought. It was narrated by Jeff Harding, who did the Jack Reacher books. I was beginning to think he wasn't that good due to his dry delivery, but that seemed to be more the way the Reacher books were written, I guess. This one was very good.… (mais)

Another fun, interesting read in this second of the A. Scott Fenney series. I think it could be read as a standalone, but I'd recommend reading the first book to better enjoy this one, which takes up almost 2 years later.

I like these books on several levels. First, there's the characters, mostly likable but a few who are either detestable or changeable. Leading the list are A. Scott's 11 year old daughter and adopted daughter (his daughter calls him A. Scott). Then, there are his partners, one a refugee from his old firm, and the other a friend from earlier life. His bodyguard, a brick wall named Louis who came with his adopted daughter from the dark side of town, is a very likable friend and capable bodyguard who likes Scott a lot because he took in Pajamae, the daughter of his last client who was a junkie accused of murder. Lots of other characters keep things moving along at a fun pace.

Aside from the characters, there is the humor, often dry, apparently overlooked by many reviewers who think the story is too simple or one-dimensional, etc. I personally think they are missing the bus on this book, but maybe it's me. Still, while the story is interesting, the characters make the book for me. Taking it seriously is a mistake, almost like saying The Hitchhiker's Guide is not believable.

Since the author is a lawyer, the legal issues are interesting and believable, giving us some real issues to think about behind the shenanigans. I think underneath the money-hungry, fashion-following beautiful women everywhere is a look into issues women face in real life, and how some of them feel forced to act in order to succeed in the man's world.

I'm glad I discovered this author, even though it was under false pretenses; people are comparing him to Grisham, an author I enjoy a lot. But I think the similarities are pretty superficial, mainly that they're both about the law. But Grisham is much more serious and realistic.

And about the audiobook version I read. The narrator was Jeff Harding, who narrates the Jack Reacher books I've read. I'm not crazy about him, and liked the narrator of the first book better (Stephen Hoye). Jeff Harding sound a bit too matter-of-fact to me, and for some reason I find it a little annoying. But it was OK.… (mais)