I am going to try to stick to the book itself and not discuss the crime, which of course, was horrific. I found this to be a memoir - he discusses how he and the other prosecutors went about proving their case to the jury. He emphasizes Casey's lying and her lawyer's behavior. He discusses the investigation and how it proceeded. He discusses the forensics in detail - he was the prosecutor who presented the forensic issues and cross-examined the defense's witnesses. If you find forensics interesting, you will find this fascinating, especially how this information can be presented to a jury legally. He emphasizes the differences in Florida law and how this influenced all aspects of the trial Personally, I think he was a very hard on the young man who found the body (what a horrible experience for him; he should be a hero for finding the child's body despite being told more than once that he was wrong) and on the jury who he seemed to feel was not very intelligent, sympathetic or hard working despite giving up weeks of their lives, showing up every day, not dropping out of the trial.
He does not discuss the controversy that arose out of the computer searches for "Chloform" which has been in the news lately - the prosecution put forth that their were many searches for this term - now the expert who was involved in the searches has a different opionin of the evidence. That fact that the information given the jury may not have been correct doesn't change the fact that she is quilty; I was just wondering his thoughts on the discrepancies especially since it is said that it might have lead to a mistrial if she had been convicted.
I would have liked to have understood more about the general concept of cases in the public media and prosecuting big trials. I would have liked more information on jury thinking while sequestered and their treatment during this time - how can we help sequestered juries process the information they are presented? What can we learn from the OJ Simpson trial and this trial about juries who are sequestered?
He also very much disliked the defense legal team without really answering the question - why did they win? How can we change our laws to require defense attornies prove their version of the situation? With this success, will this become more of a technique to defend clients using elaborate scenarios without any proof? How can the judge help the jury understand the law and separate proven information from fiction?
He states that he has prosecuted other murder trials and I would be interested if he was to write more books about those trials or other ones that are similar.
One of the questions that Audible asks is what books are similar. Books I have found similar are: "True Story" by Michael Finkel really sticks in my mind (a father who killed his family and fled to Mexico), "Zodiac" by Robert Graysmith, "Green River, Running Red" by Ann Rule, Joe McGinnis's "Never Enough" (Nancy Kissel who killed her husband in Hong Kong) and the classic "Fatal Vision"I (Dr. Jeffrey McDonald), and "Columbine" by Dave Cullen. I would recommend all these books to listeners who like true crime - all are on Audible.
I think Jeff did an
It gives some good background info and there were a few things I didn't know. If you watched the entire case unfold on t.v. you might get a bit bored at times, but keep going.
If you were into the Casey Anthony trial (as I was) this is a must listen! I watched every day of the trial from beginning to end and watched many of the news shows that talked about the trial, both leading up to it and also after it was over. This book reveals things you never knew about and more importantly, discusses evidence that wasn't allowed into trial. Truly fascinating!
Casey Anthony, of course. And she truly is a character!
Since Jeff is reading his own words, you cannot interprete them in any other way other than the way they were intended. I like this.
Yes! Ive not only read a hard copy of this book but also listened to it via audio book and you get so much more from it listening to the voice of the actual author. Its like Jeff Ashton is telling you the story of prosecuting Casey Anthony himself.... Because he is! Years with the prosecutors office and countless trials have given Ashton the gift of story telling and effective narration!
The details of the legal case were interesting and I appreciated the author's insight into the jury and why they might have decided the way they did. I was very sympathetic to the author.
Tell us about yourself! I love to escape into a good book.
It was very interesting to get the perspective of one of the main players in this headline making case.
Probably the OJ Simpson, Helter Skelter, Scott Paterson books about famous trials.
He brings a good deal of background information that I was not aware of before, he is factual without being boring, and had a good self deprecating sense of humour.I enjoyed his narration.
It is still astounding to me this individual is not behind bars. The Scott Paterson trial was based on circumstantial evidence but he was convicted.But that is the jury system for you. Sad that this child received no justice.
I listened to this book in one sitting, it is interesting without being sensationalist. Anyone interested in the workings of a criminal case and how a trial and prosecution defence is put together will find this a fascinating listen.
This gives a systematic blow by blow account of what happened from the very beginning to the very end of the Casey Anthony case. Yes, a lot of the information is already public knowledge. However, there are also a lot of gaps that we didn't get to see as members of the general public. If this case interested you, I would recommend you listen to this book. Jeff Ashton also does a great job with the narration.
Jeff Ashton does a very good job here, not only in producing a very cogent review and analysis of the events, but also as a (presumably) amateur narrator. Unless you had quit your job to follow the Anthony case 24/7, there's quite a lot of new information here, and the likelihood that you will come away with a renewed sense that Casey Anthony is a murderer is overwhelming.
Given the totality of evidence, both scientific and circumstantial, it is nothing short of stunning that a jury let this truly despicable human being walk free. After listening to this audiobook, I would sooner agree that O.J. is innocent than believe the absurd excuses put forth by Casey and Jose Baez.
I can only hope that copies of this book were sent to the jury members. As for Casey, my anger is tempered somewhat by the revelation that, as a human being, she is an utter train wreck, and the chances of her steering clear of the judicial system for any meaningful length of time are virtually nil. She has the grown-up proclivities of a full-blown sociopath, coupled with the undisciplined mind of a spoiled, petulant child. And, like O.J., she will mostly likely wind up behind bars again, an eventuality which I await with thinly-veiled enthusiasm.
Frustrations at the verdict aside, this was a credit very well spent, and I thoroughly recommend it.
HEARING ONE OF THE BEST PROSECUTING LAWYERS OF OUR TIME TAKE US STEP BY STEP THROUGH THE MOST FASCINATING MURDER TRIAL OF THE DECADE REVEALS JUST HOW IMPERFECT OUR LEGAL SYSTEM CAN BE. NOT ALL CITIZENS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE ON A JURY AND SOME LAWYERS ARE WORSE THAN OTHERS. THIS IS A MUST READ FOR ANYONE WHO BECAME FASCINATED WITH THE CASEY ANTHONY TRIAL