Lots of surprises!!
Oleg. It was always a mystery as to who he really was and how guilty he was or wasn't.
This was my first listen to this narrator. Enjoyed his performance. He added alot to the quality of the story.
The revelation of the job loss. Don't want to give away too much.
This was a pretty well thought out work of mystery. It seemed that just when you think you are figuring out the story and characters, another twist gets thrown at you!!
Pretty cool!! Liked the story and the "hard to put down" continual story line.
Although I am a big fan of this genre, this book is uninspiring.
I can't believe anyone thought this was a good read/listen. The story was unoriginal, boring, lacking in believability, humorless and had no flow. Obvious plot 'twists'. It was really bad.
Boring story, humorless.
Performance was OK.
Luckily it wasn't too long.
Anyone who gave this a good review -like Alan Dersowitz - has lost all credibility as a reviewer in my eyes.
As a lawyer that recently left "Biglaw" I could really identify with the protagonist and the pressure on a lawyer in a big firm. Yes it is actually like that!!! This is an "intelligent" thriller, which explains the procedures and creates tension without the need to add blood and guts. Highly recommended.
This book is a law professor's "wet-dream" of a legal ethics final exam. Good listen, lots of twists and turns, of course lots of conflicts of interest, and legal "ethical" issues, some recognizable, some not. Good naration; but the underlyingstory line gets complicated at times. Lawyers might find this like the arcade game "Whack-A-Mole", there's a new conflict popping up every 5 minutes.
Like mainly mystery and suspense with a bit of chick lit and non-fiction thrown in. Severe addiction going on 10 years to Audiobooks.
It is a fast paced legal thriller the way The Firm by Grisham was. You are not sure why this is being done to this lawyer...why he is being singled out...I would recommend this book to anyone looking for a well done legal thriller that will keep you guessing.
The premise of an atorney defending a man from his parent's past was intriguing.
What I liked the least were the portions of the story that strained credulity. It could have been and should have been much better.
I thought it was a bit bland and under finished.
This book started with a good premise, but never generated the feeling or enthusiasm for any of the characters that it could have done. So much potential; so little development.
I would recommend the book to a friend to read, but not to listen to. The production quality is poor and the performer has a good voice for something, but not this.
Lots of very predictable parts, chapters end mid-thought, and an ending you can see a mile away.
Pretty much anyone. I don't know too many narrators by name, but I think my wife or I could have done a better job. His voice is so cartoony.
No, I think it was pretty much all said in the first book. The protagonist is not a very compelling figure. I am not curious about him.
Some one who enjoys legal stories.
Not sure to be honest.
Probably not, the narration was very poor. The slow deliberate pace was very grating. The sighs, and asides of the main character made him sound a bit like a spoilt teenager.
Irritating - the main character was very weak and the author didn't deal with the irony of mother, son (hero) and the actual father all had affairs. Yet, the main character was behaving as a young teenager with little emotional maturity. The moral dilemmas were not dealt with at all.
I thought it was worth a listen
not change anything -- maybe learn more about the main characters parents
yes -- he is a good reader -- you can tell the difference in the characters
no -- read it over two weeks with others in between
it was a good book -- good story -- t
I was a little disappointed in the ending but the book kept me right there to the end. good read.