Justice In A Small Town
Honestly, I was hesitant to add this to my blog because of the content, but at the same time, even though it's fiction, the author raises a great point about our society and I decided to go for it. This is not a light and fluffy book by any means. It covers a rape trial and it's heart wrenching. I understand that this is a sensitive topic and it may be triggering for some. If this is the case for you, turn back now. Skip this one.
Characters: The town of Neapolis with the Moore and Blair families at the center.
Premise: A podcaster covers a rape trial as it's happening and discovers a connection a similar case twenty-five years prior.
Why do we as a society put all the burden of proof on the victim during a he said/she said rape case? Why are we more inclined to believe in a man's innocence when he's an athlete of some sort and the hometown hero? Why is a girl's word maligned when she's from "the wrong side of the tracks?" It's these questions that Megan Goldin tackles here when teenager, Kelly Moore is raped by local golden-boy Scott Blair, the son of an affluent couple What was horrifying to me is that we as a society seem to have this mindset even today (or four years ago when this book first came out).
I love crime novels, fiction or non-fiction. This was fiction, but it could easily have been a non-fictional account. You don't get to see too deeply into the mindset of the town itself as the story is predominantly from the point of view as the podcaster, Rachel Krall, which I feel was a great way for Goldin to handle the subject matter as the reader's able to watch the drama/case unfold without being biased towards either family (though Krall seemed to be on Kelly's side) That being said, coming from a criminal justice background (I majored in this in college), there were some issues legally. This is a small town where everybody knows everybody. Given this fact, the judge and lawyers should've recused themselves, there should've been a change in venue, and Rachel's podcast would've most likely affected the jury selection as it was happening because people were listening to it.
With that out of the way, as Rachel's covering the trial, she's also getting mysterious letters from a woman named Hannah Stills who turns out to be a one-time resident of the town, Neapolis who begs Rachel through a series of letters to look into the death of her older sister, Jenny, who had drowned twenty-five years earlier and Rachel agrees. Well, turns out, Jenny and Kelly's cases are connected. Jenny had been raped twenty-five years prior and it had gotten covered up. One of the detectives investigating Kelly's case had been a rookie during the time of Jenny's rape/death and was looking into it, so he was sent away to advance his career so that it would be shut up.
What I was not expecting was the revelation that Kelly's father, Dan had been one of the ones to have been part of Jenny's assault and he states that what happened to Kelly was his punishment. It doesn't work that way but I can see why he would have that view and going back to the trial itself, from what I've read, it was very true to what I know of court proceedings (the issues I mentioned above not withstanding). I'm not sure why Kelly was denied the option of her testimony being videotaped. Maybe because Scott was a peer and not an adult, I'm not sure on that type of protocol. A lawyer would probably know. As to the verdict itself: Scott was declared not guilty of rape, but guilty on a couple of counts of sexual assault and he had to go on the registry. While this certainly didn't quench my thirst for justice within the book, it was in fact, rather realistic and I gotta give props to Goldin for that.
While I don't know if I would ever read another of her books---honestly, this one left me shaky and wanting to cry---I applaud her for bringing attention to the flaws of the justice system and how it can be manipulated by those who wish to prey on others and would give this one about a 7.
Comments
Post a Comment