Comment 1 (Grobius) A courtroom drama at the Old Bailey; H.M. as a lawyer; Ken Blake; superb and you'll never guess what a Judas Window is! One Dickson's best-constructed plots, dramatically and logically, the only major flaw being, if H.M. had all his proofs and witnesses before the trial, why did the case ever come to court? There are a couple of other nits one could pick, but they are not worth mentioning. This should have been made into a movie with Charles Laughton, like "Witness for the Prosecution", which it resembles. This is a case where all the facts apparently point to the defendant's guilt, and only the brilliance of the defense barrister can save him.
|
Comment 2 (The_Thin_Man) This book had the potential to be great, but suffers from infuriatingly bad construction. Why on earth isn't the secret of the "Judas Window" revealed much earlier? Nobody could work it out from the information that Carr gives us, and it would leave the reader free to start the deductions about the murderer's identity in earnest. Also, the fact that H.M. says right at the beginning that he knows the accused person is innocent takes away a lot of the tension. The book also suffers from a wealth of nonentities as characters, including the murderer, to the extent that I had completely forgotten who he / she actually was; when the name was announced, my first reaction was, "Who?" Some of the courtroom action, however, is excellent, and it is for this reason that you should buy the book. The solution is one of Carr's best, but fails, once again, because of the poor construction of the book. It presumes knowledge of the secret of the "Judas Window", which no reader could deduce; and it suffers because the murderer is basically such an uninteresting character that its only appeal is intellectual, not emotional. |