Rusty Sabich is a head appellate judge, ruling on an appeal by a convicted murderer that he prosecuted. In real life, he should have recused (removed) himself from the case or the convicts appellate lawyers should have filed to have him removed from hearing the appeal. Either way he should not have been presiding over this case as he was personally involved.
shareYes. Was this also a fault in the book Innocent, by Scott Turow?
Although I read a lot of courtrooom-based novels, I've not read this one.
Rusty had prosecuted the man for another crime decades earlier. He was not involved in the murder prosecution. By the time of the murder conviction Rusty was chief of the appeals court tasked with reviewing decisions of the lower courts.
The case Rusty brought forward as a PA had nothing to do with the murder case years later.
I believe in the novel, Rusty doesn't remember his prosecution of the man until he is reminded of it when they meet face-to-face after the appeal hearing.