Boy With A Knife by Jean Trounstine is a book about the justice system and its problems told through the lens of one particular case. This is not, as some irrational people who think revenge is justice and so post low ratings without reading or even considering what the book is actually about, about clearing Reed or anything of the sort. So ignore those self-righteous people and decide whether you want to read it based on the reviews from people who read it and aren't either too close to the case or unwilling to think rationally.

This book is about what happens when a juvenile enters the justice system and how, on many levels, that system fails both the inmate and society. With the exception of those clinically unlikely to change, rehabilitation should be at the heart of the part of the legal system that handles sentencing and incarceration. Unfortunately, a system that fails to do so will simply cause more harm than good. I am not sure how to balance the need for holding a convicted criminal accountable while also trying to rehabilitate that person so he may one day be a useful member of society.

No doubt there are some hardliners (I am ignoring those too close to this particular case, their so-called rationale is personal and vindictive, not an actual stand they have considered as policy) who are comfortable with the treatment juveniles receive in the current system. Even though it has been shown that the human brain, particularly the aspect we consider the "mind," is not fully formed even once we are considered an adult these people still cling to the mistaken phrase "he knew what he was doing" or "he knew right from wrong." Knowing something and having access to that in an emotional moment are two distinctly different things. I know some will consider this example simplistic but I will use it anyway because it illustrates just how things do work. A person may be strongly opposed to cussing no matter what the reason. Anger, pain, sadness, it doesn't matter to that person, there is always a better way to express yourself. Period. As far as this person is concerned, there are no exceptions. Until he breaks a toe stubbing it against a table leg. He releases a short and aborted stream of profanity. I am speaking of someone I know and when this happened that is exactly what he did. He "knew" it was wrong (by his standards) and, if it had been against the law, he would have been prosecuted. In a just system, the profanity in such a situation would likely have drawn a softer penalty than if he had gone outside and cussed at a neighbor because he didn't like him. So the phrase "he knew better" does not apply unless you simply like (other people's) blood.

I would recommend this to anyone interested in the criminal justice system and in particular the system as it applies to juveniles.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via Edelweiss. ( )

I interviewed Jean Trounstine and Karter Reed for my cable TV program Book Stew http://www.wctv.org/Book-Stew in October 2015. Jean's book pales a bit when you hear in person Karter's sorrowful tale and his regret for his teenage violent actions. But Jean does a true service here by emphasizing the wrong headed sentencing of juveniles to life/long stints in prison without parole. She has done her research and is a true advocate for youthful offenders for whom there is hope for redemption, if they are not locked away to rot, with no services and no chances to return to the world as productive family members, friends, and neighbors. This is no way diminishes the true horror of Karter's evil killing of an innocent teenaged bystander. But it does prove that the teenage brain is not that of an adult. ( )

I'm so impressed with all the work Trounstine did to make this book so much more than the incredible story Karter Reed produced, all by himself, through his own work and all of his letters. She added all of the details before, during and after. It's a very compelling book which provides one more picture of the horrible state of our prison system. ( )

Whether, and how much, you will like this book depends on what you expect it to be. If you are expecting an informed and persuasive discussion of the practice of trying and incarcerating juvenile offenders as adult criminals, as the publisher's description led me to expect, you will be very disappointed; if I were to rate it based on its analysis of the relevant legal issues, I would give it 2 stars at best. On the other hand, if you want to read a sympathetic portrayal of the experiences of one such child, Jean Trounstine does a fine job of dramatizing and humanizing her subject Karter Kane Reed, and her success in achieving this goal would deserve 4 stars. Thus, my 3-star rating.

As the previous paragraph suggests, I approached Boy with a Knife from the perspective of an attorney who talks to hundreds of middle and high school students each year about the circumstances which can result in them being prosecuted as adults in Georgia. In fact, I spent yesterday, the day of the book's release, at a Gwinnett County high school where some 60 students interested in law or public safety careers passionately debated the Supreme Court's rulings on whether the death penalty and life in prison constitute cruel and unusual punishment when imposed on juvenile offenders. Their analysis of the arguments on both sides of the issue were far more nuanced than Trounstine's blind obeisance to the liberal idea that, as her publisher says, "we must change the laws in this country that allow children to be sentenced as adults." To my surprise, an overwhelming majority of the (predominantly minority) students disagreed with the Supreme Court, saying that they and their teenaged peers do understand the difference between right and wrong and deserve harsh punishment for heinous crimes.

I expected someone writing on a very specific legal topic to actually have some knowledge of the law, so I was repeatedly irritated by Trounstine's basic errors in both terminology (someone serving a 20-year sentence will be in prison, not "jail"; the judge sits on the bench, not a "dais"; states have laws, not "bylaws") and constitutional law. For example, as evidence that Karter's friend Gator was the "bad influence" who led Karter astray, she notes that Gator "refused to obey fundamental school rules such as reciting the Pledge of Allegiance"; apparently Trounstine is unaware that the First Amendment right of public school students to decline to recite the Pledge has been settled law since the Supreme Court's decision in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette in 1943.

My biggest issue with Boy with a Knife, however, may be less the fault of Trounstine than of the book's publication schedule. The e-ARC I read was printed on January 26, the day after the Supreme Court issued its decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana. Trounstine does acknowledge the existence of that case, pending "[a]s of this writing," but when one is writing a book centered around JLWOP (juvenile life without parole), the Supreme Court's ruling that a JLWOP sentence is unconstitutional in virtually all cases deserves more than a passing reference. In essence, Trounstine got scooped by the Supreme Court, depriving Boy with a Knife of its moral center.

It was only when I Googled Trounstine and found her website that I understood that her background is in drama and literature, not law. As a true crime drama from the criminal's point of view, Boy with a Knife succeeds. Unfortunately, that is not how Ig Publishing has chosen to market it, so I expect most readers are in for an unpleasant surprise.

I received a free copy of Boy with a Knife through NetGalley in exchange for an honest review. ( )