Niet blij met je aankoop? Geeft niet! Je kunt artikelen tot 30 dagen retourneren
Met een cadeaubon zit je altijd goed. De ontvanger kan de cadeaubon voor alles uit ons assortiment inwisselen.
Tot 30 dagen retourrecht
Twenty-one days before his execution, death-row prisoner Thomas Bell asks Pike Donovan to prove that a conviction everyone accepts as certain is built on lies.
Bell was convicted of murdering four people during an armed robbery twenty-two years ago. The evidence appears overwhelming: DNA, fingerprints, ballistics, an eyewitness identification, stolen property, a recorded confession, and testimony from an accomplice. Pike refuses-until Bell tells him something about Pike's first murder trial that he should not know.
Then the case begins to fracture. A missing transcript page. A suppressed deal. An eyewitness whose original descriptions pointed to someone else. Ballistics records that do not fit. A confession containing words Bell never used. And an investigator who admits they knew Bell was not the killer.
The deeper Pike digs, the further the case reaches into his own past. Twenty-five years earlier, he broke professional rules while trying to expose corruption. His instincts may have been right, but he never learned how to prove them within the law. Now he must confront the mistake that helped destroy his career.
Judge Adrian Shaw, the respected prosecutor from Pike's first major murder trial, carries his own secret. He believed the justice system could not afford to be wrong. But what happens when procedure protects a conviction the evidence can no longer support?
With Bell's execution moved forward, Pike has days to find what the original jury never heard. Every witness has a motive. Every piece of evidence must be tested. And every legal argument carries consequences.
This is Pike's final test: whether he can use the rules he once rejected to force the truth into the record.
A death-row conviction. Buried evidence. A forgotten mistake. One last appeal-and a condemned man whose life depends on proving what the courtroom refused to see.
Because proving someone innocent is not the same as believing they are innocent.
Hoi! Ik ben Libroamiko, je boekadviseur.
Hoe kan ik je helpen?