Book Discussion of Defending Jacob by William Landay
Hi everyone! I'm writing to see if anyone would like to read and discuss the book Defending Jacob by William Landay. Thank you to adventurousBranch3786 for the suggestion!
I'm tagging people who have shown interest before or who have asked to be tagged in future book posts. Please disregard if you are not interested or let me know in the comments if you would like to be removed from the tag list.
Thank you!
Date of post: August 20, 2023
Goal to begin book: around September 1, 2023
@adventurousBranch3786 @glowingPond @AffyAvo @ThadSterling @svobodovaa @OneErased @shyCat542 @Gwynifyr @Cancun
I apologize if I have missed anyone.
Next discussion question from the book (with possible spoiler alerts):
Just inserting an extra line before the question because *possible spoiler alert* š
"Before and during the trial, how would you have handled the situation if you were Laurie? Do you feel she made strong choices as a mother and a wife?"
@ReadBooks7. Spoiler Alert ā¼ļø
I think she did the best that she could under the situation. After she learned about the violent nature of her husbandās family she tried to relate it to violent incidents that occurred in Jacobs childhood that were overlooked at the time. At least she considered the idea that he might be guilty and didnāt destroy evidence.
@adventurousBranch3786 I agree. I like how Laurie handled the entire situation at that time, and I felt really sorry for her. She could have been much angrier at Andy, but she tried to understand his perspective. She was fair and showed good moral integrity while still being supportive of her son. I think she showed a lot of strength in her consideration of the fact that he might be guilty, and if so, it was her/their duty to protect others instead of keeping the truth from surfacing.
Another question from the book's discussion questions:
"Is Andy a good father? Why or why not?"
@ReadBooks7. Spoiler alert ā¼ļø
I thought he was a pretty good and caring father although although blinded by being in denial at times. Even though he destroyed evidence, I think that there are many parents who might have done the same. At first I thought what happened was due to bullying until the 2cd incident! Maybe they should have tried making him go to therapy or anger management. Iām not sure it would have helped if the problem was truly āin his genesā. But maybe it would have been worth a try.
@adventurousBranch3786 I agree that he was a good father overall, and I do think a lot of parents would do the same. I think the first instinct is to protect your child at all costs, and I am sure it is really difficult to do anything that could result in something so life-altering and terrible, even if the child brought it on themselves with certain actions.
If I understand and remember correctly, I think that Andy is the only one who knew about the person who was scapegoated for the crime as a favor from his biological father, so if Laurie did not know about that, then I can see how she would not see a need for Jacob to go to therapy, although I think he could have benefitted based on general circumstances. Andy was in complete denial, and I think if he were to admit Jacob needed therapy, he would have to admit that his son did something horrible. I do think that, in terms of love and care and wanting what is best for his son, Andy is a really good father who found himself in an impossible situation.
I should have put a *spoiler alert* up there. I was trying to comment in such a way where I would not reveal anything.
@ReadBooks7 I forgot about that scapegoating. I donāt think Laurie was aware of it either. Even though Andy knew about it he still believed in his mind that his son was innocent. So I can see why they wouldnāt have thought of therapy.
Btw they have made a series out of this book on Apple TV.
@adventurousBranch3786 I want to watch it so much!! I do not have an Apple device, and I am not very tech savvy, so I have not yet figured out a way to watch it. Do you know if it is available anywhere else, such as Amazon? I did not see it when I checked.
@ReadBooks7. There is something called Roku device that can be attached to a smart tv . I read that appletv can be accessed through Roku. Iām not too tech savvy and I was able to attach a Roku box to my tv. I donāt remember how I did it but it came with instructions that were simple enough for me to do. There were some other things mentioned on the apple site but I think thatās the cheapest one.
@ReadBooks7. Apple has a list of which smart tvās that Apple TV can be streamed from.
@adventurousBranch3786 thank you! I'm not so great with tech stuff but I do have a Smart tv, so maybe I can figure something out. I love to see the film or tv versions of books when they are done well.
Another question from the back of the book (trying to avoid major spoiler questions while others are reading, so more questions about specific plot points will be coming soon!):
"How do you think people could or should stop adolescent bullying?"
(I think this is a good question because it will also relate a bit to the next book we will read, Nineteen Minutes.)
@ReadBooks7. This is a hard one! The only thing I can think of would be for parents to be more involved in their kids lives. Talk with them about whatās going on in their lives and try to teach them not to bully but to talk things over with a parent or counselor.
@adventurousBranch3786 that is exactly what I was thinking. I think everything starts at home, so if parents are able to communicate about it, it will allow their kids to talk openly about it, whether they are the ones being bullied or the ones bullying. I think that teasing and some behaviors associated with bullying might be pretty common with kids, and if parents can say, "hey, you might not think of this as 'bullying,' but it is, or it could at least be really hurtful to another person," I think that could go a long way.
I also think that it is important for schools to be vocal about it and hold presentations and class lessons about it. Communication about what bullying is and why it should never be done will, in my opinion, only help the situation and help to prevent it. If kids feel like they have a safe place to talk about it, then maybe they will feel safe enough to tell someone if they are being bullied. Maybe even kids who are exhibiting the bullying behaviors will feel safe enough to say, "I have been behaving like this, and I did not realize it was considered bullying, and I want to make sure I do not do this again."
@ReadBooks7 Thatās a good idea having classes and presentations in school may be helpful as well.
Hi everyone! I am going to do a big
*SPOILER ALERT*
on this post since I will be starting the more plot-related discussion questions.
If you have not yet finished the book, please do not read this post any further until you do.
*Spoiler alert*
Next discussion question from the back of the book:
"Do you believe Jacob is guilty?"
@ReadBooks7. Spoiler alert ā¼ļø
I believe that Jacob is guilty.
*Spoiler alert*
@adventurousBranch3786 I completely agree. I did not want him to be guilty, but I think that he is, and I had to admit it by the end of the book.
When did you decide that he was, and why? (I have been really interested in discussing this part specifically!)
@ReadBooks7. Spoiler alert ā¼ļø
I was having trouble deciding during the trial. It was made difficult because the father got rid of Jacobās knife which very well may have been the weapon used in the crime. But there was still Jacobās thumbprint on the victim! There was also Jacobās āfantasy ā post with the exact details of the crime.
āI initially got really confused when that man confessed. I wondered how someone would confess when Jacobās thumbprint was on the victim. When it was revealed what happened with the confession I was still unsure. It all finally made sense to me after the family trip to Mexico. I felt sure after that that Jacob was guilty.
@adventurousBranch3786
*spoiler alert*
I think throughout the entire book up until the end, I wanted to believe that Jacob was not guilty, so I did. I think I was probably having the same sort of denial that Andy had, except, obviously, I am just an unbiased reader, not a family member. The evidence was potentially damning, but it could be explained as well. For instance, the fingerprint could have been left if he had checked on him (although, why would he not then call for help?). The story online could have been written by someone else (unlikely, though). I think I kept questioning his guilt or innocence, but I had decided that he did not do it, and then when the "confession" was made, I thought, okay, that proves it!
When it was revealed that the confession was not real, I had major doubts, but then I thought, Andy's father in prison doing what he did was not requested by Andy or Jacob, so it could have been done and had nothing to do with whether Jacob did it or not. It was simply done as a "protective" measure for his grandson (a very twisted protective measure).
However, after the family's trip and what happened there, I knew. There became no other explanation at that point. A second person met an ill fate in Jacob's presence within a year? Guilty. No question.
I think the author did an excellent job of taking us, the readers, on a journey through what it must have felt like for Andy.
Another question from the back of the book:
*Spoiler alert*
"Is Jacob a product of his upbringing? Do you think he is a violent person because his environment made him violent, or do you think he has had violent inclinations since birth?"
@ReadBooks7. . Spoiler alert
It sounded like he had violent inclinations from a very young age. It seems like he had a nice environment at home. His mother mentioned that āthings ā started happening to other children around him from a youn age.
@adventurousBranch3786 I completely agree.
*Spoiler alert* Throughout the course of the book, I kept thinking (probably like Andy) that those incidents could be explained, since children do get hurt from playing and rough housing, but after the vacation event, this, too, became clear. Jacob was violent from a very young age. His environment seems to be as good or better as many people's, so I don't think anything was influencing or impacting him. I think he had natural tendencies towards violence, and I'm not sure if it was a genetic predisposition (this sounds most likely, if that is in fact scientifically possible) or just the way he was wired. His parents had a healthy, happy marriage. They were excellent parents. Something within him made him the way he was.
@ReadBooks7. Irl there was a famous case in Parkland Florida. The person who committed a horrible crime had come from a home without abuses. He had violent tendencies from a young age. It turned out that he was adopted. His birth mother and half sister were both violent and in jail!
Another discussion question from the back of the book:
*Possible Spoiler Alert"
"How much of a factor did Jacob's age play into your sympathies for him or lack thereof? If Jacob were seventeen, would you view him differently? What about if he were nine?"
@ReadBooks7. Spoiler alert
āDuring the trial his age did make him more sympathetic for me. I think it would have been the same even if he was 17. Nine years old would definitely have made him more sympathetic to me. I think by the end of the book even with his young age I was convinced that society needed to be protected from him!
@adventurousBranch3786 I have struggled a bit with this one. 9 years old for certain would have made me more sympathetic. 17, not as much. That is close enough to adulthood (although newer research suggests that the brain does not fully develop into full-fledged adulthood to around the age of 25). I think for me, it is less a matter of actual age and more a matter of if he knows right from wrong. I think 14 is way old enough to know right from wrong.
On the flip side, I have read a lot about true crime and psychology of people who commit atrocious acts, and I definitely am no expert, but I do feel a certain level of empathy (maybe not quite empathy, but I lack a better word) for people who have these horrible compulsions IF they are biologically driven. For instance, if there really is a "murder gene" as mentioned in the book, and people are driven to do certain things, I in no way excuse that, but I can have some sort of empathy for them as I imagine it is a terrible way to have to live. I feel much, much, much more empathy for victims, of course. I guess I am just saying that I have some sort of compassion towards most persons, unless they are just purely evil and deriving some sort of satisfaction out of horrible things--zero compassion there.
I think that Jacob is an extremely troubled individual, and his age is not what makes me empathetic towards him. I think it is the fact that he has something so terribly wrong with him that provides him the inclinations to commit violent acts that makes me feel a little bit of compassion for him. However, I look at his father, Andy, who allegedly has the same genetic predispositions and yet is a well-functioning, compassionate person who has never really hurt anyone, at least not on purpose. That being the case, I think Jacob is responsible for his behavior and should have done more to prevent himself from doing these things. This sort of brings me back around to the question, though, because his age likely prevented him from being able to verbalize whatever he was feeling inside and therefore increased the likelihood of him acting out. So, that does make me feel more empathy specifically because of his age.
What I like about this book is that there are no easy answers, and nothing is purely black and white. Life is messy, and there are a lot of gray areas, and I think the book illustrates that.
Another question from the discussion questions at the back of the book:
*Possible spoiler alert*
"Do you think Neal Logiudice acts ethically in this novel? What about Andy?"
@ReadBooks7. Andy didnāt act ethically to me since he destroyed potential evidence in the case. I mean it wasnāt ethical in terms of the law. Itās really hard to say if it ethical in terms of what a parent would do for a child. There are probably many parents who would do the same for their child.
With Neil I canāt remember if he did anything unethical. I think that I was more focused on Andy. I try to think about it some more .
@adventurousBranch3786 I agree with everything you have written. I cannot really think of anything that Neal did that was unethical. I think Andy was unhappy with some of his questions, but I do not think he said or did anything wrong. If anything, his concern over whether or not Andy should have excused himself from the case sooner would be the ethical approach, if the concern was genuine and for the right reasons.
Andy likely did what many or most parents would do, and you make a great point about it not being ethical in overall terms but defining the ethical implications becoming more difficult when discussing a parent's role. This book is so great for these questions because it is so thought provoking.
The last two discussion questions from the back of the book follow.
*Spoiler alert*
More space for a *spoiler alert**
"What is the most damning piece of evidence against Jacob? Is there anything that you felt exonerated him?"
"If Jacob hadn't been accused, how do you think his life would have turned out? What kind of a man do you think he would grow up to be?"
@ReadBooks7. Spoiler alert
I thought that the most damaging piece of evidence was his thumbprint on the victimās clothes. It placed him at the crime. Jacob did give the excuse that he checked on the victim. I know he said he felt frightened and left the scene. I can relate to feeling frightened but I wondered why he wouldnāt have at least called 911 after leaving the scene.
The other manās confession seemed to exonerate him at first to me. But even then I still felt a somewhat suspicious of Jacob after the confession.
āIt sounded like Jacob had violent tendencies from childhood. After what happened in Mexico I didnāt feel much hope for his future.
@adventurousBranch3786
*spoiler alert*
the fingerprint was definitely, to me, the evidence that made it hard to look past. I can understand a kid being scared finding someone, but I think most, if not all, would summon help some way if they truly did simply stumble upon the person. The confession exonerated Jacob for a few minutes, until I read further and realized, that was set up and not true. I still wanted to believe it was true, though, and did, but once the girl disappeared, that was it. I knew, no doubt, he'd done it. I definitely don't think he would have had a typical or productive future. His violent childhood tendencies had quickly turned to murder, twice. I think, unfortunately, it would have continued. It's a bit chilling to think about how many others might have been hurt.
One final question that I have about the book:
*Big spoiler alert, as this question discusses the ending*
**Another spoiler alert notification just because**
**And one more, why not**
What did you think of the ending? What do you think Jacob's mother's intentions were? What do you think about what happened?
@ReadBooks7. Spoiler alert ā¼ļø
I was very surprised šÆ by the ending. I thought that Jacobās mother came to a similar conclusion about who he was as we did here. I thought that she did it to stop him from hurting anyone else. It took me by surprise and made for a very dramatic ending to the book!
There was a famous case irl where a family member recognized his brotherās writing (the uni bomber). He called the FBI to report him. That sounds more like something I could do. Although I believe she did it to protect others from her son. Iām not sure that I could do what Jacobās mother did.
@adventurousBranch3786
*spoiler alert*
I was absolutely stunned by the ending. I do not think I could do that, and I do not think that most people could/would. I am not blaming her for her actions, though. I think that Laurie was struggling a lot internally and did not have a healthy place in which to share her fears and feelings. I do not think she was in her right mind when she did what she did. Her taking off her seatbelt indicates to me that she was struggling with some thoughts of her own (I will not mention the specific word so as not to trigger). I think her heart was in the right place but that her decision came from a completely skewed and unhealthy frame of mind. She was no longer thinking clearly or in a rational or level place. She was horrified by her son's actions, scared, and likely extremely depressed. I personally do not think she should be charged with anything. I think that she should be provided help. It does not mean that what she did is okay, it just means that I think she is not fully responsible for her actions at the time--the legal definition of insanity. Instead of getting her son some serious counseling and/or alerting the authorities to the fact that she thinks he committed both crimes, she decided on a different "solution," and it is not a solution that a person who is thinking clearly and functionally would come to.