The Hamptons Lawyer Chapter 36 Summary & Analysis
⚠️ Spoiler Warning: This guide contains detailed spoilers for the entire novel. Proceed only if you've finished reading or are comfortable knowing the plot.
Summary
The afternoon jury voir dire continues with no further dramatic incidents. The lawyer, exhausted, allows her colleague McGoey to lead some questioning; he performs competently without causing embarrassment. Norma Banks, the lawyer’s veteran advisor, fills a yellow legal pad with sarcastic and profane observations about the candidates, using different colored markers to write comments like “FULL OF CRAP” and “Shut up and get out asshole,” which nearly makes the lawyer laugh out loud and draws a rebuke from Judge Horton. At nearly five o’clock, the last candidate appears: Edward Oslin, a retired venture capitalist from Brookville. The lawyer takes over questioning, making easy small talk. Oslin admits he followed the previous trial of Mr. Jacobson and says he was “shocked” that the lawyer won an acquittal. When pressed for any additional opinions, Oslin bluntly states that based on what he already knows, he thinks Jacobson “probably killed these people, too.” The lawyer immediately excuses him. Norma Banks objects (though she has no right to), then pulls the lawyer aside and insists they should keep Oslin—not because he is attractive, but because he clearly respects and appreciates the lawyer’s skill.
Key Events
- McGoey handles several candidate interviews without incident, doing a “professional job.”
- Norma Banks documents her sharp opinions with colorful markers, amusing the lawyer but also catching the judge’s attention.
- Judge Horton admonishes the lawyer for laughing, which she covers by claiming a cold.
- Edward Oslin, the final candidate, reveals he followed the first Jacobson trial and complimented the lawyer’s performance.
- Oslin admits he believes the defendant probably murdered the victims, prompting an immediate “Excused” from the lawyer.
- Norma Banks oversteps by trying to object, then forcefully argues that Oslin should be kept because he appreciates the lawyer’s ability.
Character Development
- The lawyer (Ms. Smith): Shows fatigue and a slight loss of focus by allowing McGoey to step in, yet remains sharp enough to detect the danger in Oslin’s prejudgment. Her instinct to dismiss Oslin reveals a protective stance for her client.
- Norma Banks: Demonstrates both her irreverent humor and her deeper strategic instincts. Her physical grab and urgent whisper show she is willing to break courtroom decorum to guide the lawyer. Her comment “It’s the dumb ones we throw back” hints at a seasoned, counterintuitive approach to jury selection.
- McGoey: Performs adequately, surprising the lawyer with his restraint. His use of Italian (“Tutto bene”) hints at a more cultured side.
- Katherine Welsh: The prosecutor’s visible eye rolls signal frustration with the lawyer’s casual style and with Oslin’s unexpected compliment.
- Judge Horton: Maintains stern control but shows a wry sense of humor regarding language, indicating his patience is wearing thin as the day ends.
Themes, Symbols, or Motifs
- Prejudice and First Impressions: Oslin’s immediate assumption of guilt—despite the acquittal—underscores how public opinion can color a juror’s mind. The lawyer’s quick dismissal shows her commitment to an unbiased jury.
- Mentorship and Experience: Norma Banks’s role as a seasoned advisor contrasts with the lawyer’s fatigue. Her insistence that a juror who admires the lawyer might be an asset reveals a nuanced understanding of human psychology.
- Theatricality vs. Professionalism: The lawyer’s small-talk approach to voir dire works for her but risks looking unprofessional; the judge’s rebuke and the prosecutor’s sighs reflect the tension between personality and formality.
Why This Chapter Matters
This chapter illustrates the high-stakes, micro‑decision-making of jury selection. The contrast between the lawyer’s instinct and Norma’s advice sets up a critical strategic choice: should a trial attorney seat a juror who already believes in the attorney’s competence, even if that juror harbors a prejudgment about the client? It also deepens the character of Norma Banks, transforming her from a mere comic relief into a strategic anchor. The chapter ends on a cliffhanger, with the day’s final moment unresolved—forcing the reader to wonder whether the lawyer will reconsider her rejection.
Study Questions
-
Why does the lawyer automatically excuse Edward Oslin after his comment about the defendant’s guilt?
Answer: She realizes that Oslin has already formed a strong negative opinion about Mr. Jacobson, which would likely bias him against the defense. A juror who believes the defendant is probably guilty cannot be fair, regardless of any admiration for the lawyer. -
What is Norma Banks’s reasoning for wanting to keep Oslin on the jury?
Answer: Norma argues that Oslin is not “dumb”—he is insightful enough to recognize the lawyer’s skill. She implies that a juror who respects the lawyer might be receptive to the defense’s arguments, and that his initial bias can be overcome by the lawyer’s performance. -
How does the author use Norma Banks’s colorful notes to reveal her character?
Answer: The notes show Norma’s unfiltered, cynical, and humorous personality. They also demonstrate her deep engagement with the jury selection process; she evaluates candidates on intelligence and credibility rather than simply on surface impressions.