Reasonable Doubts

Defense attorney Guerrieri has just been left by his girlfriend when he is asked to represent on appeal a man named Paolicelli, who has already been convicted at first instance of international drug trafficking. From the name, Guerrieri recalls that he is a former fascist thug who took part in beating him during his student days. For this reason, he hesitates to take the case, but meeting the defendant’s stunning wife and an inkling of the man's innocence prompt him to mount his defense. Thus begins the search for evidence to prove that the traffickers used Paolicelli’s car without his knowledge to transport the drugs. Meanwhile, Guerrieri enters into a relationship with Paolicelli’s wife, finding himself in an ambiguous predicament: on the one hand, he has every interest in seeing Paolicelli’s conviction upheld so as to continue the affair and avenge the old beating; on the other, professional duty and a growing awareness of his client’s innocence compel him to commit ever more rigorously to gathering exculpatory evidence. The narrative thus arrives at the appeal trial, where Guerrieri displays his full skill in cross-examining the real culprits and demonstrating to the judges that there is reasonable doubt regarding Paolicelli’s guilt. Yet this success leaves Guerrieri once again alone.

The novel unfolds through a continuous alternation between the detective plot and Guerrieri’s personal tribulations, accompanied by bitter reflections on the existential poverty of a life spent shuttling between courtrooms, books, and romantic relationships that never culminate in building a family. The finest part of the book lies in the trial scenes, where the background of the author—a magistrate by profession—plainly shines through. The absence of surprises and the somewhat ritualistic references to the protagonist’s existential and romantic troubles do little to sustain the narrative’s vigor, which ultimately turns predictable. Guerrieri’s moral dilemma (whether to let Paolicelli be convicted or defend him so as to prove his innocence) is treated superficially, without ever bringing the protagonist’s inner conflict into sharp relief.

Why read it? It is enjoyable, very well written, and the pages devoted to the courtroom proceedings are of genuine interest.