A Wilderness of Error

The book offers a detailed analysis of the trial and the broader issues of justice. I wonder what motivated Morris to approach it this way, blending journalism and storytelling?

The case is complex, and the courtroom proceedings are dense. Did the detailed descriptions help or hinder understanding for others trying to follow the story?

Morris’s background in journalism suggests a commitment to uncovering the truth, but I’m curious how readers felt about the narrative’s neutrality or bias.