58 pages • 1 hour read
Jodi PicoultA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summary
Background
Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Character Analysis
Themes
Symbols & Motifs
Important Quotes
Essay Topics
Tools
Part 7 begins with an overview of the Christopher Hightower case. In 1991, Hightower was convicted of murdering his best friend Ernest Brendel, along with Brendel’s wife Alice and daughter Emily. Hightower was arrested when his fingerprints were found on a 50-pound bag of lime, which had been buried in a shallow grave, along with the bodies of the Brendel family. Hightower had used the lime to speed up the bodies’ decomposition.
The story’s action resumes with Theo’s perspective. As he processes the fact that his brother is currently on trial for murder, Theo reflects on his obligations to Jacob. Theo has known for years that he will be responsible for Jacob’s care after Emma passes away. Therefore, the possibility that Jacob might be sentenced to life in prison represents a spark of hope for Theo: If Jacob is in jail, Theo will be free to live his own life without caring for his disabled brother. Theo is both excited by this prospect and disgusted with himself.
The story is then narrated by Oliver as Jacob’s trial begins with Rich testifying for the prosecution. Rich testifies that Emma made him aware of Jacob’s autism. However, Rich also says that Jacob consented to being interviewed and made an informed decision to waive his rights. Oliver counters Rich’s testimony by presenting a witness of his own: an expert who specializes in the intersection of autism and the criminal justice system. Mr. Soto is the parent of a son with autism, has a master’s degree in psychology, and has designed a curriculum that educates police departments on autistic communication. Soto testifies that many people with autism become nonverbal in stressful situations and may be uncomfortable with eye contact, the flashing lights of a police siren, or the emotional intensity of a police interrogation. Soto asserts that police officers are likely to misinterpret this behavior as being indicative of guilt. In his expert opinion, Rich’s interrogation failed to accommodate Jacob’s autism. Soto also posits that Jacob is not capable of waiving his rights.
The prosecutor rebuts Soto’s testimony by arguing that a police interrogation is uncomfortable for anyone. She also points to Rich’s testimony that Jacob had memorized his Miranda rights and quoted them verbatim. In the prosecutor’s mind, Jacob’s ability to quote his rights indicates that he knows them well enough to give informed consent. However, Oliver proves her wrong by asking Jacob to tell him what the Second Amendment to the US Constitution says. Jacob quotes the amendment exactly. When Oliver asks him to prove he understands it by explaining what it means, Jacob has no idea.
Oliver presents this exchange as proof that there is a difference between memorizing information and understanding that information. Jacob argues with Oliver and insists that he does understand. However, when the prosecutor asks him to explain how his Miranda rights apply in the context of a police interrogation, Jacob is again unable to answer. Oliver announces that this proves two things: that his client’s autism is indeed a disability and that Rich’s interrogation cannot be used against Jacob in the trial because Jacob was not truly capable of waiving his rights.
After the trial has concluded for the day, Jacob learns that Dr. Henry Lee—a renowned forensic scientist whom Jacob admires—will be giving a lecture at the local university. Jacob is ecstatic and asks his mother to buy him a ticket to the lecture, only to be reminded that he is on house arrest. If he leaves his house, he will be remanded to jail. Jacob, Emma, and Oliver argue until Jacob, unwilling to accept the limitations of his house arrest, calls 911 and reports that he is being abused by his mother.
Rich responds to the call and reflects on the paradox that Jacob represents: He is intelligent yet unable to understand why he must abide by the conditions of his house arrest. He has memorized his Miranda rights but does not understand them. In a moment of empathy, Rich tells Emma that being Jacob’s mother must be very hard on her. He attempts to de-escalate the situation by talking to Jacob and encouraging him to apologize to Emma.
Part 8’s opening case study explores the crimes of the Green River Killer, a serial killer who evaded capture for more than 10 years until new evolutions in DNA typing technology allowed detectives to match sperm—left on the body of a victim—to Gary Ridgway, who had given a saliva sample in conjunction with an unrelated case. Further DNA testing proved that Gary Ridgway was the Green River Killer; he was convicted of 48 murders and sentenced to life without parole.
This case study transitions into an examination of Jacob’s Crime Busters notebooks. Oliver is spending the afternoon in the Hunt home to review the evidence against Jacob and is convinced that Jacob’s notebooks cannot be used against him until he sees that Jacob has written about the forensic evidence associated with Jess’s crime scene.
Oliver recognizes that the prosecution will see this as evidence of Jacob’s guilt. He shares his discovery with Emma, who panics; together, Oliver and Emma begin a frantic attempt to prevent this evidence from being used against Jacob. While they brainstorm potential strategies, Theo decides that he is sick of the chaos and neglect caused by Jacob’s trial. He steals Emma’s credit card and boards a flight to California, hoping that he can reconnect with his father, Henry, and find a parent who will treat him as a priority. His reunion with Henry proves disappointing, however, and is further complicated when Emma comes after him.
Faced with Henry’s new wife and children, Emma and Theo feel disoriented. It’s obvious that Henry’s new family is uncomplicated; Emma and Theo feel a pang of longing for the life they wish they had. Emma tells Henry that Jacob has been charged with murder and Henry responds by sharing a memory: Shortly after Jacob’s diagnosis, Henry and Emma left the boys with a babysitter and went on a date. Their outing was cut short when their babysitter’s father, a paramedic, came to the movie theater to tell them that he had taken Theo to the emergency room. Theo needed 10 stitches that night because Jacob had attacked him and pushed him out of his highchair. Shocked, Emma admits that she doesn’t remember this at all. Henry responds that Emma’s love for Jacob has always made her ignorant of reality. Their conversation is cut short, and they never get to finish it, but Henry’s recollection haunts Emma as she and Theo return to Vermont to begin the next stage of Jacob’s trial. Emma tells Theo that he must pay her back the money he stole for the flight.
Part 9 opens with the 1970 case study of Army officer and medical doctor, Jeffrey MacDonald. When MacDonald called the police to report the murder of his wife and two daughters, he claimed that he was wounded, and his family was killed in an attack similar to the Manson Family murders. But MacDonald was convicted when forensic analysts discovered that his pajama top, purportedly worn by him while he was stabbed by alleged attackers, had 48 clean, cylindrical holes that were too neat for a defensive struggle. The scientist demonstrated that these holes could have been made by folding the top in a way that aligned with the 21 stab wounds suffered by Mrs. MacDonald. This indicated that the pajama top was laid on top of her before the attack. Macdonald was sentenced to life in prison for murdering his family.
The narrative moves to the final phase of Jacob’s trial, when the forensic evidence against Jacob is presented. Jacob insists that the evidence is being misinterpreted and Oliver has to let him tell the truth. Oliver counters that Jacob’s words will be twisted against him and he will likely be sentenced to life in prison. For days, in between court sessions, Jacob and Oliver argue about their conflicting definitions of the truth and Jacob’s right to testify. Jacob contends that people would understand if he could just tell the truth. Oliver counters that the truth is irrelevant; his job is to get Jacob acquitted.
This conflict between himself and his attorney intensifies Jacob’s sensitivity to the chaos of the courtroom. Every day, when Jacob enters and exits the courtroom, he is bombarded by a pack of reporters who shout at him and shove microphones in his face. This triggers Jacob’s sensory issues and makes it even harder for him to cope with a day in court. Jacob also experiences extreme sensitivity to the clothes he is required to wear in court. For Jacob, the sensation of a button-down shirt against his skin is painful; each day, Theo and Oliver have to wrestle him into his courtroom attire while Jacob writhes on the floor and screams in pain. Each day, the ordeal of getting Jacob ready and attending the trial takes a toll on Emma, Oliver, and Theo.
Whenever Jacob has a meltdown in the courtroom or needs a break, Emma sees the jury gazing at her with pity. Emma wishes that she could tell them that she doesn’t want their pity, that she loves Jacob, and that she loves being his mother. However, just as she has never known how to make people include and accept Jacob, she doesn’t know how to make other mothers understand her. Meanwhile, Oliver is feeling defeated. Although he has not revealed this to Emma, this is his first criminal trial and he is out of his depth. To make matters worse, Jacob erupts each time he is confronted with unexpected stimuli, and each time, the judge reprimands Oliver for being unable to control his client. Oliver feels that the stigma surrounding Jacob’s autism encompasses him too and makes his job harder. He and Emma bond over their shared pain and exhaustion.
As the trial drags on, Oliver and the prosecutor interview an array of witnesses including Rich, Mark, and the owner of the pizza parlor where Jacob and Jess argued. During Oliver’s cross-examination of Mark, he catches Mark in a lie and uses this to hint that Mark, not Jacob, harmed Jess. But this strategy falls flat when the prosecutor presents Jacob’s notes from Jess’s crime scene. Oliver can feel the jury staring at Jacob in condemnation and realizes that he will not be able to get Jacob acquitted. Emma feels it too and wonders if every decision she has made on Jacob’s behalf has been a mistake. She reflects on Jacob’s experience in public school—how she fought for him to be included in the empty hope that other kids would treat Jacob as if he were just like them. But as she watches the judge, jury, and prosecutor recoil from Jacob’s differences, she fears that this will never happen and that she will never be able to help Jacob be accepted anywhere.
These thoughts haunt Emma late at night as she sits on her front porch in the winter chill. Across town, Oliver is also awake and struggling to write his closing argument. At 2:00 am, Emma runs to Oliver’s apartment in her pajamas and both of them break down crying. In a moment of spontaneous honesty, they confess their worst fear to each other: that Jacob will go to prison and there is nothing they can do. But the moment turns hopeful when Oliver confesses that he has fallen in love with Emma. She reciprocates his feelings, and they have sex on top of Oliver’s paperwork for the case.
This section explores the extent to which family members are obligated to care for their loved ones with a disability. Theo confesses that he is uncomfortable with “the silent assumption that, when Mom is unable to pick up after Jacob’s messes anymore, three guesses who’ll have to take over” (295). Picoult uses sarcasm to imply that the answer is Theo instead of saying it outright; this is the kind of communication that is confusing to Jacob, further highlighting the division between the two brothers. Although Theo admits that he is “not such a colossal ass that [he]s] going to totally ignore Jacob when [they’re] grown up and when […] Mom isn’t around” (295), he longs for a future that is not constrained by the burden of responsibility for Jacob’s care. As he grapples with the possibility of Jacob being sentenced to life in prison, Theo experiences conflicting emotions. He doesn’t want to see Jacob’s sentence as a glimmer of freedom for himself, but he can’t stop himself from acknowledging that possibility. This internal struggle underscores the challenges faced by siblings of individuals with disabilities, highlighting the complex blend of love, resentment, and duty that often characterizes this relationship. However, this subplot also perpetuates assumptions that people with autism need care.
These chapters also explore the legal proceedings of Jacob’s trial from the perspective of a boy who is being victimized by the criminal justice system. Where the looming possibility of Jacob’s conviction represents freedom for Theo, Jacob sees the trial as yet another instance of being stereotyped and misrepresented. Oliver’s strategic maneuvers during the trial, particularly in challenging the prosecution’s claims about Jacob’s ability to waive his rights, shed light on the complexities of accommodating individuals with autism within the criminal justice system. The expert testimony from Mr. Soto emphasizes the need for a nuanced understanding of autism’s impact on communication and decision-making, challenging conventional notions of legal capacity and consent.
The debate about his own capacity for consent feels patronizing to Jacob and highlights the infantilization of people with disabilities. Picoult suggests that it is vital to navigate an individual’s mental competence in a way that honors and validates that person’s dignity. Although Oliver and Emma attempt to respect Jacob throughout the trial, they are often flummoxed by the differences between his perception and communication, and they sometimes struggle to treat Jacob with dignity when his behavior in the courtroom has negative impacts on his trial.
The emotional intensity of the chapter reaches its peak in Emma and Oliver’s late-night confession of their fears and vulnerabilities. Their moment of intimacy amid the turmoil of Jacob’s trial explores The Intersection of Parenthood and Identity. Oliver’s paperwork for Jacob’s trial represents Emma’s maternal relationship, and the fact that she has sex on top of it represents the fact that, at this moment, Emma is seeking romance and pleasure, and her identity is not defined by motherhood.
By Jodi Picoult