I thought the premise for this novel excellent and the beginning gripping. However, after reading thirty or so pages I got bored with the monologue. Not for me, I'm afraid that thanks to Net Galley and Penguin UK for the opportunity to read and review this unusual legal thriller. It's certainly different and I;m sure will have its fans.

DNF @ 63%

I'm so disappointed to be putting this book down as a DNF but I just couldn't get on with it. The synopsis for this is reasonably vague and so I had created an entirely different story in my head to the one that was presented to me on paper.

First of all, I imagined this book was going to about a sophisticated, charming yet narcissistic type character, a Patrick Bateman of sorts, who was going to try to woo us and prove his innocence. If you've read the book, I'm sure you'll be laughing at what I thought this was going to be like, because holy heck, it's nothing like that at all. The character we meet is a young man from South London who talks like this: now blood, there is seven evidences against me but I'm gonna prove them all wrong, you get me?

The entire book is written in this colloquial way and my God, I could not connect with it in the slightest. I'm a white girl who's lived in Buckinghamshire for most of her life, this kind of language and way of talking is so far beyond me it's unreal. And maybe that makes me closed in to the world but what am I supposed to do? To me, this "street" way of talking is just another accent to me, and like I can't read books that attempt to write in the Scottish accent, I can't read a book that attempts to write in the "street" accent. It does not compute in my little head, OK?

The writing wasn't the only problem for me, the other issue was the actual plot. What could have been such an excellent, unique story, turned out to be a long, boring, babbley mess.

For me, personally, there was nothing about this novel that made me want to continue reading it. I physically can't push myself to finish this one... What a let down.

Thanks to Netgalley & Penguin UK - Michael Joseph for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.

What a unique voice! This story is told to you the reader (& jury member) from the perspective of a young male defendant who has dispensed with his legal counsel and is on trial for a crime which you are to decide his guilt or innocence. We don't get his name but we do get his truth and with his very human monologue we are given the chance to hear a very unique and real voice! One the best books I have ever read! Truly a book for our new century!

Wow - the best courtroom thriller I have ever read! A young defendant fires his lawyer the day before Closing Speeches in an attempt to defend himself telling the whole truth despite the barrister's advice. We, as the reader, are the jury. We are asked to keep an open mind until he is finished, putting the reader in a unique position. The plot itself is outstanding, entirely gripping. I intended to only read a chapter and ended up reading the entire novel. This is one you'll struggle not to binge read. The writing style is unique working flawlessly. Readers of crime fiction should not hesitate to check You Don't Know Me out today!

I was looking forward to reading this book but unfortunately I couldn't get away with the style of writing. I found it quite hard and after about 10% felt like I didn't want to continue with it. I may go back to this in future.

This book had bits that reminded me of “Slumdog Millionaire”, bits of “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels”, bits of “The Usual Suspects”, yet was quite unique – but no less enthralling. It is basically a monologue given by the defendant in a murder trial as the closing defence speech, after he has fired his barrister. Over ten days (!) he speaks directly to the jury, to make sure that they understand who he is, how he got into this mess, and why he is not guilty of this murder charge. He is able to give alternate reasons for each of the pieces of evidence found against him – the victim’s blood under his fingernails, the murder weapon found in his flat, the clothing seen on him in the vicinity of the murder victim, witness statements of his previous interactions with the victim … He has a plausible answer for everything – even when his alternate reasons do not put him, or his friends in a particularly good light.
His mother and sister are in the courtroom listening, but the existence of none of the other people he draws into his story can be verified – at least not before the end of the court case. The defendant tears up all the rules of final defence speeches. He introduces new material without warning the prosecution, and he goes on for ever.
His monologue is delivered in very informal speech, with a lot of street slang, which he tries to explain to the jurors. In the first few sessions he apologises to the judge each time he swears, but as time goes by – and he feels more comfortable addressing the judge and jury – his swearing goes unchecked.
He is right about the jurors probably not understanding his world. I had to keep checking that it really was London and not Baltimore or Detroit or some other violent, run-down US city. It all seemed completely alien to me, and I have lived in London 30 years – both South and North of the river. But I suppose that ‘my kind’ are fortunate enough to remain blissfully unaware of London’s seedier underbelly, tutting at occasional news reports of gang related stabbings and gun crime, and then immediately forgetting about them as irrelevant to our lives.
The defendant’s rambling style has touches of Ronnie Corbett – seeming to take forever to get to a point, but remaining spellbinding throughout: “So although it looks like I’m just chatting random s*** but I’m not. It’s all important”. I can imagine the jury listening avidly, not believing their luck that they have got such an entertaining story teller to brighten up an otherwise boring jury service stint – guilty or not. And I can also imagine the prosecutor getting very annoyed. The defendant may not be traditionally well educated, but he is an accomplished narrator, with intelligence shining through, often with a quite poetic turn of phrase: “The weather was still pretty U.K. It was grey with that rain that hasn’t decided to commit to raining properly”.
The defendant is not looking for sympathy or empathy. It is not a hard-done-by tale of woe. He just wants the jury to understand his life, his ‘truth’. He is not just addressing the jury, but also the reader. We also have to make the decision to believe him and set him free – or to convict him for murder.
I loved the style and content of this book. It is a farce – but tragic rather than comedic. The lives of the main players in the story are not to be emulated, admired, detested or pitied – just accepted for who they are – real or invented, guilty or innocent.

An intriguing and compelling debut.

A man stands accused of murder. It looks like an open and shut case and that he is guilty as charged. But at the eleventh hour he sacks his barrister and closes his defence himself. He goes over each piece of evidence and tells the jury the story of what really happened....or does he?

And therein lies the beauty of this novel. We're the jury. Is this man guilty or a victim himself? It's certainly a compelling premise artfully presented. Initially I found the style a little jarring - it's written as it would be typically spoken by some people in those areas of London. Then after awhile I found it enhanced the experience so I could hear his voice. I actually felt like I was sitting listening to him, wondering where his tale could possibly lead next.

This never disappointed for a moment, a well deserved 5 stars for a book I will be thinking about for a long time.

Thank you Netgalley and publisher for this digital ARC provided for an honest review.

You Don’t Know Me is a novel with a really interesting-sounding storyline but one which I unfortunately just didn’t get on with. The way the story told is unique – the defendant seems to have decided to represent himself and is giving his own closing speech at his trail. We hear the story of what led up to the shooting and murder that he’s on trial for as he tells the jury, often stopping to interact with them or comment on their reactions. I liked that this was a different method of storytelling and it meant that I was really interested at the beginning of the novel.

The story felt a little too long, and though there was plenty happening I felt that the narrative just dragged a little unfortunately. I suppose I expect there to be more of a ‘reveal’ as to what happened and why, but it felt like the narrative had a lot of detail that didn’t really tell me much or explain that much even about the defendant himself. I lost interest in the story around half way through and unfortunately didn’t find myself particularly intrigued, even in the last few pages with what is bound to be a rather controversial ending! The language is very informal, which in itself I have no problem with – however I did find it hard to stay focused sometimes.

This is definitely something a little different but it just didn’t work for me and it failed to keep my interest. However I’ve seen lots of great reviews from others so it will like be a big success for some, just not for me.

I have heard great things about this book but unfortunately i really couldn't get into it. Sorry!

This is an unusual court crime drama, as it focuses on the lengthy closing speech delivered by a young man, being trialled for the murder of a young black youth named Jimal. Authentic and fresh, it is a very impressive debut novel from criminal defence barrister, Imran Mahmood.

Set in London the shooting occurs amidst a deprived, densely ethnic area, associated with gun crime, drugs and gangs. There are a number of key points of evidence that have been used to frame this unnamed man for the murder. Some of it sounds readily circumstantial, other parts seem adequately supported by forensics.

Essentially our defendant sacks his QC as he thinks he will portray only a slanted account of the situation, from which no one will really understand who he is and what it is like living where he lives. What transpires is a full back drop of his life, his family and friends and presents an alternative account of what happened. He is likeable, charismatic, and reasonably persuasive and his account for the better part is pretty compelling. It is just one voice in this book and as is the risk with such an approach, consequently I did find at times my interest did wane when the dialogue meandered too much, but this was only now and again. In the latter part of the described events, it lost the controlled detail as featured earlier in the story and so became less well knitted. It’s possible this could have been deliberate, but for me did expose some flaws. Nonetheless it offers a very powerful insight and causes you to really think about how we perceive and reach decisions sometimes all too quickly.

It cleverly depicts the reality of how both in the court and in deed in the wider world we use facts, assumptions and bias to interpret a situation and believe it be absolutely true. In reality what is written forms a broader warning, a time to reflect that we shouldn’t just accept everything we hear and read and take it at face value. Perspectives exist for a reason and we have a responsibility to interpret things wisely. To this end the book requires the reader to consider and deliver the verdict.

I had requested a copy of this book on Netgalley ages ago because the blurb had me intrigued, and I'll be honest it wasn't quite what I expected.
There were a few times in the very beginning that I was unsure if it was the kind of book I would be able to enjoy but before I knew it I needed to know his whole story. Forgive me for not mentioning the defendant by name, but it doesn't appear once in this book, something I have only ever seen in one other book (and I really enjoyed that one too).

Mahmood may have omitted this young mans name, but he has really given him a voice, everything is there from his mannerisms, to his street talk and dialect. You can really imagine this young man in front of you talking... which makes his story feel all the more real. The problem with this book, and it's a clever one... is we honestly do not know if we have a trustworthy narrator. Do we take his version of events as the truth? Or do we believe the stereotypes? At the end of this book we the individual reader will walk away asking ourselves did he do it? And only having our own opinion to answer the question for us.

As debut novels go this one is so far out of the box that it leaves the reader wondering if the box ever existed.. But leaves me keen to read more from Mahmood in the future.

An unnamed man, charged with murder, sacks his lawyer and for 10 days delivers his closing speech. The speech is basically the story, told from his point of view.

This is a book like no other that you've ever read. The voice used to tell the story is street slang and this takes some getting used to. I almost gave up with this book until a couple of members from my online book club encouraged me to carry on. I'm so pleased they did, as once I got used to the voice of the narrator, I went on to thoroughly enjoy this debut. A great book innit?!

Many thanks to Netgalley who provided me with this ARC. I chose to read it and give a voluntary and unbiased review.

You don't know me is a thought provoking book that keeps you guessing .A little different from other books told completely from the defendants perspective .The only thing I found hard to understand was the street language which I found annoying otherwise it was a truly compelling book .

An unnamed man stands accused of murder. Just before the closing speeches the man sacks his lawyer and decides to give his own defence. We are told his barrister told him to,leave some things out. But he thinks if he is going down for life, he might as well go down for telling the truth. With eight pieces of evidence against him, he takes us through each piece one by one.

We never learn the name of the young man who stands accused of murdering a gang member. The evidence seems to prove the young man's guilt. However the more evidence we read the narrator got into my head and under my skin. The characters have all got a huge background that tells us exactly why they were involved in the case. As soon as I read the description for this book I knew I wanted to read it. With characters that are believable, I found this to be thought provoking book and one that I will still be thinking about for a while after finishing it.

I would like to thank NetGalley, Penguin UK - Michael Joseph and the author Imran Mahmood for my ARC in exchange for an honest review.

There are very few books written entirely as a monologue. In fact, I can think of just one other, The Reluctant Fundamentalist by Mohsin Hamed. No doubt there are other examples, but it’s fair to say that it is rare. Whereas the Reluctant Fundamentalist has the narrator sitting in a café in Lahore, telling his story to a lone American, You Don’t Know Me has the narrator addressing a whole court room. For the entire narrative of this novel is a defendant – having sacked his barrister at the end of his trial for murder – standing up and delivering his own closing speech.
Our narrator is an inner-city young black man, portrayed by the prosecution as being a gang member. He stands accused of gunning down a man in the street. The evidence the prosecution has marshalled appears damning: mobile phone cell sites put him in the locale at the same time the victim was shot, he was seen arguing with the victim days before, upon arrest a Baikal handgun was found in his flat, gunshot residue was found on his hands and clothes, finally, a large sum of money was found in a bag in his kitchen.
You Don’t Know Me starts off with our narrator explaining why he sacked his barrister, why against his brief’s advice, he has decided not only to deliver his own closing speech, but to tell the jury what he claims to be the whole truth, leaving out nothing. He warns the jury that some of what he is about to tell them will not be flattering, that rather than portray him in a good light, it will damn him. But, and here’s the crux, if the jury – and by extension us, the reader – will just bear with him, his innocence of the murder he stands accused of will become apparent.
And so, our narrator launches upon his explanation. He starts by going through the evidence ranged against him, rebutting it and giving alternative explanations, but as he progresses he can’t help but get side-tracked down narrative alleyways of explanation. What results is a fascinating tale of a young man’s existence on the periphery of gang life in modern urban Britain. As he tells it, slowly, inexorably, he’s sucked into the orbit of vicious gangsters and organised crime bosses, a state of affairs that leads to beatings, shoot outs and dead bodies.
Imran Mahmood, the author of You Don’t Know Me, is a barrister practising in criminal law. He has defended many a defendant accused of being in gangs and having committed serious crimes. He says that he was motivated to write You Don’t Know Me to explore these issues and how young men get pulled into such a life. To my mind he’s done this admirably and I felt real empathy for someone who in the real world it would be all too easy to demonise. How many times does one open a newspaper, read the latest court reports of an offender sent to prison for stabbing or shooting somebody, dismiss them as evil, criminal scum? At no point does Mahmood glorify these crimes, but he does humanise the offender, show that often they are victims in their own right.
You Don’t Know Me is not some social justice rant however. While forcing the reader to confront some thorny social issues, it is also a damn fine read, a whodunnit almost. A great aspect of this book is that the verdict is not given at the end, rather, we the reader are the jury and it is up to us to conclude in our own minds whether he is guilty or not.
The apotheosis of this comes with the final twist at the end. I won’t give away spoilers, but at first this strained credibility for me, had me thinking the narrator had gone too far. But then he says to the jury – us, the readers – strange things happen in life, there are deaths which appear to be the result of conspiracies, and is it too much of a stretch that he is the victim of another? Immediately my mind turned to the deaths of Dr David Kelly, Alexander Litvinenko, even famous assassinations like those of John F Kennedy and I thought perhaps I should give the narrator the benefit of the doubt.
I won’t say whether I judged our defendant-narrator guilty or not guilty once I had read the final page. What I will say is that anyone reading this review who hasn’t read You Don’t Know Me should read it and judge for themselves!
Brilliant and original, this is a definite 5 star read!

What a different premise for a book. It had me hooked from the beginning and certainly made me think.
It gave me an interesting insight into gang life and taught me a whole new language!!
Guilty or not you guilty? You decide. The jury is still out.
4 stars.

I finished this book a couple of weeks ago and I am still torn about it. On the one hand, I mostly enjoyed the story contained within the book, on the other I can't get past all the reservations I have that this would have been allowed to have been played out as described. I simply can't believe that this is his closing speech. I struggle with the attention to detail given and the things the defendant can recall, especially the exact dialogue. I am supposed to believe that all that is in the book has been taken from transcriptions of the defendants own work. nope, sorry I can't. It starts off being credible but as the story develops, it starts to veer from being someone talking and reads like just a normal book. I am also struggling to comprehend what judge would allow a defendant to talk for that long, swearing all the way, and showboating his way through what I would consider to be new evidence and, as I have been informed by a barrister friend, that's not really the done thing in a closing speech.
And then, the ending. I am meant to make a decision. Based on what? The transcripts alone? The written word with no body language, no facial expressions, no tone of voice, and a story that, although was really interesting, was just that, a story? Not evidence as I also don't even think he was still under oath. So the ending was totally flat to me and I didn't finish with a good feeling.
As I said, all this is a shame for me as, on the whole, I enjoyed the actual story being told. Well, apart from the unbelievable cop out curve ball our boy threw in at the end. That kind of ruined it a wee bit for me. But I did find his story, his world, his battles and fights to be fascinating. It's a completely different world to mine and even just this glimpse, this snapshot opened my eyes.
Characters were good too, pacing was interesting as it was determined by the court breaks, some of which were a bit contrived and sometimes a bit off timing wise.
All in all, this was, for me, a good story that fell way short in delivery. I am obviously amongst the minority in this but this is my experience, my truth of reading this book and I am always honest in my reviews so I have to be here.

My thanks go to the Publisher and Netgalley for the chance to read this book.

This is an excellent book for a book club as it raises so many questions and discussions. Is the young man guilty or not? We decide. And I think opinions will be divided on this, hence a perfect debate for a book group.
The concept of this book is what interested me in the first place and it didn't disappoint, I'm glad I read it, and I think I will remember this one for a long time to come, and still be thinkin about it.
I can't wait for it to be officially published, so I can discuss it with people I know.