Her work situation is not much better. She is in charge of prosecuting three defendants for armed robbery. The driver of the get away car, Ian Decker, is developmentally disabled, and his lawyer, Arnold Dreiser is trying to convince her that Ian was unaware of his role in the robbery. Joanne is inclined to agree when she meets the other two defendants, brothers Gary and Tom Rubinsky. Gary, especially, is a nasty piece of work. The situation becomes graver when Ian goes missing. Ian’s mother is sure the Rubinsky brothers have killed him because they know he will tell the truth, and Joanne and Arnold can’t dispute her reasoning.

Trying to juggle her professional and personal life is proving to be a challenge for Joanne. Two teenagers with raging hormones and an ex-husband, a white collar criminal, who is not happy with her custody of the children, is upsetting enough. As she gains knowledge of the Rubinsky case, her sympathy for Ian Decker grows, as does her romantic interest in Arnold Dreiser - producing for Joanne a conflict of interest.

The basic premise for the plot of Conflict of Interest is a good one. Having a conscientious district attorney faced with trying an individual who does not understand what he did was a crime, or was exploited by his accomplices presents an interesting dilemma. However, in this case, the execution of this good idea is faulty. Ian is described as “pathetic, retarded, burdensome, useless, stupid.” His mother thinks he is a “special soul” that needs to be protected. Yet the dialogue that emanates from Ian’s mouth suggests something different. “When I came to I thought I was in a coffin. Then I must have been delusional or something because I imagined I was with Trudy at my apartment.” That is pretty complex thought, clearly articulated, by someone with limited intelligence.

Moreover, Joanne apparently has spent two years wondering where her children were, frantic about their welfare. Now she has them in her care, and leaves them, clearly in distress while she wrestles with the latest wrinkle in the Rubinsky robbery. Then, in a scene which is intensely traumatic for her daughter, Joanne is there supporting her. And what’s more amazing is her daughter accepts her support wholeheartedly. They suddenly see eye to eye. Would that horrific problems were so easily resolved in the real world.

The dialogue is not without a few bright spots that prompt one to stop and think. For instance, a comment on the workings of the criminal mind. The Rubinsky brothers targeted chain stores because they thought they made lots of money as opposed to mom and pop operations that were barely self supporting. Or Tom Rubinsky, feeling remorseful about his actions, thinks he's in hell already remembering what he has done.

Though Ms.Rosenberg's basic idea for Conflict of Interest is a good one, there are too many flaws in its execution for me to recommend it highly. Ian Decker, a central figure is not believable, Joanne's relationship with her children changes from bad to good too dramatically, and the problems work out almost perfectly by the time the final page is turned. Too good to be true is an apt description.

--Andy Plonka