Clay Stafford talks with James Grippando on “Turning Complex Ideas Into Page-Turning Stories”

Don Bruns interviewed by Clay Stafford

---

James Grippando has spent decades mastering the balance between legal accuracy and page-turning storytelling. A New York Times bestselling author and veteran trial lawyer, he understands both the complexity of the courtroom and the demands of suspense fiction. In this conversation, Grippando shares practical insights on research, pacing, simplifying complex ideas, and keeping readers engaged, all lessons that apply to any writer working with technical material or high-stakes storytelling. “James, what originally drew you to the idea of a legal thriller? Is it because you’re an attorney, your love of law, story opportunities, courtroom excitement?”

“I’ve wanted to be a writer since age eleven, but it was a dream, not a goal. I aimed to be a lawyer, inspired by a trip to Springfield, Illinois, where we visited Abe Lincoln’s law office. My goal was law; my dream was writing. The dream rested until TV shows like Law and Order in the early ‘90s and John Grisham’s fame motivated me to try. I spent four years writing a novel that wasn’t published, but I gained an agent who encouraged me to write another. I wrote it in nine months, sold it to HarperCollins over a weekend, and have been with them for 33 novels.”

“The legal world has its own terminology and rules. What’s the hardest legal concept for non-lawyers to understand without oversimplifying it for thriller writers?”

“I’ll start by saying the audience has come a long way. It began about 30 years ago with the OJ trial, when people started watching more intently. Every 18 months, a new ‘trial of the century’ grabbed attention. People became fixated, and as a legal thriller writer, I’m glad because now many understand concepts like hearsay and courtroom procedures, thanks to watching trials on TV.”

“I attribute that to Judge Judy, but…”

“Whatever works, you know. If you go back and read courtroom dramas from 45-50 years ago… I once read The Seven Minutes as a teen and loved the trial scenes. Re-reading it, I saw the lawyer pay a witness as if it were normal, which modern audiences wouldn’t accept. Still, I think you shouldn’t get too caught up in procedural details. Apply the same rule to courtroom scenes as to others: get in, get out. After this interview, you’ll review the transcript, and you won’t want it to sound like one. That’s my view. Thriller writers’ manuscripts often read like transcripts, dead and cold, lacking life.”

“Do the things you write about come from your head because of experience, or do you research?”

“I do all my own research, and I love the research side of it.”

“Do you research deeply, just skim for plausibility, or what’s your process?”

“That’s the hardest part of the job, deciding what to keep in the book from your research. I’ve read where an author clearly visited Switzerland and spoke to a Swiss watchmaker, with three pages about Swiss watches and the author saying, ‘I flew all the way over here…’”

“‘…and I am gonna keep every word of this…’”

“‘…and it’s going in the book.’ You have to watch yourself on that, no pun intended. Sometimes I get into rabbit holes with my research, which are interesting but may not make it into the book. That’s part of self-editing. I’ve never based a plot on my legal practice, but many characters influenced my writing. The key link between my law work and writing is understanding people. When I meet a new client, I ask the same questions I ask of characters: what do they want, why, and what are they willing to risk? Answering these reveals who they are.”

“Trials and the legal system move slowly, but fiction must move faster. What tools do you recommend for writers of legal dramas and thrillers to respect both, without betraying either?”

“There are two approaches. I often have emergency hearings on motions such as injunctions, restraining orders, or death warrants, which move quickly and require a tight timeline. Alternatively, as Scott Turow did in Presumed Innocent, you can divide the story into sections like fall, winter, spring, skipping detailed daily accountings. If done well, this works even if it's not in real time. In real life, months can pass between discovery and trial, so you must either link these segments effectively or consider another profession.”

“You do something I really like: you introduce a foreign concept, then briefly explain it in a few sentences, and then you continue without breaking the flow. It keeps us novices from getting lost.”

“I take that as high praise. Early in my career, I had a great drill: my agent would ask me to fax him pages, then reduce them step by step: from three pages to one, then to a paragraph, and finally to a sentence starting with ‘this is the story of…’ Once I mastered that, I was ready to write. It’s not about dumbing down but about impact. When something is worth mentioning, I try to make it flow. As a writer, if you’re not making readers turn pages, you’ve failed. Page-turners matter. If you need to sacrifice technical requirements, you must explain why. It could be as simple as noting a judge’s mistake or bias, like someone wanting to leave early. If you truncate or deal with adverse rulings that most lawyers find wrong, recognize that it’s okay because even lawyers face unjust judgments. When to explain should be clear, ideally in one non-intrusive line.”

“Is that how you consciously calibrate the cognitive load you’re placing on the reader?”

“Many aspiring writers mistakenly assume readers are less intelligent, which leads to over-explanation. This mistake often hampers their success. For example, my first novel, at 265,000 words, was too long. A debut should be around 90,000 words to be effective.”

“Even in The Right to Remain, there are moments that may arise when you’re exploring real-world legal or political issues. How do you keep the story from becoming commentary rather than narrative, especially when you’re writing legal thrillers?”

“That goes back to The Pardon. I challenge anyone to read it and correctly guess my stance on the death penalty when I wrote it. Characters have different points of view, and I aim to present them realistically, recognizing that disagreements arise from the complexity of these issues. I don’t want to make the plot overly complicated, but I acknowledge the diverse views on hot-button issues. Avoiding controversy would be a mistake; instead, presenting it thoughtfully and reflecting diverse opinions will satisfy readers.”

“From your perspective, what can a legal thriller do for readers emotionally, intellectually, or even morally that other thriller subgenres may not be able to do?”

“I think, number one, the stakes are always very high. Because the stakes are so high and there is a recognized process for dealing with that conflict, I think legal thrillers, better than any other genre, help you see people at their best. In my books, the protagonist is really trying to do the right thing. But also at their worst: people who lie on the witness stand, people who hide evidence, people who destroy evidence. I think what really shines a light on that range of conduct in an informative way is that everyone, one way or another, recognizes that they’ve either got to play by the rules or hide the fact that they’re breaking them. And it’s not just a gunfight. There is a strategy that has to be invoked in this, and when you’re strategizing about your next move, I think it makes the good in you shine brighter, but it also makes the villains, when they know they’re doing wrong and they know they’ve got to manipulate the system to get their way, illustrate the worst of humankind.”

“Are there any last words you’d like to share with any reader-writers out there who want to follow in your footsteps?”

“I would say keep it fun. That was my number one rule when I first started writing. Was I going to get published? Was I not going to get published? I never wanted that to sour me on my love of books. So, keep it fun. It is about the storytelling, not necessarily about being in print. There’s an art to storytelling in whatever form.”

---

Clay Stafford is a bestselling writer, filmmaker, and founder of the Killer Nashville International Writers’ Conference, Killer Nashville Magazine, and Killer Nashville University. https://claystafford.com/

James Grippando is a New York Times bestselling author with more than thirty books to his credit, including those in his acclaimed series featuring Miami criminal defense attorney Jack Swyteck, and is the winner of the Harper Lee Prize for Legal Fiction. He is also a trial lawyer and teaches law and literature at the University of Miami School of Law. He lives and writes in South Florida.
https://www.jamesgrippando.com/