Without a Doubt

Rating:
Summary: She takes all the credit but none of the blame!
Review: Before I read her book, my opinion of Marcia Clark was neutral, though I did think the prosecution could have done a better job with this case. After reading the book, I have no doubt about why they lost. This self-serving diatribe of Marcia's is deplorable. If you believe her, she single-handedly bore the entire burden of the case; the rest of the team only minor players! However, she will take NO responsibility for any of the prosecution's fumbles. She accuses every other player in the trial of possessing super egos, when it appears the biggest ego in the group is Marcia's. She'll have you believe that she shrunk from the media spotlight, while every one else was seeking and revelling in it. She convenietly waited until all of the other books were published, so that she could de-bunk anything that anyone had to say about her. It is painfully obvious that the case was lost because of her ineptitude for understanding basic human feelings. Doesn't a prosecutor have to understand people, what motivates them, what angers them. what gets them to cooperate? Seemingly she wasn't blessed with any of these skills. She is appalled and offended when her "bad" witnesses turn to "good" in the civil trail. Poor, poor Marcia! Perhaps a little introspection would have helped her. Through "Without a Doubt" the only thing Marcia Clark has proved is that she is obnoxious and disliked.

Rating:
Summary: A No Win Situation - But a Good Book
Review: I read four books after the trial. I read the Schiller 1000 page saga, Outrage, the present book and a book on Johnny Cochrane. Each book was different and gives us different insights.

I think it is clear to any reasonable and unbiased thinking person that O.J. did in fact kill Nicole and Ron and it is just as it is clear that Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK. Also it is clear from the other reviewers that Marcia Clark evokes a certain emotional response that colors their view of the book. If you still think O.J. is innocent then I think that is a personal problem or internal devil that you must deal with but it is not related to reality. As the title says "Without a Doubt" he was guilty.

Johnny made buckets of money as a criminal attorney. Both he and Shapiro could make sums of money in hours that only the rest of us can dream about. Johnny drove a Rolls and Shapiro rubbed elbows with the LA movers and shakers.

Marcia is more like the average citizen, working for the DA's office, probably driving a Chevrolet or Honda. She was a single divorced mother that commutes to work. After the trial she had decided enough was enough, and she wrote the book along with everyone else. And I say good for her! Make a buck or two! Its America.

Now for the book. It is what you might expect. It is the story of her involvement with the trial. It presents some prior background on her life and earlier trials and then goes in detail through the O.J. saga and what it was like from her perspective. I think is a well written book and for the most part entertaining. "Outrage" is a bit more gripping and Schiller's "American Tragedy" longer and more comprehensive. But this book is what we would expect. It deals mainly with her role and it is a solid job. She was basically a civil servant and she was the front "man" facing a raft of America's most famous lawyers including the above mentioned plus F. Lee Bailey. Then to complicate things, the whole mess was presided over by the star blinded Judge Ito. Together they faced essentially 12 black female jurors who loved Johnny and O.J.

Could she win? "Without a Doubt" she could not win, but it was nothing to do with her.

Recommend. 4 stars.

Jack in Toronto

Rating:
Summary: Excellent and Informative
Review: I just finished reading Without a Doubt, couldn't put it down. It is the first book about the Simpson trial that I have been able to read all the way through. It felt truthful and real, there was no exaggeration or grandstanding for effect. If anyone has been involved in the court system at all then they will really appreciate the intensity and importance of this book. Marsha is not self serving or whiny......I enjoyed her honesty about the case and about herself. If she had not written about herself, people would be accusing her of hiding things. I found the book very affirming, as I have been involved in the Victim advocacy system for 13 years and have just left the 'justice' system for work where I can offer my skills without having to be belittled and bashed by the attorneys appointed by the system for the criminals and the abusive parents. Thank you Marsha.

Rating:
Summary: Somewhat self serving
Review: Marcia Clark was, of course, the lead prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson trial. In this book she gives us all of the trial details from the first time she heard about the killings until the day the jury brought in the "not guilty" verdict. It's an interesting book in that it gives you insight into how each trial element was handled and the behind-the-scenes planning that has to occur to try someone.

However, Ms. Clark never feels the need to attach any of the blame for losing the case to herself. Her biggest scapegoat is Judge Lance Ito. By all accounts he is a weak judge and let the defense get away with more than they should have been allowed to, however I find it hard to believe that there was nothing that she or the DA's office could have done about it. In the book it always seems that things are about to fall apart until she steps in at the last minute and fixes everything.

This is the third book I've read about the Simpson trial (and it will be the last). I found Ms. Clark's book much more informative about the trial than Christopher Darden's "In Contempt". The Darden book was much more of an autobiography and to be honest I wasn't all that interested in his personal life. Thankfully, Ms. Clark keeps her personal life story to a minimum. So, I'd recommend Ms. Clark's book if you want to get an inside look at the prosecution side of the trial. However, if you want a less biased look at the whole thing read Jeffrey Toobin's book, "The Run of His Life."

Rating:
Summary: Marcia Clark, whine salesman
Review: Because I disagreed with the verdict in the first Simpson trial and thought Marcia Clark was treated shabbily by all concerned, I looked forward to her book, expecting an insightful description of how her quest for justice was derailed by those who wanted to acquit a murderer by pandering to racism. I was disappointed. Clark comes across as one of the most petulant, whining, immature people imaginable. Most distrubing, and least professional, is her glee at reporting what she thinks are the foibles of the people she worked with on this case. (She even tells us when she didn't like the way they dressed.) No one would want to work with her after reading this, nor should they. The only errors at trial Clark admits to are minor tactical ones. Unintentionally, however, she illustrates what lost the case for the prosecution: failure to dismiss Chris Darden from the case when it became obvious he didn't have a grasp of the proceedings. Clark's own book makes clear that Darden made serious mistakes even before the glove debacle, any one of which Clark would have described with sarcasm if it had been done by anyone else. You wonder if Clark is even aware that her book proves the opposite of what she has intended.

Rating:
Summary: Self Serving and not Informative
Review: I have read most of the books written about the O.J. Trial. All have been more about setting forth that particular author's personal/ or political agenda and not about true analysis.

What I fail to find in any of these books is what role did the media play in turning a simple crime of passion into the racial mess that this trial came to symbolize?

This story is simple. Man and woman have a very sick/tormented relationship, where many sick games are played. One day man loses his head and murders woman and the poor guy who comes to her rescue. Man goes to trial. Man goes to jail for a crime of passion. End of story.

Instead the SCLM (So Called Liberal Media) as described in the Eric Alterman's book, "What Liberal Media," enters the picture driven by the almighty dollar and turns this simple crime into the trial of the century simply for the profit margin.

We still trust the media to inform us and they failed miserably as they have done in every important story of our generation. There is no liberal media bias. It's all about the money and polarizing the country to fuel the tragic story of the Simpson case was more important to the Media than actually telling the real story.

They forgot that Nicole and O.J. loved each other and created two very lovely kids together. Race had nothing to do witth it until the media focussed on it.

Marcia Clark lost her case, because she drank the Kool Aid from the media and followed their narrative as opposed to trying the case for what it was a crime of passion.

Rating:
Summary: Hypocritical
Review: I borrowed this book from a friend, I'm glad I didn't pay for it. It didn't offer much information about the trial that wasn't widely publicized and it was published pretty late in the game by the standards of Simpson books. What I found most troubling was that Ms. Clark trashes everyone involved in her side of the case including Detectives Lange and Vannatter, Dennis Fung, LAPD brass, even Chris Darden. These were people who, like Clark herself, did their jobs under intense pressure and scrutiny who made a few mistakes, as she did. She then goes on to insult nearly everyone else involved in the case, blaming the verdict on so many different people it's difficult to determine who she really thinks is to blame. The purpose of the book seemed to be to throw out enough wild theories and speculation (for the not guilty verdict) that maybe we'll find one to believe, which is eerily similar to the strategy of Simpson's defense team.
I had so much respect for her during the trial and thought she did a great job. Many experts have attacked her for what she did and didn't do (most notable Vincent Bugliosi), but as a layperson I found her intelligent and credible. Unfortunately, in the end she sold out her collegues who went through the same trials and tribulations that she recounts as a living nightmare. And why did she do it? To make money from her role in the case, while throughout the book she repeatedly denounces others who did the same.

Rating:
Summary: Inside a prosecutor's mind
Review: Reading this book eight years after the trial, I can't help wondering if the DA's office realized they had to try Simpson against great odds and Marcia Clark was then an unknown. If they expected to win, would they have assigned a more senior, experienced, media-savvy DA?

We'll never know. But, as Clark points out in several places, police, judge and prosecutors gave OJ unique advantages. He appeared at the "site visit" unencumbered by chains and the judge may have been awed by the status of the defense lawyers.

Regardless, Clark "caught" the case and she wanted it. I don't think she wanted glory. She wanted a challenge. And she makes sure we understand she wasn't given the resources to meet that challenge effectively.

Clark didn't have control of the courtroom. For example, a media consultant gratuitously offers to "help." His insights, Clark says, were useless. Yet he gets a seat at the courtroom table, thanks to Clark's boss.

And unlike private lawyers, Clark had limited options for co-counsel. She was assigned a "partner" who was competent but not strong -- he was out sick every time a tough witness came up.

Some reviewers say Clark used this book to excuse herself. To some extent, that's true. She does come across as strident and even whiny in places.

However, she does have something to whine about. She had only two months to prepare for trial -- circumstances totally beyond her control. She didn't have a chance to get close to the victims and they didn't want her to. The Browns had depended on OJ for money so naturally their feelings were mixed.

After reading books by OJ jurors, I suspect Marcia Clark misunderstood the effects of jury stress and failed to read the jurors' body language. She writes that the jury didn't seem to be paying attention -- yet the Simpson jurors were treated like prisoners themselves, subject to random search and little outside stimulation. Some were literally going mad.

There are numerous first-hand accounts of jurors who say, in deliberations, "I don't care how this comes out. I want to go home." I can't help wondering if the OJ jurors shared those feelings.

Of course, there's no doubt that OJ's resources allowed him to challenge police evidence that typically would be ignored. And Clark herself admits she ignored focus groups that suggested jurors just didn't like her style.

Whatever the story, Clark landed on her feet, her privacy gone but a new career awaiting her. Apparently she got four million dollars for this book. Not a bad consolation prize.

Rating:
Summary: Marcia Clark, author, inept Attorney.
Review: A gabby piece of literature. Why this woman let the defense team in the Simpson trial, hand-pick a sympathetic jury, and later, she wonders why she lost the trial... I am dumbfounded. Where did she get her law degree? Toys R us? Send a woman to do a man's job...

Rating:
Summary: Pretty Good
Review: This was a compelling story written from her point of view. It is a good follow-up book to read if you have already read "Outrage" by Vincent Bugliosi or "The Run of His Life" by Jeffrey Toobin.