Rating: 
Summary: Bugliosi's "Outrage is intriguing...and very self-serving!
Review: Vincent Bugliosi's, "Outrage," is a thought-provoking critique of the inner workings of the O.J. Simpson murder trial. It is highly critical of the Disrict Attorney, Judge Ito, the defense team, the media, and especially Marcia Clark and Chris Darden of the prosecution. The book describes, in detail, the inadequacies of each of these groups, the gross incompetance of both sets of attorneys, especially Marcia Clark.
To the reader, the trial of O.J.Simpson should have been an open-and-shut case, which if handled correctly (as Mr.Bugliosi claims he would have handled it), would have sent O.J.Simpson to death row. It IS imazing how much compelling evidence was omitted by the prosecution in their case. For example, the episode of Simpson's attempted escape in the Ford Bronco which America watched glued to the television that memorable Friday night, was not even entered into evidence by the prosecution. You may remember that Simpson was caught with a gun, a passport, in excess of $8000 in cash, and a cheap disguise, when finally apprehended by the police. Nor was the all-revealing suicide note written by Simpson once he was apprehended.
His critique of the Marc Furman incident which resulted in Johnnie Cochran's LA Police Deparment consiracy argument to frame Simpson was especially poignant.
In general, Bugliosi's "Outrage" is well worth reading. The book leaves NO DOUBT of the guilt of O.J. Simpson! What bothered me was Bugliosi's "hollier-than-thou" attitude and his constant need to feed his OWN ego through his critcism and analysis of each facet of the trial. It's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback! If Mr. Bugliosi is truly "OUTRAGED" he should be so at himself for not offering to assist or consult with the proseution during the course of the trial.
Rating: 
Summary: Bugliosi forces us to bear witness to our own incompetence
Review: This book is a metaphor about what is wrong will every aspect of American life: We are surrounded by, lead by, and governed by incompetence. I am a trial lawyer. Every time before and during the trial I talked about the Simpson case with my collegues the observations were universal that (1) Simpson would be acquitted because the American public, like Lincoln said, was and is a collection of fools. And, second, the only time the public breaks out of that model is when forced to by crisis and the lucky arrival of exceptional leadership. Someday, pershaps soon, if not already, our luck will run out.Ito, Clark, and Darden, together with their co-conspirators the media, are metaphors for our larger political life. Collectively that have managed to apply the three principles of politics: avoidance of responsibiliy--did any of the three ever run the risk of loosing their job because of their incompetence. Assignment of Blame, elsewhere--the jurors were responsible. And, appropriation of credit. All have books, tours, and fortunes by the thousands. Our society should have such disgust for their failure that none would ever show their face to the light of day.
Rating:
Summary: The Real Deal on the Simpson farce
Review: Here's the problem: all of us trial lawyers knew that Judge Ito was a buffoon, that the "Dream Team" was barely competent, that the prosecution was manned by incompetents, including the Empress who wore no clothes, that the "talking heads" who chewed the case to death every night either didn't know better or were out and out shills unable to detect the level of incompetence; and, of course, that Simpson did it. As I say, all of that was obvious. But who had the credentials, the writing skill and the venom to lay it all out? Vincent Bugliosi--a rather aggressive, hard-nosed commentator, winner of 105 of 106 felony trials as a prosecutor, the prosecutor of the Manson family, and author of several true crime books. The man pulls no punches, but lest you think he is simply a hatchet man, be advised that he is equipped with chapter and verse and his analysis is faultless. Luckily for Simpson, he did not have to face the likes of Bugliosi; unluckily for Ito, Clark, Darden, Garcetti, and Cochran, they did have to face him and their incompetence is now a matter of public record for all to see. The definitive book on the Simpson case
Rating:
Summary: The definitive work on the Simpson trial/travesty
Review: It stands to reason that Vincent Bugliosi, who wrote arguably the all-time best true crime work, "Helter Skelter," would come out with by far the most comprehensive and thought-provoking book about the O.J. Simpson trial. "Outrage" is aptly titled, for Bugliosi's prose fairly crackles with it as he outlines the numerous foul-ups, bungles, and media-playing episodes that allowed a man guilty of two heinous murders to walk free. His hypothetical closing argument would have convinced even the most ardent Simpson supporter to convict. Unfortunately, hypothetical is the operative word here. Bugliosi is a brilliant attorney, an astute observer, and a sharp writer, all qualities admirably displayed in this book. Even those with only the faintest interest in the Simpson circus will find this compelling reading--and grieve anew for the extreme injustice that was rendered unto Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman.
Rating:
Summary: Justice By Proxy
Review: At last, there is a sense of "relief" for the travesty of justice that was the O.J. Simpson circus of 1994-1995. This book had me saying "Yes, Yes! I knew it!" I latched onto the words in this book with full attention. I completely agree with the author, and wondered why he was not in the courtroom instead of the prosecuters who tried the O. J. Simpson case.Mr. Bugliosi did not let a single detail of the much publicized trial escape his attention. He makes it clear that if a guilty person will not confess of his crime, for whatever reason, then everyone else who is aware will do it for him. The author's wit is razor sharp in each chapter, especially the Final Summation. I ate up every word in this book like pancakes and syrup on Saturday morning! Why did the judge allow the race card to be played? Is it a coincidence that money buys a verdict of "not guilty?" How can blood at the crime scene from one out of 233 people not be convincing? If we cannot obtain testimony--which the author, a lawyer, indicates is something that an innocent person is inclined to do after being falsely charged with a crime--then there is satisfaction, at least, from having possession of the printed words written by someone with genuine knowledgeability. The highlight of "Outrage..." is the transcripted interrogation of the LAPD with O.J. Simpson, word for word. It allowed me to understand how guilt has a way of making a story trip all over itself. There is no such thing as the perfect crime. After reading this book I feel like a lawyer instead of a spectator. Wherever you see this book, buy it, buy it, buy it. Don't think--get it! There's more in this text than the trial of one man. "Outrage..." makes a solid case for revamping the entire American judicial system.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding Argumentation From Common Sense
Review: Some other reviewers made notes I agree with.
1) Bugliosi argues this case magnificently.
2) OJ would have gotten away with it even if Vince had been the prosecutor barring one thing....
....that one thing is a powerful Bugliosi argument, a change of venue (like just happend with Michael Jackson).
Bugliosi tells it like it is. The defense attorneys were shameless nincompoops (except for Shapiro who winced at the playing of the race card and Flea Bailey who was an outstanding lawyer) who threw out red herrings. The prosecutors were so inept at their case that they didn't drill the obvious red herrings that were thrown their way.
And the linchpin of Bugliosi's argument is the simple fact that there is NO WAY the cops had time to get together and figure out what shoes OJ was wearing, what size gloves he wore - or bottom line make OJ act like the guiltiest person alive. Innocent people don't 'attempt suicide' because they've been 'framed,' especially celebrities like OJ.
Warning: this book requires a heavy dose of common sense to understand it. Don't read it if you lack said tool.
Rating: 
Summary: um....
Review: Has anyone noticed that O.J. Simpsons initials stand for Orange Juice? (LOL!!) just letting you people know about that.
Rating:
Summary: A Superb Job By Vincent Bugliosi.
Review: Vincent Bugliosi tackles the mighty and famous O.J. Simpson affair that captivated a nation for an entire year. He does a fantastic job of showing how Simpson was without a doubt guilty of the double murder. He also shows how the prosecution blew a completely winnable case with their passive and imcompetent fight, ignoring many key pieces of evidence. He also shows how ridiculous the defense theory was that the police had framed Simpson. A good read, but still could have been written better. The writing is at about a high school level.
Bugliosi is often way too critical though. He does not realize how stressful the trail must have been for both sides. The mistakes made during the trial was because of the intense pressure and media coverage. Bugliosi himself may have made some major mistakes if he was under that kind of pressure too.
The book also includes the police interview with O.J. the day after the murders, Simpson's letter, and a few other extras to fill in some missing questions people might have.
Rating:
Summary: An Honest Appraisal By A Pro.
Review: I've been a fan of Vincent Bugliosi since he wrote HELTER SKELTER (the best-selling true crime book in publishing history) and can't hear the Beatles' song of that title without thinking of the crime it was used to signify. As I recall, it was the first book I can remember reading every word, as it was so hard to believe he was writing such horrendous things about real people who appeared to be under the influence of the Devil. The real life demon was a drug-crazed Charles Manson who mesmerized his women followers to kill indiscriminately in California, for no reason.
Here, we find an impartial account of another monster who felt he was bigger than God (and had a reason), and had learned from those crazy movies he was in how he could get away with murder. His timing was off, his alibi unsubstantiated, and all the incriminating evidence proved he did it. No one else was even questioned seriously except perhaps that silly Kato Kaelin (who had no reason) who seemed such a blockhead, didn't know his right hand from his left.
According to this book, some of the most vital pieces of evidence was never presented to the jury by the harassed prosecutors. Amazingly, it took this jury of his peers only four hours to come up with the "Not Guilty" verdict. The whole world knew he was guilty.
I'd watched 95% of the t.v. coverage and had wondered what had been in the suitcase he had when the police met his return plane and Robert Kardashian took from him. This is called tampering with evidence. When it turned up later empty, no one investigated -- or at least, the public was not informed. It had to hold his bloody clothes which vanished into thin air. Many people felt that he had an accomplice.
The way he thanked his saviors (the jury) made me feel they had been 'bought.' I've never been able to figure out why the son of O.J. broke into sobs when the verdict was read, and wondered at the time if he'd been the accomplice. He was escorted out of that courtroom pronto before reporters could ask why he'd cried.
The last picture shown in the photo section showed the disbelief and abject horror on the faces of viewers in the electronics department of a Sears store in Jackson, TN, when O.J. basked in his victory over death. The photo above was gross -- a waitress named Neely and a Chicago sales rep. cheered in a bar on the southside, where my eldest son was living as a student at the University of Chicago at that time. How can people react so differently to such an unjust decision by an uninformed group of jury members who'd fought among themselves?!
Called the Trial of the Century, it proved to be a farce over which a tyrant of a judge presided and pandered to the defense, always castigating and fining members of the prosecution team. Even though I knew O.J. was guilty, I thought Johnnie Cochran's closing argument was a classic. As a young mother, I had worked as secretary to some smalltown lawyers and learned from that experience, but I had never heard such rhetoric as in his presentation. I believed Mark Fuhrman and felt that he had been unjustly treated by the media.
Only an experienced prosecuting attorney could have come up with the five reasons why O.J. Simpson got away with murder. He shows how there could have been and should have been a different verdict. O.J. somehow was exonerated and free from a lifetime in prison, but his life changed drastically. No more movies or t.v. ads, no high-flying personna people could admire.
Bugliosi won Edgar Allan Poe awards for HELTER SKELTER and TILL DEATH US DO PART. His AND THE SEA WILL TELL was #1 on New York Times bestseller list. I read all three (thoroughly researched) and watched the movies made for t.v., but it was hard. I felt "let down" by the system for a long time after the O.J. fiasco of a trial and the outrageous, unbelievable verdict.
A smalltown police chief once told me, "Don't you know, there ain't no justice." This trial makes me believe him.
Rating:
Summary: The final word on the OJ case
Review: This book powerfully clears up the case against OJ Simpson for the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. As Bugliosi explains, there was no mystery in the case itself. It was open and shut. The only mystery was how a jury managed to acquit a manifest double murderer. And this book supplies much of the answer to this mystery. It shows in detail how he would have presented the case against OJ.
Bugliosi assuredly would have presented a stronger case for the prosecution. And let's give him the benefit of the doubt, maybe he'd have won that case. But given the overwhelming evidence against OJ, what does that tell us? It tells us that in cases where a criminal has good lawyers, you'll get better justice by flipping a coin than by having a jury trial. And if expensive trials are worthless, what does that say about cheap trials? It puts the entire American criminal justice system in doubt. That is one reason to read this book and see some of the places where the system failed.
Even had OJ been found guilty, there were plenty of high profile cases that already cast grave doubt on the usefulness of jury trials. But this one took the cake, particularly since so many observers felt that there would be a conviction after reasonable jury deliberation, not an acquittal after virtually no deliberation at all. Again, this book helps show why so many observers were so convinced that even the case as presented was airtight.
Some people believe that, as in the Rodney King case (another grave miscarriage of justice), the issue was race. But the defense in a criminal trial almost always comes up with an issue other than guilt. So I agree with the author's claim that a conviction was obtainable with the actual jury. I also agree that the actual result "had an injurious effect on Americans' faith in the jury system." And I even agree that there is still hope for the jury system. However, I think this case shows that dramatic changes still need to be made for the jury system to be worthwhile. And it is sad that until that happens, we'll see an disgraceful and unnecessary number of guilty people going free and innocent people being convicted. Bugliosi thoughtfully discusses some of the recommendations to improve trials that were made at the time.
Read this book to see just how poorly the system performed here.
|
