Customer Reviews

O. J. Unmasked: The Trial, The Truth, and the Media

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

.... Now, turning to the relatively sane rest of the world...this is a compelling and intelligent read that will be thoroughly enjoyed by all OJ buffs, even if you think you've already read enough books on the subject (as I thought I had). Jeffrey Toobin's book remains the best overview of the whole loopy story, and Bugliosi's "Outrage" stands as the most powerful analysis of the trial, what went wrong with it, and how it could/should have gone down. But THIS serves as the most inscrutably logical dissection of the evidence and arguments presented in the trial (as well as some delightful bonuses like the trivia quiz). Rantala does a wonderful job of proving the contradictions and nonsense in the defense arguments simply by providing examples from the text and forcing the reader to ask himself the most obvious questions about it, again and again confirming that no conclusion other than OJ's guilt is even within the realm of possibility.

Don't let the book's low profile fool you (I'd never even heard of it, I just happened upon it in the library). Even if you already agree with its conclusions, it's a terrific read, and conversely, it SHOULD (though obviously HASN'T) convince anyone who still harbors doubts: The verdict was wrong. A killer walks free.

I have read most of the popular books about the Simpson case except for the Marcia Clark book, which I skimmed in a bookstore and decided that it added nothing new. This summer, I read Fuhrman's book and now this.

O.J. Unmasked is similar to Bugliosi's book, Outrage, in that it provides a great deal of detail and analysis of contradictions and exaggerations in the defense arguments. The two books even directly share some observations such as the fact that Simpson admitted during questioning by the police that he had bled around his house the night of the murders so there was little incentive for the police to then go and replant blood at a location he already had admitted bleeding in. The book is not so much a continuous narrative of the trial and related issues as it is a consideration of different bits of evidence and arguments put forth by the defense. Each chapter considers a different bit of evidence and underlying strategy. Rantala tries and I think succeeds in showing much of the defense's case was bunk when examined in detail and considered as a whole.

Some examples: there is a chapter on how the defense treated Fung as both a bungling idiot who handled no evidence correctly and yet was able to deftly participate in a massive coverup leaving almost no clues except perhaps some wet bindles. There is a good discussion of how Scheck's sneering closing argument misrepresented Henry Lee's actual testimony and other evidence and of the complete irrelevance of the Furhman tapes. There is also a small section on how the jury clearly misunderstood the DNA evidence and the non-issue of EDTA contamination of the blood stains on the back gate (there was no EDTA in these stains). And while numerous police arriving at the scene prior to Fuhrman confirmed they saw only a single glove at the crime scene, this was largely ignored at trial.

The ending, whereby she discusses all of the coincidences that would have to be true if Simpson were innocent, is almost worth the price of the book. I do think one flaw is that she does not discuss enough how Ito's abdication of the courtroom to all kinds of lawyer antics played a large role in the aura of confusion they were permitted to create and that ultimately won the case for Simpson. I also like how her argument that the media (read Geraldo, et al.) relied almost exclusively on lawyers for analysis and as a result, never had scientific or forensic specialists in to examine some of the court room claims for their factuality.

Overall, I would put this in the must read category for Simpson trial buffs along with Toobin's book (best overview), Bugliosi's book (how the prosecution should have tried the case), Schiller's book (a detailed behind the scenes look at defense team intrigues and strategy), and Fuhrman's book (what the crime scene evidence showed and how Vanatter et al. really messed up.)

And finally, to answer some of one reviewers' ersatz concerns: Simpson did not "smear blood all over the console". There were some blood spots and a bloody foot print on the floor mat (size 12) but not smeared blood. Some of the spots were so small, they were hard to get enough sample for DNA testing. Simpson even admitted he bled in his car (the "cut myself on my cell phone" excuse) though it is hard to fathom how Goldman's blood got there if it was that sharp cell phone that caused the bleeding. And Simpson DID bring home his shoes, clothes, and knife as well as the glove and socks. He put the shoes, clothes and knife in a knapsack which he let no one touch and which not even the defense team could produce. To this day, no one can say where that bag is. Most likely, Simpson tossed it in an airport garbage can and was lucky that no one found it before it was taken to a city dump. The socks he just took off and probably did not think there was any evidence on them. And/or he forgot them near his bed in his hurry. The glove was dropped as he banged into the air conditioner in Kato's guest house. He did not have time to go back and get it nor may he even have been aware that he had dropped it. BTW, the glove was soaked with his blood. If it were a plant and there were another killer, it should have had other blood on it as well. And so on....

Almost every major figure connected with this unfortunate event has made a tidy sum by writing books - even Simpson himself. What this book has, and the others lack, is an author with the discipline to wade through the voluminous evidence to give us a scholarly analysis of the merits of the defense and prosecution arguments. If you read this book you will be able to understand the complex blood evidence and its implications. Anyone interested in knowing the truth of this case, or how the new techniques of PCR and RFLP are utilized in the courtroom, will want to read O.J. Unmasked

In watching the OJ Simpson trial, we were assaulted with all types of information and misinformation concerning the evidence. The prosecution would say the evidence showed us one thing and we would see what they were saying, then the Defense would show us the same evidence telling us that is showed us something else. In the end a lot of people ended up confused about the evidence. One prime example was the EDTA evidence. The prosecution said there was no EDTA on the socks or the gate at 875 Bundy. The Defense expert said there was. How is one to decide who was telling the truth? Where does one go for these answers? The most reliable place I have found is in the book authored by Lauri Rantala called "OJ Unmasked". Mrs Rantala takes a long hard look at the evidence that was presented in the CA vs Simpson case. She investigated the different conclusions of the evidence brought up by the defense and prosecution and she lays to rest any speculation a person may have about the evidence that was presented in the trial. Mrs Rantala has written this book in a easy to read format and uses common sense in her writing style and conclusions. She uses lay man terms concerning some of the detailed explanations of DNA testimony, where one finds it's a lot easier to understand the break down of DNA and how it works. We the public have been deluged with books on the OJ Simpson case, from almost everyone that was involved in this case, if you want to read a book of fantasy I suggest you read "Killing Time" if you want to read a book on the facts of this case I highly recommend you read "OJ Unmasked"

If you only read one book about the criminal trial of O. J. Simpson, this little gem is the one to read.

Yes, Ms. Rantala believes that O. J. participated in the murders. If you count that as a bias, then you must consider paying attention and retaining information to be vices.

The strength of her book, however, is not her fervent belief that O. J. got away with murder(s). Rather, the book's virtue is her clear communication of why the prosecutors ought to have been able to prove O. J. guilty in court.

I believe that the jurors did what they had to do, given the hash that the prosecutors made of the case: the liars for whom the prosecutors vouched; the handling of evidence that raised more questions than the prosecutors could swat away; the motives that made no sense as presented; and so on. However, Rantala shows that, although the verdict was legally correct because Simpson was not proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the result of the trial was at odds with the facts.

O.J. Simpson would need boxes of score cards to tally his double and triple bogeys as described in Lauri Rantala's excellent book. The postscript entitled: "If O.J. Were Innocent" lays out 28 amazing coincidences that must be true if Simpson indeed did not commit the murders on June 12, 1994. Only those intent on wishing to believe in Simpson's innocence on a purely emotional level can deny the obvious as put forth by Rantala

As a certified Simpson case addict ("Hi, I am Doug... and I am an OJ-aholic"), I have an overwhelming urge to read everything I can about the case. One of the books I have read and recommend to others is called "O.J. Unmasked: The Trial, The Truth, and The Media" by M.L. Rantala. Like all of the books about the case, Ms. Rantala's book shows a definite bias. Her bias is towards Mr. Simpson's guilt. She makes a powerful case and relies on the evidence that was presented without succumbing to the emotionalism that was found in Vincent Bugliosi's "Outrage". From the gloves to the DNA to the socks on the bedroom floor, Rantala will inform and educate you on the specifics of the evidence and the tactics of the lawyers on both sides. And she does this with humor and intelligence as well as entertains. Even if you don't agree with her conclusions, you will have to admit she handled the subject honestly. No one has catalogued the case or analyzed the events and evidence more completely. Absolutely essential reading for anyone who wants to understand what happened.

The testimony of the two witnesses who cannot lie say that OJ Simpson is not guilty.

Blood and flesh were found under Nicole Brown's fingernails; the blood type did not match OJ (or Nicole or Ron). Ron Goldman walked to work, worked out, and practiced karate; his hands showed bruises from punching someone in the face or head more than once. OJ had no scratches or bruises on his hands, arms, face, or body: he could not have been a lone murderer.

The newspapers said that when the bodies were found after 12:15 AM their red blood was trickling down the sidewalk. The crime scene pictures printed in the National Enquirer showed the red blood. This says they were freshly killed, around 11:30, because their blood would be black and clotted if dead for over an hour (as in the Borden Murders).

The above physical evidence proves OJ Simpson to be innocent of these murders. Some say the 25 to 30 stab wounds on Ron Goldman suggest an emotional frenzy from a personal enemy, and Nicole Brown was the innocent bystander. The book "Killing Time" is the first and only objective book (arguments for both sides) to discuss all the evidence.

I hope that those who want to know the facts will read this, and reconsider any prejudgments that they made in June 1994.

For OJ to be guilty, you must believe that he quickly disposed of the bloody clothes, shoes, and knives so they would NEVER be found, yet brought the socks and glove back to his home! And then smeared blood all over the console!

The coroner who did the autopsies testified "the forensic evidence says the murders occurred after 11PM". The limousine driver testified he brought OJ to the airport at that time. When you read this book, note how they avoid discussing these facts.