Customer Reviews

Madam Foreman: A Rush to Judgement?

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

An attempt to cash in on the Simpson trial, this book is an embarrassment for all concerned. Just how bad it is cannot be conveyed in a mere 1000 words, so you'll simply have to read it yourself -- but maybe that's too high a price to pay. Read the summary provided by Dove Publishing. It's as though they are trying to expose the jurors as the cerebral cripples they are. Couldn't they find one coherent line in what must have been hours of mind-numbing recordings with the "authors"? While reading the book, keep in mind that this is _their_ side of the story; it is told in a manner most sympathetic to the jurors. Still, they come off as spit-drooling morons. The mind reels at the thought of someone hostile to Cooley, Bess, and Jackson having written this. As for Tom Byrnes (he garners "as told to" credit for this mess) and editor Mike Walker, don't hate them... pity them. Then again, perhaps Byrne and Walker have intended this as an indictment of our judicial system, where the search for impartial jurors has evolved into a quest for those who never read newspapers, news magazines, or even watch television more challenging than "Jackass." If this is the case, their success is complete beyond any possible expectations they might have had.

Upon first hearing the not-guilty verdict in the O.J. Simpson trial, I was sure it was because at least some of the Simpson jurors had some self-serving, self-righteous agenda. However, after reading this pathetic, to the point of being comical attempt, to justify their verdict, I have changed my mind... Not only was their so-called "analysis" of the evidence completely devoid of any truly intelligent thought, it contained leaps of logic so vast, Evil Knevil would have been too scared to jump it. For example, one juror said she had doubts O.J. did it because only a "little" blood from the victims was found in Simpsons bronco.If he was truly innocent, then why is ANY of the victims blood in his car! Throughout the trial Johnny Cochran continuously lied or distorted the truth. During the defence for instance, in an attempt to show police "contaminating" the crime scene, Cochran shows a still picture of a policeman "carelessly" walking through a bloody path. Contamination,right? Well, no. Upon simple cross-examination, we find out that only AFTER the crime scene had been processed and all blood evidence been collected did this officer then walk through this bloody path. Was there any mention of this in this book? Of course not. When Cochran tried to show an attempt by police to "plant" evidence, he showed a videotape of Simpsons bedroom depicting the ABSENCE of bloody socks that the police claimed were there. Planting of evidence you say? Again, upon cross-examination the person who shot the videotape testifies that he was there to videotape the premises for insurance purposes only. And that he was told by police NOT to go into the bedroom until AFTER they collected whatever was in there, including,of course, those bloody socks! Did any of these hapless jurors make note of this?...In fact, rare is it, that you will find consecutive coherent sentences, such is the collective wisdom shown here. So, the question is, would I recommend this book to others? To that question, my answer is surprisingly, a resounding YES!...Because while on one hand, this book was so tedious to read,what with its complete utter lack of knowledge and insight of the subject matter, I still found it facinating to delve into the minds of people who have such little powers of deduction...

Like many Americans I was stunned when after just 3 hours the OJ Simpson jury came back with a verdict of not guilty. There was little gaiety even after the civil court brought back a verdict of guilty and set an award of $33.5 million for the families. I thought I might gain some insight into the jury's thoughts through this book. I most certainly did gain some insight, but it wasn't noble or uplifting - it was banal, small-minded, stupifyingly shallow and completely wrong-headed. This book, while apparently an attempt to save face, falls far short of the mark. During the trial Judge Lance Ito might well have saved his breath when instructing the jury on how to view evidence. These people willfully and deliberately ignored his instructions and based their decisions on how they "felt" about evidence, how a witness "seemed" to them. Facts? Evidence? Pshaw...those pesky things. Appallingly bad writing coupled with poorly reasoned rationalizations show these jurors to be people who had their minds made up long before deliberation began. They were far more concerned about their own comfort than about the victims (alive and dead), segregated themselves from non-black jurors, either ignored or willfully failed to consider evidence that didn't support their position, and refused to deliberate. I'm not sure what they hoped to gain in writing this book, but it confirmed what I had long suspected. Race was always the issue - an opportunity for them to pay back the criminal justice system for years of entrenched injustice to black men. And OJ was their chosen hero. Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown weren't even considered. They were just props. While I understand the sad state of the judicial system and how unfairly it has treated black men over the years, the truth is, these jurors picked the wrong guy to champion for two simple reasons. One, he did it - a civil court had no problems wading through the same evidence presented at the criminal trial and coming to that conclusion. Two, Simpson could quite simply care less about the black "cause" as regards the courts. He just simply isn't interested in anything but himself. He prefers the company of whites, spends his time and money on self-gratification, and has never expressed even the slightest interest in helping improve conditions for blacks in America through word or deed. Then, as now, he was nothing more than an ego-driven wife-beating bully without a shred of interest in black education, black health care, black poverty, black justice. His only interest in racism was what it could do to get him out of the worst jam he had ever gotten himself into. This book appears to be nothing more than a poorly written attempt by these jurors to rationalize their despicable act of jury nullification which resulted in allowing this man to walk free simply because of the color of his skin. Jury nullification laws protect them from prosecution, but in my opinion their actions make them as guilty of the murders as Simpson himself. Disgusting.

"A Rush to Judgement" reinforces what we already know about the O.J. Simpson jury.The evidence played a minor role in the verdict.We get the life story of three jurors who seem to consider themselves civil rights activists instead of civil servants.A lot of this book is spent describing the hardships of the jurors' living conditions.Not enough time is spent remembering the victims,but the same can be said about the trial itself.The three jurors who collaborated on this book describe how the mannerisms of the attorneys helped them arrive at their decision.Evidence usually seems to be incidental.My favorite part of the book is when one juror describes her first impression of Mark Fuhrman. Even though he hadn't even spoken a word,she felt"he looked like like a ku klux klansman or a skinhead with hair." Woman's intuition,or A RUSH TO JUDGEMENT? You be the judge.

Words can not begin to convey how badly these jurors were decieved by the Simpson defense team. The fact that they allowed themselves to fall for the "race card" antics of Cocharan, et. al. is all the more reason to require I. Q. and logic tests before allowing people to sit on juries. At least with their names, faces, and now opinions known, no other poor family will have to have these people judge their daughter or son's killer.

This tape and book does provide a wonderful service showing just how faulty these jurors' logic was.

This is a pathetic and weak attempt written by the OJ Simpson jurors to excuse the outrageous and incorrect verdict that they arrived at after only three hours of deliberation. It demonstrates the unfortunate fact that even the jurors, who were supposed to be impartial, were clearly biased against the prosecution from day one of the trial, and their IQ's match an anorexic's dress size! Discounting all the other evidence, the DNA alone should have convicted SImpson, since it doesn't inject fraudulent issues into a trial, isn't overwhelmed by its own celebrity, and has no ulterior motives or hidden agenda, yet it was damningly and inexplicably ignored. And I was amazed to read the statement of one of the jurors in a post trial interview that the DNA evidence carried no weight with her! The DNA evidence was as irrefutably tied to the Simpson case as Santa Claus is to Christmas. I wonder how these jurors can live with themselves, knowing that Simpson is a murderer, and deciding that these murders should go unpunished. How could they attend a post trial victory party, hosted by that slime Johnnie Cochran, knowing that because of Simpson, Ron and Nicole are forever lost to their families? Do they ever think of Ron and Nicole at all? Do they think about their last moments alive? I do. Does the particularly gruesome crime scene picture of Nicole, lying folded in the foetal position, her head haloed by a large pool of blood, which looks like blotches of red paint splashed randomly onto an artist's canvas, haunt them at all?

I have read the books by Marcia Clark and Chris Darden and I was impressed with them. I wanted to get an opinion from the juror's side as to why the decision was made for acquittal, but I was a little disappointed because at least half of the book was about the three jurors' backgrounds. I think that they didn't even mention the trial until page 90 or so.

I wouldn't even give this book the time of day. Here's a group of people who completely dropped the ball when it came time to do their civic duty and then couldn't wait to cash in on a book deal. How utterly disgusting!! My opinion on the juror's conduct has noting to do with Simpson's guilt or innocence. There is no way these people could've weighed ALL the evidence presented in this trial and come to the conclusion they did in just 3 short hours. Garbage!!

These racist women try to justify what was so in your face. OJ was guilty but these women could care less! The book is written for an auidence that would only steal a book not buy one. Whoever thought this book would be a huge seller has to be a bigger fool then the women who wrote it. I hate the fact that they try to justify there verdict. These women I hope one day will speak the truth. The truth is "We could not convict OJ because my neighbors would cut me up like those white people".

Now I was forced to read this book for a class. It made me sick. This was a racist jury. In the years since this book was released OJ has proven he was no Saint. Most of his lawyers have ended up in some trouble or died. Good. When Johnny Cochraqn died the devil got a new assistant!

This book takes you inside the minds of the OJ Simpson jurors in the way no other Simpson recap book does.

In that way, I found it very helpful reading.

This book amply supports three propositions:

1) The jurors did not understand the DNA evidence. Though they of course say otherwise, their treatment of the DNA related issues supports the conclusion that the jurors did not understand DNA, how its extracted, the testing performed on it or most importantly just how squarely it supported the conclusion that OJ Simpson's blood was at the crime scene and crime scene blood was at OJ Simpson's residence.

2) The jurors were heavily prejudiced against the police. Though jurors in all cases are instructed to treat police testimony like that of any other witness, the jurors in this case went one step farther, and actually treated the police testimony more harshly than they would that of any other witnesses. Without exception they treated police evidence with skepticism and incredulity whereas defense witnesses were essentially and routinely given a free pass.

3) The jurors had already made their minds up. As recounted in this book, the first vote by the panel was 10 to 2 for not guilty, an amazing finding given the strength of the evidence against Simpson. Whenever I see a deliberation like that in my practice I know it's usually because I was successful in voir dire at picking jurors who already agreed with me. If they start out strongly on your side, odds are they'll probably end up there.

Of course, investigator Mark Fuhrman's use of N word did little to help matters. In that way, I do think that evidence was probably more the icing on the cake than the underlying basis for this jury's finding.

All in all the book goes a long way towards understanding what has become one of the great travestys of American justice.

Hopefully by understanding our history, future prosecutors can better prevent it from repeating itself.