Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your email address or mobile phone number.
Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O. J. Simpson Got Away with Murder Paperback – February 17, 2008
|New from||Used from|
2016 Book Awards
Browse award-winning titles. See all 2016 winners
Frequently Bought Together
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
From Scientific American
"Brilliant...the best book yet on the Simpson trial."
"The brutally candid, irreverent and authoritative book for which trial watchers have been hungry for too long."
-- San Francisco Examiner
The #1 New York Times bestseller by the author of Helter Skelter and prosecutor of Charles Manson.
Top Customer Reviews
I read this book, I could feel the incredible anger
burning from Bugliosi's soul. He is FURIOUS over the fact that a double murderer was allowed to go free, and he does not hesitate to express his feelings on the matter.
Bugliosi does an excellent job explaining why the case was lost and he backs up his opinions with precise examples, basic logic, and good common sense. The only problem that I had with the book is the fact that Bugliosi does tend to get sidetracked (when he debates beleiving in god, for instance) and some of his examples that he uses to back up his opinions are a little too lenghty (we get the picture!). Still, the book is the best one that I have read on the Simpson trial and I highly recommend it
Bugliosi presents 5 aspects of the case which resulted in an unbelievable acquital. His 5 reasons OJ got off are:
1. "In The Air - What the Jurors Probably Knew" - Information they should not have gotten during sequestration (mainly pontification by untrained talking heads with the days' trial wrap up)...
2. "The Change of Venue - Garcetti Transfers the Case Downtown" - This changes the demographics of the jury to be heavily African-American, and not representative of OJ's Brentwood "rich white" lifestyle...
3. "A Judical Error - Judge Ito allows the Defense to Play the Race Card" - The defense contends racist Mark Fuhrman planted a glove (evidence clearly indicates he did not), because he lied about saying the "N" word within the last 10 years. Fuhrman was also the only cop to pursue OJ over spouse-abuse in the past a few years earlier, after 8 previous ignored complaints by Nicole. These events are non sequiturs, but it is the only way to mangle the truth to acquit OJ.
4. "The Trial - The Incredible Incompetence of the Prosecution" - Self explanatory, but it appears they were ill-prepared.
5. "Final Summation - The Weak Voice of the People" - Again, the prosecution could and should have been much better prepared to refute the defense's stupid allegations.
He presents a strong, if sometimes rambling, argument for all points. Here are only two of them:
1. Prosecution did not present certain major critical evidence at all:
A. The slow-speed chase with the disguise, passport, and $8,500 of OJ's cash in friend Al Cowling's pocket.Read more ›
In short, Bugliosi states what the defense should have not been allowed to do, what the judge and prosecution should have done, and how the jury should have responded. In other words, had he been prosecutor, he tells us how he would have done it differently and won.
We learn the results of O.J.'s lie detector results here. He scored a minus 22. This is about the lowest score a person can receive. He lied. We also learn how Bugliosi would have attacked the defense's assertion that the three (white) detectives conspired to convict O.J. Simpson with planted evidence.
Bugliosi's argument is that conspiracy to frame a person charged with a crime punishable by death is itself a crime punishable by death in California. The defense would have had us believe that two detectives on the verge of retirement would have entered into a conspiracy with a detective they didn't know (Mark Fuhrman), and plant or taint evidence against Simpson because they were racist. For their supposed racism, they would have risked their careers, pension, jail and death to get Simpson. Bugliosi makes a strong argument here that this would have been a stretch especially for three savvy detectives. The prosecution failed to challenge this wild assertion.
He makes Judge Ito out to be what he was, a man who bent over backwards to appease the media and the defense when the latter should have been held in contempt many times.
This is about the trial more than the story of O.J.Read more ›
Most Recent Customer Reviews
There are other OJ books that are better reads. The author comes across as somewhat arrogant - as if he alone had all the answers, and there is so much redundancy that I have... Read morePublished 6 days ago by Amazon Customer
Opened my mind about what really happened. GREAT BOOK! I always believed he was guilty from the start to the end. Read morePublished 9 days ago by Gary Egeland
While I was convinced of Simpsons guilt before reading this I found the book to be hard to put down & an easy read. Read morePublished 10 days ago by Karen
A friend told me that Bugliosi was something of a narcissist. That may have been true, but it he was, it may not have been undeserved self praise. I followed the O.J. Read morePublished 12 days ago by Frank LaRue
I bought this because I loved Helter Skelter. After reading Outrage, I'm convinced Bugliosi's co-writer on Helter Skelter was the primary reason for its remarkably high quality. Read morePublished 15 days ago by Casey
The book had good information. However, the jury appeared to have its mind made up from the start. How the prosecution could have surmounted reverse rascism,not sure anyone knows. Read morePublished 16 days ago by Sharon
Boring book. It's really hard to get past his opinions on every detail. I wouldn't have minded reading his opinion at the end of the book but not on every page. Read morePublished 19 days ago by sugarbear
This book is not worth the time or money. Bugliosi makes numerous incorrect assumptions and is contradicted by many others who were actually involved in the trial. Read morePublished 26 days ago by Lberry