Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
66 of 67 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An ex-prosecutor shows his extreme disgust, September 10, 1997
If there is anybody out there who thinks that O.J. Simpson might possibly be innocent, reading this book will erase any doubt from his/her mind. Bugliosi puts on the boxing gloves and scores a knockout, stating exactly who is to blame and what they did wrong with brutal honesty. When
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
|
|
|
54 of 56 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Makes me sad, makes me mad, June 19, 2006
"Outrage" is not only the title of the book, but also the state of mind of author/lawyer Vincent Bugliosi due to what he believes to be the wrong verdict in the OJ Simpson trial.
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. Indicates flight of a guilty man.
B. OJ's suicide note/letter. Indicates guilt over murder. It's included in the book.
C. OJ's statement to police, in which he obviously lied about being cut. All of it is in the book.
2. The prosecution did not even refute much of the defense's argument or testimony. Here are some examples of that:
A. Defense argues Detective Vannater planted blood evidence at the scene. This was after many hours of media coverage with cameras rolling all over the scene, in daylight. Videotape shows he gave the vial of blood to Dennis Fung as soon as he got there. So, when did he spread the blood? And, since Vannater already knew there was blood all over the place, why risk getting caught by adding more?
B. Defense argues Vannater should have booked the vial of blood. However, all evidence is assigned a number, and as he was not the booking detective and therefore did not know the number to assign to it, he held on to it until he could give it to Fung for proper booking.
C. Defense contends Mark Fuhrman took one of two gloves from the Bundy crime scene and planted it at Simpson's Rockingham estate. However, everyone saw only one glove at Bundy before Fuhrman arrived. The first officer there, Riske, was not called to testify about that as his other testimony would point out some sloppy procedures by Vannater - the worst was not reading Furhman's notes about the bloody fingerprint on the rear gate which was never recovered.
D. Defense contends the DNA results were contaminated. Prosecution did not make the strong argument that any contamination or degradation would only make a match difficult, not turn it into OJ's blood.
Some bits of evidence the jury ignored (beyond even the DNA slam-dunk)
1. The glove argument...The former marketing exec of the glove company testified the murder gloves had shrunk about 15%, making them too small to fit OJ at the trial, much less having to pull them on over latex liners in the demonstration. Subsequently, OJ tried on a brand new pair of same-style gloves and the rep said those fit well.
2. House-guest Kato hears thumps on the wall of his room, just before the limo driver (who had been buzzing OJ's intercom for about 10 minutes) sees a black man in dark clothes approach and enter OJ's dark house. The thump Kato heard was someone running into the air-conditioner in the dark pathway behind his guest house. And where was the glove found by Mark Fuhrman? Right there at the air-conditioner. OJ tells limo driver he overslept and was getting a quick shower.
Bugliosi's writing style leaves much to be desired. He uses every cliche known to man. He also uses sentence fragments quite often. Lots of them.
There's much more, but I'm out of space, so here is part of OJ's statement to the police (Vannater) after returning from Chicago the morning after the murders:
Q: How did you get the injury on your hand?
OJ: I don't know. The first time, when I was in Chicago and all, but at the house I was just running around.
Q: How did you do it in Chicago?
OJ: I broke a glass. One of you guys had just called me, and I was in the bathroom, and I just went bonkers for a little bit.
Q: Is that how you cut it?
OJ: Mmm, it was cut before, but I think I just opened it again, I'm not sure.
Q: Do you recall bleeding at all in your truck, in the Bronco?
OJ: I recall bleeding at my house, and then I went to the Bronco. The last thing I did before I left, when I was rushing, was went and got my phone out of the Bronco.
[snip]
Q: So do you recall bleeding at all?
OJ: Yeah, I mean, I knew I was bleeding, but it was no big deal. I bleed all the time. I play golf and stuff, so there's always something, nicks and stuff, here and there.
(Reviewer - I did not know golf was a contact sport.)
Q: So did you do anything? When did you put the Band-Aid on it?
OJ: Actually, I asked the girl this morning for it.
Q: And she got it?
OJ: Yeah, 'cause last night with Kato, when I was leaving, he was saying something to me, and I was rushing to get my phone, and I put a little thing on it, and it stopped.
[big snip about past violence and failed attempt to reconcile with Nicole. Also fact that he gave subsequent girlfriend Paula the necklace and bracelet returned by Nicole, and told Paula he bought it for her. Incidentally, Paula broke up with OJ the morning of the murder...]
Q: We've got some blood on and in your car, we've got some blood at your house, and it's sort of a problem.
OJ: Well, take my blood test.
Q: Well, we'd like to do that. We've got, of course, the cut on your finger that you aren't real clear on. Do you recall having that cut on your finger the last time you were at Nicole's house?
OJ: A week ago?
Q: Yeah.
OJ: No. It was last night.
(Reviewer - so the blood found at the murder scene was not from a previous visit as defense contends.)
Q: Okay, so last night you cut it? Somewhere after the dance recital?
OJ: Somewhere when I was rushing to get out of my house.
Q: Okay, after the recital?
OJ: Yeah.
Q: What do you think happened? Do you have any idea?
OJ: I have no idea, man. You guys haven't told me anything. I have no idea. When you said to me that my daughter had said something to me today that somebody might have been involved, I have absolutely no idea what happened.
[big snip]
OJ: I know I'm the number one target, and now you tell me I've got blood all over the place.
Q: Well, there's blood in your house and in the driveway, and we've got a search warrant, and we're going to go get the blood. We found some in your house. Is that your blood that's there?
OJ: If it's dripped, it's what I dripped running around trying to leave.
Q: Last night?
OJ: Yeah, and I wasn't aware that it was...I was aware that I...you know I was trying to get out of the house, I didn't even pay any attention to it. I saw it when I was in the kitchen, and I grabbed a napkin or something, and that was it. I didn't think about it after that.
Q: That was last night after you got home from the recital, when you were rushing?
OJ: That was last night when I was...I don't know what I was, I was in the car getting my junk out of the car. I was in the house throwing hangers and stuff in my suitcase. I was doing my little crazy what I do, I mean, I do it everywhere. Anybody who has ever picked me up says that O.J.'s a whirlwind. He's running, he's grabbing things, and that's what I was doing.
|
|
|
51 of 54 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The definitive work on the Simpson trial/travesty, September 21, 2000
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.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by The Goldman Family
by Mark Fuhrman
by Vincent Bugliosi
by Vincent Bugliosi J.D.
by Vincent Bugliosi J.D.
See all Editorial Reviews
