Customer Reviews

Without a Doubt

5 star:		(38)
4 star:		(15)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(9)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

Any reasonable person who listened to the evidence at the so-called "trial of the century" knows without out a doubt that O. J. Simpson killed his ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, the hapless waiter who was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Anyone who watched the announcement of the verdict and saw the shock and disbelief on O. J. Simpson's own face, as the not guilty verdict was read, would know that even the defendant knew he was guilty.

The prosecution never had much of a chance, because the presiding judge, Lance Ito, was a bumbling idiot who could not control his courtroom and make sound evidentiary rulings. . Instead, Lance Ito allowed his courtroom to become a three-ring circus. As a career prosecutor, I was appalled at the time at what went on in that courtroom, and Lance Ito's courting of the media was reprehensible. It was also clear that he was awed by and enthralled with the celebrity of the defendant appearing before him. One need only look to the civil trial in the matter to see how an effective judge controlled his courtroom. There, Judge Hiroshi Fujisaki made sound rulings on evidentiary matters and remained in control of his courtroom at all times. Consequently, justice was obtained in the civil case.

This tell all, no holds barred book is a well-written, engaging behind-the-scenes account of the "trial of the century". While Ms. Clark does include some personal information about herself, it is in the context of why she became a prosecutor and makes for a more fully fleshed account of how and why she may have acted as she did under the circumstances. She admits to some mistakes, and probably one of the biggest was having been lulled into a false sense of complacency about the competence of the criminalist assigned to the case, rather than going with her gut instinct to get whom she thought would be the best person for the job. Consequently, she was saddled with criminalist Dennis Fung, who for his incompetence in such a high profile case should have been summarily fired thereafter.

As for the defense "Dream Team", having watched their antics on court TV during the course of the trial, it was clear that they were playing to the media for all it was worth, and the media was lapping it up. So much of what the defense did went beyond what was sanctioned by evidentiary rules and the rules of professional conduct that I was both amazed and appalled. That they got away with this kind of behavior was reprehensible. The only one able to call them on it, however, was Judge Lance Ito, and he failed to do so. The blame, therefore, for all the shenanigans that went on during the course of the trial lies squarely on Lance Ito's shoulders. He definitely gets the prize for one of the greatest failures in American jurisprudence.

Still, one cannot forget prosecutor Chris Darden's ill-advised decision in proceeding to have O.J. try on the bloodied, weathered gloves found at the scene and at his home, rather than waiting for an exact duplicate pair to be delivered by the manufacturer. In light of the fact that the manufacturer had advised the prosecution that the original gloves would have shrunk as much as fifteen percent due to repeated exposure to dampness and extremes of heat and cold, it was downright stupid for Chris Darden to proceed to have the defendant try them on. While Ms. Clark had counseled Chris Darden not to proceed with this demonstration, but rather, to wait for the new duplicate pair, he did so anyway with disastrous results. As the lead prosecutor in the case, however, the fault for this debacle lies squarely with her on this issue, rather than Mr. Darden, because when you are the lead prosecutor, the buck stops with you. Ms. Clark need look no further than herself for this major faux pas and for the ensuing creation of Johnnie Cochran's famous, catchy sound bite, "If the glove doesn't fit, then you must acquit". Never mind that the new, duplicate glove fit O. J. to perfection!

Notwithstanding the glove debacle, the forensic evidence against the defendant was overwhelming, despite the bungling of criminalist Dennis Fung. Unfortunately, the painstaking forensics case put together by the prosecution was lost under the smokescreen set off by the defense. The "Dream Team" played the race card to perfection to a sound bite crazed media that helped create a public frenzy, no doubt aided by the celebrity of the defendant. The defense team's cries of police mis-conduct and the Fuhrmanizing of the trial was a pulp journalist's dream come true. It was also a travesty of justice, as all the hoopla and media distortion masked what the trial was really about, the savage and wanton murders of two innocent human beings. Moreover, while much has been said about this being a crime of passion that the prosecution tried as dispassionately as possible, one must keep in mind that Judge Ito tied the prosecution's hands in large part, while giving the "Dream Team' an unprecedented free rein.

This book will keep courtroom junkies enthralled with its war stories and sneak peak into the "trial of the century". Ms. Clark gives an excellent analysis of what went wrong, and while some of it may be a bit self-serving, she is right on the money for the most part. This is a riveting, page turning account, and she doesn't hold back any punches. Ms. Clark painstakingly goes through the evidence that was presented at the trial, as well as that evidence that Judge Ito, in his infinite wisdom, did not allow the prosecution to present. Anyone who reads this book will be outraged by the obvious miscarriage of justice, as it will be clear as a bell why O. J. Simpson is, without a doubt, guilty of the murders of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman.

Marcia Clark was, of course, the lead prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson trial. In this book she gives us all of the trial details from the first time she heard about the killings until the day the jury brought in the "not guilty" verdict. It's an interesting book in that it gives you insight into how each trial element was handled and the behind-the-scenes planning that has to occur to try someone.

However, Ms. Clark never feels the need to attach any of the blame for losing the case to herself. Her biggest scapegoat is Judge Lance Ito. By all accounts he is a weak judge and let the defense get away with more than they should have been allowed to, however I find it hard to believe that there was nothing that she or the DA's office could have done about it. In the book it always seems that things are about to fall apart until she steps in at the last minute and fixes everything.

This is the third book I've read about the Simpson trial (and it will be the last). I found Ms. Clark's book much more informative about the trial than Christopher Darden's "In Contempt". The Darden book was much more of an autobiography and to be honest I wasn't all that interested in his personal life. Thankfully, Ms. Clark keeps her personal life story to a minimum. So, I'd recommend Ms. Clark's book if you want to get an inside look at the prosecution side of the trial. However, if you want a less biased look at the whole thing read Jeffrey Toobin's book, "The Run of His Life."

Any reasonable person who listened to the evidence at the so-called "trial of the century" knows without out a doubt that O. J. Simpson killed his ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, the hapless waiter who was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Anyone who watched the announcement of the verdict and saw the shock and disbelief on O. J. Simpson's own face, as the not guilty verdict was read, would know that even the defendant knew he was guilty.

The prosecution never had much of a chance, because the presiding judge, Lance Ito, was a bumbling idiot who could not control his courtroom and make sound evidentiary rulings. . Instead, Lance Ito allowed his courtroom to become a three-ring circus. As a career prosecutor, I was appalled at the time at what went on in that courtroom, and Lance Ito's courting of the media was reprehensible. It was also clear that he was awed by and enthralled with the celebrity of the defendant appearing before him. One need only look to the civil trial in the matter to see how an effective judge controlled his courtroom. There, Judge Hiroshi Fujisaki made sound rulings on evidentiary matters and remained in control of his courtroom at all times. Consequently, justice was obtained in the civil case.

This tell all, no holds barred book is a well-written, engaging behind-the-scenes account of the "trial of the century". While Ms. Clark does include some personal information about herself, it is in the context of why she became a prosecutor and makes for a more fully fleshed account of how and why she may have acted as she did under the circumstances. She admits to some mistakes, and probably one of the biggest was having been lulled into a false sense of complacency about the competence of the criminalist assigned to the case, rather than going with her gut instinct to get whom she thought would be the best person for the job. Consequently, she was saddled with criminalist Dennis Fung, who for his incompetence in such a high profile case should have been summarily fired thereafter.

As for the defense "Dream Team", having watched their antics on court TV during the course of the trial, it was clear that they were playing to the media for all it was worth, and the media was lapping it up. So much of what the defense did went beyond what was sanctioned by evidentiary rules and the rules of professional conduct that I was both amazed and appalled. That they got away with this kind of behavior was reprehensible. The only one able to call them on it, however, was Judge Lance Ito, and he failed to do so. The blame, therefore, for all the shenanigans that went on during the course of the trial lies squarely on Lance Ito's shoulders. He definitely gets the prize for one of the greatest failures in American jurisprudence.

Still, one cannot forget prosecutor Chris Darden's ill-advised decision in proceeding to have O.J. try on the bloodied, weathered gloves found at the scene and at his home, rather than waiting for an exact duplicate pair to be delivered by the manufacturer. In light of the fact that the manufacturer had advised the prosecution that the original gloves would have shrunk as much as fifteen percent due to repeated exposure to dampness and extremes of heat and cold, it was downright stupid for Chris Darden to proceed to have the defendant try them on. While Ms. Clark had counseled Chris Darden not to proceed with this demonstration, but rather, to wait for the new duplicate pair, he did so anyway with disastrous results. As the lead prosecutor in the case, however, the fault for this debacle lies squarely with her on this issue, rather than Mr. Darden, because when you are the lead prosecutor, the buck stops with you. Ms. Clark need look no further than herself for this major faux pas and for the ensuing creation of Johnnie Cochran's famous, catchy sound bite, "If the glove doesn't fit, then you must acquit". Never mind that the new, duplicate glove fit O. J. to perfection!

Notwithstanding the glove debacle, the forensic evidence against the defendant was overwhelming, despite the bungling of criminalist Dennis Fung. Unfortunately, the painstaking forensics case put together by the prosecution was lost under the smokescreen set off by the defense. The "Dream Team" played the race card to perfection to a sound bite crazed media that helped create a public frenzy, no doubt aided by the celebrity of the defendant. The defense team's cries of police mis-conduct and the Fuhrmanizing of the trial was a pulp journalist's dream come true. It was also a travesty of justice, as all the hoopla and media distortion masked what the trial was really about, the savage and wanton murders of two innocent human beings. Moreover, while much has been said about this being a crime of passion that the prosecution tried as dispassionately as possible, one must keep in mind that Judge Ito tied the prosecution's hands in large part, while giving the "Dream Team' an unprecedented free rein.

This book will keep courtroom junkies enthralled with its war stories and sneak peak into the "trial of the century". Ms. Clark gives an excellent analysis of what went wrong, and while some of it may be a bit self-serving, she is right on the money for the most part. This is a riveting, page turning account, and she doesn't hold back any punches. Ms. Clark painstakingly goes through the evidence that was presented at the trial, as well as that evidence that Judge Ito, in his infinite wisdom, did not allow the prosecution to present. Anyone who reads this book will be outraged by the obvious miscarriage of justice, as it will be clear as a bell why O. J. Simpson is, without a doubt, guilty of the murders of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman.

Before I read her book, my opinion of Marcia Clark was neutral, though I did think the prosecution could have done a better job with this case. After reading the book, I have no doubt about why they lost. This self-serving diatribe of Marcia's is deplorable. If you believe her, she single-handedly bore the entire burden of the case; the rest of the team only minor players! However, she will take NO responsibility for any of the prosecution's fumbles. She accuses every other player in the trial of possessing super egos, when it appears the biggest ego in the group is Marcia's. She'll have you believe that she shrunk from the media spotlight, while every one else was seeking and revelling in it. She convenietly waited until all of the other books were published, so that she could de-bunk anything that anyone had to say about her. It is painfully obvious that the case was lost because of her ineptitude for understanding basic human feelings. Doesn't a prosecutor have to understand people, what motivates them, what angers them. what gets them to cooperate? Seemingly she wasn't blessed with any of these skills. She is appalled and offended when her "bad" witnesses turn to "good" in the civil trail. Poor, poor Marcia! Perhaps a little introspection would have helped her. Through "Without a Doubt" the only thing Marcia Clark has proved is that she is obnoxious and disliked.

Because I disagreed with the verdict in the first Simpson trial and thought Marcia Clark was treated shabbily by all concerned, I looked forward to her book, expecting an insightful description of how her quest for justice was derailed by those who wanted to acquit a murderer by pandering to racism. I was disappointed. Clark comes across as one of the most petulant, whining, immature people imaginable. Most distrubing, and least professional, is her glee at reporting what she thinks are the foibles of the people she worked with on this case. (She even tells us when she didn't like the way they dressed.) No one would want to work with her after reading this, nor should they. The only errors at trial Clark admits to are minor tactical ones. Unintentionally, however, she illustrates what lost the case for the prosecution: failure to dismiss Chris Darden from the case when it became obvious he didn't have a grasp of the proceedings. Clark's own book makes clear that Darden made serious mistakes even before the glove debacle, any one of which Clark would have described with sarcasm if it had been done by anyone else. You wonder if Clark is even aware that her book proves the opposite of what she has intended.

Clark's book "Without a Doubt" is a rebuttal to her critics and pundits, most notably - if not mentioned outright - Jeffrey Toobin, author of "The Run of His Life," arguably the definitive book on trial. Like Toobin, Clark leaves no stone unturned to prove that O.J. Simpson was guilty of murdering his ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend, Ron Goldman.

Clark's "Without a Doubt," gives a detailed view of the case from the prosecutions' perspective and helps readers understand why many of the so-called errors (such as the composition of the jury and selection of witnesses who did and did not testify) actually had solid legal and strategic reasons behind them. Unlike Toobin, she devotes little time to witnesses, discounting many as lazy or liars, clearly separating them into "good" and "bad," discarding those who may have helped bolster their case.

Both agree OJ was guilty - his lawyers knew it and the evidence, overwhelming. Both agree the defense played the race card from the get go. Where they differ is in how - Toobin argues that the case was the prosecution's to lose, which they did, through their incompetence and sheer arrogance. Clark believes the case was doomed from the start by a dream jury unable (or unwilling) to understand the evidence.

Although Clarks book is rich in legal details and evidence for courtroom aficionados, Toobin gives a far more vivid account of the trial through vivid recounting of the murder trial and behind-the-scenes - almost gossipy - look at the lives and testimony of the main participants and witnesses.

Clark's disdain towards Judge Ito on all levels is very evident, always referring to him by his last name except when he does something nice (then she refers to him by first name, "Lance"). Every decision seems to be a compromise; in this regard, Toobin's account is somewhat more credible, as he explains that for the hundreds of legal decisions he had to make, the judge did make a mistake in a few.

In his book Toobin does not hide his disdain for the prosecution - to the point that you wonder if they even granted him an interview. Almost all references to Marcia Clark are exceedingly negative - with regards to her appearance, arrogance, tardiness, aggressiveness towards witnesses, stubbornness ("she was going with her gut"), at times desperate attitude, even her way of speaking, always "ranting," "sputtering" and "snarling." Clark does her best to show how professional and prepared she was during the whole proceedings - in a way she lays out a defense of Marcia Clark.

Christoper Darden, another prosecutor, fares no better as Toobin spares no chance in attacking and belittling him, comparing him time and time again to the older and wiser Johnnie Cochran Jr., defense lawyer for OJ Simpson. Darden is referred in Toobin's book to as amateurish, impetuous, splay-footed, skinny, shell-shocked, pouty, and at one point, emotionally and intellectually inferior to Cochran. Ouch. Clark on the other hand shows nothing but admiration although she accepts that Darden did make some mistakes, no doubt because of the stress everyone was under.

Toobin provides a wealth of information about the lives of all the defense lawyers, the good and the bad. Shapiro comes off as a likable, somewhat smarmy but breezy lawyer desperate to keep himself in the limelight and protect his reputation at all costs. Cochran is "pontifical" and clearly inspires awe, "eyes ablaze, full of blustering vitality," especially when at the end of the trial he surrounds himself with bodyguards.

In comparison, Clark criticizes the Defense mercilessly for their underhanded tactics, showing why many of their actions were wrong from a legal and moral standpoint.

Both agree Simpson was guilty. That the Defense did a lot of fancy footwork and some downright dirty tricks. But in the end, the reasons of why the jury acquitted are left for the reader to decide. Was it because they were clearly biased towards Simpson from the start, as Clark believes, or was it because they feared reprisals to their loved ones if they convicted O.J. in a heavily charged atmosphere of racial tension in L.A., as Toobin alleges?

It's worth reading both books. Somewhere in between the two accounts probably lies the truth of what really happened.

I seem to be one of the few reviewers who was left withambivalent feelings about this book. I found it interesting, but cancertainly sympathize with those people who found the "not my fault" theme irritating.

I just finished reading Without a Doubt, couldn't put it down. It is the first book about the Simpson trial that I have been able to read all the way through. It felt truthful and real, there was no exaggeration or grandstanding for effect. If anyone has been involved in the court system at all then they will really appreciate the intensity and importance of this book. Marsha is not self serving or whiny......I enjoyed her honesty about the case and about herself. If she had not written about herself, people would be accusing her of hiding things. I found the book very affirming, as I have been involved in the Victim advocacy system for 13 years and have just left the 'justice' system for work where I can offer my skills without having to be belittled and bashed by the attorneys appointed by the system for the criminals and the abusive parents. Thank you Marsha.

Yes, I followed the trial, and no, I'm not ashamed. It was a fascinating, history-in-the-making spectacle. At some point I knew I would buy a book from one of the players, but--believing that O.J. was guilty--I refused to put my money in the hands of anyone writing on the defense side. Marsha's book seemed like the right choice. I wasn't disappointed.

She brings us behind the scenes to see the inner workings of the legal process with graphic, sausage-making-like detail. We see how legal technicalities, a weak judge (Lance Ito), racially-biased jurors, media influence, and an outmatched prosecution team can lead to such a blatant miscarriage of justice as the acquittal of Mr. Simpson. There was so more to it than Mark Furhman, the LAPD, the "race card," or "jury nullification." One is lead to the conclusion that opening celebrity trials to the media is a huge mistake, and that because of rules of evidence and "prejudicial influence," the jury in this case knew fewer of the pertinent facts than the casual TV viewer.

Readable but not eloquent, the writing delivers a good sense of Marcia's character--like it or not--and a few juicy tidbits on the other players. Someday a more definitive and comprehensive historical summary of this case will be written by an independent professional writer. Until then, Maria's book is the way to go. --Christopher Bonn Jonnes, author of Wake Up Dead.

I pledged to never read one of the multitude of books on the OJcase, but I found this book for only ( )--couldn't pass it up.

What a great view of what the majority of Americans thought had happened during the "Trial of the Century." The most startling and disappointing aspect of the investigation and trial was the vulnerability to celebrity of many involved. The shameful way Judge Ito pandered was recorded each day, but to find that jurors and even investigating officers fell prey to celebrity was disgusting.

Marcia Clark does not paint herself as a "victim." Nor does she come off as the loveable heroine. She is quite honest about her mistakes, both personal and professional. And it was the case of her career which ultimately ended her prosecuting professession. She knew she would never again get a "high-profile" case and feared that future cases would become high-profile. A selfless gesture?