Epeolatrix

While there are women who think this, is there anything from an actual juror who believed this? I see it everywhere as a common assumption, but not from anyone with an informed view (a juror, a reporter who interviewed a juror, etc).

Dressing the house to serve the defense is the same thing as dressing the defendant favorably, like the Menendez brothers in their sweaters or putting nerd glasses on random college rapist. It's weaselly, but allowed as long as it doesn't change the material substance of a crime scene. There's a passage in Lawrence Schiller's book about the house being redecorated, and his insider dirt is supposed to have come from Robert Kardashian (says Dunne). Dunne by his own admission was gossipy and giddy about being the center of attention; it just happened to be a double homicide that put him there. When you read his Vanity Fair articles, it's constant name-dropping, bragging about where he went to dinner, and knowing who did what with whom before it hit the papers. That scene didn't strike me as wrong other than he wouldn't have shut up when a server came by. Servers give him some of his best gossip and he prized those relationships for their usefulness.

According to some of the jurors (whose book I read), the question wasn't "did he do it", the question was "did the state prove it". At least a couple of them did think he was guilty, but that was a moral determination. They felt they had to apply the law as it was explained to them, based on allowable known evidence (we knew things they didn't), and to them it meant reasonable doubt. I'm not sure all their doubts were what I'd think of as reasonable, but it wasn't this simplistic racist/classist/ageist anti-Nicole anti-LAPD vote.

According to the Daily Mail (yes, I know, not the best source for anything), it took four months.

The juror book I remember best is "Madam Foreman" by Armanda Cooley, Carrie Bess, and Marsha Rubin-Jackson. The San Francisco Gate newspaper has an excellent review of the book, saying "these three jurors from the O.J. Simpson trial offer a point-by-point analysis of evidence that should at last settle the question flummoxing observers from both sides: What in heaven's name were those jurors thinking?" Readers might still disagree with the jurors' thought processes, but it's an interesting book nonetheless. If you don't want to spring for the book, the SFGate article is a decent CliffsNotes version.

Amazon.com has a great Listmania for books about the case, with helpful notes as to the usefulness of each book. For "The People versus O. J. Simpson", my favorites are The Run of His Life : The People versus O. J. Simpson by Jeffrey Toobin and American Tragedy: The Uncensored Story of the Simpson Defense by Lawrence Schiller and James Willwerth. They seemed like the most informative and objective, although Toobin's book is full of snarky observations.

This topic is for discussion of books relevant to each season of American Crime Story.

Jeffrey Toobin for the series itself, since his is the book that was optioned, plus he serves as creative consultant for the series.

OJ won't receive money from this drama.

Anatomical summary from the autopsy report I. Incised wound of neck: A. Transection of left and right common carotid arteries. B. Incisions, left and right internal jugular veins C. Transection of thyrohyoid membrane, epiglottis, and hypopharynx. D. Incision into cervical spine, C3. II. Multiple stab wound of neck and scalp (total of seven). III. Multiple injuries of hands, including incised wound, ring finger of right hand (defense wound). IV. Scalp bruise, right parietal.

Kim Goldman has three books about herself and the case, not counting her author credit on O.J.'s "If I Did It"

Please not the Black Dahlia. Given what he did with her in "American Horror Story", it'd just be... worse than the OJ show.

He wasn't saintly or anything, but he was out of his spiritual and ethical depth in his zeal to support his friend. From all the accounts I've read, which came out around the time of the trial, he was genuinely religious and did struggle with his conscience about the case. I think the primary connection to the fame of his family is that the kids learned at an early age that being famous for virtually nothing was not only possible, it was awesome. Daddy now got them great seats in restaurants, Daddy was on tv all the time, and all Daddy seemed to have done was be friends with "Uncle OJ".

OJ's mom was in the hospital and from there she called the house line (as opposed to anyone's cell phone), so if OJ wanted to talk to her, he had to come inside to use that phone.

Likely reason AC was not charged for his role in the Bronco chase: "For one thing, a prosecution could stymie their efforts to gain access to Mr. Cowlings -- who can legally refuse to testify in any trial as long as he is a potential criminal defendant. A Cowlings prosecution also would take time and energy from prosecutors already racing to meet a speedy trial deadline in the Simpson case, and could give Mr. Simpson's defense lawyers access to discovery material and testimony that they might not otherwise be able to get in preparation for the Simpson trial, legal experts said." -http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1994-07-15/news/1994196155_1_cowlings-simpson-district-attorney

From what I've read, blood wasn't collected properly at the site, it was mishandled after collection, and there was a reasonable chance of cross-contamination. To get the blood of all three people onto a test swab could have been as simple as a tech not changing gloves or a damp sample being placed next to another sample. [NB: I think he did it AND I think the State screwed up its own case. The Defense did what it was supposed to do: protect their client from the State. ]

Jeffrey Toobin's book is really good, and I've just started Lawrence Schiller's. I'm at the point where Dr. Henry Lee is looking at multiple police photos of the same evidence but the pieces of evidence are in different locations in each photo. Which now makes me want to re-read all of Dr Lee's chapters on the case (he talks about it in a few of his books).

How dare Americans request that their pre-eminent industry award for cinema evolve with the rest of the country? It certainly would be sad if awards are devalued by being given to "diverse" people, since obviously it would be done only out of political pressure. No one can possibly be taking this moment as encouragement to expand their horizons beyond that to which they usually gravitate, on the off-chance that they are missing award-worthy performances. Nope, well-meaning so-called majority persons will hand out awards to minorities the same way trophies are handed out to school children, not based on merit but on participation. This is the thing that would make the awards meaningless, rather than the fact that they only reflect the tastes of a small percentage of people drawn from those who've already been nominated or won under a system that historically has shunned participation from "diverse" groups for decades.

It's not ripping anyone off to re-imagine a classic story for modern viewers, and tragedy often inspires artists to make art calling for an end to the enabling forces of that tragedy.

My fandom got as far as wanting to make a Hotel-themed playlist with music from the show (and anything else that should have been included), but... I got lazy. I'm not dedicated at all.

To make it easy, the single is "Love Crime (Amuse-Bouche Version)" by Siouxsie and the album track is "Love Crime from the Wrath of the Lamb (feat. Siouxsie Sioux)" by Brian Reitzell.

The film and TV show are unrelated.

Dracula could go out in the sunlight, he was just less powerful.

Schwimmer was pretty good in Band of Brothers, but that's the only thing I've ever seen him in.

Although not penned entirely by a victim, a couple of books featuring survivors of serial or mass murder are Delivered from Evil: True Stories of Ordinary People Who Faced Monstrous Mass Killers and Survived by Ron Franscell and There But For the Grace of God: Survivors of the 20th Century’s Infamous Serial Killers by Fred Rosen. Each chapter of each book is devoted to a short case summary and an interview with a surviving victim and they are pretty interesting. Delivered from Evil is the better book, but if you can ignore the occasionally dickish observations of Fred Rosen, his book is okay, too.