Crs97
-
Posts
4.3k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by Crs97
-
-
One of the things I appreciated about this season is that we didn't actually see the murders happen. I am afraid that some of these ideas will require a reenactment of the actual murder. I don't want to see it.
Regarding Katrina, they better devote at least part of an episode to the reaction of Houston. National government might have failed, but the mayor and Houstonians really stepped up for their neighbors.
Umbelina, I cannot even imagine. So glad your sister survived that horror, and so sorry that you lost her to cancer.
-
2
-
-
B v S has surpassed $700 million despite the reviews:
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/yup-critics-nailed-batman-v-superman-passes-700m-203620321.html
-
Does anyone know how much OJ's defense cost? I would love to know if he outspent the state's $6 million for his trial.
-
We watched about an hour of her questioning Kato, and now I am amazed that she won any trials, much less 19 of 20. She treated him badly and got so focused on trying to have a gotcha moment for someone who seemed to be trying to answer truthfully. It was like watching someone kick a puppy. For instance, she made a huge deal about his saying OJ wasn't angry and then saying later he was upset. She acted like he was caught in a whopper of a lie when anyone could understand what he was trying to say. Kato even said, "There is a huge range to 'upset'" but she talked over him. I couldn't figure out why she was trying to hang him out to dry when his testimony was pretty neutral. Then she railed about his having an attorney and maybe wanting to write a book . . . what a hypocrite considering Darden and she wrote books. Of course Kato had an attorney. Anyone in that situation would have been stupid not to hire one. I really cannot stand when Hollywood plays the "you only need an attorney if you are guilty" card; I am furious that a real attorney was going down that same path.
I thought Kato moved out quickly and lived with another friend, which cemented his media reputation as permanent house-guest, sofa crasher.
-
7
-
-
Not to get off-topic, but T. Cullen Davis forced his 12 year old stepdaughter down into the basement and onto her knees before killing her. He then killed his estranged wife's boyfriend and shot his wife (she survived), then chased her outside and paralyzed another friend. He was only tried for the murder of the step daughter. All survivors identified him. The defense focused on his wife's behavior during their separation (they were both dating other people). He was acquitted.
This is one of the cases that my law partners would talk about with compliments to the lawyers who got him off, which is why I was so appalled at their outrage against OJ and his dream team.Edited to add: Cullen Davis was charged again with murder for soliciting someone to kill his estranged wife and their divorce attorney, among others. They had tapes of his transaction with an undercover cop. He was acquitted again. If you want to know where Johnny Cochran got his defense plan, read this article about Racehorse Haynes, the Houston lawyer who successfully defended Davis in both his murder trials: http://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/how-cullen-davis-beat-the-rap-2/
-
5
-
-
Then tell the reporters the question is off the table and the interview will end if it is asked. They complain that the jury got sidetracked by the show and forgot about the victims. Well now they can do something about it and choose not to. I am so over it. /end rant
-
3
-
-
If one more person asks either Chris or Marcia if they slept together, the entire country may hear my scream. I DON'T CARE! We complain that the trial focused on everything but the brutal murders of Ron and Nicole, yet we are doing the same thing.
Marcia and Chris, either answer the damn question or tell them to stop asking. Your coy smiles and comments are wearing thin IMO.
-
2
-
-
I have to admit that I did start to laugh when they said Peggy reprimanded him for writing KKK on a Martin Luther King poster. Frankly, I am giggling now. Unbelievable.
To the poster who couldn't remember Peggy's reaction to Furhman's name, she hesitated and looked distressed when she saw it. Ito was turned away from her and did not see her reaction, but he would have known there was a problem if he had been facing her.
-
8
-
-
Usually, Howard says, "don't go in there."
I think the "there" in that instance was the bathroom, meaning Howard just stunk up the place.
-
We took our boys, and we all loved it! They immediately asked if they could go back and also get it on DVD when it comes out. We spent a lot of time saying things like, "Remember when . . .!"
One of my favorite parts was watching how hard she had to work to get through the academy. "Perseverance" is our family motto, and that scene will be talked about in the future.
I remember getting settled into my first job and feeling just like she did, especially on days that weren't so great. I had family close by, but still the feeling as you come home alone to your new place that doesn't feel like yours yet. . .
I shipped Judy and Nick. The biggest laugh in our theatre was Mr Big's first lines. I have no idea what he said because everyone exploded with laughter.
So much great stuff in there!
-
1
-
-
I also wonder if someone could have tried to Jerry-rig a TV to get contraband channels, maybe arguing they just wanted to watch a sporting event and wouldn't hear the news. Probably safer to say no to all the TV's, but you have to give people stuff to do if you are going to deny them access to the outside world and to talking with each other.
-
1
-
-
One of my bosses refused to see Mrs. Doubtfire because he had friends hire a nanny who murdered their child. After her arrest the police discovered the nanny was actually a man. I have never been able to watch the movie after hearing that.
-
Thanks for your service, Gam2. It does seem like there should be a rule allowing someone who served on a capital murder case to opt out of future service.
-
4
-
-
I also found a 1995 article. From that reporter's perspective, Fung shook the prosecution's hands and then Cochran approached him with a hand outstretched. Fung was surprised, but shook it and then the rest of the defense lined up. The reporter said the bailiffs were taken by surprise, as they hadn't allowed OJ to shake hands with anyone else.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1995-04-19/news/9504190183_1_simpson-defense-team-defense-lawyers
-
4
-
-
I completely thought that one juror faked her "attack" because she had already tried to get off of the jury and Ito told her she had to stay. It seemed completely contrived. I did laugh at her comment about black people and Ross though because they had Johnnie in the background nodding his head like "She's right."
I think this has already been mentioned, but they actually conflated two instances because her breakdown happened the day after she was dismissed.
There was nothing wrong with Bailey pointing out that in the eyes of the law, the juror was not raped. He was correct. I am not sure why annoying Marcia had to be a witch about it.His remark was tone-deaf, but I thought he was commenting on Marcia's argument that the juror be removed because she lied on her juror questionnaire. His point, as I took it, was that she didn't technically lie because she wasn't the victim of a crime in the eyes of the law in 1988. Bailey strikes me as the guy who always has to think he is the smartest person in the room, and I took his remark as, "I know the history of California law better than you."
I rewound that micro-scene three or four times. Clark looking at Cochran for affirmation of the juror's statement regarding Target Vs. Ross...and Cochran giving the oh-so-subtle nod and eyebrow raise. It was a beautiful small moment in a show full of them.My favorite moment of the night, even considering DS's amazing job as RK (but I always thought DS was the strongest by far on Friends).
I can't believe after everything that happened, Marcia didn't continue getting rid of jurors and pushing for a mistrial. She knew the prosecution was tanking. Once again the dream team was two steps ahead of her.
Regarding the jury, I would have been angry, too, if the deputies spoke to me the way they showed on television. In the opening scene, was the deputy not going to let them eat because they were five minutes late to dinner?!? Did they really all have to agree on one television show? I cannot imagine one day of someone barking orders at me like I am a naughty five year old, much less eight plus months.
I also thought it didn't make sense that they didn't want jurors to talk about the trial, but they let them sit at small tables during meals. I would think discussions about the trial and alliances were happened under the deputies' noses if the show's depiction is accurate.
-
4
-
-
Bill Paxton and Helen Hunt had negative chemistry in Twister, probably because Helen Hunt rarely makes a character she portrays likeable.
-
6
-
-
An earlier post described the Catholic Church's condemned movie list as "ex cathedra," which is incorrect. "Ex cathedra" (commonly known as papal infallibility) only applies in very specific situations to matters of faith and has only been invoked twice, both regarding doctrine about Mary. A list of bad movies doesn't rank that high on the church's to do list!
I remember a family friend taking me to see "Ice Castles" and then apologizing to my devout Catholic mother for the language. I can't remember now, but if the prevalent epithet was "GD" in an otherwise family film, that might have been enough in the 70's to get the dreaded C rating.
-
All I can say is, "Gig 'Em, Aggies!" Sometimes it really is just survive and advance.
-
Bernadette said
they were talking about having children and got careless one evening at Sheldon's place (in his bed!). It sounds like they were both open to the possibility. Also sounds like she was not on the pill.
Edited because I am not sure if I have to add spoiler tags for an episode that has already been shown, but is after this one. Just being careful here.
-
2
-
-
Do many people think he really brought a knife on a plane? The idea is outrageous.
But wouldn't we have to believe that if we believe, like Fred Goldman does, that RK disposed of evidence for OJ?
-
In the 90's we still had to go through metal detectors and carry-ons went through one as well. I always forgot I had mace in my purse-can't tell you how many I tossed when I flew. If the knife were in the garment bag and it were carry-on, they would have found it either when he left California or left Chicago.
-
3
-
-
There are several explanations for the gloves:
1. The gloves would have fit, but OJ stopped taking his medicine, which caused his hands to swell, and he was holding his fingers in ways to make it impossible to put the gloves on.
2. They gave OJ latex gloves to put on first, and those gloves caused the gloves in question not to fit.
3. The gloves had been wet with blood and (I've heard) were frozen, and leather shrinks when wet.
Or what FozzyBear said.
-
1
-
-
I know security was looser then, but I would think airport security would have seen the knife in the scan. Was the garment bag a carry-on?
-
I have never read or heard of another case where there was SO MUCH evidence and evidence that pointed to one person alone.
Read Scott Turow's take on the case. He basically said when the prosecution takes that long to put on its case, it actually can backfire with the jury.
So, while I think Simpson did it, I don't think it's in any way acceptable that police break the rules in order to get bad guys. I think that's much more dangerous than a single person going free. because if the police are allowed to lie, and plant evidence -- even if they are just trying to help get the right guy, then they could just as easily start to plant evidence against the wrong guy. They could just as easily starting breaking rules based on their instincts, and in some cases (probably not this one) their instincts could be wrong.
You say this like it's a hypothetical when we know that time and time again police have done exactly this. The Innocence Project is one of many groups that have uncovered these exact situations, and it seems like the unjustly imprisoned are typically poor, black, and mentally challenged in some way. I wish there was as much outrage for them as against OJ.
Do I think the police take shortcuts at times? Of course. But it seems to me that in this particular case, where a celebrity was involved, they would be extra careful to dot their "I"s and cross their "t"s.
You would think, but we know they didn't. They didn't follow procedure for booking all the crime scene material, they lied under oath, they released the crime scene too quickly, they did a horrible job questioning OJ in the beginning.
This is one of those cases that turns my stomach because I think it brings out the worst in everyone. I feel blessed that I am religious; justice may have been denied in this lifetime, but that doesn't mean justice will never happen.
-
4
-
Crime After Crime: Future Season Wishlist
in American Crime Story
T. Cullen Davis trial - he murdered his 12-year old stepdaughter (forced her to the basement and onto her knees before killing her) and then waited for his estranged wife to come home. Shot her and killed her boyfriend. Chased her outside and paralyzed another friend. All survivors identified him. He was acquitted. Then was tried again with a tape on which you could hear him soliciting the murdee of his wife and divorce judge. Acquitted again. At the time he was the wealthiest man ever on trial for murder.
John Hill trial and subsequent murder-Book is called Blood and Money. He was a plastic surgeon in Houston whose wealthy wife died mysteriously. He was tried for murder based on withholding medical attention. Mistrial but father-in-law had him killed before the next trial. Father-in-law was never charged.