The BS Alert: Discuss "Liberties" The Show Takes

[Kromm]

Things nobody could know for sure that are shown on screen, or even things that are clearly slanted for dramatic effect.  Discuss them here!

 

This will cross over a lot with the topic to discuss the case, but I don't see it as identical, since that should be focused on the specific question of OJ's innocence or guilt, and the events of the trial, where this could be about anything shown onscreen here.  

 

An example of the first (something nobody could know) is them showing OJ's reaction at the other end of the notification call. It's clearly bullshit of the highest order--since there were no witnesses, but isn't really indicative of his innocence or guilt, or anything happening in the trial.  There are likely dozens more things like this each episode.

 

An example of the second (things slanted for dramatic effect) might be the bit with Marcia Clark seemingly having no idea who OJ Simpson is. I suppose someone might chime in with some article or interview where she said such a thing, or perhaps it was in her book, but just on the face of it this seems bullshitty.

Edited February 4, 2016 by Kromm

[Kromm]

Ah here's one I just noticed. While I think most of us accept that OJ is guilty as hell, there's a scene where OJ is shown looking down at the bandage on his finger. I assume there really was a backyard video of him and the cops as they simulated in that scene, but there's no way it could have shown for sure the kind of look specifically at his cut finger/bandage that the scene showed (that part shown from OJ's own perspective). 

[Umbelina]

What the hell, I'll add one.  I think it was just done for time, but still.

 

Kato was outside investigating the bumps on his bedroom wall that knocked a picture 6 inches sideways and tilted it.  Kato was outside before and after OJ showed up the entire time.  He let the Limo driver in (who had been buzzing OJ for quite a while with no answer) and was talking to him, asking him it there was an earthquake.  More detail:

He was scared all night, uneasy from the weird drive with OJ to McDonalds, and OJ actually knocking on his door to borrow $5 (for the skycap he said he only had $100's.)  OJ had NEVER knocked on his door before, they were in no way pals.

 

So, Kato is the one who let the Limo guy in, also VERY unusual, since (if OJ were home waiting as he said) the Limo buzz could be answered/opened from his room.  In addition, Kato told OJ about the bumps, was scared, and OJ said "he'd take one side (of the small, dark walkway behind the house) and for Kato to take the other, coincidentally the non-glove side for Kato.  At that point, OJ went back in the house through the front door to get a flashlight.  I think that's when the blood drops happened, BTW.  Kato AND the driver witnessed OJ (as a blur) going into the house, and the only golf clubs outside were in the travel bag and Kato put those in the Limo.  Kato did not return to his room until after the Limo left, and saw a small bag by the Bentley that he went to load into the Limo.  OJ outran him "blew right by me" and loaded it himself.

 

OJ then called from the airport telling Kato how to arm the security code (again, Kato didn't have the code before, and was never asked to do that.)  During that call he never asked about the bumps, even though his daughter would be home later.

 

Also, when the cops first talked to Kato, the first thing he said was "Did OJ's plane crash?  Was their an earthquake and bumps followed that.

 

Also, AC and Arnell picked up the kids at the police station and took them down to Dana Point, to Nicole's family.  Sydney called her mother from there.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Umbelina

[Umbelina]

Rolling Stone Fact Checks episode one.

http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/recaps/the-people-v-o-j-simpson-episode-1-our-fact-checking-recap-20160202

 

excerpt.  (I didn't know this.)

Cochran was already part of the case before he joined the team
If you were to just watch the show, it would seem that the legendary trial lawyer was just waiting around for the Juice's call. He pontificates on air, and offers the victims' families his apologies, but otherwise has little contact. According to Toobin's research, though, Cochran and OJ had been in touch since the beginning of the ordeal. "Though television viewers never knew it," the author writes, "he was a friend of O.J. Simpson's — not, in normal circumstances, an intimate confidant, but certainly a long-term acquaintance. Since the day of the murders, Simpson had been on the phone with Cochran talking about his plight and asking the attorney to join in his defense efforts." ACS has kept them separate, however, at least for now, with Cochran participating in the coverage of the case without ever letting on that he might be offering the star advice. (1/5 Gloves)

 

 

Vanity Fair does too, but I put that link in the media thread, then found this one, and remembered this thread.  ?

Edited February 5, 2016 by Umbelina

[Kromm]

Cochran was already part of the case before he joined the team

I'm going to keep an eye on those fact checking stories. I mean it fascinates me thinking about why this might be hidden from us. In Ryan Murphy's case it could be as simple as sloppy research. But it could also be Mr. Murphy's Agenda showing. You can tell he wants to have his cake and eat it too by showing OJ as guilty, but also certain people in his camp as heroic--not so much Shapiro, but definitely Kardashian, and I think the little we've seen of Cochrane makes me think Murphy wants to go that way with him too.  Why?  I think because they definitely want to avoid portraying Cochrane as an opportunist and instead want him to come off as a hero of, and a voice for, his people. So I'm sure we'll get to see him "persuaded" to join The Dream Team, with his motivation being less about being an ongoing advisor and more about him seeing it as a Social Justice thing. A believable enough thing to assert in the immediate wake of Rodney King, even if the actual truth is that the Rodney King incident drew as many opportunists to get on Soapboxes as it did people there and talking about it less for themselves. That said, again Murphy likes having it both ways, because while I think he wants Cochrane to come off as having the right motivations, at the same time he DOES remind us he's hand-holding a weirdo like Michael Jackson through HIS issues too.

As for why it didn't come out at the time? Who knows. I suppose it's possible that Cochrane was forward looking enough/clever enough to realize that it might play better to the public if it came off like he was convinced to join the team rather than having silently been part of it all along. You know... because he talked to OJ and OJ was so convincing to him that he just HAD to get on board.

[AndySmith]

Given the whole UVa Rape Debacle, I'm not sure Rolling Stone is the best venue for fact checking. I mean, what they say could be true, but not the best source for me.

[BoogieBurns]

What are the "bumps" everyone keeps saying Kato was investigating? 

[MyPeopleAreNordic]

What are the "bumps" everyone keeps saying Kato was investigating? 

I've been wondering this too. Does anyone actually know what those bumps really were?

[MrsMoltisanti]

The bumps were OJ landing on the air conditioning unit on the guest house wall?

If memory serves me correctly OJ might have scaled the wall/enclosure by the guest house and when he landed Kato heard him

Edited February 5, 2016 by MrsMoltisanti

[Rosiejuliemom]

The bumps were OJ landing on the air conditioning unit on the guest house wall?

If memory serves me correctly OJ might have scaled the wall/enclosure by the guest house and when he landed Kato heard him

 

Didn't OJ claim that the bumps Kato heard was OJ hitting golf balls against the wall? I seem to recall something about golf balls and noises. Maybe that will be explored in a future episode? I hope so, anyway.

[Umbelina]

There is no way hitting a golf ball into a wall would cause a picture to move 5-7 inches, or to think you were having an earthquake.  Also, OJ would have had to been golfing in his next door neighbor's yard to hit that wall.  There is only about 5 feet of OJ's property behind that wall.

 

This is just part of his testimony (civil trial) about it.  There is much more, the easiest way to find it is to word-search thump or picture.  Testimony is here:  http://simpson.walraven.org/index.html page down to near the bottom.

 

He was so frightened during that long phone call with his friend Rachel that she kept insisting he just come over and stay with her, to just get out of that house.  Rachel was on the phone with him before and after the rapid series of thumps.
 

 

Q: So you're on this pretty long phone call with Rachel.

A: Correct

Q: And then did anything happen?

A: Yeah. Somewhere in the phone call, I was up against my bed, my back to it--

Q: Your back against the wall?

A: Towards the wall of my--of the bed, talking to her--

Q: Right.

A: --and that there was a noise, and the noise was a noise that moved the picture, and I said, "Did we have an earthquake?" And the noise was as if a body hit the back of a wall, and the picture moved, and it was like a thickness--a thick noise that moved it, and it was --I don't know if I can stand up or not. but--

MR. PLOTKIN: Stand up.

MR. PETROCELLI: Can the video follow Mr. Kaelin?

Q: Go ahead. Keep your voice up.

A: So I thought it was something like a (Sound), like in that order, a (Sound), and it moved the picture on my wall. And the picture on the wall--I said to Rachel immediately, "Did we just have an earthquake?" And she goes, "No." I said, "This noise I just heard, my picture moved next to the bed." I said. "It's so weird that this thing"--you know, I was trying to convince myself earthquake, but I started thinking there was something back there or someone back there, and that was--because it moved the picture, and then I got scared.

MR. PETROCELLI: Rod, did you get that? Did you get the sound?

THE VIDEOGRAPHER: (Nods head.)

MR. PETROCELLI: Okay.

Q: When you demonstrated the noise against the wall, you had to keep your microphone on the table and it didn't reach, so I just was curious if the sound got picked up.

A: Now, this sound, this noise that you heard as though a body was falling against the outside of the wall, did this frighten you?

A: Yes.

MR. PHILLIP BAKER: Mischaracterizes.

BY MR. PETROCELLI:

Q: Was it kind of a violent shaking?

A: It was in a shaky--the picture moved, so it was a noise that it definitely got my attention, and I felt there was something back--someone back there. It was powerful enough to move the picture. That's what caused me to say about the earthquake. In my head I think I was realizing it wasn't an earthquake, but the belief that Rachel might say, "Yeah, we just had," kind of thing, but she didn't and...

Q: You intellectually concluded it was not an earthquake at that point. Right?

A: Yes.

Q: Amond--And you also saw that there was nothing else in the room on the other side of that wall that moved. Right?

A: Correct.

Q: And the ground wasn't moving underneath you. Right?

A: No. My back was against that. That's where I felt the vibrating, so I didn't--that's what caused it more me asking the question about the earthquake to her.

Q: I see. But after you quickly ruled out earthquake, you then believed there was someone on the other side of that wall. Is that right?

A: Yes.

Q: And you decided that for your own safety, you'd better go check?

A: Yes.

 

There are other diagrams on this site:

http://www.davewagner.com/OJ/oj/rocklay.htm

 

Note the very bottom of the second picture, the Salinger's property line is right next to Kato's room/back wall.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Umbelina

[laurakaye]

Thank you, Umbelina.  I just asked the question about the "bumps" in another thread.  Is it proper to ask here - were the sounds Kato heard the sounds of OJ scaling the wall?  Before or after the murders?  Where was he coming from?

[rho]

Thank you, Umbelina.  I just asked the question about the "bumps" in another thread.  Is it proper to ask here - were the sounds Kato heard the sounds of OJ scaling the wall?  Before or after the murders?  Where was he coming from?

 

I'm taking the "bump"discussion to the Case thread because it's kind of spoilery but I will add that I was annoyed they didn't get into it in this episode. I feel like there was a lot missing when it came to what happens before LAPD arrived at the crime scene. Hopefully we'll get some more details through the testimony, preferably through flashback.

[Umbelina]

Dale St. John, limousine driver

St. John testified that he has picked Simpson up over 100 times in more than three years. He said Simpson had always been at home when he arrived. He said he usually pulled up to Ashford and backed in the gate. He said he would then buzz the intercom and that someone would always answer. But he added that normally the housekeeper would answer the phone. Dale testified that he never saw Simpson's dog, Chachi, leave the property.

 

EDITED because I thought this was the same limo driver that was there the night of the murders.  It wasn't.  My bad.  Sleepiness is no excuse.  Ooops.

 

http://simpson.walraven.org/p_wits.html

This site has complete transcripts as well, but these do a quick sum up of  what each witness said, and the date they said it, so you can quickly find complete testimony if you wish.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Umbelina

[VanillaBeanne]

Umbelina, that's a different limo driver. The driver the night of the murder was Allan Park, if you scroll up in your link, you'll see his name. Thanks for the link.

[Umbelina]

Thanks!  That's what I get for staying up late reading.  I'll edit.

[crgirl412]

I only had 3 hours of sleep last night as I was up reading excerpts from Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O. J. Simpson Got Away with Murder by Vincent Bugliosi. 

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0393330834/ref=nav_timeline_asin?ie=UTF8&psc=1

[Kromm]

Judgment call on if this qualifies for the topic, since it's logical speculation and not 100% proven fact, but I think this show really glossed over why a totally unqualified schmuck like Robert Kardashian was added to the legal team.

 

Fred Goldman believes it's because Kardashian was a co-conspirator after the fact. Kardashian allegedly walked out of Nicole's house that day with a suitcase nobody ever saw again. If you think logically about what might have been in such a suitcase, "missing murder weapon" is the likely suspect.

 

So then here comes smart as hell Robert Shapiro. Smart enough that even if Kardashian didn't outright tell Shapiro he did this (but think about it--he might have), Shapiro might still suspect it. So what does he do?  He adds Kardashian to the legal team. Ensuring that Kardashian can assert attorney-client privilege and there'd have to be a hell of an effort to make him testify in the case (it likely still would have been possible if Judge Ito had ordered it, but Ito was a schmuck and certainly not likely to do something as drastic as remove someone's council on the mere slight possibility he might have relevant information to the case). 
 

And how was this covered by the show? With a somewhat confusing scene where out of the blue Shapiro says "maybe you should get your license back and join the team", with no seeming motive shown (maybe with a vague implication it was to have someone around who could control OJ's temper--but it's not said outright--and really both explanations could be true at the same time).

Edited February 9, 2016 by Kromm

[BBDi]

I always believed that Kardashian might have aided and abetted OJ in some way, even if unintentionally.

Even at the time I thought it was a dick move to suddenly say he was on the legal team in order to invoke attorney-client privilege. I wasn't aware at the time that RK wasn't a practicing attorney. I thought this was pretty obvious.

Edited February 9, 2016 by BBDi

[Kromm]

I always believed that Kardashian might have aided and abetted OJ in some way, even if unintentionally.

Even at the time I thought it was a dick move to suddenly say he was on the legal team in order to invoke attorney-client privilege. I wasn't aware at the time that RK wasn't a practicing attorney. I thought this was pretty obvious.

Although legally I think it may carry the same weight/sentence, I don't think for a second that Kardashian actively aided OJ in the murder. The notion that Goldman seems to have is that Kardashian was an accessory AFTER the fact, not before--that he carried away and disposed of evidence (in other words, probably the murder weapon).

I mean it makes a hell of a lot of sense if you think about it. And clearly Shapiro either knew or suspected something was up with Kardashian (and unlike what we saw onscreen in this show probably knew damn well OJ did it), because any other explanation of Kardashian being added to the legal team is fetid steaming bullshit. I suppose he wound up taking the role of OJ-Whisperer, and kept OJ calm, but really any decent associate who kissed up to OJ enough over a few weeks could have grown into that role. Some lapsed attorney with no criminal law experience was a ludicrous person to have on the team, other than for the reason to make sure he wouldn't be asked to testify (not that being an attorney 100% barred that, but it would have taken a far ballsier DA, and a far ballsier Judge to make that happen).

[Mittengirl]

What would it have taken?

[OSM Mom]

I heard several times that Kardashian got rid of the knife for OJ. I don't know whether or not it was true.

[Umbelina]

No one knows, but yeah, AC and Kardashian were the main people, aside from OJ, suspected of getting rid of evidence.

[helenamonster]

Question, though: is there anything beyond (potentially well-founded) speculation that would lead people to believe that Kardashian was an accessory after the fact? I'm not discounting the claim and it actually sounds plausible, but I'm wondering if the reason the show is avoiding it is because it is factually unfounded. I mean, we see how much they're pandering to the Kardashians as is. Could you imagine the shit storm that family would stir up if the show implied that their father got rid of the weapon?

[bannana]

I guess I never really believed that OJ was suicidal during the slow speed chase, but Show def has him having an emotional breakdown, and seemingly feel guilt and fear and loss.  So not sure if this is based on AC's account of the events?  Or was this just concocted?  I always assumed it was a stunt and that the suicide note a fake out.  The way Show portrays it is very different, but may be what actually happened.

 

Re Kardashian, just going on memory and at the time I had no idea who Kardashian was other than his friend and lawyer, I recall it being quite commonly understood that he  had something to do with taking a suitcase that people assumed had evidence that would implicate OJ.

[Umbelina]

http://simpson.walraven.org/oj-lange.html

 

The real length of the phone call between Simpson and the officer during the Bronco ride, complete transcript. 

 

I think he was too narcissistic to really kill himself, but I also think he may have considered it, not out of guilt about slaughtering Nicole and Ron, but because his good guy image was blown.  There are places in that transcript, for example, where he seems manipulative to me, in a planning for the future way.  Also, I always felt that asking for the OJ was weird, a product he used to promote for money. 

 

Vanity Fair weekly Fact Check show vs real life.

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/02/people-v-oj-simpson-episode-2-recap

Edited February 10, 2016 by Umbelina

[Kromm]

we see how much they're pandering to the Kardashians as is.

What? You don't believe the K-kids were cute little moppets that chanted their name in sync to the TV when they saw their Dad, and that Robert didn't cry and scream his head off out of total sadness? That all TOTALLY HAPPENED. right? Edited February 10, 2016 by Kromm

[Kromm]

http://simpson.walraven.org/oj-lange.html

 

The real length of the phone call between Simpson and the officer during the Bronco ride, complete transcript. 

 

I think he was too narcissistic to really kill himself, but I also think he may have considered it, not out of guilt about slaughtering Nicole and Ron, but because his good guy image was blown.  There are places in that transcript, for example, where he seems manipulative to me, in a planning for the future way.  Also, I always felt that asking for the OJ was weird, a product he used to promote for money. 

 

Vanity Fair weekly Fact Check show vs real life.

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/02/people-v-oj-simpson-episode-2-recap

Anything this show claims happens in that Bronco is suspect. I mean they're showing entire conversations with AC nobody can substantiate. Or even the phone convo with Kardashian (we only have their word about what was said). Edited February 10, 2016 by Kromm

[biakbiak]

So did Chris Darden drive up to to Northern California, where he is from, on the day of the Bronco chase aND I missed them mentioning it because no one in Southern California is going to describe OJ as "local" because he went to Galileo High which is in San Francisco.

[JakeyJokes]

Yes, they mentioned that Darden was heading out of town to see his folks.

[laurakaye]

It might be stupid to put this here, but I wish Marcia Clark's hair was being represented fairly.  Her frizzy perm was so badly maligned by people just looking for any excuse to dislike her.  Poulson's perm is way too perky.  Marcia's hair was fried.  I also seem to remember Clark getting dragged over the coals when she finally did change her hairstyle into something much more attractive.  It's a minor detail, but there were strong opinions about her based on her looks.

Edited February 10, 2016 by laurakaye

[SunnyBeBe]

I.m really enjoying this series. I think the characters are great and mostly, it's well done, however, I feel that the actor who portrays O.J. is so dissimilar to him in appearance, that I find it distracting.  Normally, that kind of thing doesn't bother me in biographical productions, but it does here.  When he appears on screen the spell is broken.  I really wish some other actor could have been cast,  

[bannana]

It might be stupid to put this here, but I wish Marcia Clark's hair was being represented fairly.  Her frizzy perm was so badly maligned by people just looking for any excuse to dislike her.  Poulson's perm is way too perky.  Marcia's hair was fried.  I also seem to remember Clark getting dragged over the coals when she finally did change her hairstyle into something much more attractive.  It's a minor detail, but there were strong opinions about her based on her looks.

This is so true.  Her hair was awful, and she definitely got criticized for it, and then when she fixed it, she got criticized for that too!  I was thinking when watching this that Clark is probably thinking, gee, I wish my hair looked that good back then.

[laurakaye]

This is so true.  Her hair was awful, and she definitely got criticized for it, and then when she fixed it, she got criticized for that too!  I was thinking when watching this that Clark is probably thinking, gee, I wish my hair looked that good back then.

I just read a short piece in EW where Marcia does indeed mention the hair, and that she wishes her hair looked as good as Paulson's.  She goes on to say that she was a busy, frazzled mom of two young boys and just wanted something wash and wear.  As a girl of the 80's, I sympathize with her.  I never had a perm turn out as good as Paulson's, either.

[helenamonster]

Kind of pointless speculation, but something I was wondering: if Robert Kardashian's spawn had never become as famous as they are, do you guys think the show would be trying to paint him as the good guy/conscience that he apparently was not?

[Kromm]

Here are links to videos from the REAL press conferences held that day.

 

http://www.bustle.com/articles/140428-watch-robert-kardashians-oj-simpson-press-conference-a-pivotal-moment-in-the-case-our-culture

 

Some is word for word as we saw, but there are other parts where Ryan Murphy & Co. clearly just made shit up.  On something that's a matter of public record.

 

In some cases (because there's some minor editing to those clips) I suppose some stuff might have been said not being shown, but for example, the whole sequence with Kardashian being introduced and all the reporters acting confused about who he was and asking for spellings is total Murphy-bullshit, because the EARLIER part of the conference already has Shapiro introducing and using Kardashian's name. A spelling clarification could have been asked for later, but certainly not the repeated "who are you?" questions we saw on the show. Also, while Shapiro DOES use the word "I" a lot (as Fictional Johnny Cochrane supposedly railed on him for), the whole part where he talks about his part history with the Menendezes and otherwise pumps up his own brand aren't there. They could be in an area not shown on that clip, but they certainly aren't in the sequence the show showed at the very least.

 

Robert K's reading of OJ's letter seems fairly accurate, except for the dramatic part on the show where there's a part where OJ talks about feeling like a victim himself (or was it "abused"? I've already forgotten), which leads to Fictional Marsha Clark's outrage.

[Epeolatrix]

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".

[Kromm]

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".

And then they got Kim a job working for Paris Hilton. Kim (and the other girls) saw how Paris was famous for nothing (other than her money I guess) and that was another model for them. There are some funny clips and photos out there, by the way, of Paris ordering Kim around and having her do menial tasks.

[BW Manilowe]

There are numerous entertainment media Tweets on my Twitter today stating the obvious--the scene with the Kardashian kids after Robert's last name was mispronounced by the reporter NEVER happened. It was just a way to interject the kids into the story again by pointing out yes, there actually is/was a connection between "OJ's Kardashian" & the current media/famewhores Kim, Khloé & Kourtney Kardashian, their media/famewhore mother Kris Jenner, & their media/famewhore half-sisters Kendall (who I think Kris was pregnant with during the OJ criminal trial, & who was given the middle name "Nicole", for Nicole Brown Simpson, at birth) & Kylie Jenner.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Here are links to videos from the REAL press conferences held that day.

 

http://www.bustle.com/articles/140428-watch-robert-kardashians-oj-simpson-press-conference-a-pivotal-moment-in-the-case-our-culture

 

Some is word for word as we saw, but there are other parts where Ryan Murphy & Co. clearly just made shit up.  On something that's a matter of public record.

 

In some cases (because there's some minor editing to those clips) I suppose some stuff might have been said not being shown, but for example, the whole sequence with Kardashian being introduced and all the reporters acting confused about who he was and asking for spellings is total Murphy-bullshit, because the EARLIER part of the conference already has Shapiro introducing and using Kardashian's name. A spelling clarification could have been asked for later, but certainly not the repeated "who are you?" questions we saw on the show. Also, while Shapiro DOES use the word "I" a lot (as Fictional Johnny Cochrane supposedly railed on him for), the whole part where he talks about his part history with the Menendezes and otherwise pumps up his own brand aren't there. They could be in an area not shown on that clip, but they certainly aren't in the sequence the show showed at the very least.

 

Robert K's reading of OJ's letter seems fairly accurate, except for the dramatic part on the show where there's a part where OJ talks about feeling like a victim himself (or was it "abused"? I've already forgotten), which leads to Fictional Marsha Clark's outrage.

 

I'm watching these, and it's like it happened yesterday. It's so very eerie that I remember these press conferences.  And I couldn't help but notice when Shapiro was speaking, it seemed to me, as if he'd memorized what he was going to say, because at one point, he looked up, and the look on his face is like, 'okay, what am I supposed to say next?' and I just rolled my eyes. 

[Umbelina]

moved this one to the Kardashian thread. 

Edited February 12, 2016 by Umbelina

[Kromm]

I don't want to turn this thread into another endless Kardashian debate, but my speculation is that they are framing this story as it really played out.  Two sides.  One side vehemently believed OJ was guilty.  One side vehemently wanted him acquitted, I don't even know if they cared if he was guilty, believed him innocent or not?

 

Anyway, that divide, I think, will be a huge part of this story.  What better way to show that than the divide between a husband and wife, even if the marriage had been over for a year or so?  The kids are a major part of that, a present connection, since the couple had divorced.  

 

Robert Kardashian was on the defense team, and stood by OJ, one of the leaders there, even though he took a back seat as far as any actually lawyer stuff.  He was front and center in the beginning, and you always saw him on TV, he was there every single moment of that trial. 

 

Kris Kardashian was on the side of Nicole, and a huge group formed with Kris at the very center, that group still exists today.  Hiltons, Kris, Faye and all ended up somewhat famous because of it.  If nothing else, they need someone for Faye to talk to on this show (I'm assuming here) and Kris is the logical choice.  To give an example of "that group still exists today?"  Faye just got married at Kyle Richards house and Kris Jenner officiated. 

 

So, just as the country was divided, so is this "family" and it's based on this crime.  I think this is a way to personalize emotions in the telling of the story, show how ripped right down the line people were.  I don't see the exploitation of the current Kardashian fame in this, I just don't, because logically, in telling a story, it all makes sense to me.  I wouldn't be surprised if they use the kids to show that, mommy believing Uncle OJ guilty as hell, and having her coffee klatches about it, daddy believing OJ innocent, or later conflicted.  Kids are the logical connector.

 

Anyway, that's my take, and the very brief mentions don't bother me at all, because of the above.  Now should this become the Kim show (which I seriously doubt) I'll change my mind.

 

ETA

I swear I wrote all of that before I saw this:

http://www.tmz.com/2016/02/10/kris-jenner-robert-kardashian-oj-simpson/

If you're saying Kris has an upcoming bigger part of this story.. I'm angry if that's the case. They were divorced by that point anyway. The "divide" in that family had ALREADY happened. 

 

And this series is clearly making Robert out to be a "good guy". That's the implication of the totally unsubstantiated (and likely totally made up) screaming in the car scene, as well as the whole vibe of Schwimmer's performance where there aren't any shades of having an agenda, or being just another of OJ's stooges (this is even without considering the possibility of Kardashian having been an accessory after the fact). 

 

Really Kris' part of this story should be over. The kids too. It was enough to establish they existed. It honestly makes no sense to me that the story of OJ's trial includes ANY of this. It's irrelevant, and it doesn't represent society in general--where frankly the splits were less over if he was guilty or innocent and more about if "the Man" (meaning the LA authorities) should be propped up by being "allowed" to bring down a powerful famous black man. It was where the Cosby situation arguably would have been, this many years later, if there'd been less women, and many of them hadn't been black.

Edited February 11, 2016 by Kromm

[Umbelina]

The OJ trial included the circus around it.  If Dominick Dunn is going to be there, so will Kris.  As I said, divorced or not, the kids connect them, which is why I believe they were shown.  Kris was part of the anti-OJ circus, and her recent X was part of the pro-OJ circus.  This is a very good way to tell this story, make it more than just the press, bring it down to OJ and Nicole's friends, and how the shock not only impacted the country, but also those close to them.  It's the insider look so to speak.  They had dinner with them, the kids played together, both families went on vacations together, they actually KNEW them, the rest of us looked in from the outside.

 

The biggest divide was of course race, and that is being covered as well. 

 

Faye Resnick is part of this as well, and frankly, she DID talk to Kris, become even better friends with Kris, and both women were Nicole's friends.  We see OJ's, we will see Nicole's, if only to personalize that side of the story.

 

I think Kardashian looks like a huge OJ sycophant already, so I don't know what you mean there. 

Edited February 11, 2016 by Umbelina

[Aethera]

Let's not have the Kardashian yay/boo spilling into this thread now that I've asked everyone to cool it in the episode thread, please. They're here, they're not going away - fast forward through them if you need to (I certainly will), but I think everyone's opinions on the subject are clear at this point, so we don't need to continue that discussion :)

[tonymx]

 

 

The biggest divide was of course race, and that is being covered as well. . 

 

 

but is the reason why being covered.

 

White people were mad  that an attractive  white woman was murdered because we know for a fact if OJ had murdered his first wife who was black  people would not still be talknig about this twenty years later. This is even shown in the media like everytime a white women is raped , murdered or goes missing i have to here about it 24/7  yet ten black women could go missing in the smae time period nad will be lucky if they get a paragraph cough cogh Natalie  COUGHCOUGH

 

Also the trial  happened during a racially tense peiod in America   , blacks didn't trust the police then and don't now and America has long history of falsely accusing black males of the assualt of their precious white women (they burned down a whole town/city  full of black people in Florida  because of a white woman's false rape accusation) and the black male is  often convicted on faulty or circumstnatial evidence.  So I don't automatically believe and definitely don't automatically sympathize with Nicole or Family jsut because sbe is white and got murder. I think the attention this case got is riduclous nad does say something about race nad raicla double stnadards in America but i will save that for another thread.

 

 

black people  thought the way the trial was handled was shady  and the police  mishandled the evidence. On top of that historcially white males have gotten away with the murder and victimization of black men and women so it was interesting to see for the first time in history a black male get off. Especially being this is the same country were one of the youngest people to every get put on  ddeathrow was a young black male who was lynched and hanged  with little to no evidence at all.

Edited February 11, 2016 by tonymx

[heatherchandler]

There are some funny clips and photos out there, by the way, of Paris ordering Kim around and having her do menial tasks.

 

I would like to see these clips.

 

That's funny about the Domino's pizza craze during the car chase.  I think I remember actually liking Domino's pizza back then! 

[Kromm]

I would like to see these clips.

per aethera's general statement about the Ks, I think if I link that here it will really take us off-topic. We should probably take it to the Kim thread in the Keeping Up With the K-A-R-D-A-S-H-I-A-N(s) forum (heh, sorry I couldn't resist the spelling out business).

[Umbelina]

Or have a thread here so people can rant if they wish.  I agree with Aethera, they are here to stay.

 

This show isn't just about the murders, it's about the circus around them.  OJ and Nicole had friends, individually and together, and they are being shown, and they will be shown, and used as voices for what people were thinking back then.  There will be what society in general thinks, but ALSO, what people who actually knew them were thinking.  That's an important, and far more personal side of the story, and I'm looking forward to it.

[Kromm]

Or have a thread here so people can rant if they wish.  I agree with Aethera, they are here to stay.

 

This show isn't just about the murders, it's about the circus around them.  OJ and Nicole had friends, individually and together, and they are being shown, and they will be shown, and used as voices for what people were thinking back then.  There will be what society in general thinks, but ALSO, what people who actually knew them were thinking.  That's an important, and far more personal side of the story, and I'm looking forward to it.

If these were their true proven, documented reactions I'd see that point, but they're not. It's a personal side of the story that's being invented by a third party.

I can see using someone's reactions as a mirror for society. But I'd hope that could be done with true reactions rather than invented (or at least totally unsubstantiated) ones.

[Umbelina]

It's VERY well documented, both on video and in print.  These people gave many interviews, formal interviews, and off-the-cuff interviews outside the courtroom, or to Dominick Dunn at "OJ parties", and many even wrote books, both those on the side of OJ, and those on the side of Nicole and Ron.

 

I hope they show the "OJ parties."  Dunn describes them well in his articles for Vanity Fair.  Kris' group had on-going "parties" to discuss the case, so did Nancy Reagan's friend Betsy Bloomingdale (for the high class set) and they got trial people to attend as special guests, including Dominick Dunn, since he was there every day.