S01.E04: 100% Not Guilty

[GHScorpiosRule]

I don't know. I think we've all become so cynical, that when we see a portrayal of a real life person, who is still alive, we tend to think it's too over the top or as others here have stated, "campy."  I'm not trying to tell them they're wrong--they feel and think what they do.  What I think is, and based on actual footage I've seen of the real Fred Goldman, that the way Siravo played him, showed those who aren't familiar with the players, the extent of his grief and rage.  And I could feel it in his performance.  But tomatoes and tomahtoes and all that.

 

I also remember how the only thing the media was reporting about Ron, was that he was a wannabe actor/male model, whose character was shady.  And he was all but forgotten during the trial, if not for his father and sister.

 

Cuba is doing nothing to convince me he was the perfect one to play OJ. I just don't buy him as OJ. AT all.  And if I hadn't seen that one documentary, where Schiller talks about how OJ wasn't just a puppet who listened to his lawyers, but in fact, actually had a say in how his lawyers should proceed, I probably would have believed Cuba's OJ's vascillating over whether Shapiro should remain lead attorney or not. But I did, so I guess that's going to have me side-eyeing Cuba's performance that contradicts what Schiller said.  Is that fair? probably not. But I can't unsee or unhear what Schiller said.

Edited February 25, 2016 by GHScorpiosRule

[Kromm]

Speaking of cheesy, am I supposed to believe that football story Cochran told OJ? Because I swear I could smell the bullshit through my TV.

Bingo. Glad someone else "read" that scene the way I did.

[Kromm]

Still enjoying the hell out of this show though, despite... well... you know... lots of shit. Lots and lots of shit.

My concern is personally not over people enjoying this show--it's enjoyable. What I personally am dreading are the legions of people who now are going to think this is exactly how it happened--that these people really said all these things we're hearing.

[Umbelina]

Cochran WAS cheesy, but the jury ate it up.

 

I haven't read any of Cochran's books, so I don't know if he told that story or not, let alone if it was true.  I DO know he needed to convince OJ to switch from Shapiro to him as lead attorney, and his style in court was probably his style in real life when he needed something.

 

ETA my take on that scene was the Cochran was spinning a tale, being convincing, just as he did in court.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Umbelina

[savannah1985]

I was a child when this all happened, but since then I've read all of the books written by the principals of this story. I can't watch the show because it makes me so angry. I place the majority of the blame for the debacle the trial became right at the foot of Lance Ito. His wife lied about knowing Mark Fuhrman, Ito allowed the cameras and even stopped the trial to allow actors into his chambers to say hello. He was totally non-professional and intimidated by the so-called dream team.

[FuriousStyles]

Marcia and Darden's conversation about how the lawyers scored pretty much encapsulated why I knew I wasnt cut out to be a criminal lawyer. I'm wayyy too sensitive. There is no way I could find out im a 4 (despite all the good work ive done for women and in particular black women) and then not been totally self conscious moving forward. Just in general, speaking in public, the pressures of the job itself. Even the scene prior to that with Marcia and Fred Goldman. I couldnt, just couldnt.

I KNEW it wasnt a coincidence that the prosecution added Darden. Im sure he was very capable and qualified, but him being a black man definitely added to "the optics"...expect in my opinion and someone who remembers how it was back then please chime in...but I would assume it was plainly obvious, at least to the black community, that Darden was indeed there to be the "token". And that his addition backfired and was received unfavorably? Again, not because of his qualifications or anything work related, but just them trying to pull one over on the public.

I have never heard of Faye Resnick. But she is the worst kind of person. OJ at least showed Nicole who he was, even if she chose not to believe it, at least in the beginning. But this Faye person purports to be Nicole's friend? And in record time she has a book out detailing all of Nicole's dirty laundry. I dont care if everything she said is true or not, either way, she used Nicole's name and her horrific death to make money. Simple trash. I dont know how she could live with herself after doing something like that, and then going on Larry King? Uggg.

Not sure what Marcia was thinking regarding accepting the jurors that were chosen. To me, you have a white victim, so wouldnt it make sense to try to get as many WHITE women on the jury as possible. I get that given the location, the pool of prospective jurors may not have allowed to be so picky, but still, to allow the defense to have so many black jurors knowing full well they intended to make race a large part of the trial was a grave tactical error on her part.

Its amazing to me that a man so violent, career football player domestic abuser and murderer was afraid of confrontation or to speak his mind? Seriously?

Edited February 25, 2016 by FuriousStyles

[Peace 47]

Here's the thing (or rather the several things):

1.) Cochran didn't really say any of this--the show writers made it up.

2.) I had a feeling in my gut watching it that there was a kind of possibility that we weren't meant to be sure if (fictional) Cochran was being sincere, or if hr was just spinning a story to get OJ on his side. We saw in previous episodes a lot of cynicism from (fictional) Cochran, and that at least among his own confidants that his morality was all centered on the long-game of social justice and not particularly on what he did to get it.

I would like to explain my post that was being responded to here. I am seeing that this show has a point of view on everyone: Kardashian is a basically decent loyalist. Marcia Clark is a dogged prosecutor. Shapiro is a tone-deaf blowhard. And Cochran is fighting a power structure he sees as rotten to the core using his intelligence and charisma. That may or may not be how any of those people "really" were.

I didn't watch that scene in the jail between Cochran and OJ and think either that (1) it was a verbatim depiction of actual events or (2) the character of Cochran in this story was entirely truthful with OJ when he told it. Why I thought it was a "genuine" scene was because it shed some light on what the character of Cochran is doing in this case. He's telling OJ that the power of being a black icon in power is that symbolically, you are overcoming a system stacked against the common man. The story may or may not have been true for the character of Cochran, but it could be true for someone: there's value in the symbolism, and when weighed against a rigged system, it may be "God's work" to elevate the symbol over all else. Cochran is wily and ambitious and was maneuvering in that scene to get OJ on Cochran's side instead of Shapiro's, but like Darden said, Cochran has his cause and is a true believer.

Of course, to contradict myself in discounting the "truth" of it as related by this character, Cochran told that story, recounted OJ's feats in that game, and OJ recognized it as one that his team lost. If Cochran were making this up out of whole cloth, you'd think he'd have picked a game that OJ won. In any event, the scene worked for me in showing what this character is about in this story.

[partofme]

My dvr cut off right when Shapiro said he wanted to make a plea. Did anything important happen after that?

As someone who's always been team Goldman in this whole mess, I foung the scene with the Fred Goldman character to be extremely uncomfortable and exploitative. Though I did think he was a dead ringer for Fred, at least standing, sitting down you could tell he had on a really bad wig.

[wanderingstar]

Damn - Courtney B. Vance is knocking it out of the park in his role.

 

And damn - that was harsh watching Marcia listen to that focus group.

 

Nathan Lane continues to delight me as F. Lee Bailey.

[BW Manilowe]

Many, many, many friends, family members, coworkers, fans, and newscasters called OJ Juice. He was always called by his nicknames, they were interchangeable. Maybe his mother still called him Orenthal, but I don't think anyone else did.

As far as "this is all made up stuff!"

Well, not so much. Pretty much everyone involved wrote books. Pretty much everyone involved gave interviews, televised or print. Journalists also became friends with both victims, attorneys, and OJ's friends and family, even with OJ. There is no way this entire series is just based on one book. It may be hard for people who weren't around during that spectacle to realize, but this trial was everywhere. Every newspaper. Every interview show, even Oprah. Every news show had nightly updates, then there were 20-20 and Nightline, and the other news-magazine shows as well. Every radio station that had "talk," and even some who just played music, back when real DJs existed. MANY magazines, other than strict fashion magazines, and children's magazines and a couple of other specialized type ran tidbits or articles about ANY person they could get to talk. Most "friends of" talked, people who served Nicole coffee or sold her running shoes talked. People who played tennis with Ron talked. Faye obviously talked, Kris talked, but at least she didn't write a book, and her words were always in defense of Nicole. There are pages and pages of civil trial testimony and depositions that shed a great deal of light on things in the criminal trial too. This show is obviously not sticking with one book for information, for just one example, it's obvious Shiller's book is being heavily used about the lawyers, Faye's, Marsha's, Darden's, and certainly Dominick Dunne's, and many others are being used for the details.

They ALL talked. Most for money, but some for their little brush with fame, and some because they really wanted to set the record straight, or express something personal, the Goldman book, RON comes to mind there.

Anyway, of course private conversations are somewhat fictionalized, but it's also quite obvious that not only were they likely (The Goldmans and the lead prosecutor, Robert Kardashian talking to his kids about their confusion about whether or not "Uncle OJ" did it, when mom says he did, etc. The conversations between Marsha and her coworkers are gleaned from their books, but still, not word for word.) This is a dramatization, but as far as I've seen so far? It's sticking very close to the story, and certainly the feel. Fred DID say almost exactly those words in many interviews on the courthouse steps, and later on various television shows. He did become close to the prosecuting team, and the police, and later gave a party to thank them for their efforts.

If, as you say, they used multiple books as their source material, why only credit Jeffrey Toobin's book? Isn't that wrong/unfair to the authors of any other books they may have used? It seems like it is to me.

Edited February 25, 2016 by BW Manilowe

[suomi]

^^^ I agree, and I don't understand it either. Shapiro asking fellow counsel "Who thinks OJ is guilty?" and OJ considering and rejecting various locations to commit suicide are straight from Schiller's book, via Robert Kardashian. If the Mark Fuhrman/Margaret York (Mrs Ito) background is presented in detail, (which I think it will be) that will come from Fuhrman's book (and it is good stuff). I think Schiller's book is the best one for getting inside the defense. RK spilled enough that he was sanctioned by the California State Bar for violating privilege and as a result was not allowed to practice law for 2 years. BFD, because he had moved on from that many years earlier.

[Umbelina]

If, as you say, they used multiple books as their source material, why only credit Jeffrey Toobin's book? Isn't that wrong/unfair to the authors of any other books they may have used? It seems like it is to me.

I don't see why.  They say it's "based on" Toobin's book, but that doesn't mean they couldn't do other research, and they would be fools not to.  Additionally, it's likely that at least some involved in this already knew, and had read, or watched, or heard of all of the other accounts of that time. 

 

ETA, for example, they had to write scenes for Marcia and Chris, so why not read THEIR books?  Ditto the others.  It could still be "based on" but that doesn't mean "limited TO."  Of course they read transcripts, news articles, and the other books, they would be fools not to round out their series.  That doesn't mean the show was based on Garcetti's book, another book they probably read.

 

It means Toobin's lent itself to a screenplay.  After that?  Find out whatever you can about the people you will be portraying on screen.  Pretty easy in this case, since the all talked, wrote, and gave interviews.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Umbelina

[Milburn Stone]

 Cuba is slowly becoming OJ to me.  

 

Good way of putting it. I don't know whether I'm now seeing qualities in his performance that have been there all along, or whether he's just wearing me down. But I bought him as of this episode.

[Milburn Stone]

I know this show isn't meant to be funny...

 

I disagree with that, actually. Quite a lot of the show is played for dark comedy. It's one of the things I like best about it.

[Umbelina]

I kind of agree with the PTV recap.  Cuba seems like OJ in the rage moments, but he loses me completely when he starts blubbering.  Also when the women tower over him in nightclub scenes.  Was that really needed?  There are no short actresses out there?  They couldn't have put some women in flats?

[SinInTheCamp]

Although I have to admit, I have always found something about Fred Goldman off-putting. No idea what, maybe he reminds me of someone I dislike, but it is there. I can certainly sympathize with his pain, but I just don't like him.

 

 

Finally, I have found my people...(person?)!!! Thank you for this; I've always hated admitting it, but I've always found something off-putting about Fred Goldman as well. I was in my early 20s when this all went down, so I well remember seeing him often on TV. I "absolutely, one hundred percent" sympathize with him and his outrage, but something about him always irked me. I remember just after the trial, a celeb (can't remember who now) remarked that, because of his mustache, he reminded her of a sort of cartoonish beer server at Oktoberfest, swinging steins from side to side with his elbows out like a marionette. The visual's stuck with me ever since. I mean, bless his heart--I can't even imagine how he's suffered, but...yeah. He's just always rubbed me the wrong way, and the actor is totally bringing that feeling back.

Speaking of bringing it back, that nightclub scene really brought back the nineties, just like the Sabatoge car chase scene brought them back in the second episode. This show is doing a great job of capturing the era.

Edited February 25, 2016 by SinInTheCamp

[BW Manilowe]

I have to admit, I landed on the "terribly cheesy" side of the Clark - Goldman scene. It was just way over the top. Although I have to admit, I have always found something about Fred Goldman off-putting. No idea what, maybe he reminds me of someone I dislike, but it is there. I can certainly sympathize with his pain, but I just don't like him.

Speaking of cheesy, am I supposed to believe that football story Cochran told OJ? Because I swear I could smell the bullshit through my TV.

The "lead attorney" conference call, to me, didn't make OJ look like he still doesn't "get it", he just seemed like a man completely over his head, exhausted and confused. And who wouldn't feel that way? Just being in a jail cell for that long would make me a little squirrelly, I think.

I felt the same way about Fred. And Denise Brown. But particularly Fred. I know it's not because they reminded me of someone I disliked who was actually in my life, but I don't know what it is. Like you said, I felt for their pain. But every time they were on TV, I either changed the channel (if they weren't on all the channels for some reason) or I wanted to tell them to just shut it already. Maybe I just felt Fred (& Kim, actually) was pushing much too hard for Ron to be *noticed*, perhaps more than he deserved to be (like when Kim complained, in my opinion, to the media after the first ep aired that Ron wasn't depicted like "the hero who died trying to save Nicole" Kim's family just knew he was--although, at least according to a number of previous posts in the forum, there really didn't seem to be any real life evidence that Ron either was, or had time to be, a hero). Yes, it's unfair that Ron died in connection with a "celebrity" murder, but because of that he was probably always destined to be nothing more than a footnote. I'm sorry that the Goldmans seem to have been unable to process/can't deal with that & that they spent so long trying to elevate him to a celebrity status they felt he deserved, although he was always really a "nobody".

[VCRTracking]

 

He may have nailed the portrayal, but it didn't work in terms of the scene.  He came off hysterical and crazed, in a way that didn't mesh well with what Sarah Paulson was doing.

 

I thought it was appropriate. Not only was his son murdered but he was straight up BUTCHERED, and nobody seemed to care and also his name was being smeared in public.  I posted the video of comedian Brian Posehn earlier but for those who didn't watch it I'll just tell you about it: In 2009 Posehn was staying at a hotel  in Chicago and the clerk looked at him like he recognized him. Bosehn told him he was a comedian and the clerk said "Oh thank god!". Posehn thought this was a weird reaction "Where did you think you knew me from?" and the clerk tells him he rarely asks people because of one horrible incident he had working in the hotel a few years earlier  and  this older gentleman with glasses and a mustache like "from the Pringles can" and was wondering where he recognized him from. Was he a friend of his dad? An old professor? Finally he asked the man "Excuse me sir, where do I know you from?" and the man to his horror went ballistic and yelled "OJ SIMPSON KILLED MY SON!!" . And when the standup audience gasps and some say things like "Holy shit" Posehn says "Yes 'Holy shit!' is right!" Posehn asked the clerk "What did you say?" and the guy said "What could I say?" His reaction was basically (jumped back)"Aaah!" and Posehn's punchline is "What you should have said is "Noooo, that's not it!"

Edited February 25, 2016 by VCRTracking

[Pallas]

It's amazing to me that a man so violent, career football player domestic abuser and murderer was afraid of confrontation or to speak his mind? Seriously?

 

Seriously. According to both the Toobin and Schiller books, OJ saw the wisdom of having Cochran take over the lead role from Shapiro, but did his best to avoid making the decision and then, shied away from giving the word. He had to be pushed by Kardashian, who coined the "Bob's the quarterback, Johnnie's the fullback...but we're not going to pass the ball" analogy that OJ finally used, in turn.  

 

OJ loved his popularity and loathed confrontation, especially with men. Men not only provided his most gratifying affirmation: they also paid the bills, through his commercial contracts, endorsements, paid appearances and occasional acting jobs. OJ left the NFL in 1979, well before free-agency; though the highest-paid player in the league when he retired, his salary that year was $808K: $2.6M today.  

 

By 1994, OJ had spent the last fifteen years making his living as A Nice Guy, at once impressive and approachable. His persona fit his personality: he couldn't stand to be alone, went out on the town more to fraternize than party, and was a mainstay of the Riviera golf courts, tennis courts and clubhouse. He actually enjoyed his public duties with sponsors and clients at business or entertainment events -- the carefully screened, ritualized cameraderie. OJ wanted no part of conflict, choosing sides, or alienating potential admirers. 

 

That's what "I'm not black, I'm OJ!" meant: like a politician allergic to offending any of his constituency. Not only as a defendant but in his prior daily life, he didn't want to play the bad guy; he didn't want anyone to see him pull the trigger.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Pallas

[ennui]

Its amazing to me that a man so violent, career football player domestic abuser and murderer was afraid of confrontation or to speak his mind? Seriously?

 

Uhmmm, are you thinking OJ is intelligent? Strong? Because he may be violent and abusive, but he's not a deep thinker, and he's basically a weak person.

[Constantinople]

Nathan Lane continues to be AMAZING. Seriously.

I'm loving his performance, but whenever I see him, I think OJ: The Musical.

[ennui]

I couldn't tell if the awkwardness in that scene was because some/all of them DID think he was guilty or if it was because that sort of question is not asked or even brought up in such circumstances. My legal training is limited to TV viewing, but I remember Some Lawyer Guy once saying that defense lawyers DON'T ask such questions, especially if they think their client may be guilty. But that may have just been Some Lawyer Guy's process, and not a general principle.

It's not only Some Lawyer Guy, it's many.

Defense attorneys don’t ask, because the client is innocent until proven guilty. Personal feelings aside, the defense attorney is there to force the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Think of it this way … if you develop lung cancer, your doctor will help you fight it, not devalue you because you smoked.

[Superpole2000]

This was the best episode of the first four. I was hooked from before the show began, but now I'm really intrigued. Although I paid some attention to the original trial, I never had the wider lens of the situation that this show can somewhat approximate. I just missed so much stuff the first time around.

 

To me, the most interesting person in this series is Marcia Clark, and this episode really showed what an uphill battle it was for her. They could make these episodes 3 or 4 hours each and I'd still want to watch them all.

[Dev F]

I don't see why.  They say it's "based on" Toobin's book, but that doesn't mean they couldn't do other research, and they would be fools not to.  Additionally, it's likely that at least some involved in this already knew, and had read, or watched, or heard of all of the other accounts of that time. 

 

ETA, for example, they had to write scenes for Marcia and Chris, so why not read THEIR books?  Ditto the others.  It could still be "based on" but that doesn't mean "limited TO."  Of course they read transcripts, news articles, and the other books, they would be fools not to round out their series.  That doesn't mean the show was based on Garcetti's book, another book they probably read.

 

Yep. For instance, the bizarre scene in the first episode in which Shapiro says he always asks his clients whether they're guilty? It's pretty clearly taken directly from his book about the case. ("Some defense attorneys say that they never ask clients whether or not they committed the crime, because they don't want the burden of knowing. I disagree. I want to know, I have to know, it's in my client's best interests that I do know. I'm never afraid to ask the question right at the beginning, and I keep asking it throughout a case.")

 

Obviously, the actual dialogue is made up, and in real life the individuals involved probably didn't lay their personal philosophies out so clearly in casual conversation, but I bet most of the major character beats are derived from the research in one way or another.

 

But interestingly, as one of the people who's been defending the show's artistic license for weeks now, this week there was one moment that had me saying, "Oh, come on, that has to be bullshit." Specifically, as someone who works in publishing, I find it almost impossible to believe that Faye Resnick's book went from initial pitch to press in two weeks. In that time they wrote the entire book, copyedited it, laid it out into pages, proofread the pages, and got the final materials to the printer? It seems like just gathering enough material from Resnick to fill a book, let along actually writing and producing it, would take more than fourteen days.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Dev F

[Epeolatrix]

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

[Asp Burger]

I had to take a moment and say "wow" that I was watching Cheryl Ladd and John Travolta in 2016 playing spouses. That would have been such the hot ticket in 1979. Props to them for surviving a tough business all these years and still doing good work. She still looks really good.   

 

If Faye's book took four months, she got on it very fast and it would still have to be "minus a couple weeks." The murders took place in June and Amazon has the publication date as October 1, 1994, which fits both my memory and OJ's comment in the episode about Halloween coming up soon.    

 

Sarah Paulson is killing it as Marcia Clark every week, and the Fred Goldman actor made me cry for real. Perfect casting and acting with those two.  

[Umbelina]

Nicole died on June 12, people found out June 13.  Faye's book was on the shelves on Oct. 1st.  That's about 3 1/2 months.  That included printing, binding, shipping, book-cover art, all of it.

 

The guy was an Enquirer reporter, used to writing fast.  She signed over all editing control for the money, so there was no back and forth about that. She did the same thing with her second book, it's in her civil trial deposition, along with her earnings (from the books alone, not the shows, Playboy, and interviews) she had, to date, made almost $500K, more in today's money of course.

 

I think they just let her talk, fed her whatever she wanted as far as drugs and booze, I'm pretty sure they went off to some cabin somewhere to write it back east or something.  So isolated, talking, and the reporter banged out the book.

 

She was deposed for 3 days in the civil trial, bottom of this page.  http://simpson.walraven.org/ It's all in there, under oath.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Umbelina

[mbutterfly]

Here's the thing (or rather the several things):

1.) Cochran didn't really say any of this--the show writers made it up.

2.) I had a feeling in my gut watching it that there was a kind of possibility that we weren't meant to be sure if (fictional) Cochran was being sincere, or if hr was just spinning a story to get OJ on his side. We saw in previous episodes a lot of cynicism from (fictional) Cochran, and that at least among his own confidants that his morality was all centered on the long-game of social justice and not particularly on what he did to get it.

I think Cochran said something very like that because it was the only way to persuade the narcissistic OJ. We weren't to believe he was sincere. Cochran believed LA county police and courts were brutally corrupt against the black man, and his calling was to right that wrong. I haven't read his Journey to Justice that he wrote at the time, but I'm guessing it could have been in there or one of his later books. 

[FuriousStyles]

Uhmmm, are you thinking OJ is intelligent? Strong? Because he may be violent and abusive, but he's not a deep thinker, and he's basically a weak person.

No I wasnt saying he was intelligent. My point was how could this guy who obviously had no problem showing aggression in pretty much every other part of his life (chosen profession, personal life) have THAT hard of a time telling Shapiro he's off 1st chair. As RK said, that was HIS life that hung in the balance. I hate confrontation and actively try to avoid it but if I were going on trial for double murder you better believe I'd be speaking up about my defense.

[MargotWendice]

No I wasnt saying he was intelligent. My point was how could this guy who obviously had no problem showing aggression in pretty much every other part of his life (chosen profession, personal life) have THAT hard of a time telling Shapiro he's off 1st chair. As RK said, that was HIS life that hung in the balance. I hate confrontation and actively try to avoid it but if I were going on trial for double murder you better believe I'd be speaking up about my defense.

First, he likely has a personality disorder.

Second, I believe he knew someone (probably RK) would speak up and do it for him. That's why one surrounds oneself with toadies--so they can take care of the unpleasantness.

As others have mentioned, it seems like his self-image of being a 'nice guy' was absolutely essential to him. It probably became even more so after he committed a double homicide. And if this scene was portrayed accurately it all worked out beautifully--he fired Shapiro as first chair while appearing to do so very reluctantly, maybe even under the influence of others. I am guessing Shapiro was left feeling much more annoyed with Cochran, Lee, et al. than with OJ.

[Hanahope]

I KNEW it wasnt a coincidence that the prosecution added Darden. Im sure he was very capable and qualified, but him being a black man definitely added to "the optics"...expect in my opinion and someone who remembers how it was back then please chime in...but I would assume it was plainly obvious, at least to the black community, that Darden was indeed there to be the "token". And that his addition backfired and was received unfavorably? Again, not because of his qualifications or anything work related, but just them trying to pull one over on the public.

 

 

The prosecution couldn't win.  If they kept with the two person white team, they get accused of being the white people prosecuting a black man.  If they add a black person, they get accused of pandering to the black community.

 

I know that its not the point of the show, but I wish they had shown the jury consultant showing a video of Hodgeman also acting very stern/strong to a witness/defendant and let us know if the 'practice jurors' also thought he was a "bitch".  Its such a battle professional women fight, and still do today, that if they truly 'act like a man' they are a 'bitch' whereas the man is 'strong'.  I'm sure most of the time it didn't hurt Clark, because most of her defendants were probably not liked by the jury.  But when you have a likeable defendant, as OJ was, it was very hard for her to overcome the undeserved perception. 

 

It is a shame, though, that she couldn't swallow her pride and realize, however wrong it was, that she wasn't right for the prosecution team for this particular case, nor were black women as jurors.  She was fine when she was prosecuting the bad man that killed a nice female celebrity, not so good when she's trying to prosecute the "nice" celebrity for killing the "not so nice" woman.

 

 

I see now where the GoP got their "object/dispute/block/repudiate/reject" everything Obama says/does.  They obviously believe if it worked for OJ and his attorneys, it'll work for them.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I felt the same way about Fred. And Denise Brown. But particularly Fred. I know it's not because they reminded me of someone I disliked who was actually in my life, but I don't know what it is. Like you said, I felt for their pain. But every time they were on TV, I either changed the channel (if they weren't on all the channels for some reason) or I wanted to tell them to just shut it already. Maybe I just felt Fred (& Kim, actually) was pushing much too hard for Ron to be *noticed*, perhaps more than he deserved to be (like when Kim complained, in my opinion, to the media after the first ep aired that Ron wasn't depicted like "the hero who died trying to save Nicole" Kim's family just knew he was--although, at least according to a number of previous posts in the forum, there really didn't seem to be any real life evidence that Ron either was, or had time to be, a hero). Yes, it's unfair that Ron died in connection with a "celebrity" murder, but because of that he was probably always destined to be nothing more than a footnote. I'm sorry that the Goldmans seem to have been unable to process/can't deal with that & that they spent so long trying to elevate him to a celebrity status they felt he deserved, although he was always really a "nobody".

 

Wow. So, just because Ron wasn't a celebrity, and the media and everyone was talking and acting as if Nicole was the only victim, he didn't deserve justice? That the public/press shouldn't be reminded that there was a second victim? I don't believe it was Fred Goldman's intent to make his son more famous or to give him celebrity status. He was being trashed in the media as someone shady.  He was a victim and deserved better than to be a footnote. Guy was in the wrong place at the wrong time.  And OJ was charged with TWO murders, not just one. But the way everyone was talking, one would think that Nicole was the only victim.

 

So, if Ron had also been a celebrity in his own right, it would more palatable to see Fred Goldman's rage and grief and wanting his son's murder to get justice? 

 

I don't and didn't think Nicole was a celebrity. All I knew was that OJ was one, and that Nicole was the name of his ex-wife. Never saw her in the media prior to this murder. But I guess, by virtue of being married to him, she was a celebrity.

 

Still, I believed then and still do now, that Ron murder should have gotten as much attention as Nicole's. Because he was also slaughtered that night.  By the same person.  It's not as if Ron were killed by someone else, and Fred Goldman was trying to say, look! OJ also killed my son.

 

I...just can't fathom why some would think that Ron deserved to be the footnote in this tragedy because he wasn't famous in his own right.

Edited February 25, 2016 by GHScorpiosRule

[BBDi]

What I looked at Fred Goldman then I saw an ordinary looking man with a ridiculous moustache, caught up in grief, who over time I came to appreciate as actually one of the more dignified people involved in this shit-show.

I was still a fairly new parent when the crime happened, but now one of the things I really appreciate is that he tried so hard to make people see Ron as a real person deserving of respect and attention.

Just looking at Ron superficially, he sounds like a good looking, friendly guy who wanted to have a nightclub or a restaurant - the kind of guy who is a dime a dozen in LA. Very easy to dismiss, but Fred and Kim managed to make him seem like a real person who had a full life ahead of him.

I understand the attention being on Nicole because she was OJ's target and without that situation, the murders would not have happened. But if Ron were my kid I'd damn sure want to make sure people did not see Ron as less important than Nicole.

[7isBlue]

I cringe every time Robert Kardashian refers to O.J. as "Juice." Why was Robert Kardashian so infatuated with O.J. Simpson? Simpson is such a knuckle-head.

I am frustrated that they're portraying Kardashian as a wide-eyed innocent, good guy. He was a sycophant who was so into OJ that he was willing to do anything for him, including possibly disposing of evidence for him. He was a slimeball. Edited February 25, 2016 by 7isBlue

[BW Manilowe]

I probably misstated/misworded things. Yes, Ron should've been as important as Nicole & I am sorry for his family he wasn't; he was just as much a victim as she in this. But I think society in general felt he was a "nobody" compared to OJ & Nicole (who was at least a quasi-celebrity by virtue of having married a celebrity). Whatever it was, there was still something I didn't, & still don't, like about Fred Goldman (sometimes, but not always, Kim also) & Denise Brown. Mostly Fred.

[VanillaBeanne]

I also never understood why the Goldmans seemed to want Ron to be given equal media focus as Nicole because the real driver of why the media paid attention to this story at all was the OJ and Nicole angle. This would not be the trial of the century if OJ just killed Ron. Maybe the trial of the year. Also, I didn't understand what Gikdman was saying because as far as murder victims go, while not as well remembered as Nicole, Ron Goldman has been remembered. Do we as readily remember the name any of the columbine killers victims or Casey Anthony's daughter or Robert chambers victim? And most murder victims get very little media attention, so I never really understood their perspective. And I must confess I've always found Goldmans rage off putting so I probably was not able to really hear what he was saying.

That's why I was moved by the scene in this episode. When Goldman started yelling at Marcia, I was like, yep, that's classic Fred Goldman - hair trigger anger that is being projected at someone who doesn't deserve it, but as the scene went on I heard the actor portraying Goldman passionately argue that the media did focus heavily on Ron but made him seem like a flaky last-LA type and that they never focused on the real person that was Ron Goldman or the brutality of his murder. He seemed upset not that Ron was going to be forgotten but rather he was going to be remembered as just another morally lax person who ran in the Brentwood circle with OJ, Nicole, Faye and Robert Jardashians and associated with their casual drug use and affairs.

Shallow note. I hate his mostache. There I said it. He seemed like he would be very handsome without it. Certainly Ron was.

Edited February 25, 2016 by VanillaBeanne

[Hanahope]

However, without the Goldman's I'm not so sure the civil trial would have gone to conclusion, with a verdict against OJ, eventually resulting in OJ going to jail in his attempt to keep money away from the Goldman's.  I suspect that Nicole's family would have quietly settled out of court.  Not so Fred.  He wanted OJ's guilt, or at least liability, to be shouted from the roof tops.  So, good for the Goldman's, that they kept yelling out that Ron was there too.

[lovinbob]

I've always had a level of mistrust/discomfort with Fred, and Kim even more so. But as I consume this show, and all the media around it, I suspect that has more to do with my discomfort with my fascination with the story.

 

The Goldmans forced us to acknowledge the depth of the horror that was OJ and this crime. People dismiss Nicole as a gold-digger, or shrug because he was bankrolling her and her family. The Browns were not the advocates for Nicole that Fred and Kim were for Ron. Fred and Kim would not sit back and let OJ and company control the narrative. They wouldn't let it just be about the Dancing Itos and Marcia Clark's hair and the Bronco chase. They spoke (and speak) ugly truths, and I think that tends to make people uncomfortable.

 

The truth is, it still makes me uncomfortable. I watch/read Kim in news stories and I just want her to stop being such an open wound. But that's not fair, not even a little. Nothing I have seen has shown me that these people are anything but justifiably infuriated, as well as honorable advocates for their loved one's memory and for justice in general.

 

I'd still like to hear Fred's explanation for his mustache, though.

[heatherchandler]

 

 

Fred Goldman's scene had me in tears.  To this day I cannot begin to imagine his pain and outrage.  He was a father who loved his son.  I can barely type that without tears.

 

 

 

I was also in tears during this scene.  I cannot imagine what it would feel like to love your son so much and be so proud of him, and have people actually cheering for his murderer.  It must have been hell.  I am sure it still is.

[EdnasEdibles]

This has been interesting to watch for Marcia. I was in high school/college throughout this trial (graduating high school, going to college) and I remember really disliking Marcia and throughout the years I've softened to her quite a bit as I've read interviews. And now that I'm a 40 year old woman working, my heart just hurt watching the scenes where she watched people rip her apart because she "seemed bitchy" or they wouldn't want to date her. She was screwed and it wasn't even anything she could fix. She was smart, she was capable - sure she was blind to the race elements of the trial - but she was essentially told "You need to win this trial but without being yourself or relying on any of your current instincts. Kthanxbye!"

 

And it's really weird to remember what people thought of Nicole Simpson. I remember when the verdict was announced I was in college and there were a whole group of kids - mainly guys - cheering when he was found not guilty. And one of my friends was like "She lied, she made up all of that shit about him hitting her. She was a total slut" - we were not friends for long. But he truly truly believed this. It made me want to vomit. 

 

It's a tricky thing with trials when the victim isn't perfect. Ron might have been a good-hearted person who volunteered while also being a cheesy male model. Nicole might have been a vapid coke snorting gold digger who slept around - who was also a loyal and funny friend and loving mom. Everyone's multi-faceted. It's just hard to get the public at large to feel sympathetic to someone who they wouldn't want to be neighbors with. 

[vibeology]

It's not only Some Lawyer Guy, it's many.

Defense attorneys don’t ask, because the client is innocent until proven guilty. Personal feelings aside, the defense attorney is there to force the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Think of it this way … if you develop lung cancer, your doctor will help you fight it, not devalue you because you smoked.

 

The other big reason a defense attorney doesn't ask is because a lawyer can be disbarred if they knowingly let someone commit perjury. Suborning perjury is not an easy thing to prove and I'm not saying all lawyers are above it, but trial lawyers who might have to put their client on the stand often don't ask the question because it allows them the option without breaking the rules. You can suspect to your hearts content (willful blindness is cool with the courts), but if you know, you can't ask anymore questions. 

 

The fact that Shapiro always asks and the rest of the table was horrified at the idea of talking about it shows the different between Shapiro and the trial lawyers. Knowing the truth is fine if the plan is to settle, but a lawyer who wants to take the fight to court knows its safer not to open that door at all. Because while you have to keep your client's confidence, they don't have to keep yours.

[Isabella15]

Love that they called this ep. '100% Not Guilty', and ended with the lawyers walking into court to 'Above the Law.'    And on a more subtle note, the shift from Shapiro to Cochran also signaled the end of OJ's  show business career, such as it was.   Shapiro was the Beverly Hills attorney that Hollywood people called when they had legal trouble; Cochran was a criminal lawyer.

 

It's clear that Hollywood thought Simpson was guilty (Fred Levinson's interview was a good example. Levinson had created the Hertz commercials and Ronald Reagan's 'Morning in America' spots. He later admitted that he immediately thought OJ did it. The way news travels in this town, by implication most Bizpeople felt the same way.)

 

Kardashian was actually one of the few show business people who publicly stood by OJ. 

This interview was amazing and since I didn't know anything about Kardashian,really filled in some blanks:

  http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/robert-kardashian-longtime-friend-oj-simpson-doubts-innocence-33841201

[GHScorpiosRule]

Considering everything I've seen of the real life Robert Kardashian, and how Schwimmer is playing him, I totally rolled my eyes in that opener of seeing him dancing like he did. It didn't compute for me! He came (and comes in this show) across so low-key, so to see him jumping around and all manic...disconnect for me.

[Inquisitionist]

 to see him jumping around and all manic...disconnect for me.

 

Cocaine? 

[BeatrixK]

Last's nights episode was a mixed bag for me:  Good in that it was full of 'Oh yeahhhh's, I remember reading about that's,'  I was the program director for a small ABC affiliate during the trial, and so we were getting feeds/stories daily.  Yeah -- the infighting started way early -- but clearly worked to OJ's advantage.

 

The bad:  I realized that one of the publisher/author guys played Andy Garvey from Little House on the Prairie - and I realized I'm approaching 'Old crotchety lady' if I can figure out who he was from that far back.

[GHScorpiosRule]

The bad:  I realized that one of the publisher/author guys played Andy Garvey from Little House on the Prairie - and I realized I'm approaching 'Old crotchety lady' if I can figure out who he was from that far back.

 

Hee! That was Patrick Labyorteaux, who I recognized as Lt. Bud Roberts, JAG lawyer from JAG!

[VCRTracking]

And his brother Matthew Labyorteaux played Albert. Flipping channels yesterday I ran across the Little House episode where Albert's real father comes to get him. He only wants Albert to work on his farm and doesn't love him. You have scenes of Michael Landon's Charles Ingalls crying while hugging his wife Caroline and saying "They're going to take away our son!" and I'm thinking "You've only known him a year!"

 

Performance wise I think Cuba is doing a good job, but it is distracting when it seems EVERYBODY is taller than him!

[DangerousMinds]

I probably misstated/misworded things. Yes, Ron should've been as important as Nicole & I am sorry for his family he wasn't; he was just as much a victim as she in this. But I think society in general felt he was a "nobody" compared to OJ & Nicole (who was at least a quasi-celebrity by virtue of having married a celebrity). Whatever it was, there was still something I didn't, & still don't, like about Fred Goldman (sometimes, but not always, Kim also) & Denise Brown. Mostly Fred.

Because of the Goldmans' efforts, I did pay just as much attention to Ron as a victim as I did Nicole. I always felt tremendous empathy for them.

[DangerousMinds]

This has been interesting to watch for Marcia. I was in high school/college throughout this trial (graduating high school, going to college) and I remember really disliking Marcia and throughout the years I've softened to her quite a bit as I've read interviews. And now that I'm a 40 year old woman working, my heart just hurt watching the scenes where she watched people rip her apart because she "seemed bitchy" or they wouldn't want to date her. She was screwed and it wasn't even anything she could fix. She was smart, she was capable - sure she was blind to the race elements of the trial - but she was essentially told "You need to win this trial but without being yourself or relying on any of your current instincts. Kthanxbye!"

 

And it's really weird to remember what people thought of Nicole Simpson. I remember when the verdict was announced I was in college and there were a whole group of kids - mainly guys - cheering when he was found not guilty. And one of my friends was like "She lied, she made up all of that shit about him hitting her. She was a total slut" - we were not friends for long. But he truly truly believed this. It made me want to vomit. 

 

It's a tricky thing with trials when the victim isn't perfect. Ron might have been a good-hearted person who volunteered while also being a cheesy male model. Nicole might have been a vapid coke snorting gold digger who slept around - who was also a loyal and funny friend and loving mom. Everyone's multi-faceted. It's just hard to get the public at large to feel sympathetic to someone who they wouldn't want to be neighbors with. 

I know you're right, but I have always had trouble wrapping my head around this idea. I don't care if Nicole was a slut or goldigger or a drug addict or a thief, or whether Ron was a male model, waiter, or slug that still lived in his dad's basement. Simply - they were still victims of a brutal double murder and deserve justice, as everyone does. 

[charmed1]

I think the fact that people are still talking about Ron Goldman 20 years later makes him more than just a footnote. Especially considering there were other murder victims in Los Angeles during that time who received little to no coverage and many, no justice. I live in DC and can remember when Joyce Chiang went missing and watching her brother beg and plead for help in finding her. Yet just two years later, when Chandra Levy, who lived just down the street from Joyce went missing, it was a national media frenzy. And then and only then was Joyce's name mentioned by the national media. But only as a link; a possible victim of the man who murdered Levy. The only victim they really cared about. Joyce was a footnote.