Scan barcode
missuskisses's review
4.0
My book rating is based on how much it contributes to the OJ "story." That said, jurors' perspectives are always valuable, especially these three, who made it to the end to render the verdict. None of the other (dismissed) jurors' books are from jurors who actually rendered the verdict, though I may eventually read their books just for more perspectives on the sequestration part of the journey.
Marsha Rubin-Jackson, Armanda Cooley, and Carrie Bess, sequestered from the outside world, thought they were just doing their jobs, but realized how unpopular their verdict was as soon as they were released. (To this day, much vitriol is still directed at the jurors whenever this case is mentioned.) Understandably, then, I get the distinct impression that this book was also published to try to help people understand how they reached their verdict and try to assure readers that their verdict was not race-based.
Many critics of the verdict failed to understand that the public received a lot more information about the case than the jurors. You may not want to rely on this book to explain reasonable doubt, but if you want to understand that aspect better, read "American Tragedy" by Lawrence Schiller. As these jurors attest, Barry Scheck and the defense DNA experts contributed a lot more to the acquittal than Johnny Cochran. While I keep a healthy dose of skepticism when reading all OJ books, I believe these three. They had been sequestered for nine months!! So for a good part of the trial, they were a lot less impressed with theatrics and rhetoric, which they felt to be distracting and time-consuming, and were more interested in the attorneys who could prove--or in this case, disprove--the evidence. On with the substance so they could get home!
I'm not saying that I agree with these jurors' analyses of the evidence, and I am bothered by some of the 1990's attitudes towards domestic violence, which some have carried into the present. Carrie Bess, interviewed in the last couple years or so for the 2016 ESPN documentary, stated that she has no respect for women who stay with their abusers. She says pretty much the same thing in this book, though in less colorful, more muted language. But guess what? You have to work with the jury you get, so it's illuminating to see what people think. (To be fair, not a whole lot of abuse evidence made it into the trial before the jury. Still.)
The book is not very well served by the transcriber and editor, who did not seem to put much thought into the organization and flow of the book. It reads more or less like the three jurors sat down, told their stories and answered questions, and that was simply transcribed. The editor did not even catch multiple misspellings of the word "allele," a word that appears multiple times. This was especially unfortunate, as these misspellings occur just as the jurors are trying to convince the readers that they weren't as ignorant about the DNA evidence as the prosecution and the world thought them to be. Tom Byrnes and Mike Walker certainly didn't do them any favors with the shoddy transcription and editing. They probably wanted to release it as soon as possible, so the end result is not very polished. Nevertheless, the book provided much needed insight into the case, and I commend the effort.
Marsha Rubin-Jackson, Armanda Cooley, and Carrie Bess, sequestered from the outside world, thought they were just doing their jobs, but realized how unpopular their verdict was as soon as they were released. (To this day, much vitriol is still directed at the jurors whenever this case is mentioned.) Understandably, then, I get the distinct impression that this book was also published to try to help people understand how they reached their verdict and try to assure readers that their verdict was not race-based.
Many critics of the verdict failed to understand that the public received a lot more information about the case than the jurors. You may not want to rely on this book to explain reasonable doubt, but if you want to understand that aspect better, read "American Tragedy" by Lawrence Schiller. As these jurors attest, Barry Scheck and the defense DNA experts contributed a lot more to the acquittal than Johnny Cochran. While I keep a healthy dose of skepticism when reading all OJ books, I believe these three. They had been sequestered for nine months!! So for a good part of the trial, they were a lot less impressed with theatrics and rhetoric, which they felt to be distracting and time-consuming, and were more interested in the attorneys who could prove--or in this case, disprove--the evidence. On with the substance so they could get home!
I'm not saying that I agree with these jurors' analyses of the evidence, and I am bothered by some of the 1990's attitudes towards domestic violence, which some have carried into the present. Carrie Bess, interviewed in the last couple years or so for the 2016 ESPN documentary, stated that she has no respect for women who stay with their abusers. She says pretty much the same thing in this book, though in less colorful, more muted language. But guess what? You have to work with the jury you get, so it's illuminating to see what people think. (To be fair, not a whole lot of abuse evidence made it into the trial before the jury. Still.)
The book is not very well served by the transcriber and editor, who did not seem to put much thought into the organization and flow of the book. It reads more or less like the three jurors sat down, told their stories and answered questions, and that was simply transcribed. The editor did not even catch multiple misspellings of the word "allele," a word that appears multiple times. This was especially unfortunate, as these misspellings occur just as the jurors are trying to convince the readers that they weren't as ignorant about the DNA evidence as the prosecution and the world thought them to be. Tom Byrnes and Mike Walker certainly didn't do them any favors with the shoddy transcription and editing. They probably wanted to release it as soon as possible, so the end result is not very polished. Nevertheless, the book provided much needed insight into the case, and I commend the effort.
More...