A Perry Mason Moment?

Big news of the day.

Perry Mason would envy –

Marcia Clark’s new do.

4/24/95

You know what a twisted world it is when a change in the prosecutor’s coif gets more air time than the testimony in what was being hyped by the media themselves as the “Trial of the Century.”

Birth of the “Media Circus” Debated

My Facebook Friend, and longtime actual friend, Linda Deutsch, posted this on the other day:

“Judge Lance Ito was a question on tonight’s Jeopardy. Some stories live forever!”

That prompted this comment from FB Friend (also longtime actual friend) Scott Shulman:

“The answer is…he pioneered the terminology, ‘Media Circus’.”

Having been on the high-profile court scene since the run-up to the 1992 Rodney King beating trial, I begged to differ with my wonderful friend Scott as I recall that trial also being called a media circus.

Since Linda Deutsch’s high-profile trial experience goes back to the 1970 Charles Manson case (she’s been with The Associated Press for more than 47 years), I asked her if that court scene was called a media circus. Linda reached back to the 1930s and the Charles Lindbergh baby kidnapping and murder case, which was dubbed “The Trial of the Century.” No verdict yet on whether it was referred to as a media circus.

The Lindbergh trial was indeed called “The Trial of the Century” (as were other trials of the 20th Century), as cited in Hearst newspapers reporter and best-selling author Adela Rogers St. Johns’ autobiography “The Honeycomb.”  http://www.amazon.com/The-Honeycomb-Adela-Rogers-Johns/dp/0451063503. It might have been a circus, but I doubt if it was called a media circus, as the word media wasn’t ubiquitous in those pre-TV days like it is now.

A Welcome New O.J. Simpson Account — With Pictures

A photojournalist I met well before the infamous 1994-95 O.J. Simpson criminal trial invited me to Like the new Facebook page for his project, OJ “Trial Of The Century” Through The Lens Of A Black Press Photojournalist,

At this point this project is a work in progress, but the creator, photojournalist Haywood Galbreath has impressive plans.

In addition to an ebook in different format, “I also am working on a documentary and stationary photo exhibit as well as a traveling photo exhibit to tour different cities and talk about my experience in the trial next year,” Haywood said when I asked about the status of his project.

Here are a couple of his Status Updates from that page:

I want to establish in the beginning that my journey to being the only photojournalist in the world to have daily access to the O.J. Simpson double murder trial the “trial of the century” and the largest murder trial in the history of America. Was and still is a spiritual journey. As they say in a faraway place and a faraway time I chose to follow Christ. 

I also chose to believe in the power of the one I call the Great Spirit God. I could not have accomplished what I accomplished in covering that case without God making a way for me or faith, hope and love of which it speaks about in first Corinthians chapter 13 in the bible.As we take this journey, me telling my story about what it took to do it and what I saw take place in and documented taking place in the courtroom in regards to the O.J. Simpson double murder trial. I want to reiterate once again to everyone that for me it was and still is a spiritual journey. I truly believe that God ordained me from birth to make the journey for his Glory and to help his people.When I explain to you things that took place in my life and in reference to my coverage and documentation of the trial. I believe you will come to understand and believe also. What I hope the most is that you the reader will realize that what God did for me God will do for you also!

 

Twenty years ago this past August judge Lance Ito made a decision that was actually a major precedent. A major tilting of the moral arc toward that which is just. The decision was to permit the Black Press of America to have a photo position setting beside mainstream media daily in the O.J. Simpson double murder trial a major criminal court case.I am quite sure the judge did not make the decision lightly and he paid for it in many ways through his treatment by mainstream media. That decision the judge made that day. Only the most involved in media and the gathering of news images understand the precedent that was made with that decision.You will come to understand more about what I’m talking about in the book.

                                                          * * *

So far as I’m concerned, Haywood Galbreath personifies persistence and determination. He first crossed my radar in during the 1993 Reginald Denny-beating trial.  I mention Haywood several times in Anatomy of A Trial, including his request to staff a separate camera pool to represent African-American-owned and operated news organizations.

“But the Denny judge, while sympathetic, denied Galbreath’s request because he had submitted it after the trial had begun and logistics were already in place,” I wrote. “Galbreath didn’t make that mistake twice. …”

Although Haywood could be disruptive and was sometimes a pain, I came to respect not only his persistence, but his exemplary skills with a camera.

Although he has always maintained that the black perspective on the American condition and issues is different and stressed the importance of photographing events and situations from a black perspective, his recent comment says it best:

“I was of the strong opinion then and I am of the strong opinion now that anything that takes place in America, black Americans in all walks of life as well as Black Media if they choose to should have the right to have the same equal access as mainstream media.”

I eagerly await Haywood’s documentation of the Simpson trial as he photographed it.

Zimmerman’s Arrest Proves Only One Thing

Here we go again.

Countless cases have been compared the 1995 Simpson criminal trial over the past 18-19 years, including that of another two-bit ‘star’ accused of killing his wife that a veteran high-profile-trial news reporter predicted would be as big as Simpson.

Now comes Fox News Latino’s Rick Sanchez’s George Zimmerman, OJ Simpson And The Art Of Getting Away With Things.

“It’s like reliving the OJ Simpson saga all over again. I’ve always believed that George Zimmerman and Simpson had much in common, but it became crystal clear this week when I heard his girlfriend tell 911 operators that ‘he knows how to do it, he knows how to play the game.’,” Sanchez espouses.

Really! Knowing “how to play the game” is about all those two narcissistic bullies do have in common. OK, that, plus both being narcissistic bullies and neither being able to stay out of trouble.

What else? None of the captivating elements that landed Simpson in the top 10 of the Trial of the Century — sports hero, beautiful people, money, celebrity, sex — rub off on Zimmerman in any way. Although the 21st Century is young, racism,  violence against women and controversial verdict, while certainly Page 1 newsworthy,  won’t by themselves or even together elevate  Zimmerman to  even the top 100 list.

The only thing Zimmerman’s most recent arrest proves is that, like so many gun nuts, without one, Zimmerman is a nobody.

Simpson Trial Participants Update Found Wanting

Every so often, a Simpson trial “where are they now” story pops up. I guess the 19th anniversary of the “1994 ‘Trial of the Century’ double-murder case” — at least in the mind of HLN scribe Jonathan Anker (never mind that opening statements in the trial didn’t begin until January 1995) — was as good an excuse as any.

I also should have been forewarned by the “1994 ‘Trial of the Century” in his The O.J. Simpson Trial: Where are they now?  “slide show” posted today on the HLN website, that  it might contain an error or two.

And it does. The very first slide is of the trial judge, Lance Ito. The caption says:

“Judge Lance Ito: Ito remained a Los Angeles Superior Court judge until 2012, when budget cuts closed his courtroom. He now oversees the appointment of experts in Los Angeles County death penalty cases. In a recent interview, Ito estimated he’d presided over more than 150 cases since the Simpson trial. Before leaving the bench, Judge Ito’s courtroom was the only one in the courthouse without a name placard out front; thieves kept swiping the well-known judge’s nameplate, so the court finally decided to stop replacing it.”

To his credit, Anker did get a couple of things right in that blurb. One is the spelling of Ito’s name.

Snark aside, Anker did get a number of things wrong. One is that Ito is no longer a judge. Wrong. Ito remains an active judge on the Los Angeles Superior Court. His current term expires in two years and, according to a conversation I had with him less than a week ago, he is contemplating whether to run for a fifth six-year term.

It is true that Ito’s was one of 55 courtrooms in Los Angeles County closed recently because of draconian budget cuts. He did not, however, lose his judgeship as a result. He is serving as a fill-in judge in his colleagues’ absence, and he is handling special projects assigned by the court leadership.

 

What Difference Do Cameras Make?

“Is it really the trial of the century if only a few can see it?”

That is the question raised by a Boston Herald story about the James “Whitey” Bulger-trial camera ban. “Massive media contingent not daunted by camera ban”  http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/06/massive_media_contingent_not_daunted_by_camera_ban

My question is, would the Bulger case be the trial of the century — or a trial of the century, given that a good half-dozen trials held in the 20th Century were called the trial of the century — if cameras were not banned?

In my experience with dozens of trials of significant media interest, including a few that might fall into “the trial of the century” bailiwick, cameras access might affect how news organizations cover a trial, but not necessarily whether they will cover it or the level of public interest in it.

That was my conclusion in one of the most popular stories published in the National Center for State Courts The Court Manager was my 1997 “What A Difference A Lens Makes,” which contrasts media coverage and public interest in two cases that had two trials each; one with cameras and one without. http://www.anatomyofatrial.com/pages/images/Difference1_000.jpg, http://www.anatomyofatrial.com/pages/images/Difference2_000.jpg

The 1995 O.J. Simpson criminal trial, involving the murders of Simpson ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman, had camera coverage. The subsequent wrongful death civil trial didn’t. The 1993 Menendez brothers parricide trial had camera coverage, the 1996 retrial did not.

My belief is bolstered when I name several high-profile trials at presentations I do about high-profile trials and ask the people attending which of those trials had camera coverage. Most get at least one wrong.

My list generally includes:

• Martha Stewart insider trading
• Rodney King beating
• Scott Peterson murder
• Michael Jackson child molestation
• Heidi Fleiss pandering
• Menendez brothers parricide (yes and no)
• William Kennedy Smith rape
• Casey Anthony murder

So whether or not the Bulger trial rises (or sinks, depending on one’s point of view) to a “trial of the century” level will depend far more on how the media cover it than on whether their cameras can record or air it to the public.

Accuracy Need Not Apply

Blech!

“O.J. Simpson Movie Is Currently In The Works”
http://www.inquisitr.com/584523/o-j-simpson-movie-is-currently-in-the-works/#pmOKTzKZcgdBvrd9.99

Am I obsessing over this?

Just galls me to read about this on so many sites. A supposed representation of an actual event that “will take viewers behind the scenes of ‘The Trial of the Century,’ driven by the nonstop plot of a courtroom thriller and presenting the story of the trial as it has never been told.”

First, a courtroom thriller? It was a nearly 10-month trial from opening statements to verdict — more than a year, counting jury selection, which is officially part of the trial.

Second, there were far more eye-glazing hours during those endless months than “thrilling” moments. The Simpson trial was more accurately a courtroom obsession.

Third, as a prelude to just how inaccurate or factually manipulated this exploitation will be, is the statement in this story that Toobin’s book was published in 1997, “roughly one year after the not guilty verdict was handed down.”  The Simpson verdict was announced in 1995 — Oct. 3 — to be exact. How is that “roughly one year before 1997?”

If these movie makers really wanted an accurate “behind-the-scenes” view of that trial, they would base their series on my book, “Anatomy of a Trial.”

I was not only in the courtroom and literally behind the scenes, including the trial judge’s chambers, daily, my book is based on the daily journal I kept and court and other official documents.  And “Anatomy” is written in an engaging, narrative style. Plus, I contacted everyone mentioned in the book to verify the accuracy of their quotes.

But then, maybe it’s too accurate for movie makers.

T

I Wonder if They’ll Call

I wondered today if I should be sitting by the phone awaiting a call.

What about?

To be invited to serve as an adviser or consultant on a movie being touted to “take viewers behind the scenes of ‘The Trial of the Century,’ driven by the nonstop plot of a courtroom thriller and presenting the story of the trial as it has never been told,” a Los Angeles Times story, quoting a publicity statement, said.

O.J. Simpson trial and ‘Shogun’ to become Fox movie events

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-oj-simpson-trial-shogun-fox-movie-events-20130320,0,753139.story

Behind the scenes of 1995 Simpson murder trial? No one had a more “behind the scenes” view or role that I did — save, the judge, Lance Ito, and his courtroom staff. That, in fact, is what my book Anatomy of a Trial is all about. That and the often-erroneous perception people — and particularly members of the judiciary around the world — had, and still have, of that trial. So, I would be the perfect consultant.

The movie, with working title “The Run of His Life: “The People v. O.J. Simpson”, is reported to be based on a book of that name by CNN legal correspondent,author, and New Yorker magazine contributor Jeffrey Toobin.

A clue to my opinion of Toobin’s book, or at least a part of it, can be found on pages 65-67 of my book and is presaged on the home page of my website @ http://www.anatomyofatrial.com.

Another omen that might be a predictor of the movie’s accuracy is that the courtroom artist’s rendering that accompanied the L.A. Times story was done in Nov. 1996 and was of the 1996 trial, according to the illustration caption.

Simpson’s criminal trial, The People vs  Orenthal James Simpson, ended on October 3, 1995, with not guilty verdicts.

It seemed rather strange to me that the Times chose a sketch from a trial other than the one the movie is to be based on. There were hundreds of sketches done of the ’95 criminal trial.

Also in the spirit of accuracy, the 1996 trial, which actually was the 1996–97 trial, with the jury rendering its verdict on Feb. 4, 1997. I had an insightful behind-the-scenes role — and daily seat in the courtroom — in that trial, too.

A Face(book) Out of the Past

Facebook is great!

Among those I’ve connected with on it is a former Los Angeles TV staffer who, like me, has become a Midwesterner. He won a huge spot in my heart during the 1995 Simpson trial with his humor, affibility and grace. Although it didn’t make it into Anatomy, this guy filed and ‘appeal’ to prizes Judge Lance Ito awarded the graffitied comments members of the media wrote on the L.A. Times ad posted in the Criminal Courts Building ‘listening room’ of the KCBS interview Ito did months before opening statements in the trial. Identifying himself in his appeal as Alex Epstein, aka Jackal, aka Vermin, Epstein asked Ito to reconsider his decision. It’s a funny ‘appeal’ and Ito responded with an equal good humor.

Ito denied Epstein’s appeal, but since he found the appeal “mildly amusing,” he wrote, the Court “on its own motion, issues an alternative writ granting Epstein the title of Epstein the Mild winner of an Honorable Mention.” Ito’s writ was to be served to Epstein along with “one bottle of Clos Du Bois Chardonnay,  which the Court finds to be potable.”

This is but one more example of Ito’s sense of humor and personality and of him as a human being.

I don’t think I would violate Alex’s privacy by posting his Facebook reply to my invitation to friend me. So here it is:

Hi Jerrianne –

How nice to hear from you! Your “invitation” brought back a flood of memories – not the least of which was the appeal. How nutty was that?  Harvey Levin, of TMZ fame, helped me draft it (he was/is a lawyer after all) – and that you agreed to give it to Judge Ito was a minor miracle.  Thanks for your sense of humor. What stresses there must have been on you – you never let it show, and you were such a wonderful, human face to that crazy bureaucracy you worked for.

I’ll never forget however wacky our requests were, you would seriously consider them, usually take a deep breath, and say you would try to get an answer for us!

I will look for your book, because I would be interested in your perspective.

I took my personal videocamera to work (at Criminal Courts during OJ) one day – and after all these years, looked at it – it kind of captured a bit of the atmosphere — but — do you remember when the USC Marching Band came by to play (outside) when the OJ Lawyers made their morning entrance one day?

What ever happened to Diane Arbus’ photos?

Unbelieveably small world. Who would have thought I would wind up in the midwest – raising kids and trying to stay employed in the media world out here. I miss LA, because I have these rose colored memories about so many wonderful, primary experiences (and thank God I was not injured in any of the lunatic stories I covered) – thankful for the good schools and the bubble of normalcy that passes for the northern suburbs of chicago.

What brought you to the midwest? A job took me out here!

Again, thanks for getting in touch – I look forward to connecting one of these days – maybe at a cubs brewers game!

All the best,

Alex

L.A. County Bar hosts ‘Lessons Learned’ program

Glory be! The Los Angeles County Bar Association Criminal Justice Section is presenting a panel discussion on May 19 on “The First O. J. Simpson Trial – Its Impact on Law and Our Courts During the Last Fifteen Years.” And guess who’s not going to be there. I learned about this event from a friend a couple of days ago. Despite my many attempts, beginning in October, to get on the Bar’s radar about Anatomy of a Trial and my availability to participate in any upcoming programs, the organizers didn’t know about either the book or my availability. But, after learning about Anatomy on Friday, they said if I could get informational material to them, they would distribute it to the attendees. So that was my morning yesterday (Saturday). Developed a flier (I have done others, but wanted to target the audience, so created a new one) and emailed it to the contact person. I also put a bunch of Anatomy bookmarks in the mail to my friend, AP reporter Linda Deutsch who covered the entire 1995 trial and was added to the panel almost as an after thought, to also give to attendees.

So, while I would love to have been able to participate, at least getting the book mentioned is a good thing. Interestingly, California Lawyer notified me just a few days ago that a review of Anatomy will run in an upcoming issue.

On the LACBA panel, Linda will be joining three Simpson defense lawyers, Gerald Uelman, Carl Douglas and Barry Scheck; former deputy district attorney Andrea Ordin (who wasn’t on the Simpson case), and Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David Wesley.

 www.anatomyofatrial.com