O.J. the Last Word

Gerry Spence has several books on the market that detail his opinions regarding the state of modern America. Most of them, while the opinions are worth reading, tend to suffer from long, meandering repetition, that lose or sedate the reader. Employing this technique in the courtroom is probably one of the reasons Spence is such a successful trial lawyer. This book however is different. It gets right to the point, and it stays on it without wearing itself out. More importantly, while this is a book about the day-to-day events of the trial, and his thoughts regarding it, a good bit of it pertains to how this trial has been perceived by the masses and the media, and its effect on people's perception of what real trial law is about. Along the way Spence manages to input the same set of thoughts and ideas that make up the bulk of his other writings, only this time he gets to the point quickly and attaches them to a tangible event that most of us remember very well -- even those of us who tried desperately to avoid it -- the media circus surrounding the trial. Be warned, this book does not strive to tell the reader what her or she wants to hear. And Spence, an accomplished lawyer, is capable of upsetting people by presenting arguments that tend to compel them to believe things they do not wish to. Nor is this a book that hides its feelings behind a shield of political correctness. It is not rude and does not deliberately seek to offend anyone, but those who base their perceptions of this world on the false eloquence we frequently see on TV might be taken back. Which is yet another reason why this book should be highly recommended.

The Death of Justice is about so much more than O.J. - or the lawyers or the judge or the media. It's an intellectual examination, in a reader-friendly style, that breaks this famous trial down into its component parts so as to examine what went right and what went wrong, what could have been done differently, and what should be done in the future. It's also about tolerance and learning to see things from the other guy's perspective. I found it to be much more important than the other drivel out there, but then again I don't consider an intelligent discussion of both sides of an issue to be boring, or liberal, or conservative. It just is, and we should do more of it.

Gerry Spence was born and raised in Wyoming, and has lived there all his life. He has not lost a criminal case in his forty-year career, nor a civil case before a jury in twenty-five years. He is the Earl Rogers of our generation. He refuses to represent banks, insurance companies, big business, big corporations, and the rich and famous (unless there is a public issue involved). This book contains his comments on the trial, and much more on the justice system, and other events of the times. OJ Simpson first wanted him as his defense lawyer; he talked to R. Shapiro , and then viewed the trial. He has many comments on this event. The "experts" who never tried a murder case, never saw the inside of a jail, never worked in a courtroom, but were interviewed by the media. He compares them to professors of surgery who have never used a scalpel! Gerry Spence writes about many things that need more discussion. He says that the collective wisdom of a jury is superior to any one judge or lawyer; I think this would be due to the dialogues involved in summing up different viewpoints. He noted that the OJ Trial was used to attack the jury system, and the rights of all citizens; but this has failed too. Gerry Spence believes that OJ was guilty; but the evidence (and the jury) said otherwise. He mentions the person who claimed to have seen OJ at 10:45 driving north on Bundy, and sold her story for $5000 (she needed the money). This witness was never used by the prosecution or the defense. Since OJ was talking on the intercom to the limo driver at this time, he could not have been the driver of the "white vehicle". How reliable could this witness be? "Too good to be true"? The author doesn't discuss the possibility of "false witnessing" in this or other cases: e.g., "Tom Mooney" by Curt Gentry. Gerry Spence notes that the jury system is a defense agains prosecutorial and judicial tyranny. If you have never read any of his books, this is a good one to start with. Chapter 19 discusses the mass psychology of people on the guilt of OJ (and others). It is well worth reading. Stephen Singular's "Legacy of Deception" said "all the blood evidence is suspect". I believe the socks and the glove were planted. If a guilty OJ could dispose of the bloody clothes, shoes, knives, etc. then the socks and glove would also be gone.

Spence is one of the great lewyers of all time. It makes sense, then, that he should bring some light to all the furor over the OJ Case. He has explained, for the first time, what really happened in the case and why the Prosecution lost what appeared to be an "air tight" case. As he does in many of his books Spence takes the opportunity to moralize about our justice system and about its control by the corporate oligarchy. I wonder if anyone is paying attention? The man is right, and we need to wake up to what he is saying. Justice is not being done in America's courts and there is reason for it and a solution. Spence understands. Many who try cases regularly understand. The public needs to be made to understand before it is to late. Like Pastor Niemoller in Nazi Germany, we can wait too long to speak out. Read this book and then do something. We are in trouble with our justice system and it needs to be fixed.

Want to be disturbed, want to risk a difficult self-evaluation, want to endorse some uncomfortable facts about this Country's History? I guess it will be decided on why you read. Mr. Spence, "I say we must celebrate the verdict in the Simpson case, and honor the jurors for their wisdom and their unappreciated gift of freedom they have delivered to us". The first time through that statement, hopefully, will stir some emotion within anyone regardless of their color, or opinion that, "justice was aborted in this case..." And then after the emotion has passed, sit back and think about all Mr. Spence has written, and how you as an individual have any sort of race bias within you. I do not consider myself racist, but I am to a degree very wrong. If I pick up the latest novel by Robert Ludlum is there any thought given to who is behind the cash register? answer for me is no. Why then a pause regarding a book on the case of this person Mr. Simpson? I did pause when an African-American was behind the counter. Why? I thought that here in the middle of my day why do I want to possibly engage in, if not an uncomfortable moment, an outright argument. I had been routinely exposed to polls splittig the opinions of the guilt or innocence of this man based on color, and it gave me pause. Embarassing for me, and symptomatic of what the trial, and Mr. Spence's well-written book are all about. The versions of this Country's History are often great works of fiction. How would any white individual take a person of color to The Jefferson Memorial in Washington D.C. and not be embarassed? Mr. Jefferson used his slaves as currency for debts, and other functions that Mr. Spence will share with readers. "All men are created......several typos follow? Mount Vernon was the home to 300+ slaves, that Mr. Washinton generously "gave" their freedom to.........after he died. What a monumental meaningless act of arrogance, that resounds with others like it, to this day, to our Nation, to the States we live in, and the Towns we call home. He "gave" these people something that was not his to take or give. There is a museum on our National Mall to he Holocaust of World War II. Where is the same type of prominence at least equally worthy of note, and unique in that it happened HERE, ON OUR SOIL, to the African Americans, and Native Americans of this Country? Saddam gasses his people, we stand tall and condemn the man, and he doubtlessly deserves it. If we had the Helicopters and the gas in the 19th Century we would have used them too. Ugly fact, absolutely, one of the many issues we need to deal honestly with? only if we care about the length and quality of our Country's Future. Mr Spence said, "it takes a certain amount of courage to live in a Democracy". Sir Winston Spencer Churchill said, "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time".