Reasonable Doubts: The O.J. Simpson Case and the Criminal Justice System

by Alan M. Dershowitz

Alan Dershowitz, one of the foremost legal thinkers of our time, explores a series of questions raised by the most-watched criminal trial in American history. Through this brilliant, eye-opening account of the O.J. Simpson case, he exposes the realities of the criminal justice system of this country.

Here, Professor Dershowitz examines the issues and social forces -- media, money, gender, and race -- that shape the criminal justice system in America today. Among the fascinating questions raised:

Was this really a case of circumstantial evidence?

Did Simpson's wealth "buy" the acquittal?

How could one of the longest trials in the history of America's judicial system produce a verdict after less than four hours of jury deliberation?

Reasonable Doubts is a work of lasting importance; it will force us to rethink our assumptions, not only about the case itself but about the strengths -- and weaknesses -- of the criminal justice system in America today.

This book is for the many thoughtful observers who sincerely and understandably believe that O.J. Simpson murdered Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, and that the jury's verdict of Not Guilty was therefore a miscarriage of justice...

Genres: Nonfiction, True Crime, Law, Audiobook, Crime, History, Politics

3 pages, Audio Cassette

First published February 1, 1996

About the author

Alan Morton Dershowitz is an American lawyer, jurist, and political commentator. He is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. He is known for his career as an attorney in several high-profile law cases and commentary on the Arab-Israeli conflict.

He has spent most of his career at Harvard, where, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor in its history, until Noam Elkies took the record. Dershowitz still holds the record as the youngest person to become a professor of law there.

As a criminal appellate lawyer, Dershowitz has won thirteen out of the fifteen murder and attempted murder cases he has handled. He successfully argued to overturn the conviction of Claus von Bülow for the attempted murder of Bülow's wife, Sunny. Dershowitz was the appellate advisor for the defense in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman.

Reviews

[Izzy · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 i read like 70%

[Sharon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Professor Alan Dershowitz explores a series of questions raised by the OJ Simpson Trial in 1995. Dershowitz exposes the realities of the criminal justice system in America. The book is aimed at those people who believe OJ Simpson was guilty and that the juries verdict of “not guilty” was unjust.
Professor Dershowitz was chosen by the defense to prepare the appeal, if Simpson was found guilty.
He uses the OJ Simpson case to examine the issues of race, media, money, celebrity and gender in the wider context of the American justice system. The case become a lightning rod of anger down racial lines, most whites believed him guilty yet the majority of Afro Americans believed Simpson was innocent and most likely framed by a raciest LAPD. The pictures of blacks cheering the not guilty verdict and white people stunned by the same verdict is still fresh in my mind.
Alan Dershowitz has written a compelling book, well researched and he is very knowledgeable. He believes it is better to allow a guilty person to walk free than to imprison an innocent person.

[Phil · Rating 5 out of 5]

Knock Knock. ˆWho's there?ˆ Dershowitz. ˆDershowitz who?ˆ Dershowitz the best scholarly assessment of the trial I've read so far! Dershowitz, while looking a little bit like a character from "The Princess Bride," is a Harvard Law professor and provides the most measured, comprehensive examination of the legal processes surrounding the "Trial of the Century" out of all the major attorneys. He prefers a level playing field, police responsibility, and a reasonable estimation of reasonable doubt: all elements that make our nation's legal system fair and balanced. If you are one of those people who sided with the "good guy" prosecution team, then any degree of reasonability will not exclude you from liking Dershowitz as much as I did. Is it too late for me to attend Harvard?

[Marcela · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's crazy how badly the cops fumbled the bag on this one... O.J. did it, you didn't need more evidence. Truly fucked up the jury.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting examination of the case and system.

[abi burt · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book for a Law and Justice class and I have to say, this case was crazy.

I have my opinion - which I firmly stand behind- but it was honestly insane how the LAPD jacked up the evidence. I was shocked. Flabbergasted. Disbelieving.

I’m a 17-year-old-girl and I know not to do some of the stuff they did. I mean. . . Putting a blanket over a body?! Keeping blood in your pocket for hours?! MOVING the body?!

I just. . . Wow.

I didn’t know a lot about this case, as it was before my time, but I was very interested in the people involved, especially Robert Kardashian. I know I heard Kim say “Uncle OJ” one too me, but I never thought they were best freaking friends. Honestly, I don’t know what I thought. Or maybe I did but I didn’t put together how Kim and her sisters were related to it.

Anyway, this book was a good peek into what in the world happened.

Would I read it again? No. But I’m glad that I did read it; great insight to not only the specifics in Simpsons case, but in the justice system as a whole.

[Jarred Goodall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whether you love him, or dislike him, Professor Dershowitz usually finds a way to make a thought-provoking argument, and he again in this book. Whether one agrees with him or not, he always exudes the courage to stand what for feels is right, and backs it with research and experience. He always entertains, and teaches. I commend him for that.

[Eddie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Criminal trial has a high conviction standard than civil trial. Compartmentalization of evidence didn’t work out in the Simpson case. When 5% of the key evidence is proven fabricated, it’s hard to trust the authenticity of the rest. And that’s how reasonable doubt got simpson walking out free

[Vicki Gooding · Rating 5 out of 5]

I personally read three other books that presented a lot of evidence that O.J. got away with murder. I never really saw him as a black man, but an extremely good football player with anger management and abusive spouse issues. That can happen regardless of color. But it seems when the verdict was read America was nearly divided in it's response by the color of the one hearing the verdict. I wanted to read something that might help me understand what was happening. No bias, or predetermined mindset, just something that could give me some sight into the defense other than the "race card". Reasonable Doubts is that book. Alan Dershowitz who was part of the dream team did an absolutely phenomenal job of painting a picture of the law, L.A. cops at that time, and very clear reasons why people could have reasonable doubts. I may not really believe justice was shown to two slain people, but legally, as long as there is reasonable doubt they had to acquit. I wish I could tell the author thank you for a simple, logical insight he provided for me in this case.

[Andrew Evans · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very interesting book from one of Simpson's defense team. Alan Dershowitz shows why he is one of America's top lawyers by convincing you that while race and the media definitely played a large part of the trial, the blunders of the prosecution and the LAPD ultimately allowed Simpson to walk free.The book doesn't go into the behind-the-scenes dynamics of the relationship between OJ Simpson and his lawyers, nor does it try to convince you that Simpson was "innocent." It is more or less only focused on the evidence in the case and how the defense team used the mistakes made by the LAPD and the prosecution counsel to their advantage. A good read for those who want to know more about the actual lawyering in the case rather than the drama surrounding it.

[Michael Harris · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book many years ago, and it came up again today by chance. Reflecting on the case, I recall what an elder once said: this verdict marked a major turning point for American society, shaking people's faith in justice and pushing them toward a money-driven path.

The prosecution did make mistakes, and the outcome was certainly surprising—but the case still offers valuable insights into the workings of the justice system.

As for the book itself, I found it full of twists and turns, utterly captivating from start to finish.

[jessica · Rating 3 out of 5]

My greatest takeaway is that Dershowitz truly believes in the justice system. This challenges me because I'm interested in truth, not so much the system that allows the corruption of it. There were some solid defenses presented both in the trial and here. I agree that Simpson's defense out-strategized the prosecution, but facts are facts. The trial was about who killed the two victims, not about the honorability of the LAPD, which is what it became. And that is the American justice system.

[Heather · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is clear from reading this book why Dershowitz is a good attorney because he makes a good case for why the jurors might have believed O.J. was guilty, but been unable to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (Not sure that I would agree with him).

The parts of this book that I found the most interesting were not Dershowitz's attempts to convince us that evidence was planted, Fuhrman was a racist, or that the prosecution poisoned the public with too much false information before and during the trial. I did find his information on the adversary system of law and the criminal justice system interesting. The best part of the book is when he describes how the verdict was not necessarily a racial decision, but based on the experiences of the jurors and the lens through which they saw the evidence (which the defense played into and the prosecution did not even take into consideration). Dershowitz is very critical of the prosecution, particularly Marcia Clark, and details in length the mistakes that they made in their handling of the case, witnesses and evidence.

Dershowitz's main point was that the jury was making some sort of statement that the police can not lie and get away with it, so they found O.J. not guilty. For me, that felt like a justification that the jury and Dershowitz himself did not deserve.

[Lisa · Rating 4 out of 5]

After watching the recent TV miniseries on O.J. Simpson's murder trial in 1994-95, it got me wanting to do some reading about the case. I had read a number of books that came out afterwards back then, but I am reading some others I hadn't read before. This one was by one of the defense lawyers team, law professor Alan Dershowitz. His primary job would have been to file the appeal if O.J. had been convicted and as we know, that wasn't necessary.

Here Dershowitz gives us a surprisingly (to me, anyway) compelling case for why the seemingly overwhelming amount of blood evidence at the murder scene and at O.J.'s home can't be believed at face value, given what he says was the enormous amount of police misconduct rampant among the LAPD. He also says it's "possible" that O.J. committed the murders, but his point was to explain why the jurors' decision to acquit Simpson was not as far-fetched as it seems to those of us who didn't hear all of the testimony. Well-written, even if I don't completely accept the points he makes.

**#44 of 120 books pledged to read/review during 2016**

[Suli Yang · Rating 5 out of 5]

They always say "law should be stable but should not stand still", but it is only upon reading this book that I actually felt the law's pulse. The author did a great job to put law into context, and discuss how various aspect of the society is shaping it.
I would recommend to any one who is interested in the criminal justice system.

[Christy Wolfe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good book. Great insight to trial lawyers and the things they do.

[Mimi Schweid · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had to read this for my Great Trials of the Century course and I rather enjoyed it. I learned a lot which is always good.