What do you think?
Rate this book
O.J. the Last Word
America's renowned criminal attorney and pundit, Gerry Spence, presents his definitive take on the 'Trial of the Century'. Initially chosen to defend O.J. Simpson, Spence delves into the racial dynamics and critiques the media frenzy and celebrity-obsessed culture surrounding the case.
Unknown Binding
First published October 1, 1997
41 people want to read
About the author
Gerry Spence
35 books65 followersGerry Spence is a trial lawyer in the United States. In 2008, he announced he would retire, at age 79, at the end of the Geoffrey Fieger trial in Detroit, MI. Spence did not lose a criminal case in the over 50 years he practiced law. He started his career as a prosecutor and later became a successful defense attorney for the insurance industry. Years later, Spence said he "saw the light" and became committed to representing people, instead of corporations, insurance companies, banks, or "big business."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
October 13, 2009
The author couldn't rise above my lack of interest in the subject matter. Some interesting points.
May 6, 2016
Gerry Spence, famed defense attorney, offers his take on the O.J. Simpson murder trial, a couple of years after the trial was over. During the trial, Spence appeared nightly as one of the infamous "Talking Heads" on the TV shows that talked about nothing else for the duration such as the Larry King Show, Charles Grodin's show on CBNC, and Geraldo Rivera's show.
Spence was reportedly O.J. Simpson's first choice of counsel. However, before talking to Spence O.J. had retained Robert Shapiro, and when Shapiro and Spence met to discuss the matter, Shapiro told him that he was leaning toward hiring Johnnie Cochran, and Spence didn't really want to take the case unless he could have total control of the defense strategy, and told Shapiro so. So instead, he became one of the few commentators allotted seated in the courtroom throughout the entire trial.
His book is different from the others I've read because Spence sheds more light on why the jury's verdict was not incomprehensible as so many (especially white) people thought. While he hints that O.J. may actually have committed the crimes at certain points throughout the book, he says that the extent of the history of LAPD corruption made it all too easy for the defense team and the jurors to not trust the seemingly insurmountable mountain of evidence pointing to O.J. as the killer of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, and to have reasonable doubt, in which case the not guilty verdict was the correct one to reach.
Spence's writing style is fascinating and offbeat, like the man himself if you've seen him speak on television, and that alone makes the book a real page-turner, no matter what you think of the verdict that was reached in the case.
**#52 of 120 books pledged to read/review during 2016**
Spence was reportedly O.J. Simpson's first choice of counsel. However, before talking to Spence O.J. had retained Robert Shapiro, and when Shapiro and Spence met to discuss the matter, Shapiro told him that he was leaning toward hiring Johnnie Cochran, and Spence didn't really want to take the case unless he could have total control of the defense strategy, and told Shapiro so. So instead, he became one of the few commentators allotted seated in the courtroom throughout the entire trial.
His book is different from the others I've read because Spence sheds more light on why the jury's verdict was not incomprehensible as so many (especially white) people thought. While he hints that O.J. may actually have committed the crimes at certain points throughout the book, he says that the extent of the history of LAPD corruption made it all too easy for the defense team and the jurors to not trust the seemingly insurmountable mountain of evidence pointing to O.J. as the killer of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, and to have reasonable doubt, in which case the not guilty verdict was the correct one to reach.
Spence's writing style is fascinating and offbeat, like the man himself if you've seen him speak on television, and that alone makes the book a real page-turner, no matter what you think of the verdict that was reached in the case.
**#52 of 120 books pledged to read/review during 2016**
February 1, 2024
I’ve read virtually every “impartial” (i.e. by non-participants) O.J. book written, many of them more than once (for what it’s worth I recommend the Toobin book especially; those who watched every minute of the proceedings may well find Dominick Dunne’s very different Another City, Not My Own a close second). Gerry Spence’s O.J., the Last Word is a fitting conclusion.* Although I disagreed with many of his opinions (and even more of his tone) I did agree with Spence on three important points: that Simpson’s arrest was tainted from the beginning by the patently illegal warrantless search his property, that Nicole Simpson was not the ideal of femininity portrayed by the prosecution, and most important, that given Fuhrman’s unmasking as a stone perjurer there was no way an honest jury could have convicted.
Spence is a good, albeit very doctrinaire (and very egotistical) writer, and he is nowhere better than in a concluding summary: “But O.J. Simpson didn’t get away with anything. The system worked. It revealed his guilt and, at the same time, preserved its safeguards for us.”
*not so fast, Mrs. Read. It turns out that people keep writing about it and I keep reading. It won’t conclude until O.J. or I is dead. Or never.
Spence is a good, albeit very doctrinaire (and very egotistical) writer, and he is nowhere better than in a concluding summary: “But O.J. Simpson didn’t get away with anything. The system worked. It revealed his guilt and, at the same time, preserved its safeguards for us.”
*not so fast, Mrs. Read. It turns out that people keep writing about it and I keep reading. It won’t conclude until O.J. or I is dead. Or never.
June 15, 2017
"I [believe] that the quality of justice in a nation, like the quality of coffee at a restaurant, often reflects the establishment," Gerry Spence writes, describing why he too has written "one of those O.J. books." Spence offers his homespun, countrified wisdom throughout, like a well-intentioned conservative relative whom you do not see very often but makes you uncomfortable at family reunions. Spence's insights are thoughtful and provocative, and clearly this is an educated man who knows a lot about the law. Not my favorite one of those O.J. books by any means, but a solid read to be sure. In case you were wondering, the "last word" in the O.J. Simpson matter should have been "adjudicate," "judiciary," or "jurisprudence" because those words are fun to say.
May 30, 2019
Gerry Spence books have always been a good read as his insights into the legal system are spot on. This book is no exception and is a good book for those who want to learn the dynamics about what goes into deciding on how to approach a case, how to handle witnesses, and developing theories and deciding who presents those theories the best to the audience (jury.
April 21, 2024
It is a attorney who didn't get picked to be on OJ's legal team, lecturing for a couple hundred pages. He goes on tangents, and only 5% of the book is actually about the OJ trial. Very disappointing.
December 24, 2021
There were several books that came out after the OJ Simpson trial, but this is one of the better ones, authored by a recognized legal expert who did not have a role in the case. He wrote it a few years after the 1994 murder and the trial that followed and it was published in 1997.
Gerry Spence is a prominent American lawyer who has never lost a criminal case working for either the prosecution or the defense. OJ Simpson wanted Spence to defend him in his trail for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman who were both stabbed outside Brown’s Los Angeles condo in June 1994. OJ had already spoken to and retained Robert Shapiro who intended to hire Johnny Cochrane and so Spence declined Spence's offer; he wanted full control of the defense strategy. Instead, he attended the trial as an observer. A few years after the trial ended and OJ had been declared not guilty, after the public outrage died down and the dust had settled, Spence wrote this compelling post mortem of the case, describing what happened during the trial and how, when and where the case fell off the rails. He details the numerous mistakes made by Deputy District Attorney and lead counsel Marcia Clark and her co-counsel Christopher Darden, exposes the short comings of everyone involved and criticizes the fact the proceedings were televised to millions of viewers, allowing the participants to becoming celebrities. He then lays out how he would have presented the case and how the state of the present legal system worked in favour of the defense, enabling them to convince the jury to decide on a not guilty verdict based on reasonable doubt.
Spence’s narrative is particularly critical of the Clark/Darden team, pointing out their failures in selecting a jury, their inept presentation of the critical DNA evidence which the jurors never understood and identifying several missteps in their closing arguments. He also criticizes them for their inability to keep their emotions in check, a skill he believes every lawyer must perfect if they are to maintain the respect of a judge and jury.
Spence does not avoid the issue of race and the role it played in the proceedings. It hung over everything that went on during the proceedings and was a key factor in the outcome.
Spence does his share of describing his own successes, tooting his horn and inflating his persona, sounding authoritative and also arrogant. However his arguments sound legitimate and more importantly, he has the credentials to make these judgements. He is backed by the solid track record of a successful law practice, his work as a lecturer at law schools and as a sought-after presenter at conferences. He does an excellent job of analyzing why the prosecution lost the case and why the man who he believes was guilty, was acquitted and set free.
It is interesting to read Spence's insights on the present day legal system and how that and the rampant corruption in the LAPD led the jurors to the only conclusion they could reach.
It was well worth the read.
Gerry Spence is a prominent American lawyer who has never lost a criminal case working for either the prosecution or the defense. OJ Simpson wanted Spence to defend him in his trail for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman who were both stabbed outside Brown’s Los Angeles condo in June 1994. OJ had already spoken to and retained Robert Shapiro who intended to hire Johnny Cochrane and so Spence declined Spence's offer; he wanted full control of the defense strategy. Instead, he attended the trial as an observer. A few years after the trial ended and OJ had been declared not guilty, after the public outrage died down and the dust had settled, Spence wrote this compelling post mortem of the case, describing what happened during the trial and how, when and where the case fell off the rails. He details the numerous mistakes made by Deputy District Attorney and lead counsel Marcia Clark and her co-counsel Christopher Darden, exposes the short comings of everyone involved and criticizes the fact the proceedings were televised to millions of viewers, allowing the participants to becoming celebrities. He then lays out how he would have presented the case and how the state of the present legal system worked in favour of the defense, enabling them to convince the jury to decide on a not guilty verdict based on reasonable doubt.
Spence’s narrative is particularly critical of the Clark/Darden team, pointing out their failures in selecting a jury, their inept presentation of the critical DNA evidence which the jurors never understood and identifying several missteps in their closing arguments. He also criticizes them for their inability to keep their emotions in check, a skill he believes every lawyer must perfect if they are to maintain the respect of a judge and jury.
Spence does not avoid the issue of race and the role it played in the proceedings. It hung over everything that went on during the proceedings and was a key factor in the outcome.
Spence does his share of describing his own successes, tooting his horn and inflating his persona, sounding authoritative and also arrogant. However his arguments sound legitimate and more importantly, he has the credentials to make these judgements. He is backed by the solid track record of a successful law practice, his work as a lecturer at law schools and as a sought-after presenter at conferences. He does an excellent job of analyzing why the prosecution lost the case and why the man who he believes was guilty, was acquitted and set free.
It is interesting to read Spence's insights on the present day legal system and how that and the rampant corruption in the LAPD led the jurors to the only conclusion they could reach.
It was well worth the read.
November 26, 2016
I've read almost every book about oj, Nicole brown simpson, and Ron goldman, and I have to say I was excited to read this book because of who the author was. I did enjoy parts of the book, but more then once I found myself thinking it was boring and I couldn't wait to get it over with. more than once I just wanted to shut the book, put it away for good and read something else. in my opinion the book could of been better, but Mr. Spence is a very intelligent man and he is for the little guy which I like, I do agree with some of his views about the justice system and on laws and in a way he made me look at things differently after reading his book. he is correct when he says we need to celebrate the oj verdict! all in all I'm glad I read this book and you probably will be too, just push through the middle chapters because the beginning chapters and ending chapters make up for it!
April 24, 2017
I'm rating the OJ books based on how essential I think the books are.
In terms of the facts, you're better off getting them elsewhere. But, I do think this book is essential reading if you think badly of Judge Ito or the jury. It's also a good commentary on our legal system and what makes an effective lawyer (hint: being a real person with empathy and honesty).
Spence loves metaphors, and some are more vivid than others. There's more filler than meat here, but the meat is well-done and well worth the meal.
The chapters I liked the least had to do with how Spence would have told his story to convict Simpson. I wasn't wild about the story he wove, and I doubt that the jury would have bought it either.
But, I've come away with great respect for Spence, and since he thought Faye Resnick's book was worth reading (I had initially decided not to read it), I may read that one after all. (Note: Mike Gilbert also gives Resnick more credit than others have in his book, "Confession"--Resnick was credited with actually believing Nicole's accounts of abuse and helping to convince Nicole to be done with OJ once and for all.)
In terms of the facts, you're better off getting them elsewhere. But, I do think this book is essential reading if you think badly of Judge Ito or the jury. It's also a good commentary on our legal system and what makes an effective lawyer (hint: being a real person with empathy and honesty).
Spence loves metaphors, and some are more vivid than others. There's more filler than meat here, but the meat is well-done and well worth the meal.
The chapters I liked the least had to do with how Spence would have told his story to convict Simpson. I wasn't wild about the story he wove, and I doubt that the jury would have bought it either.
But, I've come away with great respect for Spence, and since he thought Faye Resnick's book was worth reading (I had initially decided not to read it), I may read that one after all. (Note: Mike Gilbert also gives Resnick more credit than others have in his book, "Confession"--Resnick was credited with actually believing Nicole's accounts of abuse and helping to convince Nicole to be done with OJ once and for all.)
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews