|
illcendiary posted:No he means Astrodome. They opened it up to house evacuees and it ended up being a complete catastrophe. That building was on the verge of being condemned before the hurricane and they decided to use it anyway. I wasn't aware of this, but chances are that he did still mean Superdome.
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 17:09 |
|
|
I guess my DVR hosed up or something because I wasn't aware until I read the thread that there was an extra 30 minutes at the end of the finale. Crap. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 08:45
|
|
|
Surely your cable provider offers free on-demand for current episodes? And if they don't, if you're in the states you should presumably have access to FX's online streams?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Agent Escalus posted:Surely your cable provider offers free on-demand for current episodes? And if they don't, if you're in the states you should presumably have access to FX's online streams? I don't know about on-demand, but I'll try FXNow
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
If they want to recycle some of their 90s props and costumes, the 1996 Olympics bombing might make an interesting season.
ninjahedgehog fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Apr 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
ninjahedgehog posted:If they want to recycle some of their 90s props and costumes, the 1996 Olympics bombing might make an interesting season. Oklahoma City bombing or Waco could work too, for continued 90s nostalgia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Might as well combine those two into one series, which could fit over a regular-length TV season, since one directly lead to the other. Maybe Barry Pepper can be cast as McVeigh?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
Waco would be much better than Katrina I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Can we get a following of the unibomber? Was he in the news enough? I really don't know much about him, but I want 10 hours of TV dedicated to him and his Montana lifestyle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Agent Escalus posted:Maybe Barry Pepper can be cast as McVeigh? That would've been really good casting at one point, but he's in Kill The Messenger which came out in 2014/15 which I just watched, and he's looking quite a bit older. All these "domestic terrorism" cases, or whatever they are like Waco, are great fodder for a miniseries/anthology, but I don't think the creators are gonna go near anything to do with terrorism. Hell, they've already said that if this next season is about Katrina that they are staying away from criticizing the government handling of it. (And if you know anything about Waco, or what lead up to it like Ruby Ridge, then that would be unavoidable.) Longbaugh01 fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Ktik posted:Can we get a following of the unibomber? Was he in the news enough? I really don't know much about him, but I want 10 hours of TV dedicated to him and his Montana lifestyle. He's definitely an interesting guy. Ted Kaczynski got into Harvard when he was 16, where he was supposedly a subject of the CIA's MK Ultra experiments.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Finally watched it. I thought the 2016 GOP presidential primaries were a mess, but this show reminds me that the OJ case (which I was not old enough to appreciate at the time) was a bigger clusterfuck. I knew Cochran's motives for defending OJ were complicated; and Courtney B. Vance deserves an Emmy. (But I still laugh at Spooky Mormon Hell Dream...) I didn't understand why everyone hated Ito. Now I know. Echo Chamber fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:I didn't understand why everyone hated Ito. Now I know. Really? Like most of the other characters I was more sympathetic after the portrayal. What did you find unlikable about his portrayal here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
timp posted:Really? Like most of the other characters I was more sympathetic after the portrayal. What did you find unlikable about his portrayal here? Now I see that he didn't have any control over the court.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
timp posted:Really? Like most of the other characters I was more sympathetic after the portrayal. What did you find unlikable about his portrayal here? He's presented as both out of control of the situation and extremely self serving. He's more concerned with what the trial can do for him than with conducting it fairly. He's not the worst though. I think aside from Robert Kardashian and Chris Darden pretty much everyone has some kind of self serving motive, even the more sympathetic characters like Marcia Clark.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
OrthoTrot posted:He's presented as both out of control of the situation and extremely self serving. He's more concerned with what the trial can do for him than with conducting it fairly. Also there's the issue of Ito speaking out in court in defense of his wife and her courageousness as a woman in a male dominated profession while he had been continuously sexist to Marcia Clark throughout the trial. That's her allegation, at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Ktik posted:Can we get a following of the unibomber? Was he in the news enough? I really don't know much about him, but I want 10 hours of TV dedicated to him and his Montana lifestyle. This would be very doable for a miniseries. It was his brother David and his wife who figured out it was him. That gives you a lot of TV material outside of a guy hanging out in a shack all the time and the standard police stuff. Contrasts with Kardashian holding out all the way for OJ. Also fits in with our That 90s Show theme perfectly. quote:. David later hired Washington, D.C. attorney Tony Bisceglie to organize evidence acquired by Swanson and make contact with the FBI, given the likely difficulty in attracting the FBI's attention. He wanted to protect his brother from the danger of an FBI raid, such as the Ruby Ridge or the Waco Siege, since he assumed Ted would not take kindly to being contacted by the FBI and would likely react irrationally or violently. The 90s are why we let whackos take over bird sanctuaries now instead of just going in and arresting them. FuriousxGeorge fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Ito's problem was that he allowed himself to be swept up in the media circus, and seemed to start to care about how he came across on TV. Not to mention how he seemed to side with the defence. It was particularly bad when OJ decided to not take the stand, and how instead of just saying Yes or No he allows OJ to rattle off a speech (As mentioned in that Bugliosi video, the speech was rehearsed weeks in advance) that makes him appear a lot more sympathetic. Darden, Ito, Clark et al might be good people who had their own problems (And lord knows Clark got treated like poo poo) but they all made astoundingly stupid decisions throughout that trial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Marcia Clark and the prosecution got a veritable hero's edit in this script, which I guess was to be expected given Sarah Paulson's history with Ryan Murphy shows. I lover her so I'm glad she keeps getting work. The biggest mistake of the season was casting Cuba as OJ. He was awful. That was a depressing finale.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Ito's problem was that he allowed himself to be swept up in the media circus, and seemed to start to care about how he came across on TV. Not to mention how he seemed to side with the defence. It was particularly bad when OJ decided to not take the stand, and how instead of just saying Yes or No he allows OJ to rattle off a speech (As mentioned in that Bugliosi video, the speech was rehearsed weeks in advance) that makes him appear a lot 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
TheCenturion posted:Dunno about California at the time, but in general, testimony in the narrative is a thing. OJ's speech wasn't presented as being such, though. Dominick Dunne summed it up pretty well at the time: quote:In a dazzling display of showmanship and chutzpah, a carefully rehearsed O.J. Simpson rose to his feet to waive his right to testify and then electrified the courtroom with an unprecedented speech ... It was hard to know where to look in the shocked courtroom. Judge Ito, who would have cut off any other defendant in mid-sentence, merely stared, knowing he had been outfoxed. Marcia Clark fumed. To my left, Simpson’s daughter Arnelle sobbed. Clark was vehemently against allowing OJ to speak, but Ito allowed it anyway. He does eventually cut him off, but it's way too late by then and he's done his performance for the cameras.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
First Ito joined in on making GBS threads on Clark about the haircut. That's when I started souring on him. Then he completely capitulated to the defense and let OJ make that loving speech. When he did that, I said out loud, "Really? gently caress YOU!" I may have gotten too into this show, but it was because I just couldn't believe all this crazy poo poo really happened. I vaguely knew about it beforehand, but I was literally a toddler at the time so I have no memories of it. I really appreciated Vanity Fair's fact-checking articles after each episode.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
From my experience, the problem seemed to be that Ito let things get out of hand, he should have been on top of everyone and everything and not allow any funny business. This trial was like, 99 percent funny business.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
Bugliosi presents some pretty damning evidence that Ito screwed up a whole number of things. In particular he behaved petulantly towards Clark, who never challenged it, and he made a number of rulings that were damaging to the prosecution but had no basis at all in law. The particular example Bugliosi gives is really weird. Simpson apparently shouted something that could have been interpreted as a confession when talking to a priest in jail. A Prison Officer nearby heard it and wrote a report. The defence argued this couldn't be admitted as evidence as the conversation was privileged. But this, as a point of law, is no argument if the privilege is considered to be waived. And Ito accepted that it had been waived as Simpson knew the Officer was within earshot. But he then disallowed the report anyway, despite the fact there is only one legal basis for doing so and he accepted it didn't apply. Bugliosi presents Ito as either ignorant or uncaring of the actual law in question.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
TheBizzness posted:If you like True Crime and haven't seen The Jinx you are doing yourself a huge disservice. Watched The Jinx because of this post and wowsers. Glad you decided to mention it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 11:45
|
|
|
OrthoTrot posted:The particular example Bugliosi gives is really weird. Simpson apparently shouted something that could have been interpreted as a confession when talking to a priest in jail. A Prison Officer nearby heard it and wrote a report. The defence argued this couldn't be admitted as evidence as the conversation was privileged. But this, as a point of law, is no argument if the privilege is considered to be waived. And Ito accepted that it had been waived as Simpson knew the Officer was within earshot. But he then disallowed the report anyway, despite the fact there is only one legal basis for doing so and he accepted it didn't apply. The priest was his friend Rosey Grier: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/stuart-529204-simpson-heard.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
Santheb posted:Watched The Jinx because of this post and wowsers. Glad you decided to mention it. The Jinx was crazy, and what an ending! You should google the guy and see what kind of shenanigans he got up to afterward.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Sand Monster posted:The priest was his friend Rosey Grier: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/stuart-529204-simpson-heard.html I think the point is that while he may have been seeing him as a friend the fact that he was a priest meant there conversation would normally be considered privileged in the same way a conversation with his lawyer would be. The only exception being if the conversation happened knowingly in earshot of others, in which case the privilege legally is considered to be waived. If Grier was just a normal friend the whole thing seems to be considered in a different manner legally, and presumably there would be no dispute that it was admissible as evidence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
LordPants posted:From my experience, the problem seemed to be that Ito let things get out of hand, he should have been on top of everyone and everything and not allow any funny business. That's why I appreciated Darden's little meltdown late in the trial. Well acted by Sterling K. Brown too, you really felt his despair at how ridiculous everything had become by that point, and the anger he must have felt, knowing that they were getting run over.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
mdemone posted:That's why I appreciated Darden's little meltdown late in the trial. Well acted by Sterling K. Brown too, you really felt his despair at how ridiculous everything had become by that point, and the anger he must have felt, knowing that they were getting run over. This was Marcia Clark letting the anger and frustration get the better of her on the morning of the verdict. It seems she probably knew which way it was going to go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg8su9gCwDw
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
LordPants posted:From my experience, the problem seemed to be that Ito let things get out of hand, he should have been on top of everyone and everything and not allow any funny business. Yeah. One of the things I remembered before watching this is that Ito was absolutely incompetent as hell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
OrthoTrot posted:Bugliosi presents some pretty damning evidence that Ito screwed up a whole number of things. In particular he behaved petulantly towards Clark, who never challenged it, and he made a number of rulings that were damaging to the prosecution but had no basis at all in law. Ito had every reason to let the fuhrman tape about planting evidence hit the record but didn't because he didn't want to seem biased.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Longbaugh01 posted:I wasn't aware of this, but chances are that he did still mean Superdome. Yeah, I meant the Superdome. Goes to show how insanely terrible Katrina was, you mention a random word, and yeah it involved a few deaths. EDIT: Thanks to the person who posted the Astrodome article. I remember reading about how bad things were in Houston during that time. New Orleans still is suffering from the massive depopulation of native New Orleans folk caused by the storm.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Ito had every reason to let the fuhrman tape about planting evidence hit the record but didn't because he didn't want to seem biased. Yeah, and that's like the only thing he did right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Sand Monster posted:This was Marcia Clark letting the anger and frustration get the better of her on the morning of the verdict. It seems she probably knew which way it was going to go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg8su9gCwDw I was really hoping they were going to recreate this in the season finale.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
precision posted:Yeah, and that's like the only thing he did right. How a tape where a guy talks about planting evidence is irrelevant to a guy whose testimony is about handling and finding evidence is beyond me. Instead it just goes back to 'this guy said an epithet once' type stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
ROCK THE HOUSE M.D. posted:I was really hoping they were going to recreate this in the season finale. Me too, but I guess it would have clashed too much with how she had been portrayed in the show, as more collected and even a bit sheepish at times. Not to mention talking about the rape with Darden afterward, that was a surprise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
I think I found a case as much of a clusterfuck as OJ:quote:The Janet Smith case. On July 26, 1924, the 22-year-old Scottish nursemaid was found dead of a gunshot wound to the temple in a home in an exclusive neighborhood of Vancouver, Canada. Although she was initially labeled a suicide (despite much evidence to the contrary), her friends were able to get the case reopened and deemed a murder. The initial suspect, Chinese houseboy Wong Foon Sing, was kidnapped and tortured for weeks in an unsuccessful attempt to extract a confession, causing a major scandal when it was discovered that various police officials and respected members of society were directly involved. Wong was eventually tried and acquitted for lack of evidence. A law was proposed, banning the employment of Orientals and white women in the same household, but failed to pass.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I think I found a case as much of a clusterfuck as OJ: I think that one would be disqualified for not being an American crime.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 17:09 |
|
|
So should Ito have recused himself when the Fuhrman tapes came up? From a layman's perspective it seems like a conflict of interest, especially if his wife didn't disclose anything about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 12:22
|
|
