MovieChat Forums > O.J.: Made in America (2016) Discussion > Is it me or is Ito an idiot?

Is it me or is Ito an idiot?

posted 8 years ago by RynoII
4 replies | jump to latest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aK1Guy2cgns

In the trial footage at 7:30 into the video, Marcia Clark explains to Ito, why Simpson shouldn't be allowed to show the jury his scar, on the legal grounds that Simpson wants to show the jury without being cross-examined.

But Ito lets her go on and on with all these analogical comparisons from other cases. Not just one comparison example, but more, and she lets her go on and on with it.

Shouldn't a judge, already know the rules, and know that she is right and not need to have her over-explain herself, and make the same point several times in different ways?

It's no wonder people say the trial went on for too long, with the jury, because Ito needs to spoonfed all these explanations in order to make decisions, of which he should already know the rules. And he doesn't even believe Marcia and has to read over the transcripts of her examples.

I mean I didn't even go to law school and even I know, that the defendant is not allowed to show the jury a part of his body, unless it's on stand, and open to cross-examination. How did Ito even graduate from law school or why does he need all this explanation to make a ruling?

[–] decarus427 8 years ago

Ito made real mistakes. Allowing cameras into the courtroom. The way he spoke to Marcia Clark. Allowing Fuhrman's use of the n word to come into the trial. Allowing the entirety of the tapes to be played to the public even if the jury wasn't in the courtroom. Not cutting OJ off when he was all one hundred percent not guilty and when he went on about his reason for not testifying. He allowed the trial to become a circus.

[–] SutterKeely87 7 years ago

Ito was not in the courtroom when he plead "100% not guilty."

[–] snowleopard 8 years ago

Read Vincent Bugliosi's book about the case, Outraged. He takes Ito to task perhaps more than anyone, and does so with extremely precise analysis time and again.

Best book written on the entire case if you ask me, and I know many others agree. It seems thick, and despite often being about the law, it moves right along and he explains things very clearly without getting bogged down needlessly.

[–] LetThemEatCake01 7 years ago

He was.