A search of “O.J. Simpson” at Amazon.com in the books department yielded 11,209 results. 
Clearly, the public’s fascination with the former football star has waned little since his 1995 acquittal of murder charges for the deaths of his wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Ronald Goldman. Fourteen years later, books are still being written. 

Among the newest books, and among the first 12 results in the Amazon search, is a 2008 book by South Milwaukeean Jerrianne Hayslett entitled, “Anatomy of a Trial: Public Loss, Lessons Learned from The People vs. O.J. Simpson.” 

Hayslett held the unenviable job of media liaison for the Los Angeles Superior Court during the criminal trial, and offers an insider’s view of what she characterizes as “the trial of the century.” 

The loss she refers to in the title has a significant ramification: That, due to the media (mostly broadcast journalists’) excesses and inaccurate reporting, judges across the country have become less inclined to allow media access in high-profile cases, and more inclined to place gag orders upon attorneys. The result is a diminished understanding of the third branch of government — one that, arguably, is already underemphasized in civics classes.

The hero of Hayslett’s recounting is Judge Lance Ito, and it is the only book with which he has cooperated. 

Judges nationwide are more hostile toward the media due to a fear of “Ito-ization,” she writes. The media, in large part, portrayed him as a “weak, starstuck, incompetent judge who succumbed to the sirens of fame and even viewed himself as a celebrity.” Ito was the butt of Letterman’s “Top 10” lists and lampooned on Saturday Night Live. And who can forget the “dancing Itos” on Leno? 

Nothing could be further from the truth, according to Hayslett. Pre-O.J., Ito was widely respected as a bright, hard-working, up-and-coming jurist, who would likely ascend to the appellate bench. That hasn’t, and probably won’t, happen. Rather, he has returned to relative obscurity, and has been quietly re-elected three times since the trial, and is still trying felonies. 

About three-quarters of the book is a recounting of malfeasance by his antagonists. There were many. 

First, and foremost, there’s the media. Per Hayslett, unethical behavior and sloppy, sensationalistic reporting was the rule with few exceptions. She doesn’t hold back when it comes to naming names. In the first category were Court TV’s Kristin Jeanette-Myers, and CNN”s Jeffrey Toobin and Larry King; in the latter was the Associated Press’ Linda Deutsch. 

Second, the lawyers on both sides often acted unprofessionally, ranging from Marcia Clark’s grandstanding, tardy courtroom entrances, to Robert Shapiro passing out fortune cookies during the testimony of prosecution witness Dennis Fung, to both sides bickering over the other’s wardrobe accessories (Clark wore an angel pin; Johnnie Cochran wore a cross lapel pin; and on one occasion, the defense team all wore matching yellow “Kunta Kinte” ties and sashes). Ito had to issue an order proscribing conduct such as speaking objections, interrupting and making personal attacks, and he levied several thousand dollars’ worth of fines for attorney misconduct. 

Third, a number of the jurors were less concerned with fact-finding and more concerned with their own brief opportunities to capitalize off the case. Among them was Michael Knox, who was removed from the jury in early March 1995. Just three months later, and before the trial concluded, his book was published. 

Fourth, some of Ito’s own colleagues took public shots at him, apparently buying into the myths about him created by the media, or motivated by their own personal animosities.  The last few chapters of the book are dedicated to the “Lessons Learned,” as the title promises. 

Despite the media’s abuses in Simpson, Hayslett remains an advocate of cameras in the courtroom. She discusses the most camera-friendly court system in the U.S., the state of Florida, where they have created their own cable and Internet broadcast system for oral arguments that’s been running since 1997 — three years before Gore v. Bush. 

Closer to home, she praises the media outlets that covered Steven Avery’s homicide trial in Manitowoc, which provided gavel-to-gavel coverage over the Internet, without commentary or narration. 

In addition, Hayslett lays out a number of strategies for judges and court administrators, to ensure that rights guaranteed by both the First and Sixth Amendments are protected.

Cameras should be owned by the courts rather than the media; and they should be inconspicuous; and no one should know when they are on or off. In addition, they should be set to only fixed, medium-wide shots of the courtroom that shows all participants at all times, with exceptions for the jury, minors, etc. The media should be granted access to the cameras, and court proceedings should be streamed over the Internet — “like a courtroom version of C-Span.”

Moreover, media outlets that plan to cover high-profile trials should be given an opportunity to help plan the logistics of matters such as seating assignments. After his acquittal, Hayslett tried this in Simpson’s civil trial and reports it went remarkably well, because there was more self-policing and an overall better rapport between the media and the court.

Perhaps the only critique I might offer of “Anatomy of a Trial” was that this reviewer would’ve preferred more “Lessons Learned,” the most thought-provoking portion of the book, and fewer of the details of the widespread misbehavior in the bulk of the book. 

Reading about all the misdeeds did get slightly tiresome after awhile. Ironically, at one point, Hayslett observes that it seemed like everybody was writing a book. All during that time, she was keeping a journal, which she relied on when writing her own book.