After reading for nearly a month about "The Book aka The Doorstop," I have to summarize my feelings for the it in real-life terms.
If I read a non-fiction work, it has to be accurate. When an author and co-author go by the seats of their pants, it's a non-starter for me. Fact-checkers are worth their weight in gold. Mr. Baez has all the documents, all the videos, and all the transcripts, even of items that didn't make it into court. Apparently, neither he nor his co-author (a professional writer) didn't bother with this little step and there were so many factual errors, one can't trust anything the author has to say. Memory fails, documents are forever.
The late, great writer Dominick Dunne wrote excellent true-crime articles for Vanity Fair. A friend of mine, who knew him, said he'd miss a day in court to meet with his fact-checkers before any article of his went to press. His articles could be trusted.
From fact we move to opinion, which is quite acceptable from the person writing a non-fiction work. I might not agree with the author's point of view, but, as long as it is balanced against the facts, I may learn something.
Have any of you who bit the bullet and read or are reading the book learned anything new about the case? Or, can you get past the discrepencies and waffling of opinion?
BTW, bring out the huge Thwart Cupcake again, I need some breakfast:
Last Sale: 6 hours
July Sales: 508
June Sales: 136
Current Rank: 2,278
You see, Carolina Moon - jose wasn't listening again and thinks we don't listen or realize why this was in the jury instructions:
WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE
It is up to you to decide what evidence is reliable. You should use your common sense in deciding which is the best evidence, and which evidence should not be relied upon in considering your verdict. You may find some of the evidence not reliable, or less reliable than other evidence.
You should consider how the witnesses acted, as well as what they said. Some things you should consider are:
1. Did the witness seem to have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified?
2. Did the witness seem to have an accurate memory?
3. Was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys' questions?
4. Did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided?
5. Does the witness' testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case?
6. Has the witness been offered or received any money, preferred treatment or other benefit in order to get the witness to testify?
7. Had any pressure or threat been used against the witness that affected the truth of the witness' testimony?
8. Did the witness at some other time make a statement that is inconsistent with the testimony he or she gave in court?
You may rely upon your own conclusion about the witness. A juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence or the testimony of any witness.
http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/04/jury-instructions-in-the-casey-anthony-trial/
While I am well aware a book is not a trial and that the attorney is not on trial, seems he would inherently use the same standard, or at least close to the same standard when trying to convenience an educated reader of the facts.
I recently sat on two jury trials, the instructions in both were we were free to give weight to the statements of the witnesses and believe part or none of their testimony. If we found that we didn't believe all of their testimony, it was up to us to determine; to toss the complete testimony or believe it in part. (Bad paraphrasing, but it is early!) On one of the cases, all the major players came into court and told a completely different story than the police reports and interviews from the day of the shooting and the week after. As a jury, we ended up considering only their written statements and police interviews and fully discounted their testimony in court due to the abundance of lies.
My point is, you would think that intrinsically JB would have used the same standard (or at least close to it!) for this book.
He did not ---------> EPIC FAIL.
