Television...and other things..
Feb. 6th, 2016 12:17 am1. A Major Crane Collapsed in Lower Manhattan -- it took out half a city block.
Here, you can watch it from the point of the view of the people watching in a near-by building:
It was a huge deal, as you can well imagine. Killed one poor woman, who was sitting in her car on the street minding her own business.
2. Attempted to watch The People vs. OJ Simpson -- didn't make it very far. In part because I can still vividly remember watching the whole thing live in 1991, while in law school. Our law professors would tell us - did you watch the OJ Simpson Trial last night? Well, don't do that. That's how you don't do litigation. And when I interned with the public defender's office? See those cops? Cops are untrustworthy, just like Mark Furhman. We used to debate whether OJ did it, and whether he'd be found guilty. (I knew he wouldn't -- the evidence was circumstantial, the prosecution and cops screwed up, and Johnny Cochran knew how to work the jury. 98% of litigation is performance -- it's pretty much who can put on the best show, present the facts the best and charm the jury. ie. Dictated by emotion not plot. Lawyers know this, you find out the hard way in law school. The public still believes what they see on television and in legal thrillers, which with the possible exception of The Good Wife, lies. To this day, I don't know if he was actually guilty or not, I suspect that he was -- but it remains unclear based on what I saw. The Civil Case was never televised, and he was found guilty in the civil case - which wasn't surprising, not as high a burden of proof. Also there were things they could include in a civil case that are excluded under criminal law. I prefer Civil to Criminal, it's easier, and less emotionally painful.)
However, it is proof that in real life there is not such thing as a tight plot, justice, or clear resolution. It's all driven by emotion and ego.
Well that, and it gave us all the Kardishians and Reality Television...the gift that keeps on giving.
It did, however, put an end to televised court cases. So there's that.
3. So I watched Mercy Street instead. Which is not quite the same level of quality that
Downton Abbey is. A bit on the preachy side, and at times feels a tad cliche and sanctimonious. I like several of the characters though, the acting is good, and there's no commercials. Plus, it focuses on the inner-workings of a union hospital in Virgina at the height of the Civil War, which I find fascinating.
One thing it does that is interesting -- is shine a light on how neither side was necessarily good or just. And how complicated the abolition of slavery actually was --- it didn't just go away over night.
Too late to continue. Going to bed now.
Here, you can watch it from the point of the view of the people watching in a near-by building:
It was a huge deal, as you can well imagine. Killed one poor woman, who was sitting in her car on the street minding her own business.
2. Attempted to watch The People vs. OJ Simpson -- didn't make it very far. In part because I can still vividly remember watching the whole thing live in 1991, while in law school. Our law professors would tell us - did you watch the OJ Simpson Trial last night? Well, don't do that. That's how you don't do litigation. And when I interned with the public defender's office? See those cops? Cops are untrustworthy, just like Mark Furhman. We used to debate whether OJ did it, and whether he'd be found guilty. (I knew he wouldn't -- the evidence was circumstantial, the prosecution and cops screwed up, and Johnny Cochran knew how to work the jury. 98% of litigation is performance -- it's pretty much who can put on the best show, present the facts the best and charm the jury. ie. Dictated by emotion not plot. Lawyers know this, you find out the hard way in law school. The public still believes what they see on television and in legal thrillers, which with the possible exception of The Good Wife, lies. To this day, I don't know if he was actually guilty or not, I suspect that he was -- but it remains unclear based on what I saw. The Civil Case was never televised, and he was found guilty in the civil case - which wasn't surprising, not as high a burden of proof. Also there were things they could include in a civil case that are excluded under criminal law. I prefer Civil to Criminal, it's easier, and less emotionally painful.)
However, it is proof that in real life there is not such thing as a tight plot, justice, or clear resolution. It's all driven by emotion and ego.
Well that, and it gave us all the Kardishians and Reality Television...the gift that keeps on giving.
It did, however, put an end to televised court cases. So there's that.
3. So I watched Mercy Street instead. Which is not quite the same level of quality that
Downton Abbey is. A bit on the preachy side, and at times feels a tad cliche and sanctimonious. I like several of the characters though, the acting is good, and there's no commercials. Plus, it focuses on the inner-workings of a union hospital in Virgina at the height of the Civil War, which I find fascinating.
One thing it does that is interesting -- is shine a light on how neither side was necessarily good or just. And how complicated the abolition of slavery actually was --- it didn't just go away over night.
Too late to continue. Going to bed now.