This review book is very thorough. I recommend it to all of my students for preparation for the AAMA National Certification Exam. The questions are well written and the answers explain not only why one is correct, but the rationale is present for why the others are wrong.

This wonderful story about a boy and his horse shows that special bond that can exist between a person and an animal. The illustrations enhance the story. Our family read an article in the Randolph (Vermont) Herald that tells the real story of John and Tom.

I agree with much that has been written by other reviewers at Amazon and do not want to rehearse those points here. Yes, much evidence that pointed to Simpson's guilt never made it into the courtroom and never reached the jurors. Judge Ito's rulings, prosecutorial misconduct, and LAPD's ineptitude all played a role. And yes, Simpson participated in the murders beyond any doubt.

Yet jurors entertained reasonable doubts precisely because of some of Vannatter's testimony and mishandling of evidence. This puzzle points to some paradoxes at the heart of this book.

Vannatter claimed that when the four detectives -- the usual complement for notifying a man who is not longer next of kin that his ex is dead -- invaded Simpson's estate, Simpson was not a suspect. This is paradox one. If Simpson were not a suspect by the time the four got to his place, then the four were incompetent detectives. If Simpson was a suspect, then the four precipitated a search as illegal as the one they conducted after Vannatter lied to get a search warrant. So which is it? Liar or incompetent?

In addition, Vannatter drove about LA with Simpson's blood for no good reason that he even he can conjure. You do not have to be Jackie Chiles or Johnnie Cochran to find that inexplicable road trip to be explicable in a way that helps Simpson. The second paradox to be highlighted, then, is that Vannatter dismissed himself!

In sum, this book poses a third paradox. If the reader is credulous enough to believe these Keystone Kops, the reader is credulous enough to believe Simpson's lawyers. Hmmmmmmmmm!

While there is lots of self-serving, cover-our-ass, if-anybody screwed-up-it-wasn't-us stuff in this book, it is still a must read for anyone interested in the trial of the century. Learn how big a hurry Marcia Clark was to get the case only to ignore some of the most telling evidence. No doubt Clark's book will lay the blame at someone elses perverbial briefcase...I will never know. This is the last of the genre for me. Read it for the cops view and American Tragedy for the Defense angle...then read something worthwhile.

This book isn't hard to stomach because of bad writing style or anything in that vein. It is hard to stomach because it describes, in detail, all the extremely incriminating evidence WHICH POINTED TO NO ONE BUT SIMPSON that was found by the detectives in this case and the Los Angeles Police Department which, inexplicably, was not raised by the prosecutors EVEN ONCE during the trial. This book proves Simpson's guilt beyond ALL doubt, showing that had ALL this evidence been displayed before the jury in the criminal joke (it's an insult to courtrooms and the hallways of justice throughout this world to call it a trial) then Simpson would have undoubtedly been convicted. But most of all, "Evidence Dismissed," like Vincent Bugliosi's "Outrage" proves once and for all that the TRUE blame for the loss of this case can be laid at the feet of the prosecution.

I'm attempting to write a hard boiled mystery and I've read almost everything I can get my hands on on crime and writing.

This is a great book cuz it has short, informative chapters and also suggestions on where to get more information.

My only complaint/gripe is that he doesn't explain the jargon in a few places. I felt I could have used a few more examples in order to truly understand what he was getting at. Jesus used parables -- and look where it got him!