← United States of Kennedy
Loading summary
Transcript210 lines
- [00:00]
Lyra Smith
This is an iHeart podcast.
- [00:04]
Ed
I just normally do straight stand up, but this is a bit different.
- [00:08]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
What do you get when a true crime producer walks into a comedy club? A new podcast called Wisecrack, where a comedian finds himself at the center of a chilling true crime story.
- [00:19]
Ed
Does anyone know what show they've come to see? It's a story. It's about the scariest night of my life.
- [00:25]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
This is Wisecrack, available now. Listen to Wisecrack on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [00:35]
George Severis
Sacred Scandal is back, the hit true crime podcast that uncovers hidden truths and shattered faith. For 19 years, Alayna Sada was a nun for the Legion of Christ. This season she's telling her story.
- [00:47]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
When I first joined the Legion of Christ, I felt chosen. I was 19 years old when Marcia Almasel, the leader of the legionaries, looked me in the eye and told me I had a calling.
- [00:56]
George Severis
Surviving meant hiding, escaping, took cour courage, risking everything to tell her truth. Listen to Sacred Scandal, the many secrets of Martial Massiel on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [01:10]
Narrator / Promo Voice
In early 1988, federal agents raced to track down the gang they suspect of importing millions of dollars worth of heroin into New York from Asia.
- [01:19]
Paul Thaler
Had 30 agents ready to go with shotguns and rifles and you name it. Five, six white people pushed me in the car.
- [01:27]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
I'm going, what the hell?
- [01:29]
Paul Thaler
Basically your stay at home moms were picking up these large amounts of heroin. All you gotta do is receive the package. Don't have to open it, just accept it. She was very upset, crying. Once I saw the gun, I tried to take his hand and I saw the flash of light.
- [01:42]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Listen to the Chinatown sting on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or anywhere you get your podcasts.
- [01:50]
Jacob Schick
It's important that we just reassure people that they're not alone and there is help out there.
- [01:55]
Ashley Schick
The Good Stuff podcast season takes a deep look into One Tribe Foundation, a non profit fighting suicide in the veteran community. September is National Suicide Prevention Month, so join hosts Jacob and Ashley Schick as they bring you to the front lines of One Tribe's mission.
- [02:09]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
One tribe saved my life twice.
- [02:11]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Welcome to season two of the Good Stuff.
- [02:14]
Ashley Schick
Listen to the Good Stuff podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [02:20]
George Severis
The Internet is something we make, not just something that happens to us.
- [02:23]
Lyra Smith
I'm Bridget Todd, host of the tech and culture podcast. There are no girls on the Internet in Our new season. I'm talking like Anil Dash, an OG entrepreneur and writer who refuses to be cynical about the Internet.
- [02:34]
Paul Thaler
I love tech. You know, I've been a nerd my.
- [02:36]
George Severis
Whole life, but it does have to be for something. Like, it's not just for its own sake.
- [02:40]
Paul Thaler
It's an inspiring story that focuses on.
- [02:43]
Lyra Smith
People as the core building blocks of the Internet.
- [02:45]
Paul Thaler
Listen to There are no girls on.
- [02:47]
Lyra Smith
The Internet, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Hey, David, it's Lyra. Hey, what's the first thing you think of? When I ask about William Kennedy Smith.
- [03:06]
George Severis
In 1991, the one thing that stands out to me was William Kennedy Smith's smile. He kind of had a wry smile and wink in his eye, and I was hoping always that he was not guilty, because after all the tragedy the family had been through and our country watched, and we were so invested in the Kennedy clan. And I can't remember if the alleged victim ever revealed herself or not. I don't think she did. But I remember his uncle coming to testify. The world was really small back then. I think I only saw it on the news or listened to the radio in the car. But when the verdict came through, he was acquitted, and the Kennedys could get back to being Kennedys. I'm George Severis. I'm Lyra Smith, and this is United States of Kennedy, a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week we go into one aspect of the Kennedy story, and today we are talking about the William Kennedy Smith rape trial.
- [04:17]
Lyra Smith
In 1991, JFK's nephew, William Kennedy Smith, was accused of raping Patricia Bowman at the Kennedy residence in Palm Beach. The part of the story everyone agrees on is that the two of them met at a bar in the area while Kennedy Smith was having drinks with his uncle Ted Kennedy and his cousin Patrick. They hit it off, and Patricia Bowman offered Kennedy Smith a ride home after Ted and Patrick had already left without him.
- [04:44]
George Severis
So they go from the bar to the Kennedy residence, and after they arrive, their stories diverge. According to Smith, the two have two separate consensual sexual encounters, one on the beach and one on the grass closer to the Kennedy residence. According to Patricia Bowman, Smith removes his clothes to go swimming. She gets uncomfortable and decides she wants to go home. She leaves, and then he chases after her and attacks her, pinning her down and assaulting her.
- [05:11]
Lyra Smith
This is all happening as sexual harassment is freshly in the public's mind due to Anita Hill's testimony about Clarence Thomas and The concept of date rape was still relatively new. The fact that Patricia Bowman drove Smith back to the Kennedy residence set doubt against her as a reliable witness, which made jury selection really difficult. Not to mention that it was a small county, so a lot of people already had developed opinions about the case.
- [05:40]
George Severis
So she was a classic imperfect victim, and he was a Kennedy. So more about William Kennedy smith. He was 30 years old at the time. He was a fourth year med student at Georgetown, and that was all that most Americans knew about him, beyond him being a Kennedy. He was handsome, he was educated, he came from a famous family. Meanwhile, Patricia Bowman was an unmarried single mother who was out drinking until 3am so it's not hard to imagine people, especially at that time, considering her willingness to drive him home as signing up to spend the night together, which hits.
- [06:13]
Lyra Smith
At the core catch 22 of victim blaming in these cases. People say she should have expected to get assaulted by allowing herself to be alone with him at his house, while at the same time saying, well, of course we believe him over her because he's such an upstanding and trustworthy man. She also thought, this is not a man I should be afraid to be alone with. So him assaulting her would be totally shocking and unpredictable.
- [06:40]
George Severis
The other irony, of course, is that Ted Kennedy is essentially the star witness. So he was with them at the bar and then later gives an emotional testimony to remind the jury that William's father had recently died. And yet another blow to the great American Kennedy family. Ted Kennedy basically reframes a night of drinking as a night of grieving with family. The same Ted Kennedy who, as we discussed again last week, left the scene of an accident that resulted in a young woman's death.
- [07:07]
Lyra Smith
So that's the disparity between the individuals and the public eye. The lawyers were also in different leagues of access and privilege. The Kennedys hired Roy Black, who at the time had already represented controversial defendants such as a mother whose toddler drowned in the sink. The fact that her first child died the same way was kept from the jury. She was acquitted. He would go on to represent more cool people like Jeffrey Epstein.
- [07:35]
George Severis
Meanwhile, Patricia Bowman's lawyer was Moira Lasch. So Lash was the Assistant State Attorney of Palm Beach County. She had a stellar professional history with a nearly 100% conviction record. But she didn't play to the press and even requested the judge be reassigned as she believed she would not be partial, which backfired as the request was denied.
- [07:55]
Lyra Smith
She had a strong case going into the trial. Lash had testimony of three other Women who said Smith had also assaulted them. But the judge didn't allow them to be heard by the jury, claiming it didn't prove a pattern.
- [08:08]
George Severis
So she did have testimony of three other women, and that was not allowed to be even mentioned in court. And that was honestly just one of many problems. As we'll discuss later, there were a few elements of the trial that were just completely detrimental to Lash's case. A couple of things that come to mind are, first of all, the testimony of Anne Mercer, who is Patricia Bowman's friend, who was called as a witness. It turned out her boyfriend had stolen an urn from the Kennedy estate when they went to pick up Patricia Bowman. And the urn was placed in front of her as she was answering the questions as a witness, which just served to remind everyone watching, both in the courtroom and at home that she was, at her core, an unethical person who is dishonest and who would do something like watch someone steal an urn and not do anything.
- [09:04]
Lyra Smith
The reason why he says he took it was to prove that they were there, Right?
- [09:08]
George Severis
Exactly. So Ann Mercer's boyfriend stole the urn to prove that he was there at the Kennedy estate. Ann Mercer did not mention it when she was interrogated at another time. And then she was caught in a lie by the Kennedy team, which, of course, as we'll mention later, had five private investigators at their disposal, whereas Moira Lash was an assistant state attorney. Another element of the case which really hurt the Patricia Bowman side was that she was written about in the press with a certain level of suspicion. One of the things that happened is that the New York Times published her name, which actually went against its own guidelines of covering cases like this. And then that led to larger fallout. It led to even worse tabloid coverage. So all of this to say, one of the reasons why this trial was so impactful was because of its media coverage and specifically because it all happened on live.
- [10:01]
Lyra Smith
It set the stage for the O.J. trial to take over the world's attention just a few years later. Court TV launched one month before the William Kennedy Smith trial and proved the network could be a runaway success. CNN also aired gavel to gavel coverage for the first time and its ratings soared. During the 10 day trial, 19 different members of the Kennedy family were present to support William Kennedy Smith. The public ate it up and didn't learn until afterwards that Smith had been accused of sexually assaulting other women before Bowman.
- [10:35]
George Severis
William Kennedy Smith was ultimately acquitted, but he would go on to be accused of sexual assault and harassment by Three more women in Chicago while running a nonprofit.
- [10:44]
Lyra Smith
With us today to discuss the way everything changed once cameras were added to the courtroom is Paul Thaler.
- [10:51]
George Severis
Paul Thaler has written two books on the subject, the Watchful American justice in the Age of the Television Trial and the Media and the making of the O.J. simpson story. Dr. Thaler, thanks for joining us. If you can describe just what the trial was in the most basic sense before we get into the media coverage of it and Court TV and all that, who was the defendant, who was the accused and what happened?
- [11:16]
Paul Thaler
Well, very simply, it was kind of an ordinary tale where William Kennedy Smith meets this young 31 year old med student, meets this 30 year old individual and they later go back to William Kennedy Smith's estate. He asks her to go for a swim, she declines, he does, goes for a swim, comes back, they engage in some sexual encounter. And this is where the great debate comes in whether in fact it was consensual or not. And subsequently this small everyday kind of encounter becomes this national event. So that's really the background. There's not really a lot of mystery to where both these folks were coming from. Patricia Bowman certainly has a different type of growing up background having to do with kind of a disruptive family life and the like. So they come from two different economic and social settings coming to play on that estate there in Palm beach, leading to this sensational trial that kind of broke out in 1991.
- [12:23]
Lyra Smith
And at that time, what was like the cultural understanding of date rape as a concept?
- [12:29]
Paul Thaler
Yeah, it was certainly very, very viable. And that certainly comes into play in the trial itself. And it was interesting, in the wake of the verdict of that case, which essentially is a not guilty verdict against William Kennedy Smith, there was concern that date rate accusations would go down. In fact, during that trial, date rape accusations in the Palm beach area did decline because victims of date rape certainly didn't want to be exposed as part of such a high profile trial where actually the victim, the alleged victim in that case is actually on camera, even though she was blotted out by electronics. People got to know Patricia Bowman pretty well, not only through the trial, but also through other media coverage. The New York Times wrote an expose about her life, the background of her life. So it certainly did have an impact on the social, political climate surrounding date rape during that particular time.
- [13:33]
George Severis
And as you said, her name was published in the New York Times, which in fact went against their guidelines and led to fallout both in the public and also internally at the Times. There were a few journalists There and New York Times employees that signed a letter saying they disagreed with the coverage. But before we get to the rest of the sort of media circus around it, I want to get down like the main characters. So we have the two people involved in the actual event. And then can you tell us a little bit about each of their lawyers?
- [14:00]
Paul Thaler
Well, I know it's funny. I have to now revisit that piece of this. I believe that William Kennedy Smith had a very high profile lawyer by the name of Roy Black. I actually got to know Roy through interviewing over the years because he was involved in some other high profile cases and his team essentially was kind of the dream team of that particular time. I can't really speak to Patricia Bowman's lawyers. I imagine they were state prosecutors and they were involved in that case. But certainly William Kennedy Smith had the name and the resources and his uncle behind this case. In fact, Edward Kennedy testifies during that particular trial. So in terms of the social political dynamics, it certainly was weighing in favor of the defendant in this particular case. That's what I can say about that relationship.
- [14:53]
Lyra Smith
Yeah, I mean, this is afterwards. But Roy Black represented Kelsey Grammer. He represented Joe Francis from Girls Gone Wild. He represented Jeffrey Epstein. And then way more recently than the others, he represented Justin Bieber. He's like a name, you know, he.
- [15:10]
George Severis
Was also called the. He had earned the nickname the professor for his sort of, you know, methodical approach to building a case and to questioning people. I do want to say before this trial, one of the things he was known for in Florida was waiting this 1989 acquittal of a police officer who shot and killed a black motorcyclist. He was known as taking on these kind of controversial cases. And for this trial, one of the ways that he really just crushed the other side is that he hired five private investigators to dig up information about Bowman. She had a child out of wedlock. She had gotten an abortion. All these things that just, if you're primed to not believe her, really did not help in a culture that was already going in sort of suspicious of a story like this.
- [15:56]
Paul Thaler
Yeah, they certainly publicized those facts. I think she had like 14 traffic violations. And they spoke about her driving record. And you're absolutely right. She was kind of painted as that woman that, you know, out to get Kennedy. She was to a certain degree the accuser, but also in certain ways defending herself during this particular trial. So, yeah, the scales of justice wasn't necessarily balanced in this particular case.
- [16:22]
Lyra Smith
We'll be back with more United States of Kennedy after this break.
- [16:31]
Ed
My name is Ed. Everyone say hello Ed.
- [16:33]
Paul Thaler
Hello Ed.
- [16:34]
Ed
I'm from a very rural background myself. My dad is a farmer and my mum is a cousin. So like, it's not like.
- [16:40]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
What do you get when a true crime producer walks into a comedy club? I know it sounds like the start of a bad joke, but that really was my reality nine years ago.
- [16:49]
Ed
I just normally do straight stand up, but this is a bit different.
- [16:53]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
On stage stood a comedian with a story that no one expected to hear.
- [16:58]
Ed
On 22 July 2015, 23 year old man had killed his family and then he came to to my house.
- [17:11]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
So what do you get when a true crime producer walks into a comedy club? A new podcast called Wisecrack where stand up comedy and murder take center stage. Available now. Listen to Wisecrack on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [17:32]
Elena Sada
At 19, Elena Sada believed she had found her calling. In the new season of Sacred Scandal, we pull back the curtain on a life built on devotion and deception. A man of God, Marcial Maciel, looked Elena in the eye and promised her a life of purpose within the Legion of Christ.
- [17:50]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
My name is Elena Sada and this is my story.
- [17:55]
Paul Thaler
It's a story of how I learned.
- [17:56]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
To hide, to cry, to survive, and eventually how I got out.
- [18:03]
Elena Sada
This season on Sacred Scandal, hear the full story from the woman who lived it. Witness the journey from devout follower to determined survivor as Helena exposes the man behind the cloth and the system that protected him. Even the darkest secrets eventually find their way to the light. Listen to secret the many secrets of Martial Maciel as part of the My Cultura podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [18:34]
Narrator / Promo Voice
In early 1988, federal agents raced to track down the gang they suspect of importing millions of dollars worth of heroin into New York from Asia.
- [18:43]
Paul Thaler
We had 30 agents ready to go with shotguns and rifles and you name it.
- [18:49]
Narrator / Promo Voice
But what they find is not what they expected.
- [18:53]
Paul Thaler
Basically, your stay at home moms were picking up these large amounts of heroin. They go, is this your daughter? I said, yes. They go, oh, you may not see her for like 25 years.
- [19:06]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Caught between a federal investigation and the violent gang who recruited them, the women must decide who they're willing to protect and who they dare to betray.
- [19:17]
Paul Thaler
Once I saw the gun, I tried to take his hand and I saw the flash of light.
- [19:22]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Listen to the Chinatown sting on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or Anywhere you get your podcasts.
- [19:31]
Jacob Schick
I had this like overwhelming sensation that I had to call her right then and I just hit call, said, you know, hey, I'm Jacob schick. I'm the CEO of OneTribe Foundation. And I just wanted to call on and let her know there's a lot of people battling some of the very same things you're battling and there is help out there.
- [19:48]
Ashley Schick
The Good Stuff podcast season two takes a deep look into One Tribe Foundation, a non profit fighting suicide in the veteran community. September is National Suicide Prevention Month, so join hosts Jacob and Ashley Schick as they bring you to the front lines of One Tribe's mission.
- [20:02]
Lyra Smith
I was married to a combat army veteran and he actually took his own life to suicide. One tribe saved my life twice.
- [20:09]
George Severis
There's a lot of love that flows through this place and it's sincere now.
- [20:12]
Lyra Smith
It's the personal mission. Don't have to go to any more funerals.
- [20:15]
Jacob Schick
You know, I got blown up on a react mission. I ended up having amputation below the knee of my right leg and a traumatic brain injury because I landed on my head.
- [20:23]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Welcome to season two of the Good Stuff.
- [20:25]
Ashley Schick
Listen to the Good Stuff podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [20:32]
Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman
I'm Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman, host of the psychology podcast. Here's a clip from an upcoming conversation about exploring human potential. I was going to schools to try to teach kids these skills and I get eye rol from teachers or I get students who would be like, it's easier to punch someone in the face when you think about emotion regulation. Like, you're not going to choose an adaptive strategy which is more effortful to use unless you think there's a good outcome as a result of it. If it's going to be beneficial to you. Because it's easy to say like, like you go blank yourself, right? It's easy. It's easy to just drink the extra beer. It's easy to ignore, to suppress seeing a colleague who's bothering you and just like, like walk the other way. Avoidance is easier. Ignoring is easier. Denial is easier. Drinking is easier. Yelling, screaming is easy. Complex problem solving, meditating, you know, takes effort. Listen to the psychology podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcast.
- [21:39]
George Severis
And we're back with United States of Kennedy.
- [21:41]
Lyra Smith
Yeah, it's kind of wild looking at it today. It almost seems fictional. Like it almost seems written. Her position and his position and then.
- [21:50]
George Severis
You know, it really is these sort of Archetypes of the powerful man that has all the resources on his side. The imperfect victim that people are primed not to believe because she's perfect in every way and she has, God forbid, made mistakes in the past. I mean, it is almost like a morality tale or something.
- [22:08]
Paul Thaler
Yeah, it's interesting because emblazoned in our mind is this kind of story, narrative. And one of the reasons it is so prominent and that we are speaking about it today is really because it was televised. And even though it was a high profile case for the most part, it would have been certainly less prominent in our historic mind collective if in fact we hadn't seen that 10 day trial hour upon hour upon hour on television. And it was also kind of, and perhaps we'll talk about this, a historic time for television because CNN is just pretty much born in 1991. It's just very, very new. And there's a new network that I'm sure we'll talk about as well called Court tv. That narrative is very, very prominent in our minds because those images are in our mind. I could visualize that courtroom as it played out.
- [23:02]
Lyra Smith
Yeah, it's interesting because actually one of my first memories of television is the Bronco Chase from OJ and in my head that's the most famous televised court case. That's what created this industry. But that's not really the truth. This predated that and this had a wide audience. Can you explain a bit about putting cameras in the courtroom?
- [23:27]
Paul Thaler
And back in the day, this was a high profile controversy whether or not to allow the courtroom, which was once kind of a sanctuary in terms of justice. The last thing judges wanted is to have the avalanche of public opinion flow into a high profile case, or any case for that matter. And once cameras came in, those floodgates opened and we had all this publicity leading to a new genre which I kind of named the television trial. And it became its own thing, its own genre, with its own network and its own cast of characters. And the idea that you remember the Bronco chase, well, that led to an 11 month trial that certainly captivated maybe the world, but certainly in America, captivated all networks, all eyes, all discussion. You could not escape the year of Simpsons. So no wonder it plays in your mind though.
- [24:27]
George Severis
So especially core tv. This trial really coincided with the birth of core tv. And it's funny because you hear core TV and you imagine this sort of craven, trashy organization that is trying to, quote, unquote, exploit people at their most vulnerable or people at these very significant moments. And Trying to make entertainment out of something that should be a very serious legal event. But, you know, we watched the Court TV special that summarized this case and something that really struck me was that compared to how things are now, it actually seems very respectable. Compared to what I now think of as the trashy parts of the entertainment industry, it seems like pretty buttoned up. So I'm wondering if you can tell us a little bit about just where Court TV came from, who was behind it and how it captured the moment.
- [25:18]
Paul Thaler
Well, I can't speak very directly to it because I would get into memorable debates with Steve Brill, who is the founder of. So I got to know Steve quite well. We were pretty much on opposite sides of the camera debate. So this lawyer, in fact, he was also the editor of a publication called American Lawyer. So he was in the media, print, business. And he has this idea, in fact, he tells the story that he's in the car and he comes up with this idea that maybe we should televise trials. And that leads to, to this kind of new network on cable, Court tv. And they were kind of scrambling trying to figure out what are we going to do with Court television? Because for the most part, trials are boring. You know, trials aren't entertaining. And if you've ever sat through a trial, you realize how tedious it could become. So, you know, I would go down to Court TV here in New York. I know he sold that business subsequently. It's no longer in his hands. But in the beginning, it was really this newborn television child. In the William Kennedy Smith trial, Court TV was the pool camera for all the networks in that particular trial. And actually Steve was a very high profile character. He actually wanted to charge CNN and other outlets to take his pool footage from that case. They kind of reached an agreement that he was only there representing the press at large. But that's kind of a side note to Core tv.
- [26:54]
Lyra Smith
What does that mean? Does that mean they had the singular cameras?
- [26:58]
Paul Thaler
Yeah, it was their camera, the core TV camera in. But the agreement is that other networks would be allowed to use that pool footage. We couldn't have every camera in that courtroom, so we had that single camera. And that's typically how it goes in these television trials. I got a behind the scenes look at how Court TV worked and it's really no surprise. I asked Steve, you know, what trials are you selecting in to televise? And basically his choices was really based on the entertainment medium of television. Whether this was a high profile case with characters that could sell well on television, that we could identify with the storylines could be captivating to us. Date rape, for instance. Murder of two people out in Brentwood, California, you know, and so the values here, we see the merging, and I don't want to get too academic here, but we see the merging of entertainment values with legal values, and often they certainly didn't coincide. We appreciate the relative, quiet judicial notions that go into a trial. The very idea that we're supposed to hold off a verdict in a trial until the very end, until both sides present their case. And we know when it comes to these high profile cases, verdicts by the public at least are reached much, much sooner by their connection to the trial itself. In fact, you're pushed into sides. Which person do you believe? And it becomes a media event itself. What I call the 13th juror, the public jury. I'm trying to recall whether this juror members in William Kennedy Smith were sequestered or not. I know in the OJ Case they were sequestered, but they reached a verdict within hours, within three hours. And they had a 45 minute lunch break. So they took about that 11 month trial. And even though Judge Ito had instructed them to certainly review the evidence, testimony and the like, they came to a virtually immediate verdict in that case. That the verdict itself captured the attention of the public. I was actually in a large university space to see the verdict of O.J. simpson. Bill Clinton stole up what he was doing to go to his secretary's office to watch this on television. My mom was on a hospital gurney. She was waiting for some checkup, nothing terribly serious, but she was left there by the nurses so the medical staff could go see the verdict of O.J. simpson. You know, that trial wasn't pulling in the American audience. And if you were around during that time, you knew what that moment was. Everyone could tell you where they were at the time of the Simpson verdict. And clearly it was a shock to the system and divisive because it did break down, often by racial lines. The double murder trial became a story about race in America. So that's a whole other large story that perhaps we're deviating from.
- [30:02]
George Severis
But I think your point to this idea that the specifics of a trial sort of get muddied when it becomes a metaphor for larger issues. And everyone kind of can project their own biases and their own beliefs onto it. And for this one, you know, for O, it might have been about marriage or race or whatever else people were projecting onto it. And for this one, it was clearly about the relationship between men and women. And of course, the idea of privilege and specifically the Kennedy family and this idea that they can kind of get away with anything because of machine that's behind them. I do want to say the jury was sequestered. I just looked it up. But what I wanted to ask was about how the theatrics that already exist in a courtroom. I mean, obviously lawyers are grandstanding. They are trying to convince a group of people of their side, how those theatrics are kind of amplified and distorted by this kind of media environment. And I'm wondering if we could talk a little bit about some of the moments in this trial that became larger stories. So I'm thinking about the interrogation of Anne Mercer, who is Patricia Bowman's friend, who she called after she was allegedly raped to come pick her up.
- [31:12]
Lyra Smith
Up.
- [31:13]
George Severis
I want to talk a little bit about the famous urn that was placed right in front of her. So if you can talk about which parts of the trial basically became front page news because it was being live streamed to everyone.
- [31:25]
Paul Thaler
Yeah, it's interesting you're bringing that up. I should probably go back and take a look at some of that footage that went on during that particular time. My memory of the trial, and it did not go back to review the trial itself and its specifics. But the larger themes certainly are part of my intellectual memory having to do with that particular case. But there would be moments, and there are moments in every trial that become the event of the day on television. You know, it could be the day of the urn, the day of Ann Mercer, they become front and center on all news coverage. You know, there was a case here in New York, the Joel Steinberg trial, in which this lawyer is accused of killing his six year old daughter. It's a horrific case and actually one of the first cases in New York to allow cameras in the court. And it was also a national and international event. There were folks in Australia that saw the Steinberg case and that might not be familiar to you, but it was a big deal in 1989 and this kind of even predated William Kennedy Smith as well as Simpson. And I was actually, I would actually attend the trial. And there was one moment in that trial where a doctor on the stand demonstrated the type of blow to the head necessary to kill this six year old child. A terrible moment. So what this doctor did was literally slam his hand and it was dramatic. Well, that testimony went on for six, seven hours that day. And I went home to watch the coverage. Every network, cnn, other networks that covered that trial on and on and on. They covered that 15 second moment moment over and over and over again. And if you were just a citizen trying to understand that case, that moment defined it for you. You may not have seen the other seven hours that day. You wouldn't have had a contextual moment. I'm using a very dramatic example, of course, but what we see on television is not what we see in the courtroom. The courtroom often plays out much more slowly, as we know. And so you're talking about two particular instances that stand out. I would venture to say if I went back to take a look at those instances, it would play out time in and time out on the coverage of that case.
- [33:48]
Lyra Smith
We're going to take a short break. Stay with us.
- [33:55]
Ed
My name is Ed. Everyone say hello, Ed.
- [33:57]
Paul Thaler
Hello, Ed.
- [33:59]
Ed
I'm from a very rural background myself. My dad is a phone and my mom is a cousin. So, like, it's not like.
- [34:05]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
What do you get when a true crime producer walks into a comedy club? I know it sounds like the start of a bad joke, but that really was my reality nine years ago.
- [34:14]
Ed
I just normally do straight stand up, but this is a bit different.
- [34:18]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
On stage stood a comedian with a story that no one expected to hear.
- [34:23]
Ed
On 22 July 2015, a 23 year old man had killed his family. And then he came to my house.
- [34:36]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
So what do you get when a true crime producer walks into a comedy club? A new podcast called Wisecrack, where stand up comedy and murder take center stage. Available now. Listen to Wisecrack on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.
- [34:57]
Elena Sada
At 19, Elena Sada believed she had found her calling. In the new season of Sacred Scandal, we pulled back the curtain on a life built on devotion and deception. A man of God, Marcial Maciel, looked Elena in the eye and promised her a life of purpose within the Legion of Christ.
- [35:15]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
My name is Elena Sada, and this is my story.
- [35:19]
Paul Thaler
It's the story of how I learned.
- [35:21]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
To hide, to cry, to survive, and eventually how I got out.
- [35:28]
Elena Sada
This season on Sacred Scandal, hear the full story from the woman who lived it. Witness the journey from devout follower to determined survivor as Helena exposes the man behind the cloth and the system that protected him. Even the darkest secrets eventually find their way to the light. Listen to Secret Scandal, the many secrets of Martial Masi as part of the My Cultura podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [35:59]
Narrator / Promo Voice
In early 1988, federal agents raced to track down the gang they suspect of importing millions of dollars worth of heroin into New York from Asia.
- [36:08]
Paul Thaler
We had 30 agents ready to go with shotguns and rifles and you name it.
- [36:14]
Narrator / Promo Voice
But what they find is not what they expected.
- [36:18]
Paul Thaler
Basically, your stay at home moms were picking up these large amounts of heroin. They go, is this your daughter? I said, yes. They go, oh, you may not see her for like 25 years.
- [36:31]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Caught between a federal investigation and the violent gang who recruited them, the women must decide who they're willing to protect and who they dare to betray.
- [36:42]
Paul Thaler
Once I saw the gun, I tried to take his hand and I saw the flash of light.
- [36:46]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Listen to the Chinatown sting on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or anywhere you get your podcasts.
- [36:56]
Jacob Schick
I had this, like, overwhelming sensation that I had to call her right then and I just hit call, said, you know, hey, I'm Jacob Schick. I'm the CEO of One Tribe foundation. And I just wanted to call and let her know there's a lot of people battling some of the very same things you're battling, and there is help out there.
- [37:13]
Ashley Schick
The Good Stuff podcast season two takes a deep look into One Tribe Foundation, a nonprofit fighting suicide in the veteran community. September is National Suicide Prevention Month, so join hosts Jacob and Ashley Schick as they bring you to the front lines of One Tribe's mission.
- [37:27]
Lyra Smith
I was married to a combat army veteran, and he actually took his own life to suicide. One Tribe saved my life twice.
- [37:34]
George Severis
There's a lot of love that flows through this place and it's sincere now.
- [37:37]
Lyra Smith
It's a personal mission. Don't have to go to any more funerals.
- [37:40]
Jacob Schick
You know, I got blown up on a react mission. I ended up having amputation below the knee of my right leg and a traumatic brain injury because I landed on my head.
- [37:48]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Welcome to season two of the Good Stuff.
- [37:50]
Ashley Schick
Listen to the Good Stuff podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [37:57]
Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman
I'm Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman, host of the psychology podcast. Here's a clip from an upcoming con conversation about exploring human potential. I was going to schools to try to teach kids these skills, and I get eye rolling from teachers or I get students who would be like, it's easier to punch someone in the face when you think about emotion regulation. Like, you're not going to choose an adaptive strategy which is more effortful to use unless you think there's a good outcome as a result of it. If it's going to be beneficial to you because it's easy to say like, like go blank yourself or.
- [38:28]
Paul Thaler
Right.
- [38:29]
Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman
It's easy, it's easy to just drink the extra beer. It's easy to ignore, to suppress seeing a colleague who's bothering you and just like walk the other way. Avoidance is easier. Ignoring is easier. Denial is easier. Drinking is easier. Yelling, screaming is easy. Complex problem solving, meditating, you know, takes effort. Listen to the psychology podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [39:04]
Lyra Smith
And we're back with United States of Kennedy.
- [39:07]
George Severis
Are there other big moments or any important questions or answers or anything that became magnified and shaped the public's opinion?
- [39:17]
Paul Thaler
I think it's almost inarguable, frankly, that the biggest moment in that case was when William Kennedy Smith goes on the stand. And I'm looking at it right now, the transcript of his description of the alleged incident. And it is pretty graphic, if that's the word, even where he talks about taking her panties off having to do with the sexual act itself. Very explicit. And I could actually see his image in my mind's eye testifying during that particular time. So if you were gonna ask me about one highlighted moment, it would be that. And I would probably, on the other of it, speak about Patricia Bowman's testimony as well. Hers is actually a little more obscure, frankly, because she was digitally blotted out by the electronics there. So her facial image certainly doesn't come to mind. But certainly that moment in the case just galvanized all media coverage at that time. So that would be my memory of that case.
- [40:23]
Lyra Smith
And it was a surprise that he took the stand, is that, well, you.
- [40:27]
Paul Thaler
Know, it's always dangerous, you know, for a defendant to expose himself to all sorts of questioning, certainly by the prosecutor in that case. And then it became, according to pundits, he said, she said type of case. Who do you believe? And we know what the result of that was.
- [40:46]
George Severis
It's an interesting media question, a mass media question. What effect does the obscuring of someone's face have on the people watching her? Because it is this double edged sword where on the one hand, of course, you don't want your face exposed to everyone when you're going through this incredibly vulnerable thing. But on the other hand, of course it's going to hopefully increase empathy if you are looking at someone crying and describing the worst night of their lives. And I think, I would imagine that it really didn't help that people couldn't see her face. Unlike William Kennedy Smith, who in fact, through a combination of I'm Sure. Media training and sort of natural Kennedy charisma actually comes across pretty well. And he's very calm. He really seems like a nice kid caught in a bad situation or something. Like, it's interesting even if you're primed not to believe him, he actually gives a very good performance in terms of Patricia Bowman's identity to zoom out a bit. Because of course the media environment isn't just core TV and cnn, it's also the newspapers, it's also tablo, an entire system. Can you talk a little bit about how her identity was unveiled and then what the fallout of that was?
- [42:00]
Paul Thaler
Well, first of all, getting back to your point about Patricia Bowman on the stand, I'm actually thinking whether the electronic distortion of her on the stand helped or hurt her in terms of the public eye. We don't see her, we don't see her facial expressions. We do see William Kennedy Smith's face and I would agree with you, I think he comes off as the good kid, you know, caught up in a bad situation. Right. And it's really kind of a double edged sword. On one hand, do you want other people who have been exposed to this criminality to shy away from reporting this because they're going to be part of the public eye in some sort of way? On the other side, by distorting her features, do you send another message to an audience that this is something maybe to be shameful about, that this is something that, you know, why aren't we seeing this person? Don't we have the right to see who's accusing us of a crime? That's on a different level altogether, I suppose. But it does create a secondary messages which are interesting to me. Someone who studies media and the like. Whether we benefit or not by having trials on television, I'm still very skeptical of it, frankly. But in this particular case, what is the imagery that's coming across from the parties concerned? By the way, if Kennedy Smith didn't look so boyish, if he really looked like he was guilty, is that how we're going to make judgments as to his legal guilt or innocence in this case? So it's an image based medium that makes us make decisions that have less to do sometimes with the law than to do with our own perceptions of the case. So I'm not sure I answered your question.
- [43:43]
George Severis
The second question was just about Patricia Bowman's identity because it was eventually revealed in. In fact, was it revealed by the New York Times or it was something like the New York Times article was written without her name and then it was somehow the editor put it in.
- [43:57]
Lyra Smith
The reporter had not put her name in, and then the editor put it in without telling them and published it.
- [44:02]
Paul Thaler
So that's the backstory in the Times. It's interesting because of course, the editor who made that decision was accused of having ties to the Kennedy family or whether the Kennedy family influenced the New York Times. And then it becomes another question about the political influence having to do with these trials. So everything comes into question as a result of this trial. And as you correctly point out, what happens when you put a camera into the courtroom, it feeds all media. It's not just television media. All media feel obligated to kind of get attached to a particular trial. If I could tell you just a brief anecdote which sometimes shows the absurdity of this plot point. I covered the O.J. simpson case and there was an editor from Dog World that was covering the case. She was at the trial and I interviewed her briefly. I said, why? Why are you covering the O.J. simpson case? And she said, well, you know, there was a dog, a Nikita, that found the two bodies, you know, at the scene at the Brentwood house. Ron Goldman and Simpson's ex wife Nicole. And she felt her readers wanted to know about this particular case. And that is one of the strange examples of this. But all media, in fact, to be out of the Simpsons story, I'm sorry, I keep going back and forth on this means you're almost out of the culture itself. So other mediums of communication kind of come in and gravitate. Pages upon pages were devoted in the Los Angeles Times to the Simpson case regularly. The LA Times became the Simpson beat the paper itself. And so did, of course, television network shows and cable shows as well. It shows the power of these high profile cases. Today we're talking about the Menendez case. Most folks weren't born, I imagine, who are talking about the Menendez case. Maybe I'm exaggerating only a little bit there. It is interesting, the afterlife life of these cases in terms of made for tv, movies and celebrity. Again. One quick example. There was a case here in Long Island, New York involving a young woman by the name of Amy Fisher. I don't know if that name rings a bell, but she was deemed the Long Island Lolita, that was her nickname. And she had an affair with an older man by the name of Joey Buttafuoco. Who could forget Joey Buttafuoco. Right. In any case, this was, this was one of the early days of television trials here in New York. And they actually just filmed parts of that pre trial hearing. They didn't follow the entire case, but in the course of one week there were three made for TV movies about Amy Fisher. One from Amy Fisher's Point of View, one from Joey Buttafoco's Point of View. And then there was a third that was kind of generic. I suppose in one week they had three made for television trials, which I find quite astounding if you ask me. In the case of O.J. simpson, there were all sorts of offshoots having to do with that case as well.
- [47:20]
Lyra Smith
You're reminding me of, like speaking of the Menendez brothers case, something that I think became more popular knowledge, or at least within my generation, I would say when this was like revisited recently was was that the facts of their abuse were not allowed to be admitted in court or I'm sorry if I'm like saying that the wrong way, but I think that's correct. They had, you know, previously had explained that they had been abused by their father their whole life. And then when this trial went, they weren't allowed to say that, which is really strange. But it reminds me of this case also in that they knew that William Kennedy Smith had been accused multiple times. I think it was three different women had accused him of a similar sexual assault. And that was not allowed to be admitted into court. Which is. I don't know. These things I think are confusing to an outsider at least. I find them confusing when like facts are not allowed to be included. But it's part of the whole making sure that the jurors are going to be not biased or. I don't know. I mean, I don't know if you can like speak to that. Cause it's just something I find interesting.
- [48:26]
Paul Thaler
I think you're making a great point. Point. Basically, in any high profile television trial, there are essentially two jurors, there's a jury inside the courtroom, and they're vetted, you know, to see that they're unbiased. We know that process of voir dire and the like. Right. And then there's a public jury. And the public jury is actually exposed to all sorts of information that is not allowed in the case. The judge makes the decision what is admissible in a courtroom. We know that. And often our decisions on a case are certainly influenced by all of the evidence and testimony that comes out beyond the parameters of that courtroom. And it doesn't surprise me that sometimes we come to two different verdicts, a public verdict, and then there's the courtroom verdict that exists because we're working from two different perceptions of the case. And we have every right to ask the question, I suppose, why wasn't this allowed? And all that, that. But there are reasons, legal reasons, why certain testimony is not allowed because it may be highly influential, but the judge thinks it's not relevant to the particular case, whatever that is. We feel sometimes we know more than the jury members do, and in a sense we do. But again, from a legal point of view, do we want to have trials by public jury or do we want to have trials that are contained within the courtroom itself and follow the rules of the court rather than the rules of journalism, which wants to tell a much bigger story, if that makes any sense to you.
- [49:58]
George Severis
Yeah, and I think what complicates it further is this idea that when you can see everything happening in the courtroom, you do have the full picture. And I think this is kind of the main argument, correct me if I'm wrong, that a lot of people that are pro cameras in the courtroom make, is that it is good for average citizens to see how justice is deliberated. But there's another layer of obfuscation because you, in fact don't have all the information. You just know what's going on in the courtroom. You don't know, or you might not know, if you haven't read very closely, for example, that three other women had accused this man of sexual assault and that just was not allowed in the court. You think, wow, I know everything, I can make a decision. But in fact, you are in a strange way, almost more ignorant than you would be if you were to just wait for the long newspaper article that explained everything in context.
- [50:46]
Paul Thaler
Yeah, I had mentioned the Steinberg case before, and here was a man who was convicted of manslaughter in the case of his 6 year old daughter. And I interviewed him for about 13 hours up at Dannemore Prison. At the time I was writing this book, I sat in this little room with him and it was a very intensive conversation. I tried to go through the case with him and talking about cameras in the court. And at one time Steinberg, who was really very intense individual, but he does turn to me and says, how would you like to be a defendant in a television trial? A very simple question, right? And I thought about that and I said, I probably would not want to be because for the very reasons we're speaking about, right. Do we want every facet of our life in a high profile case to be kind of examined and judged? And while we may feel we know more than the jury and they really Perhaps came to a wrong decision. What is the trade off? Right? Do we really want these cases that are, you know, have enormous social, political impact, sometimes to be judged, judged by 11 people or 12, 12 jury members in a case? Or do we want, you know, our founding father said trial should be public. But what they meant by that is, is not the fact that they weren't around for cameras in the court. They saw a much more contained courtroom. I mean, we're allowed to go into a courtroom, right? We have access into the space itself. The question is, do we expand that space to make that a national or international space, space in which we all can make our own personal judgments? And by the way, sometimes it has real ramifications. It's really serious. The LA cops accused of beating Rodney King, right, they were acquitted in that case and that led to LA riots. So there really are social, political consequences.
- [52:31]
George Severis
We're going to take a short break. Stay with us.
- [52:37]
Ed
My name is Ed. Everyone say hello, Ed.
- [52:39]
Lyra Smith
Hello, Ed.
- [52:40]
Ed
I'm from a very rural background myself. My dad is a farmer and my mom is a cousin. So, like, it's not like.
- [52:47]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
What do you get when a true crime producer walks into a comedy club? I know it sounds like the start of a bad joke, but that really was my reality nine years ago.
- [52:55]
Ed
I just normally do straight stand up, but this is a bit different.
- [53:00]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
On stage stood a comedian with a story that no one expected to hear.
- [53:05]
Ed
On 22 July 2015, a 23 year old man had killed his family and then he came to my house.
- [53:18]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
So what do you get when a true crime producer walks into a comedy club? A new podcast called Wisecrack, where stand up comedy and murder take center stage. Available now. Listen to Wisecrack on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.
- [53:39]
Elena Sada
At 19, Elena Sada believed she had found her calling. In the new season of Sacred Scandal, we pulled back the curtain on a life built on devotion and deception. A man of God, Martial Maciel, looked Elena in the eye and promised her a life of purpose within the Legion of Christ.
- [53:57]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
My name is Elena Sada and this is my story.
- [54:01]
Paul Thaler
It's the story of how I learned.
- [54:03]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
To hide, hide, to cry, to survive, and eventually how I got out.
- [54:10]
Elena Sada
This season on Sacred Scandal, hear the full story from the woman who lived it. Witness the journey from devout follower to determined survivor as Helena exposes the man behind the cloth and the system that protected him. Even the darkest secrets eventually find their way to the light. Listen to Secret Scandal, the mini secret Secrets of Martial Maciel as part of the Mike Ultura podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [54:37]
Jacob Schick
I had this like overwhelming sensation that I had to call her right then and I just hit call, said, you know, hey, I'm Jacob Schick. I'm the CEO of One Tribe foundation. And I just wanted to go on and let her know there's a lot of people battling some of the very same things you're battling when there is help out there.
- [54:54]
Ashley Schick
The Good Stuff podcast season two takes a deep look into One Tribe Foundation, a non profit fighting suicide in the veteran community. September is National Suicide Prevention Month, so join hosts Jacob and Ashley Schick as they bring you to the front lines of One Tribe's mission.
- [55:08]
Lyra Smith
I was married to a combat army veteran and he actually took his own life to suicide. One Tribe saved my life twice.
- [55:15]
George Severis
There's a lot of love that flows through this place and it's sincere now.
- [55:19]
Lyra Smith
It's a personal mission. Don't want to have to go to any more funerals.
- [55:21]
Jacob Schick
You know, I got blown up on a react mission. I ended up having amputation below the knee of my right leg and a traumatic brain injury because I landed on my head.
- [55:29]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Welcome to season two of the Good Stuff.
- [55:32]
Ashley Schick
Listen to the Good Stuff podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [55:40]
Narrator / Promo Voice
In early 1988, federal agents raced to track down the gang they suspect of importing millions of dollars worth of heroin into New York from Asia.
- [55:50]
Paul Thaler
We had 30 agents ready to go with shotguns and rifles and you name it.
- [55:56]
Narrator / Promo Voice
But what they find is not what they expected.
- [55:59]
Paul Thaler
Basically, your stay at home moms were picking up these large amounts of heroin. They go, is this your daughter? I said, yes. They go, oh, you may not see her for like 25 years.
- [56:13]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Caught between a federal investigation and the violent gang who recruited them, the women must decide who they're willing to protect and who they dare to betray.
- [56:24]
Paul Thaler
Once I saw the gun, I tried to take his hand and I saw the flash of light.
- [56:28]
Narrator / Promo Voice
Listen to the Chinatown sting on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or anywhere you get your podcasts.
- [56:39]
Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman
I'm Dr. Scott Barry Kaufman, host of the psychology podcast. Here's a clip from an upcoming conversation conversation about exploring human potential. I was going to schools to try to teach kids these skills. And I get eye rolling from teachers or I get students who would be like, it's easier to punch someone in the face when you think about emotion. Regulation, like, you're not going to choose an adaptive strategy which is more effortful to use unless you think there's a good outcome as a result of it, if it's going to be beneficial to you. Because it's easy to say like. Like you go blank yourself, right? It's easy. It's easy to just drink the extra beer. It's easy to ignore, to suppress seeing a colleague who's bothering you and just, like, walk the other way. Avoidance is easier. Ignoring is easier. Denial is easier. Drinking is easier. Yelling, screaming is easy. Complex problem solving, meditating, you know, takes effort. Listen to the psychology podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [57:45]
Lyra Smith
And we're back with United States of Kennedy.
- [57:48]
George Severis
So the question of the relationship between reality and media representations of reality is a very big one in the history of the Kennedy family. I just want to bring it back to, you know, this is technically a podcast about the Kennedys. And so I did have the question of how was the Kennedy name affecting how all of this was processed? Obviously, the. The jury selection was very challenging because they had to try to weed out people that had specific positive or negative feelings about the Kennedys. The trial was covered with the lens of, this is a promising young man from America's, you know, royal family. So how do you remember the kind of Kennedy specific coverage?
- [58:28]
Paul Thaler
Can I give you a quote by one of my sources? She was a French journalist. And here. Here it is. I wrote it down. Actually, I am here because of the Kennedy name. Willie Smith is a nobody. So I think that really does encapsulate this. I mean, to no one's surprise. Right. And your own political views come into. Whether this was fair or not. Certainly the imagery coming out of that corporate. Your own political sensibilities come into play. It's a very complicated question having to do with cameras in court, frankly. Right.
- [59:05]
Lyra Smith
As George was saying, when you see William Kennedy Smith giving testimony and he's so poised, he's so calm, there's media training. The Kennedys get media training. It wasn't just him. I mean, Ted Kennedy is there. When you look at who's telling this story in the court, you have Patricia Bowman and Anne Mercer, who are two women who probably don't have any media experience or any public speaking experience even possibly. And then you have Senator Ted Kennedy representing the context of what happened that night, and he's painting this story that William Kennedy's father had passed away. Anyways, one side has a lot of public speaking experience, expertise, training, the other side doesn't. And a lot of what we read about the trial is that it was lost by her lawyer not properly being able to question William Kennedy Smith. And also that Roy Black, who's a very famous, accomplished lawyer, being able to break down both of the women and both of the women's stories of the night. And it feels so.
- [60:16]
Paul Thaler
It feels unfair to you.
- [60:17]
Lyra Smith
Yeah. Not that it's impossible that he's telling the truth, but it just seems like he has a lot more going for him from the second he walks in there.
- [60:28]
Paul Thaler
You know, I think you're speaking to the truth of our American trial system. You know, there are defendants who cannot afford attorneys, and there are defendants who can afford attorneys. Right. In the O.J. case, he had seven lawyers, right. All high profile lawyers. And they were going up basically against state prosecutors in that case who were highly capable. But could they match the power of not only his legal staff, but his name, his reputation, his money that he could spend on that case? And it's perhaps a weakness of our legal system. It's interesting in that case where actually Patricia Bowman was introduced to Edward Kennedy at the bar in Palm beach before they went over to the estate. So she actually even met the senator at one point in time during that period. And he did have the best defense attorneys in that particular case. And no doubt he was prepared to go on the stand to testify. And for asking the question, does the legal process work, I could certainly understand the questions surrounding this particular case case. And actually maybe there's the positive having to do with the television trial. It makes us question the legal system. It asks us questions to resolve somehow, you know, and so maybe the positive that comes along with these television trials in terms of the nation.
- [61:56]
Lyra Smith
Yeah, we're talking about the media representation and the theatrics. And there are moments from the O.J. trial that are part of the American, you know, like if the glove does not fit, you must acquit. Like that's a phrase that is a part of our communal understanding of what happened in the court. And so there's that side of it where it would be a very powerful to have access to those kinds of lawyers. Something that I've always been curious about or confused about within that context. So, Roy Black, some of those people that we talked about, like, you know, Joe Francis, Jeffrey Epstein, this is post this trial, but before this trial, he had also he'd represented the cop who in that shooting ended up leading to the Miami rap riots. Also he had represented a woman who was found not guilty of killing her three year old. Her other child had died in the same way, drowning in the sink. He was already kind of known as taking on these kinds of cases. Is it not a bit of an admission to choose a person who had previously represented these people?
- [63:02]
Paul Thaler
You kind of get into the essential question of the American courtroom. Is it designed for justice or not? We understand that the scales of justice aren't always balanced. Most times, frankly, they're balanced against the defendant. If you look at the vast majority of cases, those defendants can't afford the Roy blocks of the world. Right. But we do pay attention when what we believe is an injustice, where someone gets off, so to speak, is guilty, because we've come to that decision because they have a high powered attorney who does his job. Do we want lawyers to defend people who seem, on the very facts, guilty? Do we want defense attorneys? Right. I mean, that leads to a whole other set of questions having to do with the type of court system that we have. Are we innocent until proven guilty? That axiom. Right.
- [63:52]
George Severis
And in the most generous reading of the value of cameras in the courtroom, you could say, well, it puts out there in the open the various power imbalances and injustices that shape our justice system system for the public to see. And then it's a sign of a healthy society that then they might react by protesting or they might react by attempting to change the way things are done. Of course, I don't think it always works out that simply. And that's a very sort of optimistic and liberal in the traditional sense way of viewing things. But along those lines, I do want to ask a little bit about just the legacy of the trial because we've talked a lot about the legacy of the O.J. trial. Obviously there are other cases like Rodney King or Jeffrey Dahmer that were just such a. Such, you know, huge media events that have stuck with us. This one is kind of interesting because on the one hand, it was so important in its time and as you argue, it ushered in this new era of, you know, to use an overused term, true crime obsession. But on the other hand, it's not one that people reference as much when talking about the important public trials of the 90s and 2000s. So I'm wondering, what do you think it's like legacy was in terms of conceptions of date rape, in terms of women victims, survivors being believed? Where did it get us?
- [65:06]
Paul Thaler
It's a great question, George. I wish I had a clear answer for you. I'm not sure how far any of these cases actually Take us in understanding, is there a resonance from the OJ Case, which is much more high profile, lasted much, much longer. I do wonder if one trial kind of replaces the next and we get the to that social issue and then we move on to the next and the next and the next. This was a 10 day trial, I believe it was. That had a sensational immediate impact, you know, when Patricia Bowman actually goes on the air, when she testifies over two days. CNN gets an average of three and a half million viewers during that time, which is nine times the number of viewers that would have watched CNN during that. But I wonder if it's kind of like a good meal that you forget the next day in a way, if that's even a proper analogy. The idea it's here and then we're onto the next meal, so to speak, television culinary idea, you know. And I wish I could say these trials really have real significant impact, but I just wonder in this melding between entertainment and the law, what is the residue of that? Do we actually do learn from these trials or are they entertainment that is replaced by the next entertainment, the next trial, the next to where it becomes a genre, the television trial, court tv. You just plug into core tv. You could see all of these old trials and movies that we could watch now from another time. But it's a good question you asked. What is the cultural resonance? Does it really have impact? I'm not quite sure. Yeah.
- [66:45]
George Severis
Something that strikes me is that with all these other trials, I can imagine other images like either fictionalizations of them or, you know, a Saturday Night Live sketch about O.J. a TV movie about Anita Hill. You know, I think this is a strange exception because I really can't picture in my head the definitive newspaper cover, the definitive dramatization. Somehow it was never picked back up again again after it was over.
- [67:12]
Paul Thaler
Yeah, yeah. Maybe William Kennedy Smith did not have the same resonance as John Kennedy or Robert F. Kennedy, so maybe he was a hate to use it this way, but a secondary Kennedy figure that didn't have the gravitational pull over time. I speculate with you why that's the case, but in talking about it with you, it certainly becomes vivid in my mind.
- [67:35]
Lyra Smith
Well, I think they knew that, that because they showed up, JFK Jr. Came. It was notable at the time, the Kennedy families showing up to support.
- [67:45]
Paul Thaler
Oh, there's no question about that. The clan kind of came together to support William Kennedy Smith, you know, and.
- [67:52]
George Severis
They were showing up in rented sedans and not, you know, fancy cars. There was no coverage of them going out to fancy restaurants in the area. You know, they were also operators as side characters in a media narrative, which is something that they have decades of experience doing. Whereas, of course, everyone involved on the other side, so to speak, was new to the whole media game. So, I mean, something that was a huge part of the Anne Mercer fallout is that she accepted money to give an interview for some video tabloid. And it's like if she had been properly trained to be a perfect witness, she would have never done that, because of course it's going to come back to. But nowadays, everyone is so used to the ins and outs of how media works, because everyone is aware of how they're coming across online or wherever they're projecting versions of themselves. And at that point, it was just so new that you had no idea what the rules were. And what incredibly bad luck to be going up against the Kennedys, the one family who does know how all of this works.
- [68:51]
Paul Thaler
You're really speaking to the bifurcation of the courtroom in the public. The Kennedys, of course, are very super aware of public opinion surrounding this case. So they're going to do whatever they can to kind of manufacture whatever image. They're going to come in rented cars. They're not going to come in limousines to that case. They understand it perfectly. They've been embroiled in that media life forever. Right. And they're very savvy to do that, frankly, in terms of projecting that kind of image that they're trying to project. And there's no question that Patricia Bowman was going up against, because they had the power also to control the press. The press, in that regard, was on their side. The Kennedys were very savvy in the way in which they dealt with the media. We still think of the Kennedys in such fashion. Right. For the most part, it is the age of Camelot. You know, it's that public image that Jackie Kennedy wanted to create around this family. And so this case really kind of violated that image in her mind. And the Kennedys were going to do whatever they could, could, to restore public opinion over to their side. So it's certainly an interesting story to revisit, at least to see what happened then and draw any conclusions.
- [70:02]
George Severis
Absolutely. I want to just read just one small thing because this is relevant to what we're talking about. I want to read a quote from William Kennedy Smith's statement after he was found not guilty outside the courtroom. He says, I have an enormous debt to the system and to God. I have terrific faith in both of them. And I'm just really, really happy. And to me, that is like the quintessential Kennedy quote. I have an enormous debt to the system and to God. It's almost too perfect. It's like out of a TV movie. So I just wanted to end on that.
- [70:31]
Paul Thaler
Well, we do find even in events that are happening today, this tie in between politics and the Lord. Right. So it doesn't necessarily surprise me that this confluence between these two systems, that's, for lack of a better term, come into play in a statement like that. So, again, he's very savvy to kind of draw in the public in terms of that sentiment. So, yeah.
- [70:57]
George Severis
Well, thank you very much. This was really great and I think we both learned a lot.
- [71:01]
Paul Thaler
Well, I really appreciate this discussion. It kind of opens up what was once old territory revisited. I look at some of the things that I wrote about, in fact, and it's wonderful, actually to see that this issue still is resonating. You know, that case study obviously done many years ago, but I think it's still relevant today having to do with this kind of collision between the medium and the message. And I think in revisiting the Kennedy case, it gives us some lessons even for today having to do with television trials. So thank you. Thank you for all of that.
- [71:36]
Lyra Smith
So that's it for this week's episode. United States of Kennedy is hosted by me, Lyra Smith and George Severis, research.
- [71:43]
George Severis
By Dave Ruse and Austin Thompson. Our executive producer is Jenna Cagle.
- [71:48]
Lyra Smith
Original music by Joshua Topolsky, edited by.
- [71:51]
George Severis
Graham Gibson and mixed by Doug Behm. Next week, we're digging into Bobby Kennedy and his pursuit of organized crime and Jimmy Hoffa.
- [71:59]
Lyra Smith
So subscribe and follow United States of Kennedy for all things Kennedy. Every week, check out the new season of Reasonable Doubt, now Streaming on Hulu. LA's most successful attorney, Jackson Stewart, defends.
- [72:16]
Paul Thaler
A young actor accused of murder.
- [72:18]
Lyra Smith
Follow Emma Yahtzee, Coronaldi, Morris Chestnut, Joseph Sakura, and guest stars Kash Doll and Lori Harvey as they fight their personal battles in the spotlight of the year's most sensational trial. In the pursuit of justice, every move counts. Reasonable Doubt, Season 3, now streaming on.
- [72:35]
Paul Thaler
Hulu and Hulu on Disney for bundle subscribers. Terms apply. Can small acts make a real impact in the world? Sometimes a small thing has the power to become more something big and meaningful. And when it comes to helping children, no act is too small. When you fill up at the Purple Giving Pump at Shell, a portion of your purchase will be donated to support charities in your community. The Giving Pump Easy to stop Easy to donate from 9125 to 103125 participating Shell stations will donate a minimum of $0.01 per gallon of the fuel pump from the giving pump or a minimum donation of $300.
- [73:10]
George Severis
It's football season and now you can get anything you need for game day delivery delivered with Uber Eats. Well, almost.
- [73:16]
Paul Thaler
Almost anything.
- [73:17]
George Severis
You can't get a running back but baby back ribs? Yes UberEats official on demand food delivery partner of the NFL At Hill's Pet.
- [73:25]
Paul Thaler
Nutrition, we know that pet parent guilt is real. Leaving too long, playing too little.
- [73:31]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
New homes, new babies, Waking them up.
- [73:34]
Paul Thaler
When they look so comfy. Running out of patience, running out of treats, running the vacuum. You can only do so much.
- [73:42]
True Crime Producer / Narrator
That's why there's hills.
- [73:43]
Paul Thaler
Science led nutrition to help you give more love than humanly possible because you're only human. There's hills. Find the right food@hillspet.com science does more.
- [73:54]
George Severis
Have you ever heard a story so unbelievable it just had to be true? Roofman is the jaw dropping new film about Jeffrey Manchester, played by Channing Tatum, a man who becomes infamous for breaking into over 40 big time Donald's through the roof, then secretly living inside of Toys R Us for six months. With humor, suspense and heart, Roof man is a cat and mouse story that will keep you hooked until the very end. Don't miss Roofman. Only in theaters October 10th.
- [74:20]
Lyra Smith
This is an I Heart podcast.