Everyone is sick of this subject, but here is a whole new tack: Did OJ's "Dream Team" criminal defense group really do the best job for their client? No way....

Yeah, he got off, but most people still think he's guilty. What's more, he'll be involved in the civil case for the next several years. Anything he earns will be paid to the plaintiffs. In other words, his life is over. The only thing the Dream Team did was to generate dream size fees for themselves, while shafting their client!!

Here's what they should have done, assuming they had their client's best interest at heart. (Silly me)

Have him plead guilty. No doubt, for a first offense, it would have been bargained down to manslaughter. The defense could then have concentrated on how Nicole "drove him to it" and in an "act of passion" he killed her. Goldman was just in the way--an unfortunate bystander (maybe not so innocent).

The result--a shorter trial, a sentence of maybe five years, and he comes out of jail "rehabilitated." Sure, his reputation is tarnished, but not destroyed. He spends way less in legal fees, and, there is no need for a civil trial. Even if there were one, there would be incredibly bad PR for the plaintiffs who are "just after his money." At worst, their award would be much smaller than it is now.

So what, you say. Here's what.

This is just another example of how the experts screwed up!! A criminal defense attorney will tell you (presumably quoting from some book) that the most important thing is to have the client acquitted. Nothing else matters. Well, guess what. It didn't work this time. The "best" legal advice got the client a lifetime of legal hassle and could impoverish him.

Now draw the analogy to conventional cancer therapy. Check this with any oncologist. The most important thing is to shrink the tumor (even if this treatment modality kills the patient--and it often does). The doc can cover himself by saying that he did "all that he could." The fee gets paid either way. But with more invasive treatment, there's always more fee. (AKA a checkbook biopsy) Is this in the patient's best interest?

Is there a conflict of interest between the expert and his client? It sure seems that way, doesn't it?

Beware the experts!! Think for yourself!

My all time favorite "expert" hype was Jim Fixx's "Complete Book of Running" followed up with his "Second Book of Running." Hello??

When did all this reliance on experts start? I think it was with Benjy Spock in the 1940's. Parents had been taking care of babies and raising kids for YEARS before his book came out, right? Well then, why did millions of new parents suddenly feel inadequate to the task, and line up to buy his book?

Were the new parents overwhlemed by the complexity of the postwar world? Were they unprepared to deal with the new onslaught of media hype? Or, were they just being "modern"?

What do YOU think??