by Wendy Walker
By far the most important experience for me came on Monday night, July 18, when I traveled to Washington to be the first guest on that night’s Larry King Live. King would come to occupy an unusual niche in the Simpson case. By the time of the trial, King had decided to devote the bulk of his program to the case, and he even moved his base of operations to Los Angeles for long periods. I eventually made several dozen appearances on the show, and King’s CNN studio on Sunset Boulevard came to resemble a sort of Hyde Park Corner for the Simpson case. On any given day that I appeared, I was likely to find a defense lawyer, an expert witness, or some other witness or peripheral figure lingering in the makeup room. For me, a reporter who was actually covering the case, the visits amounted to priceless opportunities to chat with these people in a quiet and intimate setting. So many people involved with the case developed relationships with King that he became a quasi-participant himself.
I finally got Larry away and I could exhale. When I look back now, I believe that OJ did for domestic abuse what Rock Hudson did for AIDS by putting it on the map with a face and a real-life situation. And we at the Larry King Live show helped that along. How horrific was it that a beautiful and educated woman like Nicole Brown was so frightened of her ex-husband that she had pictures of her beaten, swollen face locked away in a safety deposit box, just in case? And still she got murdered.
Larry and I had just arrived at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel on October 2. Larry was working out and I was at the bar, meeting with a source who was close to Nicole, when I glanced up at the TV screen. The OJ jury had reached a verdict. What? How could that be? I thought. They had only deliberated for four hours after the lengthiest trial anyone could remember, and they were ready to read the verdict in court the next morning. What did it mean?
I left the bar and rushed into the gym area to tell Larry they had reached a verdict, which they would read in the morning. He was as shocked as I was. That evening, I went to dinner with Jo-Ellen Demetrius, a jury selection consultant who had helped the defense team choose jurors who might be sympathetic to OJ. She had been rooting for an acquittal and she was really down in the dumps. “This is not good for us,” she said. “They’re probably going to bring in a guilty verdict because it came so fast. I feel sick to my stomach.”
I awakened in anxious anticipation the next morning, believing that this was OJ’s last day of freedom. At about 9 a.m., I called Larry and said, “I need to come to your room and watch the verdict with you.” I gave him no choice, I just hung up the phone and ran over to his room. But I was so nervous while we watched, I suddenly blurted out, “Larry, can we hold hands?”
Larry stared at me. “Huh, why?” he said.
“I don’t know why,” I answered, “I just need to hold your hand.”
I grabbed his hand, squeezed hard, and held my breath.
“Not guilty,” the foreman said.
I dropped Larry’s hand and said nothing. All I could think was: Where is the karma? Is he getting away with double murder?
I was in utter disbelief when several of my colleagues and I attended a celebratory party that was given by OJ’s group at a bar that night. We went to observe and there was much patting on backs and celebratory toasts. When we went on the air the next night, Larry interviewed Johnnie Cochran to discuss his victory. But no one was more stunned than I when the show was nearly over and a screener told me that OJ, himself, was calling in. He wanted to talk to Larry.
We have an 800 number for the general public to call in with questions or comments, and they may or may not get on the air. But we also have an “invited caller” number system where we ask an invited guest to join us on the phone. They are given a password along with a private number so we can separate a real caller from an impostor.
“Are you sure it’s really him?” I asked.
“He called on the right number and gave us the password.”
It was OJ. I was about to put him on when a producer from Atlanta called me to say hurriedly, “Wendy, Larry has to stop exactly at ten. We have a great taped show all about OJ Simpson.”
“Well,” I answered, “I have him live on the phone.” OJ live on the phone or a taped show about him? There was no decision to make as we put OJ on. Here is an excerpt from that call:
KING: We’re back on Larry King Live… For the benefit of our radio listeners, we will be extending this program… because with us on the phone now is OJ Simpson. How are you?
VOICE OF SIMPSON: I am doing fine. I want to thank you a lot, because so many of my friends told me that you have been fair in hosting your show and bringing the points of view from both sides… most of all, I want to thank that man, Mr. Johnnie Cochran, for believing from the beginning, listening, and putting his heart and soul on the line to send me home and spend time with my kids.
… I’ve been watching your show, and I don’t really have a lot to say now. Pretty soon I will have enough to say to everybody and hopefully answer everyone’s questions, but one of your callers… asked the question about a “shadowy figure… running down the driveway and across the lawn and into the front door.” That’s one of the problems I am having today, with people who have followed this trial, they have not listened to the evidence… Throughout this case, it’s been this misrepresentation time and time again. People come home from work and they hear the pundits elaborating on these misrepresentations. Listen to what the witness says, listen to what their testimony is, and not what Marcia Clark told you. And not what Darden told you… Fortunately for me, the jury listened to what the witnesses said, and not Marcia Clark’s or Darden’s or anyone else’s rendition of what they said.
KING: OJ, how would you describe yourself, as relieved, angry, what?
VOICE OF SIMPSON: A little bit of everything. I think my basic anger, and this is the last thing I am going to say before I leave, my basic anger is these misconceptions… People I’ve heard that followed the case, heard experts say this was the testimony today… and that wasn’t the testimony today. There were so many times I went back to my cell and I watched TV, I go to my attorney room, I talk to my attorneys and some witnesses, and we say, “Were these experts looking at the same… were they in the same courtroom that we were in today? Did they hear the testimony today?” Because what they were reporting on the news… on these various shows, was not what the witnesses were saying. And, once again, that lady who called in, look at the testimony. Marcia Clark told you that…
KING: A couple of quick things, and I will let you go.
VOICE OF SIMPSON: No, I’ve got to go.
KING: All right, can you just tell—
VOICE OF SIMPSON: I’m sorry, I’ve really got to go.
KING: What was it like with the kids today?
VOICE OF SIMPSON: Thank you.
KING: What was it like with the kids?
VOICE OF SIMPSON: It’s been—it’s been great. It’s been great. Thank you. Soon—and I appreciate what—how fair you have been.
KING: Thank you. And—
VOICE OF SIMPSON: Thank you.
Getting that call was a terrific coup for us, but now all the networks were vying for the “money interview”—the first live television interview with OJ following the verdict. After much wheeling and dealing, Larry and I lost the big interview to Katie Couric and Tom Brokaw at NBC. It was a huge disappointment, but I called Katie to congratulate her. Larry and I both got on the phone and I told Katie how proud I was of her. Larry congratulated her as well, since this truly was a great “get.” Katie would be flying from New York to LA for the interview.
But overnight, everything changed. Much of the television viewing audience were incensed that any network would carry this interview. People wanted to know how NBC could dare to put this man on their network, a pariah who they thought had gotten away with double murder. The protests got so loud, NBC canceled the show altogether. In essence, this interview that we had all fought so hard to get, disappeared in a couple of hours. The only positive outcome was that Katie had all of he
r congratulatory flowers sent to my hotel room since her trip was canceled!
In pondering how anyone could do what OJ did, I can only turn to the definition of a sociopath. Sociopaths, a psychological title under which this man clearly falls, have selective memories and believe only what they want to believe. OJ must have believed that he was justified in what he did, or perhaps he has no memory of it at all. I would tend to go with the justification explanation.
Either way, though, OJ sits in jail right now, not for the murders of his wife and her friend, but rather for an armed kidnapping in Las Vegas in October 2008. It seems that however much we try to be who we are not, or as much as we try to “get away with murder,” we eventually seek our own level.
I guess OJ was destined to go to jail, for one reason or another. I can think of two really good reasons, offhand. Today, he is sentenced to thirty-three years behind bars, with eligibility for parole after less than a third of that term. This is one of those times in life that can only be described by one word: “karma.” And OJ is living his.
THE LOVE YOU TAKE IS EQUAL TO THE LOVE YOU MAKE
More and more people are looking within these days to find a mind/body/spirit kind of spirituality. This means living a life in which you feel good about yourself, and the logical way to do this is to put into life what you would like to get from it. This is karma as I understand it, or the Golden Rule, where you do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
When someone hurts you, it’s a normal human reaction to think, I want them to feel the same pain I’m feeling. They don’t deserve happiness. But contrary to how you might feel, the best thing you can do for yourself is to forgive that person. If you don’t, the anger festers inside of you and permeates your life. On the other hand, when you release it, it leaves your system and you can heal your heart and walk away from the misery. In this way, forgiveness is for you, not for the person you are trying to forgive. Doesn’t that make forgiving seem a little more palatable?
When you have been disappointed by someone and wish them harm, if you take a good look at that person, you will see that they are already suffering with no help from you. Look at the person who has upset you and ask yourself the following questions:
• Is she happy?
• Would you like to be him?
• Do you think she’s living a good life?
• Do you think your life is healthier than his?
If you really look at someone who hurt you, you probably don’t want to be connected to him. The more you can put yourself in a bright light and feel good about yourself and let your anger go, the more you release negative connections. In fact, if you can’t or won’t forgive someone, no matter what they did, it’s like taking poison and wishing the other person would die. Not too smart.
I have developed a habit of forgiving people first thing in the morning when I wake up. It would be beneficial for you to make a list of those whom you need to forgive because forgiveness is not a one-time thing. It is not something you aspire to, reach, and then consider it done. Forgiveness, just like faith, needs to be renewed each and every day.
It’s like a 12-step program. You take it one day at a time. You need to forgive that person today and then do it again tomorrow. Someone once told me that the word “forgive” means thank you “for giving” me this experience. It’s all about learning who you are and how you want to live your life. When I found a way to forgive, something I do every day, people asked me why I looked so well. It was because I was learning to forgive, gradually and consistently.
When you hold a grudge, you are actually holding on to a memory. It is no longer a tangible thing, but rather a thought that keeps repeating itself over and over in your mind. It is not a book or a tree or any other object. It is a memory, and each time you go there, you will feel the sadness all over again. You have to get strong enough to remind yourself, “I’m feeling the effects of a memory. It isn’t real. I don’t have to go here again. It’s time to move on.”
My dear friend JZ Knight (who channels an entity called Ramtha) says we become addicted to our emotions. If the emotions are sadness and pain, we go there for comfort and we feel all of our sadness and pain. But if we are addicted to feeling calm and happy, well, that’s a much better place to be.
So don’t be concerned if you feel forgiveness one day and have trouble with it the next. There will be times when you fall back into the negativity, but you can keep reminding yourself to forgive, not for the other person but for yourself. It may take prayer, meditation, or a one-on-one meeting. Whatever it takes, it’s worth it to clear your own heart and soul.
CHAPTER 14
Read People Like You’d Read a Roadmap
On December 24, 2002, a twenty-seven-year-old woman named Laci Peterson went missing from her home in Modesto, California. The fact that she was eight months pregnant only added to the urgency of finding her. On the day after Christmas, police searched the home that she shared with her husband, Scott, who had supposedly been out on his boat on Christmas Eve, fishing. The story unfolded over the next several months and on April 13, 2003, the remains of a male infant were discovered on the shoreline of the San Francisco Bay.
The next day, all hopes of finding Laci alive were dashed when a decapitated female body washed up on the shore. Soon afterward, the remains of both mother and child were positively identified as Laci Peterson and Conner, her unborn son. When Scott Peterson was arrested in San Diego as the prime suspect for what they were calling a double murder, the case was splashed all over the media. Scott’s disinterest in helping the police and his flat emotional affect following the discoveries of the bodies contributed to a heavy pall of suspicion hanging over him.
The fact that, after the murders, he was found with multiple credit cards belonging to family members and enough cash and supplies for a long getaway only added to the suspicion, as did dyeing his hair and goatee blond. Then, with the discovery of a major extramarital affair, Scott seemed to be displaying the behavior of a sociopath and the media erupted into a feeding frenzy.
At Larry King Live, we were the first to grab the story and run with what I thought was the most gripping murder case since the OJ Simpson double murder trial about eight years prior. But as compelling as the ins and outs of the OJ trial were, in many ways, I found the Scott Peterson case even more peculiar and confounding.
There were several reasons for that. While OJ Simpson was an aggressive sports jock, a football star with a powerful attitude and body to match, Scott Peterson was a soft-spoken, unassuming gentleman, a cute guy, a fertilizer salesman who liked fishing and was everybody’s darling. While OJ boasted winning the Heisman Trophy and being touted around the world as a champion, Scott Peterson was a regular kid who went to a public school in a small town in California, the same school my kids attended, where he smiled pleasantly and opened doors for older women. In fact, when he and Laci wed, she was considered to have married up in the social world. They had a nice life, they were pregnant, the grandparents all around were happy, and Scott could not have appeared more clean-cut and polite. Too bad no one guessed what evil was brewing under all that grooming, manners, and courteous behavior.
The Peterson case made compelling television for many of the reasons listed above, but something else was driving me in a personal way toward this case at this particular time. I was in the painful process of a divorce and I needed a diversion that was compelling enough to hold my attention. I turned to the weirdness of the Scott Peterson case, initially relieved to have something dramatic in which to bury myself. But as time went on and more of the facts came to light in this odd case, it took on a life of its own, and I was not the only one who couldn’t get enough. The one thing that everyone agreed upon was that Scott Peterson looked like the most clean-cut, well-groomed murder suspect anyone had ever seen.
We did many shows during this time, discussing Scott Peterson’s affair with massage therapist Amber Frey, and who on earth could have killed lovely, smiling
Laci, who was nearly nine months pregnant? People thought Scott had acted strangely after the killings, they became aware of his comings and goings, and everyone wanted to put in their two cents. The panel discussions on our show were thoughtful and informative as we turned to experts in the field of criminal law. I booked a number of experts who weighed in on the mystery, which was how attorney Mark Geragos ended up being on our show a number of times before he became Scott Peterson’s defense attorney.
The consensus opinion among our experts and callers was that Scott Peterson was probably guilty, no matter how handsome he looked. At that time, even Mark didn’t have anything substantial to say in Scott Peterson’s favor. This is an excerpt from a conversation on our show on April 18, 2003, between Larry and Mark.
KING: Mark Geragos, is this case kind of plea-bargainable, or will they not go for that?
GERAGOS: I can’t imagine… unless something comes up that I’m not aware of, that any prosecutor’s going to plea bargain this. This case, from a prosecution’s standpoint…
KING: Is it a slam dunk?
GERAGOS: … even though it’s a circumstantial evidence case, the most damning piece of circumstantial evidence comes out of his own mouth and his own hands, when he hands the police that receipt from the very location where two miles away, she’s found. I mean, that is just a devastating thing. If you believe that he’s the one who, for whatever reason, got into it with her, killed her, put her in a tarp, put her in the boat, did all of that… they’ll try him [for first degree murder] with special circumstances. I’ll be shocked if they don’t.
… as I’ve said, it’s a damning, circumstantial case—the man is a sociopath if he did this crime. I mean, there’s no other way to put it. This is his wife, his unborn baby boy. If he’s the one who took the two of them up there and put concrete around them and threw them into the ocean and concocted this story and went out onto Diane Sawyer and gave that impassioned plea with the tears—I mean, that’s not somebody that generally you’re going to want to give a manslaughter [charge]… There’s apparently information on the tides and currents on his computer when they did the search, that is some pretty compelling evidence.