Byrne Books

Dr. Byrnes" was not a medical doctor. Before he died of cardiovascular disease at age 40 he held a doctorate in "Alternative Medicines from the Alternative Medicines Research Institute". His undergraduate work was not in a premed curriculum. He had a bachelor of arts degree in comparative religion.

If you want to treat or prevent heart disease read the works of Dr. Dean Ornish M.D.. His program has been clinically proven to reverse heart disease. The proof of his work is published in mainstream conservative medical journals.

The author has no special information about nutrition that mainstream doctors and scientists don't know about--he is just plain wrong. Sadly, he died of a stroke at a young age in 2004. Ignore his advice and look for books with solid scientific references, such as those by Neal Barnard, MD, if you really want to improve your heart health.

I really appreciated this book. It was information-dense, yet easy to read. I thought the chapter on Dr. Price's research was a real eye-opener into how healthy traditional peoples ate and thrived on a diet rich in whole foods, including animal foods.

The chapter debunking the Lipid Hypothesis and Cholesterol Myth was well-written. The chapter on true causes of heart disease was, again, full of information, but easy to read. After reading this chapter, you'll never eat margarine again, let me tell you!

The last chapter, "A Grab Bag of Good Things For Your Heart," was practical and informative, listing certain herbs and nutritional factors like CoQ10.

All in all, I'm glad I bought and read this book.

I found it hard to separate the wheat from the chaff with this book. The useful information in this book is buried between unsubstantiated statements of fact and obscure references. I mean, the author makes it sound like everybody should know what "acerola powder" is, as if you could pick it up at the local market. I found his writing style to be preachy and pontificating, like a politicized tirade from Crossfire, where the "other side" couldn't possibly have anything of value to add to the conversation.

Stephen Byrnes' book is short and clear and very persuasive. I have given it to three people (with cardiovascular health problems) as a gift and I am confident that if they read this book and take even a few things to heart, they will live healthier and longer.

Having read a lot of conspiracy theories over the last few years I can say without a doubt that this is probably one of the worst books I have ever read. Whilst some books create tenuous links supported by few actual facts, this author invents facts all on his own and then presents them as empirical research. I have no doubt that Mr Byrne has had an interesting time researching this book, and (as others have mentioned) there are some items of historical note presented in a highly readable way, this book should be taken no more seriously than Dan Brown - and has about as much a basis in fact as the aforementioned authors own books.

In short, if this was sold as a work of fiction then it would be reasonably entertaining, as a conspiracy theory book it borders on lunacy, and considering it as a work of research should result in someone being incarcerated.

The chapters on Templar history were the best I have ever found.
Very good stuff. Beyond that ... well, let's say the author may
be the very paragon of speculative Masonry.

I bought this book soon after I saw it on-line.
There was something which attracted my attention; I had just got Hancock's "The Sign and the Seal" Italian translation and was thinking about reading it when I found this book. The combination between the Knights Templar and the Ark of the Covenant sounded interesting to me. The book, actually, is quite interesting and confirms a statement: there is something around that area.
Many are the evidence Byrne brings in order to confirm his findings, and sometimes this bunch of prooves is a little boring. Nevertheless, it demonstrates the author's good faith and enthusiasm.
The interesting combination involving numbers, Masonic degrees and hidden treasures reaches a very high intellectual level, demonstrating how these Knights mastered the art of using numbers, locating places and code messages.
The history of the Knights Templar has definetely a hidden face, and this book, as John J. Robinson did in his marvellous "Born in Blood", on one side confirms the connection between them and Freemasonry.
The only risk the reader may run is not to finish the book, considering the many facts Byrne provides. Those who know a lot about Rennes le Château may also think Byrne insists a little too much on his conclusions and really descharges Andrews and Schellenberger's final conclusions - as well as others - a little too easily, but in the very end the great interest about Rennes le Château is that all theories lead more or less to the same place with different conclusions. Byrne is no exception. Pointing to the same site Andrews and Schellenberger reached, it is only the "treasure" which is different.
Last but not least, Byrne is an active Freemasonry; thus, from that point of view, he knows more than others.

Very well written and,much easier to understand than most instructional drum books.

This book is not very good.. Buy something else

The premise of the book is that "management" can be viewed more broadly than an application-layer protocol such as SNMP. The author shows how each layer may be understood in the context of "management" of a resource. I found the viewpoint to be very illustrative. Suddenly, many things that look different are really much the same. From my perspective, this insight does not require excessive quantitative analysis.

Control engineering has many areas of application in networking. Synchronization (various levels), flow control (TCP), etc. I anticipated this book would offer some original insights into control systems methods as they apply to networking. Greatly disappointed. Problems with this book: Lack of quantitative methods (control theory is highly quantitative, no real application of control methods except as block diagrams), no examples, broad generalities. No demonstration that he understands the fundamental factors in the success of the Internet (yet he boldly states he thinks it should be fundamentally changed). The subject was promising, but no useful techniques or methods. Doesn't even demonstrate an understanding of the control systems aspects (networking is a multi-input, multi-output control system problem, but that is not addressed). Regretfully, I strongly recommend not buying this book.

Though not as bad as some people have said in reviews it is not a very good read. The story moves at a very sluggish pace and has a horrible villain. Though the showing up of another DC Super team really kept it from completely going downhill. I can not say I recommend this unless you've read the rest of the volumes in the series.

You'd think this book was the end of civilization as we know it judging from some geek reviews here. I just take it for what it is, another superhero story. We are not talking Shakespeare for crying out loud. Fairly entertaining and art that is better than any of the cartoony looking garbage that passes for art in a lot of comics these days. The basic plot has been explained in some other reviews here, so I wont rehash it. Yeah, there is too much over-explaining of characters every action by way of the over-use of thought balloons. I didn't need Superman to provide a blow-by-blow of his every movement, but oh well.It was basically entertaining and that is what I want. Some of these guys reviews are just nit-picking to the nth degree. Comics are escapist entertainment and if I am entertained the creators have done their job. If you are a slave to every minute detail of continuity in the DC Universe you will probably be crying foul when you read this, too. If you just want some old school comic fun then you will like this book.

Chris Claremont should have quit writing comics long ago. His time is past. This storyline served no purpose other than to introduce John Byrne's rebooted new, new, new Doom Patrol, which has already been erased from continuity by 'Infinite Crisis'. It was a mistake anyway in that rebooting the Doom Patrol in this fashion erased Beast Boy/Changeling's origin from continuity. Retconning is garbage and everyone ought to knock it off. Don't buy this volume unless you simply must have a complete set of 'JLA'. Oh, also, having the Justice League fight vampires, of all things, is just dumb. Tedious. The only redeeming quality the book possesses is an absolute knee-slapping, gut-busting sight gag in the last two panels of the story; the belly-laugh is not worth the price of the book.

This Justice League of America outing looked a little dated to me. It is done in the 1980s John Byrne style, so if you really are a big fan of that and a collector, you will like it. The story with some potential Doom Patrollers and the Justice League crossing over with a circle of vampires just didn't seem to gel, for me.

Like many posters regarding this storyline, I was, and still am, a huge fan of Claremont & Byrne's run on X-MEN. I am also a fan of Byrne's run in the 80s on FANTASTIC FOUR & WEST COAST AVENGERS. That being said, this is one of the most disappointing books I've ever read. A VAMPIRE??!! Named CRUCIFER??? These characters have looked Darkseid in the face and won, but they almost get bested by a character that not even Hammer Films would have created?? Is it 1983 all over again? The sad fact of the matter is, while comics have evolved over the last 20 years since the Miller/Moore events, these two creators have remained tethered to an archaic and irrelevant form of storytelling. Now, I'm all for comics being grand adventures without bloody violence & T & A - they don't all have to be WATCHMEN or PREACHER. And it's important to tell stories like that to help bring new readers to the form. But you've got to have a good story and believable dialogue. Claremont's script has all of the subtlety and originality of a beer commercial. And Byrne's pencils are shadows of their former greatness. For top-notch storytelling & art with these characters, try Grant Morrison's run on JLA or, if you're an old-schooler, try the Keith Giffen/Kevin Maguire incarnation from the mid-80s, which is the kind of fun and adventure that this disaster wishes it could be.

The book is just that . . . some riffs. I cannot really say I got my money worth.

It's bad enough that these companions contain little more than a description of the episode, but the pictures in this latest one are horrible! An amateur with an HP printer could do better!! Very disappointing.

Note: Although the Amazon description lists this as a "(CD-ROM)", it is a DVD that will play in any DVD player.

This is one of three tiling DVDs (the others being "Tiling Floors" and "Tiling Countertops") in this series by Michael Byrne. Michael Byrne is, without doubt, one of the foremost experts in the tile setting business.

That said, this DVD is truly disappointing. Byrne spends most of the DVD showing you how to "float" walls with wire and mortar for a shower/tub tile installation. Floating walls is tremendously time consuming and requires a great deal of skill.

Almost all tile installed today is installed with cementious backerboard like HardieBacker or Wonderboard. These are like drywall made from cement. You securely mount them to the studs, and then you mount the tile to them with thinset. They're easy to use and will last decades if installed properly.

Floating walls, especially if you have not done it before, will take longer than would the entire install with cement backerboard. Floating the walls does allow you to do certain things you can't easily do with backerboard (like rounding a corner), but it would take a long time to master it. Backerboard is mentioned in the DVD, but almost as an afterthought (which maybe it was back in 1987 when this program was first filmed).

Byrne also uses a snap cutter and tile nibblers instead of a wet saw, so you don't learn how to use that, either. And the entire DVD shows Byrne setting one type of tile in one bathroom (a stage set made for this purpose).

Byrne uses basic, inexpensive 4"x4" glazed tiles, and the end result looks like it belongs in a cheap apartment. The look is dated. This may also be due to this being filmed in 1987, but that doesn't matter when you're buying it 20 years later. Almost nobody would be satisfied with the install shown in this DVD.

On the plus side, Byrne does explain different methods for planning tile layout. And, if you want to learn how to float walls, this would be an excellent resource.

I've installed a few small tile countertops and floors, so I already know how to install tile and bought this as a refresher with the hope of picking up a few new tips. Because I have absolutely no interest is floating walls, this DVD was a waste of time and money.

Conclusions:

If you are a beginner looking for a video that will show you how to install tile, steer far clear of this DVD. It will confuse you and likely leave you thinking tile work is beyond your abilities. For beginners, I highly recommend watching the 5-episode "Tiling Techniques" series on the DIY network.

If you have experience with tile and would like to learn how to float walls and pick up some layout tips, this DVD is just what you are looking for you. For someone in this position, this DVD deserves 4 or 5 stars.

I have also purchased the other two DVDs in this series ("Tiling Floors" and "Tiling Countertops"). Apparently they were filmed at the same time this DVD was made, doing work on the same bathroom set. I'll probably still watch them, and likely review them, but having seen this one I'm in no hurry.

I've never read a Barbara Taylor Bradford book before, and read this one on a friend's recommendation. For anyone who has read Valley of the Dolls -- does this not remind you of Anne Well's story, plus a murder and minus pill-popping? Maybe it's just me. I liked Valley of the Dolls. I did not like The Triumph of Katie Byrne. I was waiting for something surprising to occur ... or at least an original depiction of story that has become a little too commonplace in today's literature. (Not to diminish the seriousness of the issue) ...

Katie was the only functioning survivor of the trio of Connecticut would-be actresses to carry on with their dream of starring on Broadway. After the disaster, she's not so sure any more that she has the courage to keep on keeping on. So she takes a sabbatical to visit and study acting in England. She's not sure she will ever be "good enough" for her claim to fame.

Her British friends take her on trips. In Harrogate, the old spa town with the mineral springs, they remind her of the Dustin Hoffman film about Agatha Cristie's mysterious disappearance and it was at this spa in 1926 she registered under an assumed name, Teresa, all the time following her prey. When discovered, she claims to have suffered a nervous breakdown. In 1571, the springs were all the rage for policicians, writers, singers, actors, and the royal family; even Byron benefited from the hydrotherapy of the warm waters and soothing spa surroundings. It sounded just the thing Katie needed to get prepared for a starring role in a play which was headed for New York.

To prepare for her Emily Bronte role, she and some friends watched the early film of 'Wuthering Heights' which had been produced by Sam Goldwyn and directed by William Wyler. Lawrence Olivier was Heathcliff in the movie, which also starred Merle Oberon, David Niven, and Donald Crisp. These drama students were all fans of American films and especially liked 'The Third Man' with Michael Rennie (not Orson Welles) and 'The Seventh Veil' starring Ann Todd.

Not only does she have to get over her disturbing past, she is running from an unhappy relationship. She devotes all her energies to the play, and is a big hit on Broadway. Her lover, Chris, turned up outside the theatre after all the fanfare was over and persuaded her he loved her more than the water forests in Argentina. She agreed to marry him and takes him home to meet the happy family. They were aware that she needed space and time away from the sadness which had plagued her after the loss of her thespian friends. Her triumph on stage and in her personal life was well deserved and earned by her perseverence and hard work. That and the fact that she was a beautiful, head-turning young woman. We all need a triump or two to get on with life after an unhappy, unfair end to a love affair.

Thank goodness I didn't pay for this drivel - I picked it up in the bookswap bin at work because it looked as if it would at least be readable - how wrong I was. This book is terrible in every way - the dialogue sounds horrible - particularly the heroine's mother who talks in terribly stilted language, with an occasional 'mauvoreen' thrown in to make her sound authentic! The characters are totally unbelievable - all beautiful, nice, incredibly talented/successful and Katie the heroine seems to have no faults at all. However by the worst thing is the plot - the original murder which is actually the only interesting thing which happens in the book is conveniently forgotten and the author moves on 10 years to bore us rigid with Katie's career as an actress. It is also full of plot holes - it is continally hinted that Katie herself is in some danger from the murderer but in the end in fact it had nothing to do with her. All sorts of plotlines go absolutely nowhere - Rex the supposed 'spy', Lavinia's incredible artistic talent to name but two and the resolution of the murder mystery is the absolute nadir of the book. I'm sure there's an unwritten law that the murderer in a book or film can't turn out to be someone who we've never heard of, it's totally unsatisfactory for the reader/viewer. I vaguely remember reading one of her books when I was much younger and I certainly don't remember it being this bad, but I doubt I will ever pick up one of her books again, and I feel very sorry for anyone who bought this rubbish in hardback - they have been the victims of daylight robbery!

This book would be appropriate if she were a sixth grader and this was her first attempt at writing. But she's not. She's published millions. And so, we have clear proof that selling is in no way relates to quality.

If you want to know how to NOT write a novel this is the book to read. Horrifically bad, terrible, uncompromisingly awful are a few descriptive phrases that pop to mind. Let me explain:

She says this is her first attempt at a murder mystery. Ok let's look at plot then. Part one: the murder. Part two: a long rambling boring section where the character is now grown and drinking tea and chatting and looking into the life of the Bronte's. (add your own umlaut there) Part three: The girl from part one in the coma wakes up and remembers who killed her friend and tried to kill her -- and this person is someone we never met in the book so far and never meet again. So plotwise, it's as unfullfilling as it is unengaging.

The author's language is stilted and complimented only by the cardboard characters and wobbly settings. The story does not move forward but sags, lags, detours and flops.

The author thanks two editors but what where were they? The book requires heavy editing -- an example, at the hospital a boy is going to get the jeep from the parking lot to pick up his family at the door -- it's raining. He says something like, "I'm going to go get the jeep from the parking lot," he said to them, "Because it's raining." We know he has a jeep, we know it's raining, we know it's in the lot, we know who he speaks to. Another sentence says the door was slammed 'behind him.' Uh, if you're leaving you can't really slam the door before you and get out. At other times this word pusher lapses into long passages of passive verb construction and nearly ties herself into knots with the sheer number of "was" and "had been" constructions. Names of places are hyphenated, or not (any bad editor would have at least caught that.)

Another example that is the tip of the iceberg: In the first part the night is at first cold and dark (at 6:00 pm in October in Connecticut -- something that does not happen at that time there). Then there is a heavy fog. Next there is a clear view of the moon, then next there is heavy rain. She cannot even imagine a consistent weather. She has her characters packing into one night the events of a few days, and her sense of pacing and time is just as bad as her weather.

Bradford cannot write. I don't care if she outsold the Bible, she is not a writer in any means or form and this book proves it perfectly.

This has got to be the worst book ever written. Phony characters and an even stupider plot. I am just glad I did not waste my eyesight reading it and listened to it on CD. I did not even finish it. This was disappointing as her books on the Harte family were engrossing.

The Trial of O. J. Simpson covered "wealth, fame, celebrity, sex, race, adultery, drugs, domestic abuse, and murder". Public opinion was mostly based on race, which is not the best method to determine guilt or innocence. Any jury decides the facts in the case to resolve conflicting claims. Given the murders occurred after 11pm no other true verdict was possible. Joseph Bosco said the news on TV made the trial different from what he observed in the courtroom. This can explain mistaken opinions. This book is important because of the insight as to the jury's decision, assuming nothing was left out or distorted.

After the verdict the jurors wanted to avoid the plague of journalists (Chapters 1&2). Some were approached to sell their story. They did not want to be on TV because of all the crazy people out there (p.18). Were those offers of payment reliable (p.19)? Maybe not (p.20). A "Letter of Intent" isn't a cashier's check (p.21). A book will provide money up front and insure the story is honest, not garbled as in a late night talk show, tabloid news, or corporate TV shows (p.23). Chapters 3, 4, and 5 tell about the lives of the co-authors. Chapter 6 explains the nine months as a sequestered juror. Being isolated affected people's nerves (p.72). The jurors believed their rooms had audio and video monitors (p.85). They would have preferred to go home a few times to check things out.

Chapter 7 describes the witnesses at the trial. The coroner was not called in a timely manner (p.100). Why wasn't Simpson's house searched (p.101)? Fuhrman wasn't credible (p.104), or Vannatter (p.106). Some of the prosecution witnesses weren't credible (p.116). There was a problem with the blood evidence from the fence (pp.121-122). Simpson's blood wasn't on either of the gloves (p.123). Some believed the gloves fit (p.126). The domestic abuse testimony showed it happened when they were drunk (p.127). "Marcia Clark did an excellent job" (p.137). They had a problem with the way the evidence was gathered and preserved (p.140).

Chapter 9 tells how the jury arrived at their verdict. They had several reasonable doubts plus questions that could not be answered from the exhibits and evidence (p.156). The testimony of the limo driver said OJ was in the doorway, not the driveway (p.157). The time element was a big factor (p.160). There was a problem with the bloody glove (p.161). After talking over the evidence the verdict was not guilty on both counts. The jury's verdict caused Judge Ito's expression on his face to change (p.174). "The evidence just was not there" (p.177). A juror noted the lack of blood evidence from the crime scene was questionable (p.178). The coroner who performed the autopsies wasn't allowed to testify.

Chapter 11 is titled "The Race Card". At first they thought OJ was guilty. The subject of race was not a part of the deliberations (p.181). The lack of evidence and the shoddy prosecution led to the verdict (p.182). [Those who charge racism may be confessing to something.] Cochran said Detective Fuhrman was "the only one who found all the evidence" (p.186). If you throw out that testimony (Fifth Amendment) you have no case (p.189). Page 190 explains the jurors protest because of the dismissal of deputies. Chapter 12 has the questions and answers from their post-verdict forum. Their conversations will enlighten you, they wonder why certain "evidence" was not introduced (p.197). Money and a passport are not proof themselves of any crime. [Nicole's diary in a safety deposit box seems like a concocted threat. Who keeps a diary there?] Geraldo Rivera's question is dishonest (p.201). They did not decide whose blood was there until months later. Glenn Peterson's question is loaded (assumes the answer in the question, petitioning the principle). Ditto for Tom Greenburg. Christine Mauro is wrong, hearsay evidence is banned because it is not corroborated. Some of the Appendices contain information not found in any other book.
Those short reviews seem to have not read the book!

An attempt to cash in on the Simpson trial, this book is an embarrassment for all concerned. Just how bad it is cannot be conveyed in a mere 1000 words, so you'll simply have to read it yourself -- but maybe that's too high a price to pay. Read the summary provided by Dove Publishing. It's as though they are trying to expose the jurors as the cerebral cripples they are. Couldn't they find one coherent line in what must have been hours of mind-numbing recordings with the "authors"? While reading the book, keep in mind that this is _their_ side of the story; it is told in a manner most sympathetic to the jurors. Still, they come off as spit-drooling morons. The mind reels at the thought of someone hostile to Cooley, Bess, and Jackson having written this. As for Tom Byrnes (he garners "as told to" credit for this mess) and editor Mike Walker, don't hate them... pity them. Then again, perhaps Byrne and Walker have intended this as an indictment of our judicial system, where the search for impartial jurors has evolved into a quest for those who never read newspapers, news magazines, or even watch television more challenging than "Jackass." If this is the case, their success is complete beyond any possible expectations they might have had.

Upon first hearing the not-guilty verdict in the O.J. Simpson trial, I was sure it was because at least some of the Simpson jurors had some self-serving, self-righteous agenda. However, after reading this pathetic, to the point of being comical attempt, to justify their verdict, I have changed my mind... Not only was their so-called "analysis" of the evidence completely devoid of any truly intelligent thought, it contained leaps of logic so vast, Evil Knevil would have been too scared to jump it. For example, one juror said she had doubts O.J. did it because only a "little" blood from the victims was found in Simpsons bronco.If he was truly innocent, then why is ANY of the victims blood in his car! Throughout the trial Johnny Cochran continuously lied or distorted the truth. During the defence for instance, in an attempt to show police "contaminating" the crime scene, Cochran shows a still picture of a policeman "carelessly" walking through a bloody path. Contamination,right? Well, no. Upon simple cross-examination, we find out that only AFTER the crime scene had been processed and all blood evidence been collected did this officer then walk through this bloody path. Was there any mention of this in this book? Of course not. When Cochran tried to show an attempt by police to "plant" evidence, he showed a videotape of Simpsons bedroom depicting the ABSENCE of bloody socks that the police claimed were there. Planting of evidence you say? Again, upon cross-examination the person who shot the videotape testifies that he was there to videotape the premises for insurance purposes only. And that he was told by police NOT to go into the bedroom until AFTER they collected whatever was in there, including,of course, those bloody socks! Did any of these hapless jurors make note of this?...In fact, rare is it, that you will find consecutive coherent sentences, such is the collective wisdom shown here. So, the question is, would I recommend this book to others? To that question, my answer is surprisingly, a resounding YES!...Because while on one hand, this book was so tedious to read,what with its complete utter lack of knowledge and insight of the subject matter, I still found it facinating to delve into the minds of people who have such little powers of deduction...

I wouldn't even give this book the time of day. Here's a group of people who completely dropped the ball when it came time to do their civic duty and then couldn't wait to cash in on a book deal. How utterly disgusting!! My opinion on the juror's conduct has noting to do with Simpson's guilt or innocence. There is no way these people could've weighed ALL the evidence presented in this trial and come to the conclusion they did in just 3 short hours. Garbage!!

Like many Americans I was stunned when after just 3 hours the OJ Simpson jury came back with a verdict of not guilty. There was little gaiety even after the civil court brought back a verdict of guilty and set an award of $33.5 million for the families. I thought I might gain some insight into the jury's thoughts through this book. I most certainly did gain some insight, but it wasn't noble or uplifting - it was banal, small-minded, stupifyingly shallow and completely wrong-headed. This book, while apparently an attempt to save face, falls far short of the mark. During the trial Judge Lance Ito might well have saved his breath when instructing the jury on how to view evidence. These people willfully and deliberately ignored his instructions and based their decisions on how they "felt" about evidence, how a witness "seemed" to them. Facts? Evidence? Pshaw...those pesky things. Appallingly bad writing coupled with poorly reasoned rationalizations show these jurors to be people who had their minds made up long before deliberation began. They were far more concerned about their own comfort than about the victims (alive and dead), segregated themselves from non-black jurors, either ignored or willfully failed to consider evidence that didn't support their position, and refused to deliberate. I'm not sure what they hoped to gain in writing this book, but it confirmed what I had long suspected. Race was always the issue - an opportunity for them to pay back the criminal justice system for years of entrenched injustice to black men. And OJ was their chosen hero. Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown weren't even considered. They were just props. While I understand the sad state of the judicial system and how unfairly it has treated black men over the years, the truth is, these jurors picked the wrong guy to champion for two simple reasons. One, he did it - a civil court had no problems wading through the same evidence presented at the criminal trial and coming to that conclusion. Two, Simpson could quite simply care less about the black "cause" as regards the courts. He just simply isn't interested in anything but himself. He prefers the company of whites, spends his time and money on self-gratification, and has never expressed even the slightest interest in helping improve conditions for blacks in America through word or deed. Then, as now, he was nothing more than an ego-driven wife-beating bully without a shred of interest in black education, black health care, black poverty, black justice. His only interest in racism was what it could do to get him out of the worst jam he had ever gotten himself into. This book appears to be nothing more than a poorly written attempt by these jurors to rationalize their despicable act of jury nullification which resulted in allowing this man to walk free simply because of the color of his skin. Jury nullification laws protect them from prosecution, but in my opinion their actions make them as guilty of the murders as Simpson himself. Disgusting.