Crimes of the Century: From Leopold and Loeb to O.J. Simpson.

• Author: Entin, Jonathan L.
• Position: Review

GILBERT GEIS & LEIGH B. BIENEN, CRIMES OF THE CENTURY: FROM LEOPOLD AND LOEB TO O.J. SIMPSON. Northeastern University Press 1998. 230 pp.

The avalanche of books about the O.J. Simpson case makes it hard to believe that anyone could say anything new about that subject. Except for the judges who presided over the criminal and civil trials, almost everyone involved--prosecutors,(1) defense lawyers,(2) the plaintiffs' lead counsel in the civil case,(3) police officers,(4) jurors in the criminal case,(5) even Simpson himself(6)--seems to have written a book. On top of that, several journalists and various commentators have produced their own volumes.(7)

All of these works focus on the Simpson affair with little or no attention to other high-profile crimes. The homicide proceedings were widely described as "the trial of the century"; several O.J. books used that term somewhere in their title.(8) But the term was not original, something that was widely overlooked. Into this gap have stepped a criminologist (Gilbert Geis) and an academic lawyer (Leigh Bienen) to focus not only on Simpson but also on several earlier celebrated cases that transfixed Americans over the past seventy-five years: the Leopold-Loeb affair, the Scottsboro saga, the trial of Bruno Richard Hauptmann in the Lindbergh kidnapping, and the perjury prosecution of Alger Hiss. These cases "stood for something important, ... offering a commentary on the condition of the time";(9) they "will not be forgotten."(10) As we shall see, other well-known criminal cases fit these criteria, but the authors' selections are certainly reasonable ones. Crimes of the Century provides a wealth of detail on the five celebrated cases under review, but it goes beyond simple description to raise important general questions about the operation of our criminal justice system. The book touches on almost every significant issue in the field,(11) but the discussion is often frustratingly incomplete. Perhaps the problem reflects the authors' effort to make the book attractive to a wide audience, but the result might be too superficial for specialists and too sophisticated for general readers.

I.

Each case gets a chapter divided into four main sections: a factual overview, discussion of some larger issues presented by the case, a conclusion that ties the discussion to pervasive themes, and an essay describing materials for further reading. This last feature is especially helpful because all these cases have generated a substantial literature.

Geis and Bienen focus their factual discussion on the uncertainties that have produced so much debate about each case. Except for Leopold and Loeb (who admitted liability but sought to avoid execution), the defendants vigorously asserted their innocence; Alger Hiss went to his grave nearly half a century later insisting that he would ultimately be vindicated. The authors offer their own hypothesis about what might really have happened on the train in the Scottsboro case,(12) opine that there was reasonable doubt about Bruno Richard Hauptmann's guilt,(13) suggest that the last word on Hiss has not been heard,(14) and observe that O.J. Simpson poses no threat to anybody else even if he did commit the murders of which he was acquitted.(15)

By discussing several cases instead of focusing on just one, Geis and Bienen are able to show some connections that might otherwise be overlooked. For example, Clarence Darrow kept Leopold and Loeb from the gallows,(16) then went on to play an important role in getting the NAACP involved in the Scottsboro case.(17) Samuel Leibowitz, who represented the Scottsboro defendants,(18) also served as a commentator on the radio broadcasts of the Hauptmann trial(19) and after the conviction was upheld on appeal sought to get Hauptmann to confess to avoid the electric chair.(20) Elmer Gertz, who helped get Nathan Leopold paroled after more than thirty years in prison, also indirectly affected the last chapter of the Scottsboro case: the libel suit filed by the two complainants following a network television drama about that case foundered on the legal standards announced in a major Supreme Court decision in which Gertz was the protagonist.(21)

The authors point out other parallels between some of these cases. It turns out that Nathan Leopold and Alger Hiss were enthusiastic bird watchers. Leopold published several ornithological papers,(22) and Hiss unwittingly lent credibility to the allegations against him with his excited description of seeing a rare type of warbler, an incident that Whittaker Chambers had emphasized in talking with congressional investigators.(23) Both of these cases also had overtones of homosexuality. There were strong physical resemblances between Richard Loeb and Hiss, and between Leopold and Chambers.(24) Leopold and Loeb were suspected of having a sexual relationship,(25) although the authors give both men "a totally clean sexual slate" during their incarceration.(26) Geis and Bienen do not delve into the details of the Hiss-Chambers situation, saying that such an inquiry would take us into "totally uncharted territory."(27)

Finally, Scottsboro and Simpson present similarities as well as contrasts. In both cases African-American males were accused of committing crimes against white women. Scottsboro involved allegations of interracial rape, the most inflammatory offense in the old segregated order; Simpson had been part of an interracial marriage. The cases presented substantial economic differences, however. The Scottsboro defendants were impoverished residents of a segregated community that had a strictly enforced color line, whereas Simpson was a wealthy celebrity who seemed to have transcended race but whose acquittal by a predominantly black jury revealed wide racial disparities in public opinion.(28)

As fascinating as the factual accounts might be, the book contains a surprising number of obvious mistakes. The Supreme Court's decision in Northern Securities Co. v. United States(29) is reported as an 8-4 ruling (the actual vote was 5-4).(30) George Wallace is said to have pardoned the last of the Scottsboro defendants in 1954, although he was not elected governor of Alabama until eight years later; the correct date is 1964, when (as the authors note) Wallace was preparing to run for President for the first time.(31) Furthermore, in discussing Richard Nixon's reflections on the Hiss case during Watergate, the authors refer to "John Haldeman";(32) they apparently confused two of Nixon's top aides, H.R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman.(33)

The mistakes are not purely typographical. In at least two places there are inaccurate calculations of time. Bruno Richard Hauptmann is said to have been executed "[f]our years less one month and two days" after the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby.(34) The interval was actually four years plus one month and two days: the kidnapping took place on March 1, 1932,(35) the execution on April 3, 1936. Similarly, the bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are said to have been discovered "more than three hours after they had been slain."(36) The killings occurred "[s]ometime during the hour after 10 o'clock [in] the evening"(37) and the corpses were found "[a]t ten minutes after midnight the following morning,"(38) an interval somewhat in excess of two hours.

This is not simply a pedant's nitpicking.(39) Problems like these raise questions about the care with which the entire book was put together. The discussion of the larger criminal justice issues is also characterized by an analogous combination of sophistication and superficiality.

II.

Geis and Bienen are not content to summarize these high-profile trials. They use the five cases to explore persistent questions about the contemporary criminal justice system. Each case illustrates some issues, and broader themes emerge when the cases are considered together.

For example, the Leopold-Loeb case suggests the inadequacy of any comprehensive explanation of crime. The shocking murder defies understanding in terms of any of the leading criminological theories: differential association, social bonding, self-control, frustration-aggression, low intelligence, labeling, rational choice, or critical Marxist.(40) Psychiatric and psychological theories fare little better.(41) The authors ultimately are drawn to literary analogies, looking to Dickens and Hemingway novels for insight into Leopold and Loeb's behavior.(42)

Scottsboro underlines many of the dilemmas in the treatment of rape, although the authors concede that the case "is something of an aberration."(43) The Hauptmann trial raises troubling questions about the reliability of eyewitness identification, which was a significant element in the prosecution's case.(44) The Hiss case presents issues about the relationship between congressional investigations and criminal trials,(45) and the O.J. affair highlights aspects of police behavior.(46)

These are surely important topics, but the authors merely present them as problems for discussion without offering serious arguments for any particular resolution.(47) Although reasonable persons might disagree about how to resolve these issues, the authors do not present the strongest grounds for favoring one approach over another. Many of the issues are dealt with in a paragraph or two, with contrasting viewpoints summarized in an "on the one hand, on the other hand" fashion.(48) Except for occasional references to specific cases, there are no direct citations to sources and no...