text: Criminalist Collin Yamauchi testified from May 24–31, 1995. He was the first scientist to handle and perform PCR analysis on several key evidence items, including the glove and the sock from Simpson's bedroom in his Rockingham home. He testified that the blood of Simpson, Brown, and Goldman was on the glove: Brown's blood was found on the sock in Simpson's bedroom and Goldman's blood was found in Simpson's Bronco. All but one drop of blood collected by Fung and Mazzola was PCR testable.


title: DNA evidence in the O. J. Simpson murder case

text: During cross examination he testified that during preparation for PCR testing that a reference card is created using Simpson's donated blood for comparison to the evidence items. When asked, he initially stated he was not sure he changed his gloves when he moved from the reference card to the evidence items but then remembered he did change his gloves. In either case, he maintains that he never touched any of the evidence items with his gloved hands and used sterile instruments to handle the items that were then changed between each item. The defense claimed that Yamauchi lied when he said he changed his gloves and did handle items with his gloved hands and transferred Simpsons DNA to the evidence items from the reference vial. Yamauchi denied this, stating that before and after each evidence item is tested a blank sterile control swatch is run to determine if cross contamination like that occurred and all of the controls were negative. Yamauchi also pointed out the defenses DNA expert Henry Lee did not change gloves either when he examined the evidence items.


text: Gregory Matheson, chief forensic chemist at the Los Angeles Police Crime Lab, testified from May 1–5, 1995. His serology results revealed that blood drops found alongside a trail of bloody shoe prints leading from the victims matched Simpson's blood with the error rate being 1-in-200. Matheson stated that none of Mazzola's admitted mistakes would have resulted in contamination of evidence. Matheson also testified about the only drop of blood that was too degraded for testing found under Nicole Simpson's fingernails. The defense said that blood belonged to the "real killer" but Matheson said that blood was probably hers because that hand was found in a pool of her own blood and wet blood degrades quickly. Later criminalist Renee Montgomery, using a different test, proved it was Nicole Brown's blood.


text: During cross-examination Matheson admitted that Fung and Mazzola made several mistakes during evidence collection. He admitted the blood from the Bronco and back gate at Brown's home should have been collected on June 13, not July 3, she should have used three separate swatches to collect from three different spots on the Bronco not just one, and the evidence should have been refrigerated after collection in the police van. When asked about the 1.5 mL of Simpsons blood unaccounted for he stated that Peratis didn't document how much was taken from Simpson so there is no way to prove that blood is actually missing. He noted though that small amounts of blood do stick to pipettes, gloves, and other lab instruments during testing so that could possibly explain some blood being unaccounted for.


text: Dr. Robin Cotton, Lab director of Cellmark Diagnostics, testified May 8–15, 1995. She testified to Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) testing, the most precise DNA-matching at the time. She testified that blood found on a sock in Simpsons bedroom was Nicole Brown's with a 1-in-170 million chance of error, and that the blood drops next to bloody footprints near Nicole's body was Simpsons with a 1-in-9.7 billion chance of error.


text: During cross examination, she admitted that two cross contamination errors had occurred at Cellmark in 1988 and 1989 but the errors were found during quality control tests and had not occurred since. She stated the DNA sample sizes needed for RFLP testing in this case are too large to be susceptible to the degraded DNA cross-contamination the defense alleged. The only possible scenario would be a mixture of two persons DNA being typed, Simpsons and the "Real Killer" if cross-contamination occurred, but only Simpsons was found. She admitted her tests cannot demonstrate how the blood got on Simpson's sock, meaning her tests do not refute the possibility the blood was planted.


text: Criminalist Gary Sims of the California Department of Justice Crime Lab testified May 16–22, and again from May 31 to June 1, 1995. He testified to the results from DQ Alpha DNA matching. His results also showed Nicole Brown's blood on the sock found at Rockingham with a 1-in-7.7-billion chance of error, the blood on the back gate at Brown's home matched Simpson and the blood found inside the Bronco belonged to the two victims with a 1-in-21 billion chance of error for both.


text: During cross-examination the defense insinuated the matches were from the results from cross-contamination. Sims denied this stating that none of the 108 exhibits tested showed evidence of contamination and also mentioned the defense was offered the chance to test the evidence samples for contamination themselves but they declined. Gary Sims testified again on May 31 and had the jurors look at the socks from Simpson's bedroom with their naked eye and then through a microscope. The purpose of this demonstration was to show the blood stains were only visible under a microscope.


text: During recross-examination Sims acknowledged that foliage can contaminate blood samples but denied that occurred on the drop of blood on the back gate at Brown's home. The defense then asked if that blood could have been planted by the police since it was collected on July 3 and Fung said he didn't see it in the photo the defense showed him from June 13. Sims denied the claim and said a different photo of the same gate taken on June 13 shows the blood was already there.


text: Criminalist Renee Montgomery of the California Department of Justice Crime Lab testified from May 23–24, 1995. She reported the results from D1S80 DNA matching, narrating her results using a poster board to reconstruct the prosecution's theory of how the crimes were committed. Her results showed that Simpson was present during the murders as evidenced by his blood being found next to the bloody footprints next to the bodies. Her results show that he fled the scene through the back gate as evidence by his blood found on a trail of blood drops leading away from the victims towards and on the back gate. Her results then show he got in his Bronco and drove home as evidenced by the victim's blood found on the door outside and inside on the console of the Bronco. Her results then show he entered his home through the backyard as evidence by a trail of blood stains with his and the two victims found leading behind his home and the bloody glove found behind his home that had blood from all three. Her results suggest he changed his clothes prior to meeting the limousine driver as evidence by his sock he left in his bedroom having Nicole Brown Simpson's blood on it.


text: During cross examination, when asked about mishandling of evidence at the crime scene, she stated none of the mistakes they made would add Simpson's blood to the evidence unless it was already there. When asked about cross-contamination with Simpsons preserved blood at the LAPD crime lab, she stated that all of the evidence she testified to, except the glove and sock, were shipped directly to her and not handled by anyone in that lab. When asked about the DNA on the glove being degraded after being kept unrefrigerated and then contaminated by Simpsons preserved DNA, she denied that happened at the LAPD lab. If all the DNA was degraded and then contaminated with Simpson's blood, only Simpson's DNA should be on the glove. The fact that the victims' blood was found as well is proof that that did not happen. When asked about the reliability of her relatively new test, she stated that it was the same test the FBI was currently using and was accepted in every courtroom in the country, as reliable science.


text: The defense stated the DNA evidence against Simpson was not reliable. They said the police compromised the evidence by committing several mistakes when collecting it including occasionally not changing gloves between evidence items, using one swatch to collect blood from three drops of blood on the bronco dashboard, packaging the swatches of blood evidence using plastic bags, not paper bags as recommended, and storing them in a police van for up to seven hours unrefrigerated. This resulted in 100% of the "real killers" DNA being lost. They argued that Simpson's blood found on the evidence samples resulted from contamination in the LAPD crime lab with the reference blood in all but three exhibits. The remaining three exhibits that could not be explained by contamination were planted by the police. Although evidence of mistakes made during collection were shown at trial, no evidence of their contamination or corruption claim was presented.


text: The contamination claim was dependent on all the blood in the case being 100% degraded and the real killer's DNA lost. If that did not happen, contamination would only produce a mixture of Simpsons DNA and the killers. The contamination claim likewise would spread EDTA to the evidence samples which could be tested for as it was a preservative found in the reference vials of Simpson and the two victims. The contamination claim was also limited to just the LAPD crime lab as it was not alleged at the two consulting labs, the state department and Cellmarks diagnostics, were most of the DNA testing was done. The defense also declined to test the samples themselves for the “real killers” DNA or for EDTA.


text: Once the prosecution began showing evidence the samples were not completely degraded and no EDTA was found in levels seen from the reference vials, the defenses reasonable doubt theory became increasingly more dependent on the claim the evidence was corrupted by a police conspiracy to frame Simpson. The predominantly African American jury was receptive to it.


text: Dr. Edward Blake was retained by Simpson's defense team to discredit the DNA evidence. Blake is a world-renowned forensic scientist who pioneered the establishment PCR testing as a reliable forensic science. The prosecution had tried to retain Blake before learning the defense had already done so. All of the DNA experts were familiar with Blake and Gary Sims, who ran the state department lab, was one of his students.


text: He was slated to testify but was dropped from the witness list on March 30, 1995. After concluding his review of the case, he informed the defense that his testimony is not likely to be helpful. His review found nothing negative to say about the tests from the State Department and Cellmark Diagnostics, concluding those results are likely valid and If he testified he would have to turnover his reports stating the reasons why he reached that conclusion. He was subsequently replaced by microbiologist, Dr. John Gerdes.


text: Dr. John Gerdes testified from August 2–4 and August 7, 1995. Prior to his testimony, the prosecution asked to limit his testimony to just evidence of contamination in this case only but Judge Ito allowed him to testify about other cases of contamination as well, which they said would be misleading to the jury. During direct examination he testified "The LAPD crime lab has a substantial contamination problem. It is chronic in the sense that it doesn't go away." Gerdes testified that because of the LAPD's "history of contamination", he would not consider any of the PCR results, in this case, valid because they were done by the LAPD. He testified that both the state department and Cellmark diagnostics had made cross-contamination errors in the past too. He testified their PCR results are not valid either because the evidence they tested went "through the LAPD" for packaging and shipping. The three RFLP matches he admitted were valid.


text: Prior to his cross-examination, journalists had already observed his testimony was unreliable as he was clearly pandering to defense, noting the only three DNA tests he said were valid were the same three the defense claimed were planted. If he had said those were the result of contamination, he would have contradicted the defenses corruption claim. His claim that “you can no longer have any scientific confidence in” a newly available RFLP match linking Ron Goldman to Simpson's Bronco because the tow-truck driver had stolen items from it was also mentioned as proof he was pandering. They claim the reason Gerdes said that is because earlier he said RFLP results are not susceptible to contamination because the amount of DNA needed for that test is too large but the defense claimed those three exhibits were planted. Now the prosecution had a new RFLP match to Goldman's blood in the Bronco that couldn't be explained by contamination or fraud, so Gerdes made that claim instead.


text: During cross-examination Gerdes admitted having no experience or training in forensic evidence gathering or forensic DNA testing and had never done any of the tests whose results he was criticizing at trial himself or at his lab. He has testified in 23 trials; consistently for criminal defendants charged with rape, murder or both, claiming the DNA evidence against them was unreliable because of contamination. He also admitted making the same cross-contamination error he criticized the LAPD, State Department and Cellmark's lab had made in prior years, at his own lab as well. He also admitted the LAPD's crime lab has more safeguards in place against contamination than his own lab.


text: When Judge Ito instructed Gerdes to narrow his testimony to facts about this case during cross, journalist noted his demeanor changed as his contamination claim became more dubious. He claimed it was possible for 100% of the "real killers" DNA to degrade so every molecule was gone in the seven hours they had spent unrefrigerated in the police van but then admitted that scientists had gotten analyzable DNA for PCR tests from mummies and even fossils. He also admitted that contamination for the results at Cellmark's and the state department could only have occurred at the crime scene since LAPD packaged and ship most of the evidence they tested directly there. If that is where contamination occurred, that means Simpsons blood was at the crime scene. He later admitted that in the civil trial. He finally admitted there was no evidence cross-contamination occurred in this case and he was only testifying to "what might have occurred and not what actually did occur".


text: During the civil trial, Gerdes testified again. This time he was only allowed to testify about confirmed contamination in this case and admitted "There's no direct evidence of contamination in any of the test results that I looked at in this case."


text: Dr. Henry Lee, director of the Connecticut State Forensics Science Laboratory, testified on August 23–25 and August 28. During cross-examination Lee stated Dr. Gerdes cross-contamination theory was "highly improbable". Lee later published a book called "Blood Evidence: How Dna Is Revolutionizing the Way We Solve Crimes" and describes why none of Dr. Gerdes claims were credible.


text: A total of nine blood stains were collected from the bundy crime scene. The defense only contested the incriminating five blood drops that matched Simpson - items 48–52. Gerdes testified that those stains are all contaminates. He then admitted there was no direct evidence of contamination for any of those evidences samples except for item 52. Coincidentally, item 52 had the lowest probability of error with the chances being only 1-in-9.7 billion. Gerdes claimed that Yamauchi "handled" Simpson's reference vial prior to testing that evidence sample but admitted afterwards that he actually handled a sterile control swatch first after the reference vial and that tested negative for contamination but he claimed it was a "false negative". Gerdes then admitted that if the evidence sample contained the "real killer(s)" blood and was contaminated with Simpson's blood the result should be a mixture of both blood types but claimed that 100% of the real killers blood had "vanished" from the evidence samples after being stored in the evidence van without being refrigerated. He then admitted that the Serology results that Matheson provided, which don't rely on DNA, proved it wasn't a contaminate because they also matched Simpson and only showed a single persons blood was present.


text: A total of three DNA evidence samples were collected from the Bundy back gate. Two were collected on June 13, 1994, while the third was collected on July 3, 1994. Gerdes claimed that the two collected on June 13 were contaminates. He admitted there was no direct evidence that cross-contamination had occurred from the reference vials to the evidence samples and conceded that the serology results matched the DNA results, proving they weren't contaminates. He admitted that the sample collected on July 3 could not be a contaminate as well because the volume of DNA was too high but the defense claimed that sample was planted by the police.


text: A total of eleven DNA samples were collected from the Bronco. Eight were collected by the LAPD crime lab on June 13 and three were collected by the State Department Crime lab on July 29. Both collections returned matches to Simpson, Brown and Goldman. Gerdes only contested the incriminating matches to the victims blood in the Bronco and claimed those results were due to cross-contamination from the reference vials. When prosecutors responded that the matches from the second collection by the State department validated the ones by the LAPD because they were the same and collected from the same spot in the Bronco, Gerdes claimed that the second collection results can't be trusted allegedly because the "Bronco had been broken into" in which case Judge Ito interjected and stated "no it hasn't". Ito then ordered Gerdes to admit that the results form the second collection prove the results from the original one were valid and that both victims blood was in the Bronco which was very significant because Ron Goldman never had an opportunity within his lifetime to be in Simpson's Bronco.


text: A total of six DNA samples were collected from the socks in Simpson's bedroom with matches to Simpson and Brown found. Only Brown's blood was incriminating and Gerdes admitted that the volume of DNA on that sample was too high to be attributed to contamination but the defense claimed that blood was planted by the police.


text: A total of ten DNA samples were collected from the glove found on Simpson's property with matches to Simpson, Brown, and Goldman. The victims blood on that glove wasn't incriminating but Simpson's blood on that glove was so the defense only disputed that sample. Gerdes claimed it was also due to cross-contamination from the reference vial. Yamauchi conceded that when he opened Simpson's reference vial to withdraw a blood sample for testing purposes that he observed some aerosolized blood on the tissue paper he placed over the stopper when he opened the vial and noticed that some had gotten on his gloves which is why he changed them afterwards. The last thing he did after testing was put his initials on the wrist area of the glove where Simpson's DNA was found. However, Yamauchi maintains unequivocally that he did change his gloves after handling the reference vial which is standard policy. It's also untenable that only the last spot on the glove would be where Simpson's blood was found since Yamauchi touched at least nine other spots on the glove first prior to the wrist area and none of the other spots on the glove had Simpson's DNA. Lastly, Simpson's blood on the glove did not contain any traceable amounts of EDTA, which proves it did not come from the reference vial.


text: The defense conspiracy allegation of planted evidence primarily focused on three exhibits initially: the blood on the Bundy back gate, the blood on the sock from Simpson's bedroom and the glove found at his Rockingham estate. However, by the end of the trial the defense would eventually claim that virtually all of the blood evidence was planted by the police. Barry Scheck was the principle attorney who made all of the blood planting claims.


text: Dr. Fredric Rieders, a forensic toxicologist, testified on July 24, 1995, and again on August 14, 1995. During direct examination, he testified that the results reported by FBI Agent Roger Martz showed that EDTA was found in Simpsons blood drop on the back gate at Nicole Brown's home and Brown's blood drop on the sock in Simpson's bedroom. Using a reference article from the EPA, he testified that because the amount of EDTA in that blood is measured in "parts-per-million" (PPM) and the reference article states normally EDTA in the blood should only be detectable in "parts-per-billion" (PPB), the evidence blood contains a thousand times more EDTA than it should. Because EDTA is used as a preservative in purple top tubes for lab draws, he stated the blood could have come from their reference vials.


text: During cross-examination the claim was immediately debunked when the prosecution gave Rieders a fax copy of the EPA article he referenced during his testimony and had him read it out loud to the jury demonstrating he misread it and it does say "parts-per-million" of EDTA is normally found in blood. Rieders then claimed it was a typo, but the prosecution produced a certified copy directly from the EPA, confirming the PPM units of measure.


text: The defense called Rieders again on August 14. During redirect he clung to his claim the EDTA came from the reference vials, denied that PPM of EDTA could be found in unpreserved blood and denied that it was still used in food.


text: During re-cross examination, the claim was debunked again. This time, Agent Martz tested his own unpreserved blood and found PPM of EDTA, disproving Rieders' claim. Then Dr. Rieders admitted that the EDTA results from Martz's unpreserved blood were similar to the evidence blood drops in question and not even close to levels from Martz's persevered blood from a purple top tube, which had more than a hundred times more EDTA than the evidence samples. The prosecution also produced an article from the FDA showing that not only is EDTA still used in food (which Rieders denied), it is found in the French fries and Big Mac that Simpson ate approximately one hour before the murders. He admitted Agent Martz was correct that he could not identify EDTA from a presumptive test and the identification test was inconclusive, meaning this could not even be EDTA at all. Rieders also admitted that another witness was hired by the defense to conduct another identification test of the samples for EDTA, Dr. Kevin Ballard, to confirm the defenses claim but then declined to have him testify to what the results were.


text: Dr. Rieders would testify to the same claim at the civil trial on December 20, 1996, but admitted during cross-examination "this might not be blood from a purple top tube" and that the results could be false positives as Martz would later demonstrate. The claim of EDTA on the sock coming from Nicole Brown's reference vial was conclusively disproved by Dr. Cotton who showed the DNA in the reference vial was more degraded than the DNA on the sock, proving it could not have come from that vial.


text: FBI Special Agent Roger Martz testified on July 25 and July 26, 1995. The defense called Agent Martz because Dr. Rieders had used his data during his testimony. During direct examination he initially testified the blood samples "responded like EDTA responded" and "was consistent with the presence of EDTA" but then stated that he could not identify EDTA in the evidence samples This apparent turnaround during direct examination stunned the defense and when they accused Martz of changing his demeanor during the lunch break he admitted he had because he realized he was not being entirely truthful in his testimony before because he was only giving "yes" and "no" answers.


text: During cross examination, Martz narrated his answers and stated EDTA is also used in food and detergents and not just blood test tubes. Martz demonstrated this by testing some of Nicole Brown's clothing that did not have blood on it and found EDTA was present. Martz then tested his own unpreserved blood and found EDTA was present there as well. Martz then compared EDTA levels in his own unpreserved blood to the evidence samples and showed they were similar. He then compared both of those results to his preserved blood in a blood test tube and showed they were not even close. Martz said that environmental conditions would not affect EDTA because it is a stable substance (one evidence sample was outside on the back gate at Brown's home) and demonstrated this by testing some preserved blood that was over a year old and showed the EDTA level was still the same as his own preserved blood taken only a few days prior. Martz also stated that, although the presumptive test mentioned by Dr. Rieders was positive, the identification test for EDTA was inconclusive, meaning he could not positively identify EDTA was present.


text: Dr. Henry Lee, director of the Connecticut State Forensics Science Laboratory, testified on August 23–25 and August 28. Dr. Lee did not support the defense's claim of police fraud, but several of his answers gave the appearance he did. He testified that bloodstains on the console of the Bronco were consistent with a smearing motion which the defense said was evidence it was planted there by police. Lee also said he agreed with blood spatter expert Herbert MacDonell that the blood splatter on sock suggested the blood soaked through while no one was wearing it which the defense claimed was evidence the blood was planted on the sock. The defense implied that Lee's statement "something's wrong" with the DNA evidence item 47 due to a wet transfer stain in the case meant Lee supported their allegations that the police had "tampered" or planted it.


text: During cross-examination Lee admitted that the smearing stain does not prove that blood stain was planted. He also admitted that the transfer stain on the socks could also be produced if Simpson had touched the socks or during the swab for the Phenolphthalein test for blood. Lee also admitted that the item 47 doesn't incriminate Simpson because it belongs to Brown and was found at the crime scene and admitted the claim the police "Tampered" with it or planted it to frame Simpson was nonsensical. FBI shoe-print expert William J. Bodziak testified on September 15 that what Lee thought were a second set of shoe prints were actually just impressions left in the concrete from when it was poured.


text: Dr. Henry Lee testified again during the civil trial but stated clearly "I never meant to imply there was scientific fact to show that any LA police officer planted or did anything, cheating, with any evidence when I said 'somethings wrong'. I did not testify to that."


text: Scheck implied that Vannatter could have planted Simpson's blood at the crime scene when he returned later that evening to Simpson's home to deliver his blood reference vial to Dennis Fung but the crime scene is actually at Nicole Brown's home. Scheck then suggested that another police officer could have "sprinkled Simpson's blood at the crime scene" but the prosecution demonstrated that the blood was photographed being there prior to Simpsons blood being drawn by the nurse.


text: Scheck claimed that one drop of blood on the back gate at Nicole Brown's Bundy Drive home was planted by the police. As evidence, they offered the blood contained EDTA, a preservative found in purple top tubes used for blood draws, it was collected several weeks later on July 3, rather than on June 13, and 1.5 mL of Simpsons donated reference blood was unaccounted for. The officer who planted it was not named by the defense but Vannatter was implied. The prosecution countered that the EDTA levels found in the blood was consistent with that found normally in unpreserved blood and not even close to the levels found in blood preserved in a purple top tube. A different photograph of the gate on June 13 shows the blood was already there and the claim of some of Simpson's reference blood missing from the vial was refuted during rebuttal by the nurse who drew it who clarified he believes he only drew the amount the records show was used for testing.


text: Scheck implied that Vannatter could have planted the victims blood in the Bronco when he returned to Simpson's home but the Bronco had been impounded prior to his arrival and wasn't even there. Scheck then claimed that the results from the second Bronco collection were unreliable because the car had been burglarized (not true) but the DNA matches are the same before and afterwards, disproving that claim. Scheck then produced two witnesses who claimed there was no blood in the impounded Bronco implying it was planted afterwards but the prosecution produced photographs of the blood in the impounded Bronco, disproving that claim.


text: Scheck claimed that blood found on a sock in Simpson's bed was planted there by Detective Vannatter. As evidence, they offered that Vannatter did have possession of Nicole Brown's autopsy blood briefly prior to booking it into evidence and the blood contained EDTA, a preservative found in the reference vial of Nicole Brown autopsy blood. The claim was refuted by the defense's own witness, FBI special agent Roger Martz who showed the level of EDTA in that blood drop is consistent with unpreserved blood and not even close to the levels that would be seen in blood from a purple top tube. The prosecution also countered that no blood was ever claimed to be missing from Nicole Brown's reference vial and that the records show Detective Vannatter booked the reference vials from the victims immediately into evidence right after receiving it from Deputy Medical Examiner Dr. Irwin Golden. Dr. Cotton conclusively refuted that claim by showing the blood in the reference vial is substantially more degraded than the blood on the sock, proving it did not come from that vial.


text: F. Lee Bailey claimed that the bloody glove found at Simpson's Rockingham estate was planted by Detective Mark Fuhrman who said he found it there. No physical or eyewitness evidence ever surfaced supporting that claim. The only reason given at trial for believing that it was planted was of Fuhrman having perjured himself when claiming he had never used the word "nigger" in the last ten years.


text: The glove contained DNA from Simpson and both victims, and since the blood did not contain EDTA, the possibility of it coming from the reference vials was ruled out. Thus, if Fuhrman planted the glove at Rockingham from the crime scene, Simpson's blood would have to have been at the crime scene, contradicting his claim of being home on the night of the murders. Fuhrman's DNA was also not found on the glove, thus supporting his claim that he did not plant it. The prosecution argued that Fuhrman did not plant the glove because he did not know if Simpson had an airtight alibi that night. LA County Deputy District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi concurred with the prosecutor's argument, noting as well that Fuhrman did not know whose blood was on it at the time either.


text: All of the jurors were initially confident in their reasonable doubt about the DNA evidence. All maintain they understood the DNA evidence presented at trial and defended their decision in books and interviews. However, their confidence began eroding following events subsequent to the trial and acquittal of O. J. Simpson.


text: A separate jury found Simpson to be liable for the murders in a civil trial one year after being acquitted in the criminal trial. Though civil liability has a lower burden of proof than guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, it is very rare for someone to be found liable for a crime after being acquitted for committing the crime.


text: At the civil trial, Dr. Cotton showed that the DNA in Nicole Brown's reference vial was more degraded than her DNA on the sock from Simpson's bedroom, thus proving it could not have come from that vial, as the defense alleged. Also at this trial, John Gerdes admitted Simpsons blood was at the crime scene and the blood of both Brown and Ron Goldman was in the Bronco, neither of which could be explained by cross-contamination.


text: Several jurors co-wrote and published "Madam Foreman: A Rush to Judgement?" (1995), defending their reasonable doubt about the DNA evidence. Critics panned the book, saying it is filled with so many factual inaccuracies, illogical arguments, and spelling errors that it reinforced, not refuted, the criticism that the jury did not understand the DNA evidence that was presented.


text: Prosecutor Christopher Darden published "In Contempt" (1996) and reiterated the claim that the jury did not understand the DNA evidence. He claimed that their relative lack of education played a role in their confusion, noting that 10 did not have college degrees and 1 even lacking a high school diploma. He also noted that multiple news outlets reported the jury not paying attention during the DNA section of the trial.


text: Defense attorney Robert Shapiro published "The Search for Justice" (1996), in which he states that he does not believe the police planted blood evidence against Simpson as suggested at trial.


text: Lead Defense attorney Johnnie Cochran published "Journey to Justice" (1996), writing that Simpson is a victim of Detectives Lange, Vannatter, and Fuhrman's police fraud to plant blood evidence against him. Critics panned the book as "self-aggrandizement," noting how Cochran says that Simpson is innocent because police planted some but not all the blood evidence against him.


text: In "O.J. Unmasked: The Trial, The Truth and the Media" (1996), M.L Rantala writes that the jurors' inability to justify their reasonable doubt about all the DNA evidence reinforced the criticism they did not understand it and that is why media reenactments of the trial, such as "" and , continue to depict them that way.


text: Prosecutor Marcia Clark published "Without a Doubt" (1997) after the trial, stating that the jurors did not understand the DNA evidence because they were unfamiliar with it and were deliberately confused by the defense about it. She pointed out that, during jury selection, the defense had specifically tried to seat jurors who were unfamiliar with DNA evidence.


text: Detective Mark Fuhrman published "Murder in Brentwood" (1997), defending himself against the claim he planted blood evidence. He notes that he never had custody of any of the reference blood, and denies planting the bloody glove at Simpson's home because no one knew his blood was on it until 2 days later when the labs tested it. He also revealed that, contrary to popular belief, he did want to testify again after the tapes revealed he used racial slurs in the past to explain those comments but the prosecution refused to redirect him. He stated his taking the 5th amendment was at the suggestion of his attorney.


text: Detectives Tom Lange and Philip Vannatter published "Evidence Dismissed: The Inside Story of the Police Investigation of O.J. Simpson" (1997), defending themselves against corruption allegation. They write that no blood from the reference vials of either Nicole Brown or Ron Goldman was ever said to be missing, and Dennis Fung had testified that the vial of Simpson's blood delivered to him by Vannatter at Rockingham was still sealed in its envelope. The book states that Fuhrman did not plant the Rockingham glove and Simpson's blood on the glove did not come from the reference vial either because it didn't contain EDTA.


text: Vincent Bugliosi published "" (1997), in which he says that the jury had dismissed the blood evidence by jury deliberations, noting that they did not even ask to review it prior to rendering their verdict. He concurs with other critics that the jury did not understand the blood evidence because of a combination of factors, including unfamiliarity with it, relative lack of education, and deliberate confusion by the defense about its reliability. He partially faults Judge Ito for the confusion for allowing the defense expert to conflate contamination mistakes made in other cases with this one.


text: Defense forensic DNA expert Dr. Henry Lee published "Blood Evidence: How DNA Is Revolutionizing The Way We Solve Crimes" (2003), writing that the cross-contamination theory was implausible, as well as maintaining his lack of belief in the claim that police planting evidence. He also opines that the jury may not have understood the DNA evidence, just as other critics have also suggested.


text: Prosecutor George Clarke published "Justice and Science: Trials and Triumphs of DNA Evidence" (2007), stating that the defense abandoned their claim of the DNA evidence being unreliable after the Fuhrman tapes were discovered, because they believed they had a motive for the evidence being planted and that would explain the results too.


text: Until his death in 2021, defense attorney F. Lee Bailey was the only member of the defense that still advocated for Simpson's innocence.


text: Defense attorney Robert Kardashian stated during an interview afterwards that he had doubts about Simpson's innocence specifically because of the blood evidence and later severed ties with him and testified for the Goldmans during the civil trial.


text: Defense attorney Alan Dershowitz stated during an interview after the trial that the defense had concluded they could "not" raise reasonable doubt about all of the DNA evidence and instead attempted to elicit a cherry picking response from the jury whereby they would discard all of the DNA evidence against Simpson if they could show some of it was planted by the police. He said they did prove Vannatter planted Nicole Brown's blood on the sock despite Dr. Robin Cotton debunking that claim at the civil trial.


text: While declining to say whether or not he thinks Simpson is innocent, defense attorney Carl Douglas stated that the racial gap concerning Simpson's guilt is shrinking for 2 reasons: first, Simpson's celebrity status has faded among African Americans; secondly, there is greater acceptance of DNA evidence as reliable. He also notes that research shows African-American distrust of the police remains unchanged.


text: Defense attorney Barry Scheck stated in an interview that he and Peter Neufeld only attacked the way the DNA evidence had been collected and preserved but not the reliability of the results. Scheck specifically said the outcome of the trial "muddied" the premise of the Innocence Project. Neither Scheck or Neufeld believe the police planted blood evidence against Simpson as suggested at trial. Neither of their publications after the trial mention the Simpson case.


text: Defense attorney Gerald Uelmen stated the defense's strategy was to raise reasonable doubt about the DNA evidence based on how it was collected and preserved at the crime scene, not the results obtained at the lab.


text: Defense forensic DNA expert Ed Blake revealed after the trial that he didn't testify because his review of the case found no criticism of the testing conducted by Gary Sims or Dr. Robin Cotton.


text: The testimony of defense non-forensic expert Dr. John Gerdes—in which he raises doubt about most of the DNA evidence via contamination—is omitted by the defense in all of their post-trial publications about the trial. This would be despite the fact that jurors mention his testimony in justifying their reasonable doubt on several occasions, especially in their immediate post-trial interviews and in their co-written book, "Madam Foreman" (1995). Unlike the other experts in this case, Gerdes did not enjoy publicity from the trial because his claim that forensic DNA testing is unreliable was not true. This abandonment by the Dream Team of Gerdes' contamination claim after the trial made the jury defending their verdict untenable. Subsequent portrayals of the trial in the media often omit his testimony as well and none of the defense attorneys retained him again, including Scheck and Neufeld.


text: Geraldo Rivera asked three jurors what their reasonable doubt was concerning the blood found next to the bloody footprints near the victims. Photos of the crime scene show that the blood was there hours before blood from Simpson was taken, thus it was not planted; the blood was collected and shipped directly to the state department lab, not the LAPD lab, thus contamination could not explain it; the blood was testable, thus it was not compromised. Foreman Amanda Cooley responded that she had no explanation for that incriminating evidence and such did not factor into their reasonable doubt decision, implying she ignored it. Juror Marsha Rubin-Jackson responded that she believes Simpson's blood to have been left there next to the bloody footprints prior to the murders happening; however, defense never suggested this and Simpson said he was never there that day. Juror Carrie Bess responded that she thinks the blood belonged to Simpson's children; however, Dr. Cotton said that the chances of it being anyone else other than O.J. Simpson was 1-in-9.7 billion.


text: Lionel "Lion" Cryer was one of the jurors who came out strong for Simpson's innocence during deliberations and afterward. He was especially known in the media as the juror who raised a Black Power salute after the "not guilty" verdict was announced; an act that generated considerable controversy. However, in interviews in the 2010s, Cryer stated he does now believe that Simpsons is guilty of the murders. He admitted that what he thought at the time to be reasonable doubt of the DNA evidence really was not.


text: He stated that a portion of the trial dragged on longer than most people realize. In media portrayals, the DNA section of the trial is shortened to just the important clips, whereas the jurors had to listen to 8 hours a day for nearly 9 weeks of technical terminology that was difficult to follow. He admits that the jury not reviewing the DNA evidence during deliberations was a mistake, but states that such was because most of them have voted to acquit during the initial straw poll, and the two hold outs changed their mind quickly so further review of the evidence was not necessary.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Piracy in the 21st century (commonly known as modern piracy) has taken place in a number of waters around the world, including the Gulf of Guinea, Strait of Malacca, Sulu and Celebes Seas, Indian Ocean, and Falcon Lake.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Due to the crisis in Bolivarian Venezuela, issues of piracy returned to the Caribbean in the 2010s, with the increase of pirates being compared to piracy off the coast of Somalia due to the similar socioeconomic origins. In 2016, former fishermen became pirates, appearing in the state of Sucre, with attacks happening daily and multiple killings occurring. By 2018 as Venezuelans became more desperate, fears arose that Venezuelan pirates would spread throughout Caribbean waters.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Piracy on Falcon Lake involves crime at the border between the United States and Mexico on Falcon Lake. The lake is a reservoir constructed in 1954 and is a known drug smuggling route.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: A turf war between rival drug cartels for control of the lake began in March 2010 and has led to a series of armed robberies and shooting incidents. All of the attacks were credited to the Los Zetas cartel and occurred primarily on the Mexican side of the reservoir but within sight of the Texas coast. The so-called pirates operate "fleets" of small boats designed to seize fishermen and smuggle drugs.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: While the events have been referred to colloquially as piracy, all the waters of Falcon Lake are considered either US or Mexican territorial waters and therefore are not technically piracy under Article 101 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Piracy in the Gulf of Guinea affects a number of countries in West Africa as well as the wider international community. By 2011, it had become an issue of global concern. Pirates in the Gulf of Guinea are often part of heavily armed criminal enterprises, who employ violent methods to steal oil cargo. In 2012, the International Maritime Bureau, Oceans Beyond Piracy and the Maritime Piracy Humanitarian Response Program reported that the number of vessels attacks by West African pirates had reached a world high, with 966 seafarers attacked during the year.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Piracy in the Gulf of Guinea has evolved over the first decade of the century. For some time, smaller ships shuttling employees and materials belonging to the oil companies with any involvement in oil exploration had been at risk in Nigeria. Over time, pirates became more aggressive and better armed. As of 2014, pirate attacks in West Africa mainly occur in territorial waters, terminals and harbours rather than in the high seas. This incident pattern has hindered intervention by international naval forces. Pirates in the region operate a well-funded criminal industry, which includes established supply networks. They are often part of heavily armed and sophisticated criminal enterprises, who increasingly use motherships to launch their attacks. The local pirates' overall aim is to steal oil cargo. As such, they do not attach much importance to holding crew members and non-oil cargo and vessels for ransom. Additionally, pirates in the Gulf of Guinea are especially noted for their violent modus operandi, which frequently involves the kidnapping, torture and shooting of crewmen. The increasingly violent methods used by these groups is believed to be part of a conscious "business model" adopted by them, in which violence and intimidation plays a major role.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: By 2010, 45 and by 2012 120 incidents were reported to the UN International Maritime Organization. However, many events go unreported. Piracy acts interfere with the legitimate trading interests of the affected countries that include Benin, Togo, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. As an example, trade of Benin's major port, the Port of Cotonou, was reported in 2012 to have dropped by 70 percent. The cost of piracy in the Gulf of Guinea due to stolen goods, security, and insurance has been estimated to be about $2 billion. According to the Control Risks Group, pirate attacks in the Gulf of Guinea had by mid-November 2013 maintained a steady level of around 100 attempted hijackings in the year, a close third behind Southeast Asia.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Piracy in the Indian Ocean has been a threat to international shipping since the beginning of the Somali Civil War in the early 1990s. Since 2005, many international organizations have expressed concern over the rise in acts of piracy. Piracy impeded the delivery of shipments and increased shipping expenses, costing an estimated $6.6 to $6.9 billion a year in global trade according to Oceans Beyond Piracy (OBP). According to the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW), a veritable industry of profiteers also arose around the piracy. Insurance companies significantly increased their profits from the pirate attacks as insurance companies hiked rate premiums in response.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Combined Task Force 150, a multinational coalition task force, took on the role of fighting the piracy by establishing a Maritime Security Patrol Area (MSPA) within the Gulf of Aden and Guardafui Channel. By September 2012, the heyday of piracy in the Indian Ocean was reportedly over. According to the International Maritime Bureau, pirate attacks had by October 2012 dropped to a six-year low, with only one ship attacked in the third quarter compared to thirty-six during the same period in 2011. By December 2013, the US Office of Naval Intelligence reported that only 9 vessels had been attacked during the year by the pirates, with zero successful hijackings. Control Risks attributed this 90% decline in pirate activity from the corresponding period in 2012 to the adoption of best management practices by vessel owners and crews, armed private security onboard ships, a significant naval presence, and the development of onshore security forces.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: Pirates in the Strait of Malacca near Indonesia are normally armed with guns, knives, or machetes. The pirates in this area also attack ships during the night. If vessels sound an alarm, the pirates usually leave without confronting the crew. Pirates in the Singapore Straits attack at night, while ships are underway or anchored.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: According to the Control Risks Group, pirate attacks in the Strait of Malacca had by mid-November 2013 reached a world high, surpassing those in the Gulf of Guinea.


title: Piracy in the 21st century

text: The Sulu and Celebes Seas, a semi- enclosed sea area and porous region that covers an area of space around 1 million square kilometres, have been subject to illegal maritime activities since the pre-colonial era and continue to pose a maritime security threat to bordering nations up to this day. Recently, the abduction of crew members is the most common illicist activity, with most of the incidents being ascribed to the violent extremist group Abu Sayyaf. Since March 2016, the Information Sharing Centre (ISC) of the Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia (ReCAAP) reports a total of 86 abuctions, leading to the issue of a warning for ships transpassing the area.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Fabio Miretti (born 3 August 2003) is an Italian professional footballer who plays as a midfielder for club Juventus.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Miretti joined Auxilium Saluzzo's youth setup in 2007 and moved on to Cuneo's the following year. In 2011, Miretti was bought by Juventus with which he played across its youth levels. In February 2021, he made his professional debut with the U23 team, aged 17. The following season, he became a Juventus U23 regular, and he made his Serie A and UEFA Champions League debuts with the first team and helped the U19 team reach the UEFA Youth League semi-finals. In the 2022–23 season, he was permanently promoted to the first team.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Miretti has also represented Italy at youth levels since 2018. He has since scored nine goals in 37 appearances across Italy's levels.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Miretti started playing football at Auxilium Saluzzo's youth sector at the age of four. One year later, his talent was recognised by scout Ermanno Demaria, and he was acquired by the Cuneo's Youth Team, with which he played their friendlies with children one year older, signing his first contract in 2010. The following year, he joined the Juventus Youth Sector after being reported by sporting observer Santo Borza and after training with Juventus and Torino. He preferred to play for Juventus, as they offered him a shuttle bus to the training ground. By the time he turned 11, he had scored 177 goals for the "Pulcini" side. Miretti scored 16 goals in 17 appearances with the under-17s in the 2019–20 season, subsequently suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: In October 2020, Miretti was included in "The Guardian"'s list of the 60 best talents in the world born in 2003. On 13 February 2021, he made his professional debut with Serie C side Juventus U23 – the reserve team of Juventus – in a 3–0 away win against AlbinoLeffe, at his first call up. He spent the whole 2020–21 season playing for the Primavera (under-19s) side, with the addition of four substitute appearances with the under-23s.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Miretti began the 2021–22 season by taking part in Juventus' pre-season friendlies. In August, he was given the number 21 jersey for Juventus U23. For the under-23s, he converted his 108th-minute penalty in a 3–2 Coppa Italia Serie C win against Pro Sesto at the opener of the season on 22 August, allowing his team to enter the further round. Six days after, he scored his first Serie C goal, the opener from the edge of the box of Juventus U23's away match against Pergolettese, eventually won 2–1. On 10 September, Miretti received his first call up by the first team, by coach Massimiliano Allegri, alongside his U23 teammates Koni De Winter and Matías Soulé for the Serie A match against Napoli of the following day. He captained the U23s in a 3–2 Coppa Italia Serie C win against Feralpisalò on 15 September. His Juventus first-team debut came on 8 December, in a 1–0 UEFA Champions League home win against Malmö FF, coming on as substitute in the 89th minute. In the post-match interview, he said: "[It] was an incredible emotion. The dream of every kid who comes to Juve[ntus]' youth sector is to make his debut in front of his own fans and in his own stadium. [It] was an emotion never felt before". Five days later, he scored an 86th-minute decider in Juventus U23's 2–1 comeback to Trento after his team had suffered three defeats in a row. On 31 December, he was awarded Best Youth Player of the first half of the Serie C season.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: On 20 January 2022, Miretti renewed his contract with Juventus until 2026. He played his first Serie A match on 20 March, replacing Juan Cuadrado in stoppage time in a home 2–0 win against Salernitana. Additionally, in this match, many Juventus fans criticised Allegri on social media for preferring to adapt full-back Danilo as a midfielder instead of deploying Miretti as a starter against a newly promoted team. After another late substitute appearance against Sassuolo, his debut as a starter in Serie A and with the first team was on 1 May, in a match against Venezia at home won 2–1, becoming the first Juventus player born after 2002 to start a match. He was decisive in the actions of the two goals scored by Leonardo Bonucci, having taken the free kick and the corner kick which led Bonucci to score his goals. His match ended at the 78th minute, when he was replaced by Arthur Melo, receiving a standing ovation from the stadium.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: The 2021–22 season, saw him play 29 matches and score four goals for the under-23s. With the first team, Miretti played six matches (including four as a starter) and he made 16 bench appearances. Throughout the season, he also played some UEFA Youth League matches with Juventus U19. He scored two goals in five appearances for the U19s who were eliminated in the semi-finals, their best-ever placing in the competition.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: In August 2022, Miretti was given the number 20 jersey for Juventus, and was promoted to the first team permanently. On 31 August, he assisted Arkadiusz Milik's 2–0 goal against Spezia, becoming the first player born after 2002 to provide an assist in Serie A. He made his UEFA Champions League debut as a starter on 6 September in a match against Paris Saint-Germain at old, becoming the second-youngest Juventus player to be a starter in a UEFA competition (behind Stefano Pioli at 18 years and 335 days old in September 1984). However, after being yellow carded in the late first half, he was substituted by Weston McKennie during the half-time break.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Miretti represented Italy internationally at under-15, under-16, under-17, under-19, under-21 and senior levels. He debuted with the under-19s on 13 August 2021, in a match against Albania won 1–0. Two months later, on 6 October, Miretti scored a goal against Lithuania, his first with Italy U19. He was called up for the Elite Round of the 2022 UEFA European Under-19 Championship qualification which took place in Finland against Germany, Finland and Belgium; he scored one goal against Finland and Belgium, helping Italy qualify to the tournament.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: On 25 May 2022, Miretti was called up by Italy's coach Roberto Mancini for a training camp in Coverciano after Pietro Pellegri's injury. He debuted for Italy U21 on 6 June in a 3–0 victory against Luxembourg in the 2023 UEFA European Under-21 Championship qualifiers, playing the entire match and providing a 54th-minute assist to Gianluca Gaetano, who made it 3–0. He took part in the 2022 UEFA European Under-19 Championship, with the Italy U19. He missed Italy U19's debut against Romania due to a ban. On 21 June, he played the second match of the group stage, giving an assist to Giuseppe Ambrosino to beat Slovakia 1–0. Seven days later, they lost 2–1 the semi-final against England, to whom he scored the opener from a penalty. The Spanish newspaper "Marca" inserted him among the best ten players of the tournament.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: On 20 November, aged 19, he made his Italy senior debut as a late substitute for Nicolò Barella in a away match against Austria.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Starting his career as a central midfielder, Miretti moved up the pitch with time and became a "trequartista" through his eye for the goal. During his year at the under-19s, Miretti changed his position in the field, becoming a "mezz'ala" due to the absence of a "trequartista" in his coaches' modules. The website "Numero Diez" described him as a flexible, technical and dynamic midfielder who features excellent vision, precision, speed of thought and ball control, who can also use his weak foot. "Goal.com" and "TUTTOmercatoWEB" added that his qualities were also dribbling and passing, shooting, eye for the goal and insertion which allow him to set up his teammates with assists. He was also likened to former Juventus midfielder Claudio Marchisio by "Goal.com" for his qualities as a finisher and for his career across Juventus' youth levels.


title: Fabio Miretti

text: Miretti was born in Pinerolo on 3 August 2003, but he is originally from Saluzzo. He has a girlfriend called India and has a sister called Alessia. He also likes basketball player James Harden. His idol is former Juventus' midfielder Pavel Nedvěd and his reference point is Manchester City's Kevin De Bruyne for his role and characteristics. He has been a Juventus supporter since his childhood. He attended Juventus in-house "Liceo Scientifico con indrizzo sportivo" (Scientific high school with sports focus). On 12 July 2022, Juventus announced that Miretti had passed his school-leaving examination.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: Human is the fifth studio album by American pop rock band OneRepublic. It was released through Mosley Music Group and Interscope Records on August 27, 2021, nearly five years after their fourth album "Oh My My" (2016). After the health issues that affected the band's lead singer, songwriter and producer Ryan Tedder, OneRepublic decided to work on a standalone singles strategy to promote the album. With that, "Human" deals with lyrical themes surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as life and the connectivity between humanity and nature.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: "Human" includes electronic production consisting of drum machines, synthesizers and manipulated vocals. In addition to the band's own Tedder and Brent Kutzle, OneRepublic recruited producers Steve Wilmot and Zach Skelton, who worked on the band's previous album, as well as producers Tyler Spry and John Nathaniel.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: Six singles supported the album: "Rescue Me", "Wanted", "Didn't I", "Better Days", "Run", "Someday" also including the singles "Lose Somebody" and "Wild Life", released as bonus tracks on the Digital Deluxe edition of the album. "Somebody to Love" preceded the album as a promotional single. The album polarised music critics, who admired the lyricism and composition of some tracks, but were divided over the overproduced vocals, opaque production, and the excess of rap-trap verses and melodies in much of the songs.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: After a period of delays, "Human" peaked at number 11 on the "Billboard" 200 in its debut week, falling below the debut weeks of "Native" (2013) and "Oh My My" (2016) but surpassing "Dreaming Out Loud" (2007) and "Waking Up" (2009). The album also reached the top twenty in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Scotland, and Switzerland.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: The album was announced by frontman Ryan Tedder in September 2019, with a planned release in "late November" of that year. Tedder stated that he wanted to put out an album with eight or nine songs and then continue releasing new music in 2020. Tedder later revealed that the album had been delayed until the second quarter of 2020 because it was "physically impossible to finish an album in the timeframe that we thought we needed it", and he believed the album would not be successful if released between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Tedder also said the band had "two years worth of songs just scattered on hard drives" and were trying to find and finish "the best ones" to make "a coherent album out of the last two years". Tedder stated that the May 8 release date was delayed because of it being a "weird time", amid the COVID-19 pandemic.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: The band also stated, "due to the current circumstances requiring us to distance ourselves from each other and you, the release has been postponed." On July 1, 2021, the band announced via their Instagram account that the official release date for "Human" would be August 27, 2021.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: The lead single "Rescue Me" was released on May 17, 2019, and reached number five on the US "Billboard" Bubbling Under Hot 100. "Wanted" was released as the second single on September 6, 2019, and reached number nine on the Bubbling Under Hot 100. The third single "Didn't I" was released alongside the album pre-order on March 13, 2020, and reached number 19 on the Bubbling Under Hot 100. "Better Days" was released as the fourth single on March 25, 2020. "Run" was released as the fifth single on May 5, 2021, and reached number 11 on the Bubbling Under Hot 100. "Someday" was released as the sixth single on August 27, 2021, along with the album's release.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: The album also includes the promotional single "Somebody to Love", released on September 11, 2019. It was written by songwriter JT Roach on the series "Songland", on which Tedder serves as a judge.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: "Lose Somebody", a collaboration with Kygo, was released on May 15, 2020, and reached number 88 on the US "Billboard" Hot 100. It appears on Kygo's third studio album "Golden Hour". "Wild Life" was released on September 25, 2020, for the soundtrack of the 2020 film, "Clouds". Both songs also appear on the deluxe edition of the "Human".


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: "Human" polarized music critics upon release. Much of it was divided on Tedder's production and vocals on several tracks, while the lyricism and melodies were praised on certain tracks and received negatively on others due to the excess of rap-trap verses.


title: Human (OneRepublic album)

text: Neil Z. Yeung of AllMusic called the album proof that OneRepublic are still the "masters of the galloping, upbeat pop anthem, packing whistles, handclaps, throbbing basslines, and dance beats into every second of a song" but also mentions that "by including tracks that have been around since 2019, much of the effort feels like a time capsule of days gone by (especially in such an ever-changing genre) and, in a harsher sense, of dated material that can sound out of place when presented as a whole vision years later". "Vinyl Chapters" Zoë Andrea-Lykourgou wrote that ""Human" is a solid album that starts and ends considerably strongly. It's relatively easy to listen to and, whilst the quality does vary in places, there are more than a few powerful tracks that keep the listener interested throughout".


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The Battle of Lake Trasimene was fought when a Carthaginian force under Hannibal ambushed a Roman army commanded by Gaius Flaminius on 21 June 217 BC, during the Second Punic War. It took place on the north shore of Lake Trasimene, to the east of Cortona, and resulted in a heavy defeat for the Romans.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: After the end of the First Punic War in 241 BC, in 219 BC Hannibal, ruler of the Carthaginian territories in south-east Iberia, besieged, captured and sacked the Roman-protected Iberian town of Saguntum. Early in 218 BC Rome issued a declaration of war and Hannibal left Iberia, crossed the Alps, and arrived in Cisalpine Gaul (northern Italy) later that year. The Romans rushed reinforcements north from Sicily but were defeated at the Battle of the Trebia.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The following spring the Romans positioned two armies, one on each side of the Apennines, but were surprised when the Carthaginians crossed the mountains by a difficult but unguarded route. The Carthaginians moved south into Etruria, plundering, razing the villages and killing all adult males encountered. Flaminius, in charge of the nearest Roman army, set off in pursuit. Hannibal arranged an ambush on the north shore of Lake Trasimene and trapped the Romans, killing or capturing all 25,000 of them. Several days later the Carthaginians wiped out the entire cavalry of the other Roman army, who were not yet aware of the disaster. This destruction of an entire army as a result of ambush by an entire other army is widely considered a unique occurrence. The Carthaginians continued their march through Etruria, then crossed to Umbria and marched south into Apulia, in the hope of winning over some of the ethnic Greek and Italic city-states of southern Italy.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: News of the defeat caused a panic in Rome and led to the election of Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus as dictator, but, impatient with his "Fabian strategy" of avoiding pitched conflict and relying instead on guerrilla tactics, the next year the Romans elected Lucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius Varro as consuls. These more aggressive commanders engaged Hannibal at the Battle of Cannae in 216 BCE, a third disaster for Rome that was followed by thirteen more years of war.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The main source for almost every aspect of the Punic Wars is the historian Polybius ( – ), a Greek general sent to Rome in 167 BC as a hostage. His works include a now-lost manual on military tactics, but he is now known for "The Histories", written after 146 BC. Polybius's work is considered broadly objective and largely neutral as between Carthaginian and Roman points of view. Polybius was an analytical historian and wherever possible personally interviewed participants, from both sides, in the events he wrote about. The accuracy of Polybius's account has been much debated over the past 150 years, but the modern consensus is to accept it largely at face value, and the details of the battle in modern sources are largely based on interpretations of Polybius's account. Modern historians have described Polybius as "fairly reliable", "well-informed" and "insightful".


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Livy, who relied heavily on Polybius, is the other major source for the Battle of Lake Trasimene and the events around it. The classicist Adrian Goldsworthy considers Livy's reliability to be "often suspect", especially in his descriptions of battles, and he is generally considered untrustworthy by modern historians. There are other ancient sources, written later, which mostly survive as fragments or summaries. Modern historians usually take into account the writings of various Roman annalists, some contemporary; the Sicilian Greek Diodorus Siculus; Plutarch; Appian; and Dio Cassius. Other sources include coins, inscriptions, archaeological evidence and empirical evidence from reconstructions.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The First Punic War was fought between Carthage and Rome: the two main powers of the western Mediterranean in the 3rd century BC struggled for supremacy primarily on the Mediterranean island of Sicily and its surrounding waters, and also in North Africa. The war lasted for 23 years, from 264 to 241 BC, until the Carthaginians were defeated. Under the Treaty of Lutatius, Carthage evacuated Sicily and paid Rome an indemnity of 3,200 silver talents over ten years. Four years later, Rome seized Sardinia and Corsica on a cynical pretence and imposed a further 1,200 talent indemnity. actions which fuelled Carthaginian resentment. Polybius considered this act of bad faith by the Romans to be the single greatest cause of war with Carthage breaking out again nineteen years later.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: In 236 BC, an army commanded by the leading Carthaginian general Hamilcar Barca landed in Carthaginian Iberia, now part of southeast Spain and Portugal, which became a quasi-monarchial, autonomous territory ruled by the Barcids. This expansion also gained Carthage silver mines, agricultural wealth, manpower, military facilities such as shipyards and territorial depth, enabling it to resist future Roman demands. Hamilcar ruled as viceroy until his death in 228 BC, when he was succeeded by his son-in-law, Hasdrubal, then his son Hannibal in 221 BC. In 226 BC, the Ebro Treaty established the Ebro River as the northern boundary of the Carthaginian sphere of influence. A little later Rome made a separate treaty of association with the city of Saguntum, well south of the Ebro. In 218 BC a Carthaginian army under Hannibal besieged, captured and sacked Saguntum. In early 219 BC Rome declared war on Carthage.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: It was the long-standing Roman procedure to elect two men each year, known as consuls, to each lead an army. In 218 BC the Romans raised an army to campaign in Iberia under the consul Publius Scipio, who was accompanied by his brother Gnaeus. The major Gallic tribes in Cisalpine Gaul (modern northern Italy), antagonised by the founding of several Roman settlements on traditionally Gallic territory, attacked the Romans, capturing several towns. They repeatedly ambushed a Roman relief force and blockaded it in Tannetum. The Roman Senate detached one Roman and one allied legion from the force intended for Iberia to send to the region.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Meanwhile, Hannibal assembled a Carthaginian army in New Carthage (modern Cartagena) over the winter, marching north in May 218 BC he entered Gaul to the east of the Pyrenees, then took an inland route to avoid the Roman allies along the coast. Hannibal left his brother Hasdrubal Barca in charge of Carthaginian interests in Iberia. The Carthaginians crossed the Alps with 38,000 infantry and 8,000 cavalry in October, surmounting the difficulties of climate, terrain and the guerrilla tactics of the native tribes.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Hannibal arrived with 20,000 infantry, 6,000 cavalry and an unknown number of elephantsthe survivors of the 37 with which he had left Iberia in Cisalpine Gaul (present Piedmont) in northern Italy. The Romans had already withdrawn to their winter quarters and were astonished by Hannibal's appearance. The Carthaginians needed to obtain supplies of food, as they had exhausted theirs on their journey, and obtain allies among the north Italian Gallic tribes from which they could recruit, in order to build up their army to a size which would enable it to effectively take on the Romans. The local tribe, the Taurini, were unwelcoming, so Hannibal besieged their capital (near the site of modern Turin), stormed it, massacred the population and seized the supplies there. An interpretation of these brutal actions is that Hannibal was sending a message to the other Gallic tribes as to the likely consequences of non-cooperation.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The Romans went on the attack against the reduced force which had survived the rigours of the march, and Publius Scipio personally led the cavalry and light infantry of the army he commanded against the Carthaginian cavalry at the Battle of Ticinus. He was soundly beaten and personally wounded. The Romans retreated to near Placentia, fortified their camp and awaited reinforcement. The Roman army in Sicily under Sempronius Longus was redeployed to the north and joined with Scipio's force. After a day of heavy skirmishing in which the Romans gained the upper hand, Sempronius was eager for a battle.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Numidian cavalry lured Sempronius out of his camp and onto ground of Hannibal's choosing, where the Battle of the Trebia took place. Fresh Carthaginian cavalry routed the outnumbered Roman cavalry, and Carthaginian light infantry outflanked the Roman infantry. A previously hidden Carthaginian force attacked the Roman infantry in the rear. Most of the Roman units then collapsed and most Romans were killed or captured by the Carthaginians, but 10,000 under Sempronius maintained formation and fought their way out to the safety of Placentia. Recognising the Carthaginians as the dominant force in Cisalpine Gaul, Gallic recruits flocked to them and their army grew to 60,000.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: When news of the defeat reached Rome, it initially caused panic. This calmed once Sempronius arrived to preside over the consular elections in the usual manner. Gnaeus Servilius Geminus and Gaius Flaminius were selected and Sempronius then returned to Placentia to see out his term to 15 March. The Carthaginian cavalry isolated both Placentia and Cremona, but these could be supplied by boat up the Po. The consuls-elect recruited further legions, both Roman and from Rome's Latin allies; reinforced Sardinia and Sicily against the possibility of Carthaginian raids or invasion; placed garrisons at Tarentum and other places for similar reasons; built a fleet of 60 quinqueremes; and established supply depots at Ariminum and Arretium in Etruria in preparation for marching north later in the year. Two armiesof four legions each, two Roman and two allied, but with stronger than usual cavalry contingentswere formed. One was stationed at Arretium, and one on the Adriatic coast; they would be able to block Hannibal's possible advance into central Italy, and be well positioned to move north to operate in Cisalpine Gaul. In spite of their losses, the Romans fielded twenty-two legions in 217 BC, ten more than in 218 BC.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: According to Polybius, the Carthaginians were now recognised as the dominant force in Cisalpine Gaul and most of the Gallic tribes sent plentiful supplies and recruits to Hannibal's camp. Livy, however, claims the Carthaginians suffered from a shortage of food throughout the winter. In Polybius's account there were only minor operations during the winter and most of the surviving Romans were evacuated down the Po and assigned to one of the two new armies being formed, while the flow of Gallic support for the Carthaginians became a flood and their army grew to 60,000. Livy provides dramatic accounts of winter confrontations which Goldsworthy describes as "probably an invention".


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: In spring 217BC, probably early May, the Carthaginians crossed the Apennines unopposed, taking a difficult but unguarded route and so surprising the Romans. The Carthaginians moved south into Etruria, plundering the plentiful stocks of food and looting, razing the villages and small towns and killing out of hand all adult males encountered. Hannibal learnt that one Roman army was at Arretium and was eager to bring it to battle, before it could be reinforced: Hannibal surmised the Romans would have another army on the east coast.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Once he learnt that he had been bypassed, Flaminius, the commander of the Roman army at Arrentium, set off in pursuit. Goldsworthy points out that as they passed through territory devastated by the Carthaginians there would have been a feeling of military failure and humiliationthe army existed in order to protect its homelandand that the small farmers of the legions and their landowner officers would have taken this despoliation as an intense provocation. The Romans gained the impression, possibly fostered by Hannibal, that the Carthaginians were fleeing south before them, and according to Polybius anticipated an easy victory. The Romans were pursuing so rapidly they were unable to carry out proper reconnaissance, but they closed to less than a day's march behind their opponents. The Carthaginians bypassed the Roman-garrisoned city of Cortona and on 20 June marched along the shore of Lake Trasimene. Hannibal decided this was a suitable spot to turn and fight.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Most male Roman citizens were eligible for military service and would serve as infantry, a better-off minority providing a cavalry component. Traditionally, when at war the Romans would raise two legions, each of 4,200 infantry and 300 cavalry. Approximately 1,200 of the infantry, poorer or younger men unable to afford the armour and equipment of a standard legionary, served as javelin-armed skirmishers, known as ; they carried several javelins, which would be thrown from a distance, a short sword, and a shield. The balance were equipped as heavy infantry, with body armour, a large shield and short thrusting swords. They were divided into three ranks, of which the front rank also carried two javelins, while the second and third ranks had a thrusting spear instead. Both legionary sub-units and individual legionaries fought in relatively open order. An army was usually formed by combining a Roman legion with a similarly sized and equipped legion provided by their Latin allies; allied legions usually had a larger attached complement of cavalry than Roman ones.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: At Lake Trasimene the Romans fielded four legionstwo Roman and two made up of alliesfor a total of approximately 25,000 men.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Carthage usually recruited foreigners to make up its army. Many would be from North Africa which provided several types of fighters including: close-order infantry equipped with large shields, helmets, short swords and long thrusting spears; javelin-armed light infantry skirmishers; close-order shock cavalry (also known as "heavy cavalry") carrying spears; and light cavalry skirmishers who threw javelins from a distance and avoided close combat. Both Iberia and Gaul provided experienced infantry; unarmoured troops who would charge ferociously, but had a reputation for breaking off if a combat was protracted. Most of the Carthaginian infantry would fight in a tightly packed formation known as a phalanx, usually forming two or three lines. Specialist slingers were recruited from the Balearic Islands.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The numbers fielded by the Carthaginians are not known, but an approximation can be made. Hannibal had arrived in Italy with 20,000 infantry and 6,000 cavalry, and had fought at the Trebia in December 218 BC with 31,000 and 11,000 respectively. In 216 BC at Cannae the Carthaginians, not having been reinforced since crossing the Apennines, had 40,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry; it is usually assumed that more than this fought at Lake Trasimene. In any event, the Carthaginian army was considerably larger than the Roman.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The shoreline has changed since, but at the time of the battle the road led along the north shore of the lake, then turned south, still along the lakeshore, before climbing away from the lake through a defile. To the north of the road were a range of low hills which came closer to the lake towards the east, and the defile, steadily reducing the open ground between them and the lake. The Carthaginians made camp where the hills were closest to the lake, near the defile. This was clearly visible to the Romans.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: Once it was dark, Hannibal sent the various components of his army on night marches behind the hills to the north of the lake to take up positions from which they could ambush the Roman army. Night marches are notoriously difficult and often result in units becoming lost in the dark or alerting their enemy. The Carthaginians avoided both of these and took up positions on the reverse slopes of the hills. The Carthaginian cavalry were positioned furthest to the west, the north Italian Gallic infantry to their east and the experienced African and Iberian infantry furthest east, relatively close to their camp. Modern historians place the bulk of the large number of Carthaginian light infantry either around the defile and its mouth or as reinforcing the Gauls in the centre of the Carthaginian line.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: On the morning of June 21 the Romans set off very early and marched eastward along the northern edge of the lake. Ancient accounts state that a thick morning mist near the lake limited visibility, but some modern historians have suggested that this was either invented or exaggerated to excuse the Romans' subsequent unreadiness for battle. As Flaminius was expecting battle, the Romans probably marched in three parallel columns, which was their habit prior to a battle as this was relatively quicker to wheel into a battle line compared with a single line of march. This swiftness was relative, as forming an army up in battle order was a complicated affair which would take several hours under any circumstances. The Romans would have had a screen of light infantry out to their front and, to a lesser extent, their flank, as skirmishing was usual before a battle with the armies' respective light troops shielding their close order colleagues while they formed up. Flaminius did not send out cavalry scouts to make a more distant reconnaissance; Roman armies of the time rarely did so.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The leading Romans made contact with the most easterly of the Carthaginians, probably some of the African or Iberian close-order infantry, and the signal was given for all of the Carthaginians to advance, possibly by the sounding of trumpets. According to some ancient accounts the Romans could hear these signals on their flank and to their rear, but could not see their enemy, which caused confusion. It would have taken several hours for the Romans to convert their formation into a battle array, even when they had been facing the direction expected. As it was, with the Carthaginians attacking unexpectedly from the flank and the rear, possibly with poor visibility, there was no chance to form even a rudimentary fighting line. Some Romans fled, others clustered into groups of various sizes, ready to engage the enemy on all sides. The fugitives and many of the impromptu Roman groups were rapidly cut down or captured. Other groups of Romans put up a stiff fight; especially in the centre, where the attacking Gauls suffered heavy casualties before beating down the trapped Romans after three hours of heavy combat.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: According to Polybius, Flaminius was completely surprised and provided no effective leadership; Livy, who otherwise paints a poor picture of him, records that Flaminius was active and valiant in attempting to rally his army and organise a defence before being cut down by a Gaul. The trapped portion of the Roman army collapsed. Men attempted to swim across the lake and drowned; others waded out until the water was up to their necks, and the Carthaginian cavalrymen swam their horses out to chop at the exposed heads.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The trap failed to close on the 6,000 Romans at the front of the column, who were possibly also the Romans most prepared for battle, and they pushed their way out of the defile against little opposition. Realising that they could not affect the battle behind them, they marched on. Later in the day they were surrounded by pursuing Carthaginians and surrendered to Maharbal on the promise of being disarmed and freed; "with a garment apiece" according to Livy. However, Hannibal disapproved and only applied this to the allied captives while selling the Romans into slavery. Many of the Carthaginian infantry, especially the Libyans, equipped themselves with captured Roman armour.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The ancient sources are unclear as to the fate of the approximately 25,000 Romans known to have been engaged. According to the contemporary annalist and senator Fabius Pictor 15,000 were killed and 10,000 scattered. Polybius has 15,000 killed and most of the rest captured. Polybius reports losses of 1,500 killed for the Carthaginians, most of them Gauls; while Livy gives 2,500 killed and "many" who died of their wounds.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The second Roman army, originally positioned on the Adriatic coast and commanded by Gnaeus Geminus, had been marching west, intending to join up with Flaminius. Unaware that the destruction of Flaminius's army had left the Carthaginians able to manoeuvre freely, Geminus's entire cavalry force of 4,000 was scouting ahead when it was surprised by the Carthaginians a few days after Trasimene. Nearly 2,000 were killed in the first clash; the balance were surrounded and captured the next day. Geminus withdrew his infantry back to Ariminum (modern Rimini) on the Adriatic.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: According to the modern military historian Basil Liddell Hart, Hannibal had successfully planned and executed "the greatest ambush in history." The ambush and destruction of one army by another is widely considered a unique occurrence, with military historian Theodore Dodge commenting, "It is the only instance in history of lying in ambush with the whole of a large army." Similarly, historian Robert O’Connell writes, "[It was] the only time an entire large army was effectively swallowed and destroyed by such a maneuver." The historian Toni Ñaco del Hoyo describes the Battle of Lake Trasimene as one of the three "great military calamities" suffered by the Romans in the first three years of the war, the others being the Trebia and Cannae.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: The prisoners were badly treated if they were Romans; the Latin allies who were captured were well treated by the Carthaginians and many were freed and sent back to their cities, in the hope that they would speak well of Carthaginian martial prowess and of their treatment. Hannibal hoped some of these allies could be persuaded to defect. The Carthaginians continued their march through Etruria, then Umbria, to the Adriatic coast; continuing their devastation and plundering of the territory they crossed and the killing of any adult males captured; the Gauls were especially brutal in this respect. Contemporary reports claim that the Carthaginian soldiers accumulated so much booty they had to cease looting because they could not carry any more. The army then marched south into Apulia, in the hope of winning over some of the ethnic Greek and Italic city states of southern Italy.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: News of the defeat caused a panic in Rome. Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus was elected dictator by the Roman Assembly and adopted the "Fabian strategy" of avoiding pitched conflict, relying instead on low-level harassment to wear the invader down, until Rome could rebuild its military strength. Hannibal was left largely free to ravage Apulia for the next year, until the Romans ended the dictatorship and elected Paullus and Varro as consuls. These more aggressive commanders offered battle to Hannibal, who accepted and won a victory at Cannae which Richard Miles describes as "Rome's greatest military disaster". Subsequently the Carthaginians campaigned in southern Italy for a further 13 years.


title: Battle of Lake Trasimene

text: In 204 BC Publius Cornelius Scipio, the son of the Scipio who had been wounded at Ticinus, invaded the Carthaginian homeland, defeated the Carthaginians in two major battles and won the allegiance of the Numidian kingdoms of North Africa. Hannibal and the remnants of his army were recalled from Italy to confront him. They met at the Battle of Zama in October 202BC and Hannibal was decisively defeated. As a consequence Carthage agreed a peace treaty which stripped it of most of its territory and power.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: The Boys in the Band is a 1970 American drama film directed by William Friedkin from a screenplay by Mart Crowley, based on Crowley's 1968 Off-Broadway play of the same name. It is among the early major American motion pictures to revolve around gay characters, often cited as a milestone in the history of queer cinema, and thought to be the first mainstream American film to use the swear word "cunt".


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: The ensemble cast, all of whom also played the roles in the play's initial stage run in New York City, includes Kenneth Nelson, Peter White, Leonard Frey, Cliff Gorman, Frederick Combs, Laurence Luckinbill, Keith Prentice, Robert La Tourneaux, and Reuben Greene. Model/actress Maud Adams has a brief cameo appearance in the opening montage, as does restaurateur Elaine Kaufman.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Michael, a Roman Catholic, recovering alcoholic and sporadically-employed writer, is preparing to host a birthday party for one of his friends, Harold. Another friend, Donald, a self-described underachiever who has moved from the city, arrives and helps Michael prepare. Alan, Michael's (presumably straight) former college roommate, calls with an urgent need to see Michael. Michael reluctantly agrees and invites him to come over.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: One by one, the guests arrive. Emory is a stereotypical flamboyant interior designer. Hank, a soon-to-be-divorced schoolteacher, and Larry, a fashion photographer, are a couple but struggling with monogamy. Bernard is an amiable black bookstore clerk. Alan calls again to inform Michael that he will not be coming after all, and the party continues in a festive manner. However, Alan arrives unexpectedly, throwing the gathering into turmoil.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: "Cowboy," a hustler and Emory's "gift" to Harold, arrives. As tensions mount, Alan assaults Emory. During the ensuing chaos, Harold finally makes his grand appearance. In the middle of the scuffle, Michael impulsively begins drinking again. As the guests become more and more intoxicated, hidden resentments begin to surface.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Michael begins a telephone game with the objective for each guest to call the one person he truly believes he has loved. With each call, past scars and present anxieties are revealed. Bernard reluctantly attempts to call the son of his mother's employer, with whom he had had a sexual encounter as a teenager. Emory calls a dentist on whom he had had a crush while in high school. Both immediately regret the phone calls. Hank and Larry attempt to call each other via two phone lines in Michael's apartment.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Michael believes Alan is a closeted homosexual. Michael's plan to out Alan with the game appears to backfire when Alan calls his wife, not his male college friend, whom Michael had presumed to be Alan's lover. As the party ends and the guests depart, Michael collapses and sobs into Donald's arms. When he pulls himself together, it appears his life will remain very much the same.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Mart Crowley and Dominick Dunne set up the film version of the play with Cinema Center Films, owned by CBS Television. Crowley was paid $250,000 plus a percentage of the profits for the film rights; in addition to this, he received a fee for writing the script.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Crowley and Dunne originally wanted the play's director, Robert Moore, to direct the film but Gordon Stulberg, head of Cinema Center, was reluctant to entrust the job to someone who had never made a movie before. They decided on William Friedkin, who just made a film of "The Birthday Party" by Harold Pinter that impressed them.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Friedkin rehearsed for two weeks with the cast. He shot a scene that was offstage in the play where Hank and Larry kiss passionately. The actors who played them were reluctant to perform this on film, but eventually they did. However, Friedkin cut the scene during editing, feeling it was over-sensationalistic; nevertheless, he later admitted regretting that decision.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: The bar scene in the opening was filmed at Julius in Greenwich Village. Studio shots were at the Chelsea Studios in New York City. According to commentary by Friedkin on the 2008 DVD release, Michael's apartment was inspired by the real-life Upper East Side apartment of actress Tammy Grimes. (Grimes was a personal friend of Mart Crowley.) Most of the patio scenes were filmed at Grimes' home. The actual apartment interior would not allow for filming, given its size and other technical factors, so a replica of Grimes' apartment was built on the Chelsea Studios sound stage, and that is where the interior scenes were filmed.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Songs featured in the film include "Anything Goes" performed by Harpers Bizarre during the opening credits, "Good Lovin' Ain't Easy to Come By" by Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell, "Funky Broadway" by Wilson Pickett, "(Love Is Like A) Heat Wave" by Martha and the Vandellas, and an instrumental version of Burt Bacharach's "The Look of Love".


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: The film has a 89% approval rating on the review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, based on 19 reviews with an average rating of 7.2/10.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Contemporary critical reaction was, for the most part, cautiously favorable. "Variety" wrote it "drags" but thought it had "perverse interest." "Time" described it as a "humane, moving picture." "The Los Angeles Times" praised it as "unquestionably a milestone" but refused to run its ads. Among the major critics, Pauline Kael, who disliked Friedkin, was alone in finding absolutely nothing redeeming about it.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Vincent Canby of "The New York Times" observed "Except for an inevitable monotony that comes from the use of so many close-ups in a confined space, Friedkin's direction is clean and direct, and, under the circumstances, effective. All of the performances are good, and that of Leonard Frey, as Harold, is much better than good. He's excellent without disturbing the ensemble...Crowley has a good, minor talent for comedy-of-insult, and for creating enough interest, by way of small character revelations, to maintain minimum suspense. There is something basically unpleasant, however, about a play that seems to have been created in an inspiration of love-hate and that finally does nothing more than exploit its (I assume) sincerely conceived stereotypes."


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: In a "San Francisco Chronicle" review of a 1999 revival of the film, Edward Guthmann recalled "By the time "Boys" was released in 1970...it had already earned among gays the stain of Uncle Tomism." He called it "a genuine period piece but one that still has the power to sting. In one sense it's aged surprisingly little — the language and physical gestures of camp are largely the same — but in the attitudes of its characters, and their self-lacerating vision of themselves, it belongs to another time. And that's a good thing."


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Bill Weber from "Slant]" wrote in 2015: "The partygoers are caught in the tragedy of the pre-liberation closet, a more crippling and unforgiving one than the closets that remain."


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: The film was perceived in different ways throughout the gay community. There were those who agreed with most critics and believed "The Boys" was making great strides while others thought it portrayed a group of gay men wallowing in self-pity. There were even those who felt discouraged by some of the honesty in the production. One spectator wrote in 2018: "I was horrified by the depiction of the life that might befall me. I have very strong feelings about that play. It's done a lot of harm to gay people."


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: While not as acclaimed or commercially successful as director Friedkin's subsequent films, Friedkin considers this film to be one of his favorites. He remarked in an interview on the 2008 DVD for the movie: "It's one of the few films I've made that I can still watch."


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Kenneth Nelson was nominated for the Golden Globe Award for New Star of the Year – Actor. The Producers Guild of America Laurel Awards honored Cliff Gorman and Leonard Frey as Stars of Tomorrow.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: "The Boys in the Band" was released by MGM/CBS Home Video on VHS videocassette in October 1980, and was later re-released on CBS/Fox Video. It was later released on laserdisc.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: The DVD, overseen by Friedkin, was released by Paramount Home Entertainment on November 11, 2008. Additional material includes an audio commentary; interviews with director Friedkin, playwright/screenwriter Crowley, executive producer Dominick Dunne, writer Tony Kushner, and two of the surviving cast members, Peter White and Laurence Luckinbill; and a retrospective look at both the off Broadway 1968 play and 1970 film.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: The 2011 documentary "Making the Boys" explores the production of the play and film in the context of its era.


title: The Boys in the Band (1970 film)

text: Ryan Murphy produced a new film version of "The Boys in the Band" for Netflix in 2020. Joe Mantello, director of the play's 2018 Broadway revival, served as director of the new film version, which featured the entire Broadway revival cast, including Jim Parsons as Michael, Zachary Quinto as Harold, Matt Bomer as Donald, and Charlie Carver as Cowboy. The film was released by Netflix on September 30, 2020.


title: Healthline

text: Healthline Media, Inc. is an American website and provider of health information headquartered in San Francisco, California. It was founded in 1999, relaunched in 2006, and established as a standalone entity in January 2016.