#987: How Many "Trials of the Century" Can one Century Have?
Back in the late 1990s, I taught an 8-week film class at Florida Atlantic University entitled “How Many ‘Trials of the Century’ Can One Century Have?” The course had a dual purpose: first, to introduce students to what, in my opinion, were 4 of the most prominent and salacious crimes/trials of the 20th century, and second, to screen a Hollywood film based on said crime/trial. The four cases and their subsequent films were:
Nathan Leopold (1904-1971) & Richard Loeb (1905-1936)
1. The 1913 Leo Frank case, in which a young Northern Jew Leo Frank) was tried for the murder of a young Southern girl named Mary Phagen; 23 years later Warner Brothers produced a film based on the base called “They Won’t Forget,” starring Claude Rains, Edward Norris and newcomer Lana Turner. In real life, Frank, who was exonerated by Georgia Governor John M. Slaton, was taken out of his cell and lynched. His “trial of the century,” and subsequent murder led to the creation of the Anti-Defamation Committee.
2. The 1924 Leopold and Loeb case in which 2 wealthy, brillant, Chicago-area teenagers who were already college graduates, killed 14-year old Bobby Frank, inspired by the concept of “the perfect crime” and philosopher Frederick Nietzsche's concept of the "superman" — the idea that it is possible to rise above good and evil. This horrendous crime and ensuing trial, were turned into the riveting 1959 film “Compulsion,” starring Orson Welles, Bradford Dillman and and Dean Stockwell. (Yes, there was an earlier film based on this notorious trial, Alfred Hitchcock’s groundbreaking 1948 '“Rope,” but this one was not screened for the course in question.
3. The 1925 Scopes “Monkey Trial,” in which a Tennessee high school science teacher was arrested for breaking the law by introducing his students to Charles Darwin’s “Theory of Evolution.” This would be translated onto film by the phenomenally-talented Stanley Kramer as “Inherit the Wind,” starring those two magnificent cinematic warhorses Spencer Tracy and Fredric March.
4. The Trial of Adolph Eichman for crimes against humanity. The movie version “The Man in the Glass Booth“, was directed by Arthur Hiller from a novel by actor/writer Robert Shaw (“The Sting”), this highly fictionalized 1975 thriller portrays the trial of the Nazi’s chief originator of “The Final Solution.” Starring Maximilian Schell (who was nominated for an Oscar as Best Actor), Laurence Pressman and Lois Nettleton.
There were also several so-called “Trials of the Century” that never made it into the movies, including:
The 3 Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle trials in March/April 1922 in which the beloved (and soon to be both reviled and blacklisted) silent movie comedian stood accused of murdering young starlet Virginia Rappe at a booze-soaked party in San Francisco’s St. Francis Hotel;
The “Army-McCarthy” hearings, a 36-day television spectacular that held the attention of an estimated 80 million television viewers (many watching the trials at their local saloon or TV store) for an amazing 6 weeks from April 22 to June 17, 1954. This was the first time that television offered “gavel-to-gavel” coverage of a trial. It served to be the Wisconsin senator’s undoing: within 3 years, the once-feared McCarthy took to the bottle, was censured by his colleagues and died at age 48. Although no theatrical film has been made of this “trial of the century,” there is Emile de Antonia’s brilliant 1964 documentary, Point of Order!, in which de Antonia culled from extant kinescopes what is, to this day, the definitive documentary record of America's first great televised political spectacle.
The O.J. Simpson murder trial. Need we say more?
So far, in the first 24 years of the twenty-first century, there have already been quite a few “Trials of the Century.” Eerily, most of them have one thing in common: the name D-O-N-A-L-D T-R-U-M-P. Among the most widely-covered and widely-viewed trials and Congressional hearings have been:
· Trump’s dealings with the Russians during the 2016 presidential election (the Mueller hearings);
· Trump’s first and second impeachment hearings, and
· The hearings into the January 6, 2021 insurrection.
All of these hearings were nationally televised and watched, at least in part, by millions of viewers. But unlike say, the Kefauver Hearings, which spent more than a year investigating organized crime in Interstate Commerce (1950-1951), and the Army-McCarthy hearings of the 1950s, both of which were broadcast by precisely 2 national networks, the various Trump hearings and now, trials, are and were accompanied by a plethora of on-air commentaries, broadcast by numerous partisan cable outlets. In essence, those who were and are, generally speaking, pro-Trump fans, can view coverage produced and carried by media that makes their hero the victim of a partisan witch-hunt, while those who are mostly anti-Trump (sitting on the fence . . . all 23 of them), can have their views and opinions both validated and buttressed by the cables they most commonly watch.
Donald Trump’s current trial - in which he stands accused of paying off former adult film star Stormy Daniels $130,000 in hush money so that their alleged sexual relationship wouldn’t negatively affect his 2016 run for the White House - is rara avis: there are, by New York State law, no television cameras permitted inside the courtroom. Out on the street . . . well, that’s a different story. Hence, a judicial proceeding which has all the ingredients - conspiracy, money, the former POTUS and a porn star - could have and should have had the highest Nielsen ratings of all time. But no: the thousand-and-one talking heads and their teams of TV attorneys (many of whom are, in fact, former federal prosecutors) are reduced to talking about - rather than reporting on - the latest "trial of the century. Reputable media figures spend the lion’s share of their on-camera mornings, afternoons, and evenings opining on whether or not the former president is sleeping through the trial due to his not being able to get his daily Diet Coke fix; on which Republican Vice Presidential wannabes (Senators Tuberville, Scott and Vance and who knows, perhaps Vivek Ramaswamy) and going to be with him in court; on why not a peep – let alone a supportive visit – from his wife; on whether the jury is going to like Michael Cohen; on whether or not Judge Juan Merchan, tiring of merely fining the FOTUS a grand every time he opens his big yap, will finally send him to jail . . . and on and on.
What precise effect this latest “trial of the century” will have on Donald Trump the candidate is anyone’s guess; the impact it is having on Donald Trump the man is already quite palpable. Never known for having the firmest grip on reality, the former president shows, in my humble opinion, increasing signs of moral and psychological disengagement. Is it any wonder? Here we have an out-of-shape, morbidly obese 77-year-old (he’ll turn 78 on June 14) who has long subsisted on little sleep, a diet of fast food burgers, fries, and at least a dozen Diet Cokes a day; a man who, despite wearing a mask of extreme bravado, sees himself as a perpetual target of victimization. Of late, he has been forced to sit in a courtroom without making a sound or showing outward emotion. In his mind’s eye, he is likely seeing himself in an orange jumpsuit, denied a staff to cater to his every whim and need, and - even worse - being told where to be and what to do all day long by people he considers to be his inferiors. (I have to believe he’s having nightmares about not being able to get his hair styled and colored every morning, noon, and night. God forbid someone takes a surreptitious snap of him without the bird’s nest atop his pate!) Is it any wonder that, when gets the chance to give a campaign speech, he rambles on for an hour and a half, now speaking about how the Chinese Government is putting together an army of Chinese immigrants here in the United States and then going off on a bizarre tangent, praising the fictional Hannibal Lecter (“The late, great Hannibal Lecter is a wonderful man. He oftentimes would have a friend for dinner,”). Even his supporters started walking out on These are definitely not the thoughts or words of a man who has both feet on the ground . . . let alone one who is running for the most powerful job on earth.
So you tell me: how many more “trials of the century” is Donald Trump going to go through before this year . . . let alone this decade . . . is over?
Copyright©2024 Kurt Franklin Stone