# 1901 - 2000 What was the trial of the century? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 12, 2006, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127 "2006-07-12T03:00:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/21 "2006-07-12T08:44:24Z")
Without a doubt, the [Nuremberg Trials](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremburg_trials). ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/22 "2006-07-12T09:51:06Z")
I’d go with the Nuremburg Trials (and in saying that I’m not just referring to the principal trial; but including those elsewhere for war crimes of WW2 as a convenience). What makes it different to me, and more important was that it was international in the context of professionals in their field from at least the four presiding countries. I don’t know that I would use public exposure as a guide. How many people in remote places were aware of the OJ trial- and in the end, what did it really matter? (outside of the USA). I await adverse comments. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/23 "2006-07-12T13:02:23Z")
The [Hall-Mills Murder](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hall-Mills_Murder), of course. Nothing beat it for pure drama. Where else do you have: 1. A mysterious murder of a minister and his lover on Lover’s Lane. 2. One witness referred to in the press as “The Pig Woman.” 3. The Pig Woman being brought into the courtroom on a hospital bed as she was dying of cancer, and giving her testimony lying down. 4. The wife of the murdered man – a major suspect – being so cool over her husband’s death that she was referred to as “The Iron Widow.” 5. The supposedly retarded brother-in-law of the dead man testifying and managing to outsmart the DA. 6. The suspects found not guilty, leaving the murder still unsolved. 7. The defendants suing the newspapers for defamation. For a full acount, go to the [Crime Library](http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/family/mills/1.html). Now, this trial doesn’t compare to many of the others mentioned for importance, but for sensationalism, only the OJ Simpson trial comes close. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/24 "2006-07-12T13:03:29Z")
[QUOTE=mhendo] As a historian, my tendency would be to vote for “Brown v. Board,” and bugger any considerations of how exciting or sexy it was. [/QUOTE] Well here again, I don’t think there _was_ any trial in this case. The Supreme Court decision was actually a collective decision on cases from several states, and each of those underlying cases seems to have been decided on motions and arguments rather than trial. The Plaintiff’s cases were thrown out, based on the Supreme Court’s prior ruling in _Plessy v. Ferguson_. The possible exception _might_ be the Delaware case, where some evidence may have been taken. I think that to offer a case as “ **trial** of the century,” you’re going to have to come up with some evidence that there was an actual trial. ---
**Author:** ![Trunk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/87869e/32.png) [@Trunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trunk)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/25 "2006-07-12T13:58:12Z")
[QUOTE=chowder] Kramer v Kramer? [/QUOTE] Joe v The Volcano ---
**Author:** ![Cub\_Mistress](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea666f/32.png) [@Cub\_Mistress](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cub_Mistress)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/26 "2006-07-12T14:11:17Z")
I’m fond of the Hall-Mills case aka the Minister and the Choir Singer but I nominate the murder of Stanford White by Harry K. Thaw, over White’s debauching of Thaw’s wife, Evelyn Nesbit. [here’s a Wiki link](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Nesbit) but there are many others. ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/27 "2006-07-12T14:15:41Z")
[QUOTE=Trunk] Joe v The Volcano [/QUOTE] Earth vs The Spider ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/28 "2006-07-12T15:39:36Z")
[QUOTE=Oakminster] That’s not really what I’m getting at. Some cases are most famous for the final holding on appeal, ie _Roe v. Wade_, but they don’t really have much in the way of drama at the trial level. Appeals are generally decided on written briefs, with some oral argument on points of law. No live witnesses, no introduction of evidence, no “Perry Mason Moments”…that all happened below. As noted above, _Brown vs Board_ was a huge case…but not so much at the trial level. [/QUOTE] Well, sometimes a baseball game may be boring for the first 8 innings but then the 9th inning has all the drama. You could argue that Brown v Board of Ed, has had the most impact because of the decision. (That’s why I put in different groups) Brown is huge and it certainly impacted my life as I was bussed about as a kid. Roe V Wade seems to still dominate the news though. People argue to have it overturned. Very few people, non of them mainstream, argue that Brown needs to be overturned. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/29 "2006-07-12T16:13:02Z")
[QUOTE=Zebra] You could argue that Brown v Board of Ed, has had the most impact because of the decision. (That’s why I put in different groups) Brown is huge and it certainly impacted my life as I was bussed about as a kid. Roe V Wade seems to still dominate the news though. People argue to have it overturned. [/QUOTE] But (damn, I’m getting tired of repeating this) _neither of those cases seems to have had a trial at all_, which would seem like a basic prerequisite for the title “ **Trial** of the Century.” (See thread title.) ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/30 "2006-07-12T16:21:21Z")
[QUOTE=spoke-] But (damn, I’m getting tired of repeating this) _neither of those cases seems to have had a trial at all_, which would seem like a basic prerequisite for the title “ **Trial** of the Century.” (See thread title.) [/QUOTE] So what do they call it when the Supreme Court hears a case? Is it a trial? If it is not called a trial, then I accept that USSC decisions are out. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/31 "2006-07-12T16:22:57Z")
[QUOTE=NoClueBoy] Earth vs The Spider [/QUOTE] Santa Claus v. The Martians ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/32 "2006-07-12T16:42:07Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] Santa Claus v. The Martians [/QUOTE] With an 8 yr old Pia Zadora. \*:: le sigh :: \* You win. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/33 "2006-07-12T18:58:40Z")
My vote would be that appellate proceedings, such as those before the Supreme Court, don’t count as trials. A trial is where you present the evidence before the finder of fact (judge or jury) and get a verdict. So no go for _Brown_ or _Roe_. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/34 "2006-07-12T20:13:37Z")
[QUOTE=Zebra] So what do they call it when the Supreme Court hears a case? Is it a trial? If it is not called a trial, then I accept that USSC decisions are out. [/QUOTE] It’s a “case.” A case may or may not reach trial. Many are decided on motions to dismiss, or motions for summary judgment. Some are decided based on stipulated facts, or depositions, or affidavits, in which case there may be no need for a trial. A trial is the opportunity to present facts. If the parties do not dispute the underlying facts, but only disagree about how the law applies to those facts, no trial is necessary. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/35 "2006-07-12T20:17:52Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] Santa Claus v. The Martians [/QUOTE] No, no, no. It was [Santa Claus _Conquers_ the Martians](http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0058548/). Santa Claus was not one to get bogged down in litigation. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/36 "2006-07-12T20:58:38Z")
[QUOTE=mhendo] If we’re going to leave out these type of appelate cases, i’d probably plug for the Scopes trial. [/QUOTE] _[The Scopes Monkey Trial](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_Trial)_ (more properly, Scopes v. State, 152 Tenn. 424, 278 S.W. 57) was a set-up from the very beginning (on both the part of the prosecution and defense princials), and desipte its portrayal on film and stage, was pretty tame. Had it not been for the incisive satire of H.L. Mencken (and his support, both fiscally and publicity to the defense) it would probably not be so celebrated. It’d argue the most significant of the selections so far presented is _[Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education_of_Topeka)_ in terms of the lasting impact it had on the nation, and as a watershed to the civil rights movement of the Sixties. (Rosa Parks may have been an icon but _Brown_ established a legal front in which to assert equal rights to public services and facilities. (_Roe v. Wade_ dealt with an equally serious issue but the resulting decision was sufficiently ambiguous that it scarcely resolved anything; while opening up the debate on reproductive rights it didn’t provide a very concrete conclusion, and the resultant patchwork of abortion laws and precidents have wavered with public opinion over the decades since.) Media trials like the Lindburg kidnap case, the Sam Sheppard murder trial, and O.J. Simpson’s famous were all popularized by a media capitalizing on a lack of other real news, celebrity status, and public interest in what were otherwise pretty nominal cases, often amplified by poor decisions and gross procedural errors in trial. Famous in their time, perhaps, but how many of the average Man On The Street polled are going to know the salient details of Lindberg or Sheppard? The Simpson trial will equally fade from memory, while significant caselaw will continue to have a lasting impact upon history. It doesn’t look like any of our resident jurists have weighed in yet. I’d be curious to see what **Campion** , **Bricker** , **anu-la1979** , et cetera. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/37 "2006-07-12T21:16:42Z")
[QUOTE=Stranger On A Train] It’d argue the most significant of the selections so far presented is _[Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education_of_Topeka)_ … _Roe v. Wade_ dealt with an equally serious issue… [/quote] ::waving arms and shouting:: THOSE ARE NOT _TRIALS_! They are appellate decisions. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/38 "2006-07-12T21:17:33Z")
This is kind of a difficult question to answer seriously. Major societal and policy matters are not generally solved at “trials.” As indicated, to the extent that they are addressed in the legal system, they are decided in appellate proceedings, which are not trials. So, the concept of a “trial of the century” is not easily amenable to serious societal or political matters. It’s really a matter of public interest or excitement. In other words, it’s really a trivial matters. Our choices are things like Fatty Arbuckle and O.J. Simpson. To compare such events, separated considerably in time, I’d like to hear from a cultural historian. [QUOTE=Stranger On A Train] It doesn’t look like any of our resident jurists have weighed in yet. I’d be curious to see what **Campion** , **Bricker** , **anu-la1979** , et cetera. [/QUOTE] I did know that Bricker and Anu are lawyers, but I wasn’t aware that they were jurists. ---
**Author:** ![anu-la1979](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/47e85d/32.png) [@anu-la1979](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anu-la1979)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/39 "2006-07-12T21:20:41Z")
How sweet of you to include me in that list, **Stranger** , seeing as I barely feel like a lawyer whatever all those pieces of paper hanging on the wall say. I mean, I like to _say I am_, don’t get me wrong, but I don’t really do much lawtalking around here. I’d say _Brown_ is an excellent choice but I personally find the privacy rights cases to be more interesting (my 2nd choice was healthcare law…cripes, how did I end up as Comma Guardian???) so I’d say the entire line of cases that either expand or retract the edges of the right to privacy-_Skinner_, _Griswold_, _Casey_, _Roe_, _Cruzan_, _Bowers_ and that latest case that overturned it (_yawn_ I forget stuff once I’m no longer tested on it) to be of deeper interest to me. I’m also keen to see how the law handles the explosion of options in reproductive technology and subsequent bioethical implications-it’s on a very case-by-case basis at the moment and I’m keen on seeing whether we manage to establish any guiding principals or if we’re going to continue to determine the issues on a strictly ad hoc basis, tailing behind technology or rising above it. Or you know, I may just keep on playing with commas and corporations and just forget everything I spent so much of my parents’ money learning. I’m guessing this is most likely to happen. ---
**Author:** ![anu-la1979](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/47e85d/32.png) [@anu-la1979](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anu-la1979)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2006, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127/40 "2006-07-12T21:26:31Z")
> [@](#): > > **spoke** : ::waving arms and shouting:: THOSE ARE NOT TRIALS! They are appellate decisions. This would not be the right time to note that I spent my first year of lawschool, pencil in stubby finger, laboriously writing “P” and “D” above the parties’ names because I kept forgetting the sides, right\*? I was under the impression that the OP meant memorable/important “case”-because seriously, most trials are just dullsville and _Illinois v. Gates_ may be an appellate decision but it did originate in the trial courts. \*Yes I graduated. Ranked, even. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1901-2000-what-was-the-trial-of-the-century/364127.md?page=3)