# What really WAS the "trial of the century"? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [May 6, 2002, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632 "2002-05-06T22:26:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/21 "2002-05-08T01:40:49Z")
Boy is my face red. ---
**Author:** ![plnnr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@plnnr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/plnnr)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/22 "2002-05-08T01:55:31Z")
The trial of a sitting President by the United States Senate isn’t something you see every day. ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/23 "2002-05-08T05:09:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by plnnr \* > The trial of a sitting President by the United States Senate isn’t something you see every day. Yes, but there wasn’t much doubt about how that one was going to turn out even before it started. The whole thing was a farce. I’m surprised no one has mentioned Watergate in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![BalmainBoy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6a8cbe/32.png) [@BalmainBoy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BalmainBoy)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/24 "2002-05-08T07:54:28Z")
The Southern Hemispere’s Trial of the Century would be the murder trial of Lindy Chamberlain (“the dingo took my baby”). ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/25 "2002-05-08T11:14:41Z")
Why, it was the [Menendez Trial](http://www.crimelibrary.com/menendez/menendezsecond.htm), of course. Not one trial, but TWO! It had everything. Lawyer misconduct, legal precedent, sexual abuse, greed, idiot jurors, and of course, 2 grizzly shotgun deaths… ---
**Author:** ![Coldfire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@Coldfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coldfire)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/26 "2002-05-08T11:36:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DPWhite \* > \*\*Coldie, as much as I like my country, Americans are very ethnocentric. If it didn’t happen here, it’s not of great importance to most of us. \*\* It didn’t happen IN the US, but the fact that thousands of young American men died liberating Europe should make it significant enough, even for -or perhaps especially for?- the most ethnocentric Americans. IMHO. 🙂 But do carry on, I didn’t mean to rain on anyone’s parade. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/27 "2002-05-08T14:05:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by spooje \* > 2 grizzly shotgun deaths _Bears_ killed those people? Man, defense lawyers will say anything, won’t they? ---
**Author:** ![Crusoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/49beb7/32.png) [@Crusoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crusoe)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/28 "2002-05-08T14:10:16Z")
In the UK it’d probably be related to Profumo and Keeler. ---
**Author:** ![plnnr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@plnnr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/plnnr)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/29 "2002-05-08T14:33:12Z")
There wasn’t a trial associated with Watergate that got any national coverage. Haldeman, Erlichman, Dean, et al all got time, but I don’t recall that they ever went to trial. ---
**Author:** ![emulsified](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/emulsified/32/2915_2.png) [@emulsified](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emulsified)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/30 "2002-05-08T17:18:19Z")
If they got time, isn’t it pretty much a certainty that they went to trial? Anyway, how about the trial of the guys accused of beating Rodney King? The first verdict resulted in the LA riots… That seems to be a big deal. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/31 "2002-05-08T18:02:14Z")
They could have gotten time without a trial (pleaded out), but yes, you’re right, there was a trial for G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/32 "2002-05-08T18:50:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by chukhung \* > \*\*Possibly the first case of the Twentieth Century to be dubbed the “Trial of the Century” was the prosecution of Henry K. Thaw for the murder of Stanford White back in 1906. See [http://www.crimelibrary.com/classics/white/index.htm](http://www.crimelibrary.com/classics/white/index.htm). It’s a fascinating case, but I guess it hasn’t really withstood the test of history. Hardly anyone remembers it now. > \*\* It is one of the minor plots in the musical “Ragtime” (and possibly the book) and I’ve been humming Evelyn Nesbit’s song while reading the thread. _Brown v. Board of Education_ is the only one that comes to mind that hasn’t already been listed in the thread. ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/33 "2002-05-09T00:39:36Z")
My vote is for the Lindbergh kidnapping/murder trial. The jury is STILL out on whether or not Bruno Hauptmann was guilty. ---
**Author:** ![WSLer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a6a055/32.png) [@WSLer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WSLer)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/34 "2002-05-09T01:55:11Z")
Nuremburg. I don’t wish to get into a flame war with anyone, seeing as i’m a newbie and all, but many of the other trials mentioned are famous in good part because the press played them up, NOT because of what actually happened during the trial. What great legal decision was reached in the OJ trial, or the Lindbergh baby trial, or the Lizzy Bordon trial or the Manson trial? I can’t think of any. They were hyped beyond belief by the press. Nuremburg was important because as several posters have said before, it wasn’t a show trial as great pains were taken to ensure that the defendents got a fair and non-judgemental tial. And I don’t think that Supreme Court cases really count because technically they aren’t trials, but rather arguements over points of law. Please correct me, (gently please;)) if I’m wrong. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/35 "2002-05-09T04:21:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by WSLer \* > \*\*Nuremburg. > > I don’t wish to get into a flame war with anyone, seeing as i’m a newbie and all, but many of the other trials mentioned are famous in good part because the press played them up, NOT because of what actually happened during the trial. > > What great legal decision was reached in the OJ trial, or the Lindbergh baby trial, or the Lizzy Bordon trial or the Manson trial? > > I can’t think of any. They were hyped beyond belief by the press. > > Nuremburg was important because as several posters have said before, it wasn’t a show trial as great pains were taken to ensure that the defendents got a fair and non-judgemental tial. > > And I don’t think that Supreme Court cases really count because technically they aren’t trials, but rather arguements over points of law. > > Please correct me, (gently please;)) if I’m wrong. \*\* No, You’re right. Supreme Court cases usually aren’t trials, except in the rare cases between states or involving ambassadors. I decided to let that one go, though, I knew what everyone was getting at. 🙂 The Lindbergh baby decision actually did have some very interesting issues of law in how they were able to make a felony murder charge stick, but nothing earth-shattering (except making most states change kidnapping from a misdemanor to a felony and inspiring federal kidnapping laws), and certainly nothing on the level of Nuremburg. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/36 "2002-05-09T12:00:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by pravnik \* > (except making most states change kidnapping from a misdemanor to a felony and inspiring federal kidnapping laws) IIRC, it was the Lindbergh case that effected the all-kidnappings-are-federal-cases rule. ---
**Author:** ![chukhung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e79b87/32.png) [@chukhung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chukhung)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632/37 "2002-05-09T14:04:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by WSLer \* > **Nuremburg was important because as several posters have said before, it wasn’t a show trial** To my mind, this is precisely what disqualifies Nuremburg from being dubbed the “Trial of the Century”. Calling a case the “Trial of the Century” is just hype to give it attention, sell newspapers, and get people to watch the TV coverage. I think Nuremburg was one of the most truly important cases to _ever_ come before a court. It’s beyond the cheesy hype of being labeled “Trial of the Century”. I’ll leave that for the celebrity murders and kidnappings and other such cases (that I take a guilty pleasure in following so closely). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-was-the-trial-of-the-century/107632.md?page=1)