Glenn Garvin TV Reviews

Marcia Clark Demands an O.J. Simpson Redo in The Fix

Thinly veiled ABC drama blames the jury for flaws in the case.


'The Fix'
'The Fix,' ABC

The Fix. ABC. Monday, March 18, 10 p.m.

Let's have a little contest. I'll describe a new TV show, and you see if you can guess who produced it:

A (black) superstar is accused of brutally murdering his (white) wife and one of her friends. A genius (white) female prosecutor assembles a mountain of evidence against him, only to have a jury of blockheads vote for acquittal.

And now, eight years later, there's been another murder, of the superstar's (white) girlfriend. The prosecutor is called back from retirement to go after the superstar again. "This time," a member of her staff pledges, "we're going to get him."

You're right! Marcia Clark, the failed O.J. Simpson prosecutor, is one of the writers and executive producers behind ABC's new legal drama The Fix, and she clearly believes revenge is a dish best served as a TV dinner: stale, overcooked, and tasting like cardboard.

Clark, in the wake of the Simpson verdict, was mercilessly ridiculed by everyone from Manson prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi to Tina Fey. But since 2016, when Sarah Paulson portrayed Clark sympathetically if not uncritically in FX's The People v. O.J. Simpson, there's a growing body of thought that she was the trial's real victim, a feminist martyr to free-floating American misogny.

That, apparently, opened the door to The Fix, which is little more than a primal Clark scream. Robin Tunney (The Mentalist) plays Clark doppelganger Maya Travis, hot in pursuit of movie star Sevvy Johnson, (Adewale Akinnuoye, the mysterious Mr. Eko of Lost). Scott Cohen (The Americans) is tough, cynical defense attorney Ezra, a composite of Simpson's Dream Team of super lawyers.

The cast, much better than the scripts deserve, struggles mightily to turn The Fix into something more than a heavy-handed propaganda treatment of the Simpson case. But it's simply not possible. Scarcely a scene goes by without a venomous remark on the manifest unfairness and/or stupidity of juries.

Proclaims one prosecutor: "It wasn't about the evidence … [it] was about 400 years of racial injustice and a celebrity client who knew how to break out a megawatt smile." And it certainly wasn't about Clark, err, Maya Travis. "She's tough, but she fights fair," says the defense lawyer. "That's always been her weakness."

While there's a lot of talk about how dumbheaded the jurors were, there's no discussion at all—at least in the first two episodes, all that ABC provided for review—about what the evidence there was, or wasn't, against Sevvy Johnson.

So we don't know if the state failed to present an eyewitness to the crime, or the murder weapon, or any clothing worn by the killer other than a glove that notoriously didn't fit. We don't know if there were unresolved questions about the chain of custody of the blood evidence, or if a key prosecution witness turned out to be a racist perjurer.

All of those things—each of which might have been a significant impediment to a guilty verdict—were true of the Simpson trial, though they've apparently slipped into the fog of Clark's memory. Though one thing she recalls clearly enough: the victims. "I still see them in my dreams," says Travis. Fair enough. But take it up with a psychiatrist, not a television audience.

NEXT: Wilbur Ross Says He Did Not 'Intentionally' Mislead Congress About the Census

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. OJ Simpson, Holy Shiites, are we in a time warp here?!?!?

    1. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

      +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+……… http://WWW.PAYSHD.COM

  2. Given the shenanigans of the police, is it fair to hang this on the prosecution? Any other defendant could have been bullied into a plea.


    My faves / samples…

    O.J. showed up at his lawyer’s office wearing shorts and a Hawaiian
    shirt. The lawyer says, “Why are you dressed like that?” O.J. says,
    “Didn’t you say I was going to Cancun?” To which the lawyer replies,
    “No. I said, ‘You’re going to the can, coon.'”

    Q: Why does everyone want O.J. over for Thanksgiving dinner?
    A: He sure knows how to slice white meat!

    Q: Why were the police suspicious after they called O.J. in Chicago?
    A: He denied he was the culprit and even suggested they come to the
    golf tournament and see how bad his slice was.

    Q: Why did O.J. stop at his ex-wife’s house on his way to the airport?
    A: He had some time to kill.

    Q: What did O.J. say to Goldman when he found him with his exwife?
    A: Hey pal, mind if I cut in?

    1. On a related topic:

      Q: What is Pee Wee’s favorite holiday?
      A: Palm Sunday.

      Q: What is a Paul Reuben?
      A: Like a regular Reuben, but the customer holds the pickle.

      1. Yes, yes, and Bill Clinton’s favorite instrument wasn’t the saxophone, it was the whore Monica.

        1. Q: What’s the difference between Tiger Woods and Santa Claus?

          A: Santa Claus stops after three ho’s.

  4. The police did most of the botchwork, from storing blood in a hot trunk to all sorts of just general sloppiness. But the prosecution did their fair share. Who thought it was a good idea to let OJ try on the shrunken glove?

    Prosecutors like to run on their record, and they like to boost and protect the police far beyond what is objectively reasonable. When the police screw up like that, and when the prosecution screws up in their own way, then the prosecution deserves as much blame as possible.

    I bet everyone on that jury knew OJ was guilty, but I wouldn’t have voted to convict either, the way the prosecution screwed the pooch.

  5. Marcia who?

    1. Oh, wait, I remember, she’s like the latest Captain Marvel, trying us to take us back to the 90s.

      Let the nostalgia begin!

  6. People thought her hair was terrible and that mattered more than DNA evidence. We were all there. We know.

  7. Bugliosi’s book Outrage is a world-class rant about the prosecution’s screw-ups.

    I miss that SOB.

    1. He took the anger which was suitable to the Manson family and applied it to everyone else he disagreed with, too, which doesn’t make it always wrong, of course.

    2. I always have little respect for statist prosecutors that go on and on about how “masterminds” like charles Manson should get more time than the actual murderers.

  8. I get paid over $180 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I just got paid $ 8550 in my previous month It Sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it.
    ?????AND GOOD LUCK?????

  9. “…there’s a growing body of thought that she was the trial’s real victim, a feminist martyr to free-floating American misogny.”
    Wow. The Jury had 10 women, 2 men, 9 blacks, 1 hispanic, 2 whites and yet she was martyred because of misogyny. That’s an impressive stretch.

    1. The butt hurt from marsha is legendary.

  10. For those who haven’t hear it, you need to listen to Joe Frank’s “O.J. Chronicles“. I first heard it on a pirate radio station and didn’t know what it was. It was a surreal experience hearing David Cross talk about giving OJ full body massages.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.