From what some have said, including Paul Rodrigues who was there that night and saw it - no one even heckled Richards. There was some talking going on during Richards' set, is all. Rodrigues even said that what people were saying, was positive (excitement about seeing 'Kramer').
PR also thought that some were disappointed that Richards was not like Kramer, and that might've frustrated him. He also wondered if he was trying out 'new material' as the Laugh Factory is a place to do that as opposed to showing a finished act. He also thought Richards may have been trying to be funny but went for shocking instead, and ending up shocking himself.
Last night's on the spot interview with PR, he was a bit angry about it all, but this morning on some morning news show, he was being philosophical. He thinks Richards needs to do more to apologise though.
Sinbad was also talked to and he was there to see the incident also. Sinbad said that the apology was a joke and not sincere, and Richards needs to come to the Laugh Factory on "Sunday night, chocolate city" as Sinbad put it, and apologise THEN. They also heard from "various black leaders" (as the show put it - I can't remember now, which organisations for sure), including the head of NAACP if memory serves. I recall he said Richards "needs help" and the others talked to said his apology did not seem sincere and was not sufficient.
The show also aired some of Richards' satellite appearance on Letterman with Seinfeld (who seemed concerned). Did they air all of it though? Can anyone who saw that appearance tell me...Did Richards at any time actually say "It was wrong of me to use those words"?
Because all I heard him say were things like "I'm sorry the audience was subjected to my rage". That isn't the same thing as saying that the word itself, or using the word, is wrong. To me, Richards still also seemed churlish, when he got huffy about the audience laughing. He has to realise by now, what "nervous laughter" is. I wonder if he is having some sort of breakdown. In the past, he always seemed like a harmless goof, to me. (I first remember him from his "Fridays" days, he was on there w/Larry David.) Although, PR also added the perceptive comment that this is just the first in a similar series - due to videophones, we will start to see more from public figures that could remain hidden before.
I also agree this will reflect somewhat on Seinfeld in the public mind, people will wonder "did Seinfeld know? did he agree?" about all those years they worked together. But I think this is something none of his co workers heard from him before, though. PR said "This is a side of Michael I did not know existed", and Seinfeld also, while on Letterman, looked pretty shocked.I haven't seen the comments by Seinfeld ,but I can imagine he was pissed .Even though Jerry had nothing to do with, Richards outburst Richards tirade reflects on Jerry and the cast. Seinfeld certainly doesn't want the stigma being that he was Richards employer.