No Way OJ

I think everything about the OJ Simpson case could have and should have been done differently. For one, if they knew that Mark Fuhrman was untrustworthy and racist, they should have just avoided using him in the case at all. This way the gloves would not have the chance to be used as evidence so OJ would not be able to try them on, and Fuhrman would not have the chance to make the LAPD's case look skewed and unreliable. Also, they should not have allowed so much media coverage so early on in the case because I believe this large media presence really helped set the jury's mind on a verdict. The location of the trial also should have been moved to a place farther from home in order to insure a more fair trial. This change in location may not have done anything if there was the same amount of media coverage, but if there was less media coverage and the trial was moved early on while everything was kept more under wraps, then I believe that both sides (more so the prosecution than the defense) would have a better chance at having equal chances in the trial.

O.J. Simpson Case Study

This case study was so interesting because of the way evidence was presented in each of the trials. The prosecution made so many mistakes in the first trial that could have been avoided to change the outcome. The first mistake they made was bringing Officer Fuhrman into the case. He had a history of racism and was known to be against interracial marriages. Fuhrman declared he had not called any black person a "nigger" in the past ten years. Tapes were brought forward that proved Fuhrman was a liar. Another mistake they made was going in depth about DNA. The depth they went into was not necessary and just confused the jury. The prosecution then brought forward the murder's glove and had O.J. try it on. Of course, he made it look like it did not fit. This was a huge mistake. The first trial also spent too much time focusing on the mistakes the police made, while they should have focused on the murder. In the Civil Trial, the judge did a better job at keeping things on task and allowing certain evidence that would help the trial move along.

I learned from this case that it is so important what evidence is brought forward and who you choose to testify.

OJ Simpson or Furhman case?

The OJ case clearly aroused speculation across the United States with the mass media coverage and the complexity of a somewhat simple case that clearly showed the defendant's evidence all over the crime scene and his house. However, I still question why Furhman worked with the case and discovered the glove, and when asked about using the word nigger or tampering with the case, he excersized his fifth amendment right on the stand and chose not to speak about it. I feel that Furhman caused the trial to swing in favor of the defendant because of his racist background and history with inter-racial couples. Furhman's evidence should have been dismissed by the prosecution to disclude Furhman from the witness stand. The case became more about Furhman and his mal-practices/racist comments and less focused on OJ and the solid evidence that was collected from the crime scene, which swayed the case in OJ's favor. The jury was also poorly selected, with larger minorities, which were more likely to hate the LAPD because of the history of violence especially in the inner city. The case was less focused on OJ and more on the prosecutions team and collection of evidence. The civil lawsuit was focused on OJ which left him negligable and guilty, which is how the criminal trial should have been tried. The judge made a huge mistake in allowing the defense to focus less on the case and more of the emotions and errors of people that were barely relevant to the defendant and the crime itself.

Media in the OJ Simpson Case

The thing that bugs me the most about the OJ Simpson case is the media's involvement. The prosecution lost a lot of evidence because the media had already heard about it before the trial happened. For example, Nicole Brown Simpson's family members tried to sell her journal to the media. By bringing the journal to the media's attention, it could no longer be used in the trial. The journal could have been extremely vital to the case because Nicole had written in it how she was convinced that OJ was going to kill her. It bugs me how selfish her family was that they chose money over the justice of the case.

OJ Trial

Throughout the case studies we have been watching, it has been made clear that important people or people with money tend to get out of the law and are harder to prove guilty. I think OJ's fame had a very large part in him not being convicted guilty because people did not want to believe someone they looked up to good do something this horrible. Also, when there is a celebrity in the court room, it is a lot harder to have a jury that doesn't have a bias with OJ, especially with the media surrounding him during the case. It bothers me that he is not found guilty because it is so obvious that he killed his wife and Mr Goldman. It's frustrating that it was so hard for the prosecution to find him guilty because his blood was everywhere and it should just be obvious that he is guilty.

OJ

This case actually seems the most reasonable and just to me. In the other cases, it seemed like people either received too much punishment or too little punishment. In this case, OJ wasn't incarcerated and only received heavy fines. It seems completely reasonable to not incarcerate OJ because he isn't  a menace to society. While it is likely that he killed his wife, I don't think that he'll repeat his actions. OJ took a life and it seems like he deserves to be treated how in the same manor that he treated his wife. It seems like heavy fines are a reasonable consequence because serving time in prison would not have made him a better person. OJ paid for the hurt that he caused and for the turmoil he created. In that area, I feel totally fine with the cause and it does not "irk" me. The trial itself seemed to have many faults. The case focused on the poor collection of evidence and while all of that was true, it didn't seem to be enough to completely invalidate the evidence. Also, the conspiracy theory that stated that the police were setting OJ up seemed completely outlandish because, while some of the officers were racist, the consequences for such actions could have been death. It seems like jury was persuaded away from facts and this lead to OJ's innocence. While the resolution wasn't perfect, it seems like the punishment he received from both the civil and criminal trials was reasonable and sufficient.

During the time of the OJ Simpson, my father lived in Los Angeles. Since most of the t.v. channels were passing the OJ Simpson trial, my dad knew the the jury was going to be presenting him as innocent, even though he knew he was guilty af. He told me years later that the jury although thinking that he was innocent, h\they were afraid of another riot happening in L.A.. Therefore, preventing another riot, they decided to verify him as an innocent man.