Unethical behavior in organizations and society

Criminal Justice

Unethical Behavior

Mark Furman may have been the most crucial witness in all the days of testimony in the People v. O.J. Simpson. Furman initially seemed like a rather harmless person. He was an LA Detective who happened to gather evidence in one of the most well-known murders in history. But then the parts began to be put together by the news people, the defense team, and eventually by the jurors themselves. Furman had answered a domestic violence call at the residence several years before the murder. He was the only detective present when the supposed bloody glove was discovered on Simpson's property, which was after Furman jumped Simpson's fence the day after the murder. Tapes revealing troubling remarks made by Furman were made public. In an interview that was tape recorded he frequently utilized racist words and noted his contempt for mixed couples. He also provided a peek into the world of the Los Angeles Police Department, where he said it was regular practice for police to tell lies, plant evidence, and beat suspects (Brennan, 2010).

Furman's testimony in the case provided a thoughtful look into the world of police behavior and their testimony in court. Alan Dershowitz, one of Simpson's attorneys who wrote a book accounting his involvement in this case, points to a more universal issue in today's society where police officers are projected to lie, both in reports and in court, on how they gather evidence and carry out questionings. Dershowitz contends that from the academy on, officers are taught how to testify in court, shaping their testimony to fit the strict evidentiary requirements laid down by the Supreme Court. Dershowitz also contends that this is exactly what Mark Furman did in the Simpson trial (Brennan, 2010).

Whether Mark Furman really partook in these tactics in the Simpson case will never be known. Yet, the universal issue of officers lying under oath is something that must be dealt with. Strict evidentiary requirements have been put in place for a reason, which is to give the defendant a reasonable opportunity at challenging the facts held against him. If police are contented with lying, in fact trained to lie, in order to avoid these requirements, the adversarial system loses its cause and leads to unjust conditions for defendants (Brennan, 2010).

The infamous O.J. Simpson murder trial turned out to be a good case in point of what an officer should not do with regards to a criminal case. As the lead investigator looking into the murders of Mr. Goldman and Ms. Simpson, Detective Mark Fuhrman was a great example of ineptitude. There is a deep rooted theory that Det. Fuhrman planted evidence at the crime scene and falsified official police reports and other papers in an attempt to avoid the justice system and get a conviction against Mr. Simpson. Even though Det. Fuhrman never openly confessed to these things, the transcript of his testimony shows this to be the case. When asked during the trial if he did these things, he invoked his 5th amendment rights and refused to answer the questions. The belief is that if he hadn't done such things he would have just said so (Belrad, 2009).