O.J. Simpson: Life, career, and legacy

O.J. Simpson: The Case that Intrigued America

On June 13th 1994, Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officers arrived at Nicole Simpson's home to find her sprawled face down in a lake of blood (BBC, 1995). To her right lay the blood-soaked body of a man, who was later identified as Ron Goldman, her close friend. The most logical suspect was Nicole's abusive ex-husband, Orenthal James (O.J.) Simpson.

O.J. Simpson married Nicole in 1985. Sources close to the couple say that he was jealous and violent, and that his domestic violence led to their divorce in 1992. When Nicole was killed, evidence led police straight to Simpson. His reaction convinced many that he was guilty -- he tried to escape the police by speeding off in a Ford Bronco, threatening to kill himself. When he gave himself up, many believed his days of freedom were over. However, this was not the case. He was acquitted in 1995 in the brutal stabbing murders.

Summary (The O.J. Simpson murder trial is perhaps the most publicized case in U.S. history BBC, 1995). It was the longest trial in the history of California, costing over $20 million to fight and defend. The case had more media coverage and aroused more excitement than any other criminal trial since the Lindbergh kidnapping-murder case in New Jersey in the 1930s, even topping the infamous Manson Family trial of the early 1970s. The media influence was so strong that one poll showed 74% of Americans could identify Kato Kaelin, a key witness, but only 25% knew who the current Vice President of the United States was.

Simpson's trial lasted nearly nine months, involved 120 witnesses, 45,000 pages of evidence, and 1,100 exhibits (CNN, 1994). However, the jury took less than four hours to reach the verdicts.

Simpson was the prime suspect in the murders (BBC, 1995). The prosecution seemed to have a strong case at first, as Simpson had a clear motive, an opportunity and no alibi. He had a history of physically abusing and harassing Nicole and had made violent threats against her. The prosecution proved that he had recently bought a knife similar in size and shape to what was believed to be the murder weapon. Finally, it was believed that Simpson dropped the bloody gloves, one at the crime scene and one at his home, and that he wore shoes the same size as those found at the crime scene.

The defense case was not nearly as strong (BBC, 1995). There were no witnesses to the crime and no actual murder weapon could be found. However, the defense argued that Simpson was framed by police officers and found numerous flaws in the police evidence. They argued that Simpson was as a black victim of a white judicial system, on trial simply because he was a black man and the victim was a white woman.

Since the deaths of O.J. Simpson's ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were announced and the football hero has been charged with their murders, a question has lingered: Did Simpson's race play a role in the outcome of the murder case (Jet, 1994)?

Throughout the trial, the nation was involved in a public debate over whether a black man could be acquitted by a mostly white justice system, or whether a mostly black jury would ever reach a verdict of guilt for a black celebrity (BBC, 1995). The popularity of the case made celebrities out of the judge, lawyers and criminal justice officials participating in the case. Today, 11 years after the case ended, the debate continues.

Guilty or Not?

Evidence displayed by the prosecution included a genetic match between Simpson's blood and blood found at the crime scene and proof that blood matching both Goldman's and Nicole Simpson's was found in Simpson's Ford Bronco and in his home.

The defense team argued that the blood evidence was either the result of poor police work or had been planted by racist police officers (BBC, 1995). The defense showed tapes of Mark Fuhrman, one of the LAPD officers to search Simpson's house after the murders, using racist terms in a 1994 interview. The defense attorney compared Fuhrman to Adolf Hitler and pleaded with the jury to "do the right thing" and send the police a message about racism with a "not guilty" verdict. The jury delivered the "not guilty" verdict shortly after this plea.

Many opponents of the verdict argue that Simpson bought his freedom with an unbeatable defense team (Reed, 1994). Some blamed the jurors, who acquitted despite being presented with a great deal of evidence of Simpson's guilt (including DNA evidence). Some said they believed Simpson was probably guilty, but that the prosecution messed up the case.

Many proponents of the case argued that African-Americans experienced justice through a common sense of identity forged historically by a minority people rather than by the circumstantial evidence gathered for Simpson's trial (Reed, 1994).

Many U.S. polls revealed that race does play a role in the public's beliefs (Davis, 1995). Most blacks think he is innocent and most whites think he is guilty. A Newsweek poll showed that 60% of blacks think he is innocent, as opposed to 23% of whites. A USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll revealed that 60% of blacks think he is innocent and 68% of whites think he is guilty. An ABC News survey showed that 63% of whites said he was guilty and only 22% of blacks said he was guilty.