It’s been 20 years?

October 12, 2015 By: Juanita Jean Herownself Category: Uncategorized

by Primo Encarnación

Lost in a lot of the noise this month was the 20th anniversary of the end of a criminal case which is one of the many cultural touchstones we collect through time: The OJ Verdict.  I was walking thru a JC Penney’s north of Chicago when buzz that the verdict was in ran thru the store, and we all crowded around the TV department to watch it.

Here are just some of the issues involved in that case: domestic abuse by a football player; racist cops; mishandling of key evidence; celebrity murder; cameras in courtrooms; tabloid cash hurting key testimony; Greta van Sustern; prosecutors overwhelmed by high-priced defense attorneys; Kardashians; planted evidence; Mark Furhman; minority justice vs white justice; rich justice vs poor justice; the Trial of the Century.

How far we’ve come, eh?

Be social and share!

0 Comments to “It’s been 20 years?”


  1. Uncle Dave says:

    To the list you can add incompetent prosecutors. To begin with, a corollary to the “don’t ask a question unless you know the answer” rule is “don’t attempt an in court experiment unless you know the result” violated by asking OJ to try on the glove. Secondly, the prosecutors were caught flat footed by not anticipating how the defense would change the decor of OJ’s pad before the jurors were taken there. Perhaps the prosecutors attended a law school that did not require them to learn rudimentary evidence law.

    1
  2. P.E.: You’ve pointed out again the truth of the famous comment by a 19th-century Frenchman, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose,” which means, loosely translated to plain English, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” I always enjoy reading your comments on the insane world we inhabit here in Texas, especially in an actively political period … which is all the time.

    2
  3. Marge Wood says:

    I remember that day. I was over at the Student Center (Abilene Christian University) and the crowd of black kids were gathered around the TV. They were so excited.
    I sure hope none of us is ever put in that situation.

    3
  4. wow. very good summary

    4
  5. Marsha Clark lost that trial in her opening statement by talking down to the jury

    5
  6. Uncle Dave, you are on point.
    When my leather gloves get wet, they shrink. So if the glove didn’t fit, it must have been wet.

    6
  7. Fun fact
    Kim Kardashian dad(who is deceased) was one of OJ’ lawyers.

    Her mother was friends with Nicole.

    7
  8. Fred Farklestone says:

    OJ did happen to run into Karma, a few years back!

    8
  9. Ralph Wiggam says:

    Almost all of us refer to this as the OJ Simpson case but recently a movement has arisen promoting the idea that we should not name the murderer. I wonder if the people behind that idea will start calling this the Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman case? Or maybe that rule only applies when the murderer is white?

    9
  10. daChipster says:

    He did indeed, Fred. Did you know he’s already been paroled on some of those convictions? He is still in prison for other charges, but he comes up for those in 2 years.

    I believe the other paroles are already telegraphing what the parole board will do in ’17: in 2 years, OJ will be out, after 9 years of a 33-year sentence.

    Then his tireless search for Nicole’s real killer can recommence.

    10
  11. I was the registrar in a private school when the verdict came in. There were privileged white boys running amok in the hallways cheering! Was there an element of reasonable doubt in that case? Actually, yes. Not a whole helluva lot but there was some. OJ regularly cleaned out his closets and gave his clothes away to make room for the incoming trendy stuff. And quite frankly none of us over here ever believed that the way the white bronco was parked was a dead giveaway that a murder had just been committed. It was parked instead at a bit of angle that left some space between the near-curb rear tire and the curb itself. Detectives Dumb and Dumberer kept insisting that it was obviously parked in a hellish hurry and was halfway blocking the street. This made no sense inasmuch as the Simpson mansion had its own private driveway and parking place. And then they climbed the fence and eventually ended up arresting Simpson who had a cut on his finger. Never heard if they ever found a lot of blood on the inside of that bronco. All sorts of dangling twitches an tails in that case.

    11
  12. That Other Jean says:

    What a mess that was! A judge bending so far over backwards to be fair that he lost control of his courtroom, a trial that went on and on and on and on, solid evidence buried in minutiae, lawyerly incompetence, DNA evidence that nobody understood yet because it was so new, possible (but I doubt it) planted evidence–the chaos, like the trial, seemed endless. And OJ Simpson got away with murder, because he was famous and seemed like such a nice guy.

    12
  13. The case was lost when Judge Ito failed to control the use of the term “contaminated” by the defense.

    13
  14. Polite Kool Marxist says:

    The gentleman from the jury who has spoken since on several occasions was too polite to list one of the reasons for reasonable doubt. Exigent circumstances, my @$$; no way those detectives would have not followed procedure to wait for back-up, except that they were up to no good. Detectives out here do NOT leave their comfy air-conditioned cruisers without back-up, and they sure don’t ‘lead the charge.’

    14
  15. Old Mayfly says:

    Great comments, all. Indeed that case was messed up by both defense and prosecution. The phrase I remember is, “If the glove doesn’t fit–you must acquit.”

    As the grand-daughter of a cobbler, and the wife of a trapper, I have some experience with leather. When leather dries out, it shrinks. Likely that is why the glove didn’t fit.

    15
  16. Polite Kool Marxist says:

    Old Mayfly, I’ll bet that Johnnie Cochran is still laughing at the prosecution for biting at his glove gambit. No doubt the defense team had a few celebratory drinks that evening. Imagine that when he first proposed the idea, the rest of the Dream Team said, “nah, they’re not that stupid …” Wonder how much Kardashian money Johnnie took in wagers.

    16
  17. Old Mayfly, I’ve lost beautiful leather gloves outdoors. When found, they had shrunk from wet weather and moreover they were hard as a rock, damn near ossified. Simpsons hands were a mess with arthritis. It was so bad with swollen joints that he had special grips made for his golf clubs. That worked for awhile but then he wasn’t out on the links like he once was. It was still too much for his hands. The swollen joints made them look like something from outer space. I didn’t believe this when I heard it years ago but I sure do now. My own hands are such a mess that I can only wear stretch gloves.

    17
  18. All of you are so correct about the leather gloves. I was living in Los Angeles just a couple of blocks from Nichole’s condo at that time and watched the trial as much as possible. It was unbelievable the prosecutors let Johnny get away with that. We kept thinking everyday the prosecutors would introduce a leather expert, but it never happened. Also, unless you hold your hands and fingers in a certain way, you can’t easily put on a fitted leather glove. It was OJ’s best acting job.

    18
  19. If I remember correctly Johnny was wearing rubber gloves when he tried to put on the black one. Bet those rubber gloves didnt slide against that leather very well, especially when you hold all your fingwers splayed out like he did.

    19
  20. Missed/ignored the whole sordid affair.

    20
  21. I’ve always thought the OJ trial, in a perverse way, brought a small measure of justice in that a rich black man could get away with murder just as rich white men have been doing for, well, since there were rich white men.

    21
  22. John in Lafayette says:

    I would argue the following statement: “prosecutors overwhelmed by high-priced defense attorneys…”

    There are very few, if any, private individuals, no matter how rich, who can bring the sort of resources to a defense that a state or city can bring to a prosecution.

    How many of us have an entire police force at our disposal? Or an army of forensic scientists? The best you can hope to do with a lot of wealth is compete on an equal footing with the state.

    Criminal trials these days are always biased toward the prosecution. It’s why 95 out of 100 are pleaded out before they ever see a courtroom.

    Take murder cases. In a capital punishment case you won’t be allowed to sit on a jury if you don’t first declare that you will be willing to vote in favor of the death penalty if the defendant is found guilty.

    What does that say TO the the 12 who are chosen? What does that say ABOUT the 12 who are chosen?

    22
  23. O.J.who?

    23