When reading Johnnie Cochran's closing argument one specific fallacy that stuck out to me was, a “disconnect between proof and conclusion” as Cochran’s presented a single moment as a representation O.J.’s behavior for an entire time period. This example is similar to Heinrichs’s example of the past not being able to prove the present. Heinrichs describes how some people say they are a safe drivers because they haven’t been in a car accident yet; however, this is a fallacy because their past driving does not prove that their current driving is safe (Heinrichs). Cochran presents this same fallacy in the section of his argument where he exhibits videotapes and photographs as “proof” that O.J. was not in a murderous rage.
Cochran begins his argument
Cochran begins his argument