“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." In To Kill A Mockingbird, Tom Robinson was wrongly accused of a crime he did not commit. In an era where the privilege of life, liberty, freedom, and due process of law depended on your race; a black man’s word against a white man’s word could end in death. Harper Lee brilliantly depicted the prejudice and segregation in the fictional town of Maycomb. Orenthal James Simpson was also an African-American and he was convicted of a double murder in
…show more content…
His verdict was always guilty before the actual trial occurred.
In 1994, times have changed from the extent of racism. However, it was replaced with power and popularity. O.J. Simpson was an NFL all-star and a well-known television personality. He was accused of stabbing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman, to death of June 13th, 1994. The main difference between Robinson and Simpson is that Simpson was arguably guilty for his crime. All the factual evidence pointed towards him being guilty. He had a violent past of beating his ex-wife. All of the 72 witnesses believed that Simpson had the opportunity to murder his wife or he did commit the murder. Allen Park, Simpson’s limo driver, said to have saw “a shadowy figure, black, tall, wearing dark clothes, and about 200 pounds” enter the house around the time of the murder. About five minutes later, Simpson stated that he overslept and left the house. There were footprints of blood left at the crime scene that matched Simpson’s size 12 Bruno Magli shoes. The hair and fibers found in the hat near the crime scene matched Simpson’s DNA. Left behind at Simpson’s guest house, were bloody leather gloves that matched the DNA …show more content…
Simpson shared some common ground. In both of their trials, both race and rank held a position on the their verdict. Both of these people were African-American and their rank would either destroy or profit them. The evidence was disregarded by the jury. In Robinson’s trial, there was no medical evidence that showed that he had sexual intercourse with Mayella. It was the jury’s option to be ahead of their era and not place a white man’s word over a black person’s word. They would only place their vote on someone who is white because there was always truth or credibility behind their words. In Simpson’s trial, the evidence was manipulated by his defense attorneys and viewed wrongfully by the jury. The jury looked past the evidence of Simpson's blood at the crime scene, both victims’ blood in his car, and Nicole’s blood on the socks and his gloves. Moreover, the verdicts at the end of the trials were not truthful. Robinson and Simpson received opposite verdicts from their crime. Both were not viewed as citizens and did not receive their correct amendment rights of a fair trial. Robinson was viewed as morally corrupt and an unreasonable black man to society. Frankly, he was a disgrace. Simpson was an NFL all-star who could never do any bad in society. This demonstrates how race, money, and social status have an effect on the justice
His verdict was always guilty before the actual trial occurred.
In 1994, times have changed from the extent of racism. However, it was replaced with power and popularity. O.J. Simpson was an NFL all-star and a well-known television personality. He was accused of stabbing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman, to death of June 13th, 1994. The main difference between Robinson and Simpson is that Simpson was arguably guilty for his crime. All the factual evidence pointed towards him being guilty. He had a violent past of beating his ex-wife. All of the 72 witnesses believed that Simpson had the opportunity to murder his wife or he did commit the murder. Allen Park, Simpson’s limo driver, said to have saw “a shadowy figure, black, tall, wearing dark clothes, and about 200 pounds” enter the house around the time of the murder. About five minutes later, Simpson stated that he overslept and left the house. There were footprints of blood left at the crime scene that matched Simpson’s size 12 Bruno Magli shoes. The hair and fibers found in the hat near the crime scene matched Simpson’s DNA. Left behind at Simpson’s guest house, were bloody leather gloves that matched the DNA …show more content…
Simpson shared some common ground. In both of their trials, both race and rank held a position on the their verdict. Both of these people were African-American and their rank would either destroy or profit them. The evidence was disregarded by the jury. In Robinson’s trial, there was no medical evidence that showed that he had sexual intercourse with Mayella. It was the jury’s option to be ahead of their era and not place a white man’s word over a black person’s word. They would only place their vote on someone who is white because there was always truth or credibility behind their words. In Simpson’s trial, the evidence was manipulated by his defense attorneys and viewed wrongfully by the jury. The jury looked past the evidence of Simpson's blood at the crime scene, both victims’ blood in his car, and Nicole’s blood on the socks and his gloves. Moreover, the verdicts at the end of the trials were not truthful. Robinson and Simpson received opposite verdicts from their crime. Both were not viewed as citizens and did not receive their correct amendment rights of a fair trial. Robinson was viewed as morally corrupt and an unreasonable black man to society. Frankly, he was a disgrace. Simpson was an NFL all-star who could never do any bad in society. This demonstrates how race, money, and social status have an effect on the justice