Oj Simpson Case Study

1) What crimes were committed. The crimes that were committed were two counts of murder, one was Nicole Simpson and the other was Ron Goldman, a man Nicole had been seeing. 2) What were the defenses used? The defense used information in the trial such as the police enter OJ Simpson's home without a warrant therefore violating his 4th amendment rights. The judge then had to void all of the evidence found at the home including the glove. The defense also collected a good group of jurors that had suspicions with the Los Angeles Police Department, most of them being african american. The prosecution tried to argue that all of OJ’s abusive actions were linked throughout the years. The defense quickly discussed that after OJ beat his wife in 1989, there was a 5 year gap between that and the murder and in those 5 years the two reunited and seemed to get along through her borrowing his car, them showing up to football games together, etc. They present on a video tape of OJ going to his daughter dance recital and he was happy with his kids and family two weeks before the murder was committed. The defense displayed the cops on the crime scene as sloppy scientists, butterfingered assistant, a reckless detective, and a renegade racist cop. 3) What impacted the jury verdict? The prosecutors were the main impactors on the jury verdict. The prosecution did a poor job of convincing the jury that OJ was guilty because of their reasonable doubt having to do with the evidence collected from the DNA samples. The jury was skeptical with detective Philip Vannatter because he took the blood samples down to the lab himself. The defense attacked the prosecution on the fact that the blood-samples had allegedly been misled by the lab scientists. The blood from the crime scene had been contaminated …show more content…
But the way that the prosecution presented their evidence was put together poorly in comparison to the defense. The prosecution lied to the jury and the judge about the evidence which is against the constitution and has a death penalty in one's civil liability for criminal acts. The prosecution was not beyond a reasonable doubt in this case because of the faultiness with the DNA samples, Fuhrman being exposed of being a racist, and the time it took for each piece of evidence to be presented from the time of the crime. The jury mostly voided the fact that Simpson's blood was found at the scene because the DNA samples had been miscarried and that EDTA was found in the blood as well. Fuhrman being found a racist after oathing that he had not been racist in the past ten years was also a huge part of the case considering the jury was filled with african american people and the fact that OJ Simpson was black as well. Overall, I believe that OJ wasn't convicted of the murders because the result was based on emotional connection that the jury had with OJ Simpson. The case was turned into more into a race discriminatory thing than a murder case. At the end of the documentary, one of the jurors explicitly said that she didn't want to be the reason why Simpson died because there was a chance that the police force had turned against the NFL