The People vs. O.J. Simpson case was a crucial and critical moment in Americans culture and history. Two decades later the case is still controversial; for this murder trail expose many issues and painful truths which are still prominent and evident in society today; domestic violence, police corruption, the divide between the police and the community and racism are some of the issues that was addressed during this trial. .During the trial in 1995 the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman did not receive justice with the verdict of OJ Simpson being acquitted of all charges; the case was focused more on the corruption of the LAPD rather than the facts and evidence provided about the murder trial itself; there was various pieces
…show more content…
I think they misjudged a lot of ideas, had one- side opinions to situations and phenomenon. When they began selecting the jurors, the mistake came from selecting the location which was moved from Santa Monica to Downtown Los Angeles which dramatically changed the genetic makeup of the jury; the prosecution pushed for there to be majority black women on the jury. Marcia Clark assumed that placing majority of African-American women on the jury would have a positive impact for the prosecution because they would be more sympathetic with her arguments; which unfortunately did not work in their favor because black women were not partial or sympathetic to Nicole because they felt as if she was only with OJ for the money. The evidence that they produced was good however, I feel that it was to technical for common every day citizen to understand it. The jurors really did not use the evidence provided by the …show more content…
Mr. Simpson was acquitted of the charges because the defense was able to raise and prove reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury. One of the greatest advantages the defense had over the prosecution is the violent nature that the LAPD had with the African-American community. There were numerous instances where the mistreatment of African-Americans was evident. Which the defense use that as a major strategy throughout the trail. They portrayed the imagine as; if the Mark Furham presented an untruthful statement there should be no reason for the jury to believe that all the evidence and data collected was reliable and accurate. The defense realize that DNA testing could not be kept out of the trail; but they did make a very valid point of making people realize that the DNA test results are invalid especially if you have individuals who are incompetent, careless or may have reason to have an malice motive with the collective process. The defense highlighted that an elusive amount of evidence would prove that items were planted: they were able to present solid evidence that the sock that was soaked in blood was planted; because of the splattering pattern and there was a chemical agent on the sock that could not be traced to the human body but only found in tubes. Secondly, there was videotape that revealed the sock was not on the white rug where
I think they misjudged a lot of ideas, had one- side opinions to situations and phenomenon. When they began selecting the jurors, the mistake came from selecting the location which was moved from Santa Monica to Downtown Los Angeles which dramatically changed the genetic makeup of the jury; the prosecution pushed for there to be majority black women on the jury. Marcia Clark assumed that placing majority of African-American women on the jury would have a positive impact for the prosecution because they would be more sympathetic with her arguments; which unfortunately did not work in their favor because black women were not partial or sympathetic to Nicole because they felt as if she was only with OJ for the money. The evidence that they produced was good however, I feel that it was to technical for common every day citizen to understand it. The jurors really did not use the evidence provided by the …show more content…
Mr. Simpson was acquitted of the charges because the defense was able to raise and prove reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury. One of the greatest advantages the defense had over the prosecution is the violent nature that the LAPD had with the African-American community. There were numerous instances where the mistreatment of African-Americans was evident. Which the defense use that as a major strategy throughout the trail. They portrayed the imagine as; if the Mark Furham presented an untruthful statement there should be no reason for the jury to believe that all the evidence and data collected was reliable and accurate. The defense realize that DNA testing could not be kept out of the trail; but they did make a very valid point of making people realize that the DNA test results are invalid especially if you have individuals who are incompetent, careless or may have reason to have an malice motive with the collective process. The defense highlighted that an elusive amount of evidence would prove that items were planted: they were able to present solid evidence that the sock that was soaked in blood was planted; because of the splattering pattern and there was a chemical agent on the sock that could not be traced to the human body but only found in tubes. Secondly, there was videotape that revealed the sock was not on the white rug where