Case Analysis : Celebrity Crime Trials

Some of the hardest decisions on trial are made by the jury, which means the jurors have one of the most important roles when it comes to the trial, since they have to decide on another human’s fate, either. One decision a jury makes can be the difference between going to jail for life or being liberated. When O.J. Simpson was declared “not guilty” for the homicide of his wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and his friend, Ronald Lyle Goldman, by the Lance Ito, many argued that O.J. should have been proclaimed “Guilty”. Although many claim the verdict given was ideal, strong evidences, proves O.J. Simpson to be guilty for murdering 2 of his close acquaintances.

In the trial of Orenthal James Simpson (O.J. or Juice), Mr.Simpson was proven not guilty, but in the opinion of many OJ was guilty. In my personal opinion Mr. Simpson did not get the sentence he should have. OJ was guilty and everyone knew he was, even himself knew he was guilty. This man went to his trial expecting to get a death row sentence. OJ murdered two human beings in cold blood. This man should be watching his life passed behind four walls but instead the jury turned him loose, until 2007 he was arrested for robbery with a deadly weapon. OJ should have never walked out of the courtroom from the murder case and the robbery would have never took place, he is a criminal.

There were lots of facts and evidence against OJ, but he, of course, had the best lawyers and attorneys that money could buy on his side. His lawyers and attorneys turned the murder case into a racial battle that took the spotlight off of what crimes had really been committed. In 1985, OJ and Nicole became married, but their marriage was far from “picture perfect.” OJ wasn’t just unfaithful, he was extremely abusive. Friends and relatives on each side would often notice bruises on Nicole’s body. OJ would even openly say at parties “I’m going to kill her.”

was brought back to court for a civil trial, and in February 1997 he was found liable for the wrongful deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, and ordered to pay their families 33.5 million dollars because he razed, or destroyed the two people’s homes. This has caused many uprising questions about O.J. Simpson. Furthermore, Simpson did not go to jail for the murders that he was accused of. On the other hand, Simpson continues to serve his sentence at the Lovelock Correctional Center in Lovelock, Nevada, for kidnapping, robbery, and burglary with a firearm. He will be eligible for parole in October 2017.

The constant going back and forth on the decision of whether he is guilty or not. The jury consisted or multiracial people. I believe the jury went with the not guilty verdict to end their suffering of the long exhausting trail. The jury was also not allowed to hear testimony of an inmate who oj Simpson allegedly confessed to the murders to. With all the missing evidence it may look like there was no connection between oj and the crime but if the evidence was used in court then he would have gotten the guilty verdict. Only oj would know his way around Nicole’s house, that’s probably the reason the children slept upstairs of the house unharmed. He also didn’t have no real effort to find his ex-wife’s killer, it was as if he didn’t care. In 2007 he also released a book leading up to both of the murders, as a

Known around the world as O. J., famous celebrity Orenthal James Simpson was arrested and convicted for the murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her mistress, Ron Lyle Goldman. Although Simpson denied any participation in the crime, the FBI found numerous evidence that proved hands down that he was the murderer. After a trial that lasted more than eight months, he was acquitted and was able to go home. Personally, I feel that the jury made the wrong decision.

Simpson and his defense team saw an opportunity within the jury to appeal to their emotional side, given that the case was tried at the courthouse in downtown Los Angeles, which meant that the jurors were mostly part of the minority, Blacks and Hispanics, his defense team decide to work with the fact the the jury was aware of the racism within the LAPD and their brutality/abuse of power, thus the defense team appealed to the juror's life experiences with racism within the criminal justice system. Therefore, with the help of the media, Simpson's team made the trial a political stand about race. Thus, they accused the Police Department of Los Angeles of conspiring against

Almost every day, we hear about justice being served upon criminals and we, as a society, feel a sense of relief that another threat to the public has been sentenced to a term in prison, where they will no longer pose a risk to the world at large. However, there are very rare occasions where the integrity of the justice system gets skewed and people who should not have been convicted are made to serve heavy prison sentences. When word of this judicial misstep reaches the public, there is social outcry, and we begin to question the judicial system for committing such a serious faux pas.

In 1995, O.J. Simpson, one of the most acclaimed National Football League players, was tried on two counts of murder. This is a case that would stay inclusive forever in the eyes of most Americans; and that would change the way America’s legal system operated. During the trial racism evolved around Simpson and multiple inferences led to an especially controversial definitive, later known as the “trial of the century.”

This paper goes over the effects the media had on the O.J. Simpson case and how the media interfered. The O.J. Simpson murder case is touted as the most televised criminal trial in history and from the second the murders were discovered there was a media frenzy. On the night of June 12, 1994 the bodies of Nicole Brown and her waiter Ronald Goldman were found outside of Nicole’s condo both stabbed to death. The suspect, former athlete, icon, and actor Orenthal James (O.J.) Simpson was the main suspect of the crime. On June 16th, 1994 the LAPD pressed murder charges against him and placed a warrant for his arrest

The people directly involved with this case are Judge Lance Ito, the prosecution lawyers, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro and Robert Blasier , the jury and the defendant, O.J. Simpson. The families of the victims have also been present in the courtroom, as well as other spectators and news media. This case has heard one hundred and twenty witnesses over a nine month period.

The next process in the Justice system, a Grand Jury indictment, was interrupted. OJ Simpson hired a top notch team of defense and appellate lawyers to defend him in this case and they were able to get the Grand Jury dismissed from this case due to the massive media coverage. They claimed that the jury was prejudiced toward the defendant because of the readily available information about the case. In lieu of the Grand Jury trial a probable cause hearing was conducted. With that, the judge in this hearing felt that enough evidence did exist for a criminal trial and OJ Simpson was arraigned on July 29th 1994. At his arraignment OJ pleaded not guilty, specifically stating that he was “one hundred percent not guilty”.

One of the main reasons that Simpson's trial was sensationalized was because he was a celebrity. Thus, it can be argued that Simpson's celebrity status was one of the reasons the trial was televised. Gerald Uelmen (2010), law professor and co-counsel for the defense in Simpson's trial, comments, "[T]he cameras were a mistake because they affected the behavior of all the trial participants, judge, lawyers, and, most regrettably, witnesses. Building upon what was broadcast, tabloids and other media outlets began to attempt to take advantage of the attention Simpson's case was generating. Uelmen (2010) continues,

Since defense attorneys are often overworked and underpaid, I believe one of the first steps to be taken is reducing their hours so that they can devote more attention to each case. Additionally, since the leading cause of wrongful conviction cases is government misconduct, government officials should receive greater punishment for their actions as they have tremendous consequences on the lives of those wrongfully convicted. When it comes to adjusting to life after prison, there are several issues at hand. After exoneration, people face continual legal issues, have trouble gaining independence, lack direction, are not accustomed to the technology of the present day, and find it hard to move on without a formal apology (Westervelt & Cook, 2008). Moreover, according to Pager (2003), it is very difficult for people to get a job after prison, especially when intersected with the double jeopardy of race and class. Additionally, several states have criminal disenfranchisement laws, which take away the right to vote from those in the prison system (Uggen et al., 2005). In order to ease the transition after prison, employers should not discriminate against individuals with prior offenses, exonerees should be given formal apologies for their wrongful conviction, and people should be given mentorship, counseling, and help accustoming to modern technology. Finally, states should eliminate criminal disenfranchisement laws, as the laws further marginalize an already marginalized population and those involved with the prison system make up a significant block of the voting

O.J Simpson should have been found guilty due to his violent actions on June 12th, 1994. There were many actions or causes that led up to his violent act. The main and most known cause of Simpson’s act was “infidelity”. Simpson’s wife Nicole Simpson had been spending too much time with a man by the name of Ronald Goldman. When O.J became suspicious, he took immediate action.