Although Mr. Gooding Jr. was not the best choice to represent O. J., he did a respectable job, and his demeanor in Episode 1 gave indications that Mr. Simpson was a guilty man. In Episode Two, “The Run for His Life,” his inclination to commit suicide in Robert Kardashian’s (David Schwimmer) bedroom, and later, the miserably failed lie detector test, and the disappearance when he was supposed to turn himself in, Gooding Jr. did a good job showing further incrimination of O. J. Simpson.
Captured intimately is the insight during the strange “chase” that could not be seen during the extensive media coverage, also shown in Episode Two. Focusing on the Ford Bronco chase, where Los Angeles Police basically escorted Simpson back to his home, while
…show more content…
J. was arrested and charged with the murders, his wealth enabled him to hire the best legal defense, and Johnnie Cochran, who would be the most important of the team. Affective was the dramatization of the process in which the defense team came together, which American Crime Story’s episode 3 “The Dream Team,” revealed provocatively. In an excellent example of how the series gave insight that would not have been disclosed in normal media presentations, the episode exposes the budding animus between lead attorney Robert Shapiro (John Travolta), and F. Lee Bailey (Nathan Hale) and Cochran. Also very insightful was the bringing in other lawyers based on their expertise, and the eventual hiring of Johnnie Cochran, who at first was adamant about not getting involved in what he perceived as a losing case, and ended becoming the essential part of the team that led to acquittal. In Made in America Part 3, Johnnie Cochran’s history of a “defender of Justice,” as co-attorney Carl Douglas described him, and his experience of dealing with the L. A. Police, first as an assistant prosecutor, then as a prominent defense attorney representing victim of police abuse, set the tone for the trial, and is why I loved him as an attorney. In the article “The Greatest Story Ever Sold: Marketing and the O. J. Simpson Trial’” by George Lipsitz, the element of black defendant and white victims along with Cochran’s history, justified the defense entering racial conflictions between the police and black people (pp. 3-7, 21-23). Blatant hypocrisy is evident of those who cry out about Johnnie Cochran using the “race card,” as Lipsitz
The hypocrisy and double standard that allowed whites to bring harm to blacks without fear of any repercussions had existed for years before the murder Tyson wrote about occurred in May of 1970 (Tyson 2004, 1). Lynching of black men was common place in the south as Billie Holiday sang her song “Strange Fruit” and the eyes of justice looked the other way. On the other side of the coin, justice was brought swiftly to those blacks who stepped out of line and brought harm to the white race. Take for instance Nate Turner, the slave who led a rebellion against whites. Even the Teel’s brought their own form of justice to Henry Marrow because he “said something” to one of their white wives (1).
During Forman’s case with “Brandon” he began to notice that the courts convicting so many black males were in fact not white, but black. “It wasn’t
The job of a criminal lawyer is quite difficult. Whether on the defense or the prosecution, you must work diligently and swiftly in order to persuade the jury. Some lawyers play dirty and try to get their client off of the hook even though they are guilty without a doubt. Even though the evidence is all there, the prosecution sometimes just can’t get the one last piece of the puzzle to make the case stick and lock the criminal up. Such is the case Orenthal James Simpson.
After a lengthy two hundred and fifty-two-day trial “not guilty” were the words that left the world in shock. O.J Simpson was your typical golden boy. He had it all, the nice car, the football career, and his kids. Unfortunately, this all came to an end when two bodies came to be spotted deceased in Nicole Browns front yard and was a gruesome sight. O. J’s ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman both found with brutal stab marks. Unfortunately, all his glory days now brought to an end, he went from playing on the field to begging for his freedom when becoming the main suspect of their murders. Since this trial has not only altered the way Americans viewed celebrities, but it also racially divided society,
On June 22nd, 1994, one of the most high-profile crimes to hit the media will occur at the home of one of the most adored football players in American history. O.J. Simpson was at one time considered to play the lead role of The Terminator, but producers thought the public wouldn 't be convinced that he could be a robot on a murder spree on film. O.J. was that likable that no one could believe he could be a killer, and people today still don 't believe it.
The New York Times bestseller book titled Reasonable Doubts: The Criminal Justice System and the O.J. Simpson Case examines the O.J. Simpson criminal trial of the mid-1990s. The author, Alan M. Dershowitz, relates the Simpson case to the broad functions and perspectives of the American criminal justice system as a whole. A Harvard law school teacher at the time and one of the most renowned legal minds in the country, Dershowitz served as one of O.J. Simpson’s twelve defense lawyers during the trial. Dershowitz utilizes the Simpson case to illustrate how today’s criminal justice system operates and relates it to the misperceptions of the public. Many outside spectators of the case firmly believed that Simpson committed the crimes for which he was charged for. Therefore, much of the public was simply dumbfounded when Simpson was acquitted. Dershowitz attempts to explain why the jury acquitted Simpson by examining the entire American criminal justice system as a whole.
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.
PJ Williams. The Monsterization of Trayvon Martin In defending George Zimmerman; his attorneys exploited ugly racial stereotypes. British Library Serials. NATION -NEW YORK- 297, no. 7/8, (August 19, 2013): 17-22
It was the night of June 12, 1994, a woman and her long time male friend are murdered in cold blood. The victims, Nicole Brown Simpson, her neck cut so savagely it was almost severed from her body and Ronald Goldman, stabbed repeatedly, nearly 30 times. The accused, her ex-husband and football star, Orenthan James Simpson, better known as O.J. Simpson. During the trial, a trial that consisted of 150 witnesses, lasted 133 days and cost in the ball park of 15 million dollars, there were many questions asked and even more questions left unanswered (Douglas).
The evidence discovered during the investigation suggested to the police that OJ Simpson may have had something to do with this murder and they obtained an arrest warrant. The investigators believed that they “knew” OJ Simpson committed the murders. His lawyers and him were informed of the arrest warrant and agreed to a specified time when OJ would turn himself into authorities. Investigators are later admonished, by the defense, on how they handled the crime scene.
It has been named the Trial Of the Century. Everyone’s eyes were glued to their television screens. Everyone’s jaws were dropped while listening to the radio. And the only thing they wanted to know; was O.J Simpson guilty? The talented running back turned TV personality was being tried for two murders. In the end O.J. was acquitted. It came as a shock to many, as well as a victory to others. With a handful of evidence against him, some thought there was no way he could be found not guilty. O.J. Simpson’s “dream team” was able to win the case because the prosecution did not evaluate the evidence close enough before presenting it in trial.
One of the most coveted trials in terms of popularity and media attention the O.J Simpson trial which took place between 1994 and concluded on October 2,1995 with O.J Simpson being acquitted of charges laid upon him during the Murder Trial Due to handling of physical evidence and questions over whether Mark Fuhrman planted the bloody glove at the scene to frame O.J. so in an attempt to understand how a deviation from standard operating procedures in the handling of physical evidence can affect the outcome of a criminal trial; One most first understand evidence and how to preserve it. When the crime scene technician took blood samples from Simpson’s Ford Bronco (1996) she used a cotton swab to take samples; but instead of using
They complained that the NAACP was trying to bring fear and hatred to the people by making this situation a race issue. Clearly they hadn’t seen the lynching of young Emmett till as a hate crime against blacks. On September 6th, The same day as tills funeral service, a grand jury in Mississippi met to indict Milam and Bryant for the kidnapping and murder of Emmett Till. They both plead innocent, and were held in jail until the start of the trial. The actual trial lasted only an hour an seven minutes. A white juror boasted that it wouldn’t have taken so long had they not stopped to drink coca cola. Whites were careless and insensitive to the seriousness of the case. The life of a teenage boy was dealt with like it mattered less than a worthless animal. Both, Milam and Bryant were not guilty and set free. This story went viral across the world, newspaper articles posted things like “the life of a negro isn’t worth a whistle” and other touchy headlines. Whitfield, S.
Fairchild, H. & Cowan, G (1997). Journal of Social Issues. The O.J. Simpson Trial: Challenges to Science and Society.
... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.