What is the OJ Simpson case?

Question

What is the OJ Simpson case?

Answer 1

The OJ Simpson case denoted a sad period in race relations and media coverage in America.  Simpson, a retired, 50-something year old Heisman Tropy winner and former superstar NFL running back, was accused of the brutal slaying of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown, and her friend, Ron Goldman.  Both were nearly decapitated.  

There was plenty of DNA and forensic evidence collected at the scene, from bloody gloves to expensive designer shoe prints.  All seemed to point to Simpson since the blood evidence and the shoe prints were matches to him.  However, the prosecution blew one key point when they had Simpson try on the bloody gloves.  They didn't fit.  The odds are that the gloves shrank due to moisture, but the claim that Simpson wore them fell flat.  

Also killing the prosecution's case was Judge Lance Ito's handling of the trial.  Much testimony was provided with the jury absent, and discussed only among the lawyers and Ito.  The press covered the proceedings, but the American public wasn't really told that the jury wasn't present for every discussion.  

As for the jury, it was made of 9 blacks, 1 Latino, and 2 whites.  They declared Simpson "not guilty."  It was largely perceived that the jury was all-black and thus completely biased, but to some the jury seemed awed by "good-old OJ, the guy who ran through airports with a smile on his face in car rental ads on TV."  However, the perception that the jury was all-black or forced to declare Simpson "not guilty" due to pressure from the blacks within the panel persisted.

Of primary assistance to Simpson was an all-star legal team headed by Johnnie Cochran, a black lawyer.  Cochran nullified the prosecution with clever wording and excellent support work on the DNA side by attorney Barry Slotnik.  

All of the above caused a rift between blacks and whites.  Many blacks saw Simpson's acquittal as a kind of victory given the many injustices the legal system had historically heaped on them.  Many whites saw the trial as an example of blacks could get away with murder.  Both sides were wrong.  It was about incompetent prosecution; poor jurisprudence; a media presence that feed on emotions, not facts; and a racially polarized America that wanted to believe the worst of "the other guy."  It was ugly.  

Simpson was later found guilty in a civil trial, but that carried no jail time, just financial penalties.  To date, he is a citizen in Florida--a state that doesn't enforce the civil judgment against him--playing golf and hunting down "the real killers."  I guess they're on the back nine, or maybe they're already in the clubhouse.  

Finally, some believed from the onset that a 50-something year old man with arthritic knees couldn't have taken down both his wife and they younger, physically fit Ron Goldman.  Sure enough, in his sickening book called, "If I DID IT," Simpson talks of an accomplice.  And somewhere in the back of the jury's mind, that thought had to be there as well.  Who was it?  We'll probably never know.  

Murder, butchery, unanswered questions, and a missed opportunity for racial dialogue.  That's what the Simpson case was about.

Answer 2

It was a case in which a rich , famous, ex-football player murdered his wife and a companion with a knife, and got away with it.

Answer 3

An expensive pack of lies