O. J. "The Juice" Simpson
When picking a major case of Orenthal James Simpson, there appears a strong need to highlight some basic facts from a well-known American football player’s life. One is to keep in mind that the abovementioned procedures are necessary because of the psychological reasons. In other words, the so-called daily issues Simpson was engaged in can help us to consider the consistency of data of the main case. Moreover, nobody will deny the fact that the trial of the century must be analyzed in detail; thus a person’s psychology cannot be ignored. It should also be noted that basic points of Simpson’s life will give us an opportunity not only to set the correct opinion forth, but to assume some biographical reasons for the crime. It must be pointed out that the anamnesis of the famous football player’s life is used to make some assumptions about the committed crime, but not to accuse Simpson of the premeditated murder. Finally, it is obvious that the analysis is to be logically grounded as well as reflected in a precise way.
The Anamnesis of Simpson's Life
The facts that many people are familiar with are related to O. J. Simpson’s year of birth and his career. However, one is to be more interested in a way he lived in his early life, as in most cases it is a person’s childhood that affects his or her future. To my mind, this idea is sensible. When speaking about Simpson’s childhood, people are to draw their attention to his disease rickets as well as the very traumatic event he experienced - his parents’ divorce. These issues can be considered as extremely important in terms of a psychological framework. For instance, one can probably conclude that the disease could cause the so-called feeling of inferiority. On the other hand, the dissolution of a marriage could distort the child’s notions about happy family life. Furthermore, as far as Simpson is recognized to be one of the most prominent players in American football history, one can state that the psychology of a winner seems to explain the fundamentals of the famous case. Still, the anamnesis of Simpson’s life should not be neglected when regarding criminal trial for murder.
The trial of the century. Simpson was married twice. His first wife was Marguerite L. Whitley. They divorced in 1979. Six years later the prominent football player married Nicole Brown. The couple divorced in 1992 as Simpson was charged with a domestic violence. On June 12, 1994 Simpson’s second ex and her friend were found dead. Orenthal was number one suspect. Megan Foley points out the importance of the trial. Thus, she draws people’s attention to the scale of the case depicting the reports of the numerous publishing sources, the most interesting of which is represented by Newsweek, “for more than two and a half years, the O. J. Simpson saga was the most important domestic story in many American lives, consuming enough newsprint to sink a large fleet of ships” (Foley 2008). Generally, I suppose that the story gripped the world because of people’s different attitudes towards the crime. The most important fact, which should be taken into account, is that the representatives of dissimilar ethnic groups accepted the case in different ways. It means that most African-Americans had supported the verdict (not guilty) while the majority of the white Americans had the opposite opinion. To my mind, this fact is really of a particular concern as the verdict seems to apply to race discrimination in some way.
The Analysis of the Case
When analyzing certain chronological data, one can notice that Simpson was notified of his ex-wife’s death on June 13, 1994. Keeping in mind the first period of crime detection, special documents appear to provide an alibi for Simpson, e.g. he was informed about the crime while on a business trip (Linder n.d.). However, taking into consideration Simpson’s motive and further analysis of the case, the previous argument can be regarded as rather feeble. The fact that puts me on my guard is Simpson’s book If I Did It. One can probably state that the book was written either to save Simpson’s fame or to earn him more money. In my opinion, that is to say capre diem Simpson and his immediate environment could be interested in while the case was enthralling the USA. In his book, Simpson openly calls his ex-wife the enemy and cannot control his negative emotions. Therefore, one can conclude that his wife’s affair with Ronald Goldman still hurts him deeply. Emily Baker (2007) who is familiar with the production affirms that Simpson is “determined to use his high-profile status and his notoriety and involvement in one of the ‘90s most memorable trials to publish a book”. Therefore, nobody can state for sure that the only reason for the one of the most famous football players was to clear his name. The aim Simpson wanted to achieve could be quite ambiguous. Strong doubts appeared because of the evidence Simpson gave. As far as it is not easy to analyze data in a proper way, it is difficult to understand whether “The Juice” lies or no. So, it is hard to say whether Simpson’s book is an attempt to prove his innocence or the usual way of PR.
Earn 15% from every order!
Earn money today! Refer our service to your friends!
Simpson makes no secret of the fact that his ex-wife had a sexual relationship with young and good-looking man. Moreover, he does not conceal his outrage from people when speaking about Nicole Brown. He clarifies that his primary intention was to scare the woman. Keeping Simpson’s words in mind, one can summarize that he fully understands what happens, although he cannot explain the way the crime is committed. To my mind, that is a lie. Of course, a person can blank out, but in this case a person cannot recollect a bulk of events. Simpson, indeed remembers the details of the crime (the way Nicole’s friend starts an awful brawl, her bad language, etc.), but is not able to tell how two persons are killed. Furthermore, he neither pleads guilty nor disclaims it.
In most cases, there are people’s emotions which reveal their hidden intentions and worldviews. To my mind, there are enough data on the case to make an invariable conclusion about the crime. Fenjves (32) says, “I thought you were guilty then, and I still think you’re guilty”. I fully agree with the statement. Finally, a second man who appears in Simpson’s story seems to be not real. It is probably one of Simpson’s ways to skip the responsibility. “The Juice” pointed out that certainly it was Charlie who could commit the crime, but, unfortunately, there was no Charlie who could bear witness.
When giving evidence, Simpson was also asked about crime reports his first wife made. He told about a big fight which happened about six years ago. This fact was said to be of a particular importance as the jury could refer to a precedent to charge Simpson with the crime.
The assumption that the verdict seems to apply to race discrimination is rather important. First of all, it is the composition of the jury which must be taken into account. The pool was 60% black, Hispanic and Asian, and 40% white. So, one may conclude that the verdict was mostly determined by the racial composition of jury. Anyway, the most interesting fact is that most whites were perfectly sure that O.J. was guilty while the representatives of other nationalities were of the opposite opinion. If trial proceedings had occurred in Santa Monica where an awful murder happened, the composition of the jury would have been white. One more important fact, which is to be considered in detail, is related to Simpson’s defense. It is not a secret that Johnnie Cochran and Robert Shapiro did their best to participate in the jury selection process. It also important to note the general attitude of the jury to killed persons. “The defense's simulated jury tests had indicated that black females disliked Nicole Simpson - believing that she was irresponsibly milking money from a famous black man” (Linder n.d.). I do not think that in such case as Simpson’s one the jury are to rely on subjective opinion. Moreover, even direct evidence was not considered properly. Unfortunately, such items as gloves, socks and the knife attracted scant notice of the jury. However, if all the evidence had been analyzed carefully, the final verdict would have been different (Dershowitz 31).
Witnesses and their closing arguments. There were fifteen prosecution witnesses while the number of those of defense was half that big. There are closing arguments which are of particular significance. Marsha Clark, who was one of the principal prosecutors, appealed to Simpson’s motive and state of mind. She pointed out the main reason of a terrible murder – a stormy relationship which was based on the kind of force intended to hurt and damage. Christopher Darden, who was also a prosecutor, pointed out Simpson’s emotionality. He stated that the defendant was out of control. His emotions and behavioral pattern were destructive. However, the most interesting closing argument was represented by Johnnie Cochran, Simpson’s lawyer. Cochran’s speech was mostly related to the problem of race discrimination. He affirmed that Simpson was not guilty. The lawyer said that Mark Fuhrman, a detective who found “The Juice’s” glove was a real racist. During cross-examination, a detective was asked about his attitude to African-Americans. Fuhrman said he did not use the word “nigger” for a long time, but defense witnesses demonstrated a videotape contradicting the affirmation. A videotape was played in a court.
The trial of the century is really rather complicated, although it is clear that the verdict “not guilty” is based on racial prejudices. The only reasonable argument of Simpson’s lawyer was Fuhrman’s attitude to “niggers”, but important direct evidence was neglected. Moreover, one is to keep in mind that it was the composition of the jury which impacted the end of the case. Hair evidence, fiber evidence, blood evidence, glove evidence, shoe evidence, the anamnesis of Simpson’s life and many other things were not given enough attention when making the final decision.
In 1997, Simpson was obligated to pay Goldman’s family $33.5 million. In 2007, “The Juice” was arrested for armed robbery. He was also charged with kidnapping. One of the most famous football players was condemned to thirty three years’ imprisonment. In my opinion, the latest events prove Simpson’s criminal nature. Keeping in mind all the psychological aspects, it becomes evident that Simpson’s guilt is undisputable. The leading running back avoided the death penalty due to his lawyer Johnnie Cochran. A well-known American lawyer not only participated in the jury selection process, but appealed to their national consciousness. It was the kind of non-losing manipulation which brought freedom to O.J. In 2007, Orenthal James Simpson got his comeuppance. In 2005, “The Juice’s” lawyer dead from a brain tumor. It should be said in all fairness that the trial of the century ended thirteen years after it happened.