On CNN, Larry King told his viewers, "If we had God booked and O.J. was available, we'd move God."

Transcription

1 Prologue By Thomas L. Jones No one enters suit justly, no one goes to court honestly; they rely on empty pleas, they speak lies, they conceive mischief and bring forth iniquity. Isaiah 59: 4,9-11, In the beginning it was a double murder, and then it was a criminal trial that dominated public attention as the law tried its hardest to convict a man. A man who became perhaps the most famous criminal defendant in American history and so easily recognizable that people referred to him by his initials only. It went on for nine months. There were 11 lawyers representing the man in the dock and 25 working around the clock for the largest prosecutor's office in the country. It became the most publicized case in US history. It was the longest trial ever held in California, costing over $20 million to fight and defend, running up 50,000 pages of trial transcript in the process. There were 150 witnesses called to give evidence before a jury that was sequestered at the Hotel Intercontinental in downtown L.A. from January until October. Half way through the trial, the presiding judge, who could so easily have wandered into the whole thing from Alice in Wonderland, decided they needed some recreation and arranged for them to go sightseeing in a Goodyear blimp. For added measure he sent them to the theater and on a boat trip to Catalania Island as well. No movie or television courtroom drama would have dared to unfold the way this one did, and it was not without coincidence that it evolved in Los Angeles, so often referred to by cynics as "La La Land," the only place in the world where you look for culture in yogurt cups. The rest of the country became obsessed with the empty, celebrity-dominated West Los Angeles backdrop to the crime. On CNN, Larry King told his viewers, "If we had God booked and O.J. was available, we'd move God." The case received more media coverage and was accompanied by more unadulterated hype than any other criminal trial since the Lindbergh kidnapping-murder case in New Jersey in the 1930s, even exceeding the notorious Manson Family trial of the early 1970s. The media influence, in fact, became so intense that one poll showed 74% of Americans could identify Kato Kaelin but only 25% knew who Vice President was. An incredible 91% of the television viewing audience watched it and an unbelievable 142 million people listened on radio and watched television as the verdict was delivered. One study estimated that U.S. industry lost more than $25 billion as workers turned away from their jobs to follow the trial.

2 2000 reporters covered the trial. 121 video feeds snaked out of the Criminal Courts building where it was held. There were over 80 miles of cable servicing 19 television stations and eight radio stations. 23 newspaper and magazines were represented throughout the trial, the Los Angeles Times itself publishing over 1000 articles throughout the period. Over 80 books and thousands of articles have already been published, authored seemingly by everyone with any role in the trial. But why did America go stir-crazy over O.J. Simpson and the "Trial of the Century"? When the events began to unfold, the lead actor in the greatest soap opera to fascinate the American public in the twentieth century was hardly that important. He had admittedly been a famous professional football star, considered by some to have been one of the greatest running backs in American football history. He had won the Heisman Trophy as the nation's top college football player in 1968 and his NFL records, mainly secured in his career with the Buffalo Bills, included most rushing yards gained in one season, most rushing yards gained in a single game and most touchdowns scored in a season. But he had retired in 1979 and drifted into a mediocre to modestly successful career in sports broadcasting and minor movie roles. He was best known as the spokesman for Hertz Rental Cars. When Nicole Brown, his second wife, first met him, she had no idea who he was. When the lead prosecutor against him was approached by a LAPD detective for help in getting a search warrant on a property owned by O.J., she asked the police officer, "Who is O.J. Simpson? Phil, I'm sorry, I don't know him." Yet all three major television networks plus CNN covered the story of his trial in massive detail. A murder trial involving victims known only to their family and friends and a defendant called Simpson, who was less known and recognizable than Bart Simpson, became an epic of media overkill. If all of this was not enough, the brutal murder of two innocent victims spawned a legal mud fight that questioned the competence of just about everyone involved and created a schism between the black and white population that a CNN poll estimated may have set back race relations in the US by 30 years. To many, particularly in minority communities, the trial of Orenthal James Simpson became not so much a determination of his guilt or innocence of murder in the first degree, beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether or not a black man could find justice in a legal system designed by and largely administered by whites. To others, many of whom were white, the key question was whether a mostly minority jury would convict a black celebrity regardless of the weight of evidence against him. To others, the tragic deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman always seemed stage left, as the man on trial for their murders commanded center stage in his fight to prove bigotry and racism were the real issues on trial, using a pack of slick lawyers willing to circumnavigate the parameters of legal etiquette and acceptable courtroom manners to achieve their objectives, transforming their client, an accused double murderer, into some kind of political prisoner. Gloves, Shoes, Fibers and Hairs It is conceivable that the leather gloves were the Rosetta stone of the Simpson murder trial. One was discovered at each of the two crime scenes. Of all the physical evidence that had been gathered and catalogued that day, the gloves were, perhaps, the most tangible. There was also a terrible irony in the

3 fact that they may have been purchased by a woman as a gift for her husband, who then used them in the commission of her murder. They were unique articles of apparel and the prosecution had linked together an imposing evidence chain connecting them to the defendant. The gloves were dark brown leather, cashmere lined, size extra large. Manufactured by Aris Gloves, a subsidiary of Consolidated Food Corporation, the Isotoner Lights brand, style number 70263, were part of a small batch of only 300 pairs that had been sold exclusively by Bloomingdale's Department Store on 3rd Avenue in New York between 1989 and The store sold 240 pairs and returned the rest to the manufacturer. On December 20th, 1990, Nicole Brown Simpson had purchased two pairs of these gloves for $110. The gloves had a distinctive stitching and V pattern in the palm and were very identifiable. The prosecution assembled press photographs and videotapes of O.J.Simpson wearing this type of leather gloves during football game telecasts in 1993 and On April 3rd, the prosecution produced evidence that the glove found behind the bungalow on Simpson's Rockingham estate had a mixture of blood from Nicole, Goldman and Simpson. On June 15th, Christopher Darden called Richard Rubin to the stand. The former vice-president and general manager of Aris Gloves testified that the gloves were part of a batch sold to Bloomingdale's, New York. He measured Simpson's hand and estimated it to be size large to extra large. The police had already established this and had found three pairs of gloves in this size in Simpson's belongings. The prosecution team had arranged a trial run earlier in the day using Detective Phil Vannatter to try on a pair of identical gloves. His hands and fingers were as long and thick as Simpson's, and the gloves slid on easily. Rather than wait for the defense to beat him to it, Darden made the decision to have a demonstration with Simpson trying on the gloves. Simpson trying on the glove Cochran, however, insisted that his client wear latex gloves and he would attempt to slip the brown leather gloves on over these. Caught in full by the television cameras in the courtroom, Simpson was seen struggling to get the gloves on, saying, "They're too tight." When asked later why the gloves failed to fit his client, Johnnie Cochran said, " I don't think he could "act" the size of his hands. He would be a great actor if he could "act" his hands larger." Rubin subsequently testified that moisture had caused the extra large gloves to shrink a full size and later in the trial, Simpson again tried on a brand new pair of the Isotoner extra large gloves, which fitted perfectly. But it seemed that the damage was irretrievable.

4 Cochran would make much of the glove trial that went wrong. In his final summation to the jury, he said that the prosecution's case was slipping away as soon as they had his client try on the gloves. "You will always remember those gloves," he said "when Darden asked him to try them on and they didn't fitno matter what they do, they can't make them fit. The prosecution would do anything to contort and distort the fact, he reminded the jury as he repeated his theme, " If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." Interestingly enough, at least two of the jury who acquitted Simpson, were not that impressed with his performance that day. Juror #98, Carrie Bess, a postal worker, later stated, "Those gloves fit. He wasn't putting them on right... I do believe the gloves fit. I have no doubt about that. The glove demo didn't impress me at all. Not one iota." Marsh Rubin-Jackson, #984, also a postal worker, agreed. "Sure, you know they fitthey would have fit anybody," she said. On July 6th, the prosecution rested its case. There had been other evidence tying Simpson to the murders. The bloody footprints that led away to the back of the condominium were identified as being from a particular brand of shoes. William Bodziack, an FBI agent and one of the country's most foremost experts on shoe print impressions, testified that the prints were left by Bruno Magli shoes, style Lorenzo, incorporating a Silga sole with a waffle-type print. The footwear, manufactured in Italy, retailed for $160 per pair and was sold by only 40 retailers across America. In all, only 300 pairs of size 12 (Simpson's size) were ever sold. Only 9% of the population wore size 12. Simpson had denied ever owing a pair, calling them, "ugly-ass shoes." However, on September 26th, 1993, AP photographer Harry Scull Jr. had taken pictures of Simpson wearing these exact shoes at the Rich Stadium in New York. It didn't seem to impress the jury. Doug Deedrick, another FBI agent and a hair and fiber forensic expert, testified on the hairs found on Goldman's shirt and inside the knit cap discovered at the crime scene. He testified that the hairs on the cap and 12 hairs recovered from the shirt were consistent with the characteristics of Simpson's hair. He identified hair found on the Rockingham glove as compatible to Nicole's and Goldman's. He testified that blue/black cotton fibers found on Goldman's shirt matched the fibers in the socks found in Simpson's bedroom. He affirmed that cashmere fibers which were removed from the knit hat, matched with fibers from the glove lining. He had also examined fibers removed from the Ford Bronco and found that they matched fibers found on the glove discovered at Simpson's house and on the knit cap found at the crime scene. It didn't seem to impress the jury. One of the areas that did impress the jury revolved around evidence about EDTA. Fredric Reiders, a forensic toxicologist called by the defense, testified that EDTA was found on the sock in Simpson's bedroom and on a blood spot on the back gate of Nicole's condominium. According to Simpson's lawyers, this indicated that the blood had come from the vial of blood taken from their client at the Parker Center. Although EDTA is used to preserve blood in

5 laboratory testing, it is also found naturally in human blood, as well as in chemicals such as laundry detergent and paint. The prosecution pointed out that this easily explained its presence on a painted gate and an article of apparel. Dr. Cotton from Cellmark had also testified regarding EDTA used to stop the degradation of blood. When she had checked the autopsy blood taken from Nicole, she had found that it was more degraded than her matching blood found on the sock in the bedroom. Once blood has degraded, it is impossible to raise its DNA count. Under the defense's conspiracy theory, the blood on the sock had to have come from Nicole's autopsy vial, but this blood had a lower DNA count than her blood on the sock. In other words, it was fresher when it splashed onto Simpson's sock as he was killing her, than it was two days later when the coroner collected it. It is impossible for degraded blood to become fresh again, proving that Nicole's blood on the sock could not have been planted. The jury, however, could not get around how EDTA appeared on the sock and the gate, but not in the trail of blood spots that, according to the prosecution, had dripped from Simpson's injured finger as he left the crime scene. It also wondered how the DNA fingerprinting on the gate blood spot was higher than the other samples, especially when this blood had not been collected until 20 days after the murders. The jury could not figure out why this blood had not degraded after being exposed all those days under sun and rain So much of the "mountain of evidence" seemed to loose its credibility, either because the prosecution did a less than stellar job in preparing and presenting it, or because Simpson's lawyers were smooth enough to re-interpret it in such a way that they kept introducing reasonable doubt into the minds of the panel of jurists. It would have been interesting to see how the jury would have responded to the evidence the prosecution chose, for various reasons, not to offer, in addition to the evidence which was presented. Justice For the Dead The Government Wins When Justice is Done. Motto of the U.S. Justice Department. The criminal trial was over, but the law was not finished with Orenthal James Simpson. A year later on October 23rd, 1996, another trial began and once again, he was the defendant. Louis and Juditha Brown, Nicole's parents This time, the venue was the courthouse in Santa Monica. Before a jury of one black, one Hispanic, one Asian, and nine whites, a civil trial began to lay judgment again on him for the murders of Ronald Lyle Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson. In this civil suit filed by the Goldman and Brown families, Simpson could not invoke the Fifth Amendment and, unlike the criminal case, was forced to testify. Also, the standard of proof was a

6 lot easier than in the criminal case. There, guilt must be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt." In a civil case, guilt had only to be proven according to the "preponderance of the evidence", rather than "beyond a reasonable doubt." In other words its purpose is to decide whether it is more likely than not that the defendant committed the crime. On February 4th, 1997, the jury awarded $8.5 million in compensatory damages to Fred Goldman and his ex-wife Sharon Rufo for the loss of their son's love, companionship and moral support. A few days later, they brought in punitive damages of $25 million to be shared between Nicole's children and Fred Goldman. The jury had considered for six days, after the four-month trial. It seemed a lot more deliberate than the five hours it took the criminal court jury to decide after over nine months of testimony. Fred Goldman, a pathfinder in the legal attack against Simpson, told reporters that Tuesday evening, "We finally have justice for Ron and Nicole. Our family is grateful for a verdict of responsibility." It seemed at long last that judgment had finally been observed. The money of course, was never paid out. Simpson's lawyer, Robert Baker, told the jury that Simpson was broke, with a negative net worth of $856,157, down from a net positive worth of $10 million. He owed lawyer fees, back taxes of $685, to the IRS, and mortgage repayments, and in effect was without assets. It appears unlikely that anyone will ever get anything of any consequence. Simpson would go about living out his life on the income from a $4 million pension fund established when he was playing football. This would bring him in more than $20,000 dollars every month, and could not be touched by the courts. Not a bad life-style for most people, but way below the heady days of his wine and roses period. The Simpson children Simpson moved to a $1.5 million house in Kendall, Florida with his son and daughter. After the civil trial, Nicole's parents launched a bitter custody battle, which they lost in His move was a shrewd one. Under the laws of California, any money he acquired can be seized to pay the damages awarded against him in the civil trial. In Florida the law is different. Simpson recently told a journalist, Caroline Graham, "They can't touch my earnings here. And it will be a cold day in hell before I pay a penny." In due course, the mortgagee, Hawthorne Estates, repossessed his Rockingham estate, which was auctioned off on November 29th, 1997, for a little under $3.9 million and subsequently demolished by the buyer to make way for an even grander Brentwood palace. Simpson had borrowed heavily against his house to help fund his huge legal bills, and hadn't met his very large mortgage payments.

7 Interest in Simpson faded, and the murder and trials were relegated to the writers and commentators to analyze, dissect and ruminate over. There was plenty of comment that surfaced from members of the jury after the trial was over. Marsha Rubin-Jackson said, " If a lot of evidence had been brought out, for instance the diaries that contained examples of abuse and the evidence in the Bronco after the chase, I would have given that a lot more thought." Armanda Cooley, the lady selected as the foreperson, had also been concerned about the presentation of evidence, saying, "I felt Mr. Simpson was guilty when the prosecutors were putting on their case... I changed my thinking when I heard evidence about the glove... another episode that changed my mind was... the picking up of evidence weeks later... the results were so much different... the DNA content being so much different." She also commented, "Based on the evidence that was presented... a lot pointed to Mr. Simpson's guilt... because we had no direct evidence... I had no alternative but to think he was not guilty. There were many questions that were not answered." Perhaps the most pertinent commentary came from juror Carrie Bess: "As far as I'm concerned, Mr. Simpson would have been behind bars if the police work had been done properly." Her views were shared by Peter Bozanitch, an Assistant District Attorney, who summed up the LAPD's handling of the investigation with some irony," I've been working with the LAPD for 25 years -- this is by far the best work they've ever done! This is the best they've ever done; this is their crowning achievement." By the time it was all over, it had long ceased to be about law and order and justice served, and instead had become about voyeurs feasting on and being titillated by the complex life-styles and tragedies of people whose lives, loves and, ultimately, deaths simply served up a special brand of entertainment to help a bored audience get through the day.