Originally published October 27, 1995, in Comics Buyer’s Guide #1145
(A promise to readers: The following will, ultimately, have something to do with comics. I swear.)
There’s a truism on the Internet which states that if any argument, thread or flame war continues long enough, sooner or later Hitler will be brought up. Conversely, if Hitler is brought up, then that’s a signal to all concerned that the argument has gone on long enough and it’s time to end it.
So it came as no surprise to me when Johnnie Cochrane compared Mark Furhman to Adolf Hitler. In a way, it was inevitable.
It also came as no surprise to me when the jury acquitted O.J. Simpson. At first I thought that the rapid turnaround meant a guilty verdict, but I suddenly had a gut feeling they’d kick him loose seconds before they did so.
There’s a California consistency to it all. The Rodney King cops walked (at least at the state level). The Menendez brothers got a hung jury. O.J. Simpson, after a case costing taxpayers somewhere around $8 million, got off. If Susan Smith had pushed her kids into the Pacific, she’d probably be a free woman today. The only person out there in a high profile case that the law managed to nail was Heidi Fleiss.
And let’s face it: Anyone can nail Heidi Fleiss, and for a lot less than $8 million. Talk about bang for your buck…
Do I think Simpson did it? Sure, I do. So do some of the jurors, according to early reports. Let’s not kid ourselves. We’ve got a verified wife batterer who tells his best friend he dreams of killing his ex; an ex-wife who tells her sister that ex-hubby’s going to kill her and get away with it. By amazing coincidence, the murder occurs just before he goes out of town, which reads to me like a clumsy attempt to stage an alibi. (How could he do it so fast? Well, you don’t win the Heisman trophy by being slow, do you?)
And if it were me and the police wrongly suspected me… and I had a ton of money… I wouldn’t just offer a reward for “information leading to the arrest,” as he did. Hëll, I’d be busy hiring every private detective in town and putting them on the case to not only clear my name, but find the cretin who’d killed the mother of my kids. I wouldn’t be leaping into my car and heading for Mexico.
To me, it easily passes the duck test (namely if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are really good it’s a duck.)
Then again, what I think doesn’t matter, any more than a pitched baseball that’s right down the middle… and the umpire says it’s a ball, not a strike. Whether it really was a strike is irrelevant; it is now, in fact, a ball.
In any event, the question becomes: What conclusions can be drawn from all this?
1) Everyone can be a racist. You, me, anyone. Everyone looks down on Mark Furhman and his extensive use of “the N-word” (“Narf?”), but really, you can be a racist in your very own home and with no trouble at all. All it takes is for you to have held the following opinion at any time: This jury will never convict him because nine out of the twelve are black, and they wouldn’t convict one of their own.
This is, of course, a worldview unsupported by actual jury practices in far less sensational cases than this. It’s a racist statement, founded on the notion that people couldn’t convict because their skin color would blind them to the truth or make them unwilling to jail a popular member of the black community.
Unfortunately, disproving the sentiment wasn’t helped by the verdict.
I can’t help but feel that if the defendant had been Steve Garvey, accused of killing Cindy, he’d be packing his bags for San Quentin about now whether the jury was white, black, Hispanic or Martian. Then again, y’never know.
2) Racism can be your friend. Some people believe that no weapon used for committing the murder was ever found. They’re wrong. The murder weapon was the smoking gun that Furhman left behind in the form of the taped interviews.
O.J. Simpson owes his freedom to the most despised cop in America. That’s tremendously ironic. The taint on Furhman spread, like E. bola, throughout the entire prosecution case. When the prosecution starts badmouthing its own witness, that’s never a good sign. Racism was held up (as it properly should be) as an evil, vindictive mind set. But if there were no racism in this country, one of the linchpins of the defense would have been removed. Without racism, Simpson is likely in jail for good. Talk about your double-edged swords.
3) I sure wouldn’t want to be a black defendant right about now. Don’t think for one minute that this case is going to improve whatever inequities blacks may face in the criminal court system. Because I will bet’cha… I’ll just bet’cha… that the attitude of judges (particularly white judges) in this country is going to be, “Counselor, don’t you dare trying playing that racism card in my courtroom. Your client isn’t getting off just because he’s black.” And I daresay that most other cops, if they’re racist, are not going to be so cooperative as to leave taped evidence to undercut their credibility.
4) Riot concerns run along race lines. There was worry that if Simpson were convicted, the black community would go berserk. When he was found not guilty, no one seemed alarmed that the white community was going to flip out. I can just see whites rioting in Beverly Hills. Charging into stores in Rodeo Drive, grabbing outfits off the racks, running up their Platinum Amex cards, and then taking 90 days to pay instead of 30 because that’s how angry they are.
5) Law works better on TV than in real life. On TV, questioning a witness takes five minutes, tops. The summations are way shorter and a lot punchier. No one on TV stops, stammers, repeats themselves, or says “Uhhh” incessantly.
6) The best defense lawyers are bald white guys. Wait… excuse me. That’s what we can conclude from watching Murder One. Forget it.
7) Comic book endings are more exciting. Because if the trial had a comic book ending, then what would happen next is that Ronald Goldman–his belief in the system of justice shattered–would put on a costume and take the law into his own hands. A gold plated costume perhaps, since his last name stands up to the comic book test of being convertible to a superhero name (“Once I was mere Ron Goldman but now I am… Gold Man!”) And the first guy he’d go after would be O.J. Simpson.
And speaking of comics, a comment by Mary McCool during a CompuServ discussion led me to thinking. It was an observation she made on a totally unrelated matter, but nonetheless it’s easily applicable to the Simpson case.
The jury found that Simpson was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (which is not the same as saying he was found innocent, but let’s leave that aside.) Nevertheless, what we do know beyond a reasonable doubt is that Simpson was not a nice guy. He was violent. So violent that he whacked around his wife, terrifying her so thoroughly that she had to ask for police intervention.
Now…
When some kid commits a violent crime, oftentimes the experts try to make a point of drawing cause-and-effect conclusions from other aspects of the kid’s life. This was the basis upon which Dr. Wertham tried to crucify comics: Juvenile delinquents read comic books, therefore the comics were instrumental in causing the juvenile delinquency.
It’s a mindset that rules to this day. You’ll see newspaper stories where some kid set a classmate on fire… and it’s reported that the kid read comics. Or (gasp!) played Magic or some role playing game. Or (shock! horror!) listened to rock music.
And these “connections” have formed the basis for much of the persecution and harassment that comic books and their entertainment brethren have undergone.
Well… let’s see what we’ve got here. O.J. Simpson: Wife beater. Suspected double-murderer by at least half the country’s population. And… football player.
Football. Football, barbaric in its ferocity. Football, a game where goals are accomplished through violent means. Run into your opponent. Knock them down. Knock them back. Knock them flat. See the gorgeous bouncing babes on the sidelines cheering you on as you display the full power of unbridled masculinity by seeing how fast you can run roughshod over others.
Football, where you violently penetrate into opposing territory to take what you want: A ball. A goal. (A life? Nah. Couldn’t be.) Early on in the case, the LAPD looked foolish when Simpson didn’t turn himself in as expected. They had to stand there at a press conference when Simpson became a fugitive from justice and say, with a straight face, “We didn’t think he would run.” The media had a field day with it. They didn’t think he would run? He’s a football player!! How could the police have not expected him to act like a football player, the media and pundits guffawed.
Let them chortle. But the clear conclusion–as valid as any similar conclusion about comic books–is that the game promotes, and leads to, violent tendencies. Not enough that grown men are doing it for a living. No, that’s not the worst of it.
The worst of it is that young people are in danger from it.
Right in the schools… in the schools… kids are being taught the game that was the career of choice for the country’s most renowned wife beater. It is entirely possible that we are breeding an entire generation of future wife beaters and potential murderers. Every kid in varsity or junior varsity… every young man who earns a football scholarship… they’re all in peril. They’re being taught that goals can be achieved through violent ends. They’re being taught that, when one has a problem, the solution is to run (just like O.J.) Juvenile quarterback today, juvenile delinquent tomorrow.
And not only does the demon specter of football haunt the schools, but it also invades the home.
To start off, there’s football on television. Children being exposed to hour after hour of men crashing into each other while thousands of fans cheer them on, like a modern day Roman coliseum. While the technical wizkids are busy preparing the V-chip to screen out sex and violence, they’d be well advised to include football games as well.
And let’s not forget…
Sports Illustrated. A magazine that devotes a staggering percentage of its editorial space to covering football, the demon game. The sport of wife beaters. (To say nothing of boxing, the sport of convicted rapists.)
Even as we speak, kids are sneaking around, scarfing copies of Sports Illustrated their dads might have left lying around. Or… even worse… going to a newsstand and buying it themselves.
Why? Because this bible of unholy violence is available at kid-populated havens such as 7-11s where innocent children might be seduced away from harmless periodicals (like Spawn) to magazines that celebrate real-life symphonies of sadism. Football players, who are cheered, worshipped, put on trial and kicked loose.
My God, even a five year old could pick up a copy of SI and thumb through it. There’s no labels on it. Nothing to indicate the intense maturity of the subject matter, or warnings that exposure to images of football could lead to battering and multiple homicides. And most pernicious of all–and correct me if I’m wrong–isn’t there now a Sports Illustrated for Kids?!
As opposed to the relatively paltry number of kids who read comics, we have millions of kids exposed to televised football. Hundreds of thousands participating in school-sponsored teams, leagues, and even neighborhood pick-up games.
We must take up arms before it’s too late. Call in the psychiatrists. Rally the experts. Ready the congressional hearings. Call Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich and that woman in North Dakota. We must protect our children from the growing threat of football. Because who knows where such interests, left unattended, could lead? Violence? Murder?
Another nine-month trial with accompanying media circus?
Stop it now, I say. Stop it… before it’s too late.
(Peter David, writer of stuff, can be written to at Second Age, Inc., PO Box 239, Bayport, NY 11705. Coming soon from Steven Bocho: Murder First and Ten, a 22-episode series that focuses on just one football game.)
• 
Amazing how relevant these columns continue to be, and how the seem to be archived here in an order that lends itself to timely parallels with current issues.
.
In the light of the Casey Anthony verdict, one wonders if Florida is becoming a twin of California.
Don’t forget the swimsuit issue. Smut!
Plus there have been several high profile California cases since then where the celebrities have walked away from serious crimes. It’s like LA is the anti-Texas.
.
The only person of note that I can think of off hand who was actually convicted was Phil Spector. And look at the case they had to have: it happened in his house; he was quoted as saying, “I think I killed someone” during the 911 call; they has testimony from other women stating that he threatened them at gun point; and he had a mug shot that made him look like Riff Raff. And even THEN the first trial wound up with a hung jury. For a while there it seemed as if the ghost of Lana Clarkson had materialized in the court room stating “He killlled me,” he’d still have walked free.
.
PAD
And then there was Robert Blake. “I had gone back into the restaurant to get my gun.” was his alibi!
.
LA really sucks at prosecuting celebrities.
Some anonymous cop in Britain tried to blame video games for the rioting. There’s always a scapegoat.
.
And yet, it’s interesting that the violence of football is brought up. I don’t recall whether it was discussed during the trial. Yes, there are any number of examples of football players being violent people in general. There are any number of examples of nice guys, too, so I’m not really sure if it has any more of an effect on somebody than rock music, video games, or D&D.
.
But – and this came up briefly the other day on a radio show I listen to – you wonder now about the effects of football that, 15 years ago, were undetectable.
.
Effects that even now are not fully quantifiable until the athlete dies and his brain is cut into little slices to be examined under a microscope.
.
Chronic traumatic encephalopathy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopathy
.
It’s basically early dementia in athletes caused by the playing of their sport. Football players banging their helmets together for years. Hockey players taking shots to the head (and perhaps due to fighting). Even soccer players from taking headers.
.
In studies that have been done so far on the living, those *without* concussions are possibly even getting more CTE-causing damage to their brains, because a concussion forces you to sit out and heal.
.
But with a situation like OJ, you can’t help but wonder if football has in some way done this to him. Not because football causes players to be violent, but because violent collisions in football have done something to his brain. Usually (but not always; see: Chris Henry) the effects don’t manifest until years after the player is done playing the sport.
That reminds me of an exchange from Friends, in which Phoebe wonders why it’s not “Spiderman,” like “Phil Spiderman,” and Chandler has to explain that it’s not his last name, using the name Goldman (and the lack of a “Gold Man”) as an example, from which Phoebe concludes that there should be a Gold Man, whose power is to turn things into gold. So now we have a secret identity for Gold Man! It’s perfect, because no one would ever suspect Ron Goldman, or that he’d use his last name for his costumed identity.
See, I have no problem with the “not proven beyond a reasonable doubt” thing, because I’m familiar with LA traffic.
.
Consider: The window of time for the crime would be very limited – Simpson had to be back at his estate in time to catch the limo for his commercial shoot in Chicago (recall that by this point commercials and the occasional movie were his only source of income). The theory of the crime, propounded by the prosecution, was that Simpson snuck out the back of his estate, through his neighbor’s place (without his neighbor’s dogs barking, which seems improbable enough), got into his car (parked out front), sped through the LA metroplex of a Monday evening, hid outside his ex-wife’s condo for a period of time on the off-chance she might come out (remember that forensic evidence suggests her plans for the evening involved a warm bath and a pint of ice cream, and that she only came to the door because Mr. Goldman was returning the glasses she had left at the restaurant he worked at earlier that evening), then, when he saw her, leapt out of the bushes, taking both of them by such surprise that neither had time to shout, slit their throats (with surprising precision, given that he had never, to the best of my knowledge, either studied anatomy or worked in a butcher shop), somehow avoided getting covered with blood in the process, got back into his car, sped back across LA, snuck back across fences into his own backyard, and got cleaned up in time to catch his limo.
.
Anyone who has had occasion to drive through Los Angeles should be well aware that the traffic never dies down – it’s pretty busy out there, especially on the freeways, at 3 am! – and that it only takes one stupid person to bring traffic to a halt across a wide area. If Simpson were intelligent enough to figure out how to commit this crime without literally bathing in the evidence, he should also have been intelligent enough to know that there was a fairly high probability that he’d never make it back in time. That right there should be more than enough to hang your “reasonable doubt” on.
.
(His actions afterward are consistent with someone who is suffering from depression, whether situational or chronic – my wife is chronically depressive, and when she’s at her low end, she often makes irrational decisions.)
.
Now, I’m not saying he didn’t do it – but I do consider it far more probable that if Simpson really wanted his ex dead that badly, he’d probably hire someone to do it for him.
.
(The Anthony verdict happened because the prosecutor apparently didn’t have any actual evidence to prove Ms. Anthony was anything worse than a bad parent who was easily manipulated by idiots, so he based his prosecution on the argument, “Well, she sure looks guilty, don’t she?”)
Right now, yours truly is suffering from situational depression. I’m sick to my stomach, feel like I sold my soul to the devil and that I am going to die with no legacy at all. (That’s the short version. Long and boring version: http://xanthi-rising.blogspot.com/ ) Sorry to bother ye folks, but venting (to a bunch of strangers) is the only thing keeping me from hurling right now. Ignore me and have a nice day.
Well, I hope venting helped. Feel better?
.
PAD
Well, I hope venting helped. Feel better?
Yes, I do. Thank you.
I would have responded to your blog, but I couuldn’t figure out the form; it wasn’t in English.
Doh ! I go through the trouble of writing my blog in English, only to mess up the settings. Thanks for heads-up, John. (By the way, Mr David, could you make Doh a really nasty word in Klingon ? Something that would make you end up at the wrong end of a Klingon weapon ? [Of course, then it would have to be spelled Do’H ! Or something like that.])
Johnathan,
.
I have only a passing familiarity with the case due to not being able to avoid it back when it was happening. There are several places where your version of these events doesn’t jibe with my memory, but I’ll just point out what I consider to be the most important thing. The evidence strongly suggested that Simpson did not actually manage to commit the crimes without getting blood all over him. Blood from Nicole, Mr. Goldman and Simpson were all found in his car shortly after the attack. Blood from various principles was also found at the scene and a trail of blood drops Simpson’s car to his house. I can’t remember details well enough to say more than that I distinctly remember that blood from all three of them was in his car, but I remember thinking how dámņìņg that alone was. I realize that the close time-line was the excuse that the jury used to acquit him, but to think that the acquittal was proper they had to believe one or both of the following things.
.
1. DNA testing is unreliable as a means of identifying people.
2. Simpson was framed by a conspiracy of the LAPD, the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office and the whatever portion of the city/county that did the actual testing.
but to think that the acquittal was proper they had to believe one or both of the following things.
.
1. DNA testing is unreliable as a means of identifying people.
.
As hard as it is to imagine now, when post-“CSI” juries expect DNA evidence for every trial, there were indications that the OJ jury did not find the DNA evidence compelling. For many people, that trial was the first exposure to that type of evidence. The prosecution went to great lengths to establish its legitimacy, but it was unfamiliar and highly technical. As a result, it was hard for the jury to properly assess its significance.
Yeah, I remember reading what Andy is saying too. And I remember how mad it made me. As someone familiar with the concept of DNA, I knew the evidence was very conclusive that OJ was the killer. But people with no grounding in science whatsoever were skeptical of it.
.
And I also remember that this trial and the later comments proved to me that Liberals can be as stupid as any Conservative. I remember some Libs arguing that you couldn’t type or even THINK that OJ was guilty, because a court of law found him not guilty.
.
I suppose those are the people that would hire Michael Jackson as a babysitter.
David Hunt sez:
I realize that the close time-line was the excuse that the jury used to acquit him, but to think that the acquittal was proper they had to believe one or both of the following things.
[…]
2. Simpson was framed by a conspiracy of the LAPD, the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office and the whatever portion of the city/county that did the actual testing.
In fact, David, the premise put forth by the defense was actually more ludicrous than some rapper named Bridges 🙂 It was Simpson was framed by a conspiracy of racists in the LAPD, the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office, and the LA County Crime lab and Medical Examiner’s Office. Oh and independent of that conspiracy, their competency sucked. So, you either had a conspiracy of racists AND a confederacy of dunces, when it should have been OR. Makes about as much sense as there being a “real killer” in this case.
As someone familiar with the concept of DNA, I knew the evidence was very conclusive that OJ was the killer. But people with no grounding in science whatsoever were skeptical of it.
.
Hard to believe that some Americans were willing to reject hard science in favor of essentially gut belief.
.
On second thought, not so hard. Pretty common, actually.
.
PAD
Any kind of OJ conspiracy would be peanuts compared to the effort it took to cover up Obama’s birth or the fact that we didn’t land on the moon 😉
Jonathan (the other one)said “…slit their throats (with surprising precision, given that he had never, to the best of my knowledge, either studied anatomy or worked in a butcher shop)…”
.
.
my vague (and quite likely imperfect) recollections include something about a TV pilot about Navy SEALS that OJ was involved in and the prosecution alleging that OJ had been asking a lot of questions of the expert consultants so he’d know just how to sneak up on a target and garrote them/slice their throats.
Jonathan (the other one) wrote, Anyone who has had occasion to drive through Los Angeles should be well aware that the traffic never dies down – it’s pretty busy out there, especially on the freeways, at 3 am! – and that it only takes one stupid person to bring traffic to a halt across a wide area. If Simpson were intelligent enough to figure out how to commit this crime without literally bathing in the evidence, he should also have been intelligent enough to know that there was a fairly high probability that he’d never make it back in time. That right there should be more than enough to hang your “reasonable doubt” on.
Well, considering the fact that the chase that OJ led police on seemed to show very little traffic in the lanes heading the other direction, I’m not sure your time frame is all that accurate. According to Wiki, OJ was spotted on the 405 after 6pm ON A FRIDAY (at least, according to the calendar I’m looking at, June 17, 1994 was a Friday). The chase is available on YouTube (from various sources) and I just don’t see the volume you’re talking about.
I just came from LA. I had the occasion to make the drive from Anaheim to Los Angeles a couple of times. During the day it took between an hour and a quarter and an hour and a half. Nighttime? Forty minutes.
.
PAD
Several years ago, I heard private investigator William Dear on the radio talking up his book, OJ Is Guilty, But Not of Murder. He made a decent argument for OJ’s older son, Jason, being the killer. His assertion was that OJ helped Jason cover it up, and his behavior was designed to draw suspicion to himself, determining that, since he didn’t commit the murders, he couldn’t and wouldn’t be found guilty.
.
Never read the book and not sure I buy the theory, but, at least from what I heard on the radio, it was an an interesting one.
.
–Daryl
I read it, , it does put forth a credible theory that Jason suffered from “blackouts” if he were enraged. But actually proving he was actually the murderer is something different
Another case of interesting timing on these posts, with just the opposite happening. Today the West Memphis Three, who were convicted of murder with no evidence against them, finally walked free.
Although they had to sign a document admitting their guilt to do so.
The way I understand it, this was a circumstantial plea, and if the real killers are ever found, their convictions would be set aside without any need for new hearings or re-trials.
.
It’s still better than the alternative of Echols dying by lethal injection and Baldwin dying behind bars.
MURDER ONE, oh yes. I’ve watched that at least half a dozen times, start to finish. If only more of tv’s products were of this caliber. What a series! Until the studio screwed it into the ground in the second season by forcing unnecessary changes. Get rid of the Hoffman character? Madness! Change the format? Crazy.
I liked the first season of MURDER ONE (love Daniel Benzali’s defnese attorney privately tearing into his client for stupid and irresponsible behavior — then in the next scene telling the court how his client is an upstanding citizen and valued member of the community)… until the last episode. (Spoiler — if you consider the last episode of a show that aired 11 years ago spoiler-worthy.) They go through the intricate ins and outs of a murder trial, offering up various people and the impact the trial has on them, and vice versa — and in the end there’s a frickin’ VIDEOTAPE of the murder? We go through all the ambiguities and strategies, only to be given PROOF at the end??? To me, it was a huge letdown.
I don’t remember where I first saw/heard this, but I love the statement: The LAPD is so inept that it couldn’t even successfully frame a guilty man.
.
Jonathan, I too lived in LA during the OJ era. While I see your point about the traffic, I think the only dependable thing about LA traffic is that it’s perversely unpredictable. I don’t see a problem with the timeframe shown.
.
My big memory (and I may have shared this before) is the following. Young Tim, teaching ninth grade and about to give a quiz:
.
“Mr. Lynch, can we take a break during the quiz to watch the verdict come in?”
“Let me think about it. No.”
“But this is the trial of the century!”
“No. Nuremberg was the trial of the century. Some ex-football star hacking up his wife — excuse me, allegedly hacking up his wife — isn’t even close.”
“Who was Nuremberg?”
.
Head, meet desk. Continue repeatedly.
.
Sigh.
Are you sure you didn’t say “let me think about it for a minute/moment. No”? And to be fair to the 9th grader, I didn’t know about Nuremberg until 12th grade. (You can “thank” the Utah Education system for that one.)
Are you sure you didn’t say “let me think about it for a minute/moment. No”?
.
Reasonably sure, but not 100% sure. Why? Unless you’re posting under a pseudonym, it’s not like you were there. 🙂
.
And I agree with your latter point … it was just sad. (The fact that at least half the class stared at him in disbelief was a bit of a consolation, though.)
Nuremberg? Wasn’t that the guy who created all the silly, over-engineered devices to do really simple things like flipping a switch?
hehehe
There was something that always bothered me about the case that Johnathan brought up and it was not the traffic but its the AMOUNT of blood in the pictures of the murder scene. If memory serves the alley the bodies where found in (sorry I am NOT googling those pics) was covered in blood and it looked like a slaughter house. How did Oj NOT get that blood on him and only get a drop in the car and if memory also serves didnt the LAPD only find a DROP on a sock in the house? Dont get me wrong OJ had something to do with the murders but either he had help or was covering for or protecting someone. I am sure any good proscuter could say he (off the top of my head) wore other clothes but OJ does not come across as a cold calculated killer. He seems more of the “typical” he has a temper blows up and does something with out thinking about it type person. I mean he did abuse his wife. From what I heard she was not all that innocent either. Any thoughts?
“From what I heard she was not all that innocent either. Any thoughts?”
.
Not that innocent of what? Double murder? What exactly is it you heard she had done that would in even the slightest possible way make it reasonable to make that statement?
“From what I heard she was not all that innocent either.”
.
Meaning what? She deserved what she got? Because she what? Allegedly did drugs and dated other people after they were divorced?
.
Nicole in no way deserved this. By most accounts she was a loving mother and had many friends and was pretty much leaving O.J. the hëll alone. THAT’s what pushed him to the breaking point. It’s the typical “If I can’t have her no one will” attitude of extremely sick, insecure men.
I agree. Dude, it was awful the first time to hear some people say she somehow deserved.
.
The only thing that was even more horrible were some PC áššhølëš saying it was a blow for racial equality in America. No, it wasn’t, it was just a scumbag getting away with murder.
The phrase I recall being used was “white man’s justice.”. The concept that there are built in inequities in the system wherein a white man has advantages that those of a darker hue do not. To those with that world view, innocence and guilt were beside the point. Instead all that mattered was that the scales of justice had been tilted against minorities for so long that, if an injustice was done here, it was a drop in the bucket against all the injustices done against blacks who couldn’t afford the best lawyers.
.
What I remember most was the observation by lawyers that there were people sitting on death row who had been convicted on a fraction of the evidence that had been arrayed against O.J. How many of them were black, I don’t know. But considering the recorded inequities in terms of how capital punishment is doled out along racial lines, you see the basis for the attitude. I’m not saying I agree with it, but I understand it.
.
PAD
,.
PAD
I also understand the basis for it, and I think it’s rotten to the core, since no one with any moral sense can consider human lives as drops in a bucket.
.
It’s the same kind of moral bankrupcy as when the Right talks of acceptable collateral damage in a “just” war. Worse, because the killings of Nicole and her boyfriend had nothing to do with race. It’s not like they were Klan members that had attacked OJ or something. It was just a creepy jealous ex-husband going berserko.
.
I’ve read an interview at the time with some intellectual that kept talking of civil rights, and black rights, and the reporter asked him “What about Nicole’s rights?” And the intellectual was very dismissive of it. Shameful, very shameful.
.
(Not attacking you, PAD. You’ve said you don’t agree with it.)
And let’s not forget many blacks had frothing at the mouth hatred for Nicole because she WAS white, blonde, stunning.
.
I rememember one black reporter exclaiming, when we were discussing the case, “You think I care about that white bìŧçh?” The resentment many black women have of black men, who, once successful, seek out white women “because they think they are better is one of the great unspoken topics in our culture.
.
But the sinister truth is if this had been O.J. accused of doing the same things to his first wife, Marguerite, who is black, the trial would not have taken nearlt as long and those same jurors would have nailed him to the wall.
Well, to be completely honest, I bet a lot of whites also wouldn’t have cared if some black dude killed his black wife, they only cared because the victims were white and the killer black.
.
The disgusting thing is that there were áššhølëš in all sides of the argument. The bottom line was that two innocent people were killed by a creep. The race of all the individuals involved shouldn’t have overshadowed that fact. Sadly, it did.
I don’t think it was the fact that a black guy killed a white woman that made people take notice. I think it was because it was OJ Simpson. There are murders every day that have killers and victims in every racial combination possible but most don’t make the national news. It isn’t a coincidence that the one that did involved a celebrity.
True, Bill.
.
But it was the racial combination that caused people to become so much more worked up about it, IMO.
I have to agree with Rene here. That the defendant had been a somewhat famous football player and had even garnered some new fans in the “Naked Gun” films may have played a part in it. But there are celebrity/high-profile cases all the time. Robert Blake, William Kennedy Smith. That he was black and she was white and beautiful and blonde, plus the savagery of the murders, plus that and “innocent” friend was involved in the person of Ron Goldman, played a HUGE part in making it a case that truly did hit people’s trip wires and captivated the nation.
A few thoughts:
I have the impression that in the UScriminal justice system, it’s better to be the defendant than the victim. If word is to be believed, we might hget another example tomorrow.
Sometimes, life imitates artin a most satisfying way: after being the subject of a Law & Order episode based on his attempt to publish a book on his alleged crime, OJ Simpson was convicted for another crime (although, just like in this episoe, one could wonder if the jury convicted him for that crime of the murders).
It’s always better to be the defendant than the victim. The victim’s dead.
Sometimes, he or she can still be alive. And let’s not forget victim’s relatives. And it turns out I was right. Alas.
I just want to mention that the reason there seemed to be little traffic during OJ’s attempted drive to Mexico to shoot himself was that people were pulling over to the side of the road to wave at OJ as he drove past.
My film instructor just told the story of how he was riding his motorcycle down an LA road when suddenly all the cars around him pulled over to the side of the road.