O.J Simpson Case Study: Mug Head Shot of Simpson After His Arrest On June 17, 1994

O.
J Simpson Case
Study
Mug head shot of Simpson

after his arrest on June 17,
1994.
BRIEF HISTORY
The O. J. Simpson murder case (officially called
the People v. Simpson) was a criminal trial held
in Los Angeles County, California, Superior Court
from January 29, to October 3, 1995. in which
former American football star and actor O. J.
Simpson was charged with two counts of
murder following the deaths of his ex wife Nicole
Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman
in June 1994. The case has been described as the
most publicized criminal trial in American
history. Simpson was acquitted after a lengthy
trial that lasted over nine months—the longest
jury trial in California history.
Why was the O.J Simpson trial so
important
This trial was a farce from beginning to end. It cost
OJ and the state of California millions of dollars to
prosecute. He was guilty and everyone knew it, the
Lawyers, the judge and the jurors. But because he
was a big football star at the time, they all decided to
let him off scot free. The witness was either
unreliable, or the evidence was not allowed to be
presented in court. The criminal trial lasted for
months and was televised. This trial was or is being
used in law schools across the country. If you have
enough money it just goes to show justice can be
bought, or sold as in this case. It is also evident just
how unjust law can be.
A lot of people can’t help but to wonder, if this was

not OJ Simpson, the rich and famous celebrity, but
some guy from the wrong side of the track, defended
not by a half-dozen high priced lawyers, but by a hard
pressed public defender would the court be as
indulgent/ have a different perspective and verdict?
What was the main analytical technique
discussed in the murder trial?
>Technicians performed toxicology tests, mainly to detect the degeneration of blood
and EDTA (Ethylendiaminetetraacetic acid).
>An autopsy was also done on the bodies to determine their exact cause of death and
the weapon used.
>Due to the enormous amount of blood evidence, the most important and main test
involved in the case were that of genetic fingerprinting.
>The forensic laboratories used Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP)

and the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR).
>RFLP, the more accurate of the tests, is typically used when there is more blood
sample to work with, and is done by processing the DNA to produce autorads, which
show the length of polymorphic fragments. Investigators then examine the autorads
to see if any of the fragments match, and, depending on the number of matches,
determine the statistical likelihood of the DNA being the same as a suspect’s.
>PCR, on the other hand, is a faster but less reliable process that is typically used
>Hair and fiber analysis was also done. Hair analysis entails examining hairs
under a microscope to determine whether they are human, and then
comparing the known hair with a sample.
>In O.J. Simpson’s case, investigators also analyzed the racial characteristics
of each hair. Fiber analysis is accomplished similarly under a microscope,
examining the fiber to determine origin (natural or synthetic), colour, length,
diameter and other characteristics. Neither test, however, can individualize
evidence, and are usually only ancillary.
What arguments were brought up by the
defense and state’s lawyers?
>During closing arguments in the Simpson trial,
Cochran uttered the now famous phrase, "If it doesn't fit,
you must acquit." He used the phrase as a way to try to
persuade the jury that O.J. Simpson could not have
murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman,
because the murderer's gloves did not fit him.
>It was brought up that leather gloves shrink in water.
> The defense had to admit that lab test results of

various bloodstains were valid and proper, and it quickly
became clear that no blood had been "planted"
anywhere.
>After glove expert Richard Rubin demonstrated that

the bloody gloves could easily fit if latex gloves were
not put on first, defense lawyer Robert Baker avoided
asking Simpson to try them on.
>Plaintiff lawyers Daniel Petrocelli and Tom Lambert
brought in all the pertinent witnesses from the criminal
trial and took the jury through the evidence.
>DNA analysis of bloody socks found in Simpson's

bedroom proved this was Brown's blood. The blood
made a similar pattern on both sides of the socks.
>Defence medical expert Dr. Henry Lee of the

Connecticut State Police Forensic Science Laboratory
testified that the only way such a pattern could appear
was if Simpson had a "hole" in his ankle, or a drop of
blood was placed on the sock while it was not being
worn. Lee testified the collection procedure of the socks
could have caused contamination.
>The bloody footprints were identified by FBI shoe
expert William Bodziak as having been made by a pair of
extremely rare Bruno Magli shoes, of which it has been
reported that only 299 pairs were sold in the US.
>The large size 12 (305 mm) prints matched Simpson's

shoe size. In the criminal trial, Simpson defense attorneys
had said the prosecution had no proof Simpson had ever
bought such shoes, however then free-lance photographer
Harry Scull claimed to have found a photograph he had
taken of Simpson in 1993 that appeared to show him
wearing a pair of the shoes at a public event.
>Simpson's defense team claimed the photograph was

doctored, although other pre-1994 photos appearing to
show Simpson wearing Bruno Magli shoes were since
discovered and published
What lessons can we learn from this
case?
From the data collected, it is most likely that O.J. Simpson committed the
murder. However, Simpson was not found guilty when tried in court, and this
acquittal is generally attributed to the many mistakes made in the forensic part
of the investigation. While investigators acted correctly in many instances,
such as taking photos and notes, cordoning off the scene, only having the
appropriate professionals collect evidence and running the tests they did, too
many of the processes were fatally flawed.
O.J. Simpson’s case was a perfect example of how improper collection and
testing procedures can negatively affect a case. Had investigators been
better trained and less sloppy, O.J. Simpson would certainly be put behind
bars. However, this was not so, and O.J. walked away a free man with no
justice served to those he killed. It can be argued the only positive aspect of
his legacy is the reminder to all forensic investigators the consequences
that loom when a job is poorly done.
Discuss whether you agree or disagree with
the jury’s decision.
Not at all. There was a lot of evidence, more than enough actually, to put
O.J behind bars.
Although a few were unreliable, there were other valid ones.
The evidence are:
>African-American hair was found on Goldman's shirt.
>The gloves contained particles of hair consistent with Goldman's hair

and a cap contained carpet fibers consistent with fibers from Simpson's
Bronco.
>A knit cap at the crime scene contained African-American hair. Dark
blue cotton fibers were found on Goldman, and the prosecution
presented a witness who said Simpson wore a similarly-coloured sweat
suit that night.
> The left-hand glove found at Nicole Brown's home and the
right-hand glove found at Simpson's home proved to be a
match.
>Officers found arrest records indicating that Simpson was

charged with the beating of his wife Nicole Brown. Photos of
Brown's bruised and battered face from that attack were
shown.
>By the end of the criminal trial, national surveys showed

dramatic differences between most blacks and most whites
in terms of their assessment of Simpson's guilt.

O.J Simpson Case Study: Mug Head Shot of Simpson After His Arrest On June 17, 1994

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

O.J Simpson Case Study: Mug Head Shot of Simpson After His Arrest On June 17, 1994

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

O.J Simpson Case Study: Mug Head Shot of Simpson After His Arrest On June 17, 1994

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

O.

Mug head shot of Simpson

A lot of people can’t help but to wonder, if this was

>The forensic laboratories used Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP)

>It was brought up that leather gloves shrink in water.

> The defense had to admit that lab test results of

>After glove expert Richard Rubin demonstrated that

>DNA analysis of bloody socks found in Simpson's

>Defence medical expert Dr. Henry Lee of the

>The large size 12 (305 mm) prints matched Simpson's

>Simpson's defense team claimed the photograph was

>African-American hair was found on Goldman's shirt.

>The gloves contained particles of hair consistent with Goldman's hair

>Officers found arrest records indicating that Simpson was

>By the end of the criminal trial, national surveys showed

You might also like