Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

OUTRAGE

Five Reasons O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder

The O. J. Simpson Trial: The Jury

Information About the Author

I

IN THE AIR

What the Jurors probably knew

FINAL SUMMATION

THE WEAK VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

IV

THE TRIAL

THE INCREDIBLE INCOMPETENCE OF THE PROSECUTION

The defense Team

The media hype that converted the defense lawyers into “the Dream Team.”

  • The media accepted that Shapiro, Cochran, and Bailey were the very best lawyers in the country that money could buy. They were “the Dream Team,” “the best that money could buy”.

  • Bugliosi argues that the defense lawyers were hardly the "Dream Team" the media portrayed, because most of them had little or no experience trying murder cases.

  • The media made the defense attorneys in this case celebrities in their own right, though only Bailey was prior to the Simpson trial.

  • The jury’s viewing the defense attorneys as stars, the Dream Team, the best in the legal profession, most likely biased their perception of the evidence.

  • The “in the air” phenomenon made it so much easier, either consciously

or subconsciously, for the jury to give Simpson every benefit he was legally

entitled to, and then some.

Vincent Bugliosi, a former a Los Angeles County Deputy

District Attorney

His record in the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office:

  • 105 convictions out of 106 felony jury trials
  • 21 murder convictions without a single loss, including the prosecution of Charles Manson and other defendants accused of the seven Tate-LaBianca murders of August 9–10, 1969.

  • Although Manson did not physically participate in the murders at Sharon Tate's home, Bugliosi used circumstantial evidence to show that he had orchestrated the killings

  • Wrote a book about the Manson trial, a true-crime classic, called Helter Skelter.

  • In the final summation, Cochran and Scheck interrupted the two prosecutors an astounding seventy -one times.

“Yet Judge Ito, knowing that Cochran and Scheck were deliberately making frivolous objections to destroy the effectiveness of the prosecutors’ summations, did not once hold Cochran or Scheck in contempt of court , or even once admonish them to discontinue their outrageous conduct”.

The prosecutors did not show the slightest instinct for argumentation

  • When Cochran argued to the jury (concerning the failed glove demonstration), “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit” the prosecutors should have rebottled by saying:

“If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit?” Nothing fits better than DNA. DNA fits a person to the exclusion of all other people on the surface of the earth, better than any glove or any other item of clothing could possibly fit.

And “Mr. Cochran, with DNA tests putting your client’s blood at the murder scene you have the audacity to argue If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit”

The worst part of the prosecutors’ performance, “something that goes

beyond incompetence” was that they decided not to introduce such a great amount of very incriminating evidence against the defendant.

Evidence not introduced in the trial:

1. The suicide note Simpson wrote when he learned he was going to be charged with these murders. Yet this note, pointed in the direction of O.J.’s guilt

2. After the slow-speed chase of Simpson and his friend Al Cowlings in the latter’s Bronco, the police found in Simpson’s possession in the Bronco a gun, Simpson’s passport, a cheap disguise (a fake goatee and mustache), four pairs of folded socks, four T-shirts, two pairs of underwear and $ 8,750. Bugliosi “These items, of course, have guilt written all over them”. The jury never heard all this evidence

The fake goatee, fake mustache, bottle gum were purchased on May 27, 1994, just over two weeks prior to the murders. And just a few days after Nicole returned to Simpson earrings and a bracelet he had given her for her birthday, May 19, telling him their relationship was finally over.

Jury Composition:

Race: 9 Blacks, 1 Hispanics, 2 Whites

Sex: 10 Women, 2 Men

Education: 2 College Graduates, 9 High School Graduates, 1 Without Diploma

Other facts about the final jury:

(1) None regularly read a newspaper, but eight regularly watch tabloid TV shows,

(2) Five thought it was sometimes appropriate to use force on a family member,

(3) All were Democrats,

(4) Five reported that they or another family member have had a negative experience with the police,

(5) Nine thought that Simpson was less likely to be a murderer because

he was a professional athlete.

The typical incompetence displayed by the prosecutors

1. Prosecutors did not prepare their witnesses for cross-examination as

well as they should have. eg. Clark, trying to establish that Officer Robert Riske, the first officer at the Bundy murder scene, had preserved the integrity of the crime scene.

Riske’s answer, which stunned Clark: “They kind of glossed over it. They don’t really train you.”

2. The glove demonstration, which many feel was the pivotal point in the trial, from which the prosecution never recovered.

The prosecutors know there could be problems:

a) In the sidebar conference shortly before the glove demonstration took place in front of the jury, Clark said:

“The only problem is, he has to wear latex gloves underneath… and they’re going to alter the fit.”

b) Because portions of the gloves had been soaked in blood and left to dry, they had shrunk.

The O. J. Simpson Trial: The Jury

The Crime scene

Information about Author

A former Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney

His record in the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office:

• 105 convictions out of 106 felony jury trials

• 21 murder convictions without a single loss, including the prosecution of Charles Manson and other defendants accused of the seven Tate-LaBianca murders of August 9–10, 1969.

• Although Manson did not physically participate in the murders, Bugliosi used circumstantial evidence to show that he had orchestrated the killings.

• Wrote a book about the Manson trial, a true-crime classic, called Helter Skelter

OUTRAGE

INTRODUCTION

The Five Reasons O.J. Got Away With Murder:

  • In the air: What the jurors probably knew
  • The change of venue: Garcetti transfers the case downtown
  • Judicial error: Judge Ito allows defense to play the race card
  • The trial: The incredible incompetence of the prosecution
  • Final summation: The weak voice of the people

O.J. SIMPSON - AN OVERVIEW

Orenthal James "OJ" Simpson was accused of the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman, who were murdered on June 12th, 1994. His trial, officially called the People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson, was a lengthy and highly publicized trial. It lasted from January 24th, 1995 to October 3rd, 1995. Simpson was acquitted of both murders, and trial has been described as

the "Trial of the Century."

INTRODUCTION

  • Bugliosi expresses anger and astonishment at the actions of most of the

major players in the case, especially the media (talking heads), for what he sees

as shallow, sensational, sloppy and biased reporting.

  • A major cause of the acquittal was O.J. Simpson's astonishing popularity

  • The general belief he might get off despite the conclusive evidence of his guilt, was

a self-fulfilling prophecy galvanized by the media. Part of the media-created legend

held that Simpson was being represented by a Dream Team of lawyers.

  • Bugliosi argues that the defense lawyers were hardly the "Dream Team" the

media portrayed, because most of them had little or no experience trying murder cases.

  • Having never doubted that "Simpson committed these murders," Bugliosi

believes that the prosecution gave a D-minus performance, and that the jurors

"clearly did not have too much intellectual firepower, and were biased in

Simpson's favor, most likely from the start."

The Chase

INTRODUCTION

  • There were five blood drops at the crime scene leading

away from the slain bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and

Ronald Goldman toward the rear alley, four of which were immediately to the left of bloody size-12 shoe prints.

  • DNA tests on all five blood drops and on three bloodstains found on the rear gate at the crime scene showed that all of this blood belonged to Simpson.

  • Just on the blood evidence (DNA) alone, there’s only a one out of 57 billion chance that Simpson is innocent

  • The morning after the murders, Simpson was observed by the police to be wearing a bandage on his left middle finger.
  • When the bandage was removed that afternoon, it was seen that he had a deep cut on the knuckle of the finger.

  • Bugliosi believes that there never was any reason to believe that O.J. Simpson would get off free, and that, based on the

facts, the evidence against him was conclusive from the outset.

In Outrage, Bugliosi states his expert opinion about how it came

to pass that someone “we know, not believe, but know”

committed these two savage murders was allowed

to go free.

Adamu, Stephen

EDOL 759-Judge Tobin

March 12, 2015

INTRODUCTION

Judge Lance Ito ("Judge Ego,") "specialized in making patently erroneous

rulings, one after another" such as:

  • Allowing TV cameras
  • Shortening courtroom days to 3 p.m.
  • Sustaining an "aberrational" number (7,000) of objections
  • Inviting celebrities to chambers.

Judge Ito wrongly and "irrevocably changed the entire complexion of the trial" when he allowed the defense to ask Mark Fuhrman if he had used the word "nigger."

  • Bugliosi agrees with prosecutor Chris Darden that the provocative word was certain to "blind the jury" and thus violate Section 352 of the California Evidence Code, which states that evidence can be excluded if it "create(s) substantial danger of

undue prejudice."

  • Subsequently, prejudice became the "race card" the defense ultimately used.

  • Bugliosi believes that there never was any reason to believe that O.J. Simpson

would get off free, and that, based on the facts, the evidence against him was

conclusive from the outset.

So What Happened?

I

IN THE AIR

What the jurors probably knew

O.J. Simpson's astonishing popularity major cause of the acquittal

  • Once O. J. Simpson became a suspect, it was “in the air,” that he

might get off despite conclusive evidence of his guilt.

  • People were predicting confidently, “This jury will never convict Simpson— they wouldn’t convict him even if they were shown a film of him committing the murders.”

  • People carrying signs outside the courtroom during the trial declaring “Free O.J.,” “Save the Juice,” and even “Whether you did it or not, we still love you, O.J.”

  • The first juror called for questioning happened to be juror number 32 prompting Judge Ito to say, “I don’t know if this is an omen,”

  • Simpson was given special treatment at the Los Angeles County Jail; thousands of people were calling in on radio talk shows asserting his innocence; some, unbelievably, stating or strongly implying that even if he was guilty, he’s O.J.,

“let him go, he has suffered enough.”

INTRODUCTION

Outrage sets forth five reasons why the O.J. Simpson's murder case was lost.

  • The two most critical reasons were: the jury could hardly have been any worse and neither could the prosecution.

  • If the prosecution had given an A + rather than a D- performance, the verdict most likely would have been different.

  • Even with a “dreadfully poor prosecution”, on the first ballot, which the jury took within an hour after it commenced its deliberations, two of the jurors, a black and a white, voted guilty.

  • If your blood is found at the murder scene, as Simpson’s was conclusively proved to be by DNA tests, that’s really the end of the ball game.

  • To deny guilt when your blood is at the murder scene is the equivalent of a man being caught by his wife in flagrante delicto with another woman and saying to her (quoting comedian Richard Pryor), “Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?”

FINAL SUMMATION

THE WEAK VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

References

Bugliosi, V. (1995). Outrage: The five reasons O.J. Simpson got away with

murder. New York: W.W. Norton

Vincent Bugliosi vs. O.J. Simpson (Absolutely 100% guilty”) Part 1 (2013).

Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXgpGt11Ycw

II

THE CHANGE OF VENUE

Garcetti transfers the case downtown

  • The racial composition of the jury would have been substantially different. In the Central District (where the case was tried, the percentage of blacks was 31.3 and the percentage of whites was 29.8.

  • In the West Judicial District (Santa Monica), the percentages were 78.8 white and 7 black.

  • Santa Monica being a much more affluent area than downtown, the jury in Santa Monica would have been much closer, other than in race, to being Simpson’s peer than the jury that ultimately heard the case.
  • With poll data showing that most whites believed Simpson to be guilty and most blacks believing him to be not guilty, the decision to file the case in Santa Monica may have been the biggest mistake the prosecution made. 

Bugliosi said the mistake "dwarfed anything the defense did."

O.J Simpson 6-17 1994

I

IN THE AIR

What the jurors probably knew

Incredible and ill-advised statements by the prosecutors:

Marcia Clark’s: “You may not like me for bringing this case. I’m not winning any popularity contests for doing so.”

Chris Darden’s: “Nobody wants to do anything to this man. We don’t. There is nothing personal about this, but the law is the law.”

In the air were the “talking heads” ( lawyers-turned-TV-commentators)

  • The talking heads made daily and nightly television commentaries;

constantly finding problems and weaknesses with the prosecution’s evidence that either did not exist or that they exaggerated.

  • “The DA has no chance of winning,” “Their case is in rubbles.” said a former DA , a defense attorney most of his career.. These negative interpretations of the prosecution’s case were “in the air” every day and night.

  • The jury could easily be pushed, consciously or otherwise, in the direction of reasonable doubt, or a not-guilty verdict if the jury inferred that the prosecution’s case was full of holes and falling apart

IV

THE TRIAL

THE INCREDIBLE INCOMPETENCE OF THE PROSECUTION

The real core of the defense case had to be a police frame-up.

Thano Peratis, the male nurse from the Los Angeles Police dept.

said he withdrew around “7.9 to 8.1 cc”of blood from Simpson’s arm. Detective Philip Vannatter carried the vial of blood that to Simpson’s home so he could personally deliver it to police criminalist Dennis Fung.

  • At the trial the prosecutors could account for only 6.5 cc of the blood . The defense, throughout the trial, tried to persuade the jury that the missing, unaccounted-for 1.5 cc of blood was what LAPD detectives sprinkled at the murder scene and inside Simpson’s Bronco and home in their effort to frame him.

Garbage in Garbage Out

  • The defense played on the jury’s understanding of the word

"contamination” and used the concept of contamination to denote the term “garbage in, garbage out”. Prosecutors could not explain to the jury that there was no “garbage in” in this case, because contamination

couldn’t produce a false DNA positive of Simpson’s blood.

III

A JUDICIAL ERROR

JUDGE ITO ALLOWS THE DEFENSE TO PLAY THE RACE CARD

Judge Ito

Judge Lance Ito ("Judge Ego,") "specialized in making

patently erroneous rulings, one after another" such as:

  • Allowing TV cameras
  • Shortening courtroom days to 3 p.m.

Sustaining an "aberrational" number (7,000)

of objections

  • Inviting celebrities to chambers.

Judge Ito wrongly and "irrevocably changed the

entire complexion of the trial" when he allowed the defense to ask Mark Fuhrman if he had used the word "nigger."

  • Bugliosi agrees with prosecutor Chris Darden that the provocative word was certain to "blind the jury" and thus violate Section 352 of the California Evidence Code, which states that evidence can be excluded if it "create(s) substantial danger of undue prejudice."

  • Subsequently, prejudice became the "race card" the defense

ultimately used.

  • Bugliosi believes that there was no reason to believe that

O.J. Simpson would get off free, and that, based on the

faccts, the evidence against him was conclusive.

II

THE CHANGE OF VENUE

Garcetti transfers the case downtown

Bugliosi was very critical of the prosecution, from the moment DA, Gil Garcetti, moved the trial downtown where jury makeup would benefit the defense.

  • Because surveys showed that blacks are overwhelmingly sympathetic to

O.J., the DA’s office feared that blacks may hang up the jury.

  • The murders happened in Brentwood and it’s the practice in Los Angeles County

to file a case in the superior court of the judicial district where the crime occurred, in this case, Santa Monica.

  • In Santa Monica, there would have been a small percentage of blacks in the jury

pool. Instead, the DA filed the case downtown, where the percentage of blacks in the jury pool was much higher, thereby (assuming the DA’s fears are correct) multiplying the likelihood of a hung jury

IV

THE TRIAL

THE INCREDIBLE INCOMPETENCE OF THE PROSECUTION

4. The jury never heard the tape-recorded interview of Simpson by officers, Philip Vannatter and Thomas Lange, at Parker Center on June 13, 1994. Simpson admited dripping blood all over his car and home and on his driveway around the time of the murders! And when they asked him how he got the cut to his left middle finger that caused all the bleeding, he answered: “I don’t know”

  • Bugliosi: “powerful and irresistible circumstantial evidence of guilt”. Evidence not introduced because the prosecutors were distancing themselves from the LAPD because of the Fuhrman tapes.

5. Photos and videos of Simpson from his days as a TV football commentator wearing highly distinctive Aris Isotoner Light leather gloves identical to the gloves found at the Bundy murder scene and on Simpson’s Rockingham estate

IN THE AIR

What the Jurors probably knew

Vincent Bugliosi

The prosecutors

Marcia Clark at the Trial

Summary

Glaring Mistakes made by the Prosecution which let O.J. Simpson Get Away With Murder:

  • Bugliosi is severely critical of prosecutors Marcia Clark and Chris Darden.
  • He argued that a major mistake was the District Attorney assigning

Clark and Darden to prosecute it (due to lack of competence and skill

to try a significant murder case).

  • Prosecutors should have introduced the note Simpson had written before trying to flee (a note Bugliosi said "reeked" of guilt).

  • The jury was never informed about a change of clothing, a large amount of cash, a passport, and a disguise kit found in the O.J. Simpson’s Bronco.
  • Clark and Darden did not allow the jury to hear the tape of Simpson's statement to police about cutting his finger the night of the murders.
  • The prosecutors should have gone into more detail about Simpson's abuse of his wife.
  • The prosecutors should have made it clear to the mostly African-American jury that Simpson had little impact in the black community, and had done nothing to help the less fortunate blacks.
  • Although the prosecutors knew that Simpson's race had nothing to do with the murders, once the defense "opened the door" by trying to paint O.J. falsely as a "leader" in the black community, the evidence to the contrary should have been presented to prevent the jury from allowing it to bias

their verdict.

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi