case+study

The case which i have chosen to go into depth with, is the case of O.J. Simpson and the murder of his wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman. His trial is the most publicized crimal trial in American history. This is mostly due to the fact he was acquitted of all charges, even though the evidence against him was obvious to the general public. I believe this murder was more of a heat of passion typer of murder. I think Simpson cracked after two years of seeing his wife with another man. So he went to their home and brutally stabbed them to death. Otherwise i think he was/is a slightly insane man, the book he published shortly after the murders leads me to believe this. Why would he want to draw even more attention to himself.

There were a few major pieces of evidence that i cant believe didnt hold up in court. It absolutely perplexes me. The two bodies were discovered outside of Browns condominium at 12:05 a.m, on June 13th, 1994. The bodies were bloodied and mangled. You almost couldnt tell it was even Nicole. After searching for clues investigators found a bloodied glove, just one glove. The other they would find outside of O.J's house. Both had Nicoles blood on them. Hairs consistent with Simpsons were found on a cap at the scene and on Ron Goldmans shirt. On the gloves and the cap they found carpet fibers that matched the fibers from Simpsons Bronco. The blood evidence is the next thing that i would like to point out. The killer dropped blood at the scene of the murder, it was the same type as Simpsons, he had fresh cuts on his hand the day after the murder. There was alos blood found in the bronco, and blood on socks found in OJ's home that matched Nicole's. The investigators found size 12 shoe prints at the scene....Simpson wears a size 12. We must also consider the fact that when investigators tried to arrest Simpson after the murders, he fled from police. Three weeks before the murders a knife salesmen claimed to have sold a 15 inch german made knife to simpson, similar to the murder weapon.



The scientist were able to match the hair and carpet fibers to both Simpson and his bronco my analyzing it under a microscope. The pigment, and pattern of the hair was almost identical. In our forensics class we learned to analyze hair also, but not to the degree that these forensic investigators looked at their evidence. Still, its pretty cool to read about this stuff, and understand the gist of what they are doing. Our lovely teacher Mrs. Fries also taught us about blood, and its importance to a crime scene. They matched the DNA from the blood at the crime scene to OJ's. They also determined by that way it was splattered at the crime scene that one of the victims put up a struggle while the killers was standing over them with the knife. In Forensics we learned that the angle of impact of blood can play a great deal in the prosecution. Somthing i would of done different as an investigator would have been to make sure that the blood evidence was properly stored. A main reason Simpson was able to get away with this was because his lawyers claimed that the evidence was incorrectly stored, causing it to be useless in court. Simpson pleaded not guilty of any charges, but didnt seem to show any remorse for the loss of his ex-wife. This raised many questions to his involvement with the killings. In 2007 he published a book titled "If i killed my wife" which seemed as an almost confession. It had everything in it from the weeks before the murders right up to June 13th. Dispite all the incriminating evidence, the jury shocked everyone whey they found the defendent not guilty. The defense was able to persuade the jury that the DNA evidence, which was a new type in trials, had been mishandled. I think this is a perfect example that money can sometimes buy your freedom. Simpson had hired the best Lawyers in the world, and they did an excellent job making him seem innocent. The prosecution really messed up their case by mishandling the key pieces of evidence. In todays day and age, with all the new ways of collecting and storing evidence, there would be no way that Simpson would of been found anything but guilty. He would still be in prison, living out the rest of his life. I think CSI's are much more cautious with their evidence, and they use this "trial of the century" as something to teach, what not to do. In my personal opinion, i dont thing there is any question as to whether or not Simpson should of been found guilty. The evidence was too great, and he deserves to be in jail. He is probably the luckiest criminal in the United States for getting off on a mere technicality. Speculations are also raised due to the fact that Simpson was such a great football player. Some people feel that because he was so great, it influenced the minds of the Jury. However famous he MAY have been on the grid-iron, he will always be remembered as the murderer who got away.