Orenthal James Simpson Essay Example for Free

Orenthal James Simpson Essay The well publicized trial of O. J. Simpson for the double homicide of his ex-wife and her friend focused national attention on the decision-making process of jurors. Because the defendant in the case, which was based primarily on circumstantial evidence, was a black celebrity and the victims were white, much media commentary focused on the influence of racial factors. The defense strategy for O. J. Simpson increased concern about race; central to the defense was a theory that Simpson was framed in a conspiracy by the Los Angeles Police Department due to racial prejudice against the defendant. As the nation watched the proceedings of the trial, questions arose as to whether the jury would be influenced by racial factors when reaching a verdict. The political means for reaching that end differ. On the side are those who align themselves with conservatives and believe that the multiracial needs to focus on removing the concept of race either through the introduction of multiracial category or by advocating for color-blind agendas; on the other side are those who align themselves with liberals and believe that multiracial people should be protected group. It is perfect, as the prosecutors in this case tell us, but coupled with the testimony of a witness; both types of evidence are bolstered. In this case as well the best scientific evidence, including DNA identification, can be nullified by the specter of tainted samples or sloppy handling procedures. This is almost certainly in large part a result of the prevalence in our society of institutionalized racism, in which discrimination on the grounds of racial differences is so deeply enshrined into the systems within which we live that even those who are fair-minded and just somehow become separated from their own personal beliefs and instead get drawn into processes. The struggle over whose account of events would be believed by the jury formed the basis of the trial. Since O. J. ’s trial arose as an accusation of murder, his defense could either a denial of guilt altogether or an excuse or a justification. Low profile criminal cases experience an echo or ripple effect set off by those criminal trials that are represented extensively in the media. While it has been generally recognized that in high profile trials, publicity both before and during the trial, has direct and indirect effects on the actions of attorneys, witnesses, judges, jurors, and the viewing audiences, it is also true that high-profile criminal trials may have an even greater impact on the formal and informal operations of the everyday practices of law enforcement and adjudication, affecting the outcomes of tens of thousands of low-profile criminal cases. But the defense chose the first option. While presenting few details of O. J. ’s actions on the evening in question, the defense focused on every procedural miscue by LAPD investigators to create their counter-story that a racist police department framed the defendant. The prosecution sought to prove O. J. guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,† but spent an extraordinary amount of time countering the combined racist cops/inept lab technicians defense. Since O. J. never testified the DA did not have to directly counter any excused or justifications O.  J. might have offered for any of the acts said to be related to the crime. While prior research supports the influence of juror-defendant racial similarity on verdicts, there appear to be no empirical studies examining this variable with minority defendants of high socioeconomics status. Traditionally most of the publicity associated with trials is not viewed as pretrial publicity. Pretrial publicity commonly refers to the publicity that surrounds high profile criminal defendants and their ability to get a fair trial. It is also true, notwithstanding, that low-profile or non-publicized criminal defendants, who are involved more typically in plea-bargaining and less typically in jury trials, are indirectly affected by high-profile or media-covered criminal trials. Claims of racial discrimination have echoed in our courtrooms for decades; however, black defendants have not typically received the publicity that O. J. Simpson did. But O. J. Simpson was not a typical black defendant; not only was he a popular celebrity, he was also very wealthy. The question then became whether Simpson would be treated the same way other black defendants are treated. In June of 1994, Nicole Brown ex-wife of and Ronald Goldman a waiter who has her friend. â€Å"A veteran Los Angeles homicide policeman, one of the first officers to arrive at Nicole Brown Simpson’s townhouse at 875 South Bundy Avenue they called it the bloodiest crime scene they ever seen. † (Walton, 2006)The bodies of the two victims were found shortly before midnight lying in pools of blood on the Spanish-style walkway leading to the $700,000 townhouse. The thirty-five-year-old ex-wife’s throat was slashed through to the spinal cord, leaving a five-and-a-half-inch gash from the left side of her neck to the right ear. The issues on determination of sentence would be mostly likely to conduct; disagreements adjacent to the undetermined sentence have been many and wide-ranging. Besides the criticism of ineffectiveness, they have deal with two parts of apparent vital flaws. Sentencing judgment has been extensively burdened as subjective, impulsive and leading to unprovoked discrepancy. The apprehensively felt by the offender has been thought to be unreasonable; on the other hand the effective disagreement that such vagueness is counterproductive to rehabilitative intends also has been made. These allegations, joint with to countless, and current legislation in an amount of states as well as the national authority has stimulated in direction of larger determinacy. Current studies advocate that, under legislatively set determinate sentencing, revisions are almost unremitting, typically in an increasing trend, with little consideration to the impact of revisions or corrections or even the crime rate. This is very good corroborative evidence, the scientific analysis of fingerprints, DNA, ballistic or documents can have a real impact on a jury. This type of evidence is objective and persuasive as opposed to the subjective and often unpersuasive testimony of the informant. Officer looks for opportunities to bring this type of dispassionate and objective evidence into the courtroom in support of building the witness foundation of procedural and methodological soundness. The defense technique was applied to perfection in the O. J. Simpson case. Defense counsel Johnny Cochran masterfully attacked the investigators and their process. Regardless of what you think of Cochran or his client, the defense team brilliantly destroyed the prosecution case. So powerful was their offensive that 12 jurors were eventually convinced not only did the glove not fit but that the entire investigative process was criminally defective, and they shamelessly acquitted the defendant. It is best to eliminate such concerns preemptively and forestall any attempts by the opposition to discredit the evidence. A rigorous, complete chain of custody paper trail and careful, no-nonsense procedures in sampling, transporting, storing and analyzing the evidence will be a valuable insurance policy in favor of success at trial. But these issues did emerge in the opening and closing arguments and when interruption of evidence was discussed on the witness stand by experts or eyewitnesses. Ultimately each alleged aspect of the killing, including the events said to lead up to it, were subject to account offering and account refuting. As can be observed elsewhere in our legal system, concerned defendants and wrongdoers attack the investigators and the investigative process when the facts are not in their favor. If the accused is able to attack hard enough and long enough, somebody may eventually believe them. The responses on the subject to the same kind of analysis as offerings of excuses or justifications for O. J. for the cops, for the coroner’s office, for the defense attorneys for the prosecution, for the judge, for the jury. â€Å"Individuals defended or attacked O.  J. ’s credibility, debated whether LAPD detectives were smart enough to carry out a conspiracy to frame O. J. , whether the judge was biased, whether the defense played the race card whether Nicole was partially responsible for her demise. â€Å" (Gallup Newport, 2006) Notions of equality racism and anti-racism tend to appear in constructionist work, not as objects for scrutiny or as explicitly strategic essences, but as taken-for-granted foundations, providing common-sense moral and political coherence and direction. The spectacle of O. J. Simpson legal procedure showed how a literature practice ended up convoluting justice. In fact literate law is not meant to serve justice. Its purpose is to use the law to acquit a client. A micro-level phenomenon such as prejudice is a historical concept but it can be incorporated into a historic framework. In such a framework, prejudice and racist ideology can be explained in terms of the structure of inequality in the base of society, which gives rise to both of them. Wrapping up the trial proceedings provides another opportunity to review the case, the defense team argued for jury nullification and send message about racism. Which lead to dialogue about how cultural experiences shape the way people view life. Though in Simpson case, the outcome gives a lot of views and human behavior vary so much across situation with any gratis that is provided by the government, that is why proper assessment in such referral must undertake to provide the students and their parents the explanation of the evaluation for them to understand the process of acquiring the service. Law enforcement investigative methods are perhaps more closely scrutinized now than in decades past. The significant of case investigators, as they build the work performed during a different period and perhaps a different level of expectation and subsequently develop it to meet its standards. Evidence identification and collection practices have a directly effect in their ability to conduct and resolve any case investigations. The impact of the crime can be ruthless and atrocious. The victims of rape endure weeks of physical pain and years of psychological agony. Businesses suffer massive dollar losses and some go bankrupt due to employee theft and Shoplifting Victims of break-ins spend sleepless nights wondering if the same burglar might return again. Citizens everywhere hear stories about crimes that happen to their friends, relatives, and neighbors; television and newspapers daily thrust the pain of crime’s victims into our lives. The impacts of crime are real, but surprisingly some costs are difficult to measure and where measurable, often are not well documented. The result is a public picture of crime’s costs that is as much myth and exaggeration as fact and truth. Yet it is from the society’s point of view, no matter how accurate or inaccurate, that much of public policy and governmental effort to combat crime is based. This social impact is more or less vulnerable since their position in the society. People who have least power socially suffer most from crime. Most relevant here are the social relationship of age, class, gender and race. When analyzed in focusing on the combination of these fundamental social relationships, allows us to note the extraordinary differences between social groups as to both the impact of crime and the focus of policing. Crime scenario has no room for differing sensibilities to the impoliteness which they describe or the differing power of different communities to deal with such things and resists the downward slide. Arguments are to take into account the social impact of crime; it is on the poorest and least resourced neighborhoods that they should focus their attention. Economic impact of crime in the society is also annoying, the cost of crime are simply part of the overhead of running a modern society. A certain amount of costs is unavoidable; since the society spends just enough so that, in a social optimum, the marginal money spent for crime control equals the marginal revenue from reduced crime. Calculating the burden of crime could be an ideal state in which there is no occurrence of criminal behavior defined by existing law. Economic costs of crime arise when crime causes society to divert time, energy and resources from more productive resources. Cost of crime does not only include property losses, medical costs and pay losses due to injury. They also include costs of public and private efforts made to prevent and reduce future crime rates as well as costs of the criminal justice system. The consistent ideal characteristic of criminal law may it be politically, specificity, uniformity and penal sanction. They may be viewed as translations of these characteristics into statements of the ideal characteristics of major crimes. And in thorough study in crimes here are the characteristics of major crimes. 1. The behavior must have certain external consequences. Since a crime must have a harmful impact on the social interests; a mental or emotional state is not enough. The intention is not taken for the deed. 2. The harm must be outlawed. Any engaging immoral behavior is not crime unless the behavior has been specifically outlawed in advanced, criminal law does not have retroactive effect. . There must be conduct, must have an intentional or reckless act or omission which produces the harmful consequences. 4. Has a criminal intent, the motive for a crime may good but the intention might be to affect an outlawed harm, a criminal intent. 5. Fusion intent and the conduct do not fuse or concur. 6. Has a casual relation between the voluntary misconduct and the outlawed harm. Like what mentioned above crime has a major impact on the society especially in present highlighted form. The large-scale of crime of our days evokes fear and terror in the society; it has a terrible effect on the climate of opinion, results in the diminishing of the authority of the state, and the increase of taking justice into our own hands. The establishment of the perpetrators responsibility is slowly dwindling. It becomes more and more obvious that besides state criminal investigation, the crime prevention activity of the local and other communities is an essential factor. Prevention of crimes through environmental design, social control, encloses/ access control; criminal justice; and defensible space. These are all based on the premise that multiple housing has inevitable side effects which are sometimes undesirable and that it is possible to develop guidelines to avoid these since crimes amongst strangers are in part a simple by product of the numbers of unacquainted people who come in close physical contact. The impacts of crime are real, but surprisingly some costs are difficult to measure and where measurable. It can be harsh and brutal, public picture of crime’s costs that is as much myth and exaggeration as fact and truth. It is from the citizen’s point of view, no matter how accurate or inaccurate, that much of public policy and governmental effort to combat crime is based. Possible ascertain whether a crime has been prevented as a result of a crime prevention program. The majority of evaluations of crime efforts focus on interventions to address pre-existing crime problems and the impact of an intervention over a time period. †¢ Murder is an act of killing innocent person intentionally. †¢ Assault is an act of forceful throbbing directly or indirectly to other human beings. Kidnapping forceful abduction with an intention to ask for ransom. Basic Theory that makes it clear that the specific theoretical law which develop in the course of its unfolding and the subsequent applications of these laws to describing and explaining concrete empirical situations can be regarded as the generation by the basic theory of special theories. The behavioral model incorporates elements of organization learning, conflict resolution, shot run reaction to change in the society. Despite what appears to be only a recent concern for repaying the crime for the loss, the practice is historically quite ancient. Regulating the criminal process, reparation occurred taken by the victim against the offender. The state took control of crime justice; such revenge became in itself a criminal act. Increasing the dominance over human activities, it is also enhanced its control over criminal justice. Contribution of famous law makers makes sure that the basis of the legal system of various nations from the Roman regime to the present. The issues on determination of sentence would be mostly likely to conduct; disagreements adjacent to the undetermined sentence have been many and wide-ranging. Besides the criticism of ineffectiveness, they have deal with two parts of apparent vital flaws. Sentencing judgment has been extensively burdened as subjective, impulsive and leading to unprovoked discrepancy. Sentencing judgment has been extensively burdened as subjective, impulsive and leading to unprovoked discrepancy. The apprehensively felt by the offender has been thought to be unreasonable; on the other hand the effective disagreement that such vagueness is counterproductive to rehabilitative intends also has been made. The apprehensively felt by the offender has been thought to be unreasonable; on the other hand the effective disagreement that such vagueness is counterproductive to rehabilitative intends also has been made. These allegations, joint with to countless, and current legislation in an amount of states as well as the national authority has stimulated in direction of larger determinacy. Current studies advocate that, under legislatively set determinate sentencing, revisions are almost unremitting, typically in an increasing trend, with little consideration to the impact of revisions or corrections or even the crime rate.