Arrested
In the early morning after the murder, Simpson received a notice from the police about the death of his ex-wife at his hotel in Chicago and rushed back to California early in the morning. After returning, Simpson was interrogated by the police alone for an hour under the strong opposition of his lawyer. At that time, the police found Simpson injured. He explained that he was so excited after receiving the news of his ex-wife's death that he broke the mirror and was injured. After several days of investigation, the police decided to list Simpson as the main suspect and prepare to arrest him. On June 17, when Simpson's lawyer was going to accompany Simpson back to the police station, he found that Simpson, who had been resting upstairs, was missing. Subsequently, the national audience saw unforgettable scenes on TV: the helicopter team in the sky and the ground patrol team were all dispatched, and Simpson's white car was finally found in a few hours. Dozens of police cars launched a car chase on the Los Angeles Expressway. Simpson was eventually arrested.
trial
The formal trial began with the opening statement, and the prosecution accused Simpson of deliberately murdering his wife because of jealousy and possessiveness. After the divorce, Simpson was very jealous that Nicole was dating a handsome young man. He always hoped that the two could get back together, but the hope was getting slim. On the day of the murder, at her daughter's dance recital, Jenny was very cold to Simpson, which made him want to kill someone. Gorman was killed by accident when he entered the scene. The results of forensic identification show that the victim died between 1: and 1:15 at night. Simpson claimed that he slept alone at home between 9:4 and 1:5 that night and could not testify in court. Throughout the trial, Simpson remained silent according to law on the advice of his lawyer and refused to testify. However, the prosecution's charge of premeditated murder seems unbelievable, mainly because Simpson had to catch a plane that night and booked a luxury taxi to take him to the airport. This arrangement actually blocked the back road of his own crime, because he had to drive to the scene in a short time of 1 hour and 1 minutes, choose the time of committing the crime, kill two people with a knife, escape from the scene of the murder, hide the murder weapon in bloody clothes, wash the residual blood, and set off for the airport. At this time, the taxi driver will become an important witness. In addition, Simpson, an "amateur killer" who lacks training and experience, is the best choice to use guns, and there is no need to cut his throat with a sharp knife to kill people. This method of committing crimes will not only make him covered in blood, but also leave irrefutable "blood evidence" at the crime scene, the white mustang and his home. The defense believes that Nicole may have been killed by a drug trafficking group or the mafia, because Nicole has a history of drug abuse. If she fails to pay for a large amount of drugs on time, she may be killed by the mafia, and throat cutting is a common killing method of the mafia. In addition, Goldman's relationship with Nicole is also unusual. Someone once saw him driving Nicole's $15, white Ferrari luxury sports car in the street. More suspiciously, between 1993 and 1995, four employees of the Italian restaurant where Goldman worked were murdered or mysteriously disappeared. In the judicial system of the United States, it is not easy to convict and sentence the defendant only by indirect evidence. This is because it is usually impossible to accurately infer the defendant's guilt only by individual indirect evidence. A series of indirect evidence must be mutually confirmed to form a strict logical system, and all possibilities that the defendant cannot be suspected of committing a crime can be ruled out in order to accurately confirm the case. In addition, the collection of indirect evidence and the relationship between indirect evidence and the facts of the case should be reasonable, coherent and consistent. If there are contradictions or loopholes, it shows that the reliability of indirect evidence is insufficient and cannot be used as a qualitative basis for finalizing the case. For example, in the Simpson case, one of the circumstantial evidences presented by the prosecution was that the defendant's blood was found at the murder scene, but the credibility of this circumstantial evidence was greatly reduced because Sheriff Winnat walked around the murder scene for three hours with Simpson's blood sample in his hand. In Simpson's case, because all the evidence of the prosecution is indirect evidence, it is very important for the defense lawyers to strictly identify and review these "indirect evidence". Disappointingly, the evidence submitted by the prosecution to the court is full of loopholes and difficult to justify, so that the defense can prove to the jury with more sufficient evidence that Simpson may not be the murderer. On October 3, 1995, at 1: a.m. western time, when the verdict of Simpson case was about to be announced, the whole United States came to an instant halt. President Clinton shelved military affairs; Former Secretary of State Baker postponed the speech; Trading on Wall Street was light; The long-distance telephone line fell silent. Thousands of heavily armed policemen appeared on the streets of Los Angeles. According to CNN statistics, about 14 million Americans watched or listened to the final verdict of the "Trial of the Century". The jury found Simpson not guilty.
Trial after p>13 years
On October 3, 29, the jury of Clark County District Court in Las Vegas found Simpson guilty of 12 counts including kidnapping and armed robbery. The court is scheduled to pronounce sentence on December 5. Simpson, 61, may face life imprisonment. Coincidentally, on this day 13 years ago, Simpson accepted the trial verdict of "wife-killing case" and ended up acquitted in this long judicial process known as "trial of the century". The case happened on September 13th, 27. Six people, including Simpson, broke into the room of a Las Vegas hotel where Bruce Fromen, a sports souvenir dealer, stole more than 7 sports souvenirs, most of which were related to Simpson. Three days later, Simpson was arrested. He later claimed that these sports souvenirs were stolen after his wife was killed in 1994. According to the verdict read by the court, Simpson was convicted of 12 crimes, including kidnapping and armed robbery, and was immediately transferred to the detention center for final judgment. Clarence Stewart, the co-defendant, was also found guilty of many charges.
editing doubtful points of the case
blood evidence
One of the key evidences presented by the prosecution in court is the results of blood test and DNA test. Criminal experts agree that the results of blood test and DNA test will not lie, but if the blood is polluted, mishandled, hastily collected or deliberately planted, the credibility of these results will be greatly reduced. In the Simpson case, all these shortcomings exist. The test results show that all doubts are concentrated on Simpson. Simpson's blood was found in two places at the murder scene; The hair extracted from the scene is exactly the same as Simpson's hair; The bloody gloves found by the police at the scene and Simpson's residence are the same, and both gloves have the blood of the victim and the defendant; Simpson's blood and the victim's blood were found on the path in front of Simpson's residence, in the socks in the bedroom on the second floor and in the white mustang. Thus, the prosecution's evidence can be described as "mountains of blood", and Simpson's alleged murder seems to have become an undeniable fact. However, the defense camp believes that these "blood certificates" are full of doubts and loopholes. First of all, the blood on socks is very strange. Defense experts pointed out that the blood on both sides of the socks is exactly the same. According to common sense, if socks are worn on feet, it is impossible for the blood on the left outer side of socks to soak into the left inner side, and then through the ankle to soak into the right inner side. Only when the blood directly penetrates from the left side of the sock to the right side will the blood on both sides be the same. In other words, the blood is probably smeared on it. During the trial, the prosecution produced several photos of the scene where the blood socks were found, but the time sequence of the photos was contradictory. There were no blood socks in the photo taken at 4: 13 pm on the day of the crime, but there were blood socks in the photo taken at 4: 35 pm. So, were the blood socks originally on the carpet? Or was it later moved to the carpet by the police? The police's answers to this question are inconsistent and contradictory. In addition, when the defense experts checked the blood on the socks, they found that it contained a high concentration of preservative (EDTA). The defense lawyer reminded the jury that on the day of the incident, the police added this preservative to Simpson's blood sample after collecting it. Secondly, the on-site investigation report shows that Goldman, who is tall and strong, had a bloody struggle with the murderer, and his belongings-a bunch of keys, an envelope, a piece of paper and a pager-were scattered in different places, which shows that the struggle was large and fierce. There are traces of blood on Goldman's jeans, which shows that he did not die in a short time, but stood up and fought to the death after being injured. He was stabbed more than 3 times, and eventually died of cervical vein rupture and massive bleeding in the chest and abdomen. According to this inference, the murderer must be covered with blood. But why only a trace of blood was found in the white wild horse? What is even more puzzling is why the murderer left a lot of obvious blood on the fence in the front lane and the path from the front door to the front door of the house after getting off the bus. In addition, suppose Simpson entered the front door of the house along the front door passage wearing bloody clothes and shoes, and went to the bedroom on the second floor wearing bloody socks. Why didn't he find blood on the doorknob, light switch or white carpet of the whole house? Similarly, according to the blood test report, Simpson's blood was found in two places at the scene. In one place, the police found five drops of the defendant's blood, the same size and complete appearance, on the road leading to the backyard of the apartment. However, the defense argued that if Simpson was stabbed in the fight, according to common sense, he would bleed a lot at first, and the blood volume would gradually decrease after a short time, so the size of blood drops could not be consistent. In addition, the blood drop should be thrown out during the struggle or walking, and be impacted when landing, so the shape of the blood drop cannot be complete. In another place, the police found three blood stains on the fence door in the backyard of the apartment. However, the prosecution experts found a high concentration of preservative (EDTA) when examining these blood stains. Finally, defense experts claimed that the criminal laboratory of LAPD was poorly equipped and poorly managed, and the inspectors lacked training and did not collect blood on the spot according to normal procedures. The reason why the test results are suspicious is that the evidence samples are not handled properly. For example, according to the normal procedure, when collecting blood samples for DNA analysis, they should be naturally air-dried with cotton before being put into the evidence bag, but the police inspectors put the blood samples into the evidence bag before they were air-dried. Therefore, defense lawyer Xie Ke said rudely that the criminal laboratory of the police station is a "polluted sewage pool".
Glove evidence
The second most important evidence presented by the prosecution is a black bloody glove seized by Forman at the back of the Simpson's guest room. But this bloody glove is also very suspicious. First of all, according to Foreman's testimony, he found that his gloves were wet when he wore blood gloves. Defense experts believe that this is absolutely impossible. The murder happened at about 1:3 midnight on June 12th, and foreman found the gloves at 6:1 am on June 13th, which spanned more than 7 hours. The defense proved to the jury by simulation that the blood on the gloves must have dried up after 7 hours under the weather conditions of cloudy weather and outdoor temperature of 2 degrees Celsius on the night of the crime. So, why did foreman deny the statement that gloves were wet? There is only one possible explanation given by the defense, that is, after Foreman came to the crime scene, he quietly put the gloves stained with blood into the protective bag of police evidence that he carried with him, and then wanted to take advantage of Simpson's unprepared to find an opportunity to enter Simpson's residence to forge evidence, so the blood was still wet despite the long time span. Secondly, if Simpson is the murderer, then after he fled home from the murder scene covered in blood and frightened, there is no need to reinvent the wheel and sneak into the back of the guest room alone to hide the bloody gloves and hide the murder weapon and bloody clothes without a trace. In addition, Simpson knows his backyard, terrain and roads like the back of his hand. It is impossible for him to bump into the air conditioner and leave the blood gloves behind after losing them. Based on the analysis of various situations, it is obvious that the owner who crashed into the air conditioner and lost his gloves is a person who is not familiar with the terrain and roads of the house. In addition, if the murderer fumbled and lost his way in the dark, why didn't he find other blood and suspicious footprints and traces at the scene where the gloves were bloody? Thirdly, although the police seized a left glove and a right glove at the murder scene and Simpson's residence, and found the blood of two victims and Simpson on the gloves, there was no trace of breakage or cut on the outside of the gloves, and Simpson's blood was not found inside the gloves. This shows that Simpson's hand wound is probably not directly related to bloody gloves and murder. Finally, in order to prove Simpson is the murderer, the prosecution decided to let him try on blood gloves in front of the jury. In court, Simpson first put on ultra-thin rubber gloves to prevent blood, and then tried to put on blood-stained gloves. However, in full view, Simpson groped for a long time and found it difficult to put on gloves. The defense immediately pointed out that the gloves were too small to be Simpson's. The prosecution called the glove expert to testify.