United States: Simpson's murder case "the great case of the century" revealed a confusing case of killing his wife, and people watched the trial in an empty lane
Case replay: Simpson's murder case, a football star, occurred during the Atlanta Olympic Games in the United States in 1994, which attracted many people's attention from the Olympic Games to the courts in the United States. It's the first time since manned spaceship Apollo landed on the moon in the 1961s. On June 2, 1994, the ex-wife of Simpson, a former star of black football, and her boyfriend were killed by a sharp knife. The police found the blood of two victims and Simpson at the crime scene, as well as Simpson's hair and a pair of blood gloves. A pair of blood gloves and socks belonging to the same pair as the crime scene were found in Simpson's house, and the blood of the victim and the defendant were also found in his car. The defendant was driving a white limousine shortly after the incident. He left Los Angeles with his children and a lot of cash, and was chased by the police. The TV station made a live report on the chase. Helicopters followed white cars and several police cars all the way along the dense expressway in Los Angeles. The scene was spectacular and the audience's ratings were high. The police then prosecuted Simpson as a major suspect. In the face of the prosecution's accusation of "a mountain of blood evidence", Simpson, who is rich in money, hired a "dream lawyer team". When they decided on the jury, they repeatedly screened it with the permission of the law. In the end, the jury composed of 9 blacks, 2 whites and 1 Hispanics was left. The defendant found evidence to prove that the main police officer in this case was a serious racist and had many criminal records of perjury and abuse of blacks. Moreover, the bloody gloves found by the police officer at the scene did not match Simpson's hand. The defendant's agent also found that several witnesses were racist and lied. Taking advantage of the loopholes in the prosecution's evidence, the prosecutor and the police witnesses were stunned, and all the members of the jury were convinced that "Simpson is not necessarily a criminal, and it is very likely that someone else or Simpson was framed". Simpson was finally acquitted. In order to prevent accidents after the verdict, the Los Angeles police were all armed, and hundreds of people gathered outside the court. The tension of the situation is very explosive, which really worries people. According to the survey of relevant American institutions, most Americans think Simpson is a "murderer".
The biggest problem reflected in this case is that the racial opposition in American society is still obvious. According to a questionnaire survey before the verdict, 74% of whites thought the defendant was guilty, while 77% of blacks thought it was innocent. President Clinton also expressed concern about the emergence of such opposing attitudes in a criminal case. On the day after the verdict, he delivered a speech to the whole country, saying that the judicial system in the United States may be flawed, but we all respect this tradition of rule of law. Since the jury made this verdict, everyone should abide by it and remain calm. After the verdict, prosecutor Clark told CNN: "Although liberals don't want to admit this, it is impossible for a black jury to make a fair verdict in such cases." This statement caused an uproar in the media.
After the criminal trial ended, the victim said that he would fight a civil lawsuit and seek justice in the civil court. A year later, a civil division of the California High Court began hearing the case. This time, there were nine whites in the jury, and none was black. After a four-month trial, the jury ruled on February 5 that Simpson was responsible for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole and her boyfriend Goldman, and ordered Simpson to compensate Goldman's parents for $8.5 million. Five days later, the same jury again awarded Simpson $25 million in punitive damages. He has to pay a total of $33.5 million in compensation for civil liability. The results of civil trials are quite different from those of criminal trials, and the ethnic composition of the juries in the two trials has become a key point. This report caused a sensation again, so that the coverage and ratings greatly overwhelmed President Clinton's State of the Union address that day.
Jury system First of all, it is a way for citizens to participate in the rule of law, and it is difficult for both the prosecution and the defendant to cheat here. The jury system design makes judicial cheating difficult to work. Ordinary citizens decide cases, and the judge only plays the role of a moderator or procedural coordinator in the trial. Both sides of the defense system provide witnesses, present evidence, and ask witnesses to know everything, so as to prevent innocent people from being wronged to the maximum extent. This is the advantage of the jury system. Local powerful people, even senior officials, important people and their children, commit crimes, and the jury composed of such ordinary citizens adjudicates cases, which really contributes to social equality and prevents a small number of people from becoming extra-legal privileged elements. This is also an important reason why Americans insist on adopting the jury system. In fact, it has been investigated that the unanimous judgment of judges and juries in the United States is over 75%, which shows that most jury judgments are consistent with the judgments of professional judges. If they are not consistent, the judge can put forward his own opinions and ask for a retrial, and then a new judge and jury must be selected.
The role of money Simpson spent nearly $11 million in criminal trials. He hired the most talented lawyers, the most famous forensic experts and even scientists. These latter experts may not be interested in favoring the defendant, but express their professional knowledge and experience. In their testimony, they said that there may be another person's footprints at the scene, and DNA blood identification may not be 111% accurate. The United States is a society with a well-developed commodity economy, and many things, including a person's success and failure, are almost judged by money. Just like the election campaign in American politics, it is also an indisputable fact that money plays a certain role indirectly. The American media is outspoken about this. It is because Simpson hired the most talented and famous lawyers at a high price. They used all their wisdom and experience to challenge the prosecution again and again, which made the case complicated and protracted, and made the jury doubt the admissibility of the evidence obtained. In order to balance the cost paid by the defendant, the prosecution also sent a strong lineup and used various means to find evidence and arrange witnesses to appear in court, which also cost taxpayers millions of dollars. Clark, a female lawyer who is the main defense of the prosecution, became famous for this case, and soon after the verdict, she wrote a documentary bestseller, which earned about $2 million in royalties. Money can really affect the outcome of things in a market economy
The principle of presumption of innocence. The American judicial system advocates the principle of presumption of innocence, that is, the defendant is temporarily presumed innocent no matter how suspected he is before being found guilty in court. This system is also the most typical adversarial debate system in the world. Under this system, the defendant's lawyer can make full use of his rights to question any witness or party and provide witness testimony. In this case, the defendant's lawyer's wanton attack on the Los Angeles police and a large number of questions about the prosecution witnesses cannot be said to have violated the provisions of the procedural law. In addition, the defense lawyer never allowed the defendant to appear as a witness, thus avoiding the prosecution from directly questioning the defendant. The defendant can remain silent during the whole criminal trial, and all the lawyers speak for him, which is also allowed by American judicial procedures.
The powerful influence of the media has become a household name through TV broadcasting, and people have an intuitive understanding of judicial procedures and the specific system of the rule of law, which has become the largest classroom for popularizing legal knowledge. Television stations live on ratings. The more exciting and controversial the report, the higher the ratings. Celebrities are suspected of killing their wives, and TV stations are hyping it up for fear that someone will not know. All major TV networks spare no effort to send the strongest reporters for on-the-spot interviews, and various soap operas, comedies and talk shows also take some famous characters among judges, defendants, prosecutors and witnesses as their themes, which are very lively and do their best to help. Simpson case is a wonderful lesson, from which we can learn something that we can't learn in class: racial opposition in the United States, the maturity of the rule of law, the advantages and disadvantages of the jury system, and people's respect for the procedural rule of law, but racial opposition often interferes. How money affects politics in a market economy.