the jury system has important institutional value. The selection of the jury is prudent and complicated. The judge presides over random selection, investigates, interviews and screens the selected people, and finally determines the jury list with the consent of the lawyers of both the prosecution and the defense. In this case, the jury was isolated from the outside world during the nine-month trial. This ensures that they are not interfered by external news and public opinion such as the media, so as not to affect their judgment. They are not allowed to communicate with each other during the trial, and they make decisions that conform to the law and ethics according to their most intuitive judgments. The jury has the power of final adjudication, which restricts the judge's power, avoids the judge's one-person judgment, and guarantees procedural justice and civil freedom and democracy. Of course, the jury system also has some defects. Jurors are not professional legal persons, and their own legal knowledge is insufficient or influenced by various factors, which will lead to deviations in their judgments. However, the jury system can limit the public power of judges and play an important role in protecting the rights and interests of criminal suspects. Giving the judgment power to citizens is also an important embodiment of safeguarding legal authority and enhancing citizens' legal awareness.
the conviction standard of criminal cases is the principle of "excluding reasonable doubt". The prosecution must produce conclusive evidence to convict the other party, and it must not wronged the good people. As long as the jury has reasonable doubt about the evidence provided by the prosecution, the suspect will still be acquitted. The evidence provided by the prosecution was eventually overturned one by one. Whether it was shoe prints, sharp weapons, bloody gloves, blood, hair and other physical evidence, or the testimony of taxi drivers and police, Simpson was finally acquitted. According to American law, more attention is paid to the protection of citizens' rights, and the power restrictions on public officials are stricter, and there is no trace of ultra vires behavior.
in addition, there is the principle of non-bis in idem. That is, citizens will not fall into "double jeopardy" and prevent law enforcement officers from being unwilling to re-prosecute after the jury declares "innocence". This is also a restriction on the power of public office.
according to American law, no one can be deprived of life, freedom or property without due process of law, and no one can be found guilty, and all the legitimate rights of criminal suspects are guaranteed in the process of litigation. Simpson's wife-killing case "followed the principles of the law and safeguarded the fairness and justice of the law. We can also get some enlightenment from this case. Although the legal provisions of China and the United States are different, in the process of law enforcement and justice, we can learn from the due process principle of the United States to ensure that the procedures are legal and compliant, which is conducive to the promotion of the rule of law in China. In the process of criminal proceedings, there are many details that are fully considered. The purpose of law is to punish crimes and protect human rights. When a crime is identified, it should be given human rights protection, which is also an aspect that we can learn from.