the blindfolded lady justice is Queen.” Chad is not a judge or even a lawyer, but his quotation encompasses the concepts of due process and equality under the law that our judicial system prides itself on. Specifically in the realm of criminal prosecutions in the United States, the 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides protections to the accused and implies the fundamental presumption of innocence standard that has been carried over from common law. Judges are empowered by the nature of their position and the rule of law to uphold these standards and protections in their courtrooms as well as to make their rulings and decisions impartially, objectively, and virtuously. Although judges have these empowerments, they are prone …show more content…
The trial garnered enormous media attention and public following nationwide for numerous reasons, including Judge Lance Ito’s permitting cameras in the courtroom that televised the trial live, the ensuing Bronco chase after Simpson refused to turn himself in, the Audio Recorded Tapes of then LAPD Detective Mark Fuhrman. The last reason becoming a large focus of the defense in the as the trial progressed not only because of the perjury that ensued from Detective Fuhrman’s testimony during trial, but also because Detective Fuhrman, can be heard “ridiculing” the judge's wife in audio recordings. The additional section of the trial that had Mr. Simpson try on the gloves the prosecution alleged he wore while committing the murders additionally became a turning point in the trial and received much attention by the media and the public. This scene, to add more detail, involved Mr. Simpson putting on a pair of latex gloves and then pulling on the leather gloves on top. By wearing the latex gloves underneath, it appeared to the jury and the public that the leather gloves used by the murderer were too small to have been Mr. Simpsons and “spawned the motto” used by Mr. Cochran in his closing argument “If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit!” This motto was repeated numerous times in Mr. Cochran’s closing argument and served as an additional focus to the racial themes and epithets that were illuminated throughout the trial. Prior to the O.J Simpson murder trial, race relations had reached their tipping point in Los Angeles, following the acquittal of four white LAPD officers filmed viciously beating black motorist Rodney King in 1992. In contrast to the Rodney King incident where white officers were in the position of power and the defendants in the case and thus were credible and given the benefit of the doubt, the Simpson case
The Casey Anthony trial has been arguably the most controversial case since the trial of O.J. Simpson and has been speculated over ever since the verdict had been given in July of 2011. It was decided by a jury of her peers that Anthony was not guilty of murder, for the death of her daughter Caylee. Many believe that Anthony should have been found guilty however, very little Americans actually comprehend the justice system.
It was April 29th, 1992, and “Dawn was just filtering over Los Angeles and Courtroom 890 was silent as a tomb”(Mathews 1). The Rodney King trial had taken a little over two months and the verdict had the potential to change the history of the United States indefinitely. In both the Rodney King Beating Trial and the play Twelve Angry Men, racism played a major part in the original verdict. Rodney King was definitely in the wrong on the night of the beating, but the beating he got was not necessary. The trial was moved to a community with little diversity, therefore, the police officers were acquitted.
After a lengthy two hundred and fifty-two-day trial “not guilty” were the words that left the world in shock. O.J Simpson was your typical golden boy. He had it all, the nice car, the football career, and his kids. Unfortunately, this all came to an end when two bodies came to be spotted deceased in Nicole Browns front yard and was a gruesome sight. O. J’s ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman both found with brutal stab marks. Unfortunately, all his glory days now brought to an end, he went from playing on the field to begging for his freedom when becoming the main suspect of their murders. Since this trial has not only altered the way Americans viewed celebrities, but it also racially divided society,
On June 13, 1994, Nicole Brown, ex-wife of O.J. Simpson, was found murdered alongside Ronald Goldman (Dershowitz 19). Chapter one of Reasonable Doubts describes how many people jumped to the conclusion that O.J. carried out the murders. Incriminating evidence emerged that more than pointed to Simpson’s guilt (Dershowitz 21). Soon enough, media reports claimed that Simpson would be charged with two counts of first-degree murder. Simpson’s reluctance to be peacefully taken into custody was illustrated by his famous Los Angeles free-way chase that ended in his eventual surrender (Dershowitz 23). Dershowitz chose to join the defense team when offered the opportunity, claiming that the case could greatly educate people, especially his Harvard law students, on...
On June 12,1994, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were murdered. Their bodies were discovered outside Nicole Simpson's condominium. Nicole Simpson was the estranged wife of the famous football player and T.V. star O.J. Simpson.
The question of race was addressed in the high profile court case of O.J. Simpson when Simpson's lawyer, Johnnie Cochran took a Critical Race Theory position in defence of his client (Aylward, 1999:68). Cochran believed that racism was a central issue to the case and it was revealed primarily by detective Mark Fuhrman of the LAPD in a white supremacist form. Fuhrman was the detective who uncovered most of the evidence that connected Simpson to the murders. The defence's argument was that detective Fuhrman, motivated by his hatred of blacks, had planted the blood on O.J.'s bronco and the bloody glove at the Simpson's residence in order to incriminate him for the crime.
On the morning of March 3rd, 1991 an African-American man led police on a high-speed chase through the city of Los Angeles. Approximately eight miles later police swarmed around the car and confronted the driver, who went by the name Rodney King. During the confrontation, officers tortured King until the point he was forced to seek medical care. A case was opened and the police officers were acquitted. This angered many people, specifically Blacks and led to the historical “L.A. Riots’’ , where they felt race had something to do with the case.
The evidence discovered during the investigation suggested to the police that OJ Simpson may have had something to do with this murder and they obtained an arrest warrant. The investigators believed that they “knew” OJ Simpson committed the murders. His lawyers and him were informed of the arrest warrant and agreed to a specified time when OJ would turn himself into authorities. Investigators are later admonished, by the defense, on how they handled the crime scene.
The criminal justice system, like any system designed by human beings, clearly has its flaws. (Ben Whishaw). There has been numerous occasions that have showed the flaws of our justice ststem from convicting a person of a crime in ehich they did not commit, to the wrongfull execution of an innoncent person. Although the United States justice system was created to serve and protect the American people being fair to all, it continues to show evidence of the flaws within the system.
The People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson was the most publicized case in US history, and was the longest trial ever held in California, even exceeding the Manson Family trial of the 1970’s. It is no wonder that it became the “Trial of the Century,” considering O.J. Simpson’s high-profile status. He was a professional football star turned sports broadcaster, and even starred as the spokesperson for Hertz Rental Cars and appeared in some movies. He was the nation’s top college football player in 1968, and was one of the best running backs of all-time. Although his career with the Buffalo Bills was extremely successful, the nightmare that followed could have never been predicted. In 1994 (at age 47), O.J. Simpson was accused of murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson (35), and her friend Ronald Goldman (25), with a knife in front of Nicole’s Brentwood California home, at 875 S. Bundy Drive. It happened after 10 p.m. on the 12th of June. At 11:15 p.m., O.J. Simpson suspiciously left the scene of the crime in a limousine, and ceaselessly complained about how hot he was, although the car was air-conditioned. At 11:45 p.m., Simpson caught an American Airlines flight (#688) to Chicago.
Things only got worse when it was alleged that he transported and planted one the gloves on the Simpson estate, and the defendants legal team stating the officer wanted to frame Simpson because he was black and he disliked blacks an considering the jury was made up of mostly minorities this helped O.JSimpson even more.(2015) The key to winning a case apart from collecting evidence there must be a clear way to paint a picture that the people of the jury can understand whether or not you done the crime one must be convincing. Even though Simpson’s blood was on majority of the evidence collected it was argued that he was framed along with the contamination of evidence even if he had done it his team used all the weaknesses exposed by police involved in the case to paint a picture of innocence to the jury which proves perception of wrongdoing as persuasive to a jury as actual wrongdoing. I am sure with O.J Simpson being acquitted of the charges left a bad taste in the mouth of both police and some people in the legal field. There were too many mistakes made by the people that were tasked with the duty of collecting evidence and also in the department of how the evidence was handled but there are many lessons to be learned in every mistake the obvious one would be to not make the same ones
A judge loses this power consider motive because all criminals of the same crime are viewed as equal. By restricting a judge’s discretion, it creates injustice within the courts. Actions are based on their motives and a judge should have the ability to consider it when making a decision that can greatly impact another individual’s life. Therefore, truth in sentencing and the equal justice perspective need the discretion of a judge to justly establish a fair sentence that accounts for all aspects of the individual and their
Fairchild, H. & Cowan, G (1997). Journal of Social Issues. The O.J. Simpson Trial: Challenges to Science and Society.
There is no such thing as justice - in or out of court. Clarence Darrow i
The grounds of judicial review help judges uphold constitutional principles by, ensuring discretionary power of public bodies correspond with inter alia the rule of law. I will discuss the grounds of illegality, irrationality and proportionality in relation to examining what case law reveals about the purpose and effect these grounds.