Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Decision time for OJ jury

Edward Helmore
Sunday 01 October 1995 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

After nine months of evidence and the final, wrenching appeal by the prosecution to convict, the jurors in the double-murder trial of O J Simpson will start the unenviable task today of reaching a verdict.

Whatever their decision - to convict, acquit or agree to disagree and return as a hung jury - they have a huge burden to carry and a vast amount of evidence to sift through.

Maintaining the routine they have followed since their sequestration began in January, the jury will be driven to the courthouse from their hotel every morning and return at night. Until they reach their verdict, they will deliberate six days a week in a small room.

The nine women and three men, nine of whom are black, two white and one Hispanic, hold the responsibility for Mr Simpson's fate, and the social unrest that could result from a guilty verdict.

Last week, as the two sides presented their closing arguments, analysts' predictions shifted between verdicts. Will jurors be seduced by the defence's plea to acquit? The kernel of the defence argument is that the police framed him and that the jury should now send a message about the racial divisions in Los Angeles and, by association, America. That is fraught with difficulties.

Last month Judge Lance Ito stopped former Detective Mark Fuhrman's boasts of fabricating evidence in other cases from reaching the jury. In so ruling, he found there was no evidence to support the contention that Mr Simpson was framed.

Besides the uncertain motive of racism, why would the police want to frame him? Mr Simpson had entertained policemen at his house and had hired off-duty officers to protect him. The idea that a force which made such a sloppy job of collecting evidence could stage an elaborate operation to frame him, without even knowing if he had a strong alibi, is far-fetched.

For Mr Simpson this waiting will mean more time in his 9ft by 7ft cell, equipped with some of the benefits of celebrity - an incoming-only telephone, an exercise bicycle and a television set.

Racial politics, page 17

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in