Tag Archives: Nicole Simpson

Waiting for O.J.’s parole decision

Orenthal James Simpson was acquitted of a gruesome double murder.

Then he was found “civilly liable” for the deaths of his former wife and her friend.

And then he decided to take back some memorabilia and was convicted of robbery and assault. He’s been in prison for several years and is now on the verge of getting paroled for that crime.

An amazing debate is taking place: Does he deserve parole or should he be kept locked up because of the acquittal of that previous crime? Give me a break! O.J. Simpson’s parole status should be determined solely on the basis of the time he has served for the crime for which he was convicted. Period. End of argument.

Do not misunderstand me. I don’t give a damn about Simpson. I don’t care if he is denied parole or is granted his freedom after serving a substantial portion of the sentence he was given for the crime.

I also happen to be one of millions of Americans who believes he got away with murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman in 1994. The law, though, saw it differently. After months of testimony and televised drama, that Los Angeles County jury decided in hours that he didn’t do the crime.

The system functioned as the law intended for it to function.Ā Did it produce the desired outcome? Not in my view. But that’s just me.

That case is done. The other one for which he has spent time in the Nevada prison is still playing out — and that’s the case upon which the parole board should determine whether he walks out or stays locked up in The Joint.

Look at it this way, too. If he is released, he can resume his search for Ron and Nicole’s “real killers.” Oh, wait …Ā 

O.J. returns — sort of — to the spotlight

OJ

Orenthal James Simpson might be getting out of prison soon.

The Nevada parole board has granted Simpson parole for some of the crimes for which he was sentenced to prison five years ago. He’s going to remain behind bars, though, until he becomes eligible to be paroled for the rest of the crimes.

So, what will he do once he walks out of the slammer?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/31/oj-simpson-parole/2603497/

Here’s a thought: He ought to seek to repay the African-American community that cheered his acquittal in 1995 for the double murder of his former wife and her friend.

Simpson went to prison on charges stemming from an altercation he had in Nevada over some sports memorabilia. I don’t begrudge his becoming eligible for release on those charges.

It’s the double murder and his acquittal of those charges that continue to eat at many millions of Americans.

The jury’s finding of “not guilty” was the result of brilliant defense work by Simpson’s legal team led by the late Johnnie Cochran. That the former football star walked on those charges infuriated most Americans … but cheered a significant minority of Americans, namely, African-Americans who were glad to see Simpson remain free.

More than 20 years later, it remains a fair question to ask: Why cheer this man’s acquittal only on the basis that he, too, is black?

For his entire adult life, there can be no finding of evidence that O.J. Simpson gave back to the community from which he emerged to attain athletic stardom and, to a lesser degree, a level of celebrity as a film actor.

Indeed, I saw something just this weekend about Simpson wanting — get ready for this one — to date Kris Jenner, the former wife of the late Robert Kardashian, anotherĀ member of Simpson’s superstar legal team.

Eventually, Simpson will walk out of prison. He’ll be free to do whatever he wants — as long as he doesn’t violate the terms of his parole.

He ought to start his road back by giving something to the community that cheered him when — in my view — a jury let him get away with murder.

Then again, he did once vow to look for “the real killers” of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Is that pledge still on the table?

 

Lance Ito: circus ringmaster

Twenty years ago this week, a horrible crime occurred in front of a Los Angeles-area condo. Two people were stabbed to death. One of them was the former wife of a football legend; the other was her friend.

The football legend, O.J. Simpson, went on trial for the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman and was acquitted after an eight-month circus presided over by LA County Superior Court Judge Lance Ito.

Ito made a fateful decision early on: He allowed TV cameras to record the event. I guess it’s OK to allow the public in on these kinds of proceedings, but only if the judge sets some rules for the conduct of the lawyers who’ll take the stage.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/13/justice/o-j-simpson-where-are-they-now/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

Ito apparently didn’t do that. The trial went on for eight months. The 12 jurors were sequestered, kept away from their families and friends and left to talk only among themselves.

The trial dragged on and on and on.

I bring this up to relay a point made to me during the trial by the then-chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court, who came by for a visit at the newspaper where I worked at the time. Chief Justice Tom Phillips — a former trial court judge in Houston — and I talked for a bit about the Simpson trial and he told me something fascinating.

He said Ito had the power to limit the time the lawyers needed to make their case. He said Texas trial law gives judges here that kind of power and he said he was quite certain California law had similar provisions that gave the presiding judge the power to keep the lawyers on a tight leash.

Ito gave the so-called Simpson “Dream Team” of lawyers and the prosecution’s Team of Nincompoops all the time they requested to prance, preen and pontificate in front of the jurors — and, of course, millions of the rest of America watching on television.

As one who generally favors televised court proceedings, I prefer instead to watch a more tightly controlled event than what we got two decades ago with the Trial of the Century.

Lance Ito is going to retire from the bench next January. I’d love to read a memoir, should he write one, that explains the “logic” behind letting those lawyers run wild in a public courtroom.