Sunday, November 19, 2017
The Juice is Free
Orenthal James Simpson known by many people as their beloved OJ stood trial for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. Many people believed it was an open and shut case but with the creation of OJ's so-called dream team of lawyers, he was proven not guilty. Shortly after the trial, OJ wrote his own book titled If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer. In the book, he described how he would've killed the two victims. After the book was published the Goldman family took Simpson back to the courtroom but this time it was a civil lawsuit, Simpson was ordered to pay the Goldman's 33.5 million. Ever since Simpson has had his few share of run-ins with the law most notably in 2007 when Simpson and group of men broke into a man's hotel room who had memorabilia that used to belong to OJ. They proceeded to beat the men while holding them at gunpoint they took back the memorabilia. Simpson and the men were caught shortly after the incident, Simpson was sentenced to serve 33 years in prison. Just after 9 years, OJ was eligible for parole which he was granted, and was later released on October 1st, 2017.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This case relates to the Sacco and Vanzetti case because they both have a lack of evidence in order to prove for sure that they both convicted murder. In the Sacco and Vanzetti case, they could not confirm that they were actually there in the murder. And in this case, they could not confirm the murder weapon.
ReplyDeleteI think this goes to show how the mindset of many Americans never changes. People always believe what they want to hear. In OJ's case, the american people hear continue to hear the story of how he supposedly killed someone and they back the information that they are given and therefore want to believe. In Sacco and Vanzetti's case, people, in a way, want it to be the two of them who were responsible for the murders. At that time everyone was very strong on the idea that people like them were out to change America and spread their bad truth, and no one wanted to see them succeed to do just that.
DeleteThe O.J. Simpson case was one that impacted America greatly. It is one that most people will remember forever, but this case is one that ties back to the Sacco and Venzetti case because there was a lot of circumstantial evidence in both cases. It seems as though the juries in both circumstances were looking at whatever evidence possible to put the defendants in jail. This goes to show how confirmation bias plays a role in the juries and in eye witnesses. People will look for the evidence that is present in order to support their opinion, and disregard any evidence that contradicts their opinion.
ReplyDelete