Category: Murder

OJ Simpson and Murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman: Analytical Review

When OJ Simpson allegedly committed the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman the ensuing criminal and civil trials relating to these events began a media storm in which the subject of race figured very prominently. In the 90s racial tension between blacks and whites was very high, two years before this trial race riots had occurred in LA as a result of the vicious beating of Rodney King by the LAPD. This high tension caused a lot of issues in the news media because anger and resentment, perceived or otherwise, between blacks and whites on this case combined with the popularity of OJ Simpson at that time caused coverage to be so popular that almost any mention of the case got massive viewership.

This resulted in media companies giving the people what they wanted, interviewing and giving airtime to anybody even remotely related to the trial in a mad chase for better ratings. In this coverage, certain aspects of the case were focused on more than others because they got better ratings, this resulted in a skewed version of the case the jurors saw being presented to the nation. This paper makes the claim that the news media presented the facts and especially the outcome of the case to the nation in a way which overshadowed important aspects which helped to explain the verdict due to an overfocus on domestic violence and racism innate in the news media system.

In order to see why the news media representation of the case was a dangerous mischaracterization of the events within it, the basic facts of the case and the 2 sides’ arguments must be gone over in some detail. The prosecution was headed up by LA District Attorneys Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden and the defense was lead by Robert Shapiro and then later Johnny Cocharin, the team of lawyers involved in the defense were sometimes called the ‘Dream Team’ by the media due to the amount of money Simpson was spending on his defense.

The prosecution’s case consisted of establishing that Simpson had motive and then proving that he was present at the time of the murder to establish that he had the opportunity to commit the crime. To establish motive the prosecution showed that Simpson had a history of domestic violence against Nicole Brown, including a time that he had pleaded guilty to hitting her in 1989. They also established that the night of the murder Simpson had seen Nicole Brown and her sister at his daughter’s dance recital and that afterwards he had gotten a message from his then girlfriend that the relationship they were in was over. Next, to establish that Simpson was at the scene of the crime the prosecution displayed the gloves used to commit the murder, one of which was found at the scene and another in an alleyway behind Simpson’s house. They also had an eyewitness refute Simpson’s claim that he was at home that night. The strongest evidence, according to the prosecution, that Simpson was at the crime scene, however, was in the DNA gathered there. Simpsons blood was collected in several parts of the crime scene or on related objects like his car or clothes, sometimes his blood was found alongside Brown’s or Ron Goldman. His blood was found on the gloves, on his socks, and in and around his car. Alongside this hair resembling Simpson’s was collected on Goldman and Brown and the shoe prints found at the scene matched his shoe size.

The defense’s case rested on establishing that the DNA evidence had been contaminated and then corrupted in order to explain why Simpson’s DNA was supposedly all over the crime scene and various elements of evidence especially the gloves. They established this by showing that the DNA was contaminated when it was collected by Dennis Fung who collected the DNA using plastic bags instead of the recommended paper ones and who also did not refrigerate the evidence for 7 hours after collection. After discussing the incompetence of Fung, the defense opted to play ‘the race card’. They claimed that many people, chiefly Mark Furhman, had conspired to frame Simpson for the murder because of their alleged racism. They later cemented this by getting tapes of Mark Furhman repeatedly saying the n-word when referring to black people courtesy of a screenplay writer named Laura McKinney. With this disparaging mark on Furhman’s character the defense claimed that he and other LAPD officers had planted blood on Simpson’s socks and other articles of clothing in order to frame him. They supported this claim with the fact that the blood on the socks contained EDTA a chemical used to preserve blood by the LAPD who kept a preserved reference vial of Simpon’s blood to identify him or his DNA. Finally, the defense moved on to the gloves used by the murderer. They stated that the gloves found at the scene of the crime and behind Simpson’s house (one in each place) were planted there by Furhman, which explained why Furhman decided to break into Simpson’s house which is how much of the evidence was originally collected. They also showed that Simpson had trouble getting the gloves to fit onto his hand, Johnny Cocharin famously stated ‘If the glove doesn’t fit, you must acquit!”.

Given this basic overview of the two sides of this court case, one can see a fair case for why jurors might have ruled in favor of Simpson on this case. It is important to note that the prosecution had responses to most of the claims the defense made which helped to mitigate them, for example the prosecution showed that the levels of EDTA in the blood found on Simpson’s socks was within the baseline level found within human blood according to the EPA. However, there is a case for their being reasonable doubt, the chief detective in charge of the case was now a known racist and public pariah and the lab worker who had collected the most damning evidence had testified to making major mistakes in collection and storage of said evidence. However, many of the American people did not see this view of the case at the time because of the way the news media portrayed the case and consequently these people were unprepared for the jury’s decision.

The court case was shown gavel to gavel on American television, a novel experience for many viewers and something which helped to launch court TV to great success in later years. Viewers who watched the entirety of the case on court TV would have gotten a good understanding of the case and why the jury was able to decide there was reasonable doubt in the case so quickly. However, not everyone viewed the case through this lense. Many people, especially white Americans got their news of the case through the white controlled news media. White americans who watched white people presenting the news saw a biased version of events, and black americans who watched black people present the news did as well. Black Americans were more inclined to believe topics of police corruption, especially when targeted at a black man than white people were so black controlled media presented the defense’s arguments more favorably than white controlled media. This lead to conflicting views of the case being presented to different groups of people which resulted in a split of belief about whether Simpson should have been innocent or guilty.

During the case white pundits in the media focused heavily on the fact that OJ Simpson and Nicole Brown Simpson had an abusive relationship, which supported the prosecution’s claim that this gave him motive to have killed his ex-wife. Obviously, since Simpson had plead guilty to beating his wife on at least one occasion there is merit to bringing up this aspect of the case, but there are issues with how this portrayed Simpson and Brown. Every time the two were mentioned, there would be a large, dark, forboding image of OJ Simpson, the accused murder and a bright image of the small, thin Nicole Brown Simpson. Images like these implied that Simpson had committed the crime without ever mentioning it by showing him as a dark, dangerous, black presence. These images also reinforced racial stereotypes held by many white Americans about black men hurting white women. The presence of racism in these news reports is evidenced by the lack of discussion of race in them. The media was in a sense ‘color blind’ during this case, barely mentioning the races of the two parties despite constantly showing images that showed their skin tones.

Months of reporting like this drove home the point that Simpson was guilty to many white viewers before the case was even fully presented. Since the news media was not keen on putting to words the issue of race, much of the defense’s case, especially aspects having to do with Mark Furhman’s and his partner Phillip Vannatter’s racist remarks were under reported while other aspects were overhyped. In fact the sensationalism of the news media during the OJ Simpson court case was second to none at that time. The amount of coverage it received was outrageous, CNN covered all 134 days of the case and events surrounding the case overshadowed other important news events. The NBA finals were interrupted for the car chase, and much of the Rwandan Genocide went unreported, these events were real news events that many Americans heard very little about because of the events of the trial. The popularity of this trial changed the media landscape forever as well, Guinness World Records lists the OJ Simpson trial as the most viewed trial of all time with daily average viewers of some coverage of it averaging 5.5 million. After the case many shows like Court TV gained popularity and the celebrity news and video channel TMZ was founded by Harvey Levin, a man who had covered the case for a local LA television station. The popularity of this case and its aftermath meant that virtually everyone had seen or read coverage of the case, not necessarily the same coverage but some coverage. This lead to the nationwide outrage generally by white viewers and celebration generally by black and minority viewers.

The most comprehensive evidence for the media’s part in misrepresenting and fanning the flames of national outrage at the Simpson verdict came after the trial was over. After news of the innocent verdict spread many newspapers and tv news corporations pointed to the fact that the majority of the jury was made up of a majority of black people. In a survey of op eds written after the verdict was released it was found that the vast majority of nationally syndicated columnists, those whose op eds would be seen by the most people, wrote about the verdict primarily from a racial point of view. The study found that there were 3 main viewpoints on race among the surveyed op eds: that the jury ‘voted their race’ meaning they voted to acquit because they were the same race as Simpson, that the race of the jurors was a major factor in explaining the jury’s decision, and that the news media’s reaction to the race of the jurors was indicative of race relations in America. The first viewpoint was by far the most common, especially among syndicated columnists with the latter two being more popular with guests and local columnists. The second viewpoint was only brought up in national papers on 4 occasions and the third viewpoint was virtually only present in local or unpopular papers.

The fact that the most common viewpoint among the surveyed op eds was one which assumed that black people were so angry about their perceived oppression that they would acquit a guilty man just because they shared the same race with him helps to explain why there was so much clamor raised over the outcome of the case nationwide. These op eds help to reflect the opinions of the average white person at that time. Not only were these opinion pieces written most often by white men they were also read mostly by white people helping to spread the idea that the jury ‘voted their race’ throughout the white population. This is an issue because it distracted from people talking about how there was a case for there being reasonable doubt in trial against Simpson, a viewpoint many black Americans were getting. In fact, mention of police misconduct in the case was so rare in these op eds that not only was it less common than topics related to race but also those of domestic violence, and socioeconomic status.

This data is troubling because it shows how overshadowed discussion of the reasons behind the controversial results of the case were in certain parts of the news media. Instead of spreading the facts of the case to the population to explain the reasons behind decisions made by the jury, newspapers were spreading misinformation that stoked racial divides amongst them. This is not to say that the defense was right and the prosecution was wrong. Many white Americans were justified in their beliefs that OJ Simpson was guilty, in fact a majority of Americans both black and white now believe that he was. The OJ Simpson Trial is a good example of why people should get their news from a variety of places.

It is important to address issues head on when it comes to news media, especially when discussing race relations. Getting all of ones news from a single source runs the risk that much of the information gained from this source might be biased in some way. During the OJ Simpson trial the news media was predominantly controlled and populated by white people which gave the American public and abundant amount of white people’s viewpoints on the case. However, if other viewpoints were taken into account information about the racism of the LAPD and the mistakes the force made in its work against Simpson people might not have been so unprepared for the verdict of the court case. From this court case it is apparent that diversifying the viewpoints from which one aggregates their news information is important to getting the full picture of current events.

My Personal Ethical Theory and Justifiable Killing

In this paper I will attempt to answer the question: ‘Is there ever a time when killing in justifiable?’. I will also explain my views and apply metaethical theories to a real-life situation to conclude on the topic. My personal ethical theory includes a hybrid of virtue ethics, revelation Christian ethics, and divine nature theory.

I will first describe my personal ethical theory and the application process. Then, I will apply the theories to the real-life scenario of the question at hand. I realize that not everyone will have the same feelings or outlooks and may come to a different conclusion on the topic. It is okay to have differences in opinions.

Virtue Ethics

First, I will address virtue ethics. Essentially, this approach to ethics says, “good ethical decisions will be made by good people”. The part of virtue ethics that best describes my personal ethical theory is the fact that virtue ethics is essentially based on how you are raised and the moral characteristics you practice. “Aristotle observed that there is a reason for everything that exists” .Aristotle refers to virtues as being character traits that persuade you to act and react in a moral way. He also refers to virtue ethics as a balance between two extremes or otherwise known as, the ‘Golden Mean’. Virtue ethics to me, means that if you practice being honest, generous, or just (or practice actions that proceed a good moral character) then you, as a person, will develop and become an honorable moral character. In turn, when you continue to practice these ethical habits, you will know what the right choices to make when confronted with ethical challenges. Although, my issue with the theory is that it leaves God out of the picture.

Revelation Christian Ethics

Revelational Christian ethics applies to my personal theory because I believe that what is in the Bible should essentially be list metaethics that Christians should live by. Although, it is not that simple. Many believe that the Bible is an easily interpreted list of rules, but that is not the case. “The Bible is not some middle-school piece of literature: it is a collection of writings that were composed over a long expanse of time by people with a variety of backgrounds who were communicating some pretty advanced religious and philosophical ideas”. Also, the Ten Commandments are ethical principles that I believe we should all live by. The world would be a much more peaceful place if everyone believed in the Lord our God, if we honored our father and mother, if there was not murder or adultery, etc. Although, it is impossible for everyone to agree on these principles. The other part of the Revelational Christian ethic theory that I have based my life on since a child is the golden rule. I treat others the way I would like to be treated. Although this principle has its issues too, because the way ‘I’ want to be treated is going to be interpreted many ways. The key foundation of Revelational Christian ethics is the Bible, reinforced by careful thinking and understanding of the heart and conscience. This ethical theory takes into consideration more than just the words but the actual application to the times or ‘hermeneutics’ and the study of the philosophy behind the Bible. This approach to ethics allows us the take into consideration more than just the words, and apply it to becoming “better Christians and better people”.

Divine Nature Theory

I previously thought that I could relate to divine command theory, as well, but after reading chapter eight of ‘Theory of Moral Reasoning’ it has swayed my opinion ever so slightly. When I was introduced to a modified divine command theory, towards the end of the chapter, more commonly referred to as divine nature theory, I thought I related to this theory more so than divine command theory. This made me question my previous thoughts regarding divine command theory. So, if I were to add yet another theory to my personal theory, it would be divine nature theory. As defined in the text presented to us, “it rejects the suggestion that there is a standard of morality outside of God to which God’s commands conform, for now the standard is internal to God- in effect, God is the standard”. And although not everyone believes in God, I do. Divine nature theory can be summed up as an approach to ethics to interpret moral principles as a reflection of the definitive morals that are essential to God himself. This theory also denies the suggestion that there is a standard outside of God. It tells us that God is the standard.

Justifiable Killings

There are many times when we ask ourselves if the violence going on in today’s world is justified. You can look at the death rates by violence and the trend has continued to sky rocket in the last few years. In fact, in 2015 the number of violence related deaths in the United States was 62,516 compared to the 1998 statistic of 48,847 . That is approximately a 27.983% increase in confirmed and reported deaths by violence, just in the Unites States alone. This does not include those who go unreported or are put under a category besides ‘violence related’. There was an applied case in our reading that addressed the issue of justifiable killing, but it was related to the military. In the case of ‘Vietnam’s Legacy’ Martin Paxton’s views and feelings after the Vietnam War are different then when he was first drafted to go to war. Paxton’s grandson was questioning the U.S. draft and Mr. Paxton was at a crossroads in how he should address this topic with his grandson. Mr. Paxton has trauma still, to this day, because of the sights he witnessed in Vietnam. He also understands that we, as a country, must have a way to fight back on acts of terrorism and fighting corrupt people, in general.

The application of virtue ethics to this scenario is going to have a basis of your personal moral characteristics that you practice but also how you were raised. Personally, I grew up in a Christian home and my father has been in the military since before I was even a thought. In fact, he way deployed when I was born, and he is currently deployed, fighting for our nation, in the country of Kuwait. So, just based on virtue ethics, I would have to say that are some killings that are justifiable. Although, not even all killings that the military must commit are justifiable, but for their (those overseas) and our safety they must be carried out. It is a different world in combat zones overseas. I personally could not do what these soldiers do. There are times when they are forced to take a life of a child because the child is contributing to corrupt foreign affairs. This child is essentially innocent, although this poor child was raised to commit acts that are seen as immoral. So, based on my virtue ethics and that alone, I would have to say that killing for a just cause of greater good, would morally be okay. Although, this could possibly fall under the ethic of rule utilitarianism. I don’t think that this alone could prove that it is morally acceptable to kill for a just cause, I think it goes deeper than that.

The next part of my ethical theory that I am going to apply to this topic is revelation Christian ethics and divine nature theory. The way that I will apply these theories to the situation is that God said, “Thou shall not kill” (in original Hebrew language, “Thou shall not murder”). There is a difference between murder and kill. Although, in this passage God is referring to murder and not necessarily killing. If we could have world peace without killing and only peaceful protests it would be one thing, but I don’t think the world that we live in today is capable of that. So, then comes the thought of, what if we stop killing in the military all together, where would that get us? In the current state of our country and those where we have an active military presence, I don’t believe we would be around much longer. The reasons for war are so many, while not all reasons are just, I believe the majority are. Ecclesiastes 3:8 says, “A time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace”. And one more bible verse that supports just war would be Matthew 10:34, “And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places”. Divine nature theory has been presented to us in a way that states essentially God is the standard. God tells us to obey all laws. Per our government, it is required for certain individuals to register for the draft and if the draft is reinstated they will be called to serve. By not following these rules or laws you are being sinful. These facts and theories must be applied when trying to decipher if killing is ever justified.

Conclusion

My conclusion is going to answer the thesis question of, is there ever a time when killing in justifiable? My answer to this question is yes. There are times when killing is justified. For instance, “killing becomes murder when (and only when) it is not properly justified, and the justifications are clear: you can use whatever force necessary to protect your own life from a hostile aggressor, or to save the life of an innocent from such imminent, life-threatening danger. The difference between the legal or illegal use of deadly force is really a matter of motive, intent, and justification, and these distinctions come straight from the pages of Scripture”. I don’t think God has intended for killing to take place, but after his life, he had seen enough how humans had worked and realized that it was unavoidable. There are times when crimes are committed, or people are harmed, and those perpetrators must be handled. Overall, there are times when killing in justifiable. When looking at it from a military or law enforcement aspect, you must ensure you are fighting for the right reasons and making sure you do everything in your power to do the job ethically.

O.J. Simpson Murder Case Review

Orenthal James (OJ) Simpson, also known as the juice was a former american football running back, actor broadcaster and now a convicted felon. The juice has won numerous awards and has many achievements such as: First NFL player to rush more than 2000 yards in one season, winning the fleishman trophy and being put in the hall of fame for college and professional.

Born and raised in San Francisco, California, Simpson is a son of Eunice (née Durden), a hospital administrator, and Jimmy Lee Simpson, a chef and bank custodian. His father was a well-known drag queen in the San Francisco Bay Area. Later in life, Jimmy Simpson announced that he was gay and died of AIDS in 1986. Simpson’s maternal grandparents were from Louisiana, and his aunt gave him the name Orenthal, which she said was the name of a French actor she liked. Simpson has one brother, Melvin Leon ‘Truman’ Simpson, one living sister, Shirley Simpson-Baker, and one deceased sister, Carmelita Simpson-Durio. As a child, Simpson developed rickets and wore braces on his legs until the age of five, giving him his bow legged stance. His parents separated in 1952, and Simpson was raised by his mother. Simpson grew up in San Francisco and lived with his family in the housing projects of the Potrero Hill neighborhood. In his early teenage years, he joined a street gang called the Persian Warriors and was briefly incarcerated at the San Francisco Youth Guidance Center. Future wife Marquerite, his childhood sweetheart, described Simpson as ‘really an awful person then’; after his third arrest, a meeting with Willie Mays during which the baseball star encouraged Simpson to avoid trouble helped persuade him to reform. At Galileo High School (currently Galileo Academy of Science and Technology in San Francisco, Simpson played for the school football team, the Galileo Lions.

At 12:10 am on June 13, 1994, Simpson’s ex-partner Nicole Brown and her boyfriend Ron Goldman were found murdered outside Brown’s property in Brentwood, Los Angeles, California. Nicole’s dog had bloodstained paws and led the neighbors to the bodies. Brown was face down and barefoot at the bottom of the stairs leading to her front door. She had been stabbed multiple times in the head and neck, and had a few defensive wounds on her hands. The final cut was deep into her neck, probably as the assailant held her head up by the hair. Her larynx could be seen through the gaping wound in her neck, and a vertebrae was incised; her head remained barely attached to her body. Goldman laid nearby by a tree and fence. He had been stabbed multiple times in the body and neck. He had more defensive wounds, and a cut on his shoe may indicate he kicked the assailant. Both victims had been dead for about two hours prior to the arrival of police. Underneath Brown was a restaurant menu she may have been holding. On her banister was a melting cup of ice cream. Near Goldman was his beeper and car keys, as well as a knit cap and glove from the assailant. Robert Riske, one of the first two officers on the scene, claimed to see a single bloody glove, among other evidence. Also near Goldman was an envelope with glasses he was returning. Bloody footprints from the assailant were shown leaving the scene. Measuring the distance between the steps showed the assailant walked away rather than ran. He may have also returned to the scene after initially walking away. To the left of some footprints were drops of blood from the assailant apparently bleeding from his left side.

The Prosecution Case

The prosecution believed it had a strong case despite the lack of known witnesses to the crime and the failure to recover the murder weapon. The case was supported by DNA evidence, and a conviction was expected. From the physical evidence that was collected, the prosecution claimed that Simpson drove to Brown’s house on the evening of June 12 with the intention of killing her. They maintained that Brown had put their two children to bed and was getting ready to go to bed herself when she opened the front door of her house after either responding to a knock on the front door or hearing a noise outside. Simpson allegedly grabbed her before she could scream and attacked her with a knife. Forensic evidence alleged that Goldman arrived at the front gate to the townhouse sometime during the assault, and the assailant apparently attacked him and stabbed him repeatedly in the neck and chest with one hand while restraining him with an arm chokehold. Brown was found lying face down when authorities arrived at the crime scene. According to the prosecution’s account, after Simpson had finished with Goldman, he pulled Brown’s head back using her hair, put his foot on her back, and slit her throat with the knife, severing her carotid artery. They argued further that Simpson left a ‘trail of blood’ from the condo to the alley behind it; there was also testimony that three drops of Simpson’s blood were found on the driveway near the gate to his house.

Simpson’s initial claim that he was asleep at the time of the murders was refuted by several different accounts. Simpson claims he had never left his house that night, and he was alone as he packed his belongings to travel to Chicago. A potential alibi witness was produced, Rosa Lopez, a neighbor’s Spanish-speaking housekeeper, who testified that she had seen Simpson’s car parked outside his house at the time of the murders. However, Lopez’s account, which was not presented to the jury, was pulled apart under intense cross-examination by Clark, when she was forced to admit that she could not be sure of the precise time she saw Simpson’s Bronco outside his house.

The prosecution called Brown’s sister, to the witness stand. She tearfully testified to many episodes of domestic violence in the 1980s, when she saw Simpson pick up his wife and hurl her against a wall, then physically throw her out of their house during an argument. The prosecution then called the manager of the Mezzaluna restaurant where Brown dined on the night she was murdered. Crawford recounted that Brown’s mother phoned the restaurant at 9:37 p.m. about a pair of lost eyeglasses. Crawford found them and put them in a white envelope. Goldman left the restaurant at 9:50 p.m. after his shift, taking the glasses to drop them off at Brown’s house.

Detective Ron Phillips testified that when he called Simpson in Chicago to tell him of his ex-wife’s murder, he sounded shocked and upset, but did not ask about how she died. The prosecution offered circumstantial evidence to show Simpson’s guilt. DNA analysis of blood discovered on a pair of Simpson’s socks found in his bedroom identified it as Brown’s. The blood had DNA characteristics matched by approximately one in 9.7 billion. The blood made a similar pattern on both sides of the socks. Defense medical expert Dr Henry Lee testified that the only way such a pattern could appear were if Simpson had a ‘hole’ in his ankle, or a drop of blood were placed on the sock while it was not being worn. Lee also testified that the collection procedure of the socks could have caused contamination.

Samples from bloody shoe prints leading away from the bodies and from the back gate of the condo were tested for DNA. Initial testing did not rule out Simpson as a suspect. In more precise tests, matches were found between Simpson’s blood and blood samples taken from the crime scene. In March 1995, Fuhrman testified that he drove to Simpson’s house on the night of the murders in order to question him. He buzzed the intercom at the outside wall of the property but received no response. The house appeared empty, and he scaled one of the outer walls to enter the property. He found blood marks on the driveway of the house, as well as a black leather glove on the premises. It was later found to have both victims’ blood on it, as well as Simpson’s.

One dark leather glove was found at the crime scene, with its match found behind Simpson’s estate. Brown had bought Simpson two pairs of this type of glove in 1990. Both gloves, according to the prosecution, contained DNA evidence from Simpson, Brown and Goldman. On June 15, 1995, Simpson was asked to put on the leather glove that was found at the scene of the crime. The leather glove seemed too tight for Simpson to put on easily. “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit”.

Later, it was revealed that Simpson “has arthritis and we looked at the medication he takes and some of it is anti-inflammatory and we are told he has not taken the stuff for a day and it caused swelling in the joints and inflammation in his hands”. However, this theory was debunked as the Los Angeles County Jail doctor confirmed Simpson was taking his medication every day and that the jail’s medical records verified this. The prosecution also stated their belief that the glove shrank from having been soaked in blood and later testing. They presented a photo during the trial of Simpson earlier wearing the same type of glove that was found at the crime scene. In May 2008 one of Simpson’s former sports agents, released his book ‘How I Helped O.J. Get Away with Murder’, in which he claimed that the gloves did not fit because, on his advice, Simpson had stopped taking his arthritis medicine, which made his hands swell.

Defense Case

Simpson hired a team of high-profile defense lawyers, which was said to have cost between US$3 million and $6 million; known as the dream team. Simpson’s defense sought to show that one or more hit men hired by drug dealers had murdered Brown and Goldman because they were looking for Brown’s friend, Faye Resnick, a known cocaine user who had failed to pay for her drugs. The defense team’s reasonable doubt theory was summarized as ‘compromised, contaminated, corrupted’ in opening statements. They argued that the DNA evidence against Simpson was ‘compromised’ by the mishandling during the collection phase of evidence gathering, and that 100% of the ‘real killer(s)’ DNA was lost from the evidence samples. The evidence was then ‘contaminated’ in the LAPD crime lab and Simpson’s DNA from his reference vial was transferred to all but three exhibits. The remaining three exhibits were planted by the police and thus ‘corrupted’ by police fraud.

The murders and trial received extensive media coverage from the very beginning. The case was a key event in the history of reality television. The Los Angeles Times covered the case on its front page for more than 300 days after the murders. The media outlets served an enthusiastic audience; one company put the loss of national productivity from employees following the case instead of working at $40 billion. According to Howard Kutz of the Washington Post, the acquittal was “the most dramatic courtroom verdict in the history of Western Civilization”.

The issue of whether or not to allow any video cameras into the courtroom was among the first issues Judge Ito had to decide, ultimately ruling that live camera coverage was warranted. He would be later criticized for this decision by other legal professionals. Dershowitz said that he believed that Ito, along with others related to the case such as Clark, Fuhrman, and Kaelin, was influenced to some degree by the media presence and related publicity. The trial was covered in 2,237 news segments from 1994 through 1997. Ito was also criticized for allowing the trial to become a media circus and not doing enough to regulate the court proceedings as well as he could have.

At 10:07 a.m. on October 3, 1995, Simpson was acquitted on both counts of murder. Before the verdict, President Bill Clinton was briefed on security measures if rioting occurred nationwide due to the verdict. An estimated 100 million people worldwide watched or listened to the verdict announcement. In post-trial interviews, a few of the jurors said that they believed Simpson probably did commit the murders, but that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Three jurors together wrote and published a book called ‘Madam Foreman’, in which they described how their perception of police errors, not race, led to their verdict. Critics of the jury’s not-guilty verdict contended that the deliberation time was unduly short in comparison to the length of the trial. Some said that the jurors, most of whom did not have any college education, did not understand the forensic evidence.

Discussion of the racial elements of the case continued long after the trial’s end. Some polls and commentators have concluded that many blacks, while having their doubts as to Simpson’s innocence, were more inclined to be suspicious of the credibility and fairness of the police and the courts, and thus more likely to question the evidence. The LAPD had a history of abusing African-Americans in the city, which was emphasized in the Rodney King case. An poll taken in 2004 reported that, although 77% of people sampled thought Simpson was guilty, only 27% of blacks in the sample believed so, compared to 87% of whites. The Simpson case continues to be assessed through the lens of race. In 2016, it was reported that most black people now think Simpson was guilty.

In the February 1998 issue of Esquire, Simpson was quoted as saying, “Let’s say I committed this crime … Even if I did this, it would have to have been because I loved her very much, right?”.

In April 1998, Simpson did an interview with talk show host Ruby Wax. In an apparent joke, Simpson shows up at her hotel room claiming to have a surprise for her, and suddenly waved a banana about his head, as if it were a knife, and pretended to stab Wax with it. The footage soon made its way onto the US TV networks, causing outrage.

In 1996, Fred Goldman and Sharon Rufo, the parents of Ron Goldman, filed a suit against Simpson for wrongful death, while Brown’s estate, represented by her father Lou Brown, brought suit against Simpson in a ‘survivor suit’. The jury in the trial awarded Brown and Simpson’s children, Sydney and Justin (Brown’s only children), $12.6 million from their father as recipients of their mother’s estate.

In November 2006, ReganBooks announced a book ghostwritten by Pablo Fenjves based on interviews with Simpson titled If I Did It, an account which the publisher said was a hypothetical confession.

As a result of a 2007 incident in Las Vegas, Nevada, regarding an attempt to steal materials Simpson claimed were stolen from him, Simpson was convicted in 2008 of multiple felonies including use of a deadly weapon to commit kidnapping, burglary and armed robbery, and sentenced to a minimum nine years to a maximum 33 years in prison. Simpson was released from prison with Sunday, October 1, 2017.

O.J. Simpson Murder Case: Evidence Analysis

Orenthal James Simpson, more commonly known as O.J. Simpson, was a former star football player for the Buffalo Bills. According to many, he was considered one of th best football players in NFL history. In 1977, O.J. Simpson met Nicole Brown at a private club where she was working as a watiress at the time, she was only eighteen years old. Eight years after Nicole and O.J. met for the first time in 1977, they married. Not long after the newly-wed couple married, they welcomed their first child together, Sydney Brooke Simpson, later in 1985. Three years following Sydneys birth, O.J. and Nicole had their second and final child, Justin Ryan Simpson. O.J. and Nicole reporedly had a rocky relationship from the start. During their years of marriage, there was constant fighting, excessive jealousy, and a few case of domestic violence. Ultimately, the couple did not stay together and got divorced in October of 1992. After two years apart, Nicole Brown and her friend, Ron Goldman, were found murdered outside of her house in Brentwood, Los Angeles, California. O.J. Simpson was accused of the murders of both Nicole and Ron. Following the accusations, O.J. was arrested and taken to court. I believe that O.J. committed these crimes. There are several pieces of evidence that prove he did so. Perhaps, the most incriminating pieces of evidence from the crime scene include, a previous history of 911 calls from Nicole regarding O.J.’s savage behavior and domestic violence incidents, blood evidence at both the crime scence and O.J.’s driveway, house, and sock, lastly, the infamous bloody glove at the crime scene and its matching pair at O.J.’s home. All of these pieces of evidence serve as proof that O.J. Simpson committed the murders of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

On several occasions in O.J. and Nicole’s marriage, O.J. physically and emotionally abused Nicole. In October of 1993, Nicole made two 911 calls to report that O.J. was raging and threatening her just outside of her Los Angeles home. On the call, Nicole was recorded saying, “He’s ranting and raving outside” and followed with, “He’s going to beat the shit out of me” (The Washington Post). The history of domestic violence, with 911 calls to prove O.J.’s agressive tendencies, serve as both motive and evidence against O.J. Simpson.

Blood evidence was considered to be another big breakthrough in the O.J. Simpson case. Investigators collected many different pieces of blood evidence that supported the fact that O.J. committed the crimes. The pieces of evidence found at the crime scene included, the killers blood, whose blood type matched that of O.J.’s, the blood of O.J., Nicole, and Ron found in O.J.’s car, and Nicole’s blood found at O.J.’s home. The prosecution team had expert DNA analysts test the blood samples found at each scene and the results stated that the odds of the killer being someone other than O.J. were nearly impossible (The People Vs. OJ Simpson).

Lastly, a bloody glove was found at Nicole’s home where the murders were committed. The matching glove was found at O.J.’s home. Nicole had previously bought the pair of gloves at Bloomindales in 1990, they were said to be O.J.’s same glove size. The gloves Nicole purchased were of the same brand of gloves that O.J. wore between the years 1990 and 1994. The pair of gloves plays a crucial role in the O.J. trial and adds to the heaping amount of evidence that was found against him. This evidence not only allowed investigators connect O.J. to the scene, but further argued that he was infact Nicole and Ron’s killer.

The O.J. Simpson trial was not only an important case for O.J., but for all of the United States. When the trial was in session, every newstation was showing live feed from the court room. Citizens of the United States followed this case from the beginning. There was a gret amount of controversy regarding the case as racial tension grew across the country. Many believed that O.J. was wrongfully convicted solely based on his race, while others believed in the evidence that provednhe was infact a murder. After almost an entire year in court, O.J. Simpson was found not guilty for the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. Throughtout the course of this case, many errors were made by investigators. Dispite the fact that some evidence was unreliable, there were several pieces of evidence that included factual information and statistics to prove that O.J. was the killer. Nicole Brown’s calls to 911 and documented history of domestic violence while in a relationship with O.J. further provide us with information on O.J.’s argressive nature and a possible motive for murdering her and her friend. Blood samples and evidence found at the crime scene and O.J.’s home allowed investigators to connect O.J. to the scene of the crime and convict him of murder. After finding the bloody glove at the crime scene and the matching pair at O.J.’s house, the gloves were found to be the same size and brand of gloves that O.J. had previously owned. This information allowed the prosecution team to strengthen their argument and convince others of his guilt. Even twenty years after O.J. was aquitted, both forensic science and crime scene investigation are still feeling the trials affects today. Due to the errors made by investigators, Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman never received the justice they deserved.

Detailed Review of the O.J. Simpson Murder Case

Orenthal James Simpson was a renowned American football player who became more famous after being accused of a double murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Simpson and her friend, Ronald Goldman. The case became one of the most distinguished and interesting court cases in modern American history while the murder case of the two still remain unsolved. After prolonged court sessions, OJ was acquitted of the crimes and walked home as a free man. The jury cited the lack of consistency in the case as well as major misfits in the prosecution case. The case revealed serious issues in DNA collection with concerns raised over the poor conditions of DNA laborator ies as well as the collection and handling of biological samples and the chances of contamination through cross-examination of the sample (Williams, 2013). This paper attempts to describe in detail the post-murder events, the forensics and investigation details.

The Case

Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman were found murdered on June 12, 1994, at Brown’s residence. The police found critical evidence supporting the fact that OJ had committed the murders. A leather glove found outside Simpson’s residence matched the one that was found at the scene of the crime. In addition, OJ had a wound on his hand and his blood samples matched some drops found at the scene. Nicole’s blood samples matched those found on a pair of socks at Simpson’s residence and the fact that OJ had recently purchased a knife, which matched the type the killer used. The shoe prints found at the scene matched the size of Simpson’s shoe size, which led to the conclusion that he perpetrated the murders. Simpson was arrested later as he attempted to free and was placed under police custody (Williams, 2013).

The trial became one of the most publicized cases in the United States with Television, radio channels, newspapers, and periodicals covering every bit of the proceedings. It was the longest trial ever held in California with the state spending around 20 million dollars on the case alone making the case one of the most studied, observed and debated cases in American history. His team of expensive lawyers and attorneys cited that the client was being framed and was just another African American to become a victim of the white judicial system. The lawyers also accused the prosecution side for searching the house of OJ without a warrant in an attempt to plant evidence, therefore, violating the 4th Amendment. The officer in charge of the case Mark Fulham was accused of using racial remarks while referring to Simpson, therefore, raising the doubts for their evidence further (Williams, 2013).

Forensics at the Trial Evidence Collection

There were issues with evidence collection from the start when a bloody fingerprint was discovered at the entrance of Nicole’s residence. The head of the investigation Mark Fulham however, documented the fingerprint in his notes but the detectives who took over the shift after Fulham were not aware of the print, which ended up undocumented and destroyed. This, therefore, gave the impression of a sloppy investigation where the detectives were not keen to document pieces of evidence. Expert witnesses also testified on the mishandling of evidence by the prosecution who took photos without scales that would help in recording the measurements.

In addition, items were collected and photographed without being labeled therefore making it difficult to link the photos to the scene of the crime. The detectives also mixed separate pieces of evidence, which lead to cross-contamination of the specimen. The packaging of wet items from the crime scene caused critical changes in the evidence. The icing on the cake was when they took a blanket from the house and covered Nicole’s body, which not only destroyed the DNA samples on the body but also on anything else around the area (Pitts, Giacopassi & Turner, 2008).

Securing the Evidence

Securing the evidence raised issues in the investigation, for example, around 1.5 ml of blood taken from OJ Simpson as evidence was missing. The individual who drew the blood samples had also not recorded the exact amount he took as a reference on the missing blood. The blood was carried around before being entered into the chain of custody raising more questions on how the blood was lost. Evidence storage laboratories were also under scrutiny after unauthorized persons tampered with evidence. For example, OJ’S car was accessed at least twice while at the impound yard while Nicole’s mother’s glasses and lens were missing while at the facility. The detectives later revealed that they had picked up Nicole’s phone without gloves and did not dust it for fingerprints (Linder, 2008).

A Question of Planted Evidence

Failure to have proper collection methods by the police only meant that police had planted Simpsons missing blood on the crime scene. The defense team argued of traces of Ethylenediamine Tetraacetic Acid (EDTA), which is an anticoagulant, mixed collected blood sample to prevent clotting. If this was the case, then it only means that OJ’s blood samples collected at the scene had been planted. The chemical can also be found in human blood and in paints but at the time of the trial, the tests were not available to determine whether the presence of EDTA occurred naturally or as a result to contamination. The presence of EDTA could also have been because of contaminated equipment used to run the tests (Linder, 2008).

A Question of Character

The head of investigations, detective Mark Fuhrman was accused of being using racial remarks when referring to OJ Simpson, which came at a time individual of African American descent, were at the mercy of the overly white judicial systems questioning the remarks of the detective. The detective also searched OJ’s house without a warrant of arrest, therefore, violating the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment grants individuals the right to be secure in their houses and with their personal effects and protects the individual against unreasonable searches and seizure of property by the authorities. The warrants are only issued upon probable cause supported by oath from the necessary authorities clearly describing the place to be searched and the things to look for. The fact that the glove did not fit OJ’s hand glove questioned Fuhrman’s credibility and the whole Los Angeles Police Department. The office was accused of discriminating OJ on basis of race, searching his house without a warrant and planting evidence at the scene of the crime all of which he invoked the Fifth Amendment rights against self-inculpation by refusing to respond to the allegations against him. The Fifth Amendment protects defendants from having to testify if they feel they will incriminate themselves through their testimony (Linder, 2008).

The Forensic Science Involved

The prosecution failed to overcome the lack of knowledge in the forensics by failing to put the evidence in terms that the jury could understand and appreciate. With this, the forensic evidence was deemed useless. The blood found near the bodies was also inconclusive since DNA samples showed the chances of the blood being Simpsons as 1 in 170 million. Chances that blood on the sock belonged to someone rather than Nicole were 1 to 21 billion (Pitts, Giacopassi & Turner, 2008).

The prosecution

The prosecution portrayed the image of an angry abusive man with all the evidence pointed towards confirming him guilty. They believed OJ had killed his ex-wife and her friend in a jealous rage due to the rich incriminating evidence against him and his lack of an alibi for the night. The prosecution pulled a series of 911 calls by Nicole Brown some months before she was killed. In the calls, Nicole is afraid of OJ and what he would do to her and the kids owing to the fact that he had abused her before. The witnesses who included Nicole’s sister, Denise Brown confirmed the fact that her sister was abused at time even in her presence and at other times in public (Blohm, 2008). Kato Kaelin testimonies contradicted OJ Simpson’s recorded statements OJ Simpson. Kaelin was a family friend to the Simpson’s and was staying at a guest house within the residence. He witnessed OJ’s movements for the night but could not account for his whereabouts between 9.36 pm and 11.00pm with the prosecution alleging that the crimes were committed between 10.00pm and 10.30pm. However, Marcia Clark the lead prosecutor in the case wanted the judge to declare Kaelin as a hostile witness, therefore, abandoning his statement. The witness kept on changing his statement on the appearance of the accused on the day Nicole and Ron were killed. On an eventful day, Simpson was to catch a flight to Chicago. According to the limo driver Allan Park, arrived at around 10.25pm in the Simpson’s residence, rang the doorbell but no one opened. Some few minutes to 11.00pm, a tall dark shadowy figure dressed in dark clothes entered the house only for Simpson to appear a few minutes later saying he overslept (White, 1996).

The Jury

One of the biggest mistakes the prosecution made was firing the downtown district rather than where it happened. The reasons the prosecution had given was reducing the commuting time for the prosecutors but the reason was more political than social. By doing OJ Simpson Investigation this, the prosecution violated the Sixth amendment that the accused shall enjoy the right to aspeedy trial by an impartial jury of the State in the district the crime was committed. The prosecution thought that convicting OJ Simpson in an all -white jury, could spark protests from the public owing to the nature in which the case was publicized. A more racially diverse jury like one in downtown Los Angeles would be able to convict the case with fewer tensions. The jury comprised of nine individuals of African American descent, two Caucasians and one Hispanic. The highest number of individuals in the jury was women accounting for around three-quarters of the entire jury. It was a high-profile case at a time when individuals of African America descent were trying to redeem themselves from racial discrimination that inhibited them from accessing certain services and taking part in certain services. Majority of the African Americans believed that Simpson was innocent while their white counterparts believed he was guilty (Blohm,2008).

The Verdict

With the contradicting leads and witnesses, the jury had to give their verdict on the case. The case was difficult to determine owing to the fact that OJ had a likable image in the public eye, had been a footballer and therefore changing people’s initial perception of OJ would be difficult. The evidence was sufficient that it would lead the jury to convict Simpson, although the doubts cast during evidence collection and investigation procedures by the sloppy detectives was enough window to convict otherwise. The jury took three hours to sum up one of the most publicized cases in the judicial history of the United States that produced over 150 witnesses at the c ost of 20 million dollars. They acquitted Simpson of two accounts of murder a decision most people believed was retribution for the Rodney King’s case in 1992 and the acquittal of two white police officers accuse d with police brutality on King (Pitts,Giacopassi & Turner, 2008).

O.J. Simpson Murder Case as One of the Most Controversial Court Cases

Over the course of American history, there have been many controversial court cases that have split the general population. Cases such as ‘Brown vs. Board of Education’, ‘Plessy vs. Ferguson’, or non-supreme court cases such as ‘The Scottsboro Boys’. However, none of these cases had a celebrity as the one on trial or the available media coverage due to the era. Because this lack of availability and notoriety to the public, those cases do not come up often in normal settings and everyone agrees on the verdict. However, one case did suffer from having such a notorious main character during the big boom of television and news coverage. This case was the O.J. Simpson murder trial which was the most controversial case in the last 30 years as it divided the nation by race. The racial circumstances around the trial were also unprecedented. After the overwhelming amount of evidence that was presented against O.J. Simpson, it became clear that his acquittal was mainly due to the fear of racial backlash. This can be seen in how the trial progressed and in how the verdict was racially split.

The Notoriety of O.J. Simpson: From Football Fame to National Controversy

Before being able to really understand how the ruling was based off of a fear of racial backlash, having a sense of the notoriety O.J. Simpson brought is needed. Orenthal James Simpson was born on July 9, 1947 to his lower-class parents. Jimmie Lee, his father, was a custodian and a cook while his mother Eunice Simpson was a nurse’s aide (CNN 2). He went to City College of San Francisco in 1965 to continue his education and play as a running back on their football team. However, he transferred to the University of Southern California for football reasons in 1966. Here, O.J. thrived as he would lead the nation in rushing yards in both the 1967 and 1968 football seasons. After being a runner-up to win the 1967 Heisman trophy, the most prestigious award in college football given to the best player across the nation, he won the coveted trophy in 1968. This led him to be drafted in the 1969 NFL draft to the Buffalo Bills where he would go on to be the first player to ever rush for 2,000 yards in a season in 1973 while winning the MVP award. Before retiring at the conclusion of the 1979 season, he was the rushing leader twice more in 1975 and 1976. In 1985, Simpson was given the highest honor an NFL player can receive after being elected into the NFL Hall of Fame.

During his football success, he was also active off the field. While at USC, Simpson got married to Marguerite Whitley in 1967 whom he had three children with. However, tensions arose when Simpson’s popularity began to grow as Marguerite coveted a private life while O.J. was the life of the party. This ultimately led them to get divorced in 1979. Even though his football career ended, O.J. still stayed around the sport through transitioning into the commentating booth for games. Working ABC games from 1979-1986, the 1980 Rose Bowl, 1984 Pro Bowl, and Monday Night Football, Simpson stayed active within the football community while continuing to build a bigger name brand.

Not only did Simpson stay within the football world, but he branched out to other aspects of media, especially acting. Coveting the life of celebrities, Simpson took part in various movies, commercials, talk shows, and television shows. His movies include ‘The Klansman’, ‘The Powering Inferno’, ‘Capricorn One’, and ‘The Naked Gun’ trilogy. Through the power of commercials and catchy nicknames such as ‘the Juice’, O.J. became the one of the most marketable African-Americans to white business owners, especially due to his famous Hertz commercials. This led Simpson to begin to surrounded himself with only white folks as he did not perceive himself as black but saw his own blackness as something that is holding him back from achieving what he wanted. This fact makes it even more confusing why later on in his life, his only saving grace became the black community.

In his personal life, O.J. met an 18-year-old waitress in Beverly Hills named Nicole Brown whom he married in 1985. Although she was portrayed as just another ‘blonde in a Ferrari’, her friends told a much different story. The pair quickly had two kids together and Nicole embraced the role of “the mom with M&Ms in the seams of her car’s back seat, bananas mushed into the carpet” (Washington post). She cared for the children taking them to dance recitals but because of how quick she settled into playing mom, she missed the chance of growing up, the “ill-advised lovers, late-night shenanigans, [and] bad choices” (Washington post). She began acting on these things at the age of 33, much to the displeasure of O.J. and the pair got a divorce in 1992.

Even though their marriage looked lovely from the outside, there was a history of abuse in the household as well as multiple calls to the police. The new republic reports that Los Angeles Police Department had visited the Simpson household eight separate times due to calls from Nicole claiming Simpson was beating her. However, due to the popularity of O.J., the police were star struck each time and even pleaded to Nicole to not press charges that would tarnish O.J.’s image. The police were intensely protective of the celebrity with only one case brought O.J. where they still let him off easy with only some charity work.

According to Nicole’s friend Cynthia Shahian, the relationship between Nicole and O.J. had “sunk to dangerous depths” within “the last three weeks of her life” (qtd. In Washington post). On Nicole and Shahian’s morning run four days before Nicole’s death, Shanian was shown a letter from O.J. that exhibited a new nastiness in their relationship. That morning, Nicole told Cynthia “He [O.J.] is going to kill me and my friends are going to sell me out” (Washington post). According to Kris Jenner, Nicole had told him “He’s going to kill me and get away with it” (qtd. In Washington post), but he did not understand. This is while other friends like Grant Cramer thought after the murders that “It finally happened”(qtd. In Washington post) as if her friends knew this was coming.

The Double Murder Case: Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman

All these signs do not look promising as an already heated relationship looked as if it was becoming more unraveled. Due to the past abuses, Nicole showed that she believed O.J. was about to kill her soon, although her friends missed the multiple hints. Then, on June 12, 1994, around 10:15 P.M., the double murder of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman took place outside of Nicole Brown’s condo. According to police reports compiled by CNN, Nicole had been at the Mezzaluna restaurant with her children a couple hours beforehand. After one of the members of Nicole’s party had left their sunglasses at the restaurant, waiter Ron Goldman was going to return the glasses to Nicole’s house, leaving the restaurant around 9:50 P.M. Two hours after the murders occurred, one of Nicole’s neighbors who had found and been taking care of her Akita dog who was acting agitated and had bloody paws, decided to follow the dog who led him to the dead bodies of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, both with stab wounds as their cause of death (CNN 3).

At this same time, O.J. claims he had been sleeping and awaiting a ride from his limo driver Allan Park to the airport. However, O.J. was not at his house at 10:25 when he showed to pick him up. He buzzed the intercom several times only to no response. Around 11:00, Park sees a man resembling O.J. walking around the house before O.J. comes to the limousine and takes off for the Los Angeles Airport (CNN 3). He took a plane to Chicago where he eventually found out about the murders in his hotel room the next morning. After flying back to LA the next morning, he was questioned by the police and was named as the primary suspect in the case a few days later. Simpson was asked to surrender to the authorities but refused to do so forcing the LAPD to declare Simpson as a fugitive. Robert Shapiro, Simpson’s lawyer, read a “suicide letter [that had been] found” (CNN 2) to the public that was written by Simpson. At this same time, Simpson called 911 while in the back of his White Bronco.

One of the two most infamous scenes throughout the murder trail happened before the trail even started. The image of a lone car going down the Santa Ana Freeway followed at a distance by a fleet of police cars has been engraved into many minds as it was on all news channels and even interrupted the coverage of the NBA Finals. Simpson was in the back of the car driven by his friend A.C. Cowlings while contemplating where he should commit suicide whilst also on the phone with police with all of America tuning in to watching this former hero’s steep fall (Britannica). However, while on the freeway, Simpson was met by crowds of cheering black spectators with signs of “Free the Juice” and “Run O.J. Run” who were standing over the freeway. The car was heading towards his house but as he got closer to the white neighborhood he lived in, the cheering black spectators turned into unemotional, silent white crowds watching him go by.

After this highly televised chase, the racial divide was already clear just through who was cheering for O.J.’s last ride. This would lead into the court trial as the two sides began to prepare. O.J. got together what has been nicknamed the ‘Dream Team’ of attorneys which included F. Lee Bailey, Robert Blasier, Shawn Chapman Halley, Robert Shapiro, Alan Dershowitz, and later Johnnie Cochran as the lead attorney. On the other side, the Los Angeles district attorney’s office was led by Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden with Lane Ito as the presiding judge. As each side prepared, the dream team focused their case on the mishandling of evidences and racism of the LAPD while the DA’s office focused on the former domestic abuse and the divorce as the reason for the murder.

The Trial Begins: Evidence and Accusations

After each side gathered their evidence, the trial began on January 24, 1995 and the prosecutors began presenting evidence on why the evidence proved that O.J. was the murderer. There were blood stains found in Simpson’s foyer, on paper found at the murder scene, a fence near Goldman’s body, on Simpson’s sidewalk in shoeprint form, in Simpson’s white bronco on the door handle and a partial footprint on the pedal, on gloves with one at the crime scene and one at O.J.’s estate, and on a pair of O.J.’s socks in his bedroom (CNN). This was an overwhelming amount of blood and evidence that all pointed to O.J. The shoes that matched the prints at the murder scene were high-end shoes made in Eastern Italy that are called Bruno Magli. The shoes were not recovered by they were a size 12 which matches O.J.’s shoe size. There were only 299 pairs of these shoes in the US and there had never been a picture that had O.J. wearing the shoes before (NY Times). That is until recently as a photo taken a year before the murders where O.J. is at Buffalo Bills game has been found with Simpson wearing the infamous Bruno Maglis (buffalo news). This incriminating picture that was not revealed until a decade after the trial would have been incredibly damaging to O.J.’s story.

Blood was found everywhere and it was directly involved in what became the most pivotal and infamous scene from the trail. If someone is asked to remember one thing about the murder trial, they will respond with remember Johnnie Cochran saying “If the glove don’t fit, you must acquit”. There were two gloves used in the murders with “the left-handed glove [being] found outside the residence of Nicole Brown and the right-handed glove [being] recovered form O.J. Simpson’s estate” (CNN). However, when O.J. tried on the gloves in court, they appeared to be too small which led to Johnnie Cochran uttering the infamous phrase. On the other side, the prosecutors contested that “the gloves, once drenched in blood, ha[d] shrunk (CNN)” which matches science which says gloves shrink when they get wet.

The blood found at the crime scene was also used to take DNA samples and they were compared to known samples from Nicole Brown, Ron Goldman, and O.J. These samples and various experts found that “the DNA test link O.J. Simpson to the murders (CNN)” while the defense claimed “the crime scene samples have been contaminated or could have been planted as part of a conspiracy against Simpson” The defense claimed this after trying to get Judge Ito to throw out the DNA evidence because they knew it was the most “damning physical evidence yet against Simpson”. In this day, DNA was still relatively new and people also doubted the legitimacy of it. However, knowing what we know now, the matching DNA evidence by itself would be enough to incriminate O.J., not even needing the corroborating evidence.

All this evidence came against O.J. when even his own defense team was doubting what O.J. had told them to be true due to conflicting stories. While in Los Angeles, Simpson told Cochran that he cut his finger in LA which did not match up with him telling a detective that he cut his finger at the hotel in Chicago when he heard about the killings. When Cochran called him out on this, Simpson then offered to get someone in Chicago to say they were on the phone with him and heard the glass break but this did not add up either as the landline was in the bedroom and the only glass was in the bathroom. It was already suspicious that Simpson had cut his finger the night of the murders while he was claiming he was sleeping but him not being able to remember how he cut it makes it seem even more likely that he had something to hide.

Simpson cutting his finger would line up if the murder weapon was some sort of sharp object instead of a gun. It just so happened that the murders had been committed “with a single-edged knife” and the “O.J. Simpson had purchased a single-edged knife prior to the murders” (CNN). However, the murder weapon has never been found and it is unknown to what happened with it. There is a story of people seeing O.J. dump a black bag at the Los Angeles Airport the night of the murders as well as a potential knife being found over ten years later however the black bag has never been proven while the potential knife was proven to not be the murder weapon. Although the bag has multiple eyewitnesses, the interior is unknown but it potentially could have contained bloody clothes, the knife, or other potential evidence.

The Defense Strategy: Playing the Race Card

The defense knew they would not be able to overcome to mounting pile of evidence that had been brought forth against O.J. Simpson. Because of all the blood and DNA that had been connecting back to Simpson, they knew their only chance was to attack the LAPD and try to take the focus off of what O.J. did. Johnnie Cochran created a narrative that portrayed O.J. as a civil rights advocate and martyr who was being discriminated against by the police. He insisted that “African-Americans who failed to embrace his narrative, such as the hapless prosecutor (Christopher Darden), were not only wrong, but were not really black”. Also, he was successfully able to divert attention by attacking the prosecution’s lawyer, Mark Fuhrman, by bringing up his past use of racial slurs doing Simpson’s trial.

Playing off of this idea that it was an attack on O.J. because he was a famous black man, Cochran came up with the idea to claim that all the evidence against O.J. was actually evidence against the LAPD by claiming they planted all the blood. Toobin makes this clear that this would have been impossible as Fuhrman would have had to transport the glove with residue and “wipe the glove on the inside of Simpson’s locked car” without being seen by the hundreds of media personal there. Also, someone would have to of put Simpson’s blood on the back gate, put Goldman’s blood in the Bronco, put Nicole’s blood on Simpson’s sock, and hoped Simpson did not have an alibi so they would not get caught making this story from the defense impossible to have occurred.

To go hand-in-hand with pushing this alternative and unlikely story, Cochran and the rest of the dream team decided they had to play the race card to get their client free of charges. In the closing argument, Cochran used “an explicit call for race-based jury nullification, calling on African-American jurors to ignore the evidence and ‘send the message’ to the racist police that letting a murderer go free was an appropriate payback for a legacy of state-sponsored oppression”. This was a call that invited criticism from others for the obvious invitation for jurors to ignore the evidence presented in the trial. However, when he was accused by Robert Shapiro after the trial, Cochran said “race plays a part in everything in American” and those who deny that “are totally insensitive to the problem of race in America and the underclass” (qtd. In new republic).

After the closing arguments were presented in which there was a blatant call to race, the resulting verdict was highly controversial as the innocent verdict left the involved families feeling as if they had been wronged. This led to a civil suit “by the victims’ families for wrongful death, and the civil trial began in October 1996′ (Britannica). In this civil suit, the new jury found Simpson guilty for being responsible for the deaths of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown (Britannica). Although this did not provide full closure for the families, it brought some closure as well as $33.5 million that O.J. was ordered to pay the families.

After such a controversial and media filled trial, there were many people who wanted to hear the events from O.J.’s point of view. Questions still lingered on how the murders may had been committed if it was done by O.J. This led to a 2006 interview by Fox that did not air until 2018 due to the controversy surrounding it. In the interview Simpson gives a hypothetical explanation for what could have happened on the night of the murders. Simpson details “how he disposed bloody clothes and other specific actions following the slayings’ as well as saying he could have “gone to Nicole’s condo on the night she died with a friend he describes as Charlie”. Charlie was supposedly the one who gave him the knife to kill Nicole and Ron with. After watching the interview, both former prosecutor Christopher Darden and publisher Judith Regan believed that Simpson was undoubtedly the murderer (nbcnews).

The Verdict and Its Aftermath: A Nation Divided

Due to the amount of evidence that was presented against O.J. in his involvement in the murders, the acquittal was very surprising. However, it was only surprising to whites as most blacks believed that O.J. was innocent. This spilt was due to the race cared that had been played throughout the trial and because of the racial tensions in that time. But before talking about the reasons the verdict was on way or the other, some background on those handing down the decision is needed. The jury consisted of eight black women, two whites, one hispanic, and one black man. This did not match the population of Los Angeles County as it was only 11% black. The jury also got the chance to tour the Simpson estate however it was an altered estate. In an effort to get the jurors to think O.J. embraced his blackness, the defense changed all the pictures on the walls from white women to black people and Simpson’s family. One of the pictures was from Johnnie Cochran’s office of a little black girl trying to get to school. This was all done in an effort to swing the jury and make the trial about race.

Due to the use of race in the trial, it makes sense that there was a racial divide on O.J.’s innocence. Most whites across the country were upset as 63% of whites believed O.J. was guilty. This goes along with only 22% of blacks believing O.J. was guilty. However, there has been a shift in this due to a poll conducted in 2015 where 83% of whites and 57% of blacks believe O.J. was guilty of the murders (Washington post 2). This goes hand-in-hand with research done by Lawrence Shriller were only three of 200 African-Americans polled that Simpson was guilty back in 1995. These people polled connected with O.J. as 44% said they had personally been treated unfairly by the LAPD at least once and “29% believed that blacks were rarely treated well in the local legal system’ (new republic). On a separate panel Shriller conducted, all 6 whites believed Simpson was guilty while the 4 blacks believed innocence. When he asked the blacks voters to assume the bloody footprints left at the scene were Simpson’s, a direct guilty verdict, “three of the four blacks still said they would vote for acquittal”. This shows the verdict went past the evidence and concerned itself primarily with race.

Race made itself an issue in the case before Cochran had called it out. Many blacks across the nation and specifically in the LA area felt that the police were unfair and after them. Framing one of the most high-profile black men in America seemed more likely to them than O.J. committed the crime. This is because the anger over the harassment of the police in the LA area for the 20 years before the murder trial had been building up and had just begun to boil over two years before Simpson. During the 1980’s, there was “rising unemployment, gang activity, and violent crime to the poorer neighborhoods of Los Angeles”. It did not help that the LAPD initiated aggressive techniques to try to take control in minority neighborhoods. In 1988, “more than 80 officers tore apart a pair of apartment buildings on Dalton Street…leaving dozens homeless”. Then, a video was taken of police beating a man named Rodney King.

The rising tensions were going to boil over eventually, it was just a matter of time when. In March 1991, a man named Rodney King led LAPD through a high speed chase that ended with him on the ground being kicked and beaten with batons for 15 minutes by police officers. As a result, he got “skull fractures, broken bones and teeth, and permanent brain damage”. When video was released showing the helpless black man being beaten by white police officers with over a dozen more officers watching, the black community was outraged and four officers were charged with use of excessive force. However, the officers were acquitted of all charges by a whit jury on April 29, 1992, which led to great unrest in the streets of Los Angeles. Tensions were already high as a young, black girl had also just been shot a few weeks prior and then, all hell broke loose in the streets.

After those officers had been acquitted, the black community took out their frustration in the streets over the next few days. As fires, lootings, and beatings of white men went on, there was no response by the LAPD who “did not respond to incidents of looting and violence around the city until almost three hours after the original rioting broke out” except for cop cars driving past, ignoring the violence. After five days of unrest, there were 50 deaths, over 2,000 injured, and 6,000 looters and arsonist arrested. The city had been on shutdown since the riots began as the major had declared a state of emergency and the national guard had been called in. There was also a city curfew with schools and businesses being shut down as well. This uproar only convinced the black community that the legal system was against them which had a direct influence on the O.J. Simpson verdict. The murder trial incited race and, according to New Yorker writer Jeffery Toobin, included everything Americans obsess about: “sexual relationships, sports, violence, and a criminal mystery witnessed only by a dog’ (qtd. In Washington post 2).

Reflections on Race and Justice: The Legacy of the O.J. Simpson Trial

Overall, due to the notoriety of O.J. Simpson and the overwhelming amount of evidence against him, it appears that he was acquitted because of the fear of racial backlash that had begun with the to previous confrontations between African-Americans and the police. However, because of the expected backlash that would have occurred and the tension a guilty decision would have brought to America, the innocent decision is understandable. Although the question still remains, is it better to have social justice or legal justice when it comes to our courts making decisions.

Serial Killers in the USA: Descriptive Essay

A serial killer is typically somebody who kills multiple people in separate events. They are usually gaps in between the first set of killing and the next set of killings which can range from a couple of days to a couple of months or even a couple of years. Different agencies have different criteria on defining a serial killer. While most agencies believe a serial killer becomes a serial killer once he commits his second straight, murder agencies such as the FBI defines a serial killer once a series of three or more killings occur, not less than one of which was committed within the United States. The first serial killing to date was in 1861, and it only continues to rise. This is seen more in-depth than just the infamous Ted Bundy.

The first believed serial killer in the United States was Herman Mudgett, who was born in New Hampshire, in 1861. Mudgett was born into a wealthy family and was always interested in medicine. Herman eventually ended up graduating at the University of Michigan. In 1886, he moved to Chicago were he started murdering people for their property. According to John Philip Jenkins “The house he built for himself, which would become known as “Murder Castle,” was equipped with secret passages, trapdoors, soundproof rooms, doors that could be locked from the outside, gas jets to asphyxiate victims, and a kiln to cremate the bodies. At the reputed peak of his career, during the World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago in 1893, he allegedly seduced and murdered a number of women, typically by becoming engaged to them and then killing them after securing control of their life savings. (—) Mudgett also required his employees to carry life insurance policies naming him as a beneficiary so that he could collect money after he killed them. He sold the bodies of many of his victims to local medical schools” (2018). Mudgett was arrested in 1984 after he was caught for the killing of three of his victims whom he was tried for and later confessed to the killing of about 27 people in which he ended up getting sentenced to death and was hanged in 1986.

Jeffery Dahmer was another known serial killer born in Milwaukee in the 1960s, what made Dahmer a cold-blooded serial killer was the fact that Dahmer didnt just murder them he also raped them and not only that sometimes he would eat his victims. Dahmer sought out men from gay bars with the promise of money or sex and usually trapped them with alchol laced with drugs. He would engage in sex acts with his victims and afterward kill and dismembered them while also disposing of them, he would also keep parts of their body like their skulls as trophies or souvenirs. Dahmer said he frequently took pictures with his victims in different stages of the murder process so he can go back in time and relive the crime he just did. Dahmer admitted during his trial that he tried to turn his victims into mindless sex slaves by drilling holes into their heads after he murdered and raped them. Dahmer made so many enemies With his hate crimes that he was sentenced to death but was ultimately beaten to death in prison in 1994. According to biography.com “Dahmer was killed on November 28, 1994, by his fellow prison inmate Christopher Scarver.In accordance with his inclusion in regular work details, Dahmer was assigned to work with two other convicted murderers, Scarver and Jesse Anderson. After they had been left alone to complete their tasks, guards returned to find that Scarver had brutally beaten both men with a metal bar from the prison weight room. Dahmer was pronounced dead after approximately one hour.”

One of the most dangerous serial killers is free right now, he goes by the name of Pedro Lopez. Pedro Lopez was born October 8th,1948 in Santa Isabel, Colombia and he is most known for his nickname which is “The monster of the Andes”. Lopez is linked to more than 300 murders in Colombia,Peru and Ecuador. He seemed to target a lot of tribal women as ? of his attacks came from tribal women. Lopez’s first taste of killing came in jail as he claimed he was raped and remembered the faces of his killers and went back to kill all of them one by one. According to Karen Harris “Pedro Lopez claimed that he was viciously gang-raped as a new prisoner. He remembered the faces of his attackers and, one by one, he hunted them down and killed each one before he was released from jail.’ This was Lopez’s first taste of murder”. Lopez was arrested in 1980 as police found about 45 graves of his victims. He was convicted and later confessed to about 350 killings in Colombia, Peru and Ecuador. In 1988 he was released from prison on good behavior and today his locations still remain unknown.

Have you ever seen a cop turned serial killer? Never happened? Joseph James Diangelo was a police officer before he became a serial killer and rapist, his crimes started in the 1970s and lasted around the 1980s. He committed a total of about 13 murders and he would get away with the crimes he committed by moving from state to state on April 24th,2018 he was arrested and charged to 13 counts of special counts and murders. he was traced and caught due to the fact of dna and the evidence that was gathered throughout the years. According to Allah, “detectives of the case traced back all evidence to him because of a public genealogy website as well as the DNA samples from his car and trash. Since he pleaded guilty, he will not be facing the death penalty however, 11 life sentences would not give him any kind of light for parole as well. All these serial killer facts just prove that the truth will surface no matter how long it takes. ”

The most notorious killer in London went by the nickname Jack The Ripper as he is still unknown. He was one of the smartest serial killers there ever was due to how he would mutilate their bodies in an unusual way; it was believed that he had knowledge of anatomy. Jack the ripper managed to kill about 5 women and he is still on the run and has yet to be unidentified. He still remains London’s most wanted suspect. All the killings took place within a mile within each other, after the killing occurred the man known as Jack The Ripper would call and taunt officers and give them the intentions that more killings were coming. The first murder was Mary Ann Nicholls on August 31st, the second murder was Annie Chapman which happened September 8th, the third and fourth murders were Elizabeth stride and Catherine eddoweson which happened the same day on September 30th and the final victim was Mary Jane Kelly which occurred November 9th. There has been many speculations on who the ripper is alot of people think he was a doctor or a nurse just because of the weapons he would use, like stated before it was also believed he knew alot about anatomy. There also has been rumors that he might have been killed more then just 5 people, he also linked to the murder of prince albert victor whom is queen victoria’s grandson and was also known as “duke of clarence” althoug he wasn’t ever to blame because of evidence remain uncleared and insubstantial. Despite countless days and countless hours they have not been able to figure out the ripper’s motives and or his identity.

Richard Ramirez or better known as the night stalker was born on February 29, 1960, in el Paso texas. Richard was one of the most feared serial killers in the late 80s across California. He killed about 14 people while torturing about 24 more. Growing up Richard was a huge drug addict and grew interested in satanism. The first murder came on June 28th, 1984; victim was known as Jennie Vincow who was not only murdered but she was raped and assaulted during a nighttime burglary. Ramirez was a calculated serial killer so it wasn’t until 9 months later when his second victim, in march 17 1985 he attacked maria Hernandez who mircasialy managed to escape so he ended up killing her roommate Dayle Okazaki and his third victim came within the same day as she was known tsai-lian. Not satisfied with his killing just 10 ten days later he murdered 64-year-old Vincent Zazzara and Zazzara’s 44-year-old wife, Maxine, using an attacking style that would become a pattern for the killer.Over the next few months, Ramirez killed and tortured around 1o more victim. Ramirez was forced out of Los Angeles due to the huge media presence and made his next two killings in San Francisco and killing these two victims gave him the famous nickname we all know him by which is the night stalker. Ramirez’s last victim on August 24th was spotted on someone’s property and they were able to capture his car plate. Later on through that same night he raped women and murdered her fiance, which ultimately led to his downfall as his victim survived the attack and was able to give a description on the night stalker. Just 6 days later Richard Ramirez was captured attempting to carjack a car which led to him getting beaten badly and then finally arrested. Richard Ramirez was convicted to the death penalty in which he stayed for about 24 years and died in 2013 at the aged of 56 from complications.

The ultimate most notorious serial killer known to most of America is no other than Ted Bundy who was born on November 24, 1946. Bundy didn’t start his killing spree until the 1970s. His killing spree went on for about 20 years, went over about seven states and included over 30 women. Bundy enjoyed torturing his victims and found it sexually amusing to rape them while having the Ultima satisfaction of killing them. Bundy is known to be an effective predator because of the empathy he lacked along with being unable to feel any type of pity or remorse. According to Lybi ma “Bundy sexually assaulted his victims but it was not motivated by lust. Instead, rape was another means of dominating and controlling his victims. Also, Bundy did not lose interest in his victims after they were dead. Sometimes, he would return to have sex with the decomposing corpse of a victim long after the murder to perpetuate his domination and control of the deceased. ” Acts and thoughts like this are what made the capture of ted Bundy more glorified. In 1978 ted bundy met his fate as he was captured and arrested in which he was sentenced with the death penalty and later died by the form of electrocution in 1989. The most amusing part of ted Bundy was the fact he was able to live a double life the whole time as his wife came out years after the fact and stated Bundy treated her like he was supposed to and never made it obvious he was hiding something so cruel.

An interesting question that always comes up when discussing serial killers is what do serial killers look like? Or how can we identify a serial killer? Well the scary answer to those questions is that there is no way to actually identify a serial killer as we know with ted bundy a serial killer can look like the person next to you. According to Allaah “Movies and social bias descriptions would often portray killers as middle-aged sadistic white men who have sexual motives. While some serial killer profiles fit this, this image is often misinterpreted. If one would take a closer look, the serial killers, as well as their victims, come from a variety of backgrounds and age groups. This just shows that anyone could be a serial killer. You will come across at least 36 serial killers in your lifetime. ”However, according to the serial killer data centre, around 90% of serial killers are masculine, meaning the evil favors the Y chromosome. Some common characteristics include sensation seeking, a lack of remorse or guilt, impulsivity and the need of control.

There are also a lot of signs that point out to somebody possibly becoming a serial killer and those signs include them having lack of empathy, lack of remorse, impulsivity, grandiosity, narcissism, superficial charm, manipulation and an addictive personality. Many serial killers start as arsonists they believe in manipulating power and having control. Another sign of a serial killer believe it or not is if someone likes to tortue animals. According to Susan Frese “This is one of the strongest warning signs. Children who torture or kill small animals like squirrels, birds, cats, and dogs without showing remorse are highly likely to be sociopaths. Many serial killers kill to control others’ lives, and as children, small animals are the only lives they have the power to control.” Another huge sign that most serial killers have in common is just the fact they come from poor or beaten families. According to Susan frese “Many serial killers come from unstable families with criminal, psychiatric, or alcoholic histories. These killers often have terrible relationships with their families, and often use them as their first victims.” ( Susan Frese, 2014). Like i said before there no one way of just figuring out how a serial killer looks but the most important characteristic to notice is if there a power junkie, according to Victoria woollaston “‘Serial killers typically have a real affinity with power, even when they’ve been caught and know the game is up,’ explained the experts. ”

Serial killers are the most interesting yet disturbing human beings that exist today. In 1928 there were 128 convicted serial killers operating in the United States which is the most up-to-date. Serial killers are some of the hardest cases to solve as usually the suspect has had months of planning and is already ahead of the law once he committed the killing, so it can be days before the law notices that there is a serial killer nearby. According to Allah “Since the 1980s, there are still 222,000 unsolved serial killer murders in the US. ” She also claimed in her writing that we as humans walk right by a serial killer about 36 times throughout our life. The United States holds the highest number of serial killers, while California has the most in the United States at 1,682.

In conclusion, serial killers are the most unique and cruel people ever created in mankind. They have a controlling way of thinking and a possessive mind to have control of anything and everything, including humans. There is no visual way of spotting a serial killer, however, there are signs we cannot ignore. Some signs include a Lack of Empathy, Lack of remorse, impulsivity, grandiosity, manipulation, and an addictive personality. Serial killers tend to have a thought process and they tend to plan ahead of their crimes. Some of the worlds most prolific include Ted Bundy, Richard Ramirez, Joseph James Diangelo, Pedro Lopez, Herman Mudgett and Jack the Ripper. All of these serial killers are alike yet so different due to the fact they all planned their attacks in different ways, ted Bundy planned his attacks using his looks and sweet charm he usually made sure his victims were younger women so he can overpower them once he got them where he wanted, Richard Ramirez made sure he attacked while everyone was asleep and attacked his victims in the night, and Jeffrey Dahmer victims were usually gay and he would lure them in with drugs and sweet talk offering them money and sex. All these serial killers had their own method behind their madness, some just assaulting for a couple of months while others have yet to be identified. Overall serial killers have been going on for a lot of years especially here in the United States and police agencies have done a good job in capturing them.

Essay on Serial Killer

In the world of psychology, there are numerous controversies on the debate of whether serial killers are nature or nurture. Nature refers to all genes and hereditary factors, meaning they are natural-born serial killers (Cherry 1). Nurture refers to all environmental variables, meaning they are impacted by their surrounding culture (Cherry 1). Many think that serial killers are driven by instinct and desire to kill, while others think they are born to kill. Serial killers typically perform horrible crimes and rarely leave evidence behind at the crime scene. They maul their victim like an animal would maul its prey (Cornwell 2). Studies of serial killers’ minds make it easy for one to say nurture beats nature (Cornwell 1). Factors such as behavior, personality, and culture form a serial killer.

The behavior of a serial killer is influenced by childhood memories, illness, abuse, and other negative circumstances. Childhood memories reflect on behaviorism of a serial killer due to an unusual experience with a parent, often the mother. In an effort to keep their children chaste, some mothers have linked sexuality with death (Maria 1). For example, Ed Gein’s extremely religious mother convinced him that women were vessels of sin and caused disease (Maria 1). In a sick and twisted way, Ed misinterpreted what his mother was saying. He made literal vessels out of women, using their skulls for bowls, and other domestic objects (Maria 1). People in the psychological world examine childhood abuse as a possible key to serial killers’ behavior (Maria 1). At an early age, some children have the tendency to hurt small animals (Pemment 1). Childhood trauma, abuse, and acting out are a part of a serial killer’s actions. Many say this is a reason to believe that they are natural born killers, but there is usually more to the story such as said abuse or trauma. (Maria 1). One could argue that children across the world have suffered horrible and sickening abuse at the hand of their parents, but did not grow up to be lust murderers (Maria 1). Even though this is true, it can also be said that people cope with things differently because of other influences such as how they were raised, what they have been through, friendships, and other similar factors.

The personality of a serial killer is a distant, distinct personality. Serial killers normally have a dark realm personality (Cornwell 2). They isolate themselves from the world around them. Serial killers have tendencies of violent behavior, do poorly in school, have low IQs, and have poor social skills (GoodTherapy 1). By lacking these skills, they normally have trouble managing or holding jobs (GoodTherapy 1). They mostly work as unskilled laborers. Personality disorders such as antisocial personality disorder (APD), borderline personality disorder (BPD), schizophrenia, and narcissistic traits are what contribute to a serial killer’s personality (Pemment 1). APD is characterized by a pattern of disregard and violation of the rights of others (Pemment 1). BPD is characterized by emotion, instability, anxiety, and schizophrenia (Pemment 1). For example, serial killer Jeffery Dahmer suffered from BPD. When Dahmer was young he was disengaged, tense, and had no friends. Jeffery blamed his BPD for his violent kills (Bio 1). Jeffery killed seventeen men in all between the times of 1978 to 1991 (Bio 1). Another serial killer is David Berkowitz, better known as the son of Sam. Berkowitz suffered from schizophrenia (Bio 1). In his early life, he created terror in the hearts of the residents where he stayed (Bio 1). He was a troubled child when growing up. He developed schizophrenia after the death of his mother (Bio 1). He targeted single women and couples (Bio 1). Throughout his life, he went on many killing sprees and severely injured many. For someone who did well in school and grew up in a working-class family, Ted Bundy is a primary example of nurture. He suffered from APD, but he was shy and did not do well with his peers (Bio 1). He was someone many did not expect to be a serial killer. He was connected to thirty-six cases but he committed more (Bio 1). Throughout each one of this serial killer life, they choose to become a serial killer, even though they were impacted by personality or personality disorders. One who believes that serial killers are natural born may argue that this serial killers were made to do these wicked crimes. One also can include that it is a hereditary factor if personality problems are genetic in their families.

The aspect of a serial killer’s culture can influence them to become killers. Many serial killers’ characteristics come from their surroundings. Serial killers do not murder people they know, they tend to murder strangers. Mostly 90 percent of their victims are strangers (Maria 1). Not only are these victims strangers but are mostly outside of their culture and cultural beliefs (Maria 1). The variable of the culture is related to where the serial killer grew up (Maria 1). Serial killers are exposed to many things in their culture, like guns at an early age, knives, and extreme use of violence (Cornwell 6). Serial killers with friends who have wicked fantasies about things influence them (Maria 1). For example serial killer Charles Manson, now he is a notorious serial killer. Charles was a cult leader who follows carried out several crimes (Bio 1). He was connected to the murder of the actress Sharon Tate and other Hollywood residents (Bio 1). Manson’s mother was an alcoholic and prostitute (Bio 1). Charles’s mother wanted nothing to do with him, so he started his life of crime due to his surroundings (Bio 1). He started his cult and influenced the people around him to start doing the evil things he was doing. They first started out by doing little things then it expanded to murder after murder, eventually they become serial killers and killed people they did not know (Maria 1). Another serial killer that led cultural beliefs is Jeffrey Lundgren. He is a cult leader who murders a five-family cult (Bio 1). He started out as a Christian but later turn into a wicked cult leader. He grew up in a strict and well-civilized home. Lundgren’s family was a church-going family. He became a religious fanatic, he preached about the apocalypse and trained his followers for war (Bio 1). Lundgren misconception of religion was evil and unjust. He convinced his followers to murder the cult (Bio 1). Both Manson and Lundgren are primary examples of the influence of culture and cultural beliefs, their followers did exactly what their cult leader wanted.

The question of rather a serial killer is nature or nurture is still not solved, but many have concluded their thought and opinion on it. Besides behavior, personality, and culture there are many more factors to contribute to a serial killer being nature or nurture. One firmly believes that serial killers are nurtured. They experience things throughout childhood that influence them to become a serial killer, but it is not what makes them one. Each serial killer ultimately chose to do the deed that they have done. They may have had outside influences that encouraged them to commit their wicked and sick fantasies. Parents, society, and other things can bring a child down, but it does not make them grow to become evil.

Work Cited

1. Cherry, Kendra A. ‘The Age Old Debate of Nature Versus Nurture.’ About.com Health. Web. 29 Oct. 2017.
2. ‘Infamous Serial Killers.’ Bio.com. A&E Networks Television. Web. 28 Oct. 2017.
3. Maria. ‘Traumatic Childhood Experiences | Twisted Minds – a Website about Serial Killers.’ Twisted Mind is a Website about Serial Killers RSS. 2007. Web. 29 Oct. 2017.
4. ‘Nature vs. Nurture.’ GoodTherapy.org Therapy Blog. 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 30 Oct. 2017.
5. Patricia, Cornwell. “Journey Into A Serial Killer’s Mind.” Sunday Telegraph, The (Sydney) (n.d): Newspaper Source. Web. 29 Oct.2017.
6. Pemment, Jack. ‘What Would We Find Wrong in the Brain of a Serial Killer?’ Psychology Today. 05 Apr. 2013. Web. 30 Oc. 2017.

Mansion Murders in Washington, DC: Informative Essay

In Washington, DC, on May 13 and 14 of 2015, the Savopoulos family and their housekeeper met a terrible fate when 35-year-old Daron Wint decided to hold the house residents hostage for 19 hours in hopes of attaining a large sum of money. He held the family, excluding the two Savopoulos daughters, hostage. Evidence shows that the family was taped to chairs to be tortured and forced to comply with his demand.

Most likely, after a lot of investigations, it is claimed that he first got to Philip and the housekeeper because Phillip stayed home due to being sick. Later on, the mother arrived, and once he ducked taped her to a chair, he forced her to call the father and convince him to come home. Once he finally got there, ordered the father, Savvas Savopoulos, to call his assistant and request that $40,000 in $100 bills be dropped off at a car sitting in a garage next to the house. According to FBI-UCR, robberies accounted for an estimated $438 million in losses in 2017.

A few hours after the money had been delivered, the house was burned down, and the charred bodies of Savvas, his wife Amy, and their son Philip Savopoulos, along with the housekeeper Veralicia Figueroa, were found by firefighters on the scene. The bodies were found with bruises from being beaten with a baseball bat and stab wounds, showing that the fire is not what killed the people residing in the house. Daron Wint was not caught until a couple of days later. Meaning there was a sizable time gap between the murders and Wint’s arrest. So, what did he do during the time and why did he need the money so badly that he murdered four people, including a child, and burn down a house? What did he go through in life to make him that way? And what happened after he was arrested?

Daron Wint led a secretive life, and even though he knew people who worked in Savvas company, and he was also a previous employee, the two were said to not know each other personally. Wint was an immigrant from Guyana and had a fiancée, now ex-fiancée, Vanessa Hayles. He led a normal life before the Washington mansion murders occurred. What may have driven Wint to commit the crime was the fact that he was broke, homeless, and jobless at the time. During the situation, it was said that the only reason why they started looking into Wint was because of a pizza crust he had left his DNA on after he had ordered it at the Savopoulos family’s house. His whole life had been turned upside down not only because of the horrible deeds he had done but also because of the simple mistake of not eating a pizza crust. But the pizza crust was not the only DNA he left on the scene. A lock of his hair happened to be found with the burnt bodies of Amy and Savvas Savopoulous. There were also traces of blood that matched one of the victims. After Wint had murdered the family, burnt down the house, and burned the vehicles of himself and Amy Savopoulos, he went on his own way. With the money that he had taken from the family, he began to spend ‘lavishly’, as stated by his ex-fiancée Vanessa. His brother-in-law stated that Wint often flashed money in $100 bills around and claimed that he had won the lottery.

Prior to Wint’s arrest, the authorities found two knives and a large sum of cash in his abandoned vehicle. Then finally, on May 21, 2015, seven long days after the tragic murder, 35-year-old Daron Wint was arrested on the charges of over 20 counts, some of which include kidnapping, multiple murders, burglary, and arson. But it wasn’t until October 25, 2018, that he was actually convicted of these crimes. Wint tried to defend himself in multiple ways, for example, by putting the blame on his brothers and having his attorney state that Wint was going to give himself up before the police arrested him. But no matter how hard, the now 37-year-old, Wint tried to plea, the jury was unsympathetic and unwavering. And because of the evidence, and the inconsistency of his story, they sentenced him to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Three years after the Savopoulos were brutally murdered, their former captor and murderer had finally seen justice for his gruesome crimes. He had forever changed the lives of many people, including the family of Vera Figueroa and the two daughters of Savvas Savopoulos, who now had to live without their mother, father, and younger brother. Wint’s family and friends were completely unaware of the monster that had become of their loved one until the trial was held. Nothing will be able to reverse the damage that Daron Wint has done but with him behind bars, the families of the victims can rest easy knowing that at least something has been done to stop him from harming anyone else.

Works Cited

1. Buchanan, Scott. “Robbery Statistics and Prevention Tips: Home Security Tips by the Security Sensei (Jordan Frankel)”. Global Security Experts, https://www.globalsecurityexperts.com/home-security-2/crime-prevention-advice/robbery-statistics-and-tips.html
2. “Center for Problem-Oriented Policing”. Home Invasion Robbery| ASU Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, https://popcenter.asu.edu/content/home-invasion-robbery-0
3. FOX 5 DC. “Who Is Daron Dylon Wint? What We Know about the Quadruple Murder Suspect”. FOX 5 DC, 23 July 2019, https://www.fox5dc.com/news/who-is-daron-dylon-wint-what-we-know-about-the-quadruple-murder-suspect
4. “Robbery”. FBI, 10 Sept. 2018, https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/robbery
5. Miller, Daniel, and Stephen Tschida/ABC7. “Daron Wint’s Ex-Fiancée Testifies He Spent ‘Lavishly’ after Murders, Claims He Won Lottery”. WJLA, 24 Oct. 2018, https://wjla.com/news/local/daron-wints-ex-fiancee-testifies-in-murder-trial-says-he-spent-lavishly
6. Noble, Andrea. “Lone Suspect in D.C. Mansion Murders Flagged for Deportation”. The Washington Times, 7 June 2015, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/7/dc-mansion-murders-darron-wint-flagged-for-deporta/
7. “Stitcher”. Stitcher, 4AD, https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/true-crime-garage/e/60368386?autoplay=true

The Worst Serial Killer: Thesis Statement

Have you ever asked yourself, who was the most dangerous serial killer in America? The answer to that question would be Ted Bundy. Ted Bundy became a well-known serial killer during the 1970s because he used his charming personality and good looks to lure an endless number of women. Bundy had a persona where he acted like the typical gentleman and knew exactly what his intentions were which were not good. His killings began in Seattle, Washington in 1974, until he was finally arrested in 1978. There is no specific number of how many women were killed, but the estimate is about one hundred victims. Bundy only confessed to about thirty women, but the real number is still unknown today. Ted Bundy was the most dangerous serial in America because he was extremely smart, a great manipulator, and charismatic.

Ted Bundy is glamorized as an evil genius, handsome, and well-educated killer who outsmarted the law and killed many victims. In the article, Amanda Blackman stated, “He does not deserve to be glamorized. He does not deserve to have his name in lights while he murdered an indeterminable amount of young women.” Bundy was just an average individual while he was growing up which had many people confused. Blackman mentioned “He sounds like someone who would go unnoticed on the bus or in a restaurant. He does not sound evil. Yet, this normal-seeming man ruined countless lives forever.” No one suspected that someone like Ted was even capable of hurting anyone but that was obviously false since he is considered to be one of the most famous psychopaths in the history of the United States. He was one of the most inhuman, vicious monsters that America has ever encountered. In the book written by Stephan Michaud and Hugh Aynesworth wrote down a quote said by Ted Bundy himself, which stated, “I’m the most cold-blooded son of a bitch you’ll ever meet.” Many people considered Bundy to be the devil himself which is a quite frightening way to describe someone. So many people and the media became so invested in him until this day when a Netflix series for him was released a few months ago and it became viral.

Usually, when trying to understand why serial killers do what they do, it is important to evaluate their upbringing and how they were raised. Ted Bundy, also known as Theodore Robert Bundy, was born on November 24th, 1946 in Burlington, Vermont, to Eleanor Louise Cowell. When Ted was born, his mother Eleanor already formed him as her secret shame. Since Eleanor was unmarried when she was pregnant with Ted, she felt humiliated due to her extremely strict and religious parents. When Eleanor gave birth to Ted at the age of twenty-two, she left him behind in Vermont while she went off to Philadelphia. Ted was thrown to an unknown orphanage where he stayed there for a couple of months. Louise’s father, Sam Cowell, tracked down the orphanage that Ted was at and adopted him as his son. When his mother returned, she wanted to raise her new son, but at the same time, she wanted to avoid Ted from suffering. During the 1950s, it was known that children with an unwed mother were often teased and seen as outcasts which Eleanor wanted to avoid. Her parents took on the role of raising Ted as their biological son while she disguised herself as Ted’s sister. For several years, Ted believed that they were his parents until later on when the news was exposed to him.

Ted never came into contact with his biological father and no one really knows who he is. According to Ted’s relatives, the environment where Ted grew up was extremely toxic and violent. His grandfather was an outspoken individual that always had an opinion on his dislike of minority groups. He physically abused his wife, children, and even their family dog. He was known to suffer from hallucinations and was often found arguing or talking with people that are not even present. His wife was also believed to suffer from depression and agoraphobia. Due to the toxic environment, Eleanor changed her surname and left Philadelphia with her son to Tacoma, Washington, and stayed with other family members. Later on, Eleanor married a man named Johnny Bundy, who formally adopted Ted and gained the surname, Theodore Robert Bundy. Many psychologists believed that “Ted suffered from attachment disorder in his childhood due to his mom pretending to be his sister.” There is much evidence that backs up the theory that Bundy had this type of disorder from his childhood.

These pieces of evidence include when Ted was growing up, many relatives witnessed Ted as a very odd and abnormal child. He became interested in things that children should have no business in. For example, at the age of three, he became extremely fascinated with knives and killing animals. While growing up, Ted was shy and lonely, but extremely intelligent in school. He had a hard time with his peers and often got bullied really badly. When Ted attended high school, he completely changed as a person. He grew to be an attractive young man as many of his peers described him and became popular to an extent. Around this time, he gained his obsession with violent pornography, shoplifting, and peeping into girls’ windows. Bundy also had sexual and homicide fantasies with women. He was still doing really well in school but got mixed in with law enforcement as well. At the age of eighteen, his records showed that he was arrested twice for burglary and auto theft. When Bundy graduated high school in 1965, he attended the University of Puget Sound. While attending the university, Ted did really well academically but still struggled with his shyness and was socially awkward. Since he was socially awkward he had a hard time making friends so he decided to transfer his sophomore year to the University of Washington. While he was enrolled in the university, he majored in psychology and studied the Mandarin language.

When attending the University of Washington, Ted met the woman of his dreams and fell in love. His girlfriend, Diane Edwards, was beautiful as he described her and she came from a wealthy family. “He tried to impress her to the point of exaggerating his accomplishments even though he was working at minimum-wage paying jobs.” To gain her approval, he applied for a summer scholarship that he won at Stamford University. His life seemed to be doing quite well for him so he decided to drop out of college and began to work. Due to his lack of ambitions and motivation, his girlfriend decided to dump Ted and move. Bundy became extremely depressed and later confessed to being obsessed with his ex for many years after that. A case study made for Ted Bundy states, “It was an obsession that would span his lifetime and lead to a series of events that would shock the world.” He decided to travel across the country for a bit until he re-enrolled at the University of Washington in 1969. Around this time, Bundy found out the truth about his grandparents and mother. Many believe that the breakup with his first love and the confessions from his family became the main trigger for him to completely change as a person.

Ted Bundy’s adult life made a complete change overall as he was as a child. Ted became more outgoing, confident, and charismatic, and was obsessed with the idea of being successful. He wanted everyone to know who he was and he wanted to be important. His new confidence helped him gain a new girlfriend named Elizabeth Kendall. She was divorced and had a daughter of her own. Elizabeth deeply fell in love with Ted despite her suspicion that he was with other women, but still was loyal to him. Bundy did not want anything serious with Elizabeth but he continued the relationship. Around this time, his first love came back into his life due to her attraction to the new Ted Bundy and how confident he became. This definitely helped gain Bundy’s ego and he became knowledgeable about attracting more women. Due to his confidence, he became involved in politics. Bundy worked on the re-election campaign for Dan Evans, Washington’s Republican Governor. “By 1973, Ted became the assistant to the Chairman of the Washington State Republican Party, Ross Davis.” This new confidence that Bundy gained took a dark turn where he would use his charismatic personality to lure his victims.

As stated previously, Bundy became this new person, he had many girlfriends and even had a child of his own. No one suspected Ted could do any harm to anyone due to the persona he put on. Up until 1974, when many young women were being vanished from college campuses around the state of Washington and Oregon. Bundy’s first victim that he confessed to and that the police force knows of, was the abduction of Karen Sparks. Karen Sparks was a college student, who danced and attended the University of Washington. “In January of 1974, Ted broke into the apartment of Karen while she was asleep. He both sexually assaulted and brutally hit her with a metal rod. Miraculously, she survived but had to live with permanent disabilities that Bundy left.” Ted Bundy’s first known murder case which he also confessed to was Lynda Ann Healy Lynda was a twenty-one-year-old college student from the University of Washington, Bundy’s main target area. “In February of 1974, Bundy abducted Lynda from her apartment and did the same things as he did to his first victim.” She was abducted, sexually assaulted, and beaten to death. Her body was found at the Taylor Mountain site where many of Bundy’s victims were found later on.

Ted Bundy’s main victims were white, females with long brown hair and college students. All that everyone knows is that “Ted Bundy confessed to thirty murders in interviews just before his death in January 1989.” When looking at his victims, it is obvious to determine that he definitely had a type. All these women had long, dark brown, specifically, parted from the middle. Some people may believe that he targeted these women because they had similar features to Elizabeth Kendall, Bundy’s first love. The reason why many people gave Ted Bundy the name of one of the deadliest murders in America is because of the messed-up things he did to his victims. Ted Bundy followed a plan with these women by abducting, sexually assaulting, and murdering them. He would lure these women with his charismatic personality and would gain their trust, then use it against the victims to murder them. Ted Bundy decapitated his victims and keep their skulls in his apartment as trophies. Not only would he keep their skulls, but other body parts as well. After he killed his victims, “Bundy confessed once he raped and killed his victims, he liked to spend the night with their corpses. He’d have sex with the bodies and often revisit them for additional sexual assaults.” He would often return to the woods where he dumped the bodies and would sometimes spend the night, lying on the ground with them. He admitted to putting eyeshadow and lipstick on the decomposing bodies of the women he murdered. Not only that, Bundy confessed to having sex with decomposing bodies and practiced necrophilia which involved eating body parts. It all makes sense why many people call Bundy the devil himself, he had no mercy towards his victims.

Not only did Ted Bundy target young women, but he also preyed on children as well, under the age of fifteen. There are not many cases that are available to back up the statement since Bundy did not really confirm anything besides the thirty victims he did. The three main victims that “the police are aware of is the case of Lynette Dawn Culver, 12, Kimberly Leach, 12, and Susan Curtis, 15.” Bundy kidnaped, killed, and sexually assaulted these innocents. The disturbing part of this is that Bundy had a daughter of his own making people question his intentions. Due to Bundy being the master manipulator that he was, he definitely used that trait in order to blend in with the crowd and to avoid being a suspect. Bundy would earn his victims’ trust by having to appear ordinary without any prior planning which helped him gain the title of the most infamous serial killer. Bundy was so intelligent to the point where “when he was arrested for the first time on August 16th, 2019, and sent to prison, he escaped.” Due to Bundy’s escape from prison, which happened twice, he was able to murder a handful of women. For many years, Bundy got away from these murders until he was finally caught for a third time in December of 1977.

When Bundy escaped prison, he broke into the Chi Mega sorority house where he killed two women at FSU. In July 1979, Bundy was convicted of those crimes and his deadly crimes were given the death penalty twice.” Before his conviction, Bundy was on the run, he was asked to pull over by a police officer for his reckless driving. While the officer was examining Bundy, he noticed that Bundy had some very weird tools inside his car. When the officer was investigating the car, he found a few student IDS that were linked to the women that were killed around the area. The officer also found ski masks, tapes, gloves, knives, and many more. The police officer ran the plates and discovered that Bundy was driving a stolen car. Bundy was arrested and taken into custody for questioning and a background check. At first, Bundy did not reveal his identity until a couple of days afterward. Investigators learned that the charismatic man was suspected of killing dozens of women across the United States.

One aspect of Bundy’s arrest is that “he assisted his own defense in all his cases, and was allowed to access the Pitkin County Jailhouse law library.” This goes to show how intelligent Bundy was to the point where he assisted his own case which was never done before. “In July of 1978, Bundy was indicted for two murders that were connected to him and three attempted murders.” This occurred before Bundy revealed any sort of confession about his victims and still tried to persuade the police officers that he was innocent. A year later, Bundy was found guilty of murdering a woman and attempted murder of another victim, Ted Bundy was sentenced to death for these murders and was scheduled to be executed. Over the next few days, “Bundy confessed to various law enforcement agents. Bundy told FBI Special Agent Bill Hagmaier he killed thirty people in California, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Colorado, and Florida between 1973 and 1978.” As stated previously, Bundy only confessed to thirty murders, but many believe that he has been involved with about two hundred murders. Since Bundy enjoyed having power over others, many believe that he did not confess to the other murders because he wanted to be in control of his own story. “On January 24 of 1989 at around 7 a.m., Bundy was strapped into the electric chair and was pronounced dead.” When Ted Bundy was finally killed, everyone that gathered to witness his execution cheered and was relieved that the monster was finally gone.

Ted Bundy will always be known as one of the most dangerous serial killers in America during the 1970s. Bundy only came clean to about thirty of his murders, but many others believe that the number is much higher than the number he gave. No matter how hard an individual tries to avoid any hardships throughout their lives, they will have to face them regardless. Of course, each person deals with hardships differently, with Ted Bundy’s case, he decided to screw up his entire life. Bundy leaned towards doing criminal acts like killing over a hundred women or even more. It is quite disturbing to think about what Bundy did to his victims by keeping their body parts as trophies and having sex with their decaying bodies. As stated previously, the scary part is that when he was caught, no one believed he could ever do such a vicious act due to him being an “ordinary” guy. Ted Bundy represented two entirely distinct dichotomous people: One successful, charismatic, and intelligent, and the other one a sadist, killer, and rapist. Bundy had zero remorse over his murders and took complete pride in his ability to kill which gave him the title of the deadliest serial killer in America.