Introduction
Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were brutally murdered between 10:15 p.m. and 10:35 p.m. on Sunday June 12, 1994 in the front of Nicole Brown Simpson’s Brentwood condominium located in Los Angeles, California. O.J. Simpson committed these murders. The witness testimony and the evidence at the crime scene of the murders of Brown Simpson and Goldman clearly indicate that O.J. Simpson committed the crimes. However, the incompetence of the Los Angeles Police Department during the investigation of the murders allowed the defense to create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors so that a non-guilty verdict was rendered. The guilt of O.J. Simpson was clear, yet the verdict allowed him to go free.
Witness testimony
Witness testimony regarding O.J. Simpson’s propensity of violence toward Nicole Brown Simpson, as well as testimony of witnesses placing O.J. near the scene of the crime, prove that O.J. Simpson committed the murders. Several witnesses testified about O.J. Simpson abusing Nicole Brown Simpson in the past. Witnesses also testified that O.J. was seen near the crime scene at the time of the murders, and that he was not present as his home at the time of the murders. This witness testimony plainly shows O.J. Simpson’s guilt.
Robert Heidstra, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, testified that he heard a dog barking near the home of Nicole Brown Simpson and also saw O.J. Simpson’s Ford Bronco leaving the home of Nicole Brown Simpson at the approximate time of the murders. Two additional neighbors of Nicole Brown Simpson, Steven Schwab and Sukru Boztepe, testified about a dog they encountered shortly after the time of the murder that had bloody paws. This dog belonged to Nicole and led them to the home of Nicole where they discovered the murdered bodies of Nicole and Goldman. The limousine driver who picked O.J. Simpson up on the night of the murders testified that he did not see O.J. Simpson’s Bronco on the property when he arrived around 10:20 p.m. This testimony placed O.J. Simpson at the scene of the crime. Additional testimony also indicates that O.J. Simpson was at the scene of the crime.
Gloves that belonged to O.J. Simpson were found in incriminating locations. Los Angeles detectives testified finding the one bloody glove at the crime scene and the other bloody glove on the property of O.J. Simpson. Kato Kaelin, the man living in O.J. Simpson’s guest house, testified that he heard sounds outside the guest house the night of the murders in the same area that the bloody glove was found. A Bloomingdale employee testified that Nicole Brown Simpson bought the same gloves at the store in 1990. Two witnesses, who were photographers, also testified about pictures they took with O.J. Simpson wearing the same gloves. These gloves were obviously O.J. Simpsons, and he wore them when he committed the murders.
The glove that came off of O.J. Simpson at the crime scene led to O.J. Simpson sustaining injuries to his left hand. One of Simpson’s doctors with the Los Angeles Raiders testified seeing cuts and abrasions on the hand of O.J. Simpson just days after the murders. A forensic pathologist testified that the wounds on O.J.’s hand could have been sustained while he was committing the murders. O.J. Simpson never provided an explanation for the injuries. An FBI agent also testified that the hair and fibers found at the scene of the crime were matches to Simpson’s hair and clothing. DNA testimony revealed that there was a one and one-hundred and seventy million chance that the blood at the scene of the crime was that of O.J. Simpson. Other experts testified that an even greater chance existed that the blood was O.J. Simpsons; finding a 1 and 150 billion chance. All of this witness testimony along with the evidence found at the crime scene reveal O.J. Simpson as the murderer.
Although witness testimony presented by the prosecution should have been enough to convict O.J. Simpson of murder, the defense used cross examination of a Los Angeles Police Officer to remove the attention of the trial away from O.J. Simpson’s guilt. The testimony of Detective Mark Fuhrman and his racial tendencies placed the focus of the trial on the officer and race rather than on the fact that O.J. Simpson murdered two people. This also allowed for the defense to bring up tampering and planting of evidence allegations, which were used to distract from the real evidence proving O.J. Simpson’s guilt.
Evidence at crime scene
The evidence at the scene of the murders pointed directly to O.J. Simpson. The evidence included blood from the crime scene, bloody shoe prints at the crime scene, hair and fibers found at the crime scene and a bloody glove found at the scene of the murder. O.J. Simpsons blood was found at the scene of the crime along with hair and fibers from his clothing. And, the bloody shoe print and the bloody glove found at the scene undoubtedly belonged to O.J. Simpson.
Droplets of blood at the crimes scene were O.J. Simpsons. Investigators discovered drops of blood next to shoe prints in the blood. These drops led away from the murdered corpses of Simpson and Goldman. Investigators discovered blood on the condominium gate belonging to the home of the deceased Simpson. The droplets both represented genetic markers of O.J. Simpson. When interviewed after the murders. O.J. Simpson had a cut on his hand that he likely sustained during the murders and left the blood droplets.
The shoe print left in the blood at the crime scene belonged to O.J. Simpson as well. The shoe was not a typical shoe. It was a very high-end Bruno Magli made in Italy. The store that sold the shoe in the United States happen to be a store that O.J. Simpson frequented. Additionally, O.J. Simpson wears a size 12 shoe. This represents additional clear evidence that he was at the crime scene and committed the murder.
Fibers and hair found at the crime scene matched those of O.J. Simpson. Hair found on a knitted hat at the crime scene were comparable to that of O.J. Simpson. On the floor of O.J. Simpson’s Ford Bronco, fibers of the same knitted hat were also discovered. These same fibers were also found on the deceased body of Goldman. This is clear evidence that O.J. Simpson was wearing the hat at the crime scene and had close contact with Goldman.
The most significant item found at the crime scene that linked O.J. Simpson to the murders was a high-end leather cashmere Aris Light glove covered in blood. One of the gloves was found at the crime scene and the other was found near the guest house on the property of O.J. Simpson. The deceased Brown Simpson had purchased these same gloves for O.J. Simpson in 1990. The blood found on the glove at the crime scene and the glove on O.J. Simpson’s property was the blood of O.J. Simpson, and the blood of both Goldman and Brown Simpson. Additionally, a strand of the deceased Brown Simpson’s hair was discovered on one of the gloves. While stored in evidence, the gloves were blood socked, frozen and then unfrozen so when O.J. Simpson tried the glove on at trial, it did not fit. O.J. Simpson wears an extra-large size glove.
Clearly, the evidence at the crime scene indicates O.J. Simpson committed the murders. The techniques used by his attorney’s at trial to discredit this evidence led to his acquittal. The acquittal did not mean that O.J. Simpson was innocent, it simply meant that his attorney’s presented enough reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors.
Incompetence of Investigation by Los Angeles Police Department
The Los Angeles Police Department made many errors in the investigation of the case. This led them to attacks by the defense and ultimate reasonable doubt for the jury. Due to these mistakes, a guilty murderer was set free. Mistakes were made in documentation, chain of custody of evidence, examination of evidence and handling and contamination of evidence. Notes were not taken documenting forensic work conducted by the department. There were errors in the recording of evidence. Investigators with the Los Angeles Police Department failed to notice significant evidence at beginning of investigation, including blood on socks belonging to O.J. Simpson that were found in his home. Blood samples were improperly packaged and stored, and the person who collected O.J. Simpson’s blood placed the vial of blood in his pocket and took it back to crime scene with him. This was a failure to follow proper procedure and a mistake that allowed the defense attorneys to use in order to place reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors.
The blood evidence gathered at the scene of the crime was accidently spilled by a Los Angeles Police Department criminalist while processing the blood. The blood was that of O.J. Simpson. The mishandling of the blood led to doubts as to the positive DNA testing indicating it belonged to O.J. Simpson. The same police department employee also mishandled the glove that was found at the crime scene. He handled the bloody glove at the same time that he was examining the blood of the murder victims which led to additional contamination. The defense latched onto the police department’s mistakes and presented the mishandling in such a way as to place reasonable doubt into the minds of the jurors.
As another result of the mishandling of this blood evidence, DNA could not properly be obtained from the blood samples. The DNA results could only indicate whether there were similar genetic markers as the blood of the victims and O.J. Simpson. Although there were similar markings and the blood more than likely belonged to Goldman, Brown Simpson and O.J. Simpson, the defense used this mishap to place additional reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. This was another error committed by the Los Angeles Police Department that resulted in the setting free of a guilty murderer.
More blood samples obtained at the crime scene that belonged to the victim Goldman were also mishandled. The blood samples were gathered then placed in the trunk of a police vehicle where they remained for several hours. The heat affected the DNA of the blood which led to the inability of the laboratories to identify the blood as that of the either victim or O.J. Simpson. The prosecution attempted to rectify this matter at trial by presenting testimony of an expert but the defense again used the information to place reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. These mistakes in handling the crime scene blood by the Los Angeles Police Department led to the acquittal of O.J. Simpson. The DNA tests did reveal that the blood belonged to the victims and O.J. Simpson clearly indicating that O.J. Simpson committed the murders. The police department employee that handled the blood samples was not competent and did not follow proper protocol when he handled the blood.
Additionally, mishandling of blood samples occurred when a Los Angeles Police Department placed the blood sample of O.J. Simpson into his pocket and returned to the crime scene. The defense used this mishap to claim that the detective planted blood at the scene of the crime. The blood sample was supposed to be taken immediately to the police station and marked as evidence. The samples were not taken to the station until several hours later. A very large mishap on the part of the Los Angeles Police Department occurred when investigators failed to notice blood stains on O.J. Simpson’s socks found at his home. The socks were examined several times by detectives and experts and no one discovered the blood. When the blood was finally discovered on the sock, the defense used the oversight to again allege that blood was planted.
The most harmful error relating to the blood evidence was that a chemical called ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid ("EDTA") was discovered in the blood samples. This was due to improper storage of the blood samples by the Los Angeles Police Department. Evidence of this chemical was found in the blood samples because the tubes that the blood was stored in were not cleaned properly. However, the defense took this error to establish reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors which led to a guilty murderer being set free.
The Los Angeles Police Department also made major mistakes when collecting and documenting evidence. Although the majority of the blood evidence was gathered the day following the murders, the police department delayed collecting important blood samples at the home of the victim. The blood discovered on the gate of the home of the deceased victim was not gathered until twenty days following the murders. Again, the police department failed to pay attention to details that could have led to the clear conviction of O.J. Simpson but instead, the mistakes led to the defense establishing reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. The reasonable doubt was not that O.J. Simpson did not commit the murders, the doubt was that the evidence obtained was not clearly direct but simply circumstantial. The defense also used these errors to allege the police department planted to the evidence to convict a non-guilty man.
Conclusion
The witness testimony and evidence at the crime scene validate that O.J. Simpson committed the murders. The witnesses testified about the anger and the past violence of O.J. Simpson which clearly show he had motive as well as the ability to commit the crimes. Witnesses testified that the bloody gloves belonged to O.J. Simpson. Witnesses testified seeing O.J. Simpson near the scene of the crime and not at home where he alleged to be. This witness testimony along with the evidence at the crime scene point directly to O.J. Simpson as the murderer. The evidence at the crime scene included a glove owned by O.J. Simpson, blood of O.J Simpson as well as a shoe print left by O.J. Simpson’s shoe. This testimony and evidence alone are enough proof to show O.J. Simpson’s guilt.
However, there is even more evidence pointing directly toward the guilt of O.J. Simpson. O.J. Simpson had motive as well. Although they had already divorced, a Nicole Brown Simpson had sought to reconcile with Simpson the year before the murder but ended up abandoning the idea of getting back together only a month before the murders. Additionally, O.J. Simpson had carried a bag from his home to the limousine. The bag likely carried all the evidence relating to the crime because he would not allow anyone to touch the bag and the bag was never seen by anyone again. If the Los Angeles Police Department had not been incompetent in their investigation into the murders, then O.J. Simpson would have been convicted of the crime that he committed. Yet, their incompetence led to an acquittal.
An important factor that is another indication of the guilt of O.J. Simpson is the judgment rendered against him in the civil lawsuit filed by Nicole Brown Simpson’s family. The witnesses provided the same information, and the evidence from the scene of the crime was identical. The witnesses testified about the domestic abuse inflicted upon Nicole Brown Simpson by O.J. Simpson in the past. Jurors heard the testimony of witnesses who claimed that O.J. Simpson was near the crime scene. Evidence from the crime scene included the blood of the victims and O.J. Simpson’s blood, as well as hair and fibers. The jurors did not have to concern themselves with the dramatic role played by O.J. Simpson’s defense lawyers, or all the distractions from the true issues. The jury, however, was required only to find that by a preponderance of the evidence O.J. Simpson committed the murders. O.J. Simpson lost the lawsuit wherein he was held responsible for the wrongful death of Nicole Brown Simpson. This is another clear indication that O.J. Simpson should have been held criminally liable for the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Yet, he was set free.
The witness testimony and the evidence at the crime scene make it clear that O.J. Simpson committed the murders. His guilt becomes even more apparent when considering the other evidence presented at the criminal trial as well as the fact that he was found civilly liable for the deaths. Had it not been for the numerous failures of the Los Angeles Police Department to conduct a legitimate investigation, the guilty man would have been incarcerated for the crime.
Bibliography
Baley, B. (n.d.). The Murders of Nicole Brown Simpson & Ron Goldman. Retrieved from True Crime & Justice: http://www.karisable.com/oj.htm
Brian "Kato" Kaelin, Criminal Trial, March 21-23, 1995. (1995). Retrieved from O.J. Simpson - A Different View: http://web2.iadfw.net/marjo/kato2.htm
Lessons Learned from Evidence Gathering Mistakes in Simpson Case. (2015). Retrieved from Aizman Law Firm: http://www.lacriminaldefensepartners.com/lessons-learned-evidence-gathering-mistakes-simpson-case/
Linder, D. O. (1995). The O.J. Simpson Trial: Excerpts from the Trial Transcript. Retrieved from Famous American Trials: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/transcript.html
Mueller, C. (1996). Introduction: O.J. Simpson and the Criminal Justice System on Trial. Colorado Law Revew, 67. Retrieved from Background Facts on the O.J. Simpson Case: https://uchastings.edu/academics/faculty/facultybios/park/classwebsite/docs/fall-2012/Simpson-OJ-1-26-12.pdf
Roger Martz's Testimony in O.J. Simpson Case. (1995). Retrieved from Officer of the Inspector General: https://oig.justice.gov/special/9704a/07simpso.htm
