Tracking an Offender After a Crime - Research Paper Example

Tracking an Offender after a Crime al Affiliation Step This essay chose to analyze a case featured in CNN on 4 October 2000. This case is known as the People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson is the name of the criminal trial held against O.J Simpson after he had murdered his wife. Simpson was a former American Football star and an actor. He was arrested and tried on two counts of murder of both his Ex-wife and her friend Ronald Goldman. This case has attained publicity as the most publicized criminal case in American History (Rantala, 2001). Simpson acquittal occurred after a lengthy trial that lasted for more than 8 months. This essay analyses the case of O.J Simpson and the offences that he committed. The main aim of this essay is to show knowledge of the criminal Justice system and the processes involved in this institution (Uelmen, 2009. His case was presided over by Judge Lance. The case of Simpson was characterized by hiring of a highly professional defense team, which was initially lead by Robert Shapiro. Step 2 Simpson was arrested in police car chase in Los Angeles. His arrest was a public arrest and it was watched on the national television by the national audience. During the time of Simpson’s arrest, he was running away from Los Angeles. The police managed to locate him through a vehicle that his friend was driving. Simpson explained to the police that he had a firearm and he would commit suicide if the police would stop his car by force. The police on a cellular phone promised that they would not stop him forcefully. This event was aired in the television since the Los Angeles Helicopters captured the scene. His arrest and trial ignited a national debate of race, corruption in the legal system and fame resulted into a highly publicized case (Uelmen 2009. Simpson was arrested and tried on 20th June and he pleaded not guilty for both murders. As it is stipulated in the United States constitution, the judge ordered that he should be held without bail. On the day that followed, there was a conference of a jury so that they could discuss and reach a consensus whether they should indict Simpson for the two murders. The jury was later dismissed after two days when due to excessive media coverage. This was done because it appeared as if the media coverage in this case would affect neutrality of this case. Jill Shively was the witness of this case who testified to the judges that he had actually seen Simpson when he was speeding away from the area surrounding Nicole’s house during the night of the Murder (Rantala 2001). The second witness of this case was Jose Camacho who worked at a cutlery shop (Simpson 2007). In his testimony, he claimed to have sold a German made knife that was 15 inches long. After these two witnesses had sold their story to the press, they were not resented by the prosecution at the criminal trial. The television show paid $500 to Shiverly after she had made the testimony to them. On the other hand, Camacho did sell his story to the National Enquirer at $ 12500. Later, a probable cause hearing was held to determine whether it was right to bring Simpson to trial. This was a minor victory for Simpson’s lawyers since they now got evidence of the case as it was being presented to the prosecution and contrast it to the grand jury ruling (Rice 2002). On 7th July, Kthleen Kennedy Powell who was a California superior court judge ruled that there was insufficient evidence to bring Simpson into trial for the murders. On 29th July, Simpson was asked how he pled for the case during this arraignment. He reacted by breaking a court practice which says that the accused should plead in simple words of “guilty” “not guilty”. In fact, he firmly stated that he was absolutely and one hundred percent not guilty (Simpson 2007). Investigation of the Murder case of Simpson was then launched and the case was televised for 134 days (Rosenberg 1994). Tom Lange who was a Los Angeles Police department detective was in charge of this investigation. The prosecution chooses to ask for life sentencing instead of death penalty for this case (Uelmen 2009). The exposure of this case in the television made the figures involved in this case to be celebrities. Simpson wanted a speedy trial, therefore, the defense and the prosecution worked hard to conduct his trial on time. In October 1994, Judge started interviewing the 304 prospective judges. They were expected to fill a questionnaire that was seventy-five pages long. Simpson’ trial began in 24th January 1995 and t was continuously televised by Court TV and other news outlets. Christopher Darden who was the chief prosecutor of this case argued that Simpson killed his Ex-wife out of rage that was caused by jealousy. They began this case with the evidence from a 9-1-1 call that Nicole Brown had made to the police department on 1st January 1989(Rantala 2001). In this recorded call, she made a clear expression of the fear she had that Simpson could harm her physically. There was Simpson’s voice in the background as he yelled. The prosecution presented DNA finger print analysis, shoeprint and blood analysis that linked Simpson to the crime scene. The prosecution presented the incriminating evidence against Simpson during the opening weeks. Simpson’s lawyer had the argument that only a single proportion of women who are abused by their men are murdered. The defense attorneys in this case included Carl E. Douglas, Robert Shapiro, Robert Kardashian, F. Lee Bailey and Gerald Uelmen. The evidence presented at the trial of Simpson was of various kinds. It includes a DNA analysis of blood found in Simpson’s pair of socks and it clearly indicated that this bloodstain belonged to Nicole Brown. Both socks had about twenty stains of blood and this blood was identical to Nicole’s blood. In addition, the left-hand grove that was found at Nicole Browns home matched with the right hand grove that was found at Simpsons’ house. The DNA analysis of the left hand grove that contained blood proved to be Nicole Brown’s blood. The carpet had stains that were fibers from Simpsons Bronco. Goldman’s shirt was also found to contain a few strands of African American Hair. The officer also found past arrest records that clearly showed that Simpson used to constantly assault his wife. These records included photographs of Brown after being battered by Simpson in an attack. There was so much evidence presented as incriminating evidence in this case. The burden of proof was left to Simpson and his defense layers. The prosecution side of this case felt that they had a very strong case. They did not have the murder weapon or witnesses of the murder. The physical evidence that they collected suggested that Simpson drove to Brown’s house with an intention of murder. The prosecution also suspected that Nicole came to the door to respond to a door knock after taking her children to bed (Simpson 2007). He grabbed Nicole Brown before she could scream and he attacked her with a knife. Forensic evidence that followed suggested that he Goldman actually came to the scene of crime during the assault and Simpson attacked him too (Rice 2002). He attacked her by stabbing her at the neck and the chest for several times. The prosecution also argued that some bloodstains were found on the way to Simpson’s house near his gate. The prosecution argues that Simpson was last seen in the public at 9.36 pm. This was the time he had returned at the front gate of his house with a friend. He was later seen after about one hour and 18 Minutes. The prosecution and the defense agree that the offense occurred between 10:15 and 10:40. The prosecutor presented a witness who confirmed that he had seen a Bronco that resembled Simpson’s car. The criminal trial of Simpson was a sensational event of the media since it was aired in most television stations in Los Angeles. It also brought about a great deal of racial divisions in America. In fact, some people began calling the US criminal Justice system into question. During the proceeding of his case, majority of Afrin-Americans believed Simpson consistently believed that Simpson was innocent of the murder of the victims of the murder of the two victims (Rosenberg 1994). On the other hand, the whites supported the Media and constantly believed that Simpson was guilty of the two murders. A jury made up of Two Whites and 9 African Americans and one Hispanic made a ruling that he was not guilty of the charges after only four hours. In a civil trial in 1997, Simpson was found answerable to several charges that were related to killings. He was sentenced to pay millions to compensate the punitive damages to the families of the victims. However, these families did not receive the complete compensation that he was penalized. Step 3 The weakest thing about the Criminal Justice System is the fact that it leaves the responsibility to make the judgment to on single person or a series of judges. The truth is that judges are also human (Rice 2002). Therefore, they are also subject to bias and err. In addition, they may be tribal, racist or even practice nepotism. In addition, the discretional powers in the criminal justice system are also another weak link. This is because it causes the growth of other criminal acts such as corruption, extortion, Police brutality, drug trafficking and apprehended goods. The truth is that discretionary powers predispose the signatories of the judiciary to a possibility of misuse of the power they are vested with by the constitution. On the hand a strong link about the Criminal Justice is the fact that it requires that both the prosecution and the victims should provide enough evidence to enhance the trial of facts in a court of law. This allows the prosecution to gather enough evidence during the processing of cases in the courts of law. Reference Hunt, D. M. (1999). O.J. Simpson facts and fictions: news rituals in the construction of reality. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Rosenberg, C. B. (1994). The trial of OJ: how to watch the trial and understand whats really going on. Los Angeles: Pub. Partners. Rantala, M. L. (2001). O.J. Unmasked: The Trial, the Truth, and the Media. Los Angeles: Open Court Publishing. Reiher, N. (2010). Reactions to the O.J. Simpson Verdict. Florida: GRIN Verlag. Rice, E. (2002). The O.J. Simpson Trial. Raleigh, N.C.: Lucent Books. Simpson, O. J., Dunne, D., & Fenjves, P. F. (2007). If I did it: confessions of the killer. New York: Beaufort Books. Uelmen, G. F. (2009). Lessons from the trial: the people v. O.J. Simpson. New York: Andrews and McMeel. Read More