Exposé Evariste, Yann et Pierre-Henri

OJ Simpson MURDER Case.

1. Biography:

Orenthal James Simpson (nicknamed “the juice”) was born in San Francisco on July 9, 1947. He started playing football in his school team of Galileo High School of San Francisco.

He won a few awards and trophies during his college football career between 1967 and 1969. In 1969, he began his professional football career in the NFL (National Football League) in the Buffalo Bills team where he played until 1977. Before the 1978 season, the Bills traded Simpson to the San Francisco 49ers for a series of draft picks. He played two seasons.

Simpson was a great running back, in 1973 he has been the first to rush more than 2,000 yards (1,828 km) in a season.
For all his career he was elected to Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1985.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1p5mgaT6mY )

After retiring from football, OJ began a successful film career, participating in the television mini-series “Roots” and movies such as “Capricorn One” or “The Towering Inferno”. His personality close to the people and his natural charisma opened doors for him. He also worked as a commentator for sports programming.

On June 24, 1967, Simpson married Marguerite L. Whitley and they had three children. Unfortunately in August 1979, their third children Aaren drowned in the family's swimming pool at the age of 2. The couple divorced the same year.

6 years later, in 1985, Simpson married Nicole Brown and they had two children. The couple divorced in 1992.

2.OJ Simpson Interview.

_ First of all, hello Mr. Simpson. It's very nice to you to receive us to answer some question. Could you tell us of what are you really accuse to have done?

OJ: Well in fact, at 12:00 on June 13, 1994, the police discovered the corpses of my ex wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman in the house of Nicole, in Los Angeles. My children was sleeping upstairs, thanks God she was alive. It's a fact that Nicole and I were divorced for 2 years.
The police found and collected evidences at the crime scene and they suspected me as the murderer.

_How Mrs. Brown and her friend have been killed?

OJ: This poor Nicole and her friend Ronald have been stabbed a multiple times. Nicole has wounds in the head and the neck. The wound through her neck was gaping, through which the larynx could be seen and vertebrae C3 was also incised...

_Gosh... And what happened next?

OJ: Well, my lawyers convinced the LAPD to allow me to turn myself in at 11:00 am on June 17, even thought the double murder charge meant no bail and a possible death penalty verdict if I was convicted. Over 1,000 reporters waited for me at the police station but I didn't went there.

One of my friend and my lawyer, Robert Kardashian read a letter to the journalists who were waiting in front of my house. I had written this letter myself : “First everyone understand that I have nothing to do with Nicole's murder... Don't feel sorry for me. I had a great life.” A lot of people thought I wanted to kill myself and the began to search me. My attorneys appealed me to surrender.

_So what did you do?

OJ: At 6:45 am, a sheriff spotted my car, a white Ford Bronco 1993, on the highway 405 in direction of the North. When the officer approached the car, a friend of mine who was driving roared that I had a gun aimed on his head. The officer moved away and a low speed pursuit began.

_Yes indeed we saw this pursuit because helicopters filmed the event isn't it?

OJ: Yes it's exact! At first there was only one helicopter of KCBS Channel but at the end there were about twelve other helicopters from different Channels broadcasting the pursuit on several television channels. I think a lot of spectators encouraged me.

_How did it finished?

OJ: At about 8:00 pm I stopped the car but I waited 45 minutes before going out of the vehicle. The police had increasing fears on the eventuality of a suicide. Finally the police found in the car $8,000 in cash, a change of clothing, a loaded .357 Magnum, a passport, family pictures and a fake goatee and mustache.

_Well thank you Mr. Simpson for answering those few questions. It has been a pleasure to meet you. Goodbye.

3. Media Scandal:

It's clear that Orenthal James Simpson was a real star in the United States. Football is the national sport, like for us in France with Soccer and great players are quickly loved by thousands people. OJ Simpson was a charismatic man in a country which support the principle of the American Dream which tells that you have to work hard for what you love to achieve what you want.
In fact we have to consider the case if it had happened in France with a famous people like Zinedine Zidane.
In the United States there had been a huge break in the population. In fact, the black population didn't think that Simpson was a murderer, or at least a higher percentage than the white population. Indeed, a huge part of white people believed that Simpson had indeed murdered Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman. We can see that

there was a real issue about racism and social levels.

After the verdict of the criminal trial the famed prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi wrote a book called “Outrage:The Five Reasons O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder”. Bugliosi shows himself very critical of Clark and Darden and points to many obvious errors they had committed during the trial. He accuses them, for example, not having found the word that Simpson had written before attempting to escape, holding that it "smelled" the guilt and the jury should have the right to see. He also highlighted a set of clothes, a large sum of money, a passport and a disguise kit were found in the Bronco and that the jury had never been informed. Simpson had also made a statement particularly incriminating to the police about the cut on his finger which he had the night of the murders. Bugliosi also Clark and Darden reprimand for not having allowed the jury to read the statement. He added that prosecutors would have had to examine the issue of abuse that OJ Simpson was doing to her ex. It concludes that we should have explained to the jury, composed mainly of African-Americans, that Simpson had little influence on the black community and had never done anything to help the more disadvantaged than blacks itself.

A lot of experts think that the choice of the jury has been determinant for this result. Indeed, surveys showed that there was a clear difference of mind between the colored population and the white population. The jury, composed initially of 40% white, 28% black, 17% Hispanic and 15% Asian was at the end of the selection process, composed of 10 women and 2 men: 8 black, 2 Hispanic 1 mestizo and 1 white.

4. Pre-Trial Criminal Procedure

We are going to present you the criminal procedure in the united states under the study of the The O. J. Simpson murder case (officially called the People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson) was a criminal trialheld in Los Angeles County, California Superior Court from January 29 to October 3, 1995

Criminal procedures refers to the body of rules governing the enforcement of criminal law.

Crimes are divided into felonies: crime punishable by death or by imprisonment for a year or more.

Ans Misdemeanors: punishable by less than a year in jail.

I_ Pre-trial procedure: before magistrate and grand jury

A_ The arrest and police investigation.

Criminal proceeding begins with the arrest of the suspect. There is no interrogation of the accused by the office of the prosecutor between the investigative phase conducted by the police and the trial itself. For administration efficiency reasons, police and prosecutor have a great deal of discretion.

At 12:00 am on June 13, 1994, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were found murdered outside Brown's Bundy Drive condo in the Brentwood area of Los Angeles. O. J. Simpson and Nicole Brown Simpson had divorced two years earlier. Evidence found and collected at the scene led police to suspect that O. J. Simpson was the murderer.

If the police believes that there is a “probable cause” to believe the suspect committed a crime, the suspect is immediately arrested.

Probable cause= facts and circumstances within the officers' knowledge and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offence has been or is being commited”.

The arrest may prevent from escape of the suspect with the use of force.

Under the protection of persons' private sphere of the 4^th amendment, it is possible to carry out an arrest in public places but the entry in a building to search for suspect must be undertaken with judge warrant.

However the vast majority of arrests are made based on probable cause, without a judicial warrant. This is around 90% of arrest. The appreciation of the sufficient evidences constituent of a probable cause is made by the Magistrate after the arrest.

Arrest can be made after a report based on information provided by a victim but it implies a pre arrest investigation.

June 13, 1994 O.J. Simpson is notified of the murders while on a business trip in Chicago.  He returns to Los Angeles, is temporarily handcuffed, and taken in for questioning.

After he's arrested, the suspect is informed of his “Miranda Rights”:is a warning that is required to be given by police in the United States to criminalsuspects in police custody before they are interrogated to inform them about their constitutional rights

the main miranda rights are that he or she has the right to remain silent, and that anything the person says will be used against that person in court; the person must be clearly informed that he or she has the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, and that, if he or she is indigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent her or him.

Lawyers convinced the LAPD to allow Simpson to turn himself in at 11 am on June 17, 1994[13]:87 even though the double murder charge meant no bail and a possible death penalty verdict if convicted

Robert Shapiro is contacted on Simpson's behalf and asked to become  defence counsel.

This right to counsel is given under statements of the 6^th amendment.

June 17, 1994

About to be arrested for murder, Simpson slips out of Robert Kardashian's home.  He is chased by police while riding in his white Ford Bronco, driven by friend A.C. Cowlings.  When he returns to his home on Rockingham, Simpson is taken into custody.

Police investigators don't have the right to issue subpoenas or otherwise compel unwilling witnesses of victims to give statement to them.

Policemen must resort to persuasion, pressure or charm.

Only when the Grand jury conducts the investigation, they can issue a subpoena to get testimonies and proofs. The grand jury can also give an immunity to the witness and force him to speak by the Contempt of Court.

In fact, the grand jury is mostly used to screen cases after the prosecution decides it has enough evidence to charge a person.

B_ The prosecution

Role of the prosecutor.

After that investigation, the prosecutor may or not authorize the charges. That's an opportunity to take.

Prosecutor Marcia Clark, a 40-year-old Deputy District Attorney, was designated as the lead prosecutor, which was to be her twenty-first murder trial during her 13 years with the D.A.'s office

While the person waits for the first appearance before the court, a police officer prepares a complaint against the suspect. The complaint is a document that describes the alleged crime. It is screened by prosecutors and then submitted to the court. The court reviews the complaint to determine whether there is sufficient legal basis to hold the person in custody. If the magistrate finds that the facts alleged do not establish probable cause to believe that the suspect committed the crime, the magistrate must dismiss the complaint and order the release of the person from custody.

The complaint, to allege the accused, must respect the burden of proof.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution in a criminal trial, which must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged.  This means that the proposition being presented by the prosecution must be proven to the extent that there could be no "reasonable doubt" in the mind of a "reasonable person" that the defendant is guilty

The First appearance

First, the arrested person must be brought as soon as possible before a magistrate (judicial officer) for a preliminary of “first appearance”.

The 1^st appearance has several purposes:

-to assure that the person arrested is actually the person named in the complaint

At this appearance the accused must be informed of his rights and a date will be set for preliminary examination or hearing in felony cases, in misdemeanor cases, the case may be tried immediately.

-To advise the defendant of the charges against him or her and to provide information about irght the accused will have in futur proceedings. Including the right to a lawyer, this stage is the point at which most defendants have their lawyer appointed.

-To determine wether the accused is to be released prior to trial at all.

At this stage, the magistrate can hear some new witnesses, hear the accused, consider new evidences...

In felony cases, the judges sets a date for a “preliminary examination” . In misdemeanor cases, the trial may be tried immediately.

As it's to protect the defendant, this one can waive the first appearance.

After a warantless Court made it a constitutional requirement that a prompt judicial determination of probable cause follow a warrantless search. It ruled that a determination must be made without unreasonable delay, and in no event later than forty-eight hours after arrest. Therefore, all state and federal warrantless arrests must comply with the holdings of Gerstein and County of Riverside.

III_ Preliminary examination: Before the Judge or Before the Grand jury.

July 8, 1994

Six-day preliminary hearing ends with Judge Kathleen Kennedy-Powell ruling there is sufficient evidence for O.J. Simpson to stand trial on two counts of first-degree murder.

A few days or weeks after the first appearance, the first examination, or first hearings takes place.

Both sides are present and are represented by counsel.

Simpson was represented by some of the most prestigious lawyers of the country, he paid them hundreds thousands dollars: the most popular being Robert Shapiro and Johnny Cochran.

The key issue of this Preliminary hearings is to determine if there is enough evidence to “bind over” the defendant for trial, the probable cause is once again asked.

Also, the question of the bail is very important: will the accused be enjailed waiting for the Trial (if trial there is) or not?

In fact 3 issues are possible at the end of this preliminary hearing when the judge hears the case,

the two parties make their own witnesses be heard by the magistrate who can decide:

-to qualify these facts of Misdemeanor

-To Bind Over The Trial, under the conditions that he found out that a crime has been committed and there's a probable cause to believe that the defendant committed it.

-To make a Dismissal of the complaint. This isn't definitive, the Grand jury can make an indictment thanks to Fifth amendment, or an other Magistrate can bind over the trial.

The conduct of the preliminary hearing as well as the specific rules regarding the admissibility of evidence vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Should the court decide that there is probable cause, a formal charging instrument (called the information in some jurisdictions) will issue; and the prosecution will continue. If the court should find that there is no probable cause, then typically the prosecution will cease. Many jurisdictions, however, allow the prosecution to seek a new preliminary hearing, or even seek a bill of indictment from a grand jury.

Some important questions that such a hearing generally addresses are:

1. Did the alleged crime occur within the court's jurisdiction?
2. Is there probable cause, to believe that the defendant committed the crime?

If a judge determines that there is sufficient evidence to believe that the defendant committed the crime, it is said that the defendant is "held to answer" or "bound over" (in U.S. jurisdictions).

 A preliminary hearing is not always required. In the U.S., if the defendant is charged with a federal felony, [s]he has the right to an indictment by a grand jury pursuant to the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

In felony cases in states where the GRAND JURY indictment is used to start a criminal proceeding, defendants often waive the preliminary hearing, because the grand jury will make the probable cause determination. However, some defendants request a preliminary hearing because it allows them to gain information about the basis of the prosecution's case or to move for dismissal of the case.

O. J. SIMPSON requested a preliminary hearing in 1994 after being charged with two counts of first-degree murder. Although Simpson's attorney, ROBERT SHAPIRO, failed to secure a dismissal, he was able to elicit information from police and forensic witnesses that proved valuable at Simpson's 1995 murder trial, which ended in Simpson's acquittal.

After the court holds a defendant to answer, the court schedules an arraignment.

II- Pre trial phase: before the court of judgement.

The arraignment.

July 22, 1994

O.J. pleads "absolutely 100 percent not guilty" to the charges.  Judge Lance A. Ito assigned to hear case.

Arraignment is a formal reading of a criminal complaint in the presence of the defendant to inform the defendant of the charges against him or her. In response to arraignment, the accused is expected to enter a plea.

The different pleas.

When you ask to provide a plea at the arraignment, there are normally only two possible answers: "Guilty" or "Not Guilty." Even where an accused may ultimately acknowledge his guilt and plead guilty to certain charges, they ordinarily plead not guilty at this initial appearance in court. Absent a plea agreement that may provide more favorable terms for the accused, there is generally little incentive to confess guilt at the arraignment stage.

Indeed, while a "Not Guilty" plea can always be changed to "Guilty" after successful negotiations, the opposite is not true. By pleading guilty to a crime, a defendant waives a host of contitutional rights, including the right to stand trial, to confront his accusers, to demand proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and to a trial by jury where applicable. Even when one is inclined to plead guilty, there are alternatives that may be a bit more palatable for those who maintain their innocence, but fear an unfavorable result at trial.

Plea Bargaining

Like all court appearances, the arraignment provides prosecutors and defense counsel with an opportunity to discuss the merits of a case -- even if such discussions are off-the-record and are not actually a part of the arraignment process.

In some cases, charges may even be disposed of at this early stage, either because the prosecutor decides to voluntarily dismiss certain weak or insignificant cases, or where the parties have reached a plea agreement.

In the United States, prosecutors have wide discretion to dispose of many cases in which they feel that a trial may be unwarranted, or to dismiss certain charges in exchange for an accused's agreement to plead guilty to other crimes. They may also dismiss charges where they believe the evidence is lacking or even where the authorities have made critical errors in charging documents.

As more than 90% of all criminal cases in the United States are resolved through plea bargaining, any opportunity for the prosecution and defense lawyers to meet provides an opportunity for "plea bargaining."

In many cases, defendants will plead guilty to less serious offenses in return for the prosecutor dropping more serious charges or where the government agrees to recommend a more lenient sentence. Where defendants plead guilty at their arraignments, judges typically refrain from imposing their sentences at that time, preferring to schedule a sentencing hearing at a later date.

Process for accepting a guilty plea is:

-the defendant is personnaly questionned about the plea

-this inquiring is twofold: insuring that the plea is voluntary and to set ou sufficient facts to show that the defendant is in fact guilty of offence.

-without these conditions the plea cannot be accepted by the court an the case will be set for a trial.

The Pre-trial Motions.

After the preliminary hearing and before a criminal case goes to trial, the prosecutor and the defense team usually appear before a criminal court judge and make pre-trial motions -- arguments that certain evidence should be kept out of the trial, that certain persons must or cannot testify, or that the case should be dismissed altogether.

August 18, 1994

Defense counsel files motion to obtain personnel records of Detective Mark Fuhrman.

The motions are not so used in criminal cases, the reason why is that just a few cases are tried.

Whenever we re going to present then briefly.

It exist different sort of motions:

-motion to dismiss: the aim is to make the trial cease. It's in fact the most often an administrative step of the trial more than a real doubt on the fact that the trial is okay.

• the motion to supress evidence when it is obtained through unconstitutional police methods.
  • The motion For discovery: in a large communication of evidences to the defense, this one is in position to ask for more detail of the plaintiff material evidences.

III. The Trial procedure.

January 24, 1995

Trial opens.  Prosecutors Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden deliver opening statements.

January 25, 1995

Johnnie Cochran makes opening statement for the defense.

Jury selection: “voir dire” process= determine qualifications of potential members of jury to select an impartial jury to try the case.

They are admonished (or warned) to keep an open mind and not to discuss with any one.

November 3, 1994	Jury panel selected: eight black, one white, one hispanic, two mixed race; eight women, four men.
December 8, 1994	Alternate jury selected.

1. OPENING STATEMENTS . First the prosecutor, then the defense, will make opening statements to the court. Opening statements typically provide an outline of the facts each side will try to prove during the trial.

2. PROSECUTION CASE-IN-CHIEF. The prosecution will present their side of the criminal case through direct examination of their chosen witnesses . The defense will then have the opportunity to cross-examine these prosecution witnesses. A re-direct will allow the prosecution to re-examine the defense Once the prosecution has finished presenting their case, the prosecution will rest, concluding this period of the trial.

Direct Examination has 3 parts:

-background of the witness

-Setting the scene by describing the place where the incident occurred

-Description of the incident.

Cross-examination

Its main purpose is to underme the credibility of the witness's direct examination testimony.

Redirect:

Its main purpose is to repair any damage done in cross-examination.

March 15, 1995

Detective Mark Fuhrman, cross-examined by defense attorney F. Lee Bailey, denies using the word "nigger" at any time in the previous ten years.

May 15, 1995	Simpson tries on the bloody gloves.  They seem not to fit.
July 6, 1995	The prosecution rests.

Controversy over the glove:

On June 15, 1995, defense attorney Johnnie Cochran goaded assistant prosecutor Christopher Darden into asking Simpson to put on the leather glove that was found at the scene of the crime. The prosecution had earlier decided against asking Simpson to try on the gloves because the glove had been soaked in blood (according to prosecutors) from Simpson, Brown and Goldman,[12] and frozen and unfrozen several times. Darden was advised by Clark and other prosecutors not to ask Simpson to try on the glove,[citation needed] but to argue through experts that in better condition, the glove would fit. Instead, Darden decided to have Simpson try on the glove.

The leather glove seemed too tight for Simpson to put on easily.

 Cochran repeated a quip he had used several times in relation to other points in his closing arguments, "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." 

3. MOTION TO DISMISS . At this point during a criminal trial, the defense will often make a motion to dismiss all charges. This request is not often honored, and is often more of a formality than a useful tool.

4. DEFENSE CASE-IN-CHIEF . The defense will then have the opportunity to present their main case through direct examination of their witnesses. The prosecution will have the opportunity to cross-examine the defense witnesses. During a re-direct, the defense may re-examine the witnesses. The defense rests when they have finished presenting their case.

July 10, 1995

The defense calls its first witness, Arnelle Simpson, O.J. Simpson's daughter.

5. PROSECUTION REBUTTAL . At this point in the criminal trial, the prosecution may offer evidence to refute the arguments made by the defense.

September 21, 1995	Both defense and prosecution rest their cases.  In a statement to judge waiving his right to testify, Simpson says "I did not, could not, and would not have committed this crime."  Judge Ito gives jury instructions.

6. CLOSING ARGUMENTS . The prosecution will make their closing remarks and the defense will follow. The prosecution will summarize the evidence they've presented and explain why the judge or jury should render a guilty verdict. The defense will summarize their version of the facts and explain why the defendant should be acquitted.

Sept. 26 & 27, 1995

Clark and Darden deliver prosecution's closing arguments.

September 29, 1995

The case goes to the jury.

7. JURY INSTRUCTIONS. The jury will be told which laws should be applied to the case and how they are to carry out their duties. In some cases, jury instruction will come before the closing arguments are made.

8. JURY DELIBERATIONS. The jury will deliberate for as long as it takes to reach a verdict . In most states, unanimous agreement must be met for a verdict to be reached. In some states a certain number of “votes” from the jurors will constitute a guilty verdict. Once the jury has determined their verdict, either guilty or not guilty for each crime in question, it will be read to the court.

10. SENTENCING.

If the defendant was convicted of the crime(s), sentencing will be determined by the judge immediately after the verdict is read or at a later court date.

The next step is to determine what punishment is appropriate to impose a sentence.

October 2, 1995	After less than four hours, jury announces that it has reached a verdict.
October 3, 1995	Jury finds O.J. Simpson not guilty of two counts of murder.

5) CIVIL PROCEDURE.

6) Comparison between the US legal system and the French legal system.

In the world there are two main models of criminal procedure: the accusatory and the inquisitorial.

In the accusatory procedure, the justice is public, oral and contradictory. Everything is discussed in front of a referee who listens to the parties before deciding. Non professional judges return the justice. The accuser starts the pursuits and he has to bring the proof of its charge. The American criminal procedure is inspired by the accusatory model.

The inquisitorial procedure is secret, non contradictory and written. It is led by a professional judge who is at once a judge and a prosecutor. The procedure is centered on the interrogations and the research of the confession. The French procedure is historically inspired by the inquisitorial model, but evolved over the years towards a mixed procedure: the first phase of the trial, the phase of investigation, recovers from the inquisitorial model: it is written and non contradictory. The second phase, the judgment, is rather connected with the accusatory model with public audiences, oral debates and this contradictory exchange between the parties.

In France, the phase of instruction is very long, the accused in custody is going to spend a lot of time there. Then, as the justice cannot go back on a decision, the pronounced punishment will not be lower than the duration of the custody, except in the case of acquitement. On the other hand, the phase of judgment is relatively fast, because the main part was previously made.

In the United States the trial itself lasts for a long time because the public audience is made in the instruction.

The most collectively critics sent to the American justice are among three.

1. It is a justice for rich or at least, an unequal justice. In France, the State pays investigating judge, which is going to appoint experts or to make further inquiries. In the United States, the defense has to conduct its investigation with discharge. To look for witnesses, proofs, etc. can be very expensive. The accused can be attended free of charge by a public lawyer. There are cities or States in which the budget of the legal aid is considerable, and where the public lawyers have means of investigation comparable to those private lawyers. But there are also States, in particular in the South, where the legal aid is poor quality and refreshed of not enough means. The difference is that the work of the defense is lesser as far as the instruction is paid by the State. But if investigating judge makes a mistake, the work of the defense will be bigger. It's rare that the poor accused have the possibility of paying the pledge. For the poorest, to plead guilty is a way of getting out of it at a lower cost, and the risk exists that innocents plead guilty. If the accused is not satisfied by the transaction which is proposed to him, he keeps the possibility of choosing the public trial.
2. The judge and the jury don't have files but only facts expressed orally in front of them.
3. The importance of the jury is excessive: he judges the facts but members are non professional. A jury can declare innocent a guilty person, and nobody can appeal a decision of acquittal. We can understand why defense and charge take so much time to choose the jury's members (they are twelve), each part having the right to reject without motivating a certain number of members of the jury.

In France, the inquisitorial procedure loses ground as far as investigating judge is not more seized only for the very big affairs. In the United States, the plea bargaining removes of the jurisdictions most of the cases.

In France and in the United States the legal system became powerful with revolutions (1776-1783 in the United States and 1789 in France). Indeed, the Constitution of both countries recognized that the judiciary part was essential to rule a country. People die for the freedom of their believes and they wanted an equal legal system which could represent the people. Things have changed with time but the ideology remain the same and people still believe in Justice even if there are a lot of things which could be better.