The O.J. Simpson Verdict, 10 Years Later: The Impact and The Aftermath
Date: Sunday, October 02, 2005
By: Monica Lewis, BlackAmericaWeb.com


The scenes were as different as night and day when the “not guilty� verdict was delivered in the O.J. Simpson double murder trial 10 years ago Monday.

As an estimated 150 million people watched the live broadcast of the courtroom finale on October 3, 1995, television news cameras captured the vastly-different reactions of black and white Americans, and the images spoke volumes about race relations as the 20th century drew to a close.

At the verdict's announcement, many blacks across the country joyfully celebrated the vindication of the former football great, while, in stark contrast, many whites in cities from New York to New Mexico gasped in disbelief, shock and anger.





JoAnn A. Epps, a one-time prosecutor for the city of Los Angeles and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Philadelphia, told BlackAmericaWeb.com that she believes the Simpson trial presented a defining moment for blacks and the legal system.

“I think the O.J. trial did empower African-Americans across this country to believe that they could get a fair day in court, although for many that realization was tempered by the worry that their day in court would be costly,� said Epps, who is black. “But the trial gave hope for many that they could have their case and their voice heard.�

Some would argue that the trial and the infamous use of the “race card� by Simpson’s defense team were nothing more than a public spectacle, while others believe it played an important role in getting people to have frank discussions about race.

“The race card spawned a tremendous amount of conversation on race,� said Epps, a professor and associate dean at Temple University’s School of Law. “Not all of it was easy, but it was good that we were reminded of this thorny issue.�

Noted psychologist Na’im Akbar, agreed that the trial made people face the reality of racism, but it wasn’t enough to maintain momentum in permanently breaking down any barriers.

“It seems that there are these poignant moments that occur in the media, and [the Simpson verdict] was one of those moments that showed a persistent and consistent racial divide,� Akbar told BlackAmericaWeb.com, adding that the dialogues on race at the time were fleeting at best.

“I think that it’s unfortunate that we only think about [race] in a serious manner when you have these fleeting poignant moments,� Akbar said, likening the days immediately following Hurricane Katrina to the days after Simpson was found not guilty.

“O.J.’s trial was a reflection of the fact that there’s a major racial divide between black and white people in this country, despite the superficial indication that race relations have improved,� Akbar said. “What O.J. showed us 10 years ago and what Katrina shows us today is that the divide is not only present -- it’s gotten worse.�

When the June 1994 murders of Simpson’s wife, Nicole, and her friend Ronald Goldman occurred, the issue of race instantly flowed to the forefront. Although Simpson was castigated by numerous blacks because of his affinity for blonde beauties, many instantly proclaimed his innocence -- or at least hoped he’d be cleared of any criminal wrongdoing. When the late Johnnie Cochran became a member of Simpson’s vaunted defense team, even more blacks began to side with Simpson because of Cochran’s history of fighting for the rights of blacks often unfairly treated at various levels of the justice system.

For many, Simpson’s not-guilty verdict was perceived as a victory that far too few blacks accused of crimes -- particularly those with smaller bank accounts and less fame than Simpson -- were given the opportunity to have.

“I think that one of the things that black Americans did gain was recognition that there is redress in the legal system if you can afford good representation,� Akbar said. “Michael Jackson comes along and gets a similar kind of redress. It’s not whether or not the court system can work; it comes down to an issue of whether you can afford representation. And historically, we could not get that. Justice in America is not a matter of the Constitution. It’s a matter of having the finances to support it.�

“This trial really revealed the extent to which black Americans and white Americans saw things through different lenses,� David Sklansky, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley’s School of Law, told BlackAmericaWeb.com. “There was just an astonished lack of comprehension by many white Americans, and there were things that seemed plausible to black Americans that didn’t seem plausible to whites -- like how blacks were much quicker, in general, to believe that police could have planted evidence.�

The person many believed to have planted evidence was Los Angeles homicide detective Mark Fuhrman, who discovered a bloody glove near the murder scene. While on the witness stand, Fuhrman also denied ever having used a racial slur, although it was eventually discovered that he spewed the N-word in a taped interview 10 years prior to Simpson’s trial.

“That was an important lesson from the trial,� said Sklansky, who was a criminal law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles at the time of the trial. “It was a lesson that, despite all of the progress that has been made, we still live in a universe in which black and white lives can be very different. The fact was that police officers that didn’t utter racial epithets in court might very well use them outside of the courtroom.�

Asides from the race lessons, the trial allowed Americans to view the legal system in an entirely different light, Epps said.

“The trial was an interesting one because it was one of the first times that an enormous amount of the public had an opportunity to watch a trial from beginning to end,� Epps said, adding that it was the Simpson trial that spawned the popularity of Court TV and television shows like “CSI.“

“This trial had a tremendously profound effect in terms of our interest in the law and in criminal trials in particular,� Epps said. “It wasn’t a happy moment in its entirety, but it was clearly a profound moment.

“We didn’t have the ability 50 years ago or even 30 years ago to view a trial like this,� Epps said of the trial, which lasted eight months and saw 150 witnesses give testimony. “Trials were mostly private, and you heard the outcome only if the media thought it was important enough to cover.�

In fact, society has yet to see another trial like Simpson’s, even if celebrities on the wrong side of the law are covered in great detail in print, broadcast and electronic media. Even with Michael Jackson’s most recent run-in with pedophilia charges, cameras were barred from the courtroom, leaving a cable network to hire a Jackson look-alike to appear in daily dramatizations of what took place in the trial.

“[Simpson’s trial] remains special because there are things about it that celebrity trials haven’t had. Because it was the first one of the new hyper-covered celebrity trials, the coverage was much greater, and the trial went on much longer,� Sklansky said. “Partly because of the lessons learned, subsequent celebrity trials have had generally less of a circus atmosphere, and there’s been more control by judges, especially in keeping attorneys on a shorter leash.�

All in all, the Simpson trial will go down as one of those moments where people can vividly remember where they were and what they were doing when they heard the news.

And regardless of whether one believes Simpson was innocent or guilty, the true lesson to be gained from the trial was that the structure that makes up the justice system is tried and true, Epps said, adding that she did not believe that the gridiron great would be acquitted.

“My first thought was surprise, and not unpleasantly so, because it reminded me of something that I had forgotten,� Epps said. “The right outcome of a trial is the outcome a jury gives us. And it was a spectacular outcome.�


* * * * * * *


[font=Arial][size=2][size=3]