1995: The year the future began
Former professional football star O.J. Simpson was acquitted in October 1995 of murder in the slayings of his former wife, Nicole, and her friend, Ronald Goldman — dramatic verdicts that closed what often was called the “Trial of the Century.”
But as I discuss in my book about the watershed year of 1995, Simpson’s acquittal was certainly justifiable and perhaps inevitable, given how thoroughly his defense team impugned the prosecution’s evidence.
This is not to say that Simpson was innocent: Most assuredly, he was not. At a civil trial in 1997, he was found liable for the killings, which occurred June 12, 1994, outside Nicole Simpson’s townhouse in the Brentwood section of west Los Angeles.
But the criminal trial — which spanned much of the year, from late January to early October 1995 — was a spectacle in which Simpson’s lawyers, led by Johnnie L. Cochran, often outmaneuvered the prosecutors, keeping them off-balance and forcing them on occasion into jaw-dropping errors.
The most stunning of those failures came in June 1995, when one of the prosecutors, Christopher Darden, asked Simpson to try on the blood-stained leather gloves that the killer was believed to have worn in attacking Nicole Simpson and Goldman.
Facing the jury box, Simpson appeared to struggle in pulling the evidence gloves over the latex gloves he was required to wear during the demonstration, to avoid contamination. Simpson grimaced repeatedly and was heard to mutter: “Too tight.”
The evidence gloves, as I write in 1995: The Year the Future Began “did seem small for Simpson’s hands. But they likely had shrunk in the testing that they had been through. Still, the ill-advised demonstration had allowed Simpson to testify in effect, without having to face cross-examination. It was widely recognized as a pivotal moment in the trial ….”
The bungled demonstration inspired a rallying cry for defense lawyers — an idiom that remains familiar nearly two decades later. In his closing remarks, Cochran recalled the glove demonstration and told jurors: “[R]emember these words; if it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.”
And they did, after deliberating less than four hours. Simpson never took the stand in his defense.
Bungled police work also undercut the prosecution’s case — which lacked a murder weapon, a persuasive motive, and witnesses to the crimes. Prosecutors did have substantial DNA evidence in the blood stains and droplets that pointed to Simpson’s having been at the scene of the crimes.
That evidence was adroitly challenged by Simpson’s high-powered defense lawyers, whom the news media, indulging in hyperbole, often referred to as the “Dream Team.”
During cross-examination at the trial, Simpson lawyer Barry Scheck did not challenge the validity of the science supporting forensic DNA evidence. Rather, he challenged how the evidence was collected. Scheck extracted acknowledgements from police criminalists that in the Simpson case, they mishandled or overlooked DNA evidence.
“They had placed DNA evidence inside plastic bags where they were prone to degradation,” I note in 1995. “DNA samples were placed in a police evidence van that lacked air-conditioning. Crucial blood evidence was collected at the gate near Nicole Simpson’s townhouse three weeks after the killings. A portion of a reference sample of O.J. Simpson’s blood was spilled at the police laboratory where DNA evidence samples were tested.”
The inept and questionable police work allowed the defense to argue that Simpson was framed by Los Angeles police. It was an far-fetched argument, but not utterly implausible, given the series of screwups in gathering and handling DNA evidence.
The screwups impugned the evidence that otherwise might have convicted Simpson.
In the end, the most important and lasting contributions of the Simpson case centered around DNA: The trial helped settle disputes about the value and validity of DNA evidence in criminal cases. The trial also anticipated and arguably enhanced popular interest in the potency of DNA testing.
As I write in 1995:
“The trial marked a delineation in the recognition of forensic DNA testing as decisive in criminal trials and Simpson’s acquittal encouraged a push for improved procedures in collecting, storing, processing, and analyzing DNA evidence.”
More from The 1995 blog:
Pingback: The big gap in Monica Lewinsky’s speech |
Pingback: It’s out: ’1995: The Year the Future Began’ |
Pingback: Looking back to 1995, the year the future began | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Quirkiness on New Year’s, 1995: ‘Far Side’ farewell, errant Clinton prediction | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Rolling out 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Media fail: A 1995 subtext that’s familiar today | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Watershed status of 1995 explored in book rollout at Newseum | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Going ‘Majic’ for a brisk radio discussion about 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: ‘1995 was watershed moment in consumer technology,’ says Intel CEO | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: What ‘Time’ forgot in its look back to 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Much tedium, little drama in CNN rehash of O.J. Simpson trial | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: O.J. and DNA: Applying the ‘Page 99 Test’ to ‘1995’ | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Recalling the quaint early struggles to describe the Web | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: 20 years on: Recalling O.J.’s wretched bestseller | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Part One: Highlights of ‘1995’ interview with Reason.com | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: ‘The Internet? Bah!’ Classic off-target essay appeared 20 years ago | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: ‘Calvin and Hobbes’ was best ended in 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Talking Internet history, and 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Terror in the heartland: Oklahoma City, April 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Hinge moment at the O.J. ‘Trial of the Century’ | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: 1995 as tipping point: Recalling Smith Corona’s bankruptcy | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Contrived ballyhoo: Recalling Microsoft’s rollout of Windows 95 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: When America stood still: The O.J. verdicts, 20 years on | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: DNA: The enduring legacy of the 1995 O.J. trial | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Million Man March: Controversial rally in a watershed year | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: The 1995 ‘Trial of the Century’ is back: But so what? | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: FX miniseries on 1995 O.J. case is crassly exploitative | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Ballyhoo over FX series leads to outsize claims about ’90s O.J. murder case | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Fascination with sideshow: O.J. miniseries mirrors the 1995 trial | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: ‘Everything O.J. is in the zeitgeist right now’ | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: ESPN’s documentary about O.J. Simpson: A dissenting view | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: ESPN’s O.J. doc: Less exceptional than its rave reviews | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: The O.J. Simpson case: Five readable books | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: When the U.S. stood still: Awaiting the O.J. verdicts, October 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: The ’90s: With us still | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: PBS doc on OKC bombing signals anew the significance of 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: PBS doc on OKC bombing pushes hard on vague, distant connections | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: While he sits in jail, O.J. Simpson has become cultural reference point | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Messaging, sequencing a puzzle as CNN launches ’90s series | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: No cause for cheer if O.J. Simpson wins parole | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: O.J. Simpson wins parole, but it’s no 1995 moment | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Narcissism on full display: O.J. Simpson’s quasi-confession is aired | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: O.J. case ‘do over’: Why the ’95 trial is alive in popular consciousness | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Misportrayals and missing DNA: Closing observations about flawed O.J. miniseries | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Chuck Todd’s bad impeachment analogy | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: With us still: 1995, 25 years on | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: ‘Too tight’: The botched glove demonstration at O.J. ‘Trial of the Century’ in 1995 | The 1995 Blog
Pingback: Quote of the 1990s? ‘If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit,’ 25 years on | The 1995 Blog