Porn The Vote

As usual Mr. Wachter has foiled me with his attention to details. You win Mr. Wachter! Your blog is excellent.

I however still agree with the court of public opinion and think O.J. Simpson was guilty of the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman either directly or by association. My opinion is not based on the facts as you have clearly stated. 

What about his children? Wouldn’t a father and husband of his murdered wife be with them and not fleeing down the highway threatening to take his own life? Not the type of man I want as a neighbor in my community.

Persia Monir

In response to Persia’s blog, ( a response to my original blog regarding O.J. Simpson ) Persia has a number of her facts wrong.  To base conclusions of guilt or innocence upon mere intuition rejects a rational assessment of the facts.  It is subjective, capricious, and absent of consonance concerning the legal predicate of determining guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, as required by law.

First to clarify the facts. O.J. was with his friend Al Cowlings when he was pursued by the police.  The vehicle was a white Ford Bronco, not a Ford Explorer.  Al Cowlings was the driver, not O.J.  The pursuit ended at (if I recall correctly) O.J.’s Mother’s residence, where he surrendered to police after a brief stand-off.  

Nicole Brown-Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered long before this event.  Thus, O.J. was not fleeing at the moment he learned of the murder of Nicole, as Persia asserts. Rather, he was fleeing because he was aware that he was charged with the murders, and knew he was about to be taken into custody on the warrants issued for his arrest for two counts of first degree homicide.

Considering the L.A.P.D.’s stellar reputation for its treatment of minorities (think Rodney King, for example), along with my firm belief that O.J. was innocent, then this flight mode can be attributed with reasonable cause to a panicked reaction on O.J.’s behalf.  

Moreover, public opinion was already being poisoned against O.J. by the national media, which was all but suggesting that O.J. be lynched.  Not exactly cause for him to feel he would receive a fair and impartial trial.

I would also point out that once someone insults and imputes guilt on another, any actions that the “guilty party” engages in are automatically perceived as sinister, malevolent, and indicative of guilt.  (Thus Persia’s interpretation of O.J.’s actions)  She is assuming and conjecting based entirely on her own intuition.  This is not sound jurisprudence, to say the least.  It is, in point of fact, the very mentality that turns our nation’s courts into three ring circuses at the expense of fair and impartial justice.

Contrary to Persia’s assertions, I recall watching O.J.’s reactions to Judge Ito and the prosecution’s introduction of photos and details of the condition of Nicole Brown-Simpson’s body.  O.J. became visibly upset, and highly agitated. His response was deeply emotional, which is contrary to the point of diametric opposition to what Persia suggests.  The implication that O.J. responded as a remorseless sociopath is entirely without merit or factual basis.

The fact remains, as I pointed out in my initial blog, that the state never had a solid case against O.J., and the jury’s verdict of Not Guilty affirms this fact.

Michael Anthony Wachter

I appreciate Mr. Wachter’s blog on O.J. Simpson and his pragmatism. I, however are of a more intuitive nature. 

As a Registered Nurse and one that spent her years in Intensive Care Units, I counseled many families of the dying. I consider myself an expert on death and dying.  I can tell you that in all my years of nursing, I never once saw a grieving husband whose wife had been murdered act the way that O.J. Simpson did. 

If you recall the moment he supposedly found out about Nicole’s murder, he was speeding down the highway in a Ford Exploreer running away with gun in hand threatening to kill himself.  I knew at that moment that I was watching a guilty man in flight mode, not fight mode. 

It is unfortunate that the court case turned into a circus full of corruption as so many court cases do. In spite of the excellent arguments in Mr. Wachter’s blog, I still believe that O.J. Simpson is guilty as sin. 

Persia

Christmas came early for the families of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. O.J. Simpson will be going to prison; perhaps for the remainder of his life. 

Was justice served or subverted to become a tool of vengeance? It seems that the general consensus, after O.J.’s acquittal in 1994 for the slayings of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman is that the prosecution botched the case and thus O.J. got away with murder. Two, in fact. Literally. Now the perception is that the guilty verdict against Simpson in Las Vegas is, in effect, long delayed accountability come due. 

This was certainly the slant offered by U.S.A. Today in two articles it printed on December 8, 2008. One titled, “For Goldman’s Simpson Verdict Long Overdue”. The other, “What’s This? Accountability?” was an Op-Ed.

This gloating vindictiveness does not jive with the objective application of justice, which every criminal defendant is entitled to. Even O.J. Simpson. I would say, especially O.J. Simpson, who it seems was convicted in the court of public opinion, ostensibly for robbing some sports memorabilia dealers, and thereby providing the jury opportunity to, in reality, convict him for the murders so many are convinced he committed in Brentwood, California 13 years ago. What I recall being most astonishing by Simpson’s 1994 acquittal, was that the judicial process genuinely worked as it is designed to. Guilt is determined by a preponderance of evidence, leading to an absence of doubt amongst a jury, that a defendant is guilty as charged. I recall that there was plenty of cause for doubt that O.J. committed the murders. If the case against O.J. had been so solid, why did it appear that detective Mark Furman planted evidence? Specifically, blood on items seized as “evidence” that upon analysis, revealed preservative in the blood? What about Detective Furman’s relationship with Nicole Brown? His racist remarks caught on tape? All of which does not begin to touch upon the bumbling incompetence of the primary prosecution team, Marsha Clarke and Christopher Darden. 

The state did botch its case. It screwed up by the numbers, and did so because it never had a solid case against Simpson. As soon as it became clear that evidence had been compromised through tampering, and witnesses for the prosecution began lying, any claim to credibility that the state asserted against Simpson was undermined and ultimately destroyed. 

After O.J.’s acquittal, the vindictive rage to relentlessly hound Simpson, for the deaths of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, orchestrated primarily by the Goldman family, effectively destroyed Simpson’s reputation and life. 

Kim Goldman, after the Las Vegas verdict, gloated to the media that her family’s vendetta against Simpson motivated his actions. “We can feel we pushed him into this”, she said. Judge Jackie Glass claimed, she was not there “for any retribution or payback”. Clearly, the Goldman’s were and so it would appear so were others. 

I find it impossible to believe that the Las Vegas jury reached its verdict against Simpson without being influenced by the 1995 Los Angeles acquittal. Claiming O.J. had a fair day in court when the judge presiding over the case felt compelled to deny she was there for “retribution and payback” stretches credibility to breaking.

If the crimes committed by Simpson and his co-defendants were so serious, then justice would seem to require consistent application amongst all involved. Instead, four of Simpson’s co-defendants received probation after taking plea deals to testify against Simpson. By contast, O.J., and the co-defendant who refused to take a plea bargain, both received nine to thrity three years in prison. The appearance is that the crime was only a means to the ends of obtaining “retribution and payback” against Simpson. Only the co-defendant who would not partcipate in the conspiracy to crucify O.J. under a pretense of law shared his fate. Loyalty and integrity are costly.

I never believed that Simpson murdered Nicole Brown or Ronald Goldman. Too many “facts” never added up for my satisfaction. The truth, whatever it may be, will probably never be known. However, if Simpson did not commit the murders, whoever did, has been free all of this time. Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman may have never received the justice of their killers capture and conviction. And now, O.J. Simpson may be another victim whose life is destroyed.

Michael Anthony Wachter

mwachter452002@gmail.com