Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays about the o.j. simpson trial
Essays about the o.j. simpson trial
O. J. Simpson murder case
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays about the o.j. simpson trial
Essays about the o.j. simpson trial
O. J. Simpson murder case
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The evidence presented by both sides in the courtroom, would have long lasting effects on everyone involved in the case, as well as the millions of Americans that were following the trial. Visual testimony in any trial, especially a murder trial can have many effects on the outcome of a trial. Both prosecutors, and defense attorneys have a huge burden to fulfill in order
Jurors should not know anything about a specific case and not follow public affairs and read the news (Doc F). When a person is selected to be part of a jury, they have to say an oath stating that they will not use their emotions to determine the verdict of a trial. If a juror is caught using their emotions, they will be fined for a crime called perjury. Since there are twelve people in a jury, there is a variation of opinions when the jury decides a verdict. But, a judge is more professional and knows how to only use the evidence provided and be less biased.
On the 14th of October 2011, Mr Rayney had submitted an application for a trial which only involved a judge without a jury present. This was due Mr. Rayney assuming that a strong bias had been manifested pre-trial as a result of the subjective publicity revolving around the death of his wife, Corryn(The Conversation, 2012). Therefore, the jury and any member of the public would already have preconceived views in favour of Mr Rayney being guilty of murdering his wife. The trial was successful for Mr Rayney where he was acquitted of murdering his wife. Similarly, this issue is somewhat common as it had also occurred in the case Evans v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASCA 182, in which both appellants had made appeals after being convicted for murder.
On Sunday, November 13, 1842 a double murder occurred at Smith Farm in Old Fields, Long Island. The victims, Alexander Smith and and Rebecca Smith, were a wealthy, well- respected married couple who ran Smith farm. George Weeks, the Smiths farmhand, was reporting for work the monday after the murder and heard the dog barking from the work-shed by the Smiths house. George Weeks then became suspicious since the dog was usually inside with Mr. Smith. George then looked in the house and saw that the east room window was broken and Mr. and Mrs. Smith were lying on the floor covered in blood.
In June 21, 1973, Miller was convicted on the ground of advertising the sale of what was considered by the court as adult material. He was found guilty as he broke the California Statute. The California Statute forbids citizens from spreading what is considered offensive in societal standards. The question that was being asked was that if the action of Miller was Constitution thus is protected under the law. However, he lost the case due to a vote of 5 - 4.
The jury system has cases where jurors are influenced by the media because it is almost impossible to find someone who has not heard about the case and formed a personal opinion already (Doc F). In widely known cases, jurors may have been influenced by outsiders and the media indirectly and directly. For example, in the People vs. O.J. Simpson case, the infamous decision might have been made because of the jurors discussing the case with people who they are not suppose to discuss it with. An argument can be made that jurors are specifically instructed not to discuss the case or read anything about it, but there is no way to verify that the jurors are actually following this rule. Jurors can also have personal bias because they are very different from the defendant or prosecution (Doc E).
O.J. Simpson was a famous football player and that was accused of killing his ex-wife nicole brown , also her boyfriend Ron Goldman. They were brutally stabbed to death on June 12, 1994 at the resident of Nicole brown condo in Brentwood. Before the bodies were ever recovered Oj had packed his bags and caught a flight to Chicago, later he received a phone call saying that Nicole Brown was murder. The cops wanted to talk to him and later he had lead the cops on a hot pursuit chase and they apprehended him. OJ Simpson should be held accountable for murders of his ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.
This may cause the jury to be indecisive between what the actual case and what the media portrays it to be. The amount of media released for cases creates a negative impact within the courts and makes it difficult for a fair trial. When juries are uncertain about a case or a suspect, they result to social media platforms and news coverage that will provide them with more information and depth into the case. ‘’But if the case unfolds in the media, by the time a case gets to court, the supposedly impartial jury (or even the judge) may have already heard information and allegations (not admissible by court standards) that have caused them to seriously prejudice the parties’’. (Nedim, 2014).
“The boy is five feet eight inches tall. His father was six feet two inches tall. That’s a difference of six inches. It’s a very awkward thing to stab down into the chest of someone who’s half a foot taller than you are. ”-(Juror two, 54)
Like in “Twelve Angry Men” jurors did not talk their vote serious and only voted for the majority. “Oh. well… I think he’s guilty. I thought is was obvious. I mean nobody proved otherwise.” this shows juror two hesitate and only choosing with the
The O.J. Simpson case was a different one because he was a celebrity. The celebrity status made all the difference in the case, as most people had diverse views on the case. As a famous individual, the media also had the chance to broadcast the trial and give differences of opinion on the case. The celebrity status had a significant influence in the O.J. Simpson case as the public had to struggle with an image he had created for many years. People knew O.J. Simpson as a footballer and an actor with a charming character impossible to hurt anyone.
But in majority of the cases jurors are older. When the juror is younger they were more likely to find a defendant not guilty compared to the older juror. The evidence that would be compelling to me as a juror is when a small child is involved. There are so many cases now that shows how people are abusing the children and even killing them. While they are in a fit of rage.
This is an important element when deciding who the best and worst jurors were. There were no facts as to who was right or wrong because we didn’t see the crime in question. All
The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar
These people are dangerous and don’t need big reason to kill someone.(This is an example of Prejudice too) Perception Discussion of elevated train (0:18:05) Could hear the argument (0:19:24) Discussion of lady's testimony (1:21:21) In all three situations Jurors organizes the information and translates it into something meaningful and comes to conclusion which results into making others to switch their vote from guilty to not guilty.. Representativeness heuristic "