O.J. Simpson Murder Trial
The O.J. Simpson defense team is arguably an assemblage of the finest legal talent that money can buy. Further, the theory central to its defense of Simpson is that an incompetent, deceitful LAPD rushed to charge Simpson, thus letting the real perpetrator(s) escape.
Why doesn’t the defense team place its primary focus on buying the finest private investigative resources to find and bring to justice the real perpetrator(s) in this case? A large team of former CIA, FBI, etc. investigators should be able to solve this mystery with dispatch. I would think Simpson himself would insist on this, not only for his own benefit but to find and bring to justice the vicious killer(s) of the mother of his children.
Am I missing something here?
WALLACE B. ROBERTS
San Clemente
* The Feb. 19 Opinion piece by Charles Lindner calling for Judge Lance Ito to shut off the camera in his courtroom is an excellent example of why an attorney’s work can be appealed. He is wrong.
The one and absolute certainty in the case has been the unbiased reporting of that sturdy little camera out of the courtroom. No hype here. No sensationalizing that which is already sensational and thus requires no extra help. Just the facts. At least on CNN, Court TV and the local television stations that are carrying the trial day in and day out.
Critics of television coverage of the courts mistake what goes on in the courtroom for that which surrounds it, matters over which the judge and responsible members of the new industry have no control--nor should they. This is, after all, still a free country and if the rambunctious actions of some are offensive enough then the marketplace of ideas and opinion will destroy them.
Complaints cited by Lindner have absolutely nothing to do with the camera in court. His moaning over the failure of the news organizations to use this opportunity to educate are misplaced. CNN for one, has done considerable programming on the very topic he mentioned.
Finally, and most important, the public has a right to watch how one-third of its government--the courts--does its job. For too long the judiciary, unlike some of the executive and the legislative, has closed its doors to the public as represented by the non-intrusive camera. Today’s television instrument requires no special lights, no operator, is silent, becomes the silent observer for the public. It is the most unbiased reporting one can get. And, God forbid, it leaves the analysis and conclusion drawing to the viewer. Lindner may have a legitimate complaint with the conduct of some journalists and the behavior of some news organizations but this is a clear case of an attorney attempting to kill the innocent messenger.
ED TURNER
Executive Vice President
Turner Broadcasting System, Atlanta
* In Feb. 22 testimony in the Simpson trial LAPD Detective Tom Lange stated that he never tested Nicole Brown Simpson for rape because, in his opinion, this was such a violent attack that the assailant was clearly not interested in sex.
Since when is rape about sex? Rape is an extremely violent crime. How could an experienced detective make such a statement?
KAREN CARLON
Los Angeles
* Defense counsel Johnnie Cochran’s weak contention that his client bore no body marks or bruises (Feb. 22) after the alleged life-death struggle with the victims, inferring Simpson’s innocence, is fallacious and ludicrous.
Simple reasoning dictates that any mobile adult, male or female, armed with a sharp, long-bladed knife can indeed inflict severe and fatal wounds on one, two or perhaps even three unarmed victims without a chance for the victims to strike back in self defense especially in a surprise ambush attack.
This is another of Cochran’s alibis that just doesn’t hold water.
JOHN BURDETTE
Los Angeles
* Based on his conduct and statements prior to the commencement of the Simpson trial I had great confidence in Judge Ito. That confidence has steadily eroded. The judge chides Deputy Dist. Atty. Marcia Clark as if she were an unruly child while showing great deference to the defense.
Judge Ito’s conduct on Feb. 23 was outrageous. He permitted Cochran to denigrate the professional experience of both prosecution attorneys without one word of comment. He held Deputy Dist. Atty. Christopher Darden in contempt without making one effort to diffuse the situation.
The media reporting has also been incredible. Every report I have heard, seen or read has spoken only of Darden’s remarks. Not one word of criticism of Cochran’s statement.
PAUL WESTEFER
La Crescenta
* Thank you, thank you, Marcia Clark, for standing before the court (Feb. 24) and explaining that your child-care arrangements would not allow you to work late without prior notice. You spoke for the many working women who are faced with this dilemma. Unfortunately, most private sector employers aren’t as sensitive as Judge Ito.
PATRICIA R. HERNANDEZ
Pomona