Simpson Case One-Year Mark

A year has passed since Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman died in Brentwood. That years has been marked by candlelight vigils, round-the-clock media saturation, more legal analysis than even law students must endure, national and international coverage, television specials, and, perhaps worst of all, unconscionably grinning tourists posing for ghoulish snapshots beside the safe, secure enclave where two people were brutally murdered.

With due respect for the tragic loss suffered by the friends and families of the victims, I will feel much better about our society as a whole when we pay as much attention and feel the same outrage over the murders of two nonwhite people in East Los Angeles or in South-Central Los Angeles as we have done for the murders of two white people in West Los Angeles.

MEL POWELL Brentwood

* We’ve lived O.J. Simpson for a year now. In that time, we’ve watched and listened to hours and hours of nothing but mindless drivel. Lawyer drivel, analysts’ drivel, celebrity drivel, people-on-the-street drivel--it comes at you from every direction and it just goes on and on and on. Maddeningly, the trial still has another six to eight months to go.

Now we hear about this shrinking alternate juror-pool thing. All of a sudden there is serious talk of a mistrial. All of a sudden there is hope! A mistrial could be our saving grace. The case could then be retried in a calmer atmosphere without the cameras.

Some say, “What if O.J.’s defense team succeeds in getting him off by claiming double jeopardy or something?” To that I say, fine with me, let him off. I don’t care any more. I just want him out of my life.

STEVE McCOLLUM La Canada

* The dismissal of jurors in the Simpson case might be due, in part, to stress. One of the factors in that stress is the requirement of silence; jurors must not communicate among members about the trial. Each juror must hold tight any information, impressions or questions about this dramatic presentation.

Consider this hypothetical analogy. You are asked to be one of 12 persons who are to judge a cricket game which ordinarily takes three days. You have never before watched an entire game. You are constantly reminded that you are not to discuss the game, its play, its players or anything about the game with anyone; not even with the other 11 persons who are to decide who is the winner.

Do you believe that you can obey that requirement of silence, remain attentive, not get frustrated and not be mentally and emotionally affected? Every so often you might feel like a prisoner in solitary confinement--or worse.

The reasons for and the benefits of the admonition of utter silence (whatever they might be) should be considered in relation to the almost inhuman requirement of “locked-in” non-communication. Perhaps it is that rule that lies at the root of the cause for juror dismissal.

LOUIS M. BROWN Professor of Law, Emeritus, USC

* Re Willie Cravin’s dismissal from the Simpson trial, June 8:

As one white juror was dismissed and replaced with a black alternate, Cravin was dismissed and replaced with a second black alternate. Cravin is upset and claims the dismissal was racist. Against whom? Certainly not Cravin, because he is black. He might want to try and count this one again.

STEPHEN WALLIS Long Beach

* “Simpson Case Is Already Rewriting the Rule Book,” June 11:

The point of this article seemed to be about issues of race and money. The “rule book” will be rewritten because Californians are learning the truth about the criminal justice system and that it is in desperate need of reform. Since the ‘60s our state legislators have stacked the cards in favor of defendants’ rights, to the detriment of victims, their survivors and our communities. How sad it is that a victim, or family of a murdered victim, oftentimes has to fight for the right to be present in court. The Simpson case illustrates the critical need to re-balance the scales of justice.

JACKIE RAVEL Sun Valley

* Regarding the great glove try on (June 16) where Simpson attempted to pull on the bloody glove over a latex glove in front of the TV camera and the jury:

It seems the only dummy isn’t on the coroner’s staff. As tens of thousands of California clean-room employees know, pulling on latex gloves over a large hand is almost impossible; the web between the fingers never gets down to the hand. Pulling on a dress glove over the latex gloves is therefore doomed to failure, the dress glove appearing to be too small.

WALTER LIEBERMAN Irvine