Criticism of Simpson Jury

Re “Maybe It Is a White Conspiracy,” Commentary, Oct. 11: Karen Grigsby Bates postulates that because whites don’t believe the jurors who say race had no place in the O.J. Simpson verdict that “Reasonable Black People” are beginning to think that a vast white conspiracy to keep blacks in their “assigned places” does indeed exist. Did Bates believe the Simi Valley jurors when they said race had nothing to do with their Rodney King case verdicts?

These kinds of articles, which do nothing to suggest ways in which the races can come together, simply perpetuate racism. Yes, there is a need for juror reform. Perhaps in cases in which race or police misconduct will be a factor (or perhaps in all cases), we must mandate a jury which represents the local racial composition of the population as a whole, thereby exposing the verdicts to multiethnic experiences and feelings.

NANCY CALLAHAN HINDERER

Granada Hills

*

* Bates clearly underscores the reasons for my distress and embarrassment as a white retired judge of our state court system. As she notes, a large majority continue to slander and excoriate the Simpson jury because the verdict was not what was preordained by this segment of our citizens. No facts support the allegation of this jury’s failure to follow carefully the court instructions.

Why can’t we accept that the jury did not declare Simpson innocent, but rather repudiated the case of the prosecution: the district attorney, police, labs and their evidence (much of which was concededly questionable), alike? It is our system and we are obliged to support and respect it.

MICHAEL O’MALLEY

Menifee

*

* I disagree with Barbara Allen Babcock (Opinion, Oct. 8), whose recent article objects to prospective changes in our jury system. Why should attorneys be allowed to tailor juries to their own advantage?

Our current jury system would be greatly improved if peremptory challenges were discontinued. As we have seen, this can result in a “stacked deck.”

Why not establish a juror selection committee, acting under the supervision of the grand jury? This committee could qualify a pool of prospective jurors for specific trials, eliminating those who could not comprehend the issues to be considered, and those with predisposed opinions.

The final jury would then be chosen by blind draw from the qualified pool. We need changes like this to restore faith in our legal system.

ROGER NICHOLSON

Tustin