Karma Comes Back to Simpson

There was a reason why in the late ’90s, every time I had a glass of juice, “murder” was the first phrase in my mind.

Orenthal James “O.J.” Simpson was the focus of one of the biggest trials in history.
We all know the back-story, and the ridiculousness of the proceedings were lampooned on everything from Seinfeld to Saturday Night Live.

As much comedy as Simpson gave us, the trial was a serious social issue that brought race relations and the judicial process into question.

The trial was my first real lesson that our justice system isn’t perfect.

Maybe it was inept lawyers or the effect of media’s constant coverage, but the trial ranks up there with the 2004 election in the “How Did That Just Happen?” category.
Even if we disagreed with the ruling, we had to accept it as an official decision of the court.

If you do think Simpson is truly innocent of the murder charges, even with the mountain of evidence against him, then I’m not going to argue with you. If the sheer craziness of his failed tell-all book “If I Did It” – where Simpson details how he would’ve killed his wife and friend – doesn’t convince you, then there’s nothing else I can say. You either completely trust the judgement of the system or really like college football and the Naked Gun trilogy.

With Simpson’s recent trial on 12 charges, including armed robbery and kidnapping, a major concern was separating it from his past. Amazingly, one juror claimed he did not know about Simpson’s acquittal.

Though all 12 jurors claimed they would give Simpson a fair trial, I doubt the trial from more than a decade ago was not constantly in their minds. Five claimed they disagreed with the 1995 ruling, but how can we really tell?

Discussing the case with numerous people around campus, it has been common to hear people say they would’ve lied during jury selection. In any kind of high profile case, is it really possible to get an unbiased selection of one’s peers? I say no, we merely get a selection of people who either assume they can be unbiased or are good liars.

I’m not saying Simpson was unfairly charged in this trial; merely that it was attempt number two to punish a man who had narrowly escaped justice before.

Ironically, the guilty verdict came 13 years to the day Simpson was acquitted in Los Angeles. Simpson now looks at the possibility of a life sentence and won’t know his fate until December.

While the system might not be perfect, maybe we can take away some solace in the idea that eventually those guilty will get caught.

Look at the South Park episode where Cartman inherits an amusement park and eventually loses it all.

Be it karma or stupidity, things eventually seem to even out. Unfortunately, Simpson’s detainment will keep him from finding Nicole Simpson’s “real” killer.