why did the jury find OJ Simpson not guilty despite the evedence like the DNA and gloves?

Question

I know it was about10 years ago im just curious im not familiar with what happend so for thode of you who watched the trial tell me about it.I heard thier was DNA evedence against hin and gloves im not sure what acually happend during his arrest and trial.

Answer 1

The glove was damaging to prosecution. Because the defense convinced jurors that racist cop planted the glove and other evidences. This became race trial because of that glove. If the glove was not used by prosecution, race issue would have not played a role and that may have been better for prosecution.

Single most important thing is that 'racist cop' who supposedly planted evidence. This just threw out the whole case.

Yes the evidences were good. More than good. But defense basically told juror 'you can't trust any white cops, they're framing OJ.' And this worked.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/oj/

Answer 2

They acquitted him based upon unsubstantial evidence if I remember correctly. But since everyone's aware that he was poised to admit to the murder in his book that was never printed (He couldn't be prosecuted again due to the whole "double jeopardy" thing), then we can look better at the falliablity of the justice system as a whole.

In short, anyone who pulls the right cards and has enough money can either get off scott free or spend some time in a minimum security prison. OJ had some great lawyers that knew the system and they did their best to turn the case away from indicting OJ and into all of the events surrounding the case itself. Heresay, planted evidence, etc. Since the prosecution couldn't prove otherwise (and how can you, really?), the case was dismissed.

Answer 3

The gloves didn't fit because they had gotten wet (with blood). If you've ever had leather gloves, you know how they shrink when they get wet. They found Nicole's & Ron's blood in his white bronco. They found OJ's blood on the gate and his footprints (unique, expensive shoes) in the blood on the sidewalk. They found blood inside his foyer at his house. He had a motive and an opportunity and he was probably high. Lots of DNA, but it seems the jury just dismissed the scientific info and used the trial, as some think, to get even with cops.

Answer 4

1. Brilliant defense team.
2. Distrust of police officers by the general public after the Rodney King beating incident was broadcast.
3. Long-time distrust of government employee efficiency.
4. Well-liked, well-known, and attractive defendant.

Answer 5

If I remember right, the glove was supposed to incriminate him and he tried it on and proved it couldn't fit. I don't recall what the DNA was about.
I wasn't on the jury and it didn't matter what I thought or said, so I pretty much only partly listened to the whole thing.

Answer 6

first the glove didn't fit. next the poor handling of blood samples and transport of materials. mark furman. the one thing you learn in law school is keep it short, use small words to explain technical data and DNA. race card is not what won that case or money cause the prosecution had plenty at their disposal. what won that case is the prosecution just did a crappy job presenting their material and the defense ran them over with a mac truck.

Answer 7

The worst travesty of justice I have seen in my 69 years

Answer 8

They played the race card and said that the police were racists & planted evidence etc... The Jury said there was resonable doubt ,despite all of the evidence once the race card was played it was over.

Answer 9

If it doesn't fit, you must acquit!

Answer 10

if the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit-the jurors loved it