The Tech - Online EditionMIT's oldest and largest
newspaper & the first
newspaper published
on the web
Boston Weather: 26.0°F | Overcast

Jury System Worked Well in Simpson Case

Jury System Worked Well in Simpson Case

After hearing the ravings of the disgruntled on network talk shows and newspapers (including The Tech) following the Simpson verdict, I decided that another point of view was desperately needed. People have said that the Simpson verdict was an injustice and complained that the justice system is a joke. I don't see how those comments can be applied to this case. It actually worked this time. It is a shame that it took wealth and celebrity for a black man to triumph over overwhelming odds. However, this is the reality of American justice.

The jury came back with a verdict of "not guilty." That is not synonymous with innocence. Simpson may very well have been the killer - the evidence points to him. But look at the quality of the prosecution's evidence: It included lying cops, missing blood, improper police evidence collecting and handling, and a glove that didn't fit. Even the supposed motive did not make sense. If you were on the jury, you were expected to believe that Simpson killed his wife just because there was a history of spousal abuse between the two.

The jury could not convict Simpson with reasonable doubt. I am tired of people putting the jury on trial for their verdict just because they and many others disagree with it. I was insulted by the insinuations in last week's guest column ["Rhetoric Triumphs over Justice in Trial," Oct. 6] that the jurors probably had occupations that "never demanded that they analyze arguments or intelligently base their decisions on facts." I can't see how anyone can make these statements before listening to the jurors' explanations. Just because this jury was predominately minority and didn't live in the hills of Southern California does not mean they couldn't return an educated verdict on the evidence. This kind of speculation has contributed to the huge racial chasm regarding the Simpson verdict.

The bottom line is that if the jury had voted the other way, we would not hear all of this criticism. People would have praised the jury for being fair and expedient despite the race and celebrity of the defendant and all the "smoke and mirrors" of the defense team. Black America is called racist because of celebration following the verdict.

Black America did not celebrate a guilty man going free. Many of us did not believe the evidence had proved Simpson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and dreaded the prospect of another black man going to prison for a crime he may not have committed. And despite conventional opinion, Simpson has not been idolized and made a hero. The trial is over. Get a life and get over it.

Terrence L. Evans '95