Case Research

Only available on StudyMode
  • Topic: Nicole Brown Simpson, O. J. Simpson, O. J. Simpson murder case
  • Pages : 5 (1757 words )
  • Download(s) : 41
  • Published : May 15, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
Kimberly L. Wyche
April 24, 2013
Case Research Assessment
Dr. Toni Asterino Starcher
Law 211

Intentional Tort Case
The case that I researched was O.J. Simpson verses the Goldmans. Prior to this case O.J. Simpson was arrested for the murder of his Ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. O.J. did plead not guilty and after a 133 day trial, he was found to be not guilty of the crimes on October 3, 1995. On October 23, 1995 in the state of California Simpson was back in court for the wrongful death case; where the parents of the deceased Ronald Goldman were asking to be compensated for their loss from Simpson’s actions. Ronald Goldman’s family decided that it would be easier to sue Simpson in civil court, which meant a finding of civil liability requiring only a finding that it is more probably true than not that the defendant caused the injury. The Plaintiffs names on the case were Ronald Goldman’s family members such as his mother and father. The Defendant name was O.J. Simpson. Some of the key arguments that were presented by the plaintiffs were to show that Simpson wore very expensive shoes and they supplied 39 photos of those same shoes which matched footprints from the murder scene. They also made O.J. Simpson take the stand which he didn’t in the criminal case. The attorneys for the plaintiff’s also noted that Simpson admitted to being very upset with Nicole about the way she was flirting with other men around his children. Some of the key arguments that were presented by the defense are that it raised doubts about the 39 photographs of Simpson wearing Bruno Magli shoes eight months before the slayings. The defense said a person "can fake a photograph" if that person has enough motive. The main key argument addressed was emphasized that some of Simpson's evidence sample could have been planted on a gate at Nicole Brown Simpson's condominium and on samples in the police crime lab. He said Ms. Simpson's blood, taken at autopsy, could have been planted on the socks found in Simpson's bedroom. The jury found O.J. Simpson willfully and wrongfully caused the death of Ronald Goldman. They also found that Simpson committed battery against Goldman, and that battery was committed with oppression, which means cruelty, and malice. The jury ordered Simpson to pay $8.5 million in compensatory damages to the Goldman family.

Crime Case
The case I researched was the People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson this was a criminal trial held in Los Angeles County, California. On June 12, 1994 Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman were stabbed to death. Both bodies were discovered in the front yard of Nicole's condominium in Brentwood, California. On June 13 Simpson was informed of the murders while attending a business trip in Chicago. Simpson did return to Los Angeles only to be handcuffed and taken in for questioning. Robert Shapiro was contacted on Simpson's behalf and asked to become his legal defense counsel. On June 17, Simpson was about to get arrested but snuck out of Robert Kardashians home with his friend A.C. Cowlings and led police on a high speed chase. Upon reaching his home, Simpson was taken into custody. On July 22, 1994 Simpson pleaded 100% not guilty. Some main key arguments from Johnny Cochran the defense counsel showed pictures of Simpson's nearly unharmed body taken days after following the homicides, Cochran argued that a person who attacked two people in a short time frame would have struggled aggressively and sustained multiple wounds, many more than the few marks seen on Simpson's hands. Another key argument that the defense showed was the glove left on the side of the road did not properly fit the hand of O.J. Simpson causing Cochran to play on the prosecution's gloves-didn't-fit failure, Cochran said of any evidence: "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." He insisted that so much of the prosecution's case doesn't make sense that prosecutors couldn't prove guilt beyond a reasonable...
tracking img