Comparison Of BBC And O. J. Simpson

When comparing the two documentaries on O.J. Simpson, there was not much similarity. Each documentary focused on the basic evidence of the Simpson case, and that is where most of the similarity ends. The parts of the ESPN documentary watched, were heavily focused on the trial of the Simpson case. ESPN framed the documentary to be about race and whether or not O.J. Simpson was framed of murder. The ESPN documentary was heavily narrated by friends, colleagues, lawyers or writers, during the time that the murders happened. The BBC documentary had lots of expert testimony, rather than friends being interviewed to talk about what happened. In the ESPN documentary, most people refer to Simpson as, O.J., juice, or Mr. Simpson. When referring to Nicole Brown Simpson, they say Nicole and whenever mentioned, they refer to Ron Goldman as Ron.
With the BBC documentary, all parties are typically called their first and last name. This is a very formal way of talking to viewers watching the documentary. The BBC documentary focused on two things, contamination of evidence and other parties that could have murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. In the BBC documentary the trial and the pandemonium happening during the trial, was not center focus, unlike in the ESPN documentary. The BBC documentary started off talking about how contaminated every piece of evidence was that was gathered from the Bundy condominium, the white Bronco, and from Buckingham Palace. In the ESPN documentary series, they talked mostly about the planting of the glove by Mark Fuhrman, rather than how all of the crime scenes were handled. The ESPN documentary does not cover how evidence was missing, tampered with, or completely ignored. The lack of information about the evidence in the ESPN documentary, causes speculation for