Mav News
78° Longmont, CO
Mead High School’s Student News

The Mav

Mead High School’s Student News

The Mav

Mead High School’s Student News

The Mav

OJ Simpson has a considerable amount of evidence directing to him as the murderer

Just as the narrative fits like a glove, Simpson fits the glove found on the crime scene
Jacob Morales
Mav Murder: A true crime analysis was started by Alice Stewart

This article covers sensitive topics that may be disturbing to some readers. Reader discretion is advised.

On June 13, 1994, the bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were found in Brown’s driveway, stabbed to death. Though there was no weapon on the scene, a leather glove was found covered in blood, and Nicole’s dress was marked with a bloody footprint.

According to detectives, it was a “rage kill.” The medical examiner said the wounds were most likely from a “strong, large man.”

From the beginning, OJ Simpson, Nicole’s ex-husband, was a prime suspect due to evidence of a matching bloody glove discovered behind Simpson’s house in resemblance to the one found at the scene. He also matched the description given by the medical examiner.

The murder occurred at 10:00 p.m. the previous night.

The night of the killing, Simpson had a flight for Chicago set to leave at 11:45 p.m., leaving the police no way to find and investigate him at the time. Two days after the murder, a 90-minute car chase ended with Simpson being arrested at his California home and pursued.

The trial was one of the most publicized criminal trials of all time. At nine months with the most expensive defense team, the trial was full of twists and turns.

The prosecution painted a violent image of OJ Simpson as an abusive husband. I saw the arrest of Mr. Simpson on New Year’s Day 1989 for domestic violence that had disturbing images of Nicole’s bruised and battered face. Nicole’s sister came to the stand and testified against OJ, claiming she had been with her sister and was abused by OJ. The defense created the image of a racially-based trial, asserting the detective framed Simpson due to his race. While testifying on the stand, detective Mark Fuhrman was caught lying after he claimed to never have said a racial slur.

The defense brought forth a recording of Fuhrman saying racial slurs 40 times in one recording, with many more waiting. Thus, throwing out part of Fuhrman’s testimony.

Finally, the last piece of evidence gave us the famous line, “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit” from the infamous glove. During the trial, the prosecution requested that OJ try on the gloves found at the crime scene. OJ struggled to put the glove on, and when it was on, it was noticeably small. In the end, an innocent verdict came back. Outrage and excitement ripped through America with a variety of reactions in this case. Though in criminal court he was acquitted, in civil court they found OJ Simpson financially liable to the Brown and Goldman families.

But Simpson did it. Based on the evidence, it was clear.

The defense’s main argument was that Simpson was accused of the crime due to Detective Fuhrman’s racism. Recordings were played in court demonstrating Detective Fuhrman to be a racist; this does not negate his relationship with the victim, Nicole Brown.

According to a study in 2011, “about 2 out of 5 female murder victims are killed by an intimate partner.” Thus making Simpson guilty of the crime more likely than anyone else. Also, there had been evidence of previous abuse; there was domestic violence from Simpson to Nicole with images of her bruised face and accounts from Nicole’s diary and Nicole’s sister.

And “about 4,000 women die each year due to domestic violence,” which makes it even more likely that abusive OJ Simpson killed Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman.

Furthermore, based on newly discovered information, the argument about the leather gloves can be kicked out completely. Leather, when left in heat or moisture, can crack and shrink the material. The gloves had been sitting in blood, frozen and unfrozen, multiple times leading up to the trial. So leather gloves sitting in moisture, blood, and being frozen multiple times are bound to shrink the gloves a good amount. Along with that, during the try-on of the gloves, Simpson wore rubber gloves so as not to contaminate the evidence; this would make the gloves feel smaller and be harder to put on than on bare hands. The gloves would not fit due to all of these factors.

Along with that, over the years, OJ Simpson has done many things to incriminate himself. In 2007, OJ Simpson published the book “If I Did It,” which was a’made-up’ account of what might have happened that night. Saying that if Simpson had killed Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, this is how he would do it. However, he was later sued by the Goldman family for the book, which is now their financial property. It’s pretty incriminating to make a detailed description of the murder you’ve been accused of.

In other cases, Simpson has been in interviews openly joking about how and why he would kill Nicole and Ronald on that fateful night. These are not the only pieces of incriminating evidence in the case, and OJ Simpson should’ve been convicted for the murders of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman.

View Comments (1)
Donate to The Mav

Your donation will support the student journalists of Mead High School. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
About the Contributors
Isabella Pacotti
Isabella Pacotti is a sophomore. She enjoys skateboarding, drawing, painting, and reading. She is involved with orchestra and theatre. She is looking forward to writing articles for The Mav this year.
Jacob Morales
Jacob Morales, Writer
Jacob Morales is a sophomore. He enjoys playing the drums, eating sushi, and napping with his dog, Ellie. He is involved with Marching Band and Advanced Jazz Band. Jacob is looking forward to making music with his band, passing his AP classes, and playing concerts.
Donate to The Mav

Comments (1)

The Mav intends for this area to be used to create healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Comments are expected to adhere to our standards and to be respectful and constructive. As such, we do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks, or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous (this means that if what a reader writes is false or intentionally misleading, we do not have to publish it). Comments are reviewed and must be approved by a moderator to ensure that they meet these standards. The Mav does not allow anonymous comments, and requires a valid email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comments.
All The Mav Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • S

    SavanahMar 7, 2024 at 9:45 pm

    You wrote this so well izzy! Love it!