SIMPSON VERDICT
Campus pauses as trial of century ends
Defense team
racial strategy
aided doubt
By Chad Lorenz
Senior Editor
Racial issues were apparent throughout the
O.J. Simpson trial, but race might have played
its biggest part Monday in the jury’s acquittal of
Simpson, said two local black leaders.
John Harris, special assistant to the vice
chancellor for student affairs, said the taped
racist comments of Los Angeles police detec
tive Mark Fuhrman proved the possibility of a
police conspiracy to frame Simpson.
“That may have been one of the most impact
ing factors in their decision,” Harris said.
The jury was given the job of finding any
reasonable doubt that Simpson murdered his
ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron
Goldman, he said. The racial strategy applied
by the defense may have provided that doubt, he
said.
But the defense team didn’t have to paint a
racist picture of Fuhrman, Harris said.
“Fuhrman painted his own picture,” he said.
The “race card” played by the defense was
effective because American people are sensi
tive to bigotry, Harris said.
If lawyers can use race strategy the right way,
he said, they can generate the desired response
to win a case.
Nebraska senator Ernie Chambers of Omaha
said race was an issue in the trial, but the jury’s
decision was simple. They weren’t convinced
by the evidence presented to them that Simpson
was guilty, he said.
Fuhrman’s racist attitude destroyed the cred
ibility of the evidence obtained by the Los
Angeles Police Department, Chambers said.
It also destroyed the prosecution’s credibil
ity.
“They knew they had a racist and a liar,”
Chambers said. “I think they were their own
worst enemy.”
The jurors, however, had solid evidence that
spoke for itself: a glove that didn’t fit, socks that
had been tampered with and an impossible time
bracket to commit the crime, he said.
Harris said some people would be upset
regardless of the verdict.
Harris said he saw students crowding around
televisions in the Nebraska Union waiting only
for the verdict they wanted to hear.
“Many white people — not all — wanted a
guilty verdict,” he said. “Many minorities —
not all, but many — wanted him acquitted. *
That’s tension right there.”
And the verdict doesn’t resolve the central
issue ofthe case, he said—two people are dead
and police have no other suspects.
Jeff Haller/DN
A large crowd focuses its attention on a Nebraska Union television Tuesday, moments before the announcement of the
not guilty verdicts in the O.J. Simpson trial.
Civil suit next for Simpson 1
By Erin Schulte
Staff Reporter
It’s finally over ... maybe.
Although jurors handed down a not guilty
verdict Tuesday morning, more O.J. Simpson
news may be to come. There are still legal
options the prosecution and the victims’ fami
lies can pursue, Nebraska legal experts said.
Collin Mangrum, a professor of law at
Creighton University in Omaha, predicted the
families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald
Goldman would bring civil charges of wrongful
death against Simpson. The families would sue
for damages, Mangrum said.
Goldman ’ s family announced Monday a civil
lawsuit would be filed. In a civil trial, Simpson
would have to testify.
It’s easier to find someone guilty in a civil
suit, said Jo Potuto, professor of constitutional
law at the UNL College of Law. The jury only
has to decide if it was more likely than not that
the person committed the crime, Potuto said; in
a criminal court the jury must be sure beyond a
reasonable doubt.
Therefore, even if Simpson is found not
guilty in criminal court, he could be found guilty
in civil court, Potuto said.
No more criminal court action will be taken
because of the double jeopardy law, Potuto
said. Mangrum agreed there would be no fur
ther action in the criminal court because ofjury
nullification (the jury’s ability to convict or
acquit not withstanding the evidence).
Alan Loya, a second-year UNL law student
from Los Angeles, said the prosecution may try
to find out if jurors did anything inappropriate,
such as view outside news media about the case.
The prosecution could then call for a mistrial
and issue an appeal.
“No judge would want to get his hands dirty
with this case, though. They’d find a way to
overturn the appeal,” Loya said.
Mangrum said it would be hard for the pros
ecution to call a mistrial because the jury cannot
testify why they decided one way or the other.
Travis Heying/DN
Jennifer Bevins, a senior
psychology major, reacts to
Tuesday’s verdict.
Verdict may hurt victims
By John Fulwider
Senior Reporter
It was a case deemed by some to be
a fight for all victims of domestic
assault. And it was lost.
After the jury in the O.J. Simpson
case returned not guilty verdicts Tues
day, womens’ rights advocates reacted
with disappointment and concern.
The heavily publicized case sends
women a difficult message that people
are not held accountable for domestic
violence, said Madeline Popa, coor
dinator of the Nebraska chapter of the
National Organization for Women.
“It’s sending the message that no
matter what, you are not going to be
able to have people look at your story,”
she said.
Although the verdict was discour
aging, Popa said, it was only one case.
The struggle against domestic vio
lence must continue, she said. “There
are so many more cases where women
need to fight for their life, for their
rights,” she said.
In Lancaster County, domestic as
sault cases total more than 2,000 a
year, said Deputy County Attorney
Nancy Wynner.
Though the Simpson case didn’t
result in a conviction, she said, that is
not reflective of the norm.
“We’ve got a pretty good convic
tion rate in Lincoln,” she said. Some
times those convictions come on a
lesser charge, such as disturbing the
peace, but Wynner said that was not
extremely common. “The key is get
tingcooperation from the victim,” she
said.
The not guilty verdicts may clear
Simpson of murder, but Popa said he
was guilty of another crime. “He is
guilty of the domestic violence he
imposed on her throughout their mar
riage,” she said. “That also will stay
with him.”
Lisa Cauble, UNL Victim’s Ser
vices coordinator, said she was not
sure if the verdict itself would make a
difference.
But the coverage of the trial, she
said, has brought domestic violence
into the national spotlight. And that’s
good, she said. “People have been
made aware of it,” she said, “and know
that something needs to be done about
it.”
Wynner agreed, but said that atten
tion was lost as the trial dragged on.
“The focus switched from domestic
violence to race,” Wynner said.
“The justice system will not always
fail women,” she said. “We’re con
cerned that women in the community
know that we are still here for them.”
Senior editor Brian Sharp coatrtbated
to this report
Reaction
Continued from Page 1
more accounting major. “It didn’t add
up. He was railroaded.”
McElligott shrieked and jumped
from her seat on the union floor after
the first verdict was read. Her celebra
tion had started even before Simpson
mouthed “Thank you” to an interna
tional television audience.
The crowd at Lazzari’s sat silent
while the verdicts were revealed.
Expressions of shock and disbelief
engulfed most of the patrons. At one
table, someone clapped. At another, a
woman lifted her hand to her mouth.
One customer, Miriam Davis of
Lincoln, said the verdict sent society
back to an era when violence against
women was tolerated.
“We’ve gone back in time,” Davis
said. “If you’re the right person with
the right attorney, you can get off.
Women — look out.”
A similar silence swallowed the
lounge at the Rec Center. An inter
preter for a deaf student stood otr&
chair at the front of the room and
signed the reporters’ commentaries
and the comments being made in the
courtroom. There was nothing to in
terpret from the room around her—it
was quiet.
“This is bigger than the Super
Bowl,” one man said. His comment
“My opinion doesn’t
matter. The jury has
spoken.’’
BUDDY KUALAPAI
UNL student
was answered by nervous laughter.
Noise filled the room as soon as the
verdicts were announced. Some stu
dents shook their heads. Others
laughed.
Senior Alicia Haugen said she was
relieved the trial was over.
“If he were found guilty, there
would probably be a lot of appeals,”
Haugen said. “People want this thing
to be over.”
Buddy Kualapai, who came up
stairs just to hear the verdicts, said he
wasn’t sure if the decision was fair.
“My opinion doesn’t matter,”
Kualapai said. “The jury has spoken.”
Moments after the verdicts were
announced, all of the crowds began to
clear.
Reggie Barnes, a freshman psy
chology major, stayed in the union to
watch the decisions be replayed.
“Say it again,” Barnes said, bow
ing his hands to the big screen televi
sion with a frozen picture of Simpson.
Barnes and a group of friends
agreed that race played a major factor
in the Simpson case. If the victims
were not white, they said, the case
would have received less publicity.
Mark Byars, a senior accounting
major, stood about 10 feet from the
big-screen television as the court clerk
read the verdicts.
Byars, who wore a blue suit with an
American flag necktie, said that race
was not a major factor in the trial.
However, he said, two cases have been
ongoing: one in the courtroom and
one in the public.
“I thought he was guilty. And I did
think he would be convicted,” Byars
said. “Obviously the jury didn’t think
so.”
After the verdict was read at
Lazzari’s, conversation and the clat
ter of plates and silverware filled the
restaurant once again.
As slowly as the crowd grew, it
began to thin out, leaving just a few
people in the pizzeria by 12:30 p.m.
From the Avery Hall Lounge, Mike
Stricklin shook his head. The journal
ism professor said he was never sure
whether Simpson was guilty or inno
cent.
“I’m glad I didn’t have to face the
question,” Stricklin said. “It’s a lot
easier to let someone else decide it.”
Reported by Dally Nebraska! staffers
Jeff Zeleay, Doag Peters, Melaale Braadert,
Tbor Schrock aad Beth Naraas.