Gmail: Good or bad?

Code of Ethics


Erin Konrad:
Cast your vote, make a difference

Erin Konrad archives

Jennifer Kitzmann:
Oops! O.J. did it again

Jennifer Kitzmann archives

Susan Acker:
Standing by my convictions

Susan Acker archives

Richard Lugo:
'Collision at the Coliseum'

Richard Lugo archives

Web Exclusives
LV Life
Arts, etc.
Search Archives
Best of CT
ULV Comm Dept.
ULV Home
ULV Home
Oops! O.J. did it again

Posted Sept. 12, 2008

Jennifer Kitzmann
LV Life Editor

The O.J. Simpson trial is back again—not for murder but for armed robbery. This time, the media has little to no sympathy for the former football star. Simpson is accused of armed robbery of a Las Vegas sports memorabilia dealer September 2007.

According to Clark County District Judge Jackie Glass, the Simpson trial in Las Vegas will not be cancelled, rescheduled or postponed and she assured defense attorneys that this decision would not change. The trial will continue as planned.

The judge interrogated potential jurors whether they considered Simpson a murderer, and she asked potential jurors to put aside their feelings about his acquittal in the trial for the slaying of his ex-wife and her friend in 1994.

The judge also said jurors should avoid any media or Web content on this case or the previous O.J. murder case.

This may be a difficult task for jurors. Jurors might also find it hard to put aside their feelings about O.J.’s guilt from the 2004 trial. How will they say they don’t know about the O.J. trials in 1994 for his wife’s murder? Unless they look for jurors in a far away island where they have no prior O.J. trial knowledge, it almost seems impossible for anyone to have little or no opinion on the subject, especially after the recent book he wrote titled, “If I Did It.”

O.J. received $3.5 million to write about how he would have killed his ex-wife and her friend had he done it. Why should we give O.J. any more of our time, tax dollars and concern? Who writes a book like that if they are innocent?

For now, 248 potential jurors have been called to serve. Only 12 will be appointed. The court has potentially picked 19; seven will serve as alternates.

Knowing human nature, some will serve with the back of the mind thought that they will get back at O.J., no matter what they promised. And for those who were up front saying they thought O.J. was a murderer? Perhaps they just wanted to get out of the five weeks of jury duty. Only the “hard-core O.J. go get him jurors” will stay in for the long haul.

The judge said if they think they're going to punish Simpson for what happened in Los Angeles, then this is not the case for them. Nevertheless, this is more like a fish in a tank full of sharks ready to eat him.

The judge also told the jury pool that if any of the jurors were looking to become famous or to write a book about the case, then they don't belong either.

I don’t think this will work either, but it was a good effort.

It is human nature to be connected to historic moments and then profit from them through story telling. I can see it now: titles like “He Got What He Deserved” or “O.J. Could Not Run This Time.” I think book deals will be flying after this one.

The “no sympathy” for O.J. has already spread to the Las Vegas community to other cities.

A restaurant across the street from the courthouse has a menu called “O.J.’s killer breakfast special.” It is a shot of O.J., a stab of steak, scrambled eggs and cheese handcuffed with onion rings. That sounds like a loser breakfast to me.

Regardless of the O.J. history, and whether he is guilty or not, I hope the truth comes out. It is no longer in O.J.’s destiny to save himself. Johnny Cochran is no longer here to save him, and his life now lies in the hands of the people. I will be watching this trial, as I watched his last trial, just to see if the gloves really do fit this time.

Jennifer Kitzmann, a senior journalism major, is LV Life editor of the Campus Times. She can be reached by e-mail at jennifer.kitzmann@laverne.edu.