Warning: this article discusses domestic violence and murder.
Netflix’s new documentary seriesAmerican Manhunt: O. J. Simpsonexplores the infamous case in a new light. The series uses interviews and archival footage from the trial and the events surrounding it.American Manhuntoutlines the events of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman’s deaths, the police response to the crime, O. J. Simpson’s trial for the murders, and the larger impact on American culture that the events had. As one of the most well-known court cases of all time,the Netflix TV seriesdoes a good job of tracing all the most important elements of the trial.
American Manhunt: O. J. Simpson’s biggest strength is its use of interviews with many of the people involved in the case from both the prosecution and the defense. By including individuals from both sides along with a juror on the case and the sister of one of the victims, the true crime documentary series does give a fairly well-rounded perspective. Though the case is so well-known that many viewers likely already know many of the main arguments made, the docuseries does bring to light several big reveals that are impactful.
10Several Witnesses Were Never Called To The Stand
Their Testimonies Could Have Changed Jury Opinions
The OJ Simpson case had a lot of evidence, but at the end of the day, the biggest factor in the trial actually ended up being the witnesses used and how the two sides questioned them. On the whole, the defense did a much better job at using witnesses to their advantage, and to this point,there were several witnesses that could have helped the prosecution that they chose not to bring to the stand at all. In particular, the two witnesses who share their stories in Netflix’s documentary series both saw OJ the night that the murders occurred but were never asked to testify.
While it is unclear the exact impact that these witnesses could have had, they likely would have aided in corroborating the prosecution’s timeline.
The first witness, Jill Shively, was driving home when she saw O. J. Simpson driving away from his ex-wife’s neighborhood, putting him near the scene of the crime at the right time. Shively later sold her story, so Marcia Clark thought that she would not be a very credible witness. Skip Junis, who saw Simpson arrive at LAX acting strangely, was also never called to testify. While it is unclear the exact impact that these witnesses could have had, they likely would have aided in corroborating the prosecution’s timeline.
9Ron Goldman Was In The Wrong Place At The Wrong Time
The Docuseries Features Interviews With Goldman’s Sister
Despite being a murder case, very little attention is often paid to the victims in discussions of the O. J. Simpson trial because of Simpson’s fame. While the Netflix documentary necessarily has to give a detailed outline of the case,one important point that the series does remind viewers of is the innocence of the victims and the impact that the murders had on their families. In particular, the series makes it very clear that Ron Goldman was in the wrong place at the wrong time, with several interviewees even positing that he had attempted to save Nicole Brown Simpson.
10 Best Feature Length True Crime Documentaries
Many of the best true crime documentaries aren’t produced as a series but as a feature-length format that makes for an epic and captivating watch.
Goldman was friends with Brown Simpson and had gone to her house to drop off a pair of glasses that her mother had left at the restaurant where he worked. This, unfortunately, placed him at her house at the time of the crime. Both deaths were incredibly tragic, and interviews with Goldman’s sister help the documentary continuously draw focus back to them rather than solely on the court case that became a media frenzy.
8Several Pieces Of Physical Evidence Were Never Collected By Police
In the first episode ofAmerican Manhunt: O. J. Simpson, several of the LAPD detectives who were on the case outlined how they believed that other detectives and crime scene analysts at the scene had failed to properly tag and admit certain objects into the official evidence in the case. There was a wealth of evidence at the scene, butbecause the police involved in the investigation never fully compared notes, some of it was lost or tampered with. The docuseries points to medical supplies in Brown Simpson’s house that had been tampered with and laundry that was still wet and could have yielded DNA.
Perhaps the most famous evidence that overshadows the case is the pair of gloves that were split between the murder scene and Simpson’s house. Even these fell under suspicion of tampering. Likewise, though detective Mark Fuhrman made notes of the scene, his notes were supposedly never read by the other detectives on the case, meaning thatall the police were not even on the same page. Notably, despite the vast amount of physical evidence at the scene, the murder weapon was never found.
7DNA Evidence From Inside And Outside The House Was Not Collected
Additionally, The Evidence Was Not Managed Properly
In outlining the crime and the appearance of the crime scene, one of the biggest things thatAmerican Manhunthighlights is that a lot of DNA evidence was not collected by police at the time.The docuseries shows images of blood on light switches and door nobs, which it notes that officers did not collect.Additionally, the laundry that was still wet and in the washer was not examined at all. These major oversights could have definitely helped show whose blood and DNA were in the house and outside.
The Netflix series points to bad communication between the detectives and their lack of good notes or pictures as a major problem for the investigation.
Though there was a lot of DNA collected for testing, the defense later argued that it could have been contaminated, meaning thatany additional DNA that was collected at the beginning could have proved helpful.Additionally, the Netflix series points to bad communication between the detectives and their lack of good notes or pictures as a major problem for the investigation. While there were only three DNA profiles associated with the blood that was tested, collecting further samples from other locations around the crime scene and Simpson’s house could have further indicated what happened that night.
6Simpson’s Initial Interview With The Police Was Not Used In Court
After Simpson returned to Los Angeles from Chicago and was fully informed of the situation surrounding his wife’s death, he was interviewed by the LAPD. While segments of the interview are used in the documentary series, the interview was never used in court. Throughout it, Simpson was not able to give any consistent answers about his whereabouts that night or what had happened since then.
The 25 Best Documentaries On Netflix Right Now
Netflix has many critically lauded documentaries to check out but the sheer number is overwhelming. Which are the best to check out first?
One big question mark for the police was that Simpson had a cut on his left hand which would have been consistent with the drops of blood at the crime scene, as the bloody footprints leaving the scene had drops of blood on the left side of them. However,O. J. Simpson was unable to give a clear answer about how he had cut his hand, either to the police or to his friends afterward. He alternatively said that he cut it before he left for Chicago or that he cut it in his hotel room in Chicago, but none of his stories have even truly been proven one way or another.
5The Documentary Casts Doubt On Mark Fuhrman
WhileAmerican Manhunt: O. J. Simpsoninitially frames Mark Fuhrman as one of the primary interviewees for the series, as the show progresses it becomes clear that he was actually a major problem in the case. His role and testimony are certainly one of the most infamous parts of the case, asFuhrman was the only person in the O. J. Simpson trial actually convicted. However,American Manhuntmakes the extent of his actions and their implications crystal clear because his racism influenced the entire outcome of the case.
When Fuhrman returned during the defense’s case, he took the fifth for all the big questions, including whether he had ever falsified a police report or planted evidence, making him look guilty of something.
The defense brought Fuhrman’s name up at trial to point to his racism as a factor in Simpson’s arrest.These allegations came up when he first took the stand as a witness for the prosecution. When Fuhrman returned during the defense’s case, he took the fifth for all the big questions, including whether he had ever falsified a police report or planted evidence, making him look guilty of something. While in his interviews for the docuseries, Fuhrman is adamant that he never falsified a report, it certainly was not a good position for the LAPD to be in.
4The Jury Selection Took 2 Months
They Interviewed 257 People
The nature of the case and O.J.’s fame ensured that people knew about the trial going in, which made it very difficult to select the jurors. Because so many people had been following the case prior to the trial,it was difficult to find jurors who would be able to give an unbiased decision. Selecting the jury ultimately took two months and 257 people were interviewed before the prosecution and defense had accepted enough jurors and backups.
The trial was held in Downtown Los Angeles rather than in Santa Monica, where it had occurred, to gain a more diverse jury, whom the defense rightly believed would be more likely to side with Simpson. The defense believed that Black jurors would be more likely to find Simpson not guilty, and the prosecution believed that women would be more likely to find him guilty. This resulted in the jurors being mostly women and mostly Black.
The Science Was Still So New And People Were Skeptical
Because the trial was the very beginning of when DNA evidence analysis was being used, many people were not very familiar with it, including the jury and some of the crime scene analysts. This meant that detectives missed crucial things that could have solidified the DNA evidence even more. Based on the DNA that was tested,Nicole Brown Simpson, Ron Goldman, and O.J. Simpson’s DNA were present both at Brown Simpson’s house and Simpson’s house. Though this seemed like it would conclusively link Simpson to the crime, the defense was able to argue against it.
Since Marcia Clark largely argued the case from the standpoint of science and facts, her case was often not as compelling as Johnnie Cochran, who argued his points through the emotional connection he could create with the jurors.
Because some of theofficials working on the crime scene had not been properly trained, they contaminated the crime scene in various ways.American Manhunthighlights that gloves were not always used, and blood samples were not always transported in the correct way, among other issues. Additionally, since Marcia Clark largely argued the case from the standpoint of science and facts, her case was often not as compelling as Johnnie Cochran, who argued his points through the emotional connection he could create with the jurors.
2The Defense Used An Argument Of Evidence Planting
Trouble With The Los Angeles Police Was A Huge Factor In The Case
Along with the defense’s claim that the collection of the DNA evidence was done incorrectly and contaminated the findings,they also alleged that the LAPD was actually behind framing O. J. Simpson. The defense claimed that Mark Fuhrman had moved the second glove from Nicole Brown Simpson’s house to O. J. Simpson’s house and had hidden it behind his guest bungalows. The docuseries alleges that Simpson’s team used Fuhrman’s noted racism to give him a motive to frame O. J. Simpson.
10 Gritty TV Crime Dramas For Fans Of True Crime
While there are plenty of true crime shows currently streaming, there are also many traditional crime dramas that true crime fans will enjoy.
Beyond Fuhrman’s alleged tampering, which has been found to be completely false, the defense also hypothesized that another official on the case, Vannatter, had carried a vial of Simpson’s blood to the crime scene in order to plant evidence there. This has also been proven false. Whilethese two claims are completely unfounded based on the evidence of the case and subsequent investigations into the officers in question, the claims were effective in drawing attention away from the murder and towards a potential police cover-up.
1After The Criminal Case, The Victims' Families Brought Forward A Civil Case
Unlike The Criminal Case, The Civil Case Prosecution Won
While the criminal court case was the trial that garnered the most attention, after O. J. Simpson was acquitted there, he had to go back to trial in a civil case. The case was brought forward by the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman for wrongful death. In the civil case, further notice of Simpson’s domestic abuse was entered into evidence and the judge did not allow the defense to use the same arguments about the LAPD’s racism. Additionally, Simpson testified, but he was unable to answer even basic questions.He was found responsible for their deaths.
Kim Goldman, Ron Goldman’s sister, stated inAmerican Manhuntthat her family never received any of the money they were owed from O. J. Simpson.
Following the decision in the civil case, O. J. Simpson owed the families of the deceased $33.5 million. However, there were no adequate checks to ensure that he actually paid that money. More than anything, his guilty verdict in the civil suit helped provide the families of the victims with some sense of closure that they did not get from the criminal trial. While it is impossible to ever make up for the loss of life,American Manhunt: O. J. Simpsonends with a reflection on the tragedy of the event and its lasting impact.
