SIUC law professors, a SIUC student and a local attorney have contrasting reactions to Tuesday’s acquittal of O.J. Simpson on a double murder charge.

William Schroeder, an SIUC law professor and former prosecutor in southeastern Massachusetts, said he did not believe the jury would find Simpson guilty, but he thought there was overwhelming evidence of Simpson’s guilt.

The short deliberation indicates that they probably made up their minds a long time ago, he said.

Advertisement

Schroeder said there were two big factors that set Simpson free:money and a sparkling public image.

The judicial system is not about justice, Schroeder said. It’s about process, and if you have money, you can buy process.

Schroeder said a jury has to think someone is a rotten person to convict that person, and he said the 911 tapes of Nicole Brown Simpson’s beatings did not do that.

People have an image of the type of people who are criminals, he said. He doesn’t fit that image.

Richard Whitney, a third-year law student from Carbondale, said he would not second guess the jury because they were in the best position to come to a decision in this case.

Whitney said there was a fair amount of evidence tending to show Simpson’s guilt, but people have forgotten one thing.

It’s important to uphold the principle that people are innocent until proven guilty, he said.

Advertisement*

Whitney said if there was enough evidence to convict Simpson, then the Los Angeles Police Department and the prosecutor’s office only have themselves to blame.

Thomas McAffee, an SIU law school professor, said he was disappointed with the jury’s decision and thought there was enough evidence to prove Simpson guilty.

McAffee said Simpson’s image, the tremendous store of good will that the American people feel towards him and money had a lot to do with his acquittal.

I think he carried that strong presumption into the trial, he said. And the money didn’t hurt either.

McAffee said he did not believe the accusation that the police had a conspiracy plotted against Simpson.

Everything about the circumstantial evidence in this case goes against the grain of a massive police conspiracy to convict O.J. Simpson, he said.

McAffee said the trial system is riddled with imperfections but is the only system that works.

Substitutes make it worse, he said. This is true of the adversary and jury system which I think failed today. People who say otherwise don’t know what they are talking about.

McAffee said he hopes some justice will be obtained through a civil law suit for damages that might be brought by the Goldman family.

Tom Moyer, a Carbondale attorney at law, said he did not agree with the verdict and was also surprised by it.

Moyer said the defense did not present enough evidence for reasonable doubt concerning Simpson’s guilt.