Ed Shaw Law | no nonsense legal advice

To Get Started, Call Us At 800-507-0352

218-520-0325
  • Home
  • About
    • Shaw, Edward R.
    • Lubinus, Blake
    • Dosser, Marc W.
    • Porter, Jules M.S.
  • Our Practice
    • Family Law
    • Criminal Defense
    • Bankruptcy
    • Estate Planning And Probate
    • Real Estate Law
    • Civil Law
  • How A Lawyer Can Help Your Business
  • Success Stories
    • Testimonials
  • Blog
  • Contact
Ed Shaw Law | no nonsense legal advice
  • Home
  • About
    • Shaw, Edward R.
    • Lubinus, Blake
    • Westerberg, Sara N.
    • Porter, Jules M.S.
  • Our Practice
    • Bankruptcy
      • Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
      • Fair Debt Collection
    • Civil Law And Litigation
      • Types Of Civil Cases We Take
    • Criminal Defense
      • College Crimes
      • Domestic Violence
      • Drug Crimes
      • DUI Charges
      • Theft
      • Tourist Crimes
      • Violent Crime Charges
    • Estate Planning And Probate
      • Getting A Will
    • Family Law And Divorce
      • Child Custody
      • Child Custody Evaluation Services
      • Child Support
      • Divorce
      • High – Asset Divorce
      • Mediation And Divorce
      • Modifications
      • Orders For Protection And Restraining Orders
      • Property Division
  • How A Lawyer Can Help Your Business
  • Success Stories
    • Testimonials
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Invoice Payment
  • Make A Retainer
Email
CALL
Local Solutions
For Local Problems
  1. Home
  2.  » 
  3. Firm News
  4.  » 
  5. OJ trial part 2, why did the jury find OJ not guilty?

OJ trial part 2, why did the jury find OJ not guilty?

On Behalf of Ed Shaw Law | Mar 8, 2022 | Firm News |

I am one who respects the jury system. It is easy for someone to watch a thirty second soundbite on a case and think they know more about it than the jurors who listened to the entire trial.

In the OJ case, we now know a lot more than the jury knew at the time of the trial. OJ’s actions after the trial, including authoring a book called ‘If I did it’ which talked about how he murdered his wife, have been consistent with the acts of a guilty person.

The evidence presented at trial that he was the killer was convincing in showing that he had a motive, anger at his ex-wife, opportunity to commit the crime, and physical evidence tied him to the scene.

With all of this evidence, how could the jury find OJ not guilty?

Was it because he had a great defense team? In the vast majority of criminal cases the prosecution has more resources than the defense; they have the police conducting their investigation, prosecutor’s offices in many states including California have their own investigations in addition to the police.

In most cases the accused are represented by the public defender’s office and in the better states like Minnesota, they are decently funded, but still lag behind prosecutor’s offices, in the worst states they are hopelessly under resourced and under paid. Unlike most accused, OJ had great attorneys; a team with several legal stars on it which included F. Lee Bailey, Johnnie Cochran, and Robert Shapiro. It was an effective team, but the prosecution team was no slouch. Marcia Clark and Chris Darden were top notch attorneys and the L.A. County District Attorney’s Office put far more resources into the OJ case than for a typical trial. Having great lawyers certainly helped OJ, but that is not why he won the trial.

The reason OJ walked was because of a weak link in the prosecution case; a racist, lying investigator, Detective Mark Fuhrman. Mark Fuhrman was one of the investigators who oversaw the crime scene after the murder and was of course, a key witness for the prosecution. Mr. Fuhrman made numerous disparaging comments about people of color, mixed-race couples in particular, ‘OJ is black, his late wife was white.’

To make matters worse, when questioned about his racial attitudes at trial, Mr. Fuhrman denied having made racist comments. The defense had solid evidence, including credible witnesses, and recordings, that he had made racist comments, when the recordings were played Fuhrman was shown to be a liar right in front of the jury.

The jury, which included many people of color heard that not only was Fuhrman a racist who hated people like them, but that he had lied about it under oath (lying under oath is perjury which is a felony that Mr. Fuhrman was prosecuted for after the trial; he did however plead no contest, meaning that he conceded guilt)  The defense argument that OJ had somehow been framed was given new life when Fuhrman’s lies came out in trial.

While we cannot be sure what would have happened if the state’s key witness had not been a lying racist, it is fair to say that OJ would have likely been convicted without Mark Fuhrman. The prosecution cannot say that they were surprised. Mr. Fuhrman’s racism was long known within the Las Angeles Police Department, and he should have been let go years before the OJ case.

The OJ trial had a lesson, one which was unfortunately not followed in most of the country; when police officers betray their oaths to protect and serve by being racists, by abusing their authority and the public, they need to be removed from law enforcement. If they are not removed, not only do they harm the public, and bring disgrace to the many honest and hardworking officers in their departments, but they undermine the public’s trust in the police and in the courts, making it harder to investigate crimes and convict the guilty.

The recent cases in Minnesota and elsewhere will hopefully lead to a long overdue house cleaning in law enforcement. Officers like Mark Fuhrman have no place in the future of law enforcement.

Why do different states have different laws?

by Edward Shaw | Jun 30, 2025 | General Law

I get asked the question all of the time, why are the laws different in each state, and, why do people need to get different lawyers when they have legal issues in other states. The answer goes back to the founding of our country, we have always had a federal system,...

read more

Will I lose everything in Chapter 7 bankruptcy? 

On Behalf of Ed Shaw Law | Jun 5, 2025 | Bankruptcy

Chapter 7 bankruptcy helps erase debts when you cannot pay them and give you a fresh financial start. However, many people think of bankruptcy as losing everything. Fortunately, Minnesota laws protect essential assets.  Confidence comes from knowing your rights—learn...

read more

What is the difference between legal and physical custody?

On Behalf of Ed Shaw Law | Apr 23, 2025 | Family Law

If you're going through a custody issue in Minnesota, it's important to understand the difference between legal and physical custody. These terms may sound similar, but they each play a different role in your child's life. Understanding legal custody Legal custody...

read more

JAIL PHONES

by Edward Shaw | Apr 4, 2025 | Criminal Defense

Many of you have seen movies involving phone calls from a jail or prison, maybe some of you have gotten calls from a jail or prison.  If you have, you may be familiar with the message that often plays 'This call is from a correctional institution and may be...

read more

EXPERT WITNESSES

On Behalf of Ed Shaw Law | Mar 27, 2025 | Firm News

Most people outside of the legal system have never heard of expert witnesses, a critical part of the legal system.  Unlike regular witnesses, who can testify about what they observed or heard, experts can offer opinions.  Experts are used to explain a variety of...

read more

Contracts for Deed

by Edward Shaw | Mar 12, 2025 | Business Law

They are an alternative method of financing the purchase and sale of property.  Instead of the buyer getting a bank loan, payments are made to the seller.  The arrangement has its advantages, by taking payments over time a seller can in some cases save on taxes. ...

read more

WHEN DO YOUR RIGHTS HAVE TO BE READ TO YOU

by Edward Shaw | Jan 31, 2025 | General Law

I have written on this topic before, but, because it is a source of a lot of misunderstanding among the general public, it needs more attention. Police shows for decades have shown people being arrested and read the Miranda warning, 'their rights', you have the right...

read more

When can you sue someone for something they say?

by Edward Shaw | Jan 24, 2025 | Civil Law, General Law

Free speech is a cornerstone of our society, for good reasons.  A democracy depends on people being able to express their opinions about anybody, and anything.  Even the richest and most powerful in society can be criticized by any citizen in a free society. Like all...

read more

MONEY AND DIVORCE

On Behalf of Ed Shaw Law | Jan 13, 2025 | Firm News

When divorces are tough there are usually issues with money.  The rules on dividing assets, money, real estate, vehicles, anything of value, are simple, it is generally divided equally, regardless of who earned it, or whose name is on it.  The exception is...

read more

Tips for co-parents to keep the holiday season peaceful and joyous

On Behalf of Ed Shaw Law | Dec 6, 2024 | Custody

Co-parenting presents challenges throughout the year, but the holiday season can amplify these difficulties, even for those who maintain a cordial relationship with their former spouse. From Thanksgiving through the end of the year, the added stress of coordinating...

read more
« Older Entries

Recent Posts

  • Why do different states have different laws?
  • Will I lose everything in Chapter 7 bankruptcy? 
  • What is the difference between legal and physical custody?
  • JAIL PHONES
  • EXPERT WITNESSES

Categories

  • Bankruptcy
  • Business Law
  • Civil Law
  • Civil Litigation
  • Criminal Defense
  • Criminal Law
  • Custody
  • Divorce
  • Domestic Abuse
  • Drug Charges
  • Drunk Driving Defense
  • Estate Planning
  • Family Law
  • Firm News
  • General Law
  • Orders For Protection
  • Parents Rights
  • Real Estate Law
  • Restraining Orders

Archives

RSS Feed

Subscribe To This Blog’s Feed

Contact The Firm

What’s on your mind? Send us a message.
We’ll get back to you soon to discuss how we can help.

Ed Shaw Law | no nonsense legal advice
  • Follow
  • Follow
  • Follow

Make an Invoice Payment



Brainerd Address

722 South 6th Street
Brainerd, MN 56401

Ph: 218-520-0325

Brainerd Office


St. Cloud Address

14 Seventh Ave North
St. Cloud, MN 56303

Ph: 320-347-7589

St. Cloud Office

© 2025 Ed Shaw Law • All Rights Reserved

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw