The People's Truth

The following article is under submission. Reproduction in computer file and messages bases is permitted for informational purposes only. Copyright (c) 1995 by J. Neil Schulman. All other rights reserved.


by J. Neil Schulman

The jury has given its verdict, it has "spoken truth": there was a reasonable doubt that Orenthal James Simpson murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Under the presumption of innocence until proved guilty inherent in the American system of jurisprudence, we must now accept O.J. Simpson back into our society as an innocent man, and put our suspicions behind us.

The jury's truth has a corollary: there is a reasonable suspicion that someone else, so far uninvestigated by the Los Angeles Police Department and never indicted by Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti, committed these brutal murders.

Yet, what did we see in the prosecution's press conference following the jury's "truth saying"? Did we hear the Los Angeles District Attorney declare that the jury had spoken and we must now accept the jury's verdict of innocence as true? No. We saw Gil Garcetti and Marcia Clark declare that they were still satisfied with the evidence they had presented against O.J. Simpson, and Garcetti strongly implying that they were finished: they had no intent of investigating these murders further.

Gil Garcetti and Marcia Clark left the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman with the conclusion that there would be no justice for their loved ones.

They did further damage to a man the jury has left an innocent man falsely accused, by failing to declare that the jury has proven their case wrong.

But in declaring O.J. Simpson "Not Guilty" and making the presumption of innocence permanent, the jury has spoken the people's truth. Where do these public employees get off questioning our truth and continuing to maintain that O.J. is guilty? It's just another example of the arrogance of the officials the American people rely on to administer our system of justice.

Since Mark Fuhrman talked freely to Florence Bell, a woman he didn't even know, about his willingness to discriminate against mixed couples and his desire to see all blacks killed; and spoke on tape for many hours about how he would fake evidence and brutalize suspects, are we to think for a moment that Fuhrman's fellow officers didn't know about his criminal personality when they allowed him unobserved access to O.J. Simpson's Bronco and estate on June 13, 1994 and afterwards?

The Los Angeles Police Department covered up Mark Fuhrman's racist beliefs for the twenty years that Mark Fuhrman was on the force. They allowed him to rise to the rank of detective. And on the word of this racist liar, they allowed themselves to be guided toward O.J. Simpson as their sole suspect, and spent no energy investigating what other possible scenarios might have enacted these murders.

The detectives and prosecutors for the City of Los Angeles are incompetents who spent eight million dollars of the people's money in failing to prove O.J. Simpson's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the presumption of innocence requires us to say that they spent eight million dollars of the people's money pursuing an innocent man for fifteen months, draining his purse and blackening his reputation beyond repair.

They spent fifteen months convincing the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman that O.J. Simpson was the man responsible for the deaths of their loved ones, and now that the jury has spoken its truth that they were wrong, they stand unrepentant for their incompetence and their willingness to hide the truth from the jury by active complicity in the cover-up for Mark Fuhrman's racism, and the possibility that he conspired to frame an innocent man.

Gil Garcetti needs to be defeated if he seeks reelection as Los Angeles District Attorney. Marcia Clark should be fired immediately for misuse of eight million dollars of the people's money entrusted to them, for manipulating the victims' families, for pursuing a man the jury has said they were wrong to pursue -- and now refusing to accept the jury's truth.

We can keep Chris Darden on the job -- he was the only prosecutor who had the guts and class -- and the understanding of our system of jurisprudence -- to declare that he accepted the jury's verdict. He should consider running against Garcetti in the next election.

But those detectives of the Los Angeles Police Department who, according to the jury, failed to find the truth, should be put back onto the streets of Los Angeles, writing parking tickets, until retirement. We can no longer trust them with anything important.

And I eagerly await the perjury trial of Mark Fuhrman when it hits my TV set.

Justice is too important to allow public servants to screw things up then arrogantly tell a jury that they have not spoken the people's truth.

One more thing. If any public official, or public personality, continues to declare that O.J. Simpson is guilty now that the jury has said that by law he is innocent, I hope O.J. sues their pants off and wins. A jury's saying of truth needs to be final, and no one should be allowed to question it in public with impunity.

And the victims in this case -- including, according to the jury, O.J. Simpson, a man who by the people's truth is forever presumed innocent of these crimes and therefore must also be regarded as a victim -- deserve to have a full investigation of whoever else might have committed these crimes.

And those of us who watched this trial do, too.

Return to Is this a case for Perry Mason?

Return to Recent Articles by J. Neil Schulman.

HTML by J. Kent Hastings [Artist],,
1354 East Ave. # R-108, Chico, CA 95926. Fax: (916) 893-1525.