An example of cherishing reputation

Due to the long delay, the jury's isolation time reached a record level during this period.

10 jurors were either disqualified or voluntarily asked to leave the jury for various reasons. Fortunately,

Besides twelve jurors, there are twelve alternate jurors. From beginning to end, alternate jurors are accompanied by officials.

Judges participate in the trial activities of the court together. Whenever a juror leaves for some reason, there will be a substitute.

Up there. Once all the substitutes are exhausted, someone has to quit, and the trial may be due to the jury.

If the number of people is insufficient, it will be declared a failure, and everything will start again. So, everyone is sweating and has tried.

That's a long time, but don't screw it up at the last minute because there aren't enough juries. Fortunately, the rest of these people

Stick to the end.

Jurors are the most mysterious group in the court. On the one hand, it is because of their "right to life and death".

On the other hand, the right caused by this mystery "the camera lens in the court has swept all the people and everything."

It's all public, but jurors never appear in front of everyone. Because it is not allowed. Therefore,

Whenever a juror "quits the mystery", a large group of reporters always follow. generally speaking

Said, and they all covered their faces, hurried into the car, never appeared again, because they don't want to because of this.

I like the experience of a juror and affect the quiet life of myself and my family. However, once this identity is removed,

Freed from the shackles of the law, he answered reporters' questions and even accepted interviews with TV stations. Looking at these jurors, I

Sometimes they will shout: Americans let such people decide the judgment of major cases! I'm sure. That's it.

They are all ordinary people looking for on the road, so ordinary that you can't figure it out: the most scientific hair in the world.

Da, an industrially developed country, how can it hand over the jurisdiction of all major cases to an illiterate old man?

Last name, but let a bunch of doctors of law watch!

The defendant's lawyer provided few witnesses. Compared with the prosecution's hearing time, this period of hearing time also appears

Very short. However, there have been several national or even international masters. One of them won the Nobel Prize.

Winner. Perhaps because we are from China, we pay special attention to a witness in China. In fact, his appearance is also

The reason why people pay attention to it is because Dr. Li is a world-famous senior criminologist. He's Simpson.

Lawyers are Shapiro's friends, and their acquaintance is natural. Shapiro is a lawyer, and his hands are full.

Major case, and Dr. Li is a famous criminologist, who has given Shapiro a lot of help from a technical point of view. He used to work for

Many major cases have presented key evidence. This evidence is used to convict criminals and help suspects.

Free of charge, he just presents scientific evidence from a scientific point of view, which is his job. This is his science.

Our research results and fair scientific attitude are universally respected in related fields. Simpson from Chicago

When I first returned to Los Angeles, he received Shapiro's request for help in scientific evidence.

Later, he promised to testify in court. This kind of expert is paid to testify, but he obviously attaches great importance to Chinese.

Cherish the tradition of reputation, before appearing in court, he announced that he would donate $50,000 to LAPD.

As an education fund. Why would he donate it to LAPD who works for the prosecution? Because the main part of his testimony

There are some problems in LAPD's evidence collection, especially the poor level of the main forensic detectives. Coincidentally,

The main forensic detective attacked by defense lawyers is also from China. Dr. Li, who was born in Taipei Police Academy, is very beautiful.

Director of the Criminal Identification Laboratory at the Connecticut State Police Headquarters, which means that he is an employee of a subordinate unit of the Ministry of Justice.

Members. The federal and state justice departments are responsible for prosecuting criminal cases, but he came all the way from the northeast of the United States.

The southwest came to testify for a major murder suspect prosecuted in another state. This is a normal thing in America.

Providing scientific evidence, whether to the defendant or the prosecutor, is complete for a scientific worker.

The same thing, the difference is that you can get higher pay for testifying for a celebrity like Simpson, but this time he

Donated the predetermined reward to the opponent in court. However, even if he does not donate the money, he will not get any money.

External and psychological pressure. On the contrary, experts were on TV every day after the defense announced that he would testify.

Our comments are full of admiration, as if waiting for the appearance of a big star.

Entrusted by Simpson's lawyer Shapiro, he made a physical examination for Simpson to prove that he was healthy.

There was no sign of any struggle, and the photos of these inspections were presented in court. He also took photos of the crime scene.

Made some inferences. The most important point is that after analyzing a scene photo, he thinks that one of them

This trace "may" be "the second pair of footprints". If this proves to be true, it will be a major breakthrough.

Because only one person's footprints were found at the scene except the victim, although the shoes of the perpetrator have never been found.

Yes, but the footprints are as big as Simpson's. They must be a couple that only rich people care about.

Expensive shoes. Prosecutors believe Simpson acted alone. Dr. Li's discovery is "reasonable"

Doubt. "There is an extremely important principle in criminal law. The defendant only needs to raise a "reasonable doubt". number

There must be proof, which is called "burden without proof"; On the contrary, the prosecution must provide evidence of "transcendence"

Reasonable doubt ",this is called" burden of proof ",or" burden of proof lies with the prosecution ".

So the prosecution didn't want this broken anyway, and they invited criminal experts again.

Deny Dr. Li's push. In court, the prosecution also picked out the irregularities in his operation from his work video.

At this time, there was an unexpected situation outside the court. After being refuted, Dr. Li started in his own laboratory.

Press conference. He told reporters that there was no big conflict between his conclusion and the experts who refuted him because

Because what he said in court was "maybe the second set of footprints", he never said "it must be".

At the same time, he was also very angry that the prosecution singled out his irregular operation and accused the prosecution of its operation.

He didn't cooperate and didn't provide him with suitable equipment, so that he couldn't find gloves at all and had to operate illegally. He also

He told reporters that he regretted being involved in the case. This move seems to be eager to defend his testimony, and public opinion at that time.

Big bang. Generally speaking, the role of a witness is to testify in court, and the success of testimony is also in court.

It's over. Out of court, what's your explanation for your testimony? The jury can't hear you. In this case,

The child has no job. But these remarks obviously have an impact on people outside the court, but they obviously have no impact on the defense.

Li. The defense lawyer certainly didn't expect such a move. I think this is also the psychological reason why China people value their personal reputation.

Function, he seems to be most concerned about, is that his long-established good reputation should not be damaged. Li doctor ju

The jury can't know the press conference, but as a world-famous criminologist, he is in court.

The conclusions drawn after various analyses should have great influence on the jury. His proposal for prosecution

The blood evidence says, "In this case, the only opinion I can draw is that something is suspicious."

The really dramatic plot happened to Furman, a police officer who found blood gloves. No one thought that this world.

There is such a coincidence in the world that Furman, the key witness of the prosecution, has been on and off for nearly ten years.

Successfully let a playwright record a lot of his remarks. This is because the playwright wants to collect the life of the Los Angeles police.

Material, introduced by friends, paid Furman to record. You have to admire the lawyer Simpson hired,

How did they get the evidence? This is the last stage of the whole long trial, and there is such a case.

The climax, as soon as it came out, almost kicked the judge out.

Because Judge Ito's wife is a senior official of the LAPD and used to be Furman's boss. In Furman

In the recording, there are not only a lot of remarks attacking blacks, but also many derogatory remarks targeting Hispanics, Jews and women.

These remarks included an attack on the judge's wife. Therefore, the prosecution proposed that the judge himself was also involved in this matter.

In this case, these recordings involving his wife may allow the judge to judge whether to allow these recordings to be shown.

Don't be swayed by emotions, and don't take justice seriously. Therefore, the judge is required to be out. Ito is also in court.

Tears admitted that when he heard the attack on his wife, he would feel as deeply hurt as ordinary people. This is really lively.

Yes The trial, which lasted for a long time, received a lot of criticism. Juror withdrawal

If you don't tell ten people, even the judge will be unemployed now. Finally, after two days of heated debate, the prosecution

Finally, it was decided to wash away the contents of the video about the judge's wife in advance and not ask the judge to withdraw the lawsuit. everybody

I'm finally relieved.

Of course, the jury was invited out of the court during this time, and they didn't know about the storm.

In the absence of the jury, Furman's tapes were first played in court to confirm the recordings.

If you can play any sound to the jury. On the day when the tape was played, the atmosphere in the court was dignified and silent.

Sound. Furman's tapes not only reverberated in court, but also shocked everyone in the whole United States. you

You can feel that this guy is a "cow", boasting, brazen and unabashed about his attitude towards blacks.

Hatred, boasting about abuse of power. Worst of all, he described the police's forgery with complete certainty.

Illegal evidence collection and planting. Five months ago, he swore to tell the truth and announced himself in this court.

I haven't mentioned the word "nigger" for ten years. But now in the same court, you can hear his voice.

Claiming that all blacks in Los Angeles should be shot together. In fourteen hours of recording, he was over forty years old.

I used the word "nigger" again. I believe you have seen this in domestic reports.

This recording shocked all Americans. As I mentioned in my last letter to you

In fact, even the Klan now avoids using direct racial insults in their propaganda.

Because in the past thirty years, great changes have taken place in the racial problems in the United States. However, due to historical reasons, by

Due to various complicated factors, race is still a sensitive issue in the United States. Hearing this recording, black

Of course, people are angry, and most white people who are not racists are embarrassed.

However, when the most direct emotional agitation has passed, the most concentrated topic is of course Furman.

What the recording will bring to this trial. I think we should talk about what it was like before this.

Situation. In my last letter, I mentioned the general views of Americans around me. In fact, every night,

There are also a large number of legal experts who have made many authoritative comments on the development of the day. Throughout the trial,

As time goes by, there are more and more differences and arguments, but in Furman's tape.

Before coming, most legal experts believed that the case could not be decided because the jury disagreed.

Absolutely.

You may ask, what does this mean? This is because American law stipulates that regardless of the final verdict of the jury,

What kind of verdict, whether "guilty" or "not guilty", must be a jury.

The unanimous opinion of all jurors. As long as there is no agreement, it means "no ruling".

It is necessary to declare the experiment a failure. After the trial fails, the prosecution must make a decision immediately.

No matter whether the charges are retried or dropped, the case will be closed as "trial failure". If the former is selected,

Then all the programs that have been done once have to be done again from the beginning. Of course, if there is, both sides can.

In order to provide the court with new evidence, the attack strategy can be changed without new evidence. I want to go to the playground again.

Metaphorically speaking, the failure of the trial means that the ball has been kicked, so let's have another game to decide the outcome.

Before the Simpson case came out, there was a very sensational case in which two brothers shot their biological parents.

Their parents have huge property and seem to have a clear motive for killing. However, these two big brothers,

Admit murder, but disagree with the "first-degree murder" he was accused of. They cried in court,

It is said that their parents have sexually abused them for a long time. Recently, they suspect that their parents will silence them. they are

In order to defend ourselves, we just "pre-empt" in fear. If this statement is true, the charges and sentences are not.

Similarly, once you are paroled in a few years, you can come out and enjoy the inheritance. After the case was tried for a long time, it was because

The trial was declared a failure because the jury disagreed. The trial was recently retried.

Another possibility after a failed trial is to drop the charges. Sometimes it's because the prosecution thinks a retrial is impossible.

If we can get the jury to agree to their charges, we will give up. Sometimes it is purely for economic reasons.

Therefore, the prosecution is unwilling or impossible to bear huge litigation costs, so it gives up. In this case, it is obvious that

But it's good for the defendant. As for the verdict itself, it is obvious that it must be unanimously passed by the jury to count.

However, this is also a "cautious" rule. In my opinion, this can only further show that the American judicial system "prefers

Let a thousand go, don't kill one by mistake.

Why do most legal experts think that the jury will disagree before Furman's video comes out?

This reflects the complexity of the case itself. On the one hand, it has a lot of scientific evidence, on the other hand, it also

There are many doubts and logical deficiencies. Dr. Li even talked directly afterwards, generally.

There is little scientific evidence such as DNA that can be found in the case, but there is too much DNA evidence in this case.

People are suspicious. "Therefore, experts estimate that the jury will produce a group that is convinced of a large number of physical evidence and has doubts about the case.

There are so many other factions that experts think it is difficult for them to achieve unity through mutual persuasion. But in Furman's recording,

After that, most experts tend to think that the jury will reach a unanimous verdict of not guilty. When experts make this judgment,

It is not emphasized that this is because of the racial proportion of the jury. In the final jury, there were nine blacks, one of whom was from Los Angeles.

Ding and two white people. So in fact, what is the change brought by Furman recording? There are two changes.

It is certain: the recording makes the most important witness of the prosecution from credible to absolutely untrustworthy, and the recording makes the defense.

It is possible to put forward an unlikely myth of police planting. The first one is based on Furman's first certificate.

There are obvious lies in his speech, and the second one is based on Furman's strong racist tendency, which makes people believe that he may have a problem with Xin.

Thompson's motive for planting this plant.

In the American judicial system, there is a set of norms about how jurors decide cases. For example, everything is done according to law.

Take the law as the basis, witness as the evidence, don't trust the lawyers of both sides, don't participate in your own ideas and

Point of view, to make sure there is no problem with the evidence before making a guilty verdict, and so on. As you can see here,

Even if the jury thinks Simpson may have committed the crime, as long as the evidence is in doubt, he still

A verdict of "not guilty" will be made according to the law.

In the fair competition between the two sides, the failure of the prosecution on this issue is obviously that it cannot compete with the defense in strength.

In other words, the work is not done at home. Because, on the surface, the confrontation game between the two sides is a verbal confrontation in court.

Tongue arrow, but actually revealed only the tip of the iceberg. For such a big case, the workload behind the scenes is huge.

Both sides are trying their best to collect evidence, including information about their own witnesses and other witnesses.

We have a situation. Like Furman's recording, it is the key information of this key witness, if it was originally done by the prosecution rather than the defense.

With this information, the prosecution may not let him appear as its own witness at all. This recording

It is in the hands of a female playwright who has a very good personal relationship with Furman. She lives in North Carolina, some distance from Los Angeles.

It is farther from Shanghai to Xinjiang than Shanghai. This recording is a completely private transaction, and few people should know it.

It seems understandable that the prosecution did not grasp this situation, you did not grasp it, and the other party did.

You can't forgive yourself. American courts are like an arena for seeking fairness. Any party, if it is at the customs,

There is always emptiness in the rear. It is useless to live and watch the other team score goals and regret the heartbreak.

These recordings were recorded intermittently for ten years. The interview place is usually in a quiet restaurant.

The interview shows that the two sides are so far apart that they can continue to exchange and cooperate for ten years, which shows that their relationship is

Very deep. In court, she was asked about her relationship with Furman. She obviously stammered, but

After the answer, there is a general cooperative relationship. Of course, the prosecution's lawyer hates this witness, so outside the court, the prosecution

Lawyer Fang said that if she said that again, I would publish her love letter to Furman in court. place

By mentioning this, I also want you to know that the defense can get the news of the existence of this tape and can

Enough to turn this pure private recording into "evidence", I don't know how much work has been done.

When the playwright appeared in court, she appeared as a defense witness. In fact, she

She is not a direct witness in the Simpson case. She's just a witness to Furman and the tape. When the defendant's lawyer submitted the record,

After the tape evidence, the court will hold a debate as usual to discuss whether this evidence should be presented in court to avoid jurors.

Intense court debate. The playwright appeared in court in the absence of the jury.

It was too late for the prosecution to mend it, so it tried to stop the tape from being played to the jury. In the melee

At that time, Goldman's father spoke outside the court again. He questioned the defense lawyer whether this was a trial.

Thompson or foreman. The prosecution also invoked the "irrelevant" provision to defend, saying Furman was a kind of.

Nationalists have nothing to do with Simpson's murder. Just because he is a racist doesn't mean he will go.

Plants. However, it is hard to say that this recording is irrelevant to this case.

In order to handle Furman's recording carefully, Judge Ito decided to summon Furman for a hearing again. Of course, the jury.

The regiment was not present. Furman came to court again. On this day, the atmosphere in the court was dignified. At this time, he

He is no longer a policeman. As soon as the tape was exposed, he immediately applied for resignation. It can be said that as

The witness in this case, far from being "tried" in court, is almost ruined.

Crack, lost his job, the future is boundless. By the time he went to court this time, he was already a notorious racer in the country.

A symbol of justice. It is worth noting that he brought one of his lawyers to court. Now he met it himself.

Trouble, he also needs a lawyer to give him advice and safeguard his rights.

Furman has been asking a lawyer for help for a long time. He must have been long before the tape was released.

I know I'm in big trouble, so I always have two lawyers working for him. As soon as his tape was exposed,

One of the lawyers announced his resignation. Many people speculate that he doesn't want to be such a notorious person again.

Employer services are also possible. For such a "dead tiger", he felt powerless.

Simpson's case reminds us of the jokes and jokes of law school students again.

Reflections on the responsibility of lawyers. What kind of social role should a lawyer play? I think only lawyers.

Similar to a consulting and service organization, it only provides legal knowledge and information to customers.

And services. There is only an equal transaction process between him and his customers. Clients pay, lawyers provide services, anything.

If one party is not satisfied, the contract can be terminated. Because of the special content of lawyer consultation, this industry is better than its

His technical consulting industry has added more emotional and social content, but in fact he has put too much social responsibility.

Not only is it unfair, but it may also distort the profession. therefore

It is not the duty of lawyers to seek and pursue social justice directly.

Lawyers have their duties. His duty is to charge customers, no matter who his customers are.

At the same time, it provides perfect legal services so that his clients can make maximum use of legal protection.

Their civil rights. When everyone in this society can pass such laws when necessary.

Legal services fully enjoy civil rights, and real social justice is reflected.

Actually, for you and me, this truth is easy to understand. We have all experienced and witnessed the differences.

Different understandings of "justice" on the historical stage by society and individuals. If the lawyer's duty is to do justice

"Justice", then at what historical stage do you expect him to maintain "social justice", and himself?

What kind of social groups prefer to understand "justice"? If lawyers are required to "uphold justice",

A large number of individuals will lose their legitimate civil rights because they cannot get due legal protection. They are the most basic.

Ben's freedom, the most basic living conditions and family happiness may all be the so-called "justice" that is all the rage.

Swallow it.

Therefore, whether Simpson, a suspect in a major murder case that is still unresolved, is "alive" or "dead of old age"

Tiger Furman, as a lawyer, served them wholeheartedly and did not violate the professional ethics of lawyers.

Please read this story carefully ~

Good luck ~ ~ ~