The O. J. Simpson Case of 1994
In Simpson’s case, Christopher Darden was the prosecutor who took the task of investigating into the case and analyzing the evidence. During his activity, it was not very smooth as anticipated. There were some problems that he encountered during the process before proving Simpson guilty of murdering her ex-wife.
First, there arose a need to perform a DNA test from the bloodstains on the victim’s footwear. While performing the DNA test, the substantiation predicaments were more problematical since, during the 1994, this test was comparatively new. On interrogation of the LAPD forensic scientists, mistakes committed in the collection and testing were highlighted at the major centers of the research.
By leaving blood samples in hot trucks for too long, investigators subjected the samples to contamination risks hence a likelihood to tamper with evidence. “Scheck also honed in on the work of one DNA analyst who did not change gloves while handling a tube of Simpson’s blood and evidence from the murder scene”.
Scheck states that the activity was a success on his trial as bad practices were shined over. He is even attributed to the exoneration of O. J. Simpson. He says that “obviously there’s a stigma attached with the O.J. case because most people think he killed those victims”.
The second major problem during Simpson’s trial was racism. Although officer Mark Furman denied his racist inclination, his testimony portrayed great signs of the vice. He was at some point described as having a similar attitude as Hitler. Fuhrman, the LAPD officer who came across the glove and sworn to have spotted blood marks in Simpson’s driveway was interrogated by Bailey whether he had detained the beliefs of racism but he denied.