Race, O.J., and Politics–The Potential for an October Meltdown UPDATE–SIMPSON GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS


From the Las Vegas Sun:

Simpson guilty on all counts; could face life imprisonment…

O.J. Simpson is going to prison.

A predominantly white, predominantly female jury has found the former NFL All Star guilty of all of the 12 robbery, kidnapping and weapons charges he faced following a run-in last year with a pair of memorabilia dealers.


Note the opening of the story–as if you could miss it. Just as I predicted.  Racism taking center stage…not to mention the “woman” factor…

I’ve been thinking about the possible ramifications of a guilty conviction, especially since racism was injected into the trial as well as during jury selection (see below)…What does Obama do?  Will he be under intense pressure from his black voting block to issue a statement of some kind?  And what kind of a statement could that be, what kind of balancing act would he have to do?

I guess it depends on what kinds of demands will be made by some of his more radical followers…and if the mainstream media even allows us to know about those demands…after all, they hide nearly everything when it concerns anything dubious about Obama, his connections, and his followers.

More on Judge Jackie Glass later…I’ll just say that my research on her has revealed that she has a reputation as a very tough judge when it comes to sentencing…

Edge of Forever has commented that the media will bury the story–no more “Trial of the Century” hype like last time…and, the way things are going, she’s probably right.  I speculated in the original post that the media might love the story for it’s ratings potential and give the media and Obama another chance to play the race card…but things have been shifting, so that’s probably out the window.  It’s all about making him “the winner” now and preserving his gloss.  But, we still have to see what “the followers” do…


~~By InsightAnalytical-GRL

The O.J. Simpson trial now going on in Las Vegas, NV wasn’t on my radar until Monday when my mother read something from the paper to me. And yesterday, while sitting in a medical office, I was trapped into watching a report on CNN and found out that they’re streaming the trial live at the CNN website.

Well, obviously it’s being discreetly handled by CNN at this point…but does it warrant on-line streaming?  In the real world, no. In Obama Media Land, however, it makes perfect sense.  It’s part of the slow build-up and they’ll be able to jump to the verdict immediately.  I really think that if we didn’t have this mortgage crisis drama unfolding, they’d have the trial going full-tilt all day…

Now, with the polling being done to prove that 30% of Democrats are racists and that white women are “a problem,” we’re getting the preview of the blame game that will happen if Obama loses fails to steal the election.

But, I believe all this will pale if the verdict on O.J. comes in and he’s convicted.  I’m not going to review the current case, since all the info is up at the Las Vegas Sun, which has an entire page dedicated to the trial.  O.J. may not be convicted, of course, but if he is, it could be a huge ratings opportunity…and another chance to help play Obama’s race card.

First, let’s see why our media buddies might be praying for a guilty verdict for the benefit of their own interests.  Way back in 1995, when O.J. was acquitted of the murders of his wife Nicole and Ron Goldman, “…at 10 A.M. PST on October 3, Judge Ito’s clerk read the jury’s verdict of “Not Guilty,” 91% of all persons viewing television were glued to the unfolding scene in the Los Angeles courtroom,” according to The Trial of Orenthal James Simpson, a project of the University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) School of Law. If a conviction comes down, then we’ll see the 1995 trial replayed and lots of chatter about how justice has finally been served. The media will milk it for all it’s worth. How many times will we see that “slow chase” down the highway?

And a conviction would also provide a golden opportunity to bring the race card back, big time.


First, lets flashback to 1995. Who can forget how the trial was inexplicably transferred out of O.J.’s tony Santa Monica district and into downtown LA?  Who can forget the composition of the jury (did you know they were all Democrats?) and the celebration over the verdict in the black community after O.J. was acquitted of murder by a jury of “his peers” after a trial full of racial tensions?

Johnnie Cochran’s summation for the defense added controversy to an already very controversial trial.  His co-counsel, Robert Shapiro, was later to condemn his closing for “not only playing the race card, but playing it from the bottom of the deck.”  Cochran compared the prosecution case to Hitler’s campaign against the Jews:

There was another man not too long ago in this world who had those same views, who wanted to burn people, who had racist views, and ultimately had power over people in his country.  People didn’t care.  People said he’s crazy.  He’s just a half-baked painter.  And they didn’t do anything about it.  This man, this scourge, became one of the worst people in the world, Adolf Hitler, because people didn’t care, didn’t stop him.  He had the power over his racism and his anti-religionism.  Nobody wanted to stop him….And so Fuhrman.  Fuhrman wants to take all black people now and burn them or bomb them.  That’s genocidal racism.  Is that ethnic purity?  We’re paying this man’s salary to espouse these views…

The jury spent only three hours deliberating the case that had produced 150 witnesses over 133 days and had cost $15 million to try.  As America watched at 10 a.m. PST on October 3, 1995, Ito’s clerk, Deidre Robertson, announced the jury’s verdict: “We the jury in the above entitled action find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder.”  Simpson sighed in relief, Cochran pumped his fist and slapped Simpson on the back.  The Dream Team gathered in a victory huddle.  From the audience came the searing moans of Kim Goldman, Ron’s sister, and the cry of his mother Patti Goldman, “Oh my God! Oh my God!”


The Simpson trial demonstrated the polarization of racial attitudes on issues such as law enforcement that still exists in our country [POLLING DATA ON SIMPSON VERDICT].  It may be for that, more than anything, that the trial will be remembered.  But it had other effects.  It created a greater awareness of domestic violence issues, provided lessons in how not to run a criminal trial, slowed the trend toward the use of cameras in courtrooms, and created a new type of “immersion” journalism that still flourishes today.

Fast forward to Wednesday and Rep. Alcee Hastings ranting about Palin, hunting, and Jews

Rep. Alcee Hastings told an audience of Jewish Democrats Wednesday that they should be wary of Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin because “anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks.”

Eerie, to say the least.  And venomous and illustrative of the seething resentment that we’ve seen during this campaign.

And this hostility could erupt further if O.J. is convicted now. As this report from the Las Vegas Sun on the current trial reveals,  the jury situation this time around is entirely different.

O.J. Simpson jury contains mostly women, no African-Americans

Two alternate jurors are black — one man and one woman

O.J. Simpson’s future and freedom is in the hands of a predominantly white, predominantly female 12-member jury.

Simpson, 61, and his co-accused, Clarence “C.J.” Stewart, 54, could be sentenced to life behind bars if convicted. The two former golfing buddies face 12 robbery, kidnapping and weapons-related charges following the alleged Sept. 13, 2007, raid of two memorabilia dealers’ Palace Station hotel room.


The nine-woman, three-man jury will hear from them, along with dozens of other witnesses, in the coming weeks.


Judge Jackie Glass, along with lawyers for the prosecution and the defense, questioned shortlisted candidates for four days to compile a pool of 40 qualified jurors from which a jury could be selected.


The prosecution challenged and ejected two of the four black people in the potential jury pool. One of them, a middle-aged female minister, was originally slated to serve as part of the critical 12-member jury that will deliver the verdict.

The defense challenged both dismissals, saying they were racially motivated.

“Exercising that peremptory challenge excludes her as the one and only (African American on the jury),” Simpson’s attorney, Yale Galanter, said about the minister’s dismissal.

African-American jurors are a particular interest in this case because both Simpson and Stewart are black. It is often thought that black jurors are more sympathetic toward African-American defendants than white jurors.

Simpson’s 1995 murder trial had a jury made up of nine African-Americans, two whites and one Hispanic who delivered the not guilty verdict.

Much like his current trial, most of the 1995 murder trial’s jurors, 10 of the 12, were women.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Owens and District Attorney David Roger insisted their reasons for having the two women dismissed were completely “race-neutral” and instead largely related to their deep religions beliefs.

They argued ministers can have a perceived moral authority and influence over others. Prosecutors said a minister might “take over” the jury, if left sitting.

They also worried the second woman, was also deeply religious, employed philosophies that could lead her to forgive a guilty person rather than deliver a verdict that would condemn them to prison.

Glass ultimately sided with the prosecution. “Throughout these last four days there has been no evidence to me that the state has made a purposeful discriminatory effort to eliminate African-American jurors,” she said.

The judge was careful to say no racial stacking of the jury was afoot. “We have no quota system for jurors,” she said, noting the pool of potential jurors was randomly selected from a cross-section of the community.

After the two controversial peremptory challenges, the no blacks remained in the main jury panel. However, there appeared to be one Asian woman and another Latina juror. Court officials could not confirm the ethnicity of jurors.

The two blacks that remain, one man and one woman, are in the pool of alternate jurors. This six-member panel will only be used if and when main jurors are dismissed. Six of the original 12 jurors from Simpson’s 1995 murder trial were dismissed.

The current group of alternate jurors is split 50-50 in terms of gender, with three men and three women.

Can you imagine what will happen if O.J. is convicted??? The racial hostility we’ve seen during this campaign, most recently from Rep. Hastings, could erupt in a manner that could become even more ugly than what we’ve seen so far. Will we hear how Judge Jackie Glass, with “only” six years on the bench, wasn’t qualified to try this case? And how the jury was stacked against O.J. and his co-defendants?  And, don’t you think we’ll see a parade of Obama spokespeople pushing the victim/race card?  Don’t you think that media will cooperate by having their pundits pound into the brain of every American voter the same message?  Won’t the guilt-trip be laid with the insidious intimation that Obama should be for REWARDED with the Presidency because he’s been victimized by whites, especially by that group of troublesome white women who should be falling in line? Look at all those white women on the jury, perhaps seeing the opportunity to finally punish O.J.! And how will the media drag McCain into the morass?

The trial started on September 8, with final jury selection was completed on the 11th.  Several weeks of proceedings are expected, which means the trial could go into October.

Which means we all my be facing an “October Surprise” that could become a nightmare…and a final meltdown for this Presidential race.

21 Responses

  1. GRL –

    I definitely think there is a link (timing seems to be a major part of the Obama campaign – think North Carolina primary/Bill Clinton, Rezko, Wall Street crisis). I also wonder if this can’t be turned around since you’ve brought it to the fore here.

    Simpson was tried for killing a white woman, after all. Shouldn’t whites be allowed to scream racism if he gets let off again?

  2. I don’t know if there’s a link, the trial started exactly 1 year after the attempt to take the memorabilia at gunpoint…in the middle of the campaign.

    I don’t like to get paranoid about these things, but the Rezko lawyers on 9/20 asked that the case be thrown out (“unreliable witness”)…Sentencing scheduled for 10/28…

    If he’s guilty, you won’t hear about it in the MSM…if he isn’t, it will be used to push the Obama advantage….

  3. I’ve been hearing about this trial for many months, and right NOW it’s starting? There are NO coincidences in Obamaland.

    And if you recall, Rezko kicked into full gear just when the media was all atwitter about – you guessed it – racism.

    If it looks like a skunk, and it smells like a skunk – it’s probably a skunk.

  4. If the media are determined to forcefeed the public a “Black” candidate, why did they pick Obama and not Cynthia McKinney? Could it be that she actually has experience, principles, and courage? Or is it because she is a woman? They certainly had no problem tearing her down and making up stories about her when she spoke out against the election fraud of 2000 and the bungling of the Bush addministration’s response to the attacks in 2001and when she was singled out by a security guard on Capitol Hill.

    What could it be?

    Janet Brown at the Commission on Presidential Debates:at jb@debates.org (info from comment at Green Party Central)

    If the debate is going to be rescheduled, there is time to make sure that ALL candidates who have qualified on state ballots across the country participate.

  5. Re: McKinney…because McKinney questioned about possible foreknowledge about 911

    She was classed as a nutcase…

    and it was also reported that she had Muslim ties….

    Obama “looked” safer….

  6. […] Race, O.J., and Politics–The Potential for an October Meltdown […]

  7. Either an OJ conviction or an Obama loss will loose a stream of protests the likes of which we have not seen in years.

    I don’t even want to contemplate the result of getting both.

  8. GRL, if you can get the documentary film, American Blackout, you might find it interesting.

    Taking a tangent here, please allow me the indulgence of sharing my letter to Director Brown (jb@debates.org). You and your readers are welcome to use any of the content as food for thought or call to action.

    Dear Director Brown:

    If the debate scheduled for September 26, 2008 is going to be rescheduled or refitted, there is time to make sure that ALL candidates who have qualified on state ballots across the country participate. The organization of the Commission to control the political process in this country was a blow to democracy and an attempt to force all political voices through the corporate parties’ megaphone. The cutoff of a 15% polling level is a blatant attempt to stifle expression and limit the choices of the voting public. The national standard for recognized party status is 5% of votes cast in the previous election for statewide office in many states. Please explain the decision of the Commission set a polling standard of 15%? No explanation you could invent will hide the truth that it is about control of taxpayer money.

    Well, Director Brown, there is a big to-do about how to use $700,000,000,000 of that, OUR, money right now. I think the people of the United States should hear ideas about how to fix this mess and avoid it in the future. The Democrats and Republicans are responsible for allowing this crisis to occur. Credible, intelligent, committed candidates for President are ready to have their voices heard and ideas debated. There is a better response than, “No one knows what to do.”

    I sincerely hope that the Commission can show that it wants to operate in the interests of the American people–not the two corporate parties. Open the debates to candidates McKinney, Barr, Nader, Baldwin, and any other candidate who has qualified on state ballots across the country.

    Thank you for your time and consideration.


    A. Citizen

  9. Fine letter….the networks controlled who was debating in the primaries…What happened to the League of Women Voters????

  10. I’m with you there GRL, take the Debates away from the media and give them back to the League of Women voters. The networks have shown that they are not up to doing the job correctly, honestly and fairly.

  11. McKinney says that she’ll debate Obama:


  12. Somehow, I think Obama wants to be alone at Ole Miss…

  13. Someone commented on another blog that he could debate himself–given his history of changing position on so many topics.

    IIRC, the LWV was basically pushed out of their debate hosting by the Commission. Once the Commission came into being, it had the media. Tough luck for LWV and us.

  14. Anybody remember the Rodney King uprising?

  15. Sure do….

  16. http://www.sfgate.com/

    Alleged victim testifies he and O.J. were set up

    By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP Special Correspondent

    Thursday, September 25, 2008

    (09-25) 20:22 PDT LAS VEGAS (AP) —

    One of the alleged victims in the O.J. Simpson armed robbery and kidnapping trial testified Thursday that he didn’t want to be on the witness stand as he provided key evidence undermining the prosecution case.

    Memorabilia peddler and convicted felon Alfred Beardsley testified that he and Simpson were “set up” by Thomas Riccio, the collectibles broker who arranged their meeting in a casino hotel room, and that “chunks” of dialogue were missing from secret recordings Riccio made of the confrontation.

    “I do not want to be here,” Beardsley said. “I’ve made that clear for the past year.”

    Clark County District Attorney David Roger later told reporters he plans to rest his case Friday after the testimony of central witness Michael McClinton, who has said he brought guns at Simpson’s request and wielded one during the confrontation.

  17. Want to follow dog whistle racism in the election? Visit http://www.stopdogwhistleracism.com for daily updates on the good, bad and ugly from the left, right and center on race in the race.

  18. ea
    Agree on McKinney – and remember Carol Mosley Brown? Barely acknowledged. Why? No penis and no endorsement from the big boys (Obama got more from Wall Street than Bush when incumbent in 2004)
    And GRL:
    Interesting how OJ Simpson is no longer “the trial of the century”
    I doubt Obama will touch it with a ten foot pole and the media won’t make him.
    Will this stoke some racism before the election? No more than Obama himself & friends did with their accusations.

  19. Obama will not want any reminders to the American public of the travesty of justice that was done in the first O.J. trial. He especially will not want all those bitter white women that he is trying to win over to be reminded of what happened to Nicole Brown Simpson.

    How the mighty have fallen. At one time O.J. Simpson garnered adoration much the same as Obama does now.

  20. Is it racist for a white jury to convict when the evidence points to guilt, or is it racist when a black jury acquits when the evidence points to guilt? Race relations in America is spiraling down the toilet. An Obama win will hasten the flow. The person that said, “We should have picked our own cotten”, got it right.

  21. “Cotton.” Just seeing if you’re paying attention.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: