The Impact of the Murder Trial, and Acquittal of Orenthal James Simpson

ICYMI: Hour One of ‘Later, with Mo’Kelly’ Presents – An in-depth look at the cultural and societal impact of the infamous murder trial, and acquittal of former football star, turned actor, Orenthal ‘OJ’ James Simpson, who has died at the age of 76 - on KFI AM 640…Live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app 

Episode Transcript

(00:22):
Well, I guess it's my turnto talk about OJ, because that's what
everyone's talking about today. It's laterwith Mo Kelly k if I am six
forty Live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app. But in the discussion of OJ Simpson,
I think that there are three facetsto the discussion. I think all
of them are important. There's lifein la in the events leading up to

(00:43):
the trial. That's one facet.There's the trial itself, second facet,
and lastly, how OJ conducted himselfafter his murder acquittal three chapters. If
you will first talking about life inLa La prior to the trial. If
you talk about the OJ trial butleave out names like Ula Love, Ron

(01:04):
Settles, Latasha Harlan's, then you'renot really telling the OJ story correctly.
You're leaving out a lot of importantstuff. If you allege that the OJ
verdict was just a response to theRodney King beating verdict, I think you're
being dishonest. It was so muchmore complex than that. The La riots

(01:29):
weren't just about Rodney King his beatingor the acquittal of the officers. The
La riots were about those names Ijust mentioned. They were about Ula Love,
They were about Ron Settles, whosupposedly hung himself in a jail cell
because he was distraught over a trafficstop. And people actually believe that Natasha

(01:51):
Harlan's, fifteen years old, wasshot in the back of the head on
video after being accused of stealing someorange juice, even though in that same
video, remember on video she hadleft the money for the juice on the
counter. Harlan's killer was son Joandu She got probation probation murder on video.
Harlan's was just killed months before theRodney King videotape dropped. Talking about

(02:16):
context, So there was this animosityand distrust between black people here in LA
and law enforcement which had been growingfor years, if not decades, the
acquittals of officers Lawrence Powell and StacyCohon and others. That was just the
last straw, not the first.It was the last straw. LAPD And

(02:37):
I say this with all due respect, We're not going to rewrite history.
LAPD was notorious here in LA inthe seventies and eighties. There were no
body cams and there were no convictions, and those went hand in hand.
The OJ Simpson murder trial was onthe heels of all of that. So
before we start talking about the trialand its verdict, you have to talk

(03:00):
about what was going on in LAprior to the trial, not just the
Rodney King beating, not just theriots. Because I know and I speak
with a number of African Americans thatI can verify this. We felt we
had been living with the mistreatment forfar longer than that just one video.
And OJ Simpson at this time goinginto the trial, pre trial, was

(03:23):
reviled in the African American community.He was not beloved, he was loathed.
Why because OJ didn't identify with us, He didn't socialize with us,
he didn't even go to church withus, he didn't recognize us. He
did not in any way deal withblack people. The African American community prior

(03:46):
to the trial had little love forOJ. And that's a huge part of
the story. The context is keyhere. That's pre trial. Let's get
to the trial. Johnny Cochrane,his lead attorney, used all of that
to his advantage. He knew thehistory, he personally experienced some of that
history, and he incorporated that intothe case. Like him, hate him,

(04:12):
Yes. Race was explicitly and implicitlypart of the trial. No doubt
about it. I don't think anybodycan deny it. But let's also be
clear. His job was to zealouslyrepresent his client, not helped convict him.
His job was to get an acquittalor a hung jury. And he
got an acquittal unanimous verdict. Yes, Johnny Cochrane used Mark Furman and the

(04:35):
issue of race, no doubt,no argument. But he also poked holes
in some of that evidence and chainof custody and pune witnesses. His job
was to create doubt. That's allhe was supposed to do, and he
was effected in that regard. Andnobody told Chris Darden to make oj put

(04:55):
on the glove in front of thejury. Nobody told the prosecution to do
Some of the things that they didwere just head scratching in nature and make
all those mistakes. Johnny cochran didhis job, and he created reasonable doubt
in the minds of the jury,not the general public. Remember the general
public. We saw things that thejury did not see. We heard things
that the jury did not see.He was supposed to create reasonable doubt in

(05:17):
their minds. And let me getto the jury, because that's a sticking
point to me. Personally, Icringe every time I hear someone say that
the jury was somehow stupid. No, they weren't stupid. And the only
thing that was unanimous about that jury, just in case facts matter. They
weren't all black, they weren't unanimousin their race, they weren't unanimous in

(05:41):
their economic strata, they weren't allpoor, they weren't all uneducated. But
when you say that this jury wasstupid, then I have to wonder did
you say that about the people whoacquitted Robert Blaker Casey Anthony, Because if
you actually followed the cases, therewas more direct evidence implicating both Blake and
Anthony. You know that, right, I mean, there was actual direct

(06:05):
evidence putting both Blake and Anthony atthe respective scenes of the crimes. But
those juries weren't disparaged as in thesame way as being called stupid. And
my point is the way we talkabout the verdict and the way we criticize
the juries and we criticized the verdict, it's been very different, and it's

(06:25):
been way over the line in regardto the OJ verdict. And for those
of us who are in the AfricanAmerican community, man of us, many
of us took exception to that becauseyou weren't really talking about the jury.
You were talking about something and someoneelse. But let me go there.
I really want to go there,and as an African American man who is

(06:46):
from LA and has discussed this inthe community over the years, I want
to explain what African Americans buy andlarge were feeling about OJ and the verdict.
And I'm not speaking for all.I'm just talking about as someone who's
lived in the community and really understandswhat people were saying and thinking at the
time. I'm talking about in churchservices and barbershops and just general gatherings.

(07:11):
I'm not talking about what people haveto say on the news or on the
radio who have no connection and haveabsolutely no wherewithal to be able to talk
about us. Let me tell youthere are four main groups of people in
regard to the conversations about OJ.We were not monolithic. There was group
one. Those are the folks whowholeheartedly believe that OJ did it and his

(07:33):
ass should burn in hell. Andif that's the case, he's burning right
about now. But that goes backto how reviled he was in the black
community. He was no, hewas not a saint. He was not
beloved, he was not. Andhere's the second group. This is a
group that believed that OJ probably didit. But given all the history I

(07:55):
told you about between the African Americancommunity and law enforcement and also the justices
said, basically, in so manywords, now you know how it feels.
Now you know how it feels tobe let down by the justice system.
Now you know what it feels liketo be angry at the justice system,
to feel like, despite all theevidence sitting in front of you,

(08:16):
still couldn't get it right. AndI would say that's the largest group.
And there was the third group.Many African Americans thought that o J probably
did it, but the prosecuting probablydidn't meet its burden of proof looking at
it strictly anaclet analytically, straightforward,dispassionate, because a lot of us understood

(08:37):
that what the jury saw and juryheard was different from what you and I
saw and heard on TV and radio. And there was the fourth group.
And this is probably the smallest group, but for some reason it's considered the
largest group. This is a groupof people who actually thought that OJ was
innocent. That's the smallest group.Those are the conspiracy theorists who think maybe

(09:00):
his son did it or something likethat. Well, what about you,
mo, I want to tell youwhat I think about the case before we
go to break. I personally thoughtthat OJ likely had some role in the
murders. I believe he was there. I believe he had some hand in
it. But I don't think hecould have pulled off killing two people by
his own hand, by himself andnobody heard or saw a thing. I

(09:24):
just don't think it was physically possiblefor him to do that without some sort
of help. I don't think thathe would have been able to get all
the blood off him. Go onlineright now and look for the crime scene
photos of those murders. They're outthere. You can see it. The
blood was overwhelming. It was everywhere. The killer or killers had to be
soaked in blood. And I don'tbelieve that him just taking off his clothes

(09:46):
and giving him to Robert Kardashian,as the legend goes, would have been
enough. There would have been moreblood in the bronco and so forth.
So let me summarize it this way. I think he was involved. I
think he had some hand in there, which means that he should have been
convicted, and I think he wasguilty of it. That's where I come

(10:07):
out on it. But I bristlewhen you call the jury stupid or you
want to make some statements that you'reoutraged, but you don't have much to
say about Casey Anthony or Robert Blake, because you know, if all lives
matter, let me stop. You'relistening to Later with Moe Kelly on Demand

(10:28):
from KFI AM six forty if Iam six forty is later on mo Kelly
Live Everywhere in the iHeartRadio app.And I was talking about OJ Simpson,
reflecting on the fact that he passedaway at the age of seventy six,
and how we all have very disparatefeelings about the moment and how we will
remember O. J. Simpson.And I was making the case that we

(10:52):
should try to be a little bitmore nuanced and a little more comprehensive in
discussing the significance of the trial,what happened at the trial, and how
we should view OJ big picture.And I was saying that there, at
least in my mind, there arethree facets to the discussion of OJ.
There's life in LA leading up tothe trial, what was the mood in

(11:15):
LA, and also there was atrial itself, and then I would say
the the you know, the PostScript, how OJ conducted himself in the years
leading up to his death. Andwe got through the first two parts LA
before the trial and the trial itself, I gave my thoughts about whether I
thought OJ did it and so forth. So when you send your mail accused

(11:35):
me of saying something I didn't say, be clear on that. The third
the third part is OJ since thetrial, and this is where I think
OJ did himself no freight of favorsand earned a lot of the type of
vitriol that we've seen in more recentyears. If OJ would have just gone

(11:58):
and satis down somewhere and did nothing, maybe history would have been somewhat more
tolerant, of the amount we wantto say, kind but tolerant. If
he didn't do that book, ifI did it and spit in the victims
family's faces, that might have changedthe story to a certain degree. If

(12:20):
he wasn't seen out there partying andseeing disrespectful and seemingly disregarding the severity and
seriousness of his place and history,I think people may have viewed him a
little bit differently. So this iswhere the nuance comes in. OJ was
an ass OJ does not deserve anyof our sympathy. But some of the

(12:43):
critique of OJ wasn't just about OJ. There was a lot of commentary which
didn't really have to do with OJ, but more dislike of other people.
Let me put it that way.Jay. In the time since that first
acquittal, he earned everything bad whichhappened to him after that, his partying

(13:09):
in Las Vegas, which eventually ledto his armed robbery case and conviction.
He earned that. He did thatall by himself. And I don't think
anyone, I think would disagree withthat. But there's something else that we
need to be honest about. Weneed to be honest that there was a
certain type of distaste about OJ whichwas never shown anyone else of comparable case.

(13:37):
I hung out, if you will, with Robert Blake. I live
not too far from Robert Blake,and I would run into him at the
Sportsman's Lodge maybe about once a week. I would sing karaoke there and Robert
Blake, this is post murder ofhis ex wife boner Lee Bakley, would
come in and have dinner and getthe same thing everybody knew who he was.

(13:58):
No one bothered him, there wasno ill will shown towards him.
But everyone knows. As far asif we say that OJ did it,
Robert Blake did it, he wasat the scene of the crime. He
basically set it up, and whenhe died, it didn't have the same
cultural impact. And I get it. I get it. OJ the chase,

(14:20):
OJ, the spectacle, OJ,the Dream Team, the coverage day
in day out. OJ was oneof the biggest stars in the world at
the time. I get all that. I'm just saying. I noticed that
there's been a very disparate reaction whenwe get supposed angry about someone being acquitted

(14:45):
for murder when we know the persondid it. And I noticed it when
Robert Blake died and nobody had muchof anything to say. And I assume
that when Casey Anthony dies, theresponse will be probably be the same.
And I take personal umbrage when it'sonly reserved for OJ and the way that

(15:07):
we discuss OJ, it's clear thatit's not about OJ. It seems like
there's a particular distaste and dislike forOJ getting away with it quote unquote as
opposed to Casey Anthony or Robert Blakeand there or Robert Wagner. You know,
we can go back to Natalie Woodand how he was never prosecuted with
that. They're all sorts of correlationsand comparisons that we can make which make

(15:33):
this a very very difficult day toparse with Nuance. And I say this,
my heart goes out to the Goldmanfamily. My heart goes out to
the Brown family because moments like these, they have the families of victims having
to relive the loss of their lovedones. They have to relive the circumstances

(15:56):
surrounding the loss of their loved ones. You could not turn on a TV
or radio today without having wall towall coverage of OJ Simpson, his trial,
the murders, and what the familieshad to go through. So let's
not lose sight of the Brown familyor the Goldman family, but also don't
lose sight of the Simpson family.I'm talking about. OJ Simpson was a

(16:18):
father and a grandfather, and Ihave nothing positive or nice to say about
OJ Simpson, but I do knowwhat it's like to lose a father,
and so I don't lose sight ofthat. I try not to lose my
humanity in the discussion of OJ,because people are still mourning his passing,
whether we find him valuable or histime here of value at all or not.

(16:42):
I don't care about OJ the footballplayer. I don't care about OJ
the pitch man. I do careabout how we discuss OJ in the larger
context of how we discuss these casesand how we disparage not only the person,
but the people associated to the personor associated with the person. And

(17:06):
when we come back, we wouldgo around and get individual thoughts with the
later crew as far as where theywere when they were for the chase.
I know that Keyana probably wasn't youweren't even alive, and I think Stephan
was too young to remember most ofthis. But when we talk about context,

(17:30):
we are closer. I should saythe OJ trial was closer to all
the events that I told you,like Latasha Harlan's and Rodney king verdict.
They were that close. That wascloser than we are right now to COVID.
All these things are connected in thesense of you can't discuss OJ without

(17:55):
discussing all the things leading up toOJ. And if we're going to be
honest, we have to make surethat we include all these facets in the
discussion. So we're going to getsome input from the later crew when we
come back, maybe even Mark Ronneras well. You're listening to Later with
Moe Kelly on demand from KFI AMsix forty six four days later with mon

(18:15):
Kelly Live Everywhere on the iHeartRadio app. I remember I was at Delamo,
Ma Sears and Stephan. You maynot know this, but Sears back in
the day, if you go tothe electronics department, they would have all
these TVs stacked on top of eachother, sometimes on the same channel,
sometimes to different channels. But onthis particular occasion, they were all on

(18:37):
one channel and there's about a crowdof I want to say, fifty two
one hundred people watching the slow speedChase. That's where I was when OJ
was, I guess running from thepolice down the freeway about thirty five miles
an hour. I was at Searsat delamoh Mall Twalla. Where were you?
I was at home. I wasat home and me and I believe

(19:00):
me and my brother we were watchingon TV. Yeah, it's kind of
tripping out, like what is thisguy doing? It was high speed chase
to slow speed chases. That wasn'treally a thing. This was breaking news
for that reason, and the newswas slow to come out. What's going
on? Uh? And yeah,And I just remember going outside and everyone
talking about it, and it becamea joke that day, just run Ojay

(19:22):
run. It was unclear whether hehad a gun, whether he was trying
to evade capture, whether he wasgoing to kill himself, because remember,
no one was clear of anything atthat point. No, we just knew
that he wasn't going to immediately turnhimself in. Yeah, yeah, Mark
Ronner, do you remember where youwere for the slow speed Yeah. I
was at my first newspaper, babyjournalist, Mark. We were all crowded

(19:44):
around the TV in the newsroom andit was quite an event. I was
also a columnist at the time too. And to your point about this thing,
the whole scenario being fraught with otherbaggage, It did not exist in
a vacuum. Also, things thathappened in a court of law are different
than how you observe them in thereal world, where people walk around and

(20:04):
use their faculties for observation, criticalthinking, and judgment. So I got
bombarded with hate mail because I dida column after he was convicted, after
he was acquitted the first time,and before I believe he was found liable
in his civil trial. I dida column and I said something along the
lines of, it doesn't matter ifyou're black or white, young or old,

(20:26):
whatever. If you think, ohJay's innocent, you're a moron.
And you I think you would believesome of the mail I got because people
brought a lot into that situation.I just got flamed. Yeah, and
I get that it was the trialof the century. The news coverage was

(20:47):
it was incredible. If you didn'tlive through it, you didn't experience it
firsthand, it's hard to describe it, especially when you're talking at the very
very beginning of cable news. Ohyeah, there was no Internet. There
was no social media to no internetto speak of, no social media at
all. So the communication and theinformation dissemination was completely dependent upon TV and

(21:11):
radio. And even then there wasn'teven much talk radio because that was at
the beginning stages of talk radio aswe presently know it. Yeah, a
little baby Rush Limbaugh at this timeas well. Now, Stephan, I
know you're not old enough to reallyremember all of it, but what do
you, if anything remember about thistime. It just kind of coincides with

(21:33):
what you guys are talking about.Like all I remember as a kid was
that's all I saw on my televisionat home because I was a kid,
and we'd go to the mall,like you were saying, Sears, Macy's,
any TV that was on if theyhad the opportunity, the coverage was
there, and that's all you eversaw. And that's so I remember just
not understanding what was happening, butremember seeing his face and seeing the trial

(21:57):
and seeing everything and part of thechick as well. Oh something else I
forgot to add. And I knowMark Roder, you remember this when we
talk about OJ trial and we talkabout the the how race impacted it,
it was very much upfront. Themedia also when I said the medium talking
about print media, radio and televisionalso had a role to play in that.

(22:19):
Do you remember how Time magazine darkenedthe mug shot of OJ for their
cover That does ring a bell?Oh yes, I remember. And so
there were a lot of bad actorsin this in trying to shape not only
the trial but of our perception ofOJ and the trial. It was a
big media inflection point for all sortsof different reasons. Like I remember Bernard

(22:42):
Shawn c CNN saying ugly ass shoes, and it's like, Okay, we've
broken new ground there too. Yeah, because CNN was I think the only
cable news network which had any coverage. Fox News was like ninety six.
Did they come in. I don'tremember the exact yea, yeah, it

(23:03):
was much later. Okay, Soit was only CNN as far as cable
news coverage, and I think thatwas the window for most of the country
at that point. Yeah, CNNwas the eight hundred pound gorilla. They
had, like you know, thesame thing with Monica Lewinsky, it was
around the clock stuff. What doyou think we learned or didn't learn from
this? Mark? Well, whatI've been thinking today is that it's so

(23:26):
ironic that OJ outlived Norm MacDonald.I mean, this is really small picture
stuff, but people who at thetime saw things. Clearly, you can't
always say what's true in the media, even if it's staring you right now
in the face. And I couldrun down a whole laundry list of things
right now that if I said whatis objectively true, I probably wouldn't be

(23:48):
working here tomorrow. But there werea lot of people at the time who
just they suffered the consequences, likeNorm got fired from Saturday Night Live from
making jokes about OJ after he wastold not to. It was my understanding,
and anybody can correct me if theyhave more information on this is my
understanding that a big wig in NBCwas friends with OJ and he took offense

(24:11):
at all the jokes quite possibly,and what Norm's response to that was to
make more OJ jokes and he wasway out in front of everyone. Yes,
and if you don't remember, NormMacDonald had the most incisive and also
insightful jokes we talk about like theDaily Show and what maybe Stephen Colbert does
today or John Stewart. Norm MacDonaldwas doing that then. But in direct

(24:36):
relation to the OJ trial and verdict. It's the total court jester routine of
saying the shocking direct truth when it'sa little impolite in normal company. But
it was accurate. It certainly was. But there are just things right in
the moment that if you're in themainstream media, you can't come right out
and say that like a stand upcomic. And believe me, we we

(25:00):
have those discussions here you're listening tolater with mo Kelly on demand from KFI
AM six forty late ten, lateten, I Am six forty live everywhere
in the iHeartRadio app later with moKelly, and we're finishing up our conversation
about OJ, the trial, theverdict, his legacy. We're not spending

(25:22):
all night on that. No,we're not doing three hours wall to wall.
But there were some things I thinkwhich needed to be said and needed
to be said a certain way.I remember clearly the sentiment, at least
in my neighborhood and amongst the peoplethat I hung out with. At this
time, I was deep into hiphop, you know, and this is

(25:44):
at a point in time when therewas still some quote unquote conscious hip hop
within the music industry. I was, uh, so, you're still a
teenager at this point. I waslike, yeah, what nineteen Yeah,
yeah. And I remember having aconversation, me and my friends. We
were sitting out, all of us, chilling on the porch, and I

(26:06):
remember we were all saying, wedon't care about this dude, OJ.
We don't even care about the murder. People get murdered every day. That
was our sentiment. What we feltis how the media at large, in
the papers on local news and invarious radio shows. They used the trial

(26:29):
of OJ Simpson as another opportunity todemonize black men. All of us were
young black men, and we feltthat we were already in the mode of
walking by cars and watching people lockdoors, or people hold their purses closer
when we walk next to them,and things like. We felt that we
were already in that mode where policewere pulling us over for no reason.

(26:52):
And maybe they weren't going on hamlike they did because this is after Rodney
King, and so they were tryingto slow, quietly give us a little
bunch, you know it, sayoh my bad, my mistake. But
we remember feeling in this moment,damn, OJ, you're using this as
an opportunity to disrespect me. You'reusing this as an opportunity to further tear

(27:14):
down the black community. And thatwas the thing that people, I think
don't really understand. We were notfighting for OJ. Oh my goodness,
We could not care less about OJSimpson. He had a great football career
all that, but he was nota hero in that regard. It wasn't
like we were running to protect him. And in part of the problem I

(27:37):
had with the media when I saythe media, I'm talking about radio and
television at the time of the verdict. They would show African Americans cheering the
verdict in one or two rooms,with no context, with no real understanding
of the historical moments leading up tothat point and why people felt a certain
way. And it wasn't about celebratingOJ. It was about hopefully people would

(28:00):
understand our disappointment in the justice systemand people would see, for once,
now you know what it feels like. Now you understand this is what we're
talking about. This is why we'reso frustrated. And I meant to say
this earlier. If if your onlypoint of reference as to injustice or someone

(28:26):
getting away with murder is OJ Simpson, then you've missed the plot of the
story. You've misunderstood what all thiswas about, because it wasn't ever about
OJ. It was about what ledup to OJ. And then his acquittal
said one thing. I should say, his trial said one thing, his
acquittal said another thing. And Iknow people in my circle were saying,

(28:48):
like, yeah, we know whatit feels like. It feels like the
evidence was laid out and y'all couldn'tget it right, and the justice system
let you down. I know exactlywhat that feels like. Yeah, yeah,
I remember when the verdict was read. There were people who said exactly

(29:10):
that. They said, hah,so you all are mad that the justice
system failed. You're mad that youfeel the justice system felled this time,
this one time. You do notknow of all the people in our community
who have been abused and murdered andunjustly stopped anything at that time by LAPD.

(29:32):
Because this is not far removed fromRampart and all of that, there
was a point in them was goingon it. That's what I'm talking before
it was actually exposed. All thatI'm talking this is not that far removed
from when we were all dealing withthat, and that was the sentiment.
That's what we were going through,That's what we were feeling. So it

(29:52):
wasn't about cheering oh Jan and Ioftentimes, because over the years with the
Moe Kelly Show, anytime OJ,you know, walk down the street,
all of a sudden, you'd getan email or you'd get a message and
someone have to all OJ, didX y z MO? What do you
think? And I would always thinkto myself, if you are worried about

(30:15):
OJ and getting away with murdered.Are you also then worried about George Zimmerman
and his getting away with murder?Well, let me jump in there,
because a lot of times we perceiveinjustice or the degree of injustice through our
sympathy or lack of sympathy for theperson murdered, not actual injustice, not

(30:41):
actually on the merit of the case, but whether we find kindred kinship or
we respect or we value the personwho died. Uh. And you are
correct to all because I look upthat the dates, because Rampart was in
the mid nineteen nineties through two thousand. Rampart was happening at the same time

(31:03):
as oj Oh. I remember.I remember because that's something that we were
like, this is not being talkedabout. These officers are out of control
of This is not being talked aboutnow just for people, because I forget
people like Canna may not remember this. To Rampart Department scandal was more than
seventy police officers were initially implicated invarious forms of misconduct, including unprovoked shootings

(31:27):
and beatings, planning of false evidence, stealing and dealing narcotics, bank robbery,
perjury, and cover ups. Thereofthe Rampart Division scandal. This was
happening simultaneous to the OJ trial andverdict, So that's why it The OJ

(31:48):
verdicts meant different things and different peoplefor different reasons. And if we don't
have a more comprehensive discussion, thenyou missed, you missed the point of
it all. It's later with MoKelly kf I AM six forty. We're
live everywhere the iHeartRadio app. Wego through all the thing that's going on
so that we can tell you justthat you need to know. K f

(32:08):
I k OST HD two, LosAngeles, Orange County, live everywhere on
the eart radio app.