Right to a Fair Trial

Well, O.J. Simpson will be facing a jury again.

Just this morning, Las Vegas Justice of the Peace Joe M. Bonaventure refused to dismiss any of the twelve charges levelled against the former NFL running-back. Lawyers on both sides are now preparing for a lengthy trial to decide whether Simpson is guilty of armed robbery and kidnapping.

The whole affair has got the media riled up. As far as many people are concerned, O.J. Simpson is 'the one who got away' after he was cleared of murder charges following the death of his wife Nicole Brown Simpson in 1994.

Back then, the Los Angels District Attorney's office failed to make a convincing case pinning the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and friend Ronald Goldman on Simpson. As far as the media is concerned, the Las Vegas trial will be their opportunity to even the score.

After all, it's an 'open secret' that 'O.J. did it.'

Or at least, that's the consensus of opinion in America.

Which does raise some very serious issues when a jury gets picked to hear Simpson's case in six months time. A jury is meant to be unbiased. How can you possibly find a person with no bias when it comes to the infamous O.J. Simpson?

Everybody has an opinion. Most people have convicted him even despite the evidence...

And, yes - let's not forget the evidence.

Because no matter how suggestive the circumstantial case against Simpson was back in '94, the most 'convincing' evidence was made somewhat less convincing by the fact that the lion's share of it — things like the famous 'bloody glove', the bloody socks and Ron Goldman's blood in OJ Simpson's Ford Bronco — were found by Los Angeles Police Detective Mark Fuhrman.

During the trial, Fuhrman committed confirmed perjury on the witness stand and then pleaded the 5th Amendment when people started querying his integrity.

In their desperation to convict, the Los Angeles Police Department tried to pin an awful lot of false evidence on O.J. Simpson to 'beef up' their case - which is turn destroyed it's credibility.

Most people believe O.J. Simpson was guilty of murdering his wife - and turn a blind eye to the fact that an innocent-until-proven-guilty man was stitched up like a kipper by the Los Angeles Police Department.

Whether he was guilty of the murders or not, no jury in America should have convicted him based on the horrifically flawed prosecution case - but his aquittal has led to a common cry that O.J. Simpson might have been found 'not guilty' - but that's a long way from 'innocent.'

Which leads on the the problem he'll face in six months time.

I don't believe that O.J. Simpson will be put on trial for armed robbery and kidnapping, which are the allegations made against him by Prosecutor Chris Owens. When he enters that courtroom, he'll face down a jury of people trying to convict him of murder all over again.

If he does manage to avoid a conviction, it will be a real testament to the American justice system - and if he is convicted, that verdict will forever be tainted by the nation's universal bias against him.

Because, after all, it's not exactly a watertight case. O.J. Simpson and two associates are charged with holding a Las Vegas sports memorabilia dealer hostage at gunpoint to recover certain items - items which belonged to OJ Simpson in the first place.

The bulk of the Las Vegas District Attorney's case is made up of testimony by O.J. Simpson's own associates, who have all copped a plea in return for speaking out against Simpson.

As defence attorney John Moran Jr said in court, the testimony against Simpson would be delivered by "crackheads, groupies, pimps and purveyors of stolen merchandise - and gun carriers, con artists and crooks."

"These guys are bad. The court can't ascribe any credibility to what comes out of their mouths. Every witness up there is looking to sell testimony and make money off of this case."

I'm not saying O.J. Simpson is innocent - but I'm certainly not going to be spoon fed a leaky case like we were back in 1994.

Just like during his murder trial, the issue is not whether O.J. Simpson is guilty - it's whether the prosecution can deliver a convincing case, which proves his committed the crimes beyond any reasonable doubt.

They couldn't then and I honestly believe they won't be able to this time. But sadly, I don't think that will have any effect on the jury's verdict.

O.J. Simpson is one of the most hated men in America - and I don't believe it's possible for him to receive a fair trial.