The O J Simpson Funk - Part 2

The sheer and the patently pedestrian pretense that, somehow, more than a quarter-century later, some new and morally edifying and intellectually refreshing evidence regarding the full-suit or panoply of O. J. Simpson’s so-called Trial-of-the-Century has been serendipitously uncovered is an absolute hogwash (See “O. J. Simpson, a Secret Informant and a Decades-Old Mystery” New York Times 10/18/26). Even as the coauthors of the aforereferenced mini-essay, namely, Messrs. Michael “Mike” Baker and Tim “Timothy” Arrango, categorically note, among a host of other things, what may be aptly called “The Ippolito Factor” was always known and suspected well before the inception of the Judge Lance Ito-presided judicial proceedings.

Now, for those of our readers who may not have yet been born at the time or were rather much too young to remember and/or to have systematically and meticulously followed the morally jolting sequence of gruesome and catastrophic events about the details surrounding this admittedly most horrific tragedy, the leaden cloud of doubt that the prime suspect, Mr. Orenthan James Simpson was solely culpable for the double-murders of his estranged wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Mr. Ronald Goldman, the widely alleged “friend” of Mrs. Simpson, was both practically and forensically inescapable, as publicly hinted by both forensics experts, detectives, criminal defense attorneys and, of course, even ordinary American citizens.

Yet, as it was to be expected, largely based on America’s long history of visceral and implacable White-American Animus for the African-Descended Person, both individually and collectively, the near lilywhite and “tokenized” integrated team of O. J. Simpson Prosecutors of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and the Office of the Los Angeles District Attorney (LADA), decided that so stereotypically monstrous and sinister was Mr. Simpson, a proverbial snooty and “Uppity Nigger” through and through that the former College Football Legend and Awardee of the nationally coveted Heisman Memorial Trophy did not need or require any assistance to enable him to “slaughter,” a la the Trumpian slaughtering of the 200 Tehran Schoolgirls in the wake of the February 28, 2026 collaborative war by the United States and the Zionist Republic of Prime Minister Benjanin “Mileikowsky” Netanyahu’s on the Revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran.

Such professionally gross failure of forensics objectivity, it was even emphatically suggested well before the full unfolding of judicial proceedings, could very well let the prime and sole criminal suspect off the hook, as it were. And lo and behold, Dear Reader, this was precisely what panned out eventually. As this writer vividly recalls, the critical question of “Reasonable Doubt” constituted the “Overriding Theme” in the O. J. Simpson Double-Murder Trial. In short, the general public was informed by many a legal pundit that what was really at stake here was not the simple question of whether it was forensically ascertainable or provable that, indeed, the 46-year-old Mr. Simpson was guilty of the crimes of which the well-heeled African American Man with a White Wife stood officially accused.

Even far more significantly, the real question squarely devolved on the fact of whether, indeed, the criminal suspect could have or was likely to have committed the crime of the Double-Murder of Mr. Goldman and Mrs. Nicole Brown Simpson all by himself, with absolutely no outside help. In other words, the unignorable implication here was that Mr. Simpson could not be successfully convicted of murder, if the prosecution could also not firmly and convincingly “Prove Beyond Any Iota or Shadow of Reasonable Doubt” to a team of 12 reasonably well-educated jurors, that Mr. Simpson committed the crimes of which he stood accused hermetically and exclusively all by himself.

Now, from the details of the mini-essay or long read New York Times’ article by Messrs. Baker and Arrango, it is patently clear that the much-maligned O. J. Simpson Jury accurately and perfectly delivered exactly the verdict that the proverbial judge ordered, hot and steamingly delicious and fresh, as it were. Which simply means that even if the jury had not been convinced of the total and the complete “innocence” of Mr. Simpson, whose most heinous act of wanton and unspeakable criminality well appears to have been the voracious and the lurid desire of a “Filthily Moneyed Uppity Nigger” to conjugally cross the “Color Bar,” the latter “Original Sin and Crime of the Democratic American Republic” was equally compounded by the very fact that the prosecution, led by Ms. Marcia Clark and, the literally brought along for “look-good ride,” Mr. Christopher “House Nigger” Darden, had apparently not been able to prove above and beyond the standard threshold of any iota or shadow of reasonable doubt that, indeed, Mr. Simpson had committed the double-murder of his estranged wife and her “friend” all by himself. Which is precisely what the aforereferenced long-read article or mini-essay by Messrs. Baker and Arrango clearly suggests.

Even so, the aforementioned article is clearly and decidedly bereft of any definitive credibility, as it is almost wholly predicated on what may be aptly termed as “hearsay,” in standard legal parlance and practice. Then also, there were a slew of evidentiary flaws in the presentation of a clearly exuberant and a scandalously amateurish prosecutorial team that conspicuously appeared to be far more fixated on thoroughly and witheringly railroading a taboo-busting “Uppity Nigger” that meticulously and systematically allowing the bare facts and the naked evidence to deliberately tease out the unvarnished contours of the case.

Ultimately, the lesson here, both morally and practically, inheres in the daunting fact that as a nation and a people, the much-ballyhooed and zealously vaunted story of America as a Multicultural and a Multiracial Beacon of rarefied hope and nonesuch Democratic Justice is still a dream that is worth the dogged pursuit, albeit obviously not attainable. At least not in this age and time.

By Kwame Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr., PhD
Professor Emeritus, Department of English
SUNY-Nassau Community College
Garden City, New York
E-mail: [email protected]