The civil jury was emphatic in its unanimity - a 9-3 vote would have been sufficient to determine liability - and the extraordinarily large $8.5 million award in compensatory damages to the Goldman family. Jurors will not be able to explain their verdict until they complete deliberations on the question of punitive damages, but their verdicts thus far ring of certainty.
The two Simpson trials were far from identical. Simpson did not testify in the criminal trial but was confronted with tough cross-examination in the civil procedure, where he could no longer invoke the Fifth Amendment. Judge Hiroshi Fujisaki refused to allow Simpson's civil attorneys to proffer the absurd notion about a police conspiracy that his attorneys had used to enflame jurors in the criminal case. The discovery after the criminal trial of more than 30 photographs showing Simpson wearing rare shoes that he claimed never to have owned damaged his credibility beyond repair. The evidence of Simpson's guilt was overwhelming, and the notion that the verdicts from the civil jury stemmed from its predominantly Caucasian make-up is nonsense.
Even those differences were not enough, however, to answer questions that remain about the criminal justice system. Is the system adequate in trying a defendant wealthy enough to hire a "dream team" of attorneys to face down overmatched government prosecutors?
Is the country so racially divided that an attorney can persuade a predominantly African-American jury to release a murderer to "send a message" to law-enforcement authorities? That seems to have been the case in the criminal trial, but a single case of this magnitude is not a true measurement of the criminal justice system. Safeguards intended to protect the rights of the accused may result in the acquittal of the guilty.
Fred Goldman, the father of Ronald Goldman, says he is relieved that "justice" has finally been attained. Perhaps a modicum of justice has resulted from the civil verdicts, but they did not rectify the criminal ones. Justice should not be confused with solace.
Considering that this was Clinton's first State of the Union address since his re-election, his mood seemed subdued. Could the reason be the reports of improper practices of the Clinton team in soliciting campaign contributions? These disclosures have robbed the president's victory of some of its sweetness.
More investigations lie ahead to add to the president's continuing problems with Whitewater, the travel office fiasco, the misuse of FBI files and the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit. These matters, more than educational initiatives, are likely to occupy the president's time in his second term.
Rupert E. Phillips, CEO
John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher
David Shapiro, Managing Editor
Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor
Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors
A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor