Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

O.J. Simpson Dies. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 11, 2024 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:00:32]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And we're beginning with breaking news.

O.J. Simpson is dead at 76 after losing a battle to cancer, according to his family. Simpson may be one of the most controversial people in our nation's history. Before his murder trial, which divided the country and essentially turned him into an outcast, he was a celebrated football star who won the Heisman Trophy in college.

He was also an actor and a pitchman, universally loved by Americans, but that life as he knew it ended on June 12, 1994, when his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ron Goldman were found stabbed to death outside of her home in Los Angeles, the shock of their murders intensifying five days later.

For hours, time stood still, as nearly 100 million Americans watched on TV at this, Simpson taking police on a low-speed chase 60 miles through Los Angeles in that white Ford Bronco.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Simpson would go on to surrender and stand trial for the murders. He was eventually acquitted in what was dubbed the trial of the century, and it aired on television daily, almost daily, for 11 months, capturing the world's attention.

Here was one of those historic moments from trial.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We, the jury in the above-entitled action, find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder in violation of penal code section 187(A), a felony, upon Nicole Brown Simpson, a human being, as charged in Count I of the information.

Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, in the matter of People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson. We, the jury, in the above-entitled action, find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder in violation of penal code section 187(A), a felony, upon Ronald Lyle Goldman, a human being, as charged in Count II of the information.

We, the jury, in the above-entitled action, further find the special circumstance that the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, has in this case been convicted of at least one crime of murder of the first degree and one or more crimes of murder of the first or second degree to be not true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: You hear the sobbing in the courtroom after that historic moment, one that was widely unexpected.

Despite his acquittal, Simpson's reputation never fully recovered, both legally and in the court of opinion. He was eventually found liable for the murders in a civil trial, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, much of which he never actually paid.

Legal troubles followed him for decades, especially after being sentenced to nine to 33 years in prison for a 2007 Las Vegas hotel robbery. Simpson was released on parole in October of 2017.

KEILAR: Today, a post from the Simpson family on Simpson's verified X account said this.

"On April 10, our father, Orenthal James Simpson, succumbed to his battle with cancer. He was surrounded by his children and grandchildren. During this time of transition, his family asks that you please respect their wishes for privacy and grace."

SANCHEZ: Let's discuss all the angles of this story with CNN's Jean Casarez, investigative journalist Diane Dimond, who was the first reporter at the murder scene in 1994. And attorney Areva Martin is also with us.

Let's start with Jean Casarez.

Jean, this story touches so much of American life and what was happening in the 1990s from so many angles, but perhaps one of the most enduring legacies of the Simpson trial is the way that it defined how Americans view the legal system.

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: No, absolutely.

And there are really two O.J. Simpsons, right? I mean, there's the football icon, and there's also the one that was charged in two criminal cases, convicted in one, acquitted in another.

But I think, because there were cameras in that courtroom, you saw a legal story play out, and that trial went for months. CNN covered it wall to wall. Court TV had their cameras. It made the Court TV network at that point in the mid-'90s. But you got to see witnesses. You got to see demeanor. You got to see social issues.

You got to see a dream team of a defense to show that you have got to have a high-quality defensive attorney or team. And you also saw the outcome.

[13:05:06]

But the mystery remained, because the mystery of what happened to O.J., to the victims in this case, to Nicole Brown Simpson, to Ron Goldman,

I just got off the phone with David Cook. David Cook has been the attorney for the Goldmans for years. And he is the one that has tried to collect the monies from the resulting civil verdict, because he did not win in the civil court in California.

And I think, as you have mentioned, they struggled for years, the Goldmans, to get any type of monetary damages that they were awarded. That was the justice they got was civil court.

And I spoke to David Cook minutes ago, and asking him, what did you get? What did you ever get in the form of justice from that civil trial? Do you remember the book "If I Did It"? That was a book that came out. Well, the Goldmans got the right to that book. And it became, "I Did It." And it was on "The New York Times" bestseller.

And that's how the Goldmans got some of the civil judgment that they were due from that civil trial following the criminal trial in Los Angeles.

KEILAR: Yes, I read that book. And it was sort of stunning that O.J. Simpson, after being acquitted, had written a book as if he had committed the murders, and that the way this family had to get some of the damages was to have it out there as if he had done it, that that was a way that they could get some of the monetary damages that they were due.

It was really kind of stunning and didn't seem like something that should happen.

Let's talk with Diane Dimond. She is an investigative journalist. As we said, she was the first reporter at the scene of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman's murders.

And I think, Diane, we're kind of all transported back to 1994 when we are here seeing that O.J. Simpson died. Take us back to 1994 and when you arrived there and what it was like.

DIANE DIMOND, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: Yes, Brianna, that's the -- that was the first thing I thought about when I heard about O.J. Simpson's passing today, was that murder scene.

My cameraman and I rolled up on the Brentwood apartment of Nicole Brown Simpson just as they were loading the bodies into a morgue truck. And the morgue truck pulled away. And there we were standing outside on the sidewalk, a long pathway going up to her front gate. And the pavers on the sidewalk were full of blood.

There were paw prints from her dog, who had gotten loose after the murders and had gone down to the corner and started howling and alerted some neighbors. And we went inside the front gate. And I was stunned to see there was Nicole Brown Simpson's living room. It was all glass. The candles were still going on the hearth up on the fireplace mantelpiece.

And there was a big picture of O.J. and their two children. And it was so eerie to be standing there literally in pools of blood. The police had gone. There was no police presence. There was some police tape, but we sort of ducked under that. And there I was standing where those two people had been murdered, and the candles were still burning on the mantelpiece.

It was -- that's the first thing I thought of today when I heard about this news.

SANCHEZ: Wow, really insightful color of what those moments were like.

Let's bring in Areva Martin.

And, Areva, one of the things that O.J.'s trial brought to light was the way in which questions about policing and the way that communities of color are policed were too often ignored, I think, by the country as a whole. And they were central to this case. And they were a huge part of why O.J. was acquitted.

AREVA MARTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Absolutely.

We can't forget the testimony of Mark Fuhrman, one of the detectives that was very involved in the collection of evidence in the investigation of Nicole Brown's death, as well as Ron Goldman. And Mark Fuhrman perjured himself on the witness stand. He was asked the question under a withering cross-examination by Johnnie Cochran about making former racist statements, using the N-word, and he lied about it.

And there was evidence. He had done a recording with someone else, and they were able to bring that in and impeach him. And, in fact, he had to plead no contest to perjury charges that were filed against him after the trial of O.J. Simpson ended.

So, we cannot underestimate the racist nature of policing in Los Angeles during the period of this O.J. Simpson trial. This is right after the 1992 civil unrest, where we watched in Los Angeles white police officers protect affluent neighborhoods, while they allowed neighborhoods in black and brown communities to burn, where we watched the police be engaged in all kinds of violent conduct against protesters.

[13:10:10]

So that was the backdrop in which this trial was happening. And the racism of the L.A. Police Department was on full display in this trial. And there were gaping holes in the prosecutor's case, not just with Mark Fuhrman's perjured testimony, but also with the collection and preservation of evidence.

Johnnie Cochran called it a contaminated cesspool, a cesspool of contamination. We just heard Diane say she walked up to the crime scene, and she could have walked under the tape. That's how poorly this crime scene was maintained, was preserved.

And yet they were forced to put on a case using the evidence from that contaminated crime scene and using these police officers, many of whom, like Mark Fuhrman, had a horrific history and past with respect to the treatment and statements about African-Americans.

KEILAR: Yes, and yet even a contaminated crime scene -- this is also the early days of DNA, right?

SANCHEZ: Yes.

KEILAR: And what should have been -- it's so interesting to think about if this case had been tried 20 years later. It probably would have just been a slam dunk on DNA, because contamination doesn't make DNA more likely to match a suspect.

It would make it less likely to match a suspect. And yet the defense was able to overcome that evidence, Areva. I wonder, as you look back on this, because it did reveal so much about what was going on in Los Angeles with policing, what was going on in the nation, how did the verdict age over time?

MARTIN: I don't think it aged well, Brianna.

I think folks who had formed an opinion about his guilt back when this happened in 1994 probably still believe that he's guilty. Those that believed that this was a setup, that he was framed by Los Angeles police detectives probably still believe that this was a setup by the police department.

And there's ample evidence, I think, for each of those positions with respect to this notion that this was a framing. One of the detectives involved in the case took blood, took a vial of blood from O.J. Simpson at the police department, put that vial in his jacket pocket, and then went to the crime scene.

And that allowed the lawyers, the defense attorneys, to argue -- basically make the argument, suggestion to the jury that the blood at O.J. Simpson's -- or at the crime scene was actually smeared on by this blood vial that was taken from this detective.

So, those kinds of mistakes make it very difficult for us to have any faith in the criminal justice system or in the evidence that was presented by the prosecution. But yet here we are. If O.J. Simpson didn't do it, there has never been anyone else identified as the murderer.

So, for those folks that believe O.J. Simpson is guilty, they don't have any other alternative. There's never been any other person identified as a suspect.

SANCHEZ: Diane, we do want to give you the last word, as someone who closely covered this story and this case.

As Jean Casarez put it a moment ago, you can split O.J. Simpson's life into two chapters, essentially, and this was the central turning point of it. Twenty years removed, nearly, from the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, what are your reflections on everything that transpired and the legacy ultimately of the biggest moment of O.J.'s life?

DIMOND: Yes.

I think that the double murder, whoever committed it -- of course, the jury said he didn't do it -- and then his conviction for an armed robbery in Las Vegas, which we haven't mentioned yet, I think that honestly stains the football hero, the Hertz rent-a-car guy running through the airport looking so handsome.

I think people will remember him more for the criminal aspect of his life, rather than the athletic.

SANCHEZ: Diane Dimond, Areva Martin, and Jean Casarez, thank you all so much for the perspective.

We're covering this breaking news from all angles. Stay with CNN NEWS CENTRAL. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:18:52]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: ... Simpson, case number BA097211.

We, the jury, in the above-entitled action, find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder in violation of penal code section 187(A), a felony, upon Nicole Brown Simpson, a human being, as charged in Count I of the information.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, in the matter of People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson. We, the jury, in the above- entitled action, find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder in violation of penal code section 187(A), a felony, upon Ronald Lyle Goldman, a human being, as charged in Count II of the information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: All right, that was live reaction from the audience of "The Oprah Winfrey Show" at the moment that the verdict was read in the O.J. Simpson murder trial.

You saw the mixed reaction of cheers. There were others just left stunned.

SANCHEZ: Yes, that is a time capsule that just captures a snapshot of where the United States was at the time, and the reverberations of that decision carry on to this day.

[13:20:02] The televised trial culminating in that verdict broadcast from within the courtroom created some of the most intense early demand for the current 24-hour news cycle and so the seeds for what became reality TV.

For more on this, we want to bring in CNN's Oliver Darcy.

Oliver, put into context the way that that case drew so many eyeballs and captured so many people across the United States to the way that we process and live in media now.

OLIVER DARCY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, this was a defining moment in American history that shaped our current politics and culture.

You had the chase that started it all. That drew about 95 million live viewers, which was unheard of really back in the '90s, when this was happening. I mean, you didn't have this current live information ecosystem. People typically would come home and watch the evening news, and they weren't consumed by what was happening live back then.

But 95 million people tuned in to watch this chase. Then this trial goes on, and it generates mass interest. It gives birth to Court TV. It really boosts CNN; 150 million people tune in live to watch the judgments, the culmination of the trial, and it really boosts this cable television ecosystem.

And you have then, soon after this trial, Rupert Murdoch, he launches FOX News in 1996. CNN really is solidified, and Court TV, again, becomes a thing. And then you also have this trial birthing reality television. This was a reality TV moments before reality TV was a thing.

Of course, there's an obvious connection to reality television, being the Kardashians, but it boosts reality television. And then -- and so you have this media environment that is with cable news and reality TV. And then you have someone like Donald Trump, I think, that comes along.

And you can really see the connections to where we are as a society today, in our politics, in our media. And you can trace a lot of that back to O.J. Simpson and the mass interest in his trial.

KEILAR: Yes, it's so interesting.

Oliver, thank you for that report.

Let's get into his sports legacy here. We're joined by CNN sports analyst Christine Brennan and sports broadcaster Cari Champion.

Cari, first off, just give us your reaction, especially from the sports perspective. Obviously, all of this becomes, I think, intersectional. But what is your reaction learning that O.J. Simpson has died?

CARI CHAMPION, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, Brianna, that's actually true. It is all intersectional. I say that about sports often, but, for me, this is even more -- it

hit home because I grew up in L.A. I remember the chase. I remember people running to the freeway to say that they want to send these messages to O.J. Simpson. And, just contextually, what I remember is that this, to me, was the very first time I can remember how divisive we were in public.

The black culture was very excited about the fact that O.J. Simpson was -- quote, unquote -- "not guilty." And I remember it being on the heels of Rodney King. And that whole entire community, at least from when I grew up there in Los Angeles, felt like it was it was them versus-us-type of campaign.

We all know how it all turned out in terms of what people feel about O.J. Simpson. But his legacy is interesting in sports, to me, because O.J. Simpson was the very first, to me, black icon in sports that was accepted in mainstream media, where people really, truly appreciated what he represented.

He was America's friend, if you will, the Hertz commercials that we talk about, that wonderful Colgate smile. He went to USC. He was a Heisman winner, which is the highest level of an award you can get as a football player. He was everything, and he was very intentional about being the type of football icon/player/star that America loved, because he was able to transition easily into the movies because people really love him.

But it was a choice. O.J. Simpson knew, especially when he was coming up -- and I will wrap this quickly. When he was in the midst in the '60s in the '70s, they wanted O.J. Simpson to be a part of the civil rights movement, they being Lew Alcindor, known as Kareem Abdul- Jabbar, Jim Brown.

They wanted him to be a part of that community. But O.J. wanted to be a superstar icon, which he was. And, arguably, this, to me, is one of the most, if not the famous case of someone going from a hero to someone who was a horror story, and not necessarily overnight. But you would have never thought this would have been the case.

SANCHEZ: Christine Brennan, to you.

As Cari just said, the trajectory of O.J. Simpson's life is almost Shakespearian.

CHRISTINE BRENNAN, CNN SPORTS ANALYST: Well, it is Boris.

And, yes, Cari detailed it very well. For me, growing up as a girl who loved sports, watching O.J. play, Heisman Trophy winner at USC, of course, then into the NFL and the Buffalo Bills and the 2,000-yard record, 2,003. I will remember that number forever as a girl growing up in Toledo just loving sports. That was O.J.

[13:25:11]

And O.J., of course, also was really one of the first athletes to cross over into our culture. I think he may well have been the first, in a huge way, with the Hertz commercials, with the fact that O.J. was not only there on Sundays for the NFL, but Monday through Saturday with the commercials as a pitchman and as an icon in our culture.

And you think now of athletes. We have talked about Caitlin Clark a lot the last couple of weeks, Angel Reese, the commercials you see, of course, Tom Brady, LeBron James, Michael Jordan, Serena Williams. They have all crossed into our lives from sports.

O.J. was really the first one to be able to do that and led the way for so many others. Now, again, I think it's also important to say that the fall from grace, of course, all self-induced, the murder trial, the civil court -- the civil decision that he lost, and just the absolute disgrace, as we remember, of course, there were two people who were murdered.

But when you're asking -- when you're talking about sports, that's the question, this man was iconic. And, again, the fall from grace was so extraordinary because he had so far to fall.

KEILAR: Yes, he did have so far to fall.

Christine, Cari, thank you so much to both of you.

And we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)