After winning acquittal last year in a criminal trial, O. J. Simpson is defending himself once again, this time on civil charges. The families of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Simpson are suing Simpson on behalf of the estates of the murder victims for wrongful death. The families are seeking unspecified monetary damages, claiming Simpson is responsible for the June 12, 1994 stabbings. If the jury finds for them, Simpson may lose his fortune -- but not his freedom. He cannot go to jail as a result of this civil action.
Wrongful-death suits are common in the civil justice system. After a fatal plane crash, an airline is typically sued by victims' families. However, a wrongful death suit after a homicide is rare, especially when the defendant has been acquitted of criminal charges. But unlike most homicide defendants, Simpson is wealthy, which makes him a more likely target. (The extent of Simpson's wealth was the subject of a pre-trial deposition, which the court sealed.)
But in this case, the families apparently have other motives besides money. Denise Brown's heart-rending testimony of the domestic abuse she says her sister suffered and Fredric Goldman's outbursts on the courthouse steps during the criminal trial indicate that both families want to see Simpson tell the world what he was doing on the night of the murders. At the criminal trial, Simpson's Fifth Amendment privilege protected him from being forced to testify. Because he was acquitted, Simpson cannot invoke his Fifth Amendment right.
Although it may seem like Simpson is being charged with the same crime twice, he is not. Experts in civil law point out that the criminal trial is the responsibility of the state and that the crime victims have no hand in the proceedings. The civil justice system allows victims and their survivors to settle their differences with the defendant in a legal arena.
"The civil system is partly designed for people to come to court and resolve their deeply felt anxieties and hatreds, and get vindication there instead of privately," says Barbara Babcok, a professor at Stanford Law School.
The biggest difference between the civil and criminal trial: Instead of needing to find Simpson guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" as in the criminal case, the civil jury will decide if he is liable based on a "preponderance of evidence." In lay terms, that means more than 50 percent. Another key difference: California law says that only nine of the 12 jurors need to come to agreement to reach a verdict.
The cast of characters in the civil trial will be partly familiar and partly new. Expected to testify from the criminal trial are Brian "Kato" Kaelin, limousine driver Allan Park, and -- through videotaped testimony -- forensic expert Dr. Henry Lee, among others.
New testimony may come from Paula Barbieri, Robert Kardashian, and A.C. Cowlings. It is unclear whether Detective Mark Fuhrman will testify, although the defense served him with a subpoena. The most watched witness, of course, will be Simpson himself. The attorneys handling the case are almost all different than in the criminal trial. The only member of Simpson's "dream team" of criminal defense lawyers working on the civil case is Robert Blaiser.
Superior Court Judge Hiroshi Fujisaki pulled the plug on television cameras inside the courtroom and imposed a gag order that prevents lawyers from putting a spin on the day's events after each court session. Lawyers may only talk to the press to explain the legal proceedings.
The Suits:
Several suits have been consolidated for this trial. Goldman's mother Sharon Rufo and father Fred Goldman have both filed wrongful death suits against Simpson for the loss of companionship of their son. They are divorced and Ronald had been estranged from his mother. A jury could award different damages to each parent.
The estate of Ronald Goldman, represented by both parents, has also filed a survivor claim against Simpson. To win this type of suit in California, the plaintiffs must show that Goldman survived, albeit briefly, the attack. In a survivor suit, the plaintiff's claim of actual damages is low. But unlike a wrongful death suit, the plaintiff can win money for punitive damages.
Nicole Brown Simpson's estate, represented by her parents, has also filed a survivor claim against O.J. Simpson. Interestingly, no wrongful death suit has been filed against Simpson by the Browns. The actual plaintiffs in a wrongful death suit would be O.J. and Nicole's two young children Sydney and Justin. Under California law they could still file suit against their father until they turn 19.
The Plaintiffs' Case:
From early indications, the plaintiffs will probably try to paint a broader picture of the events leading up to the June 12, 1994 murders than prosecutors did in the criminal trial -- and they will try to do it in less time. They don't want to get bogged down in long DNA testimony, nor do they want to go into great detail about the forensic evidence -- especially because the Los Angeles police were shown to have made a number of mistakes in the criminal trial. Expect more evidence about domestic violence, possibly including excerpts from Nicole's diary, which was ruled hearsay in the criminal trial. A new California law, passed in reaction to the Simpson criminal case, may allow the plaintiffs to introduce it. Judge Fujisaki will rule on the admissibility during trial. The plaintiffs also may bring up evidence that was not used by the prosecution in the criminal trial. This may include: testimony about Simpson's low-speed chase with the LAPD, the money and disguise he took with him when fleeing arrest, and his purported suicide note. New evidence will likely include a freelance photographer's picture of Simpson apparently wearing Bruno Magli shoes, which he said he never owned.
The Defense's Case:
Simpson's defense team has been very close-mouthed about its legal strategy. But the motions they have filed so far in court suggest they will follow a similar defense as was used in the criminal trial. Expect the defense to challenge the LAPD at every turn. Even if Mark Fuhrman does not testify, his name will likely be bandied about the courtroom at every possible opportunity. Because of Fuhrman's Oct. 2 no contest plea to perjury charges, Judge Fujisaki has allowed the defense to raise questions about the planting of some evidence, including the bloody glove found in Simpson's yard.
The Plaintiffs' Lawyers:
All three plaintiffs have separate counsel. Their biggest challenge for the case will likely be working together. While each has a different client with slightly different interests, they are all working toward a common goal: proving Simpson liable for the murders. A united front will keep them from unnecessarily prolonging the case and boring the jury.
Fred Goldman's lawyer, Daniel Petrocelli, has taken the lead for the plaintiffs in court so far. A noted corporate civil lawyer in Los Angeles, Petrocelli's focus has been on complex civil litigation. He does not have a vast amount of trial experience. His past clients include Guess Inc., Saban Entertainment, and Occidental Petroleum.
Sharon Rufo, Ronald Goldman's mother, is being represented by Michael Brewer. He filed the first wrongful death suit against Simpson in July 1994. Brewer has handled a number of wrongful death suits and seen a lot of courtroom action, though often on the defense side.
John Kelly, a former deputy district attorney in Queens County, N.Y., is handling the case for the Nicole Brown Simpson estate. He has worked as a criminal defense attorney and as a civil litigator.
The Defendant's Lawyers:
Simpson's lead attorney is Robert Baker, one of the most prominent civil litigators in Los Angeles. Practicing out of his own law firm in Santa Monica, Baker has 25 years experience concentrating mainly in medical malpractice and product liability cases. He has defended numerous wrongful death suits. Baker's son Phillip is also helping out on the defense, as is former Simpson criminal lawyer Robert Blaiser, who is working on scientific evidence matters. F. Lee Bailey and attorneys with his office have been named on some of the briefs and attended some depositions, but it is unclear what role Bailey is playing in the civil trial. He has not yet been in court.
The Judge:
Superior Court Judge Hiroshi Fujisaki is the second judge assigned to the civil trial. The defense challenged and had removed the first judge, Alan Haber. Fujisaki, 60, has said he will retire when this case has finished.
A former public defender, Fujisaki has been on the bench since 1980 and has even handled celebrity trials before, presiding over cases involving Jack Nicholson, Gary Coleman, and Zsa Zsa Gabor. In issuing a gag order on trial participants and banning the TV camera from the courtroom, Fujisaki derided the first trial as a "media circus." He has vowed that this trial will be different. On the first day of the trial, he issued 39 rulings and let the lawyers know he plans to keep the case closely focused on whether or not Simpson killed his former wife and Ronald Goldman.
