Hyper-justice: The New OJ Simpson case

The paradigms of sociology, criminal justice, criminology and law were all greatly influenced by the first OJ Simpson case with the 1994 murder trial. New ideas of how justice operates in the media — how media can influence a criminal trial, were some of the major analytical outcomes. However, with the new charges against OJ — I couldn’t help but notice that the public trial has already begun in the Las Vegas robbery case, at a much faster rate due to the internet.

Media outlets were able to obtain and distribute transcribed audio recordings of the incident, a confession on a telephone answering machine and even covert audio of the pre-meditation to the incident at a party. These audio snippets were broadcast only days from the initial incident, possibly hours after the arrest of OJ and the supposed accomplices. With the rapidly accessed and distributed audio, we see an instant delivery of information in crime reporting, almost as if the investigation takes a life of its own through the public.  It is evident that the initial days of reporting on the case created a public trial with evidence, exhibits, confessions, witness statements, all of which were distributed before an investigation was completed by police. This ‘hyper-justice’ takes Jean Baudrillard’s theories to an extreme, where citizen-oriented surveillance, the legal system and media combine to create a public trial almost immediately after the crime had occurred. This is by far, unprecedented in criminal justice and will likely create a challenge for police and the courts in any upcoming ‘official’ legal proceedings.

‘Coaching’

I recently started coaching a new recruit, my first. It is an event that can be a rewarding experience, yet holds immense responsibility at the same time.

It’s rewarding to teach someone how to do good police work and to show them how to keep themselves and others safe while doing it. Also, riding with a new recruit, you often learn things that you might have overlooked otherwise since your own training. With the questions they ask and necessity for me to give proper advice, its a great learning experience and it forces a person to look introspectively into how I do my own job.

However, the coaching work involves an immense amount of responsibility (or at least it should). You see, in teaching a new person, I believe you’re also responsible for them. As their mentor, you’re responsible for their actions, but also for their safety. My job is to teach the recruit as much as I possibly can in a work day and also ensure that they finish each and every shift with me. It sounds almost paternal, but its difficult to describe the potential for danger in the first few months of work. Starting police work is like being thrown in the fire (although training prepares you for the most serous of incidents), there’s lots to learn the first day you attend briefing or go out on patrol. Your first call could be the ‘big one’ — I know a few who had been backup officers for officer-involved shootings in the first two weeks on the job. I’d gather it is very similar to a new army replacement entering a war zone — everyone tries to make sure the replacement makes it through the first bit so they can learn to do it themselves.

Having been an academic of sorts, I sometimes didn’t appreciate the importance of coaching in the cultural development of a new police officer. Now, I find I’m helping to ingrain the main tenets of police culture (that I often read about in journal articles) into the new guy. Quite a switch.