We are told we are days away from Orenthal James Simpson’s early release from a Nevada correctional center, after serving part of his “guilty on counts” sentence for kidnapping, weapons and robbery charges since 2007. As a woman of color, and specifically an African-American woman, I am preparing myself for an uptick in “O.J. Talks” with triggered friends of all backgrounds. I think, though, these talks will significantly shift, if only for me.
Despite O.J. actually having been recorded, tried and convicted for the Vegas crimes, none of my friends, acquaintances or enraged accusers in grocery stores have ever referenced anything but his original 1995 acquittal for the murders of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson. I’ve seen the end of multiple relationships after “the O.J. talk,” but those moments never were about whether anyone believed he was guilty. It was about the nature of the conversation itself: their underlying and unexamined, uninformed and condescending beliefs about Black intellect and history, the mistaken license they granted themselves to speak profanely and hostilely and disrespectfully towards me, the assumption — despite being the least informed people in the conversation — that they were more credible by virtue of not being Black, etc.
So much has changed since my last ridiculous O.J. talk — which was not even three months ago, I must point out. So as I watched the news this morning that his release was imminent, I wondered how the events of the past thee years might radically shift what is waiting for me in mainstream America as I walk out of the door.
Of course, the biggest shift will be that this conversation will take place predominantly on social media rather than in person or with strangers on the street asking me, sobbing, “Why did you let him go?”
(1) “They only acquitted him because he’s Black”/”No Black person was going to convict a Black celebrity.” This is the top shouted belief in an O.J. talk. Now some may understand better:
- #BlackLivesMatter. Some now will know that there has been systemic police injustice towards the Black community. Some now will understand the effect of showing the rampant mishandling and/or poor selection and/or presentation of evidence in the case. Some now will understand the disastrous impact of the lead detective having been recorded calling Black people “n****rs” repeatedly and of his refusing to answer if he had planted evidence or framed a suspect. Some will recognize that, at best, the prosecution lost the case and, at worst, the LAPD won it for Simpson. Some now will understand while it was, at minimum, very possible that an LEO had done something illicit in this or any case. That seemed inconceivable to many white Americans 25 years ago. Some have watched enough videos and read enough posts to realize how much they had been oblivious to years ago.
- #Intersectionality. Although the jury was Black, Latino and white, it also had 9 out of 12 female members. Some in today’s conversation will understand now that women of color don’t identify solely based on their race. And that they were facing a domestic abuser of a very young and tiny woman. So when the prosecution participated in forming that jury and including all of those women, they probably weren’t naive and self-defeating in their logic.
- #TriggerWarning. Hearing that tape of that woman being hunted by her abuser and ignored by police made it impossible for me to care what was happening in this case. I was too enraged to move beyond those moments of terror. Some may now understand how women can react to the plight of other women.
(2) “Johnnie Cochran played the race card”/”Johnnie Cochran came in and made it all about race.” This is important to many because it eliminates the possibility that an African-American lead lawyer could have defended a Black man accused of a heinous crime against two white people using expertise and remaining within the law. I explained to someone once that “Johnnie Cochran was a brilliant attorney.” He cut me off (of course) to correct me (of course) that “No, he wasn’t. He just had to be Black.” Some may know better now.
(3) “You think he’s innocent because you’re Black”/”You can’t see this as impartially as I can (because you’re Black.” They never seemed to take into account my anger at being cursed at (the requisite red-faced “F*** you!” when uninformed authority is calmly challenged with facts) by a friend — much less a stranger. Or my impatience with people who aren’t Black feeling they know my mindset and experience better than I do because, in their minds, it’s quite simple: I process everything as being “Black” or “not Black.” No education, analysis, weighing of evidence, checking with other opinions, etc. It’s just Black/not Black. I came to understand that was, in fact, how they were processing me, so they assumed that must be how I, an actual Black person, was processing the world. Some may now know better.
- #Whitesplaining. That’s a thing now. Some will realize they are doing it in the midst of their “O.J. Talk” moment.
- #WhiteFragility. This also may affect the filter of some of the formerly enraged. They now understand what POC meant when they asked why it was disrupting them that ONE person was acquitted of a crime against their own. When faced with the entire history of the criminal justice system being acquitted — or never even charged — for heinous, recorded and even admitted crimes against people of color.
- #TreyvonMartin #EricGarner #TamirRice #AllyLeeSteinfeld… Most importantly, some now know that the history of killers going free or getting lesser charges is deeply rooted and continues to the present day. And they know that the sorrow for the Brown and Goldman families is the same as the sorrow for so many families who wanted justice for their slain loved one. They see the spectrum now.
(4) “Do YOU think he’s innocent/guilty?” The litmus test is always the final challenge in these talks. It’s checking if I am a “good Black,” by agreeing with my white friends on Simpson’s guilt. After the level of detailed discussion and analysis I’ve offered at this point, this reduction sharply reminds that there is no real care about any of that. They only process me as “Black/Not Black.” And this is the Uncle Ruckus test because they believe that approval by a white person is a standard of excellence for me as a Black person. Some may see that differently now.
- #BlackTwitter. For those who have delved into the diverse, direct and often hilarious trending topics in the very public universe of Black Twitter, they get now that we are not driven by or even deferential to white approval. We have a culture and norms and alliances and differentiations within our own massive universe, and that is enough to navigate and engage in. Some may have gone ahead and engaged themselves (#InvitedtotheBBQ).
As we gear up for another O.J. news cycle and O.J. talks, I do believe things will be different now. For some.
I also think that some things won’t change. Like 45, Simpson is a narcissist with no/low impulse control and a desire to be seen and admired. I don’t know what comes next after the “steak and new iPhone,” but I know it won't be silence.
As for the picture, maybe that needed it’s own trigger warning. A smiling, free O.J. Simpson will disrupt many. MANY. Maybe even you. If so, I hope you will unpack that reaction and see what the past 25 years — and certainly the past three or four — may offer you in terms of processing it more holistically. It is not a “black and white case,” literally or figuratively. It never has been.
-------------------------
P.S. If you haven’t, watch the Oscar-winning documentary “O.J.: Made in America” over the weekend. I resisted any rehashing until a client insisted I watch it. He correctly explained that it wasn’t about the trial but the makings of the man, the trial, the reaction and the fall out itself. The trial is a small part at the end. By then, you will see it, possibly, in a more comprehensive light. You might see it, as I did. It’s okay if you don’t. But please share your thoughts if you’ve watched already or after you do.