One of the major problems that arose during the OJ Simpson Murder trial had to do with the bloody glove that had allegedly been found at the crime scene. On June 15, 1995, Simpson’s defense attorney Johnnie Cochran goaded assistant prosecutor Christopher Darden into asking Simpson to put on the leather glove that was found at the scene of the crime. The prosecution had earlier decided against asking Simpson to try on the gloves because the glove had been soaked in blood (according to prosecutors) from Simpson, Brown and Goldman, and frozen and unfrozen several times. Darden was advised by Clark and other prosecutors not to ask Simpson to try on the glove, but to argue through experts that in better condition, the glove would fit. Instead, Darden decided to have Simpson try on the glove. The leather glove seemed too tight for Simpson to put on easily, especially over the latex gloves he wore underneath.
It was then believed that the prosecution in the Simpson case had manipulated the evidence in their case against Simpson.
This does not mean that Simpson did not commit the crime, but sometimes, police and prosecutors do cheat to secure convictions and sometimes, this can lead to innocent people being convicted for crimes they did not commit.
In Santa Clara County, California, the District Attorney prosecutor in the Todd Burpee sexual assault case, assistant district attorney James Leonard is believed to have manipulated evidence in other court cases leading to innocent people being wrongfully convicted and possibly, guilty people getting away with Heinous crimes.
It is therefore imperative that the Burpee case and other cases handled by the same prosecutor are carefully scrutinized to detect patterns of prosecutorial misconduct.
Assuming O.J. Simpson was guilty, why did the gloves not fit? What’s the argument against Johnny Cochran’s famous argument, “If the gloves don’t fit, you must acquit”?
Ask them to review the Todd Burpee case.
( Santa Clara County Superior Court Docket Number: BB730348 / APPELATE COURT DOCKET NUMBER: H034797 )
Since prosecutorial misconduct in these Santa Clara County Superior Court Cases may effect judicial proceedings on the appellate court level, it may also be a good idea to contact California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal at firstname.lastname@example.org
and also the California Supreme Court:
Supreme Court of California
350 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102-4797
Office of the Clerk
Please mention that the same prosecutor, James Leonard is believed to have tampered with evidence in other court cases such as this one.
The following video involves another court case in Santa Clara County, California which was allegedly mishandled by assistant Santa Clara County District Attorney: James Leonard:
After the verdict, a tearful Chekita Griggs sat in the plaza outside the Hall of Justice in San Jose.
It was a lonely place for her and her daughter, inhabited only by the sounds of rushing traffic and the mother and daughter’s mourning. There were few people there to comfort them, except for Burpee’s defense attorney, Daniel Olmos, on his face etched the gravity of the sentence his client could receive.
“My son is not the monster the D.A. portrayed him as,” said Griggs, who acknowledged that her son was involved in the assault crimes and has had problems with anger management. But she remained unconvinced of his guilt on the sexual charges, however, saying her son “is not a sexual predator.”
“It’s the worst nightmare for a parent. My heart of course goes out for the victim as well. But my son is a victim, too,” she said sobbing.
“The worst punishment he has is beating up on himself,” she said.
Griggs said she wanted people to know that her son had made great strides in his life and was on a good track before something went wrong.
“My son is somebody,” she said, expressing the pain of reading media reports that portrayed him only as a criminal and not as a person”