SMITHSONIAN REJECTS OJ SUIT AS PART OF HISTORY
Posted on | March 4, 2010 | No Comments
From Dr Boyce Watkins – see the original post here
Remember the suit that O.J. Simpson wore when he was acquitted of murder in 1995? I’m sure you do. The images of O.J. breathing a sigh of relief after his acquittal were viewed all around the world. You probably remember exactly what you were doing at that precise moment, similar to the 911 attacks. Well, the Smithsonian Institute has announced that they do not want O.J.’s suit, claiming that it is “inappropriate for their collection.”
The announcement came after a 13-year legal fight over what to do with the suit. Since that time, it has been in the possession of Simpson’s former sports agent, Mike Gilbert. Fred Goldman, father of one of the men Simpson was accused of killing, has been fighting for the suit since the 1990s. Simpson told authorities that the suit was stolen from him.
Credit: AP
The suit was also part of the reason that Simpson is in prison right now. O.J. was arrested and convicted for an incident, where he robbed men in Las Vegas in order to reclaim memorabilia that he believed to be stolen. He’d been told that the suit was among the list of things being offered for sale.
The Smithsonian used these words on its website:
“The Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History will not be collecting O.J. Simpson’s suit. The decision was made by the museum’s curators together with the director.”
Gilbert, the man in possession of the suit, was disappointed by the decision of the Smithsonian:
“Whether we like it or not, it’s part of American history,” he said. “I’m disappointed that they didn’t wait to hear from me and consider my vision of how it should be displayed.”
Others weighed in on the decision, including Simpson’s attorney:
“I’m saddened by the fact that the foremost museum in America has refused this very important item in the history of American jurisprudence,” said Simpson’s attorney, Ronald P. Slates. “Regardless of one’s feelings about Mr. Simpson, his acquittal by a jury of his peers on Oct. 3, 1995, was of great significance and is widely talked about to this day.”
In this case, the Smithsonian may be wrong. There’s no denying that the O.J. Simpson case was arguably the most closely watched trial in American history. I can’t think of another trial that received this much attention, at least during the age of television. One can’t help but wonder if the Smithsonian is being unscholarly in its decision to pass up on the Simpson suit, since there is no denying Simpson’s relevance to American social, legal and racial history. This move reminds me of Time Magazine’s decision not to name Osama Bin Laden it’s Person of the Year, in spite of the fact that his attacks on the World Trade Center had such a dramatic impact on the global community. Instead, Time made the weak and easy choice of Rudolph Giuliani, shooting down its own journalistic integrity in the process.
The O.J. Simpson trial was yet another bellwether of American racial progress. The vast difference in perceptions between whites and blacks over this trial reminded us that we have a long way to go when it comes to achieving racial equity. What was most interesting about the trial was that even though Simpson was acquitted, America treated him like a guilty man: He was harassed everywhere he went, and people spoke about him as if he’d committed the crime. I would have sued the butts off of some of the major media outlets for their remarks.
Before the trial, Simpson was a regular in celebrity events and endorsements. Many felt that he’d abandoned the black community and most of us accepted that fact. But like Tiger Woods, America’s perception of Simpson as the dirty, evil black man with the audacity to hurt a beautiful white woman led to his fall from grace. Had Nicole Brown Simpson been black, the trial would not have made the news more than 3 or 4 times.
Comments
Leave a Reply