THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, October 6, 1995 TAG: 9510060005
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Short : 39 lines
Of all the opinions circulating regarding the O.J. Simpson verdict, staff writer Charlise Lyles' (``A justice to make up for past injustices,'' Oct. 4) is the most reckless and reprehensible I have come across.
Although I vehemently disagree with them, there are people who truly believe O.J. was innocent or that there was at least reasonable doubt of his guilt. Lyles, on the other hand, claims neither. ``If ever a man was guilty of murder,'' she stated, ``Orenthal James Simpson is.'' Yet in the same breath, she says, ``The O.J. verdict is justice.'' Since when is it justice to set a cold-blooded murderer free?
Lyles believes the verdict is a collective testimony to the African-American experience and that it brought justice to compensate for ``every black neck ever hanged on a tree branch . . . every African American who ever died mysteriously in police custody . . . every black who ever faced an all-white jury and lost.''
While racism and police corruption are serious problems that need to be addressed, this trial was not the forum in which to do so. This trial was not supposed to be about avenging past or present racist injustice; it was supposed to be about avenging the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Neither Mark Fuhrman, the LAPD nor the judicial system were supposed to be on trial; it was supposed to be O.J. Simpson.
Those who share Ms. Lyles' opinion (including, apparently, the jury), propagate the very racism they profess to hate. They contribute to the very injustice they seek to stamp out. And the only one who wins is O.J. Simpson.
KAREN GULBRANSON
Virginia Beach, Oct. 4, 1995 by CNB