Could knife provide fresh DNA evidence in O.J. Simpson case?
Police in Los Angeles are examining a knife that may 鈥� or may not 鈥� be evidence related the trial of O.J. Simpson two decades ago, over the murder of his ex-wife and her friend.
The knife was recovered within the last month, according to a police statement Friday, handed over by a retired Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officer, who said he had been given the item by a construction worker claiming to have found it during the demolition of Mr. Simpson鈥檚 house in 1998.
The revelation raises a multitude of questions, such as why the item has been handed in now, after so many years, what impact it could have on the case, and what evidence could possibly be gleaned from it.
鈥淐ould it still contain forensic evidence of value? Yes,鈥澛爏ays James Adcock of the Center for the Resolution of Unresolved Crime (CRUC), in a telephone interview with 海角大神.聽鈥淚t depends on where it was, how it was handled, where it was stored.鈥澛�
The knife is currently being examined by LAPD鈥檚 forensics lab, but observers wonder why it has taken so long for the ex-officer concerned to hand it over, pointing to how the timing coincides with the airing of a TV show, "American Crime Story: The People v. O.J. Simpson."
The L.A. police spokesman, Capt. Andrew Neiman, himself cast doubt on the veracity of the claims, saying it has yet to be determined 鈥渨hether or not this actual piece of evidence is in fact evidence or it鈥檚 鈥�.
Moreover, it is not the first time a knife purportedly linked to the case has emerged, the murder weapon never having been found during the initial investigation.
But the police are nonetheless still interested in potential evidence, as the case remains open: 鈥淯nless there鈥檚 an actual arrest or conviction to prove that we have actually closed the case, cases [such as the O.J. Simpson and other murder cases or robbery cases]聽remain open,鈥� explained Captain Neiman.
So, what is the likelihood of the knife yielding evidence, if indeed it was related to the murders?
鈥淒NA only solves about 30 percent of all cases. Period. No more,鈥� Dr. Adcock of CRUC tells the Monitor. 鈥淏ut there have been cases decades old where we鈥檝e found evidence. There always is that potential.鈥�
鈥淭he knife could hold some DNA, or even a latent fingerprint,鈥� continues Adcock.聽鈥淏ut just because someone鈥檚 DNA is there, doesn鈥檛 mean they鈥檙e guilty. DNA can get there in numerous ways.鈥�
In addition, in a study published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences in 2014, it was found that 鈥渘ew information from witnesses or information from new witnesses鈥� were the .
Yet Simpson could not be charged again with these murders, as he has already been tried and acquitted 鈥� the double jeopardy legal standard applies 鈥� but this appears to make little difference to public interest in the case, with people still fascinated by every twist and turn, even 20 years later.
鈥淭his really was 鈥榯he trial of the century,鈥� but that was largely down to the media,鈥� says Adcock. 鈥淚t was the start of court TV in the United States.鈥�
