The first page of the website will explore issues of media and race in the Los Angeles Riots. It is concerned with the pluralistic facets of urban life in Los Angeles that developed in the decades following World War II. It considers the riots following the beating of Rodney King and acquittal of his assailants as a matter shaped by perspectives from urban and suburban peoples. It examines the impact of these perspectives and the change that the LA riots did and did not bring.

On the second page, the website dives into the trial itself, and why it ended with a “not guilty” verdict. Why did the “trial of the century” end the way it did? How did the jury come to its decision so quickly, and what factors contributed to their decision?

Due to heightened racial tensions in regard to the LAPD’s treatment of African Americans in the wake of the LA Riots, and O.J.’s elite status as both a successful black man and a football hero, the jury in the O.J. Simpson trial was predisposed towards a “not guilty” verdict. 

The website looks at the trial through the lens of some of its most key individuals: Mark Fuhrman, Johnnie Cochran, Chris Darden, and the jurors. It explores how racial tensions from the Rodney King beatings connect Fuhrman to the trial, and how Johnnie Cochran takes advantage of them. It talks about how Chris Darden opposes Johnnie Cochran, but is alienated by some members of the African-American Community. Finally, it explains how the jury formed, and why their particular composition was excellent for the defense.

The website looks at the trial through the lens of some of its most key individuals: Mark Fuhrman, Johnnie Cochran, Chris Darden, and the jurors. It explores how racial tensions from the Rodney King beatings connect Fuhrman to the trial, and how Johnnie Cochran takes advantage of them. It talks about how Chris Darden opposes Johnnie Cochran, but is alienated by some members of the African-American Community. Finally, it explains how the jury formed, and why their particular composition was excellent for the defense.

On the final page, the website explores the ramifications and lessons learned from the O.J. Simpson trial through the lens of Professor Gerald Uelmen’s 1996 speech entitled, “The Five Hardest Lessons from the O.J. Trial.”  Uelmen, who came up with the catch phrase, “If it doesn’t fit, you can’t acquit,” developed five lessons with no simple solutions:  first, we all have tinted lenses, but we don’t all wear blinders; second, bad journalism drives out the good; third, money makes a difference; fourth, garbage in is garbage out; and fifth, racism is alive and well in America and so is denial.

In analyzing each lesson, the webpage examines what and how well the country has learned from the lessons.  From the increased use of jury consultants, to cameras in the courtroom, to a battle for more equitable representation for the poor, to improved DNA labs, to the role of race in America, the website’s final page paints a mixed picture of the country’s ability to learn from the O.J. trial.  In an email to the webpage’s author, Professor Uelmen claims that, “The lessons learned are even more valuable today, because advances in technology and communication have only magnified the human foibles that distorted the events of the O.J. trial.”