Evaluation of the O.J. Simpson trial
Beech weighs in on the O.J. Simpson trial. He upholds the supremacy of the law. Because of race, the ruling in Simpson's case comes under scrutiny by the media. Beech argues that the law should be binding and sufficient. He discusses the media's role in heightening racial tensions so that more advertisements can be shown.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Harvey E. Beech, September 25, 1996. Interview J-0075. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- ANITA FOYE:
-
So, since you didn't think that you wanted to be a judge, what
was the highest level you wanted to go to in the legal profession?
- HARVEY E. BEECH:
-
Practicing law. That I think I achieved. In everyday cases, in all kinds
of cases. I, you say what is your specialty? Law. I wouldn't
bother the intrinsic things about business and corporate law or
anything, but the general practice, I handled personal injury cases for
years. Criminal cases for awhile, and when we got in a partnership, we
divided it all, but practicing law is a challenging thing to anybody.
And being a judge wouldn't fit me at all. Because the first
thing, I don't think God has endowed me with the power to
judge anything, about anything.
- ANITA FOYE:
-
So you didn't have a special area of law that you liked
better? For example--?
- HARVEY E. BEECH:
-
Personal injury, finally. For the last ten years of my practice,
that's all I did. With Mr. Pollock, Don Pollock who went to
law school at Chapel Hill, under my encouragement. And Morehouse, by the
way, under my encouragement. And Paul Jones, who is now a judge, I
introduced to the court the other day. He went to Central. And he works
with me. And Don Pollock.
The criminal, the criminal, the most interesting part about the practice
is criminal law; it's more intriguing than any other. And,
you know, you're looking at justice as it is, and you
don't get--a lot of people say did you win the case or did
you lose the case. You never win a case or lose a case, the case is won
or lost depending on what your client did or did not do. And the client
is entitled to everything the law says.
This is what disturbs me about O. J. Simpson's trial. They
keep on talking about what happened in his case. It bothers me as a
lawyer. I don't have a whole lot of feeling for O. J. one way
or the other. But I can say this: he was tried by the system, and he was
found not guilty. Now, that should be the end of that. He is not guilty
under law. Nobody said a thing in Mississippi when Emmett Till was
killed, and the Klan was tried and couldn't find them, and
tried them and set them loose and then, and all that kind of excuses
about even trying them. Nobody said anything about it.
- ANITA FOYE:
-
How did you feel when the media turned it into a race issue?
- HARVEY E. BEECH:
-
Well, I felt as I feel now. I felt the same way, that if they
can't win--. They would have been pleased by the fact that if
he were convicted and sentenced. So, the media is looking for things to
excite people by. And I guess it's a business deal, too. The
more attention they get, the more people interested in what they show,
then the more advertisements they get, you know. That's part
of the business game. So, you know, I can see their motive. Their motive
is making money by selling a product, and selling a product is to get
people excited enough to look. They
don't bother me one way or the other. What I'm
saying is O. J. was tried by the rules that we set down; he was found
not guilty by the rules, now let's get on to something else.
And I don't have a whole lot of love for
him, one way or the other. OK?