RIGHT OF CENTER: A GULF BETWEEN WHITES, BLACKS

I tapped my Webster's dictionary to search for the best word to describe my reaction to the verdict this week.

The entry for "consternation" comes pretty close: "Amazement or dismay that hinders or throws into confusion; to bewilder, alarm."

Unlike many who tried to analyze the jury's brief deliberation, I never wavered from my year-long belief that O.J. Simpson would be acquitted. The closing arguments, and Johnnie Cochran's dealing the ace-in-the-hole race card, only bolstered my belief that doubts and emotions would nullify the evidence against Simpson.

Jurors seemed to take the view that since a racist cop, Mark Fuhrman, was among the investigators who gathered the most damning evidence against Simpson, that evidence wasn't sufficient to convict.

The public's reaction, split largely on racial lines, reveals a gulf between white Americans, who generally trust our criminal justice system and are shocked when the guilty go free, and black Americans, who believe the system is so stacked against minorities that justice isn't a simple matter of finding, and then punishing, the guilty. Thus a juror can say after the verdict that she thought O.J. probably was guilty, but because the case was built on evidence gathered by a racist cop, he should go free. In other words, group identity trumps individual responsibility. Most black citizens agreed with the jurors.

The revelation of Mark Fuhrman's recorded racist remarks commanded more attention in the trial than the gory photographs of the slain victims. But why are we only allowed to be so horrified by white racism?

What about the kind of racism that prompts Cochran to hire Nation of Islam bodyguards on the day the verdict was read?

Through affirmative action programs that seek to redress past grievances, we tolerate reverse discrimination. We necessarily condemn white racism but continually condone prejudice against whites. Cochran's choice of bodyguards is akin to Marcia Clark hiring the Ku Klux Klan as bodyguards.

Most white Americans don't believe the evidence against Simpson stemmed from a conspiracy by a single, racist investigator. That investigator, Fuhrman, was so obtuse that he perjured himself by denying words he knew were on tape. Yet we're to believe he was clever enough to plant evidence, undetected by fellow cops, that would send a prominent, wealthy American hero to prison for the rest of his life.

White racism has that effect. It clouds reason. It was enough for the jury that Fuhrman was a bigot. It was the open door through which reasonable doubt could enter, ensuring Simpson would go free.

David Gelernter, an author and professor of computer science at Yale, describes the Fuhrman obsession in the most recent issue of National Review. "When you are a society that allows congressmen to be denounced as racists because they voted against some spending program or other, what do you call a man who really is a racist? An artichoke? The degradation of our language is one reason it has been so difficult to keep the Fuhrman affair in perspective. It is indeed an ugly thing to be a bigot and to fake evidence. Then again there are worse things, such as murdering your wife."

Of course, just because Fuhrman is a lout doesn't prove he planted evidence. But, as Gelernter writes, "certain journalists would like to treat the tapes as typical, not exceptional. 'Racism of a rogue officer,' the New York Times announces, licking its chops, 'casts suspicion on police nationwide.' How much consideration did it give to a headline along the lines of 'Murder of Mrs. Simpson casts suspicion on black males nationwide'?"

That race so dominated this trial is what is most consternating. It leaves unanswered the most important question: If O.J. didn't do it, who did?

Investigators spent a good deal of time gathering evidence in the case before they arrested Simpson. More evidence was gathered and analyzed in the trial's discovery phase. All the evidence points to Simpson as the murderer. But the jury says he's not guilty. Presumably, investigators and prosecutors are at ground zero, and we have simply another unsolved double murder in Los Angeles.

But if we assume Simpson really is the killer, we have something far worse. We have witnessed with alarm how the taint of color emphasis and quotaism have injected themselves into untold facets of our society, including the workplace, our schools and the government. Adding criminal justice to the growing sphere of society so tainted corrupts a system that, to work, must remain neutral on such issues.

Disregard for that neutrality not only jeopardizes the cause of justice, it foments further racial polarization in society.

~Jay Eastlick is the news editor of the Southeast Missourian.