Walk down South Bundy Drive in Brentwood today and it’s surprisingly quiet. The trees are lush. The condos look expensive. But back in June 1994, this patch of Los Angeles pavement became the most scrutinized square footage on the planet. When you look at the OJ Simpson crime scene, you aren't just looking at a double homicide. You’re looking at the exact moment the American legal system shifted on its axis.
Blood. Lots of it.
The scene at 875 South Bundy was grisly. Nicole Brown Simpson lay near the gate, her throat cut so deeply she was nearly decapitated. Nearby, Ron Goldman’s body was slumped against a fence, his hands showing defensive wounds that proved he’d fought like hell for his life. It was a chaotic, narrow walkway. And yet, the prosecution’s "mountain of evidence" eventually dissolved into a puddle of doubt.
How does that happen?
The Initial Discovery and the Trail of Red
It started with a dog. A barking Akita with bloody paws led neighbors to the bodies just after midnight. When LAPD officers arrived, they found a literal trail of breadcrumbs—except the crumbs were drops of Type A-negative blood.
The OJ Simpson crime scene actually spanned two locations: Nicole’s condo and OJ’s estate at Rockingham.
Investigators found a left-hand Aris Isotoner glove at the feet of the victims. Later, Detective Mark Fuhrman claimed to find the matching right-hand glove behind a guest house at Simpson’s property. This was the "smoking gun" that turned into a backfire. The defense later argued that the glove was planted, citing Fuhrman’s history of racist remarks. Honestly, whether it was planted or just poorly handled, the damage was done.
The blood trail at Bundy led away from the bodies toward the back alley. Drops were found to the left of shoe prints. Forensic experts later noted that OJ had a cut on his left middle finger. It seemed like a slam dunk. Simple math, right?
Not quite.
Blood on the Gate and the Missing Vials
You've probably heard of EDTA. It’s a preservative used in lab blood vials to keep the samples from clotting.
During the trial, the defense team—the "Dream Team"—pointed out that EDTA was found in blood stains on the back gate at the OJ Simpson crime scene and on the socks found in OJ’s bedroom. Their argument was genius in its simplicity: If the blood came from OJ’s body during a struggle, it shouldn't have lab preservatives in it. If it has preservatives, a cop must have taken it from a vial and wiped it on the scene.
The prosecution countered that EDTA is found in small amounts in the human body and in various household products. But for a jury already skeptical of the LAPD, it was a seed of doubt that grew into a forest.
📖 Related: Joe and Kristine Elliott with Baby: What Really Happened Behind the Scenes
Then there was the issue of the missing blood. Nurse Thano Peratis drew about 8cc of blood from OJ for the investigation. However, the records only accounted for about 6cc. Where did the other 2cc go? The defense suggested it was used to "pepper" the crime scene.
Sloppy Footsteps and Contamination
The LAPD’s handling of the OJ Simpson crime scene is basically a "what-not-to-do" manual for modern forensics.
Lead investigators didn't wear booties. They walked through the blood. They covered Nicole’s body with a blanket from inside her house, which experts say probably contaminated the scene with outside fibers. One criminalist, Dennis Fung, admitted under cross-examination that he handled evidence without changing gloves. He even placed blood swabs in plastic bags instead of paper, which can cause moisture to build up and degrade DNA.
The jury didn't see high-tech science. They saw a comedy of errors.
The footprints were another mess. There were bloody prints made by size 12 Bruno Magli shoes—a rare, expensive Italian brand. Simpson denied ever owning "those ugly shoes." Years later, photos surfaced of him wearing them at a Buffalo Bills game, but during the criminal trial, the lack of a physical pair of shoes in OJ's closet made the evidence feel theoretical rather than literal.
💡 You might also like: Central Cee Before Fame: What Really Happened in Shepherd’s Bush
Why the Science Failed to Convince
In 1994, DNA was the new kid on the block.
The prosecution spent weeks on grueling, technical testimony about RFLP and PCR testing. It was boring. It was dense. The jury’s eyes glazed over. Meanwhile, Johnnie Cochran was speaking in poetry. "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."
The OJ Simpson crime scene was a biological goldmine, but the chain of custody was a disaster. If you can't prove the blood wasn't tampered with from the moment it left the pavement to the moment it hit the lab, the DNA results don't matter. It’s like having a 5-star meal served on a dirty trash can lid. No one’s going to eat it.
The defense also focused on the "Mark Fuhrman factor." By turning the trial into a referendum on the LAPD’s racism, they made the physical evidence at the crime scene secondary to the social context of Los Angeles just two years after the Rodney King riots.
The Bronco and the Rockingham Evidence
The "scene" wasn't just at Bundy. It extended to the white Ford Bronco.
Inside the vehicle, investigators found traces of blood from OJ, Nicole, and Ron Goldman. To a scientist, this is the "unbroken circle." To the defense, this was more evidence of a frame-up. They argued that the Bronco had been sitting in an unsecured police lot for days and that anyone could have smeared blood inside.
At the Rockingham estate, a pair of dark socks was found at the foot of OJ's bed. These socks had Nicole’s blood on them. But again, the defense pointed out that the blood had soaked through from one side of the sock to the other in a way that suggested the sock was flat when the blood was applied—not on a human foot.
Actionable Takeaways: How to View the Case Today
Looking back at the OJ Simpson crime scene 30 years later, we can see how much forensics has evolved. If this happened today, the digital footprint alone—cell tower pings, GPS from the Bronco, Ring doorbell cameras—would have changed everything.
If you're a true crime enthusiast or a student of law, here is how to process the evidence:
- Study the Chain of Custody: The OJ trial is the best example of why how evidence is collected is more important than what the evidence is. Always look for the gaps in the timeline between collection and the lab.
- Analyze the Intersection of Race and Law: You can't understand the crime scene without understanding 1990s Los Angeles. Context often outweighs content in a jury trial.
- Look at the Civil Trial: If you're frustrated by the criminal verdict, read the transcripts from the 1997 civil trial. The burden of proof was lower (preponderance of evidence vs. beyond a reasonable doubt), and the "missing" Bruno Magli shoe photos were finally introduced.
- Forensic Advancements: Research how modern "touch DNA" differs from the 1994 methods. Today, even a few skin cells left on a gate would be enough to build a profile, likely bypassing the need for large blood samples that are easier to contest.
The Bundy walkway has been remodeled. The address was even changed to discourage tourists. But the ghosts of that crime scene remain the foundation of how we understand celebrity, justice, and the fallibility of science in the American courtroom.