From what I know of the facts of the trial, it was a little of both. The case is muddled, and we will never know the whole truth. There may be some evidence that the prosecutors and the defense attorneys each broke some of the rules.
This is a very subjective question to which people might have very different answers.
The basic difference between these two models is that the crime control model aims to maintain law and order while the due process model aims to prevent injustice and unfair treatment of defendants.
Some might argue that the Simpson case showed prosecutors using the crime control method. From this point of view, the prosecutors were willing to do anything to get the conviction. They were willing to do things like relying on Mark Fuhrman in order to convict Simpson. This would show them not really caring about Simpson's rights and hoping only to get a conviction.
However, this presumes that Simpson's rights were actually violated by Fuhrman or by other police actions. There are many who would not agree with this. Many people would argue that the prosecution did nothing wrong but that the jury was simply swayed by the defense's arguments.