NFT: OJ Simpon - Your Verdict

but Robert Blake? Oh, Baretta did that shit.

Seriously though, I don't see how any reasonable person can think he wasn't guilty. The amount of evidence pointing toward him, combined with motive that only he had - just can't find any way to give a glimmer of hope that he wasn't guilty.

as guilty could be, not a doubt in my mind. She was dead woman walking for a long time before he finally snapped.

Him not being guilty is outside of the realm of possibility.

Travolta's portrayal of Shapiro in the show caused me to spend a good deal of time thinking if this is what he's like he's a irritating person.

The evidence, motive, history, etc... is staggering. Even the bias should have been against him, he fled for fucks sake.

In comment 12798664 Patrick77 said:

Quote:

The evidence, motive, history, etc... is staggering. Even the bias should have been against him, he fled for fucks sake.

He is in jail for another crime, I think?

In comment 12798664 Patrick77 said:

Quote:

The evidence, motive, history, etc... is staggering. Even the bias should have been against him, he fled for fucks sake.

Uh...OJ is very much in jail.

.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1797248.If_I_Did_It - ( New Window )

to decide it was not "beyond a reasonable doubt". Bur remember, the jury in the civil lawsuit with a "preponderance of the evidence" standard found him guilty.

He was guilty.

well, he is in jail. just for something else.

I think he definitely did it, but his lawyers were better than the prosecution team.

then you don't think anybody ever did anything.

In comment 12798664 Patrick77 said:

Quote:

The evidence, motive, history, etc... is staggering. Even the bias should have been against him, he fled for fucks sake.

He's not in jail for one reason and one reason only. He was rich. He got the rich man's verdict because he could afford a legal team that could muddy the waters and just throw so much up there no one could tell what was true or not. That along with the DA Garcetti moving the trial to downtown LA from Brentwood sealed the verdict.

Him being in jail for stupid things he did after this doesn't really show the justice system worked in any capacity.

very well done, looking forward to the next episode

Got dragged into watching by the wife, some pretty solid performances.

My biggest issue, and it has nothing to do with the program, is that I had repressed all memory of the fucking hangers on like Faye Resnick and Cato. It annoys me that I know who those people are.

Not sure why Travolta decided to play Shapiro gay?

that's the ticket.

.

was it confirmed that it got wet and shrunk? I can't really remember.

In comment 12798719 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

was it confirmed that it got wet and shrunk? I can't really remember.

I thought it looks as if OJ was extending his hand, widening his finges if you will pretending, making it not fit..

My brothers bat shit crazy ex fiance' believed him to be innocent.. lol.. that ended that...

In comment 12798719 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

was it confirmed that it got wet and shrunk? I can't really remember.

That's always been the theory. Also, OJ tried it on over latex gloves and didn't really make an effort to fit into it, and there's a belief that he stopped taking arthritis medication for a time so his hands would swell up a bit.

to either be seriously stupid or have such a strong bias to repress any logical thinking.

How you determined which category you're in?

there was something like OJ intentionally didn't take his meds for arthritis and his hand was swollen, but I could be mixing up speculation with an actual theory.

The doctor credited with discovering CTE recently said that he would bet his medical license that OJ had CTE.

but how awful must that whole ordeal have been for the Goldman family. Not only enduring the terrible tragedy of losing Ron, but having the public view him as "the other victim" the whole time in the celebrity saga. During depositions for the civil trial, Fred Goldman and OJ were sitting at the same table - I'm surprised he didn't sneak a gun in and shoot him.

but his lawyers did a great job of obfuscation and misdirection...

It's obvious to all. His Lawyers were great, but OJ still fucked things up after that.

The people that don't think he did this are the same ones who believe 9/11 was a government conspiracy and Columbine never happened.

If you're are innocent why are you driving around with a gun to your head while I am trying to watch the NBA finals? Remorse ... that's why.

I am going to refrain from name calling but, that jury got it wrong.

Doesn't matter (I guess it does) - he is where he belongs.

In comment 12798664 Patrick77 said:

Quote:

The evidence, motive, history, etc... is staggering. Even the bias should have been against him, he fled for fucks sake.

He is in jail - just not for murder.

In comment 12798681 Patrick77 said:

Quote:

Him being in jail for stupid things he did after this doesn't really show the justice system worked in any capacity.

Sorry Patrick - I answered your other post before reading this one.

but his defense team did a great job of mucking up what should have been a slam dunk trial.

Despite a bungled investigation and prosecution, everything points to his guilt. He had motive, he had opportunity, he had no alibi, and the DNA ties him to the scene in a hundred different ways.

It's utterly implausible that anyone else committed the crime. And if a jury of OJ's actual "peers" (wealthy Brentwood residents) had heard the case instead of a jury of people who idolized him, he'd have been convicted. The fact that they deliberated for only 4 hours and came up with a not-guilty verdict tells you they didn't understand the critical facts of the case, or even try to.

Why not?

In comment 12798828 Scyber said:

Quote:

Why not?

I don't think anyone is saying CTE means OJ wasn't guilty.

But I do believe as we learn more and more about it and who had it there is going to be a disturbing trend of changing behavior and horrible actions.

without a doubt.

In comment 12798731 Big Al said:

Quote:

to either be seriously stupid or have such a strong bias to repress any logical thinking.

About a year after the trial there was a TV show that assembled about 8 members of the jury and they were presented with a number of things they had no answer for but still insisted their verdict was correct. That jury was a pretty good combination of the two things that I cited above.

but I also think the verdict was correct. You can't explain away the glove. Either the police planted it (most likely imo) or the prosecution just messed up big time. That glove would not have fit a 12 year old, let alone a man OJ's size. He was obviously not wearing it when he committed the murder. So someone dabbed it in the blood and put it in the driveway. No way in hell someone gets rid of the murder weapon so expertly that it is never found and then drops a bloody glove on his well-lit path.

The stuff about it shrinking in the rain is laughable.

I don't know for certain what it was made out of. But anyone who has used gloves of various types can understand how a glove covered in a liquid (blood, water) that then sat for X amount of time would likely be a hard fit. Or how a person could make it appear to be a hard fit in front of a room of people pretty easily.

The whole trying on the glove was stupid to do.

In comment 12798634 YAJ2112 said:

Quote:

but Robert Blake? Oh, Baretta did that shit.

Thank you! I say "Oh, Baretta did that shit" all the time and no one ever gets it.

Quote:

Prosecutor: Mr. Chappelle, what would it take to convince you that R. Kelly is guilty? Dave Chappelle: Okay, I'd have to see a video of him singing "Pee On You," two forms of government ID, a police officer there to verify the whole thing, four or five of my buddies and Neal taking notes, and R. Kelly's grandma to confirm his identity. R. Kelly's Grandma: That's my Robert, always peeing on people.

If Ron Goldman had not, simply by chance, showed up that night, would there have been any murders?

I think not.

In comment 12798670 njm said:

Quote:

to decide it was not "beyond a reasonable doubt". Bur remember, the jury in the civil lawsuit with a "preponderance of the evidence" standard found him guilty. He was guilty.

I have always thought there was a misinterpretation of how the reasonable doubt argument was discussed by many. Personally I think the glove stuff was nonsense and breaks down under real analysis rather than some sound bite by a lawyer.

However if you have 20 facts pointing directly to guilt, finding reasonable doubt to 5 of them does not do away with the overwhelming case based on the other facts where you can only show unreasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt in one factor does not disprove that factor as wrong. You just dismiss it and look at everything else.

Sort of like saying you have a film of someone shooting someone and evidence that the weapon was bought by the shooter. Raising reasonable doubt about whether he actually bought the gun does not dismiss the film evidence.

I followed the trail and have no doubt

The glove should never have been the deciding factor in whether he was guilty or not. The DNA evidence tied him to the murders; that alone should have been enough. But he had great lawyers who argued that it was mishandled and got contaminated and the test results could not be trusted.

So there were several things that led to reasonable doubt.

but DNA evidence was really new to the general public then.

In comment 12798943 Stan in LA said:

Quote:

If Ron Goldman had not, simply by chance, showed up that night, would there have been any murders? I think not.

Yep, Goldman had one of the most tragic "wrong place, wrong time" instances you could ever imagine. If you put any credence into OJ's "If I Did It" book, he noticed there were candles lit in the house, then a good-looking 25-year-old shows up, and he went ballistic.

course.

DA Chris Darden was an idiot for expecting a defendant to cooperate with his glove demonstration. OJ was flexing his hand and when Darden pressed the issue, OJ growled, Darden cowered and stopped pressing.

Crime scene mismanaged. Strange procedural things like Detectives handling blood samples. Unprofessional conduct between DAs. Furman perjuring himself about matters unrelated to the trial.

Judge in over his head.

And, to call the jury defendant friendly is the understatement of the century. One juror attended the celebration afterwards - wtf?

He was guilty as guilty can be, but the blame can be spread around.

There were no other suspects - and never have been
OJ's DNA was at the crime scene
The cut on OJ's hand

And there is so much more eveidence

How bout the witnesses? Jill Shively nearly gets in a car accident with OJ minutes after the murder while he's driving from Nicole's house back to his - he even glares right at her so she can make a positive ID. Then she goes and sells her story to "Hard Copy" and the prosecution can't call her.

I've always been fascinated by the limo driver - imagine coming to the realization that you had a double-murderer in the backseat of your car just a few minutes after he did the deed, likely with bloody clothes and maybe a murder weapon in his possession at the time?

What a joke. It was a men's large.

It fits when you don't spread your fingers wide when you put it on.