OJ Simpson----Guilty or Not?

I was reading a book about true crime cases and when it got to the OJ case, I thought that I was sure OJ was guilty and all the evidence was overwhelming. I was wrong.
I think it is more than likely that OJ was involved, I am practically sure of it. His disappearances and strange behavior that night were never explained. But I think the LAPD did plant evidence. And if I had been in the jury, I do not think I could convict on the prosecutions evidence even though I know he is guilty.

Some of OJ's blood was found on a fence and on a pair of socks 3 weeks after the crime. But it contained blood preservatives that the LAPD uses when storing samples. This leads me to believe it was planted. And 1.5 mililiters of OJ's blood sample were missing, out of the LAPD's sample. strange

just got lucky via inept prosecution...

But that doesn't excuse the LAPD from being a racist gestapo squad.

there are some bad ones, but unfortunately, they get most of the press

I didn't want to believe it, but after watching almost all of the trial, I believe he was. I think someone helped him clean up things at his house, but not with the killings.

The guy's still got a few golf courses to check yet. He hasn't given up on finding the REAL killers, and I haven't given up on OJ.

That was just another sad domestic violence case which happened to involve famous people and money for expensive lawyers.

Now we have to say "Orange Juice".
No more OJ.
bummer

But good for many bad jokes nonetheless.

I agree with the NG group. There were so many "accidental" LAPD screw-ups that something was not right with that case. What the motivation for that was, I have no clue.

Of course, a trifiling little thing like the lives of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman wouldn't inhibit the LAPD at all.

As for OJ's part in it, that's up for grabs, anything from no complicity whatsoever to a cool-headed homicidal spree. But nobody is likely to find out now short of a deathbed confession.

--bkl

I think he is guilty. I, too, believe evidence was planted.

OJ may have done it but because the cops screwed it up with their illegal immoral attempt to frame him, he is innocent according the court. To me that means he is innocent.
When this happened I did not understand the reason why AA coworkers felt so happy over his aquital. I saw the division along racial lines when the verdict was announced and it really upset me. Now I understand that the reason for their happiness was that the system is racist and at least this one time, the cops didn't get away with it.
BTW I am not saying he didn't do it. We will never know that. However he is innocent according the to law and that is good enough for me.

not innocent. He is a wife beating asshole who got lucky that a few corrupt cops tried to strengthen their case against him.
He was missing at the time of the murders, and there was more evidence that wasn't planted, but the planted evidence looks really bad.

maybe it makes you feel better to spout angry whiteguy right wing talking points...but either way he is innocent according to the law.

He could not be found guilty, but I think he is far from innocent.

"angry white guy right wing talking points'---whatever you say, Captain. You are a real winner, aren't you?

the cops went from wanting his autograph to planting evidence. Please.

PLEASE yourself :eyes:

he is 'not guilty' according to the law. Big difference from being 'innocent'. The jury had no choice. Sloppy, sloppy police work.

you are talking semantics here. This is the type of talk the right wing regurgitated endlessly about Clinton.

This has nothing to do with Clinton, Bush, Rush Limbaugh, RW, LW, communism or politics at all.

And he is right---being found 'not guilty' means the state could not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That does not mean innocence.
And he did lose a civil case that ruled that he was likely the killer.

handling of the evidence. Also, I was never sure that he had the time to do it. I watched the entire trial and it was the first time that I was really aware of a real bias in the media. The defense would make a huge point that pointed to his innocence and then I would read the paper and it corresponded in no way at all to what had happened at the trial. Then, of course, came Clinton and the right wing media went wild.

The LA DA should NEVER try to frame a guilty man!

I honestly beleive evidence was planted to bolster the case, and acquittal was the reasonable solution. The DA would have had enough evidence to convict if they had not planted, so they shot themselves in the foot.

they planted extra evidence and it bit them in the ass

he did that.
killed them most cruelly and violently.
the conspiracy that the defense imagined as a boogey man could not haver existed....it would have taken legions of cops, many of whom had never met each other, to all agree within a few hours (perhaps less) that "Hey, we got a chance to screw Simpson! Let's go for it."
Admittedly, there may be SOME l.a. cops who would go along with that, but somewhere along the way, wouldnt ONE l.a. cop have some pangs of guilt.

still, i think at least a couple of cops fiddled with the evidence....and when you fiddle with the evidence, a judge is obligated to throw it out.

And the prosecution blundered again and again. ANYBODY from Minnesota knows that once you get leather gloves wet (be it snow, sleet, ice or blood) and dry them out they will shrink, stiffen and become almost impossible to put on without tugging them up the wrist inch by inch.
they agreed they would NOT ask Simpson to try on the glove, and then did so anyway. it was a monster blow to the prosecution.

More on the DNA evidence- the samples from the crime scene that alleged contains Simpson's DNA was missing a custody seal. A custody seal is kind of like the tamper-proof seal on medicine bottles, only more so. A missing custody seal isn't evidence of an inept forensics unit, it says to me that it was purposefully tampered with. Couple that with the fact that a lead investigator that testified for the prosecution was a perjuring racist and I say that's more than reasonable doubt.

Way too many unanswerable questions about his whereabouts, the cut on his hand, etc., not to mention his behavior toward Nicole previously.

It's the ability to buy a defense that got him off.

Nicole's chicken restaurants were used as money laudering front for same. Tied to Chicago cocaine trafficers and Yakuza.

Google it!

this was not a pro hit. It was a rage killing. The slashes to Nicole's face and the extreme overkill make it likely the killer knew her and was acting out of rage (profiling 101). Goldman looked like he had stumbled onto the scene and then fought with the killer but was overpowered.
The mob would have killed with silenced .22 pistols most likely. They don't usually go on rage killings with a short knife.

I do think that Homer was guilty. How disgusting that they pinned it on the baby!

Well, probably.

for example, they found blood on the lightbulb inside the bronco's interior light. that's cuz he had unscrewed it so it wouldn't come on when he got out or got back into his car. later he screwed it in again and left the blood there. that's apparently a common ploy.

they held back on some evidence (such as the above) because they didn't want it to look like they were coming on too strong.

the photo Mark Fuhrman has of the empty Swiss Army knife box that was found at O.J's house? Box was not collected as evidence and later 'disappeared'. A reporter did a story on it and had a prominent forensic pathologist examine a similar knife and the autopsy photos of Goldman. She pulled out one blade at a time and asked "could this have caused the wound?" referring to the stab wounds. One by one, he discounted each blade until she came to the sawblade. He agreed it could have caused the wound. Then they examined the photo of long scratches on Goldman's face. The photo was projected on to a screen at life size. Holding the blade up to the photo it appeared to me that the teeth of the blade lined up perfectly with the scratches. Only saw the show once, can't remember reporter's name, pathologist was Werner Spitz I believe.

he is *SO* F***ING GUILTY.

n/t

with two clear pieces of knowledge. 1. The possibility of a LAPD frame up, cover up and/or planting of evidence is next to zero. 2. Simpson, the murdering S.O.B, found not guilty in criminal court, without the slightest doubt killed Nicole and Ron.

I couldn't get past page 30 in that book. Bugliosi kept getting sidetracked into rantin about the lack of good customer service in restaurants and other such Limbagh-alike nonsense. He sounded like a grumpy old republican grumbling about his incompetent butler. Maybe there's some good points in there, but the tone REALLY turned me off.

I think he's guilty, but I also think the LAPD is corrupt, and fascistic and not above planting or tampering with evidence.

Let's also not forget that the distraction of the OJ scandal in the media also helped to coverup the repub takeover of the House in 1994, and Gingrich's strongarming of the voting bloc.

distracted at times and wanders off but his research and objectivity
is unbeatable. Bugliosi, being the good Democrat that he is, is OK with me. We should remember as well that in the second trial brought by the Goldman family Simpson was found liable for (their) deaths. I suspect Petrocelli used "Outrage" as template to get Simpson found liable.

From what i have read, the liklihood of planted evidence is rather high, particularly the blood on the gate and on the socks, which had traces of blood preservative used by the LAPD in it. And there is 1.5 mililiters of missing OJ blood.

I still cannot say OJ is innocent, but the prosecution's case was fatally flawed.

"OJ didn't get off because he's black. He got off because he's RICH! If he had been a bus driver, he now be known as Orenthal the Murderin' Bus Driver"

That is the problem with cops like Furman.
He made a habit of fabricating evidence to frame black people,
and had publicly and proudly admitted to doing so.

With him on the case, we cannot trust the "evidence".

include the attempted flight that was not entered into evidence. I agree Furman discredited the case, but the blood was everywhere and no way one mililiter in dispute was spread around the socks, the house and his car.

someone is even Godlike enough to know how all other DUers would weigh in. Apparently all the talk of our system of justice being highjacked by the right is rank hypocrisy. Justice and the law only apply to people you all think are worthy.

snobs there are here! It is amazing that someone is godlike enough to declare that we do not believe in justice because we disagree!

eom

That's a felony. The bum should have gone to prison.

And there should have been the mother of all investigations to catch whoever else participated in or turned a blind eye to the blatant planting of evidence that went on in this case.

If we started sending bad cops to jail for perjury and planting evidence, there'd be a lot fewer innocents in prison and a lot fewer innocents executed.

As for Simpson, I think he probably did it, but if I'd been on the jury, I would have had to vote to acquit -- because once you know some evidence was planted, any evidence could have been planted.

what a complete screwed up job they did.

It was well documented at the time.

I'm surprised you don't remember.

the murderer)

He might have killed them. He might not have. He was found not guilty in a count of law. End of story for me.

I am grateful that he was hit with the civil penalties. Let him remain a banished jerk living under a cloud of suspician.... too bad the same thing could not have happened to T Cullen Davis.