Did Oj Do It?

Did OJ do it?

  • Yes, no doubt!

    Votes: 7 77.8%

  • No, my brother is innocent!

    Votes: 2 22.2%
  • Total voters
    9
Haich

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,758
IMG_3407.JPG
I recently watched The People V OJ again, starring Cuba Gooding Jr as OJ Simpson.

I wasn't around at the time of this trial but it was interesting to see just how much controversy it caused and it still divides people to this day.

Although some of the acting was dry (David Schwimmer) I learnt a lot about how the trial and have come to conclude that OJ DID IT!

What do you guys think?
 
rainerann

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
I was like in junior high when that happened. Gosh, that trial was ridiculous. They used to stream it live on some of the TV stations. I forget what channel it was on, but start to finish every day, you could watch it live.

They have the entire trial on YouTube it seems now. This is what I remember and then they would recap the highlights on the evening news. We only had one TV and no computer at the time, so I would have to watch a lot of this because my father was following this.


I never formed an opinion on whether he was guilty or innocent. It was so sensationalized and covered in news media, it was hard to tell what was real. Both legal teams became celebrities because of the trial and the news covered it too much to make a decision at the time is basically my conclusion.

One day they were talking about planting evidence, the next day they were talking about OJ being physically abusive to his wife when they were married. Back and forth, back and forth like gossip columnists rather than journalists. It was like listening to a rumor mill all day long and it went on forever. It was such a headache. I would call the coverage of the OJ trial something straight out of the MK Ultra handbook.

It would be interesting to see the movie. I don't know whether it would help to form a conclusion after all these years.
 
Haich

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,758
Yh it was sensationalised to the extreme. What got me was his blood was found in the bronco at the crime scene, there were black gloves too which he admitted were a gift from his wife, these too were covered in his blood and his wife and her lover's blood

Then the famous line was born 'if the glove doesn't fit you must acquit'. It was a complete circus and I feel for Marcia's team as they brought a lot of evidence on the table. Cochran really pissed me off, he tried to make a racial issue and even sent a team to redecorate OJ's house and remove any white women and replace it with African art and women. This was due to the jury's home visit, they were checking his home (no idea why) but ultimately the evidence was stacked against him

He even fled for hours on the motorway! Why would an innocent man flee?

His close friend Robert kardashian couldn't believe he got off lol


 
rainerann

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
I remember the debate over whether the glove was planted and whether Mark Fuhrman was corrupt. It was things like this that led to him being not guilty I think. That whole trial/investigation was a disaster. At the time, it did seem very possible that he was being framed because of things like this.

There were still many racial issues in law enforcement at the time. California may be a liberal state, but the police force has a strong history of racism and corruption demonstrated in videos taken of the police beating Rodney King and the riots that followed. California has always been kind of whitewashed. Most of the forced sterilizations during the Eugenics movement were done in California. There are dirty things that happen there that the media hides probably because it is where Hollywood is located. It's pretty weird really.

However, OJ was also a celebrity, so it did seem possible that the media was protecting him by saying that the glove was planted as well. It was just a bizarre trial.
 
TMT

TMT

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,201
I always felt that the OJ trial was a dry run test of reality TV programming.

I won't say if he did or didn't do it, but it was impossible for an honest trial after all that news coverage, weird times.
 
polymoog

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
8,216
when LAPD tainted the evidence, he had every right to have the case thrown out. i do wonder if the case dismissal was almost an act of compensation to the blacks in CA, since this was right after the reginald denny incident. i recall a poll that said most blacks felt he was innocent the whole time. i do not.
 
Etagloc

Etagloc

Superstar
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
5,291
I used to know someone who stole people's IPhones... he was actually in the local news because he got caught and his lawyer turned it into a race thing and said it was RACISM and the guy got off... but I was there when he was stealing IPhones and I saw him do it
 
S

sangreal

Newbie
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
4
i remember at the time of the trial i thought he was guilty based on the what the defense was using to make it seem like someone else did it plus him being black. but after all the stunts he pulled to land himself in prison and no other suspects id have to say he did do it.
 
Haich

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,758
O. J. Simpson:
The Timeline

The matching bloody gloves found at the murder scene and outside Simpson's home
9:36 P.M. Simpson, wearing a dark sweat suit, is seen by Kato Kaelin.

9:30-9:45 Charles Cale, walking his dog by Simpson's Rockingham residence, does not see Bronco.

10:02 Simpson attempts to call Paula Barbieri on the cell phone from his Bronco.

10:15 (prosecution)-10:40 (defense) Period during which murders took place.

10:22-10:30 Limo driver Allan Park, scheduled to take Simpson to airport, does not see Bronco on Rockingham.

10:40, 10:43, 10:49 Allan Park buzzes Simpson's intercom, but gets no response.

10:50 White or light bronco observed at the intersection of Bundy and Dorothy.

10:51 or 10:52 Kato Kaelin hears three thumps on the wall outside his room.

10:54 Allan Park sees a man wearing dark clothes, about 6-feet tall and 200 pounds, walk across the driveway of the Simpson residence.

10:55 Simpson lies to Allan Park.
 
Haich

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,758
Criminal Trial Evidence
1. The 9-1-1 call and the history of Simpson's violence directed at Nicole Brown.

2. Hair evidence: (1) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on cap at Bundy residence, (2) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on Ron Goldman's shirt.

3. Fiber evidence: (1) cotton fibers consistent with the carpet in the Bronco found on glove at Rockingham, (2) fibers consistent with the carpet from the Bronco found on cap at Bundy residence.

4. Blood evidence: (1) killer dropped blood near shoe prints at Bundy, (2) blood dropped at Bundy was of same type as Simpson's (about 0.5% of population would match), (3) Simpson had fresh cuts on left hand on day after murder, (4) blood found in Bronco, (5) blood found in foyer and master bedroom of Simpson home, (5) blood found on Simpson's driveway, (6) blood on socks in OJ's home matched Nicole's.

5. Glove evidence: (1) left glove found at Bundy and right glove found at Simpson residence are Aris Light gloves, size XL, (2) Nicole Brown bought pair of Aris Light XL gloves in 1990 at Bloomingdale's, (3) Simpson wore Aris Light gloves from 1990 to June, 1994.

6. Shoe evidence: (1) shoe prints found at Bundy were from a size 12 Bruno Magli shoe, (2) bloody shoe impression on Bronco carpet is consistent with a Magli shoe, (3) Simpson wore a size 12 shoe.

7. Other evidence: (1) flight in Bronco, (2) strange reaction to phone call informing him of Nicole Brown's death, etc.
 
Haich

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,758
Incriminating Facts that the Criminal Jury Was Not Permitted or Able to Consider


1. Simpson did not testify at his criminal trial. Defense attorneys will almost always call as a witness an articulate client that they believe to be innocent.

2. Subsequent to the trial defense attorneys talking about the trial have been careful to say "the jury did the right thing," while not stating that Simpson was in fact innocent.

3. Subsequent to the trial, Simpson has devoted no real effort to tracking down the "real killer," nor has any significant evidence surfaced suggesting that the killer was anyone other than Simpson.

4. The jury was not allowed to hear testimony concerning Simpson's rumored jailhouse confession to Rosie Grier.

5. Subsequent to the criminal trial other evidence of Simpson's guilt surfaced. The most significant of the new evidence may have been photographs of Simpson wearing Bruno Magli shoes. The new evidence, together with much of the evidence considered in the criminal trial, convinced a civil jury that Simpson murdered Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman.

6. In his 2007 book, If I Did It, Simpson (for all intents and purposes) confessed. The book describes in detail events leading up to the moment of the murders.
 
Haich

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,758
I don't buy his once great legacy, he didn't really involve himself in the black community. The guy was a coconut, black on the outside but loved up white women and rubbed shoulders with the upper class white guys

I don't understand how black people at the time could blindly support a man who had a ton of questionable evidence stacked against him and had little to no affiliation with the black community

The defence did a poor job, the jury were swayed by the race card and he just had a bunch of con men as lawyers who were after making money and not the truth

Parasites
 
Etagloc

Etagloc

Superstar
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
5,291
Haich said:
Precisely, he had it all and ruined his life out of jealously and malice. I'm sure many people have been cheated on but that's not grounds to flipping murder your wife !
Click to expand...
That's very true stuff. He had all these worldly riches and power but ruined himself because of what was not right within himself.

I must always remember that it is better to be a poor person with a good heart than to be rich without a good heart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top