CA - O.J. Simpson & the murders of Nicole Brown, Ron Goldman, 1994 *not guilty*

[LP Moderator]

of course, i was being facetious. and sarcastic..i loathe and despise everything he did and does.

Of course!!! I just don't know you wel enough yet!! By the way, would you please email or PM me with updates on the case you and I spoke of?

 

[Love_Mama]

with a very close friend of mine in the Real Estate business. He is President of the Board of Realtor's where I live.......he is blind...........he has a pHd........and beside's being very bright has a wonderful sense of humor and well well read! This is what he told me the other day about what he thought of OJ Trial.
He think's that Marsha Clark and Cris Harden were "picked" to lose the case.....because the City of Los Angeles thought that IF OJ didn't get off there would be huge riot's and the whole City would literally be on FIRE!

Now my friend Joe.........XXXX is not someone to draw fast conclusions.
He is on the internet all the time, is one of sharpest most trustworthy men I've ever know. He at any time can tell you what's going on in the world, who's involved........in other words, he keep's up with everything.

I had never heard this theory before. Have any of you? Comments?
Reason I'm asking is because I thought the prosecution........was simply awful.
Maybe my friend is right!

xxxxxxxxxo
mama

 

[Buzz Mills]

Don't know how many are familiar with "Frontline" but their programs are always outstanding. On PBS, Tuesday @ 9:00PM

The O.J. Verdict (#2316) Duration: 56:46 CC Stereo
Ten years after one of the most controversial verdicts in the history of the American justice system, Frontline revisits the O.J. Simpson trial. For more than a year, the Simpson saga transfixed the nation and dominated the public imagination. The slow-speed chase, the "Dream Team" of defense lawyers, the bloody gloves, the 911 calls, and the Fuhrman tapes. The best screenwriters in Hollywood could not have imagined the drama and intrigue. But the Simpson trial also revealed startling truths about American society. It exposed deep and enduring racial rifts and introduced thousands of Americans to the complexities of the legal system. In October, the tenth anniversary of the Simpson verdict, veteran producer Ofra Bikel investigates the "perfect storm" that was the O.J. trial, and through extensive interviews with the defense, prosecutors, and journalists reveals what its lasting impact will be on the American justice system.

 

[Bobbisangel]

Catherine Crier had a "10 yrs after" on her show friday. I turned the channel.
She also had a "10 years after" last year and that was 10 yrs after the murders. I guess now they are doing the same thing with "10 years after" the trial and verdict.

To be honest I can't stand to even hear the name OJ Simpson. He is a killer walking free...IMO. He got away with two murders because he could afford a table of expensive attorneys who knew how to twist every word around to the benefit of OJ Simpson. They played the "race card" which had nothing to do with the murders but was convient because the killer was black and the victims were white.

These attorneys hired Dr. Henry Lee who had his head up his rear when it came to the blood at the scene and at Simpson's place. Many lost respect for Lee's abilitys during that trial.

Another reason OJ Simpson walked was because the Prosecutors were so incompetant it was unbelievable. They put on evidence that didn't matter and they kept evidence out that did.

They were dumb enough to have OJ Simpson try on the "gloves" wearing vinyl gloves under the leather gloves. A child probably knows that leather won't slid over vinyl. Did they really expect the gloves would fit? Obviously those two didn't experiment with the gloves first.

And then there was Mark Furhman. IMO he was the scapegoat of the whole trial. And there stood Marcia Clark in closing arguments agreeing with the defense and putting Furhman down. She crucified her own witness!

Last but sure not least was the jury. I believe all 12 of those people walked into that courtroom during jury selection with their minds made up. They walked into deliberations already knowing what the verdict was going to be. Even though OJ Simpson had never done a thing to help his own people they proudly set the killer free.

After the trial OJ Simpson loudly stated that he was going to find "the real killers." Well, we all know that he hasn't spent a dime looking. Why should he when all he has to do is look in the mirror to see the "real killer."

I refuse to spend another minute of my time watching or listening to anything to do with OJ Simpson and that farce of a trial 10 years ago. Maybe this will up some show's ratings but for the life of me I don't know why anyone would even be interested in anything to do with OJ Simpson. We all already know more about the trial and what a travisty of justice it was then we probably even wanted to know 10 years ago. That trial was a great example of how the judicial doesn't work. IMO.

 

[Buzz Mills]

Catherine Crier had a "10 yrs after" on her show friday. I turned the channel.

SNP

I refuse to spend another minute of my time watching or listening to anything to do with OJ Simpson and that farce of a trial 10 years ago. Maybe this will up some show's ratings but for the life of me I don't know why anyone would even be interested in anything to do with OJ Simpson. We all already know more about the trial and what a travisty of justice it was then we probably even wanted to know 10 years ago. That trial was a great example of how the judicial doesn't work. IMO.

Frontline has great presentations, and where I wouldn't waste my time watching a program about OJ by anyone else, the Frontline presentation will be well worth the watch. It will mostly focus on white America, versus black America, then, and now.

 

[Hbgchick]

I heard something about someone (sorry to be so vague, but can't remember which show) saying that they had definitive proof that it was OJ's SON that committed the murders.I, for one, have been a card-carrying member of the "of COURSE he's freakin' guilty" club for 10 years now...but this is the first thing OTHER than "OJ did it" that makes even a little bit of sense. Part of the reason I was so sure OJ did it was the lack of any reason for anyone else to want to. And OJ LOOKED guilty. But if it was his son, and OJ was covering for him...not that I've jumped ship and believe it totally but I would like a little more information. What's everyone think?

 

[concernedperson]

I heard something about someone (sorry to be so vague, but can't remember which show) saying that they had definitive proof that it was OJ's SON that committed the murders.I, for one, have been a card-carrying member of the "of COURSE he's freakin' guilty" club for 10 years now...but this is the first thing OTHER than "OJ did it" that makes even a little bit of sense. Part of the reason I was so sure OJ did it was the lack of any reason for anyone else to want to. And OJ LOOKED guilty. But if it was his son, and OJ was covering for him...not that I've jumped ship and believe it totally but I would like a little more information. What's everyone think?

I believe that was on Catherine Crier's show. Cannot remember the author's name that stated this but he pointed out that OJ's son had anger management problems. Had assault charges before, issues with women etc. Don't know what to believe.

 

[MrsMush99]

It was OJ's blood at the scene, OJ with the cut finger, OJ who ran, OJ's hair in the cap that was found at the scene, OJ's blood on the door of the bronco and in the bronco, along with Ron and Nicoles, either ron's or Nicole's blood on OJ's sock found in his bedroom. That's enough for me to believe there was no other killer.

 

[Hbgchick]

It was OJ's blood at the scene, OJ with the cut finger, OJ who ran, OJ's hair in the cap that was found at the scene, OJ's blood on the door of the bronco and in the bronco, along with Ron and Nicoles, either ron's or Nicole's blood on OJ's sock found in his bedroom. That's enough for me to believe there was no other killer.

This is true...but they're saying that he was there after the fact. And part of my biggest doubt was about the blood - what always bothered me was..."where was the REST of it?". Two people that are brutally murdered generate a lot of blood, not just a drop here and a drop there, it should have been all over the killer, his clothes, and his vehicle. The cut on the finger bothered me too. It looked like Ron especially fought his attacker for his life. Where are the other bruises, cuts, injuries?

Like I said, I always believed he was guilty, but there were a lot of things that bothered me too. The main reason I felt he HAD to be guilty is that there was nobody else - that I knew of - that could possibly have reason to brutally murder two completely innocent people if not for robbery at least. But...:waitasec:

 

[MrsMush99]

what would be the reason his son killed them? I think I might watch the show to see what they say.

 

[Hbgchick]

Well, from what I heard on the program, they say that Jason had well-documented psychological and rage disorders - had attacked several girlfriends in the past. He was a chef, and they say (just passing on info here, I'm not sure I believe it or not) that Nicole was supposed to go to his restaurant that night but did not because she was nervous that Jason had begun "stalking" her and instead ate at Mezzuluna (sp?). The timeline that Jason originally told police is also in question, his punch-style time card had been altered by hand to say when he left work. I got this only sporadically because my hubby was talking - I'd like to see the program again when I can pay more attention to it.

 

[Buzz Mills]

Understand that the Frontline presentation won't be a debate about the right, or wrong, of the verdict; Frontline will present facts, if anything, and the focus of the program will be the perception of the black community, and the white community, then, and now, and the effects of the decision on the justice system. If you haven't ever, and have have the opportunity to watch any Frontline program, please do; out of all of the programs, on TV, it ranks at the top, especially if you want to come away with the feeling that you are now more knowledgeable than before, on how, and why, things happen as they do.

 

[Hbgchick]

Understand that the Frontline presentation won't be a debate about the right, or wrong, of the verdict; Frontline will present facts, if anything, and the focus of the program will be the perception of the black community, and the white community, then, and now, and the effects of the decision on the justice system. If you haven't ever, and have have the opportunity to watch any Frontline program, please do; out of all of the programs, on TV, it ranks at the top, especially if you want to come away with the feeling that you are now more knowledgeable than before, on how, and why, things happen as they do.

Just to clarify...the show I was referring to is NOT Frontline. Sorry if I confused anyone. I will defintely try to check it out.

 

[ziggy]

One thing that continues to bother me is those who defend OJ say, "cut on his finger but no corresponding cut on the glove" DUH, glove was off when finger was cut. There was a struggle. For all we know both gloves came off and he managed to grab only one upon exiting.

The guy who made the case for Simpson's son had VERY interesting information. The most curious for me: THE FRICKIN COPS NEVER INTERVIEWED HIS SON and OJ hired his kid a lawyer immediately. Also he said that the hairs from the knit cap did not match OJ in microscopic comparison but did match Jasons. Interesting. Seems the police should have done a more thorough investigation on the kid's angry background.

 

[Hbgchick]

One thing that continues to bother me is those who defend OJ say, "cut on his finger but no corresponding cut on the glove" DUH, glove was off when finger was cut. There was a struggle. For all we know both gloves came off and he managed to grab only one upon exiting.

The guy who made the case for Simpson's son had VERY interesting information. The most curious for me: THE FRICKIN COPS NEVER INTERVIEWED HIS SON and OJ hired his kid a lawyer immediately. Also he said that the hairs from the knit cap did not match OJ in microscopic comparison but did match Jasons. Interesting. Seems the police should have done a more thorough investigation on the kid's angry background.

I find this information very compelling. If all this guy says is true...we might have another trial on our hands. I think it would be a very strange bit of irony if after Mark Furhman solved the Moxley murder years after the fact, if someone ELSE solved the OJ murder - a case on which he acheived his initial noteriaty - years after the fact.

 

[Bobbisangel]

I heard something about someone (sorry to be so vague, but can't remember which show) saying that they had definitive proof that it was OJ's SON that committed the murders.I, for one, have been a card-carrying member of the "of COURSE he's freakin' guilty" club for 10 years now...but this is the first thing OTHER than "OJ did it" that makes even a little bit of sense. Part of the reason I was so sure OJ did it was the lack of any reason for anyone else to want to. And OJ LOOKED guilty. But if it was his son, and OJ was covering for him...not that I've jumped ship and believe it totally but I would like a little more information. What's everyone think?

OJ didn't have to take the stand in the murder trial but he had no choice during the Civil Suit. From what I understand he was a pitiful witness on that stand. His lies stood out for everyone to see and it was said that it was obvious that he murdered Nicole and Ron. I wish CTV had gone into that trial.
From what I understand that trial was nothing like the first one.

I've heard that about his son too but I've also heard that OJ's older kids liked Nicole and that there is no proof that anyone else but OJ Simpson murdered the two. If there was absolute proof that the son did the murders LE would have arrested him by now. OJ probably started that rumor!!!

 

[Buzz Mills]

The Frontline OJ Verdict program was very good, but it was surpassed by the Frontline program following it which dealt with people being forced into accepting Guilty Pleas, even though were factually innocent; it was a very sad commentary on our justice system. Hoping that some others will watch for this program on their PBS stations.

 

[englishleigh]

LOS ANGELES — In a scene from his new candid-camera program "Juiced," O.J. Simpson pulls a prank involving the infamous white Bronco, drawing criticism from the family of a man he was accused of killing.

As part of the pay-per-view show, Simpson pretends to sell the Bronco at a used car lot and boasts to a prospective buyer that he made the vehicle famous, according to a segment aired Thursday on "Inside Edition."

"It was good for me — it helped me get away," Simpson said, referring to the slow-speed, televised police chase that preceded his 1994 arrest on charges of murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman.

Goldman's father, Fred, told "Inside Edition" he found Simpson's comment "morally reprehensible."




http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195258,00.html

 

[kk's mom]

What an idiot...

 

[lisag]

He is an absolute loser.