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

New Posts

Does anyone remember the glove being tried on at the OJ Simpson trial, by someone other then OJ and Robert Shapiro?

I've looked online over the last few years to see if I could find the glove being tried on in court by someone other then them because my brother who was adopted out, was working for court TV at the trial. He said that he was asked to try it on but I can't find a record of it anywhere. Does anyone know or remember?
 
I was in college when the O.J. "not guilty" verdict was handed down in Fall 1995, and clearly remember walking across campus at the time & hearing a huge amount of cheering from inside one of the student buildings - and this was clearly heard as I was walking outside. I also couldn't understand this, given that he was clearly guilty of murdering two innocent people. In later years, most people you talk to do believe he was guilty - but I suspect that wasn't true at the time the verdict was handed down. I also remember having to be very careful about voicing my opinions re: the trial & the verdict when I talked to certain other people about this back in the '90's.

Some other thoughts about the infamous OJ "trial of the century":

-The jury was sequestered for 8 months - WTF?! Horrible. I can't imagine being out of touch with everything for that long, being away from work, etc. I don't know how most of these people kept their jobs - unless they were retired. There should be a law against having trials last this long - sickening.

I'm sure the cost of this trial ran well into the millions. Just housing & feeding that jury in an expensive hotel for 8 months must have cost a pretty penny. Your taxpayer dollars at work.

-OJ wore latex gloves when he tried the leather gloves on - so, of course the leather gloves didn't fit! Just wearing the latex gloves would keep the leather gloves from fitting properly. And, it should be common knowledge that leather tends to shrink when it's moistened - as these gloves were. And, apparently he wasn't taking his arthritis medication, which caused his hands to swell up - so that they wouldn't fit as a result of this.

In any case, it was extremely foolish for the prosecution to have had OJ try the gloves on.

-If OJ didn't commit these heinous crimes, how did his blood/DNA end up at the murder scene?! And, how did the blood/DNA/hair of Nicole & Ron end up all over his car, leading up to his house, in his house, etc.?! Going along with this, he had cut(s) on his hands when he was caught. His guilt seems straightforward to me.

-I don't believe Mark F. - or anyone else - planted any evidence. Not because I don't believe the authorities aren't capable of it - or that they wouldn't do it if it served their purposes....but because there was so much blood/DNA/hair evidence already there. Yes, Mark F. was dishonest by not coming clean on his racist statements - however, that doesn't mean that he would have planted evidence on a case where the prosecution should already have had more than enough to begin with.

Plus, when would this evidence have been planted?! The crime scene was not discovered by LE - it was discovered by a neighbor walking his dog who alerted them. This type of crime was very unusual for that upscale part of L.A. - so I don't believe the authorities would have been cruising that neighborhood.

Plus, as has already been stated, the LAPD definitely did not "have it in" for OJ before this crime took place - he had already been given more than one pass by them when they were previously called (more than once, apparently) re: his domestic abuse against Nicole.

So, why did OJ get a not guilty verdict? I think there were five main reasons for this:

1) First and foremost & has already been said, the authorities were afraid of rioting. The trial ended in late 1995, and the horrific 1992 L.A. riots were extremely fresh in everyone's mind at that time. So, to avoid having something like this happen again - I don't see that he would have been convicted. However, IMHO there were other reasons as well.

2) Judge Ito allowing the trial to be televised. Obviously Ito wanted to make a name for himself. As a result, public opinion had a lot to do with the outcome here, when it shouldn't have.

3) The decision by the prosecution to call Mark F. to the stand - incredibly foolish.

4) The decision by the prosecution to have OJ try on the gloves - also incredibly foolish.

5) DNA testing hadn't been around that long back in 1994/1995, when the crime & later trial took place. A lot of people at that time didn't really have a clue on how accurate this was in establishing someone's identity.
 
The idea that O.J.'s older son Jason (from his first marriage) either was the only killer of Nicole & Ron or "helped" his dad do the killings is ridiculous. Even if you believe that he had motive & opportunity, there was no other blood/DNA evidence found at the scene other than O.J.'s, Nicole's, and Ron's. Also, the blood evidence/blood trails, etc. led directly to O.J.'s car (the Bronco), O.J.'s house, etc.

Also - in going through some of the older posts, I see a resurgence of interest in this case back in 2016 - given the FX American Crime Story: O.J. mini-series, as well as the superb O.J.: Made in America ESPN documentary. I remember watching both of these ATT & remembering how these got people talking about & interested in the case again.

I recently re-watched both of these - on Blu-ray. Some points:

-The FX mini-series was definitely entertaining at time. Overall I did enjoy this. Not only did it bring back memories of the trial, but I also enjoyed the nostalgia re: the great '90's-era rock/pop soundtrack.

However, it was also extremely flawed. The biggest issue I had with this was the extremely poor casting of CGJ as O.J. While he's a solid actor & while I've enjoyed many of his other roles, he was a terrible choice here. He didn't look like O.J. at all, his voice was completely off, and he over-acted to the point of being ridiculous. It's obvious that there are other actors out there that would have been far better choices.

I also question the validity of some events/situations that were depicted in the doc. I.e., did Marcia Clark & Chris Darden take a road-trip together one weekend for the birthday party of one of CD's old friends? And, when the detectives knocked on Kato's door (in the guest house), did they immediately ask him if he was drunk/on drugs?!

By contrast, the O.J. ESPN 7+hour documentary was incredible. I re-watched this in one sitting. It was an extremely well-done doc. that traced O.J.'s personal history before, during, and after the trial. Very comprehensive, with excellent real-life footage - and very well-edited. Definitely one of the best docs. I've ever seen.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 91 more.
Total: 3,621 (members: 92, guests: 3,529)

Online statistics

Members online
92
Guests online
3,529
Total visitors
3,621
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,494
Messages
17,969,855
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top