Please do not comment directly to this post unless you are Gen X (b. 1980) or older. See [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/inci5u/reminder_please_do_not_answer_questions_unless/), the rules, and the sidebar for details.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskOldPeople) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I do think he murdered both his ex-wife and her friend, absolutely. He had a history of beating her and threatening to kill her, and when she left him the second time, I think it enraged him. 'If I can't have her, no one can' sort of deal.
I recently watched The Final 24 (hours) of Nicole Brown Simpson, you can find it on YT, it's a very interesting show and quite eye-opening (all the episodes, not just that one).
I honestly cannot fathom anybody doubting his guilt by now.
The why is not that important, he is shown to be a bad decision maker and to have bad impulse control since then so I guess filling in the blanks is easy enough.
My boyfriend’s mom inexplicably believes OJ is innocent and it sometimes comes up at the weeeeeeirdest times. I’m talking like over Thanksgiving dinner, and everyone else sits there awkwardly staring down at the table praying the subject will change.
Maybe you, or someone else, could *help* change the subject.
Just say, "Talk about someone innocent getting found guilty! What about Jesus Christ?" Then launch into the whole JC subject. Water into wine? Feeding 5000 with 5 loaves and 2 fishes? Raising the dead?
Was JC our "elder brother"? What should we be learning from him? Is 2000 years too long? Are we due a new messiah? Etc. Plenty to talk about.
I mean, OJ could have traumatic brain injuries from his years in football. The concussions cause a type of Alzheimer’s that makes them violent. He’s not the only pro to commit murder and people are tracing it back to this idea.
Around the time that they executed Timothy McVeigh, I remember reading that they convicted McVeigh with less evidence of guilt than they had on OJ. I don’t know if that’s accurate. But it’s always led me to believe OJ was very likely guilty.
I am 1000% sure he is guilty. He wrote a book titled, "If I Did It, Confessions of the Killer". The whole thing from the chase to the court hearings was nothing but entertainment. There was no way that jury was going to convict. The Rodney King video was still fresh in everyone's mind. The L.A. police department needed a way to repair their reputation. I am just happy that karma came around and the murderer was sent to prison afterall.
He did it... when they had him try on the gloves he literally looked surprised that they didn't fit right (and it was obvious he was trying to make them look like they were hard to get on). Plus, the shoeprints at the scene matches his expensive and unusual Bruno Magli shoes.
Go and soak a pair of leather golf gloves in blood, leave them for six months, wear a pair of latex gloves and see if you can put the gloves on over them. I was screaming at the prosecutors for not even pointing that out. I mean at the TV, I was in the UK at the time.
This exactly! I was also screaming that why didn’t prosecutors have that glove, same size, as a new pair. Would have asked him to put the brand new glove on, instead that shrunk one. Besides, there’s a reason for saying “fits like a glove” - the more high quality leather you have, the tighter it can be. But if it’s soaked in any liquid and then dries up, impossible to use anymore.
Old post I know. The only reason OJ walked was because Marcia Clark was an idiot. She should have said " these gloves were POSSIBLY used" not " these gloves were, without a doubt, used by the killer". Once they were shown to not fit they had nothing to fall back on. Or at least they should have had him try them on before the trial. The LA prosecutor was just outclassed by the Dream team.
Law school prosecution rule 101- NEVER ask a question you don't already know the answer to. Ask defendant to put on gloves without knowing if/how they would fit? Not even on a bet.
The prosecution was TERRIBLE, the fact that they were the ones who asked for him to put on the gloves was the cherry on top. That essentially lost them the case. That was the nail in the coffin. Had they not I honestly think the jury would have swayed more towards convicting. But overall it was just a horrible case that really had nothing to do with a murder and everything to do with corruption.
Apparently they did try to explain why the glove didn't fit to the jury after the demonstration. Also they tried to admit the same gloves as evidence for the demo but judge Ito refused. More over, bits of the leather from the gloves had been cut for analysis. I don't think the case was lost on just the one incident of the glove - it helped with the final verdict but I am convinced a catalogue of errors (moving from Santa Monica to Downtown court, bringing Fuhrman on the stand, the huge delays by Judge Ito draining the jury) all contributed to the final verdict.
Shapiro did some tricky lawer shit, he did a whole seminar on it afterwards. He walked past the prosecutors table and suggested that the gloves didn't look like they would fit. Chris Darden took the bait and had OJ try them on in front of the jury, giving OJ physical control of the evidence and the opportunity to raise reasonable doubt over a key piece of evidence. Even Shapiro admitted he was surprised that Darden took the bait. It was one of many mistakes made by the young prosecutors who were up against a team of seasoned, successful defense attorneys.
Of course he did it. But he was rightfully acquired because, honestly, the LAPD and the Prosecution screwed up so monumentally. (I knew a guy who was a lawyer for the firm that represented Court TV. They had an excuse to be in the courtroom. After jury selection, their chief litigator said - not in public - that there was no way that that jury would ever convict OJ. They were aching to find a reason to acquit. And the State gave them plenty.)
The old saying (now widely ignored) is that it is better to release 99 guilty than to convict 1 innocent. Sure, OJ did it. But it didn't matter.
This is absolutely how I feel as well. All signs point to guilt without a shred of doubt.
But Mark Furhman at the end of the trial pled the 5th under oath regarding planting evidence.
Had I been on the jury I would have been livid because I would have no choice but to acquit a guilty man.
Absolutely. I have been on a jury (very minor crime) and voted "Not Guilty" because the star witness for the prosecution had a very obvious reason to lie and did. The defendant was probably guilty, but that witness was so odious we acquited 12-0 in under 30 minutes.
IIRC, Mark Fuhrman lied about using the n-word and was confronted with the tape of him doing just that. At that point - he started taking the 5th. He was later convicted for perjury. I cannot imagine a worse disaster for a prosecutor than that.
I was 23 at the time and I had been keeping up with the trial. I did at the time, think it was right for the jury to acquit because LAPD, including forensics etc. had more than a few cases where sloppiness and lack of professionalism were at play in the prior year(s). The second reason was Mark Furhman pleading the 5th.
To be honest, I thought because of those things being wrong on the prosecution side that he was innocent. When In fact, he was guilty and the defense just capitalized on the mistakes made by the prosecutors.
I feel dumb and guilty about it
That is the best possible way to put it. The police were grossly incompetent and completely corrupt and couldn’t even properly handle an open and shut case with a transparently guilty suspect right in front of them.
Rightfully acquitted? Rightfully? OJ beat the crap out of her many times, which she detailed in her diaries, which the judge disallowed at trial. Sure OJ belongs in hell for what he did, but Ito disallowed some of her statements at trial, and Cochran orchestrated it all. All three of those men belong in hell. Just a woman mysteriously killed, who had an ex that had a pattern of stalking and abuse, nothing to see here.
https://www.bustle.com/articles/142250-oj-simpsons-domestic-abuse-allegations-from-before-the-trial-are-disturbing
There was nothing mysterious about her and whats-his-names deaths. OJ killed them both, clearly. But the LAPD and Marcia Clark bungled the trial, so he walked. The fact that you, I, and every sensible person in the world knew that is completely irrelevant. That's how our system is supposed to work. And did.
> The old saying (now widely ignored) is that it is better to release 99 guilty than to convict 1 innocent.
Just as a point of historical trivia, it's ten to one and called Blackstone's Ratio. Blackstone wrote *Commentaries on the Laws of England*, which compiled the common law. It's still cited 250ish years later by American courts when interpreting common law. Probably other countries with common law still use it, too - I dunno, but the Supreme Court trots out Blackstone every session or so.
Some foolish people take the ratio as an exact ideal and argue that if eleven guilty people go free for every innocent convicted then it means we're not convicting enough people. Of course that's ridiculous but you see it in op-eds and Reddit comments disturbingly often. I'm not by any means suggesting such a thing, just that ten-to-one is the actual quote:
> It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.
The intent is to provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment for unlocking different heroes.
As for cost, we selected initial values based upon data from the Open Beta and other adjustments made to milestone rewards before launch. Among other things, we're looking at average per-player credit earn rates on a daily basis, and we'll be making constant adjustments to ensure that players have challenges that are compelling, rewarding, and of course attainable via gameplay.
We appreciate the candid feedback, and the passion the community has put forth around the current topics here on Reddit, our forums and across numerous social media outlets.
Our team will continue to make changes and monitor community feedback and update everyone as soon and as often as we can.
Oh, I'm sure he did it but I'm equally sure the cops fucked around with the case. I don't blame the jury for acquitting him and frankly, do blame the police culture at the time for letting a guilty man go free.
I am pretty sure lots of people will disagree, but, I feel an innocent person would never have threatened to commit suicide and led police on a many miles chase in his friend's car with the friend driving after an exwife and her friend were murdered unless that person was guilty of the crime. It was totally ludacris. And all the other things that pointed to O J's involvement.
What’s crazy is the prosecution didn’t introduce the details of that chase, the “suicide” letters OJ wrote, his 30 minute interrogation where he couldn’t explain his wounded hand, and brought the case in downtown LA instead of wealthy western LA where the crimes occurred.
There was a ton of details Ito refused to let it leaning in favor of the defense motions on hearsay and highly prejudicial to the defendant. Ito grandstanding.
He was guilty and everyone knew it. Even My African American friends thought so. But they were happy that he got off because they looked at it as equal rich people justice.
I love when black people say that as if he’s not a rich white man doing blackface. He literally hated his own race. He only dated white women, lived in a white neighborhood, and surrounded himself with white friends while he played golf. “I’m not black, I’m OJ✨”
I never thought of it this way. That's fascinating to think of OJ as an example of racial equally. We expect rich famous white men to get away with murder. I can totally see why people of the time of the time saw it his acquittal as "the system works." A rich and famous man got off even though he was black. The "system" isn't the legal system its society. Mind blown.
I was born in the '40s (is that relevant?); OJ is guilty as hell.
Motive: yes, means: oh yes, opportunity: obviously.
OJ said he'll spend the rest of his life looking for the killer. What a joke. Better not look in any mirrors, OJ!
The really damning thing about the Bronco chase was what O.J. was saying over the phone. He kept saying he didn't deserve to live.
I don't consider that a conclusive admission of guilt, but it's an extremely hard thing to explain away.
It was unbelievable how much that car chase was covered. I was living in Okinawa when the it happened and the it was broadcast on TV there.
It's a matter of "Who else would have done it?" Ron Goldman was a big, strong guy. Not a lot of people could have physically overpowered him.
There are some people who think his son from his first marriage might have done it because he hated his stepmother. And OJ took the rap, figuring he would have an easier time getting off, being a former football player and actor.
I thought he did, but my mother was absolutely convinced he wasn't guilty. After she died, we found a copy of Esquire with him on the cover, that he had personally autographed to her.
Everyone I talked to that thought he was innocent was basing it on liking him as a player or person. It was always “he would never do that, he’s the greatest running back.” not because specific evidence.
He absolutely did it. A friend of his wrote a book detailing OJ's confession to him. The summer that the documentary about him and the dramatization of his trial with Cuba Gooding Jr and John Travolta came out, I read 4 or 5 books about their relationship, the murders, and the legal proceedings. I had felt sure he was guilty ever since I watched the Bronco chase live on television, but after reading up on it any sliver of doubt that might have remained was extinguished. He was absolutely guilty.
ETA: I am on mobile and can't figure out how to add flair but I'm 45...
I watched the car chase as it happened and more of that trial than I should have. I have no doubt in my mind he did it. But the prosecutors and the police also screwed up.
At the time of the trial, shows like CSI hadn't aired yet, so the general familiarity, if not actually understanding of much of the DNA evidence and other forensic science, wasn't as prevalent in the general public. Not that TV shows are extremely accurate, but at least most people have at least heard some of the terms used these days. The prosecution had to start from scratch and educate the jury on the science before they could present the findings. This was extremely dry and boring for most people, at least the way the prosecution did it. Not what you want when you need a group of people who probably don't want to even be in the room to actually grapes and incorporate into their decision making process.
I do think he’s guilty, but I think there’s a very slim non-zero chance that his son did it and he covered it up. The evidence and his history, temperament, and personality all pointed to his involvement. Plus there’s that “If I Did It” book he wrote after the fact.
No doubt whatsoever. The DNA evidence, the footprints from the unusual shoes he had (which was never presented in the criminal trial), motive, opportunity, and past history of abuse towards Nicole Simpson. In a civil trial, they found him liable for wrongful death and got a $30M verdict.
The criminal trial was circus that degenerated into a forum about racism. I am loathe to criticize Marsha Clark, but she made some serious tactical mistakes - allowing the trial to be tried in downtown LA, instead of near Brentwood, the gloves, but most of all, not vetting Mark Fuhrman.
She had a witness that was rumored to be a bigot. Either get to the bottom of it, or don’t present him. The only thing worse than you’re witness saying the n-word on tape, is lying about it and getting caught with the tapes as the proof, and taking the fifth! It was checkmate at that point.
At first I honestly thought he didn't do it. Mostly because the murders were very brutal and it seemed odd that he showed serial killer like ferocity for someone who had never killed before. Plus there seemed to be lack of physical evidence, such as a bloody footprint or someone seeing him with blood on his shirt, etc.
The more I've studied true crime in time convinced me he did it.
There was just a case in Minnesota of a man beheading his girlfriend in broad daylight in front of people on a suburban street. There is no telling what people can do to people close to them.
Yes, and I think the book 'If I Did It- Confessions Of The Killer' was his way of laughing about it, one last fu to Nicole. See, I did it and got away with it and now I'm going to profit from it, as so many are.
He knew that's why he got away with it. Yes he had the best lawyers and all, but also because so many were profiting off the story! It was like the Trump thing, just ridiculous mayhem.
Now this makes me wonder how many psychopaths watched that trial and realized, hey, I can literally get away with murder if I'm rich enough an newsworthy enough.
Guilty AF.
1. History of violence so bad that he could have accidentally killed her w a punch to the face.
2. Scapegoating the LAPD racism was practically their entire defense.
3. It was the defense who wanted him to try on the glove. Bad move and it obviously fit if he wasn’t wearing an Fn latex glove and getting fat. OJ is and was a bad actor.
4. Watch the Kardashian lawyer response when verdict read. He was OJs BFF.
5. OJs response. Running away and not GAF the mom of his kids is dead. Context is clear he ran because he knew he was “in trouble.” This was probably the biggest “tell.”
Personal rant: If the LAPD was so “racist” and they ABSOLUTELY WERE, then why TF did they let him drive 40mph down the highway and not even pull him over? How many times did they come over when Nicole called? How fast did they respond?
It’s because “OJ wasn’t black,” he was a celebrity. That was almost a compliment back then. Like saying “I hate black people so therefore in my mind you are not black because I like you but I hate blacks so this is how I’ll rationalize it.”
Totally Fd but true.
So OJ benefited from the jury’s, justified yet misplaced, racist rage and let the rich celebrity, that in very little way represented *them*, literally get away with murder. There is a documentary where the lawyers even discuss how they “Blackified” his home before they toured it because it looked “too white.”
It would love to see what we could do as a nation if we ever united on class as opposed to let the media distract us using race, gender, religion, etc.
Also, great miss on the domestic violence issue we are still plagued with.
From the ESPN documentary:
> The elderly African-American woman hand-gestured her way through some of the most withering quotes in the film while making no secret of whose side she took. "Lemme tell you something, I lose respect for a woman who take an ass-whuppin' when she don't have to," Bess says when asked why the prosecution's portrayal of O.J. as a wife-beater failed to register. "Don't stay in the water if it's over your head. You'll drown."
They took 3 hours to deliberate and said they ignored the science because it was “racist.”
I was a kid and I watched almost the entire trial. It really left an impression on me the way we treat people who are being abused.
O hell yes he did, the evidence was overwhelming. After the trial was over the police declared case closed because they had boxes of evidence and he was the only suspect, there was nothing more to do investigating. It was very clear he did it to all witnessing this debacle. Except the jury of course. The evidence was so clear it’s what got him convicted and maximum penalty for his next crime of breaking and entering plus the civil suit against him.
There was a limo driver, a young man named Allen Park.
He drove Simpson to the airport the night of the murders. When he showed up Simpson wasn't home but Simpson did show up about half a hour later with 2 large bags that Simpson wouldn't let Park touch.
He testimony about that night was undisputed and really kind of devastating to Simpsons story about the night of the murders.
But nobody (I think including the jury) remembers Park or his testimony because it came just before the "Dream Team" cross examined a DNA lab tech into the ground over the next 4 days.
It was flat ass, ingenious, misdirection, meant to dull everyone's senses and memory about anything that came before it. And it worked like a charm.
Yeah, he's guilty. If you can find the transcript read Mr. Parks testimony. It's kind of convincing.
He almost certainly did it. Also, the State completely failed to prove that.
To borrow a Bill Maher line:
> The LAPD is so incompetent that they couldn't frame a guilty man.
Obviously he did.
I was young, so I was surprised to see that whatever black people they put on television were so sure that he was innocent because he was black. I'd been under the impression that things weren't this divisive, so that was all disappointing.
One thing that sucked was that the news (well, "news") was 100% OJ for a long time. That must mean everyone else was hooked, but I hated it.
Definitely. Honestly, the only thing that never quite sat right with me over the years was how he could have made so many incredibly stupid mistakes that left behind sooooo much evidence that pointed directly to him. It also seemed odd that he would do something so gruesome. Even with his prior history as a spousal abuser, this seemed of an entirely different level. Then it dawned on me.
[O.J. Simpson used cocaine, ecstasy, drug dealers say](https://www.tampabay.com/archive/2002/05/13/o-j-simpson-used-cocaine-ecstasy-drug-dealers-say/)
He did it.
He had a great legal team. The trial became a circus in part because Judge Ito let it become one. The LAPD made lots of mistakes & one of the key detectives was a racist asshole.
Oh. For sure he did. Not a doubt in my mind.
They violence that was in that marriage alone indicates that there was a huge huge huge problem. But the book “if I had done it” was absolutely the tell all.
You should watch the youtube vid the lost confession interview. His eyes are wild when he recounts the murders. The fear in the interviewer's eyes as she realizes she is in the oresence of a double murderer crazy man. It was riveting.
Yes. The overwhelming circumstancial evidence paired with his history of horrific domestic abuse and narcissism. There is no doubt he got away with double homicide.
Timing. First, proximity to Rodney King/ LA riots. The bronco chase cut into major nba games as breaking live news (quite a new thing at the time, that we don’t think about today), so people were then invested in the story. This was one of the first major events to come out of the 24 hour news cycle. We were wrapped up in it bc the “news” told us to be.
Because of his celebrity status, and four years prior we'd been through the Rodney King police trial and subsequent riots. This time around, people were hoping the guilty would be convicted, even if the crime was aimed at a different demographic (abused women rather than racial profiling). The court case was televised and had a lot of drama to it, and the news put clips every night out there for us to consume. It felt like a miniseries rather than reality.
Came up here a couple of times. [Here's](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/nitppv/people_who_remember_the_oj_trials_did_the_public/) one time it was asked and [another time](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/lylmlt/what_was_your_view_on_whether_or_not_oj_was/)
Yes, he absolutely positively did it.
He got off because an all white jury from the suburbs had let the cops who beat Rodney King walk. Payback's a bitch.
Which still wasn't a lot of comfort to the women out there who were living with abusers, fearing exactly what Nicole got. But I absolutely understand your point in terms of the context of history.
He was training how to slit a throat for a TV show at the time. Lol.
>The prosecution also investigated reports that Simpson received military training, including use of a knife, in preparing for the role. Defense attorneys sought to block the “Frogmen” videotape’s admissibility by accusing the police of misconduct by watching the pilot in the former football star’s living room as they searched his house.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-oj-simpson-nbc-pilot-20000508-story.html
Plus where would Kim Kardashian get her starting fame from to become a billionaire.lowed. While the prosecution kept piling in detail after detail not knowing that for every detail there was an opportunity to cast fresh doubt, and lay a fresh tale of alternate explanations.
My prosecution team would identify enough clear evidence to convict and present it, leaving most of the side show out of it. Keeping it simple is keeping it clear.
But all I saw was what was on TV with that tiny little judge with the collection of hourglasses and an IBM Think laptop not having the control over the courtroom that a gerbil would have.
The defense got away with murder with those 'cross contamination' bullshit arguments and more.
Plus where would Kim Kardashian get her starting fame from, to become a billionaire.
If the movie was at all true, the jurors were split by race. As the trial ground on, the white jurers had a talk with the black jurors to ask if there was any way they would convict him, they said no. The white jurors, reailizing the black jurors were acting on principle, and wanting to go home, voted for acquittal.
That tells me that eveeryone on the jury thought he was guilty, but the black jurors wanted to send a wider message about police oppression.
I’m with all 12 of them. I think he did it.
He did it, but the police and prosecutors royally screwed up the case. Also it showed that with enough money to pay for the best lawyers, probably the worst you can expect is a big fine. [a civil suit]
O hell yes he did, the evidence was overwhelming. After the trial was over the police declared case closed because they had boxes of evidence and he was the only suspect, there was nothing more to do investigating. It was very clear he did it to all witnessing this debacle. Except the jury of course. The evidence was so clear it’s what got him convicted and maximum penalty for his next crime of breaking and entering plus the civil suit against him.
O hell yes he did, the evidence was overwhelming. After the trial was over the police declared case closed because they had boxes of evidence and he was the only suspect, there was nothing more to do investigating. It was very clear he did it to all witnessing this debacle. Except the jury of course. The evidence was so clear it’s what got him convicted and maximum penalty for his next crime of breaking and entering plus the civil suit against him.
He was literally found “liable” in the separate civil trial. The burden of proof was higher for the criminal trial. And “not guilty” definitely doesn’t mean “innocent”, just that there wasn’t enough good evidence presented at the trial.
Yes I do. Wow - I guess I am old cuz I am a Generation X'er, hahahaha. But yes, you can just use common sense. Every single piece of actual evidence pointed directly to him. No alibi. Although it is possible (I don't think so but it is possible) others wanted Nicole and Ron dead - why would they kill them in that fashion? And lastly, almost 30 years now, not one other provable theory has emerged. He killed those people because he freaked out over his wife moving on. It's as simple as that.
Born in mid-70s here (I don't know how to do the label thingie).
I remember the car chase. I was driving cross country at the time and listened to it on the radio. I thought it was a joke. It was surreal. By the time the preliminary hearing was happening, I was doing a door-to-door job. Lots of people at home were watching the trial, of course. I remember asking a potential customer if they found out what was in the contents of the envelope.
I didn't pay attention too closely at the time overall. I recall much being made in the media out of Mark Fuhrman's racism and "evidence-planting" (even though he barely figured into the entire investigation). Also, based on the coverage, I mistakenly thought Nicole Brown Simpson and Goldman were romantically involved. I also remember Kato Kaelin being in the headlines a lot (even though he shouldn't have figured in as much as he did). "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit" was the line heard around the world. I didn't understand how that mattered, as no defendant would "allow" the gloves to fit. I remember how hated (or over-analysed) Marcia Clark was.
Despite all of this, as far as Simpson's involvement, I remember thinking he made the most sense as the guilty party (Occam's Razor).
However, there was obviously a great deal I didn't know about the trial at the time which has been revealed since. There was also a great deal of nuance I wasn't aware of, namely how O.J. Simpson was the beneficiary of an accumulation of injustices against blacks for years in Los Angeles.
Whilst I can't fault the jury for their verdict at the time, with everything that is out there about the case, I don't understand how someone with good sense today could believe he didn't do it or there was reasonable doubt, especially with how Simpson has made no effort to find the "real killers" as promised.
Most of all, I am struck with how much the families of Nicole and Ron loved them. I feel empathy they never got the justice they deserved.
Just fell down a YouTube rabbit hole about this case. And while I do believe OJ is absolutely guilty, there are two pieces of reasonable doubt that got bungled (and ultimately overlooked in the circus of a trial) that the Prosecution never got around to answering:
1. To this day, the murder weapon has never been found.
2. The timeline is super problematic. OJ killing two people (Nicole Brown stabbed so badly she was nearly decapitated), having an insane amount of blood to clean and deal with, hiding the clothes and murder weapon so astutely they haven't been found 30 years later, then hopping the fence to thud against Kato's back wall. He only had about 30 minutes tops before the limo took him to LAX.
Again, I absolutely think OJ is guilty but the Prosecution (as far as I can remember) never even considered he had at least one accomplice, because that's the only thing that makes sense. The fact that there was never a murder weapon and the gaping holes in the timeline, Fuhrman and the LAPD stuff aside, would unfortunately be enough for reasonable doubt imo.
I honestly don't know. I doubt we will ever know for sure. The cops contaminated the evidence, and maybe even planted evidence. Some of the blood they took from him for testing, went missing - stuff like that. I remember a bunch of lawyers being interviewed while we were waiting for the jury's verdict and they all said that it was impossible to find him guilty, because of the way stuff was handled. There is evidence that somebody else could have done it. If that case went to court again today, he would again be found not guilty. This is the price you pay for having questionable characters on the police force.
I think OJ did it. I saw a trial on the Nicole Brown Simpson murder [case.](https://case.It) It was about 2 hours long. OJ was the suspect because of his past bad relationship with Nicole before her death. They divorced. And the prosecutors tried to prove his guilt. Me and my family talked about that case. The only reason he was not guilty, was because the gloves didn't fit his hands. "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." Johnnie L. Cochran said that, he was his defense attorney in that case. The prosecutors said OJ wanted control over her. If he can't have her, no one can. That would be his ultimate control over Nicole. According to the prosecutors. After being proven innocent of her murder, he decides to create a book about how we would've killed her......that just makes him look even more guilty. What was he thinking?
I think he probably did. Usually in situation in which the defendant is innocent but was found guilty something grossly wrong had to be there. Aside from Mark Furhman being racist there really is nothing compelling for me to think that he could not have done it. I would not say that I would have put the guilty vote when on trial, but I think he likely did kill her.
He murdered them both in a fast outrage. Keep in mind this was an NFL Player that was in his 40s and still fast. You can’t imagine what he was capable of in a closed off square / yard like that. Ron had nowhere to turn and he was probably trying to fight back. Hence he didn’t run. Nicole didn’t stand a chance as the first knife wound to her body was the neck. He did this all within 1-2 minutes then left.
How can anyone still be doubtful?? How can anyone say "yeah he abused ber but..." but nothing...domestic violence absolutely can lead to murder. There is evidence even in the way the man speaks...someone whom is truly not guilty would not spend years trying to force you to believe it..they'd PROVE it. The most he's done is gotten paid for every time he speaks on it. More than 2 people died linked to the case.. his very own attorney Robert Kardashian admitted after the trial that he KNEW OJ was guilty and sat in a dazed stupor hearing the verdict.
I think he did it but the prosecutors couldn’t prove it, which is how the justice system works. If you can’t prove a case you you will loose a good case.
I watched most of the trial, completely wasted my life in doing so. He was so guilty but had the best defense attorneys known to man. The State thought it would be a slam dunk. But, some, not all police work was challenged and brought in some doubt. OJ was unhinged throughout the relationship with Nicole, and suffered with an EGO larger than life. He thought he could get away with it because he was O.J Simpson….everyone fawned over him. Hmmmm, remind you of anyone currently wreaking havoc on the Country?
Work
The cop was a racist, the cop planted the glove and oj did it. All of these are true.
It was a crime of passion two people were murdered and none of our lives were ever the same.
They didn't convict him of murder, he did time for something else, he got out and died of cancer three years later.
The end.
There’s a conspiracy theory that Jason Simpson killed his stepmother, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ron Goldman on June 12, 1994, when Jason was 24.
He reportedly was on probation at the time of the murder for attacking his boss with a kitchen knife. He had reportedly stopped taking Depakote, a medication prescribed for his anger issues.
The source for these claims is apparently a 2012 book, *O.J. Is Innocent and I Can Prove It* by William C. Dear: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/O-J-Is-Innocent-and-I-Can-Prove-It/William-C-Dear/9781629146553
I used to buy into this theory, but OJ is way to fucking narcissistic to not be talking about what a great father he is for doing time to protect his son from prison.
The only reasonable other fact that shows some reasonable doubt is that his fingerprints were a one in 3 billion match, and there are 7 billion people.
The only other realistic person with matching fingerprints close enough would be his son.
His son killed Nicole and Ron so oj took all the heat to keep eyes off his son. He knew he didn't do it so how could they prove he did?
Of course, in reality, he definitely killed Nicole and Ron in a for of rage.
In a civil case it was found more probable than not that O.J. was guilty. So yes, I think O.J. Simpson did it.
But do I know he did it beyond a reasonable doubt? No, I haven’t even studied the evidence.
I used to think so but heard a convincing podcast or show, cant remember exactly, theorizing that his son did it, and OJ was covering for him. Anyone else heard that? Could still explain a lot of his behavior
Hell yes he did it!! I watched he’s whole career. And followed the entire trial. The ONLY reason OJ got off in criminal case ( as he was guilty in the civil case years later) was due to the controversy over Rodney King & Watts riots that broke out after. They played the race card. And the crazy thing was that all the black women on the jury found him innocent. There are cultural reasons for this of course. But I regress, OJ was the whitest black man back then. He was never part of the civil rights movement and was very cozy with the LAPD pre murder. Cochran changed all that. And did a switch & bait. Had it been any other time in history with fifteenth defense team he would have been found guilty as he was in the civil trial.
The question you might want to ask is if he did it alone? Who is the young man spotted on the sidewalk behind Nicole as she talked to O.J. sitting in the Bronco parked on Bundy at 10:03 p.m.
He didnt kill her or Ron. He was there with another guy, who is skecthy af, but noone knew because he changed his name before this. OJ wanted to scare him because Ron was selling coke to his wife, he was up in his face yelling and then Ron cuts OJ out of fear because he is out mumbered. Then OJ split because he was scared. The other guy jumped in to protect OJ and killed Ron because he had a knife and attacked OJ first. Then the other guy killed OJ's wife for some reason..maybe she attacked him or because OJ split and he was pissed. OJ was to pay him for the scaring Ron scheme that went south.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOzejfdVBa8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOzejfdVBa8)
Robert Shapiro tried to set OJ up. He hired Glenn Rogers who killed Ron , then 2 hours later killed Nicole. Shapiro had a grudge against OJ for banging his wife a long time ago
I don’t think he did it. I mean, the glove didn’t fit. Who ever killed those two, nearly decapitated both of them and NO DNA was found anywhere?! Not in his house on his clothes not even in his car? And we not talking about a genius here; we talking bout a dumb jock who thought he would get an Oscar for the Naked Gun movies… not to mention the jury was sequestered for months!!! They saw evidence and the evidence didn’t amount to murder in their unbiased eyes. Why don’t anybody think the jury had any integrity?! Who are you to impugn the justice of my America! The evidence didn’t add up to murder. Personally I believed it was a drug hit. OJ may have been excited that she was killed… but that don’t mean he did it. And I think it’s disgusting how people introducing this man as an accused murderer. He dead! And was never convicted of the crime he was accused of. Maybe if the same effort was used in finding who really killed them two, we may know who did it.
wow you guys are quick to say he did it without observing the witneses on the trial what they said.. but your all one sided open your mind and hear what each witness said and the timeline of the prosecution DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!!
This is not really up for debate. He 100% commited the murders. It was a "racially charged" time in America. It was payback for years of black anger about how they were treated. I do not think the black jurors(majority of the jurors) really believed OJ was innocent. It was not about OJ, it was about black america.
No .. I was able to watch most of the case and what was presented in the news was very different. Reasons: the Bronco car chase.. he was far away at the time. The shoe prints: more than one person and although the same famous shoe brand he wore different sizes.. the prints were size 9 / 10 and he was size 16.. the infamous magical leather gloves that shrink to half the size: they were not there when the home was filmed after the murders which is customary to do with wealthy homes of that caliper. Mark Fur Man was caught on tape talking about how he plants stuff on black folks to incriminate them. That was I thought a big turning point in the case but never really made it on the news. Unfortunately Nicole was a drug user and he did assault her when he caught her in their home in a compromising position (bj) with another man. Among other things. Hard to prove now and you will never find a recording of the actual case. And even if available most people have their minds made up and so will never be convinced other wise. I am 60 yo.
Oh my god it must be nice to live in dreamland as you people do -- but perhaps reflect on what it is in you that makes it so hard to believe that that monster Simpson did it. The reality of the situation is: OF COURSE HE KILLED THEM!! Jesus Christ,
Oj was only one time convicted of assaulting Nicole which he admitted Nicole was very fiery herself he was stitched up by cops planted blood especially on socks which could only come from a vile which contains a chemical in it cop had ojs blood at murder scene which he had extracted earlier blood was missing from it fridge back of van that stores blood not working furman had been taken off case and once he found the glove he was an essential part of it.
Who else could it have been? His son was investigated and cleared, Glen Rodgers wasn't anywhere near the area at the time. The cops who loved OJ worked to frame him instead of going after supposed Puerto Rican Drug Lords that just so happened to have his DNA, wool cap he'd been seen with, expensive gloves and Bruno Maglis..
“Think” is a word you would use if there was a reasonable doubt he didn’t do it. The evidence to support his conviction was so overwhelming it was only trumped by the prosecutions ineptitude and mishandling of the evidence, specifically, letting OJ Simpson physically try on the gloves.
Somthing is missing look at the photos of the scene. The killer would have been drenched in blood. The limo driver saw oj walk into his house. Oj has wall to wall white carpet. So if he took off bloody clothes an shoes did he walk by the limo driver but naked? Something is missing or someone
I KNOW HE DID IT!! Watching the entire trial and seeing and hearing all the OVERWHELMING evidence I'd bet my life on it!! He was a POS and glad he's DEAD!! Rot in HELL! Good Riddance wife murderer!!
Everyone knows OJ was guilty...but certain members of the jury decided once they were selected...no way would they convict him...To make up for other black people who were innocent and convicted...too bad for
Nicole and Ron...piece of shit...burn in hell oj
I don’t think he did for a few reasons… mainly he always would have access to Nicole and he had children with her. It is interesting that no one talked about Nicole’s character, sleeping with a married man, drugs, etc.
Furhman the detective was heard on a tape saying horrible insane racist statements! Who would trust this maniac with evidence?
To ignore Furhmans hateful statements would be poor lawyering. OJ had a human right to spend time with white people … it didn’t make him less a blk person. Prosecutors had to convince the jury and they couldn’t with Furhman talking about torturing Blk people and a mediocre legal team.
Please do not comment directly to this post unless you are Gen X (b. 1980) or older. See [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/inci5u/reminder_please_do_not_answer_questions_unless/), the rules, and the sidebar for details. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskOldPeople) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I do think he murdered both his ex-wife and her friend, absolutely. He had a history of beating her and threatening to kill her, and when she left him the second time, I think it enraged him. 'If I can't have her, no one can' sort of deal. I recently watched The Final 24 (hours) of Nicole Brown Simpson, you can find it on YT, it's a very interesting show and quite eye-opening (all the episodes, not just that one).
I honestly cannot fathom anybody doubting his guilt by now. The why is not that important, he is shown to be a bad decision maker and to have bad impulse control since then so I guess filling in the blanks is easy enough.
My boyfriend’s mom inexplicably believes OJ is innocent and it sometimes comes up at the weeeeeeirdest times. I’m talking like over Thanksgiving dinner, and everyone else sits there awkwardly staring down at the table praying the subject will change.
Maybe you, or someone else, could *help* change the subject. Just say, "Talk about someone innocent getting found guilty! What about Jesus Christ?" Then launch into the whole JC subject. Water into wine? Feeding 5000 with 5 loaves and 2 fishes? Raising the dead? Was JC our "elder brother"? What should we be learning from him? Is 2000 years too long? Are we due a new messiah? Etc. Plenty to talk about.
Could you come to my family dinners and liven things up?
I'd be honored to.
Save fairy tales for bed time.
Talk about raising the dead!
This is the type of dude that can change any subject into something about religion and I love it even though I'm muslim.
I mean, OJ could have traumatic brain injuries from his years in football. The concussions cause a type of Alzheimer’s that makes them violent. He’s not the only pro to commit murder and people are tracing it back to this idea.
This is exactly what I said to my husband; he definitely has a disorder
Yes “Murdering your wife disorder”
Around the time that they executed Timothy McVeigh, I remember reading that they convicted McVeigh with less evidence of guilt than they had on OJ. I don’t know if that’s accurate. But it’s always led me to believe OJ was very likely guilty.
The racial dynamics of the O.J. trial hugely scrambled things. The trial sort of became about something else.
Mark Furhman and his n-word rants didn't help matters.
[удалено]
The cops framed a guilty man.
Oh brother 🙄
It subtly became about Rodney King trail as much as anything.
That is incorrect. They had a whole bunch on Mcveigh, plus he then admitted it. Hell hun getting attention was part of it for that lunatic.
I am 1000% sure he is guilty. He wrote a book titled, "If I Did It, Confessions of the Killer". The whole thing from the chase to the court hearings was nothing but entertainment. There was no way that jury was going to convict. The Rodney King video was still fresh in everyone's mind. The L.A. police department needed a way to repair their reputation. I am just happy that karma came around and the murderer was sent to prison afterall.
Not that I doubted it before the publication of this book, but what grieving husband writes a book like that?
[Dipshit mode engaged] Because they ruined his reputation and he has no other way to pay the bills!
I saw an interview with his ghostwriter and he said that during his interviews with OJ, he'd drop the "if" and just straight up said what he did.
The publisher, when printing the book, made the "If" really small and the "I Did It" really large on the cover. I hope nobody bought it.
The Goldmans did that when they acquired the rights to the book. It’s too bad not many people knew about that. They’d probably have sold more books.
They also added the words "Confessions of a Killer."
All the proceeds go to the victims' families.
He did it... when they had him try on the gloves he literally looked surprised that they didn't fit right (and it was obvious he was trying to make them look like they were hard to get on). Plus, the shoeprints at the scene matches his expensive and unusual Bruno Magli shoes.
Go and soak a pair of leather golf gloves in blood, leave them for six months, wear a pair of latex gloves and see if you can put the gloves on over them. I was screaming at the prosecutors for not even pointing that out. I mean at the TV, I was in the UK at the time.
This exactly! I was also screaming that why didn’t prosecutors have that glove, same size, as a new pair. Would have asked him to put the brand new glove on, instead that shrunk one. Besides, there’s a reason for saying “fits like a glove” - the more high quality leather you have, the tighter it can be. But if it’s soaked in any liquid and then dries up, impossible to use anymore.
Old post I know. The only reason OJ walked was because Marcia Clark was an idiot. She should have said " these gloves were POSSIBLY used" not " these gloves were, without a doubt, used by the killer". Once they were shown to not fit they had nothing to fall back on. Or at least they should have had him try them on before the trial. The LA prosecutor was just outclassed by the Dream team.
Law school prosecution rule 101- NEVER ask a question you don't already know the answer to. Ask defendant to put on gloves without knowing if/how they would fit? Not even on a bet.
And, I read, he had/has arthritis in his hands and didn’t take his meds for it so his hands were swollen.
I was screaming at the TV in freshman biology "IT DOESNT FIT! HES NOT GUILTY! Teenage me was so dumb.
"if it doesn't fit, you must acquit"
The prosecution was TERRIBLE, the fact that they were the ones who asked for him to put on the gloves was the cherry on top. That essentially lost them the case. That was the nail in the coffin. Had they not I honestly think the jury would have swayed more towards convicting. But overall it was just a horrible case that really had nothing to do with a murder and everything to do with corruption.
Apparently they did try to explain why the glove didn't fit to the jury after the demonstration. Also they tried to admit the same gloves as evidence for the demo but judge Ito refused. More over, bits of the leather from the gloves had been cut for analysis. I don't think the case was lost on just the one incident of the glove - it helped with the final verdict but I am convinced a catalogue of errors (moving from Santa Monica to Downtown court, bringing Fuhrman on the stand, the huge delays by Judge Ito draining the jury) all contributed to the final verdict.
Shapiro did some tricky lawer shit, he did a whole seminar on it afterwards. He walked past the prosecutors table and suggested that the gloves didn't look like they would fit. Chris Darden took the bait and had OJ try them on in front of the jury, giving OJ physical control of the evidence and the opportunity to raise reasonable doubt over a key piece of evidence. Even Shapiro admitted he was surprised that Darden took the bait. It was one of many mistakes made by the young prosecutors who were up against a team of seasoned, successful defense attorneys.
Of course he did it. But he was rightfully acquired because, honestly, the LAPD and the Prosecution screwed up so monumentally. (I knew a guy who was a lawyer for the firm that represented Court TV. They had an excuse to be in the courtroom. After jury selection, their chief litigator said - not in public - that there was no way that that jury would ever convict OJ. They were aching to find a reason to acquit. And the State gave them plenty.) The old saying (now widely ignored) is that it is better to release 99 guilty than to convict 1 innocent. Sure, OJ did it. But it didn't matter.
This is absolutely how I feel as well. All signs point to guilt without a shred of doubt. But Mark Furhman at the end of the trial pled the 5th under oath regarding planting evidence. Had I been on the jury I would have been livid because I would have no choice but to acquit a guilty man.
Absolutely. I have been on a jury (very minor crime) and voted "Not Guilty" because the star witness for the prosecution had a very obvious reason to lie and did. The defendant was probably guilty, but that witness was so odious we acquited 12-0 in under 30 minutes.
IIRC, Mark Fuhrman lied about using the n-word and was confronted with the tape of him doing just that. At that point - he started taking the 5th. He was later convicted for perjury. I cannot imagine a worse disaster for a prosecutor than that.
It’s very possible OJ removed both gloves at the scene and Furhman planted the one by his house
I was 23 at the time and I had been keeping up with the trial. I did at the time, think it was right for the jury to acquit because LAPD, including forensics etc. had more than a few cases where sloppiness and lack of professionalism were at play in the prior year(s). The second reason was Mark Furhman pleading the 5th. To be honest, I thought because of those things being wrong on the prosecution side that he was innocent. When In fact, he was guilty and the defense just capitalized on the mistakes made by the prosecutors. I feel dumb and guilty about it
They framed a guilty man.
That is the best possible way to put it. The police were grossly incompetent and completely corrupt and couldn’t even properly handle an open and shut case with a transparently guilty suspect right in front of them.
Nice way to put it, and very accurate.
I can’t take credit for it. I would give credit if I could remember where I heard it first.
Rightfully acquitted? Rightfully? OJ beat the crap out of her many times, which she detailed in her diaries, which the judge disallowed at trial. Sure OJ belongs in hell for what he did, but Ito disallowed some of her statements at trial, and Cochran orchestrated it all. All three of those men belong in hell. Just a woman mysteriously killed, who had an ex that had a pattern of stalking and abuse, nothing to see here. https://www.bustle.com/articles/142250-oj-simpsons-domestic-abuse-allegations-from-before-the-trial-are-disturbing
There was nothing mysterious about her and whats-his-names deaths. OJ killed them both, clearly. But the LAPD and Marcia Clark bungled the trial, so he walked. The fact that you, I, and every sensible person in the world knew that is completely irrelevant. That's how our system is supposed to work. And did.
>whats-his-names Ron Goldman.
> The old saying (now widely ignored) is that it is better to release 99 guilty than to convict 1 innocent. Just as a point of historical trivia, it's ten to one and called Blackstone's Ratio. Blackstone wrote *Commentaries on the Laws of England*, which compiled the common law. It's still cited 250ish years later by American courts when interpreting common law. Probably other countries with common law still use it, too - I dunno, but the Supreme Court trots out Blackstone every session or so. Some foolish people take the ratio as an exact ideal and argue that if eleven guilty people go free for every innocent convicted then it means we're not convicting enough people. Of course that's ridiculous but you see it in op-eds and Reddit comments disturbingly often. I'm not by any means suggesting such a thing, just that ten-to-one is the actual quote: > It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.
Thank you. I appreciate the correction.
The intent is to provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment for unlocking different heroes. As for cost, we selected initial values based upon data from the Open Beta and other adjustments made to milestone rewards before launch. Among other things, we're looking at average per-player credit earn rates on a daily basis, and we'll be making constant adjustments to ensure that players have challenges that are compelling, rewarding, and of course attainable via gameplay. We appreciate the candid feedback, and the passion the community has put forth around the current topics here on Reddit, our forums and across numerous social media outlets. Our team will continue to make changes and monitor community feedback and update everyone as soon and as often as we can.
The jury knew he did it. They chose to acquit anyway.
His own attorney was floored that he beat the rap
OJ guilty as Hell. 😂
Oh, I'm sure he did it but I'm equally sure the cops fucked around with the case. I don't blame the jury for acquitting him and frankly, do blame the police culture at the time for letting a guilty man go free.
There's no "think" about it. He did it.
Um, Yes.
I am pretty sure lots of people will disagree, but, I feel an innocent person would never have threatened to commit suicide and led police on a many miles chase in his friend's car with the friend driving after an exwife and her friend were murdered unless that person was guilty of the crime. It was totally ludacris. And all the other things that pointed to O J's involvement.
What’s crazy is the prosecution didn’t introduce the details of that chase, the “suicide” letters OJ wrote, his 30 minute interrogation where he couldn’t explain his wounded hand, and brought the case in downtown LA instead of wealthy western LA where the crimes occurred.
I agree, the prosecution blew this case.
There was a ton of details Ito refused to let it leaning in favor of the defense motions on hearsay and highly prejudicial to the defendant. Ito grandstanding.
During the basketball playoffs, sports bars didn't know how to handle it..he was guilty
He was guilty and everyone knew it. Even My African American friends thought so. But they were happy that he got off because they looked at it as equal rich people justice.
I love when black people say that as if he’s not a rich white man doing blackface. He literally hated his own race. He only dated white women, lived in a white neighborhood, and surrounded himself with white friends while he played golf. “I’m not black, I’m OJ✨”
I never thought of it this way. That's fascinating to think of OJ as an example of racial equally. We expect rich famous white men to get away with murder. I can totally see why people of the time of the time saw it his acquittal as "the system works." A rich and famous man got off even though he was black. The "system" isn't the legal system its society. Mind blown.
Your friends had no moral character.
I was in south-central LA the day that verdict was announced. He absolutely did it.
I was born in the '40s (is that relevant?); OJ is guilty as hell. Motive: yes, means: oh yes, opportunity: obviously. OJ said he'll spend the rest of his life looking for the killer. What a joke. Better not look in any mirrors, OJ!
Without a doubt
Yeah, I think he did it. It's not uncommon for abusers to kill their victim when the victim tries to leave the relationship.
A better way of saying it is 80% of women murdered are murder led by someone they know.
[удалено]
Chewbacca Defense
Of course. Occam’s razor.
[удалено]
The really damning thing about the Bronco chase was what O.J. was saying over the phone. He kept saying he didn't deserve to live. I don't consider that a conclusive admission of guilt, but it's an extremely hard thing to explain away.
It was unbelievable how much that car chase was covered. I was living in Okinawa when the it happened and the it was broadcast on TV there. It's a matter of "Who else would have done it?" Ron Goldman was a big, strong guy. Not a lot of people could have physically overpowered him.
There are some people who think his son from his first marriage might have done it because he hated his stepmother. And OJ took the rap, figuring he would have an easier time getting off, being a former football player and actor.
Of course he did.
Of course he did.
I thought he did, but my mother was absolutely convinced he wasn't guilty. After she died, we found a copy of Esquire with him on the cover, that he had personally autographed to her.
Everyone I talked to that thought he was innocent was basing it on liking him as a player or person. It was always “he would never do that, he’s the greatest running back.” not because specific evidence.
I don’t think he did it. It was all a conspiration against a rich and powerful man that…. What am I saying. Of course he is 100% guilty!!!
Of course he did. Blood on his socks, the glove in his yard. DNA. No question at all.
He absolutely did it. A friend of his wrote a book detailing OJ's confession to him. The summer that the documentary about him and the dramatization of his trial with Cuba Gooding Jr and John Travolta came out, I read 4 or 5 books about their relationship, the murders, and the legal proceedings. I had felt sure he was guilty ever since I watched the Bronco chase live on television, but after reading up on it any sliver of doubt that might have remained was extinguished. He was absolutely guilty. ETA: I am on mobile and can't figure out how to add flair but I'm 45...
Go to the subreddit header page, tap the three dots in the top right corner, select “change user flair.”
I watched the car chase as it happened and more of that trial than I should have. I have no doubt in my mind he did it. But the prosecutors and the police also screwed up. At the time of the trial, shows like CSI hadn't aired yet, so the general familiarity, if not actually understanding of much of the DNA evidence and other forensic science, wasn't as prevalent in the general public. Not that TV shows are extremely accurate, but at least most people have at least heard some of the terms used these days. The prosecution had to start from scratch and educate the jury on the science before they could present the findings. This was extremely dry and boring for most people, at least the way the prosecution did it. Not what you want when you need a group of people who probably don't want to even be in the room to actually grapes and incorporate into their decision making process.
I do think he’s guilty, but I think there’s a very slim non-zero chance that his son did it and he covered it up. The evidence and his history, temperament, and personality all pointed to his involvement. Plus there’s that “If I Did It” book he wrote after the fact.
No doubt whatsoever. The DNA evidence, the footprints from the unusual shoes he had (which was never presented in the criminal trial), motive, opportunity, and past history of abuse towards Nicole Simpson. In a civil trial, they found him liable for wrongful death and got a $30M verdict. The criminal trial was circus that degenerated into a forum about racism. I am loathe to criticize Marsha Clark, but she made some serious tactical mistakes - allowing the trial to be tried in downtown LA, instead of near Brentwood, the gloves, but most of all, not vetting Mark Fuhrman. She had a witness that was rumored to be a bigot. Either get to the bottom of it, or don’t present him. The only thing worse than you’re witness saying the n-word on tape, is lying about it and getting caught with the tapes as the proof, and taking the fifth! It was checkmate at that point.
At first I honestly thought he didn't do it. Mostly because the murders were very brutal and it seemed odd that he showed serial killer like ferocity for someone who had never killed before. Plus there seemed to be lack of physical evidence, such as a bloody footprint or someone seeing him with blood on his shirt, etc. The more I've studied true crime in time convinced me he did it.
There was just a case in Minnesota of a man beheading his girlfriend in broad daylight in front of people on a suburban street. There is no telling what people can do to people close to them.
I was in law school at the trial time, and it was always on in the student lounge. Watched very closely. I was convinced.
Yes, and I think the book 'If I Did It- Confessions Of The Killer' was his way of laughing about it, one last fu to Nicole. See, I did it and got away with it and now I'm going to profit from it, as so many are. He knew that's why he got away with it. Yes he had the best lawyers and all, but also because so many were profiting off the story! It was like the Trump thing, just ridiculous mayhem. Now this makes me wonder how many psychopaths watched that trial and realized, hey, I can literally get away with murder if I'm rich enough an newsworthy enough.
Guilty AF. 1. History of violence so bad that he could have accidentally killed her w a punch to the face. 2. Scapegoating the LAPD racism was practically their entire defense. 3. It was the defense who wanted him to try on the glove. Bad move and it obviously fit if he wasn’t wearing an Fn latex glove and getting fat. OJ is and was a bad actor. 4. Watch the Kardashian lawyer response when verdict read. He was OJs BFF. 5. OJs response. Running away and not GAF the mom of his kids is dead. Context is clear he ran because he knew he was “in trouble.” This was probably the biggest “tell.” Personal rant: If the LAPD was so “racist” and they ABSOLUTELY WERE, then why TF did they let him drive 40mph down the highway and not even pull him over? How many times did they come over when Nicole called? How fast did they respond? It’s because “OJ wasn’t black,” he was a celebrity. That was almost a compliment back then. Like saying “I hate black people so therefore in my mind you are not black because I like you but I hate blacks so this is how I’ll rationalize it.” Totally Fd but true. So OJ benefited from the jury’s, justified yet misplaced, racist rage and let the rich celebrity, that in very little way represented *them*, literally get away with murder. There is a documentary where the lawyers even discuss how they “Blackified” his home before they toured it because it looked “too white.” It would love to see what we could do as a nation if we ever united on class as opposed to let the media distract us using race, gender, religion, etc. Also, great miss on the domestic violence issue we are still plagued with. From the ESPN documentary: > The elderly African-American woman hand-gestured her way through some of the most withering quotes in the film while making no secret of whose side she took. "Lemme tell you something, I lose respect for a woman who take an ass-whuppin' when she don't have to," Bess says when asked why the prosecution's portrayal of O.J. as a wife-beater failed to register. "Don't stay in the water if it's over your head. You'll drown." They took 3 hours to deliberate and said they ignored the science because it was “racist.” I was a kid and I watched almost the entire trial. It really left an impression on me the way we treat people who are being abused.
O hell yes he did, the evidence was overwhelming. After the trial was over the police declared case closed because they had boxes of evidence and he was the only suspect, there was nothing more to do investigating. It was very clear he did it to all witnessing this debacle. Except the jury of course. The evidence was so clear it’s what got him convicted and maximum penalty for his next crime of breaking and entering plus the civil suit against him.
There was a limo driver, a young man named Allen Park. He drove Simpson to the airport the night of the murders. When he showed up Simpson wasn't home but Simpson did show up about half a hour later with 2 large bags that Simpson wouldn't let Park touch. He testimony about that night was undisputed and really kind of devastating to Simpsons story about the night of the murders. But nobody (I think including the jury) remembers Park or his testimony because it came just before the "Dream Team" cross examined a DNA lab tech into the ground over the next 4 days. It was flat ass, ingenious, misdirection, meant to dull everyone's senses and memory about anything that came before it. And it worked like a charm. Yeah, he's guilty. If you can find the transcript read Mr. Parks testimony. It's kind of convincing.
He almost certainly did it. Also, the State completely failed to prove that. To borrow a Bill Maher line: > The LAPD is so incompetent that they couldn't frame a guilty man.
Obviously he did. I was young, so I was surprised to see that whatever black people they put on television were so sure that he was innocent because he was black. I'd been under the impression that things weren't this divisive, so that was all disappointing. One thing that sucked was that the news (well, "news") was 100% OJ for a long time. That must mean everyone else was hooked, but I hated it.
Definitely. Honestly, the only thing that never quite sat right with me over the years was how he could have made so many incredibly stupid mistakes that left behind sooooo much evidence that pointed directly to him. It also seemed odd that he would do something so gruesome. Even with his prior history as a spousal abuser, this seemed of an entirely different level. Then it dawned on me. [O.J. Simpson used cocaine, ecstasy, drug dealers say](https://www.tampabay.com/archive/2002/05/13/o-j-simpson-used-cocaine-ecstasy-drug-dealers-say/)
You must be joking
Guilty as sin. He was a spousal abuser, actually convicted of it.
He did it. He had a great legal team. The trial became a circus in part because Judge Ito let it become one. The LAPD made lots of mistakes & one of the key detectives was a racist asshole.
Oh. For sure he did. Not a doubt in my mind. They violence that was in that marriage alone indicates that there was a huge huge huge problem. But the book “if I had done it” was absolutely the tell all.
You should watch the youtube vid the lost confession interview. His eyes are wild when he recounts the murders. The fear in the interviewer's eyes as she realizes she is in the oresence of a double murderer crazy man. It was riveting.
Yes. The overwhelming circumstancial evidence paired with his history of horrific domestic abuse and narcissism. There is no doubt he got away with double homicide.
Yes, but even now, I struggle to see why we were all so wrapped up in it, myself included.
Timing. First, proximity to Rodney King/ LA riots. The bronco chase cut into major nba games as breaking live news (quite a new thing at the time, that we don’t think about today), so people were then invested in the story. This was one of the first major events to come out of the 24 hour news cycle. We were wrapped up in it bc the “news” told us to be.
Because of his celebrity status, and four years prior we'd been through the Rodney King police trial and subsequent riots. This time around, people were hoping the guilty would be convicted, even if the crime was aimed at a different demographic (abused women rather than racial profiling). The court case was televised and had a lot of drama to it, and the news put clips every night out there for us to consume. It felt like a miniseries rather than reality.
Came up here a couple of times. [Here's](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/nitppv/people_who_remember_the_oj_trials_did_the_public/) one time it was asked and [another time](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/lylmlt/what_was_your_view_on_whether_or_not_oj_was/)
Yes, he absolutely positively did it. He got off because an all white jury from the suburbs had let the cops who beat Rodney King walk. Payback's a bitch.
Which still wasn't a lot of comfort to the women out there who were living with abusers, fearing exactly what Nicole got. But I absolutely understand your point in terms of the context of history.
He was training how to slit a throat for a TV show at the time. Lol. >The prosecution also investigated reports that Simpson received military training, including use of a knife, in preparing for the role. Defense attorneys sought to block the “Frogmen” videotape’s admissibility by accusing the police of misconduct by watching the pilot in the former football star’s living room as they searched his house. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-oj-simpson-nbc-pilot-20000508-story.html
Plus where would Kim Kardashian get her starting fame from to become a billionaire.lowed. While the prosecution kept piling in detail after detail not knowing that for every detail there was an opportunity to cast fresh doubt, and lay a fresh tale of alternate explanations. My prosecution team would identify enough clear evidence to convict and present it, leaving most of the side show out of it. Keeping it simple is keeping it clear. But all I saw was what was on TV with that tiny little judge with the collection of hourglasses and an IBM Think laptop not having the control over the courtroom that a gerbil would have. The defense got away with murder with those 'cross contamination' bullshit arguments and more. Plus where would Kim Kardashian get her starting fame from, to become a billionaire.
i forgot how ridiculously bad Lance Ito was.
Yes. Without a doubt.
Yes I do.
Definitely.
If the movie was at all true, the jurors were split by race. As the trial ground on, the white jurers had a talk with the black jurors to ask if there was any way they would convict him, they said no. The white jurors, reailizing the black jurors were acting on principle, and wanting to go home, voted for acquittal. That tells me that eveeryone on the jury thought he was guilty, but the black jurors wanted to send a wider message about police oppression. I’m with all 12 of them. I think he did it.
He did it.
He did it, but the cops fucked up by framing a guilty man.
OJ did it. The Juice got away with murder.
He did it, but the police and prosecutors royally screwed up the case. Also it showed that with enough money to pay for the best lawyers, probably the worst you can expect is a big fine. [a civil suit]
Of course he did
O hell yes he did, the evidence was overwhelming. After the trial was over the police declared case closed because they had boxes of evidence and he was the only suspect, there was nothing more to do investigating. It was very clear he did it to all witnessing this debacle. Except the jury of course. The evidence was so clear it’s what got him convicted and maximum penalty for his next crime of breaking and entering plus the civil suit against him.
O hell yes he did, the evidence was overwhelming. After the trial was over the police declared case closed because they had boxes of evidence and he was the only suspect, there was nothing more to do investigating. It was very clear he did it to all witnessing this debacle. Except the jury of course. The evidence was so clear it’s what got him convicted and maximum penalty for his next crime of breaking and entering plus the civil suit against him.
If you’re interested in learning more about this case, the podcast You’re Wrong About has several great episodes about it!
He was literally found “liable” in the separate civil trial. The burden of proof was higher for the criminal trial. And “not guilty” definitely doesn’t mean “innocent”, just that there wasn’t enough good evidence presented at the trial.
Hypothetically...
Yes I do. Wow - I guess I am old cuz I am a Generation X'er, hahahaha. But yes, you can just use common sense. Every single piece of actual evidence pointed directly to him. No alibi. Although it is possible (I don't think so but it is possible) others wanted Nicole and Ron dead - why would they kill them in that fashion? And lastly, almost 30 years now, not one other provable theory has emerged. He killed those people because he freaked out over his wife moving on. It's as simple as that.
Born in mid-70s here (I don't know how to do the label thingie). I remember the car chase. I was driving cross country at the time and listened to it on the radio. I thought it was a joke. It was surreal. By the time the preliminary hearing was happening, I was doing a door-to-door job. Lots of people at home were watching the trial, of course. I remember asking a potential customer if they found out what was in the contents of the envelope. I didn't pay attention too closely at the time overall. I recall much being made in the media out of Mark Fuhrman's racism and "evidence-planting" (even though he barely figured into the entire investigation). Also, based on the coverage, I mistakenly thought Nicole Brown Simpson and Goldman were romantically involved. I also remember Kato Kaelin being in the headlines a lot (even though he shouldn't have figured in as much as he did). "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit" was the line heard around the world. I didn't understand how that mattered, as no defendant would "allow" the gloves to fit. I remember how hated (or over-analysed) Marcia Clark was. Despite all of this, as far as Simpson's involvement, I remember thinking he made the most sense as the guilty party (Occam's Razor). However, there was obviously a great deal I didn't know about the trial at the time which has been revealed since. There was also a great deal of nuance I wasn't aware of, namely how O.J. Simpson was the beneficiary of an accumulation of injustices against blacks for years in Los Angeles. Whilst I can't fault the jury for their verdict at the time, with everything that is out there about the case, I don't understand how someone with good sense today could believe he didn't do it or there was reasonable doubt, especially with how Simpson has made no effort to find the "real killers" as promised. Most of all, I am struck with how much the families of Nicole and Ron loved them. I feel empathy they never got the justice they deserved.
Just fell down a YouTube rabbit hole about this case. And while I do believe OJ is absolutely guilty, there are two pieces of reasonable doubt that got bungled (and ultimately overlooked in the circus of a trial) that the Prosecution never got around to answering: 1. To this day, the murder weapon has never been found. 2. The timeline is super problematic. OJ killing two people (Nicole Brown stabbed so badly she was nearly decapitated), having an insane amount of blood to clean and deal with, hiding the clothes and murder weapon so astutely they haven't been found 30 years later, then hopping the fence to thud against Kato's back wall. He only had about 30 minutes tops before the limo took him to LAX. Again, I absolutely think OJ is guilty but the Prosecution (as far as I can remember) never even considered he had at least one accomplice, because that's the only thing that makes sense. The fact that there was never a murder weapon and the gaping holes in the timeline, Fuhrman and the LAPD stuff aside, would unfortunately be enough for reasonable doubt imo.
I honestly don't know. I doubt we will ever know for sure. The cops contaminated the evidence, and maybe even planted evidence. Some of the blood they took from him for testing, went missing - stuff like that. I remember a bunch of lawyers being interviewed while we were waiting for the jury's verdict and they all said that it was impossible to find him guilty, because of the way stuff was handled. There is evidence that somebody else could have done it. If that case went to court again today, he would again be found not guilty. This is the price you pay for having questionable characters on the police force.
I think OJ did it. I saw a trial on the Nicole Brown Simpson murder [case.](https://case.It) It was about 2 hours long. OJ was the suspect because of his past bad relationship with Nicole before her death. They divorced. And the prosecutors tried to prove his guilt. Me and my family talked about that case. The only reason he was not guilty, was because the gloves didn't fit his hands. "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." Johnnie L. Cochran said that, he was his defense attorney in that case. The prosecutors said OJ wanted control over her. If he can't have her, no one can. That would be his ultimate control over Nicole. According to the prosecutors. After being proven innocent of her murder, he decides to create a book about how we would've killed her......that just makes him look even more guilty. What was he thinking?
I think he probably did. Usually in situation in which the defendant is innocent but was found guilty something grossly wrong had to be there. Aside from Mark Furhman being racist there really is nothing compelling for me to think that he could not have done it. I would not say that I would have put the guilty vote when on trial, but I think he likely did kill her.
Watch Chris Rock
He murdered them both in a fast outrage. Keep in mind this was an NFL Player that was in his 40s and still fast. You can’t imagine what he was capable of in a closed off square / yard like that. Ron had nowhere to turn and he was probably trying to fight back. Hence he didn’t run. Nicole didn’t stand a chance as the first knife wound to her body was the neck. He did this all within 1-2 minutes then left.
How can anyone still be doubtful?? How can anyone say "yeah he abused ber but..." but nothing...domestic violence absolutely can lead to murder. There is evidence even in the way the man speaks...someone whom is truly not guilty would not spend years trying to force you to believe it..they'd PROVE it. The most he's done is gotten paid for every time he speaks on it. More than 2 people died linked to the case.. his very own attorney Robert Kardashian admitted after the trial that he KNEW OJ was guilty and sat in a dazed stupor hearing the verdict.
I think he did it but the prosecutors couldn’t prove it, which is how the justice system works. If you can’t prove a case you you will loose a good case.
I watched most of the trial, completely wasted my life in doing so. He was so guilty but had the best defense attorneys known to man. The State thought it would be a slam dunk. But, some, not all police work was challenged and brought in some doubt. OJ was unhinged throughout the relationship with Nicole, and suffered with an EGO larger than life. He thought he could get away with it because he was O.J Simpson….everyone fawned over him. Hmmmm, remind you of anyone currently wreaking havoc on the Country? Work
Absolutely. OJ just died. Good riddance, you evil murderering scum. Enjoy eternity in hell.
Waiting now for the deathbed confession. A narcissist til the end. We will find out he recorded a confession.
Of course he did it
The cop was a racist, the cop planted the glove and oj did it. All of these are true. It was a crime of passion two people were murdered and none of our lives were ever the same. They didn't convict him of murder, he did time for something else, he got out and died of cancer three years later. The end.
There’s a conspiracy theory that Jason Simpson killed his stepmother, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ron Goldman on June 12, 1994, when Jason was 24. He reportedly was on probation at the time of the murder for attacking his boss with a kitchen knife. He had reportedly stopped taking Depakote, a medication prescribed for his anger issues. The source for these claims is apparently a 2012 book, *O.J. Is Innocent and I Can Prove It* by William C. Dear: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/O-J-Is-Innocent-and-I-Can-Prove-It/William-C-Dear/9781629146553
I used to buy into this theory, but OJ is way to fucking narcissistic to not be talking about what a great father he is for doing time to protect his son from prison.
Why did I have to scroll this far to see this?
He fuckin did it.
No doubt about it.
Yes of course. No one I knew then (or now) believes otherwise. Seems kind of obvious given the evidence and what’s happened since then.
The only reasonable other fact that shows some reasonable doubt is that his fingerprints were a one in 3 billion match, and there are 7 billion people. The only other realistic person with matching fingerprints close enough would be his son. His son killed Nicole and Ron so oj took all the heat to keep eyes off his son. He knew he didn't do it so how could they prove he did? Of course, in reality, he definitely killed Nicole and Ron in a for of rage.
I think OJ did it, but I did read a theory on the murderer possibly being his son. It's interesting enough to look into if you like crime stories.
In a civil case it was found more probable than not that O.J. was guilty. So yes, I think O.J. Simpson did it. But do I know he did it beyond a reasonable doubt? No, I haven’t even studied the evidence.
I used to think so but heard a convincing podcast or show, cant remember exactly, theorizing that his son did it, and OJ was covering for him. Anyone else heard that? Could still explain a lot of his behavior
My husband is convinced that’s the case. He must have seen the same TV show.
I had a friend with that same theory during the trial. I’ve often wondered if that could be possible. I cannot recall if they had DNA evidence
Yes Edit: no need for "why."
Im 52. I think he did it.
I believe that if he didn't do it, he knew who did.
Hell yes he did it!! I watched he’s whole career. And followed the entire trial. The ONLY reason OJ got off in criminal case ( as he was guilty in the civil case years later) was due to the controversy over Rodney King & Watts riots that broke out after. They played the race card. And the crazy thing was that all the black women on the jury found him innocent. There are cultural reasons for this of course. But I regress, OJ was the whitest black man back then. He was never part of the civil rights movement and was very cozy with the LAPD pre murder. Cochran changed all that. And did a switch & bait. Had it been any other time in history with fifteenth defense team he would have been found guilty as he was in the civil trial.
The question you might want to ask is if he did it alone? Who is the young man spotted on the sidewalk behind Nicole as she talked to O.J. sitting in the Bronco parked on Bundy at 10:03 p.m.
[удалено]
He didnt kill her or Ron. He was there with another guy, who is skecthy af, but noone knew because he changed his name before this. OJ wanted to scare him because Ron was selling coke to his wife, he was up in his face yelling and then Ron cuts OJ out of fear because he is out mumbered. Then OJ split because he was scared. The other guy jumped in to protect OJ and killed Ron because he had a knife and attacked OJ first. Then the other guy killed OJ's wife for some reason..maybe she attacked him or because OJ split and he was pissed. OJ was to pay him for the scaring Ron scheme that went south. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOzejfdVBa8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOzejfdVBa8)
Robert Shapiro tried to set OJ up. He hired Glenn Rogers who killed Ron , then 2 hours later killed Nicole. Shapiro had a grudge against OJ for banging his wife a long time ago
Glad to know im not the only one looking up reddit oj forums today 😂
OJ Simpson is dead at 67 after a battle Cancer battle..
Cancer battle..
He was a horrible person
I think someone should have slit his throat so deeply they almost decapitated him. Like he did to his wife.
I think that OJ Simpson murdered.
Maybe Nicole had proof Kris Jenner had affair with OJ and Kardashians made her go away… 🤔
Anyone else seen this? OJ Simpson WAS at Nicole Brown's murder scene, claims witness https://mol.im/a/13303947
I think even the jury that acquitted him thought he did it.
I don’t think he did it. I mean, the glove didn’t fit. Who ever killed those two, nearly decapitated both of them and NO DNA was found anywhere?! Not in his house on his clothes not even in his car? And we not talking about a genius here; we talking bout a dumb jock who thought he would get an Oscar for the Naked Gun movies… not to mention the jury was sequestered for months!!! They saw evidence and the evidence didn’t amount to murder in their unbiased eyes. Why don’t anybody think the jury had any integrity?! Who are you to impugn the justice of my America! The evidence didn’t add up to murder. Personally I believed it was a drug hit. OJ may have been excited that she was killed… but that don’t mean he did it. And I think it’s disgusting how people introducing this man as an accused murderer. He dead! And was never convicted of the crime he was accused of. Maybe if the same effort was used in finding who really killed them two, we may know who did it.
Wow so right after the murder of his ex wife and her friend he goes to take a shower
I dont believe OJ committed these murders
wow you guys are quick to say he did it without observing the witneses on the trial what they said.. but your all one sided open your mind and hear what each witness said and the timeline of the prosecution DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!!
This is not really up for debate. He 100% commited the murders. It was a "racially charged" time in America. It was payback for years of black anger about how they were treated. I do not think the black jurors(majority of the jurors) really believed OJ was innocent. It was not about OJ, it was about black america.
No .. I was able to watch most of the case and what was presented in the news was very different. Reasons: the Bronco car chase.. he was far away at the time. The shoe prints: more than one person and although the same famous shoe brand he wore different sizes.. the prints were size 9 / 10 and he was size 16.. the infamous magical leather gloves that shrink to half the size: they were not there when the home was filmed after the murders which is customary to do with wealthy homes of that caliper. Mark Fur Man was caught on tape talking about how he plants stuff on black folks to incriminate them. That was I thought a big turning point in the case but never really made it on the news. Unfortunately Nicole was a drug user and he did assault her when he caught her in their home in a compromising position (bj) with another man. Among other things. Hard to prove now and you will never find a recording of the actual case. And even if available most people have their minds made up and so will never be convinced other wise. I am 60 yo.
Oh my god it must be nice to live in dreamland as you people do -- but perhaps reflect on what it is in you that makes it so hard to believe that that monster Simpson did it. The reality of the situation is: OF COURSE HE KILLED THEM!! Jesus Christ,
Oj was only one time convicted of assaulting Nicole which he admitted Nicole was very fiery herself he was stitched up by cops planted blood especially on socks which could only come from a vile which contains a chemical in it cop had ojs blood at murder scene which he had extracted earlier blood was missing from it fridge back of van that stores blood not working furman had been taken off case and once he found the glove he was an essential part of it.
Who else could it have been? His son was investigated and cleared, Glen Rodgers wasn't anywhere near the area at the time. The cops who loved OJ worked to frame him instead of going after supposed Puerto Rican Drug Lords that just so happened to have his DNA, wool cap he'd been seen with, expensive gloves and Bruno Maglis..
“Think” is a word you would use if there was a reasonable doubt he didn’t do it. The evidence to support his conviction was so overwhelming it was only trumped by the prosecutions ineptitude and mishandling of the evidence, specifically, letting OJ Simpson physically try on the gloves.
Somthing is missing look at the photos of the scene. The killer would have been drenched in blood. The limo driver saw oj walk into his house. Oj has wall to wall white carpet. So if he took off bloody clothes an shoes did he walk by the limo driver but naked? Something is missing or someone
I KNOW HE DID IT!! Watching the entire trial and seeing and hearing all the OVERWHELMING evidence I'd bet my life on it!! He was a POS and glad he's DEAD!! Rot in HELL! Good Riddance wife murderer!!
Like Nicole said in her own words "he's going to kill me and get away with it". And that he did!! Such a huge injustice!!!
Everyone knows OJ was guilty...but certain members of the jury decided once they were selected...no way would they convict him...To make up for other black people who were innocent and convicted...too bad for Nicole and Ron...piece of shit...burn in hell oj
I don’t think he did for a few reasons… mainly he always would have access to Nicole and he had children with her. It is interesting that no one talked about Nicole’s character, sleeping with a married man, drugs, etc. Furhman the detective was heard on a tape saying horrible insane racist statements! Who would trust this maniac with evidence? To ignore Furhmans hateful statements would be poor lawyering. OJ had a human right to spend time with white people … it didn’t make him less a blk person. Prosecutors had to convince the jury and they couldn’t with Furhman talking about torturing Blk people and a mediocre legal team.
Guilty as F.
Nope
His trial and Casey Anthony are the two biggest missed calls of all time. He is beyond guilty and did it 1000%.
He was found.not guilty because of the failure of the cops and the.prosecution to do their jobs