OJ simpson Died

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Menendez Brothers were also unfairly maligned but now they may be released as it’s come out their father was sexually abusing them since childhood.

Wanna take a hunch who didn’t take their word for it? Lapd

What? A jury didn’t take their word for it but also abuse wasn’t allowed in 2nd trial so there’s that.

Oj, no shadow of a doubt, he did it and you fall for the same thing Trumpers do. Maybe, it was this, that, someone else, instead of trump.
Deflection doesn’t work for Oj. The evidence was overwhelming

Omg. The evidence was not overwhelming. In fact, it was obviously falsified . this will be my last post here as it is obvious people here aren’t open minded .

I don’t think that crime was done by one singular person. You can’t hold a knife, someone’s body, and then another body and a dog unless you have a third hand around

It could have been boulders.

[Anonymous]

https://apple.news/ACTwGHp7kRpeBEE-aBPKLMg

[Anonymous]

His confession

https://apple.news/ACTwGHp7kRpeBEE-aBPKLMg

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:His confession

https://apple.news/ACTwGHp7kRpeBEE-aBPKLMg

If he confessed, it would’ve made breaking news years ago. He was being exploited.

Every Tom, Dick, and Harry was monetizing An encounter with OJ and how he only confessed to them in private of course . He’s just going around confessing to everybody (prisoners, journalists, agents). I guess now the hospice workers will say he has a final confession. I’m sure forged letters will come out and sold to tabloids with his “deathbed confession”

[Anonymous]

I stopped reading that article at the first paragraph. From the beginning, it starts with hypothetical and vague.

Could you imagine someone with this logic being on a jury of your peers and in charge of critical thinking about a case and evidence?

If O.J. Simpson had played football in the '60s for Bay Shore High School and taken Harold Anderson's humanities class, he would have known this.
Mr. Anderson would have lovingly encouraged O.J. to play less football and read more Shakespeare, which may have led to a better outcome for O.J. in the long run.

[Anonymous]

Clearly, she must have been asleep during her own Shakespeare classes because lots of violence and murders occur. Shakespeare would love the OJ and Nicole case

[Anonymous]

To be fair, if anyone responding on here by saying that O.J. Simpson was innocent, is under say…..45 yrs. old then sorry but your opinion would be simply based on things that you have read about, etc.

Those 45+ who actually remember when everything happened actually can vouch for the fact that there was a lot of compelling evidence presented in court, however the jury simply focused on the wrong things when making their decision to acquit.

There were mistakes made during the aftermath of the actual murder, I.e., contaminated blood from investigators walking throughout the crime scene.
Also, Mark Furhman, the detective who claimed he found the bloody glove on OJ’s property could not be trusted since he publicly perjured himself on the witness stand.

That key part was a huge blow to the defense as nothing he said could be taken in as legitimate.
Finally the jury pool was predominantly Black and at the time, Black people were still hugely angry due to the Rodney King situation and this was a golden opportunity to make a statement.

OJ had a ton of compelling evidence against him - DNA and more.
However there were other factors at play during the trial which the jury focused on instead which caused a murderer to walk free. 🙁

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be fair, if anyone responding on here by saying that O.J. Simpson was innocent, is under say…..45 yrs. old then sorry but your opinion would be simply based on things that you have read about, etc.

Those 45+ who actually remember when everything happened actually can vouch for the fact that there was a lot of compelling evidence presented in court, however the jury simply focused on the wrong things when making their decision to acquit.

There were mistakes made during the aftermath of the actual murder, I.e., contaminated blood from investigators walking throughout the crime scene.
Also, Mark Furhman, the detective who claimed he found the bloody glove on OJ’s property could not be trusted since he publicly perjured himself on the witness stand.

That key part was a huge blow to the defense as nothing he said could be taken in as legitimate.
Finally the jury pool was predominantly Black and at the time, Black people were still hugely angry due to the Rodney King situation and this was a golden opportunity to make a statement.

OJ had a ton of compelling evidence against him - DNA and more.
However there were other factors at play during the trial which the jury focused on instead which caused a murderer to walk free. 🙁

The jury made the right decision. If Oj were white, he would have got off as well with the same jury. The detective perjuring himself and Cochran calling out Marcia Clark and Dardens contrasting stories was a huge death blow.

Again, the motivation was supposedly OJ seeing Nicole and Ron together . But the production also said Ron walked into the slaying and tried to play hero. How would he hold down , stab both without help? Why outside in public where everyone can see? She wasn’t in a secluded ranch but a townhouse community in Brentwood .

Can anyone concede that at the very least even if you think he’s guilty, he couldn’t have done it alone?

Both Nicole and Ron fought their attacker very very hard. There are ring or teeth impressions on knuckles (of course dental records weren’t examined-dental impressions are increasingly a huge exoneration and modern DNA indicator ) . None of this was looked at. Drops of blood not belonging to OJ were found on Nicole’s back.

Why were the kids not questioned? They were there and maybe saw or heard something. An argument and yelling would ensue. Nobody gets stabbed without a fight

[Anonymous]

Prosecution *

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be fair, if anyone responding on here by saying that O.J. Simpson was innocent, is under say…..45 yrs. old then sorry but your opinion would be simply based on things that you have read about, etc.

Those 45+ who actually remember when everything happened actually can vouch for the fact that there was a lot of compelling evidence presented in court, however the jury simply focused on the wrong things when making their decision to acquit.

There were mistakes made during the aftermath of the actual murder, I.e., contaminated blood from investigators walking throughout the crime scene.
Also, Mark Furhman, the detective who claimed he found the bloody glove on OJ’s property could not be trusted since he publicly perjured himself on the witness stand.

That key part was a huge blow to the defense as nothing he said could be taken in as legitimate.
Finally the jury pool was predominantly Black and at the time, Black people were still hugely angry due to the Rodney King situation and this was a golden opportunity to make a statement.

OJ had a ton of compelling evidence against him - DNA and more.
However there were other factors at play during the trial which the jury focused on instead which caused a murderer to walk free. 🙁

+1, Ron Goldman’s blood was in OJ’s Ford Bronco. That’s definitive.

I just can’t deal with the PP who keeps saying Scott Peterson was wrongfully convicted because there was no physical evidence linking him to the murder, while simultaneously discounting the heavy abundance of DNA evidence in the OJ trial.

The blood in the Bronco wasn’t collected or handled by Mark Furhman! Three independent labs confirmed the same results. Facts are irrelevant to racists and fanatics.

[Anonymous]

Only 1/8 of a drop of blood was found in the Bronco.

That’s ridiculously small for the volume of blood and pools of blood that would come from two stabbings done by one person.

1/8 of a drop sounds like something that would come from someone with just 1-2 mm (the missing amount) of Ojs blood from the test tube. Fuhrman couldn’t say yes or no to the question of fabricating/evidence planting which in a 1988 tape recording he said he did to many black suspects he detained. What s class act

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I stopped reading that article at the first paragraph. From the beginning, it starts with hypothetical and vague.

Could you imagine someone with this logic being on a jury of your peers and in charge of critical thinking about a case and evidence?

If O.J. Simpson had played football in the '60s for Bay Shore High School and taken Harold Anderson's humanities class, he would have known this.
Mr. Anderson would have lovingly encouraged O.J. to play less football and read more Shakespeare, which may have led to a better outcome for O.J. in the long run.

No it doesn’t start like that. Clearly how you all make your opinions, reading one line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only 1/8 of a drop of blood was found in the Bronco.

That’s ridiculously small for the volume of blood and pools of blood that would come from two stabbings done by one person.

1/8 of a drop sounds like something that would come from someone with just 1-2 mm (the missing amount) of Ojs blood from the test tube. Fuhrman couldn’t say yes or no to the question of fabricating/evidence planting which in a 1988 tape recording he said he did to many black suspects he detained. What s class act

Oh, get off of it. Ron Goldman’s hair and clothing fibers, in addition to his blood, were found in OJ’s car, a man whom he had never met.

This evidence has absolutely ZERO to do with Mark Fuhrmam. He’s just one detective, unrelated to CSI and he had nothing to do with collecting, handling or testing evidence found in the Ford Bronco. You do realize that LAPD has more than one detective and that they’re not all friends?!?!

[Anonymous]

No recordings or receipts for a car wash of the Bronco were ever found. Do you know what a trail /pool of blood from butchering 2 people like that would do to a white car and it’s interior?

The blood in the Bronco, sock, and glove are not slam Dunks. Furhman couldn’t say he didn’t plant those things there. He jumped the gate at Oj’s home the same night illegally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only 1/8 of a drop of blood was found in the Bronco.

That’s ridiculously small for the volume of blood and pools of blood that would come from two stabbings done by one person.

1/8 of a drop sounds like something that would come from someone with just 1-2 mm (the missing amount) of Ojs blood from the test tube. Fuhrman couldn’t say yes or no to the question of fabricating/evidence planting which in a 1988 tape recording he said he did to many black suspects he detained. What s class act

Oh, get off of it. Ron Goldman’s hair and clothing fibers, in addition to his blood, were found in OJ’s car, a man whom he had never met.

This evidence has absolutely ZERO to do with Mark Fuhrmam. He’s just one detective, unrelated to CSI and he had nothing to do with collecting, handling or testing evidence found in the Ford Bronco. You do realize that LAPD has more than one detective and that they’re not all friends?!?!

He was the lead detective . The other detectives were following his lead. He was in charge of closing the scene. He was the one who went to OJs home that night and he was the one who told Nicole’s kids and her parents she was dead. As one juror put it,

“Fuhrman was the trial," Bess wrote. "Fuhrman found the hat. Fuhrman found the glove. Fuhrman found the blood. Fuhrman went over the gate. Fuhrman did everything. When you throw it out, what case do you have? You've got reasonable doubt right before you even get to the criminalists."