Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting, I have a friend in California who told me he knew OJ's son [work related, I believe] and he was known for is really really temper - I have always believed that it was two people - I have always thought OJ was one of them and his son the other. I have believed, with the intensity of those killings it had to be truly emotional/personal and I have believed it had to be two people -- perhaps one more than the other but two people -- perhaps OJ was also helping to cover for his son and/or his son's involvement-participation knowing full well he would get acquitted - so, legal question - what if it turns out that in fact that his son did kill and/or participate -- even though OJ was acquitted, can the son be charged and taken to trial?
Yes - his son can be charged and tried.
Familial relations has nothing to do with double jeopardy.
Naw - he lost his temper and acted stupidly going to that hotel room -and now people want to use the armed robbery conviction against him and say that it is "proof" that he is a murderer. They are two entirely unrelated incidents.
That glove didn't fit his hand. Mr. Cochran (RIP) was amazing in that trial. The state lost the case right then - when he said "if it doesn't fit - you must acquit".
why exactly do you think he didn't do it? because he was acquitted? that is a whole lot of misplaced faith in our justice system, for sure.
the guy fit the profile, he had cuts on his hands, he made threats beforehand, she even said, "if i'm killed OJ did it". the guy had a great team of lawyers that if i were ever sick enough to do anything as stupid as kill someone, i would pray for that kind of green.
and that's what it boils down to. had he not been famous, the guy would have been tossed into prison and forgotten about. as i am fond of saying, oj isn't black- he's green, like money. that's what got him off. and as far as i know, he has done NOTHING, at all, to act like anything but a guilty man. an innocent man would have came out of that and gone looking for the person who killed the mother of his children. he would have used his millions to hire the best team of detectives he could get his hands on, and he would have kept on til he found them. period. but he didn't, instead pouring his energies into writing what is perhaps the stupidest book ever written (apart from maybe "mein kampf" or "the protocols of the elders of zion")- "If i did it". the guy is an idiot, a murderer, and a booby. having said that, i ask without any sarcasm, why do you think he is innocent? i never hear anyone proclaiming that so i have never had the chance to examine the other side.
That dude's got a serious mean streak once he takes off that robe.
Seriously, Orenthal James Simpson killed those two. The 33 years he got for stealing his own stuff was retribution which was not right. First man in history to be sentenced to prison for the rest of his life because of being acquitted in an earlier case.
President Obama will give him a presidential pardon. I'm going to write a letter to the President urging him to do so and the reasons why he should.
Last edited by LexusNexus; 05-14-2013 at 04:31 AM..
I have a tough time taking this thread seriously. I mean guys, is this even worthy of debate?:
THERE WAS LITERALLY A TRAIL OF BLOOD LEADING UP TO OJ'S BEDROOM!
OJ's blood found at the murder site, shoe prints, bloody gloves found at OJs house (and the gloves did fit), blood in the car, blood in OJ's driveway leading up to his bedroom, history of domestic violence, the attempted escape in his Bronco, rumours of jailhouse confessions by OJ, and writing a book himself on how he practically described how he killed the two. Some of his lawyers later came out and said he was probably guilty (Kardashian I think). I mean, the OP must be one of only 5 or 6 on the planet that actually think he may be inoccent.
The talk of his son being responsible or involved was dismissed in another thread in this forum a couple months ago. Dismissed as in "judged not to be credible".
Great post. I'm at a loss as to how the jury did not convict him. There was so much evidence and who else had the motive to kill Nicole and overkill at that? It beggars belief that he got away with this. It is not a good advertisement for juries.
I still wonder what happened to the murder weapon (knife) & bloody clothes ?
It's been said the Robert Kardashian was seen removing a garment bag from OJ's house. There has been much speculation about what was in that bag. Bloody clothes?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Judge Ito
