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.
He didn't plant the glove...that's just crazy talk!!But the glove demo by Chris Darden gave them reasonable doubt.Also they should never have moved the case downtown they were not a jury of OJ's peers!
He didn't plant the glove? Really? Other detectives missed it? But he finds it?
He gets caught committing perjury and later pleads no contest to charges.
He pleads the 5th when asked if he plated evidence.
And he gets the benefit of the doubt by you
He planted that glove. The innocent do not plead the 5th to a simple question of "did you plant evidence".
The glove was OJ's. I think the glove was left at the murder scene and planted at OJ's house by an overzealous and racist cop. Why pleaded they 5th? That makes zero sense. You only plead the 5th when you do not want to self incriminate
He didn't plant the glove? Really? Other detectives missed it? But he finds it?
He gets caught committing perjury and later pleads no contest to charges.
He pleads the 5th when asked if he plated evidence.
And he gets the benefit of the doubt by you
He planted that glove. The innocent do not plead the 5th to a simple question of "did you plant evidence".
The glove was OJ's. I think the glove was left at the murder scene and planted at OJ's house by an overzealous and racist cop. Why pleaded they 5th? That makes zero sense. You only plead the 5th when you do not want to self incriminate
I can't remember all the details but he had to plead (Fuhrman)the 5th to every question he was asked because if he answered just one question he would open himself up to other legal liability!!But isn't it funny how OJ butchered two human beings(one the mother of his children) and people get all hot and bothered over Mark Fuhrman (who is no hero in my book)!!
I watched almost every minute of the case and the prosecution did a fine job. The jury let him off because of his race and because of their distrust of law enforcement. Defense lawyers always want to find the dumbest jurors they can because they are easier to manipulate.
Completely disagree. The prosecution did a lousy job of trying that case, which is why he walked.
His defense team did one and one only brilliant move: The didn't wave their right to a speedy trial. Normally, a murder case like this would take 3+ years to get to a jury. By the defense not accepting delay's and using their right to a "speedy trial," the prosecution was not ready. They figured they would have literally years to process the evidence, get trial strategies, etc.
When they were forced to trial so soon, they bungled almost everything. The glove didn't fit, blood was missing, witness testimony totally impeached, evidence lost, DNA not ready, et al.
OJ Simpson is guiltier then sin. However, his defense team was brilliant. Please remember: The prosecution has to prove BEYOND A RESONABLE DOUBT he committed the murder. I believe, anyone who really watched that trial, saw all sorts of doubt.
I'm a police officer and was shocked at the blatant investigative steps which were bungled, lied about (on the witness stand), and just totally botched.
I doubt if all twelve jurors thought he was innocent. In fact, I'll bet they all thought he was guilty. But the state did not prove it and bungled the case.
They thought he was guilty and didn't care because he killed white people.
As for the self-defense crap. I would arm myself with a knife too if OJ showed up dressed in black from head to toe wearing leather gloves and a ski mask in balmy California.
People seem to act like OJ is the only person to ever beat a murder charge. Happens every damn day.
Just not with people as famous as he once was. The guy had high powered Black attorneys who got him off with not even a slap on the wrist. Racial tension was a huge part of this trial.
Heros don't get on the witness stand, tell bald faced lies and scuttle a murder trial. The LAPD told so many lies and simply implausible statements during the course of the trial, the only thing I could figure out that it may have been the first time in history the police tried to frame a guilty man.
(a self professed red-neck buddy of mine at the time opined, "Catto any white man who says that he hasn't used the n-word in the last 10 years is a damn liar!" I don't know if it's true but it was funny as hell.)
I think most people who maintain his innocence simply have a hard time believing that in America a black man could possibly get away with the murder of a blond white woman...in the 1990s at that. Even I have a hard time believing it, and I was only 7 when the trial took place. Still remember it being quite a big deal with the grownups
Well he can admit to committing murder. After all, double jeopardy. Can't be tried for the same crime twice after being acquitted the first time
No, but he can get his ass whooped by someone who thinks it's their place to serve justice.
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.
