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.
There aren't a lot of comparisons past the celebrity.
OJ's slo-mo Interstate chase is only one example of how that entire murder case was a runaway, literally, right from the very first. Blake's trial, on the other hand, was not televised, discussed daily everywhere, argued over, or had any of the shock value of the Simpson trial.
Blake's murder trial was less notorious because Blake wasn't as famous. His trial was more like Phil Spector's; both were long past their height of fame, and neither had OJ's universal familiarity.
Sports fans knew OJ, he was in the movies, on TV, in commercials, in magazine ads. Many more degrees of familiarity than Blake. And Blake was nowhere as glamorous and handsome as OJ, or as seemingly stable. Blake, if anything, was known as a nut case.
Blake's wife was far from beautiful, and she had a history as a grifter. She was nowhere as popular a victim as Nicole Simpson. I think that also had a damping effect on the notoriety as well.
Let's face it the rich can get away with murder. The Durst case(s) decisions are more atrocious than either of the ones under discussion. The OJ case was just so widely publicized paired with the racial aspect led to everyone having a strong opinion on guilt or innocence.
OJ's case proved rich black people could get away with murder too. I guess a positive step for those espousing the end of bigotry.
OJ Simpson was a sports HERO and was much more famous than Blake for that reason alone. OJ's trial was highly publicized and the "White Bronco Chase" drew a lot of attention to the case.
As far as OJ being black, that was the defense strategy to get OJ off. Jury nullification because of the "twin white devils" and the use of the "n-word" by Det. Fuhrman, led to the most infamously erroneous jury verdict in history.
DNA science was very new and therefore the defense was able to sway the jury with misdirection with regard to planted evidence, etc.
Witnesses like Kato Kaelin, who was more interested in the notoriety and his 15 minutes of fame, and all the OJ friends and co-conspirators who were willing to cover for him led to the lack of conviction, as did the incompetent prosecutors and the weak Judge Ito who was swept up in the spectacle and failed miserably at maintaining control in the courtroom.
I am an OJ Trial expert. Read every transcript. Watched the entire trial. Read every book that was published.
Not so much on Blake, so I don't really know why he got off and whether it was a valid verdict.
I do know that OJ Simpson got away with two extremely brutal murders and the only redeeming outcome in the whole tragedy is that the Judge in Vegas finally got justice for Nicole and Ron.
The OJ case was just vastly higher profile in both celebrity status and the way that it unfolded with the White Bronco chase.
Remember the Ray Lewis trial? No, most people don't. Why? Because he was white!?!? Lmao.
Also, the case divided along racial lines and while OJ and Blake were both guilty, there was just enough doubt that top-notch legal experts were able to get them off. Had they both been truck driver John Smith in Iowa they'd have both gone to jail regardless of their race.
Heck, they've been playing ads on NPR all week with the actor playing either OJ or Johnnie Cochrane talks about how exciting it was in his youth to see a "black lawyer get a black man off". In fairness, given history I can understand that emotion.
The more I hear in retrospect 20 years later is that a lot of young people at the time that jumped up and cheered by the OJ verdict have more mature mixed emotions in hindsight about how it was good to see a black man could indeed get off like some rich white dude but also some sheepishness that yeah....he probably did do it and cheering his verdict was regrettable.
OJ Simpson was a sports HERO and was much more famous than Blake for that reason alone. OJ's trial was highly publicized and the "White Bronco Chase" drew a lot of attention to the case.
As far as OJ being black, that was the defense strategy to get OJ off. Jury nullification because of the "twin white devils" and the use of the "n-word" by Det. Fuhrman, led to the most infamously erroneous jury verdict in history.
DNA science was very new and therefore the defense was able to sway the jury with misdirection with regard to planted evidence, etc.
Witnesses like Kato Kaelin, who was more interested in the notoriety and his 15 minutes of fame, and all the OJ friends and co-conspirators who were willing to cover for him led to the lack of conviction, as did the incompetent prosecutors and the weak Judge Ito who was swept up in the spectacle and failed miserably at maintaining control in the courtroom.
I am an OJ Trial expert. Read every transcript. Watched the entire trial. Read every book that was published.
Not so much on Blake, so I don't really know why he got off and whether it was a valid verdict.
I do know that OJ Simpson got away with two extremely brutal murders and the only redeeming outcome in the whole tragedy is that the Judge in Vegas finally got justice for Nicole and Ron.
Blake got away with it largely because Bakley was a longtime scam artist that conned men in lonely hearts stuff. As such there were a number of possible other people with motives to kill her. Without the doubt created by that, Blake would have been cooked.
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.