Do you believe OJ Simpson was innocent? (case, murders, criminal)
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.
I think that anyone who is as sure as I was that OJ did it should look at the BBC docu "Was OJ Innocent?" and make up their own mind. There are some compelling things in there. Frankly, it changed my mind. I think there is a FAR greater chance his son did it. He really does fit with the facts in a way that is uncanny, and wasn't really clear at the time. It also throws new light on why OJ behaved as he did at the time. He WOULD act that way if he knew his son did it, but didn't want to say. Watch the docu.
.
Soooo..... did this documentary mention the fact that Jason Simpson was at work at a restaurant called Jackson's, being seen by numerous people including his boss (Alan Jackson) at the time of the murders?
Soooo..... did this documentary mention the fact that Jason Simpson was at work at a restaurant called Jackson's, being seen by numerous people including his boss (Alan Jackson) at the time of the murders?
Of course not. They would never let facts get in the way of a good 'documentary'.
I think that anyone who is as sure as I was that OJ did it should look at the BBC docu "Was OJ Innocent?" and make up their own mind. There are some compelling things in there. Frankly, it changed my mind. I think there is a FAR greater chance his son did it. He really does fit with the facts in a way that is uncanny, and wasn't really clear at the time. It also throws new light on why OJ behaved as he did at the time. He WOULD act that way if he knew his son did it, but didn't want to say. Watch the docu.
Also, Oj had no injuries at the time anything like what you would find on someone who had stabbed and beaten the victims as he did. That's just a fact. One little cut on his finger. He would have had massive bruising. I don't care how beefy you are, you are gonna have some kind of serious bruising on your hands from beating and also holding the knife to stab. Simply isn't there.
I also have a serious problem with people saying, "well, he did that thing in the hotel room, he's a total thief, he must have done it". That isn't thinking logically, actually. I always think of the Marley lyric, "I shot the sheriff, but I didn't shoot the deputy". Oj is a wife beater, an idiot, a thief, but that doesn't make him a murderer. And believe me, since the crime happened, I have been a dyed-in-the-wool believer in his guilt. Now I am not sure at all.
Why would OJ's son murder Nicole? If you look at the history of OJ and Nicole's relationship OJ was a wife beater and very controlling. All the evidence leads to OJ. Who was really angry with Nicole? Whose blood was found at the crimescene? Who acted very erratic after the crime? It all leads to OJ. If someone is abusive to their wife and the wife ends up dead don't tell me that isn't powerful circumstantial evidence? This case though is not based on circumstantial evidence but blood and crimescene evidence. The jury was just hoodwinked by a lot of red herrings. I sometimes do wonder if juries are the best option. A lot of people on juries don't even want to be there. Some might not have the capacity to understand complicated dna evidence. In this particular case the jury also appeared to have a case of celebrity worship and was very willing to believe that the Police tampered with evidence. Some of this tampering defies logic because blood that was proven to be OJs was photograped at the scene before anyone even had access to OJ's blood.
I don't understand how someone can believe the least obvious and way out theory when this case is just one of the many cases of partner murder.
Soooo..... did this documentary mention the fact that Jason Simpson was at work at a restaurant called Jackson's, being seen by numerous people including his boss (Alan Jackson) at the time of the murders?
He left work that night. In fact, Nicole was supposed to come for dinner that night, and she didn't show up. And it bothered him. They had had a contentious relationship and were trying to sort through that. He had invited her to a dinner at that restaurant and she decided not to go. Its also worth noting that it is just a few miles from Nicole's house. Also, he had been arrested the week before for assaulting his girlfriend.
Why would OJ's son murder Nicole? If you look at the history of OJ and Nicole's relationship OJ was a wife beater and very controlling. All the evidence leads to OJ. Who was really angry with Nicole? Whose blood was found at the crimescene? Who acted very erratic after the crime? It all leads to OJ. If someone is abusive to their wife and the wife ends up dead don't tell me that isn't powerful circumstantial evidence? This case though is not based on circumstantial evidence but blood and crimescene evidence. The jury was just hoodwinked by a lot of red herrings. I sometimes do wonder if juries are the best option. A lot of people on juries don't even want to be there. Some might not have the capacity to understand complicated dna evidence. In this particular case the jury also appeared to have a case of celebrity worship and was very willing to believe that the Police tampered with evidence. Some of this tampering defies logic because blood that was proven to be OJs was photograped at the scene before anyone even had access to OJ's blood.
I don't understand how someone can believe the least obvious and way out theory when this case is just one of the many cases of partner murder.
Again, that's what I thought, and I am no lawyer and my word is not sacred, but there is some compelling info in there about how Jason had invited Nicole to his restaurant that very night and she didn't show up. And he was apparently pizzed off about it. See my reply above.
Of course not. They would never let facts get in the way of a good 'documentary'.
Uh, yeah, they did. At length. Seriously, how many of you are just gonna watch it and make up your own minds? I mean, really, aren't you the slightest bit curious, or at least wanna have a reasoned argument? Thats' the only reason I watched it, figuring it would close the holes and be a bunch of garbage I could discount. I was shocked, frankly. I mean, its 50 minutes long or something. They even found traces of a chemical in the DNA that is only present in a LAB SAMPLE. There is a whole bit about the DNA on there as well. Again, the wounds on his hands? As in, the LACK of wounds on his hands- if you look at the autopsy reports someone would have came out of there with serious bruising. No matter if you are a heavy dude like OJ, your hands would still look like hamburger.
I mean, OJ is an idiot but I don't care if they caught Fred West for jaywalking and I knew he didn't do it, I would still open my yap. OJ is a moron and a wifebeater and did I say moron? I am not attesting to the guy's character. But there is a lot of "hmmmmm" moments when I look at this Jason thing. It could explain ALOT more than may be first perceived. That's why he isn't out trying to find the real killer. He already knows.
Maybe. I really don't know. But I am no longer 100 percent sure like the rest of you.
If some people want to believe OJ is innocent of brutally killing his ex-wife and her friend, that's fine. Believe whatever they wish.
OJ had more motive than anyone else and since he didn't follow through with his claim that he would find the real killer, I'm convinced there was no one else responsible. OJ did it (imo) Besides, it's a moot subject since he was found not guilty by the criminal court. Funny though, he was found responsible by the civil court.
I went back and viewed HOURS of trial footage, closing arguments, and documentaries from Simpson's trial. I found everything quite interesting. Based on what you know about the case, do you believe he was guilty or innocent? Did he get away with murder due to his brilliant defense team? The black jury? The Rodney King beating? The downtown LA demographic? The LAPD procedural negligence? Or was he truly innocent and framed by an overzealous and racist LAPD?
Not anymore. Since being acquitted, he has said some things that made me think otherwise. Also, that explains the Bronco chase and nobody else being charged. He's guilty and very stupid for ruining his life for somebody that had already moved on.
First of all did you all forget that the evidence in this case was tampered with and contaminated ? And that Mark Furman was a admitted liar and racist. Hello ? I have read the autopsy report on Nicole and I have read reports from people that investigated this case thoroughly and from them I have to say there is no way that OJ did this is in the time they say and ran home to clean up - without blood being everywhere not just little small drops. Also he could not take care of them both without any marks and some struggle. This was done by a person or persons that had experience with such things - military or maybe serial killer that had committed such crimes before. Glen Rodgers who was around at the time of crime and who had killed others all with knife and similarly claims he did it to his family. And his story of how was more of a close description than any told yet.
With the above dontcha think that is more than reasonable doubt? Also what is wrong with you that think slamming this man for trying to get his stuff back from criminals after the police refused to help is ok when it is really about the first crime not the later ? If the justice system gets away with this and sets a precedent - well everyone should be afraid that has been tried and found "Not Guilty" which was his verdict. This is not suppose to happen and all of you that think its ok had better get ready for the scales to be tipped whatever way the common opinion weighs and not by the crime or evidence of such a crime committed. How many others are incarcerated for similar crimes as his with the same sentence ? Give me a break the punishment does not even fit the crime!!
When you lay down at night think about the fact that this man has had his life ripped from him. (it also effects his childrens lives.) He is being denied at every turn any chance for a fair trial. So he got 33 years for this joke of a crime in Vegas - can you or would you be willing to bet your life on his guilt? Running your mouth is easy but really would you be able to say in all honesty that you truly believe he did it and if you are wrong then give up your life? If not then please think about saying it is right for him to have to give up his.
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.
Oj is not guilty !!
