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.
The real question here is: Why would anyone, with even half a brain, engage in a debate with someone who actually believes Simpson didn't do it? This is nothing more than a troll thread, and not worthy of a response.
The real question here is: Why would anyone, with even half a brain, engage in a debate with someone who actually believes Simpson didn't do it? This is nothing more than a troll thread, and not worthy of a response.
Why was he on that plane? Why did he run? They got him on stealing cable.......... In one state he is found guilty, already. Honestly I think it was planned out. Either A. he did it all and took advantage of his bare strength B. somebody did not like him and wanted him out of the picture. C. Evidence is missing or have been concealed by everybody but your god.
100% in death only then we will find out the truth as with 9/11. I think OJ was something the TV stations did to keep up busy. It was on TV all day long; like entertainment. Not even funny. Even the man horse pulling the other man in Texas was not even funny.
Believing he was guilty is not necessarily the same as believing he should have been FOUND guilty. I have no idea how strong the prosecution's case was, what kind of physical evidence they had, etc.
I know his behavior in the few interviews, etc. he's done has been very bizarre... one thing that sticks out to me is a segment I saw once where he pretended to stab a female interviewer with a fake knife or something, as a "joke." What??? And I don't personally believe that an innocent man would pen a memoir called "If I Did It..."
Please...the prosecution had more evidence in OJ's case...blood,motive,opportunity...they were NEVER going to get a conviction from that jury for many reasons none of which had to do with lack of evidence...
Please...the prosecution had more evidence in OJ's case...blood,motive,opportunity...they were NEVER going to get a conviction from that jury for many reasons none of which had to do with lack of evidence...
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.
...the prosecution had more evidence in OJ's case...blood,motive,opportunity...they were NEVER going to get a conviction from that jury for many reasons none of which had to do with lack of evidence...
