1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Do you think O.J. did it?

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by DiabolusInMusic, Mar 4, 2016.

  1. Yes, I think he did it

  2. No, I think he is absolutely 100% not guilty

  3. It was O.J. in the library with a carrot (did it)

  4. It was Kaelen in the den with a bag of baby carrots (didn't do it)

    0 vote(s)
  1. DiabolusInMusic

    DiabolusInMusic Functionless Art is Merely Tolerated Vandalism Supporting Member

    Like many of you, I am currently watching American Crime Story. It is fantastic if you're into legal drama, great actors and great production (John Singleton directed this weeks episode!!) This thread isn't about the show, however, go here for that. This thread is talk about the verdict.

    For those that do not know how it ends, do not read any further... major spoilers below and I'm not using a button!

    Legally speaking, O.J. is innocent of a double homicide. There are no doubts there. I think he is guilty regardless of the verdict thought. I am honestly astounded the guy got off and I do not know anybody who thinks he didn't do it. Everything points to him, particularly his track record of spousal abuse.

    I just figured with a crowd of this size there must be a handful of folks who think he is innocent. I was also quite young when the case went down so I do not have the same perspective those who were adults at the time would, I'm looking forward to hearing about it. I have learned a lot of little things by watching the show, such as the chase happening during the NBA finals.

    I have included carrot-themed options for good measure.
    mbelue likes this.
  2. DiabolusInMusic

    DiabolusInMusic Functionless Art is Merely Tolerated Vandalism Supporting Member

    Munjibunga and mbelue like this.
  3. Munjibunga and DiabolusInMusic like this.
  4. DiabolusInMusic

    DiabolusInMusic Functionless Art is Merely Tolerated Vandalism Supporting Member

    Wouldn't that make for a helluva twist.
    Munjibunga likes this.
  5. Gorn


    Dec 15, 2011
    Queens, NY
    Legally speaking he's not guilty of double homicide. The law isn't saying he didn't do it. The law is saying the burden of proof showing he did do it hasn't been met.

    Personally, I think he's a murderer.
    ChrisB2, nixdad, JLY and 9 others like this.
  6. charlie monroe

    charlie monroe Gold Supporting Member

    Feb 14, 2011
    Buffalo, NY
    I have no doubts that he commited this heinous crime
  7. Murdoc_420


    Jan 20, 2016
    If the glove doesn't fit ... it was probably planted
    DiabolusInMusic likes this.
  8. Marial

    Marial weapons-grade plum

    Apr 8, 2011
    Either way, the cop who kept the knife ought to be charged with tampering with evidence at the very least.
    GregC, DiabolusInMusic and mbelue like this.
  9. blue4


    Feb 3, 2013
    St. Louis area
    A cautionary tale for all law enforcement on everything you should not do when investigating a murder.
    GregC, DiabolusInMusic and mbelue like this.
  10. Hoff Kinkmeister

    Hoff Kinkmeister

    Dec 17, 2015
    One dark leather glove was found at the crime scene, its match found near Kato Kaelin's guest house behind Simpson's Rockingham Drive estate.[10] Kaelin testified that he had heard "thumps in the night" in the same area around the guest house the night of the murder.[10] Brown had bought Simpson two pairs of this type of glove in 1990.[10] Both gloves, according to the prosecution, contained DNA evidence from Simpson, Brown and Goldman, with the glove at Simpson's house also containing a long strand of blonde hair similar to Brown's.[10]

    On June 15, 1995, defense attorney Johnnie Cochran goaded assistant prosecutor Christopher Darden into asking Simpson to put on the leather glove that was found at the scene of the crime. The prosecution had earlier decided against asking Simpson to try on the gloves because the glove had been soaked in blood (according to prosecutors) from Simpson, Brown and Goldman,[15] and frozen and unfrozen several times. Darden was advised by Clark and other prosecutors not to ask Simpson to try on the glove,[citation needed] but to argue through experts that in better condition, the glove would fit. Instead, Darden decided to have Simpson try on the glove.

    The leather glove seemed too tight for Simpson to put on easily, especially over the latex gloves he wore underneath.[10] Uelmen came up with and Cochran repeated a quip he had used several times in relation to other points in his closing arguments, "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." On June 22, 1995, assistant prosecutor Christopher Darden told Judge Lance Ito of his concerns that Simpson "has arthritis and we looked at the medication he takes and some of it is anti-inflammatory and we are told he has not taken the stuff for a day and it caused swelling in the joints and inflammation in his hands." The prosecution also stated their belief that the glove shrank from having been soaked in blood and later testing.[10] A photo was presented during the trial showing Simpson wearing the same type of glove that was found at the crime scene.
    O. J. Simpson murder case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    DiabolusInMusic likes this.
  11. ONYX


    Apr 14, 2000

    Yes I do.
    nixdad and DiabolusInMusic like this.
  12. mbelue


    Dec 11, 2010
    The original trial had a masterful defense, a woefully comic prosecution, and a police force that dropped more balls than a bingo caller. Obvious he did it.
    The civil trial was even more convincing.
    Then he robs somebody in a hotel? This is not the behavior of an innocent person. Thats a repeat offender that has beat the system.

    "The knife" gets found a couple of decades later? Not the smoking gun it's being made out to be. Just another example of the police buffoonery.

    Sad really. How does someone so successful go so wrong so late in life? Probably had problems the whole time that got overlooked due to said success.
    andruca, JLY, One Drop and 2 others like this.
  13. Gorn


    Dec 15, 2011
    Queens, NY
    I don't get the whole civic court aspect of it. Criminally, he's not guilty of murder but he was guilty in civil court?
  14. DiabolusInMusic

    DiabolusInMusic Functionless Art is Merely Tolerated Vandalism Supporting Member

    To be convicted in criminal court you need to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. To be guilty in civil court you just need to be the most likely candidate, the burden of proof is much lower.

    American Justice did a great episode on why O.J. beat the criminal case but lost the civil one.

    andruca, JFOC, ONYX and 1 other person like this.
  15. mbelue


    Dec 11, 2010
    Yep, he was sued. So financial penalty vs. penal.

    The constitution exists to protect citizens against the government, not from each other. Which i always found to be a interesting distinction.

    I imagine the criminal case would have gone much different if the cival case came first.
    DiabolusInMusic likes this.
  16. DiabolusInMusic

    DiabolusInMusic Functionless Art is Merely Tolerated Vandalism Supporting Member

    Ron's parents actually own the rights to the entire story now. O.J. dropped his "If I did it" a few years back and they own the rights, they re-released it as "If I did It: Confessions of the killer."

    I found it interesting that Ron's parents never say "O.J." they always say "the killer." Apparently this was always the case from day one, my mother and I were discussing it over dinner last night.

    Ronald Goldman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Ron's father is also now commenting on the knife, it came up when I googled Ron. Apparently he is not a fan of the mini-series.

    Ron Goldman dad fascinated by 'insane' O.J. knife discovery

    MAJOR METAL The Beagle Father Supporting Member

    Guilty as sin.
    DiabolusInMusic likes this.
  18. DWBass

    DWBass The Funkfather Supporting Member

    In civil court he was deemed 'responsible' for Nicole's death. And he was to pay a monetary settlement as a result.
    DiabolusInMusic and mbelue like this.
  19. mbelue


    Dec 11, 2010
    Another interesting distinction!
    DiabolusInMusic likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.