The OJ simpson case

[john121]

Why was OJ let off the hook? There was plenty of evidence shown (and not shown to the jury) that would've immediately sent any ordinary man to jail, no question. So, why does a football star get off the hook? A few theories:

1. the prosecution made several errors with presenting evidence (the infamous glove incident, for example)

2. a guilty verdict would've inticed riots in the streets much like the rodney king beatings

3. (maybe a theory) it was WAY too telivised, it was like a regular TV show back in '95.

any comments, suggestions?

 

[Lemonking]

cuz hes black its that simple...

 

[GhostFox]

I think the Jury made the right decsion. I think OJ is guilty as hell, but there was plenty of reasonable doubt. Whether that was the result of shoddy prosecution, or just a lack of evidence can be debated, but I see no big conspiracy here.

 

[No Limit]

Because the police in that case tried to set him up in certain instances. The fact he got off is the complete fault of the police department.

 

[KoreBolteR]

why did the police try and set him up? :/

 

[K e r b e r o s]

They did'nt, but most of the stir about OJ Simpson case came from people being mad about the Rodney King Riots.

I think he did it -- glove or no glove.

 

[KoreBolteR]

They did'nt, but most of the stir about OJ Simpson case came from people being mad about the Rodney King Riots.

I think he did it -- glove or no glove.

so because he was famous .. and black, he got away with it? :O

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

Its because of the Chewbacca Defense.
Look it up on google.
I don't think film shot in court rooms should be allowed to air until the case is over and in fact, the process should be kept private until as I said, its over.

 

[mabufo]

Ladies and gentlemen, this - is a wookie!

Works every time.

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

OMG... Is there anyone who doesn't believe OJ killed her???

He didn't get away with it because he's famous or black. He got away with it because he had a ton of money for the best lawyers coupled with the most incompetent prosecution (Left-Coast Lawyers).

But the most important thing was that his rights as a killer were protected.

 

[mabufo]

Why are we talking about this? It happened so long ago...

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

Because talking about world events gets these guys depressed.

 

[Calanen]

I don't think that the police department tried to set OJ up. But, Mark Furmann lied about racist comments he had made, so all of his credibility went out the window. Incidentally, the only person convicted of anything related to the OJ trial was Mark Furmann, for perjury.

OJ managed to do a pretty messy killing (why would any1 use a knife when guns are so much cleaner and readily available) without getting very messy at all. Not much forensic evidence about. Johnny Cochrane is also very good.

But on the evidence presented, should the jury have convicted OJ, on the basis that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt? Very borderline call. The police evidence was sketchy. One would normally assume that there would be blood lit up by luminol all over the place. There was not - very little blood to be found anywhere.

On the less standard of proof for the civil suit, on the balance of probabilities or is it more likely than not, that OJ murdered his wife and her 'friend' - I would answer in the affirmative without hesitation. On the higher standard of criminal proof, borderline.

Make no mistake - the jury must adhere to the standards of proof, and whether they think that OJ did it or not, determine guilt or innocence based on what the prosecution and defence shows them. And I think over all, there was enough reasonable doubt, for a jury to find him not guilty. I think that he either committed the crime, or arranged for another to have it committed for him. But the state must prove its case, whatever our gut feelings may tell us.

In the Peterson trial for the murder of Lacy Peterson - I am sure that the jury made the right decision. The evidence while circumstantial (ie no1 saw him throw a body into San Francisco bay) was overwhelming the question becomes, why? And only Scott Peterson can answer this question, but more than likely he never will.

 

[No Limit]

I don't think that the police department tried to set OJ up. But, Mark Furmann lied about racist comments he had made, so all of his credibility went out the window. Incidentally, the only person convicted of anything related to the OJ trial was Mark Furmann, for perjury.

Then why was so much evidance presented in court that wasn't shown in the original crime scene photos? These are the photos that are taken before any evidance is collected.

 

[No Limit]

http://www.cnn.com/US/9701/09/simpson.civil.trial/

Lee referred to LAPD crime scene photos and identified dozens of blood stains, impression evidence, partial shoe prints and a blood-soaked piece of paper, none of which were collected by LAPD investigators.

If you ever get the time read the actual transcripts, or at least the closing arguments, they are interesting but extremely long:

http://simpson.walraven.org/#lists

 

[Lemonking]

Ladies and gentlemen, this - is a wookie!

Works every time.

/head explodes

 

[KoreBolteR]

this is whats goingto happen to michael jackson.

wacko jacko is this year's OJ.. :O

 

[No Limit]

this is whats goingto happen to michael jackson.

wacko jacko is this year's OJ.. :O

Let me guess, you know for a fact Jackson is guilty?

 

[Eg.]

/head explodes

that was the monkey-puppet

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

Let me guess, you know for a fact Jackson is guilty?

KoreBoldteR knows all. Do not question KoreBolteR.

 

[Calanen]

The police stuffed up the investigation, that is clear. But the police always stuff up the investigation, to a greater or lesser degree. If you are a prosecutor representing the police, its like babysitting a play school. Oh? You lost the drugs? You lost the weapon? You wiped the fingerprints off? You lost the confession? You withheld documents from us in discovery......'

DAs and Prosecutors are covering up the appalling 'who cares' attitude of the cops quite often. I don't see that the LA police were malicious, against OJ, just that they stuffed up the investigation, which the police do in almost every investigation.

 

[Calanen]

Originally Posted by No Limit
Let me guess, you know for a fact Jackson is guilty?

KoreBoldteR knows all. Do not question KoreBolteR.

Maybe he spent some time at the Neverland Ranch......

 

[bliink]

Why are we talking about this? It happened so long ago...

Don't post if you aren't going to contribute.

 

[mabufo]

Don't post if you aren't going to contribute.

Contradiction..? Plus, I feel that asking that question is perfectly fine.. because it really did happen a VERY long time ago, so I don't see why the thread even exists.

 

[Yuri]

Contradiction..? Plus, I feel that asking that question is perfectly fine.. because it really did happen a VERY long time ago, so I don't see why the thread even exists.

zomg letz not talk about things that are old! No discussion about things over 3 years old, people. sry.

By the way, no one seems to remember-- OJ's wife wasn't the only victim. A man that just happened to be passing by also had his throat slit, had nothing to do with anything, just happened to be walking by.

And I always wondered why "the glove" seemed to get him off the hook. If you're going to murder someone, does your glove have to be a comfortable fit, or are you just going to grab the nearest friggin' pair, or one, or whatever?

Plus, he had a slow car-chase with the police. I mean, this guy definately seemed extremely guilty.

 

[mabufo]

zomg letz not talk about things that are old! No discussion about things over 3 years old, people. sry.

It happened back in 1995...

 

[Yuri]

It happened back in 1995...

Wait... how was thata supposed to null my point? I was being sarcastic, and it says "over 3 years old." 2005-1995 = 10

10 > 3

 

[Hazar]

From all I've heard, he seems really guilty.

dunno what's keeping them from proscecuting him (if he hasn't been already)

 

[Yuri]

From all I've heard, he seems really guilty.

dunno what's keeping them from proscecuting him (if he hasn't been already)

Prosecuting him? They had like a, 2 year long trial, and he ended up being considered innocent. Since then, no one has really heard of him, except I remember some country club that he was a part of kicked him out and wouldn't let him back in, and he bitched about it.

 

[mabufo]

You are the one who invited me to go and make a comment... yuo decided to be an asshole and make a sarcastic comment... so I'm just stating the fact THAT: 10 years ago is long in the past.. we need to move on.

 

[Yuri]

You are the one who invited me to go and make a comment... yuo decided to be an asshole and make a sarcastic comment... so I'm just stating the fact THAT: 10 years ago is long in the past.. we need to move on.

I guess you win, dude. But you honestly must have boring conversations. Do you ever talk about history?

 

[Calanen]

zomg letz not talk about things that are old! No discussion about things over 3 years old, people. sry.

By the way, no one seems to remember-- OJ's wife wasn't the only victim. A man that just happened to be passing by also had his throat slit, had nothing to do with anything, just happened to be walking by.

And I always wondered why "the glove" seemed to get him off the hook. If you're going to murder someone, does your glove have to be a comfortable fit, or are you just going to grab the nearest friggin' pair, or one, or whatever?

Plus, he had a slow car-chase with the police. I mean, this guy definately seemed extremely guilty.

I'm not saying the guy deserved his throat slit - but the Ron Goldman guy appeared to be romantically involved with OJs ex. So he was not just a 'passer by'

 

[No Limit]

The police stuffed up the investigation, that is clear. But the police always stuff up the investigation, to a greater or lesser degree. If you are a prosecutor representing the police, its like babysitting a play school. Oh? You lost the drugs? You lost the weapon? You wiped the fingerprints off? You lost the confession? You withheld documents from us in discovery......'

DAs and Prosecutors are covering up the appalling 'who cares' attitude of the cops quite often. I don't see that the LA police were malicious, against OJ, just that they stuffed up the investigation, which the police do in almost every investigation.

I agree with you to a degree; however, when you have a racist investigating a black man it will never be a good thing. The reason I think there is a chance the LAPD went in to greater lengths to possibly frame OJ was that this was going to be a huge media frenzy. The judge was certainly affected by this and I don't see a reason why the police wouldn't be. Is OJ guily? There is a huge chance he is; however, you have to take in to account the jury heard all the facts and made a decission on those facts. There is a chance they were wrong but there is also a chance they were right; we will never know 100%.

 

[No Limit]

And I always wondered why "the glove" seemed to get him off the hook. If you're going to murder someone, does your glove have to be a comfortable fit, or are you just going to grab the nearest friggin' pair, or one, or whatever?

You wouldn't use a glove that doesn't fit you as there would be a huge chance that glove would fall off during the crime exposing you. I can kind of understand having a larger glove; but not smaller.

What the glove did was leave 2 conclusions open; OJ was innocent or the LAPD tried to frame OJ. Both conclusions are going to be bad to the prosecution.