SinInTheCamp

I don't know a whole lot about the Nevada strong-arm robbery case, ArizonaGrown, but while I agree that the sentence is a very long one, I'm not sure it can be classified as "bending the rules." They probably just gave him the maximum penalty, not one actually beyond the limitations of ten or so felony convictions he received. I'm not going to address your post point-by-point, but I will note that juries absolutely can vote for conviction in criminal trials, even if they're not absolutely sure of the defendant's guilt. They only have to believe in it "beyond a reasonable doubt," not beyond all doubt. I never had really strong feelings either way in this case and have always been open to both sides, so I don't feel I have a bias. With that said, the evidence AS A WHOLE points to his guilt. The issues with the blood work indeed indicate sloppiness, but those wouldn't cause false positives. And intentional planting of blood evidence would have required a) an immediate decision by the first officers on the scene to frame OJ--before they even knew if he had a rock-solid alibi or not, and b) an agreement/conspiracy by a dozen or more officers and lab technicians to frame a man who was extremely charming and one of the most likable sports/film/TV celebs in L.A., a man so liked by the LAPD in fact, that they'd brushed his previous crimes under the carpet, so....why??? He hadn't even arrived back from Chicago when the blood collection was happening, so did they just gamble on the chance that they'd have the opportunity to draw blood from him to later add to the sealed samples somehow when, for all they knew, he'd been seen by dozens or even hundreds of people during the time frame of the murders? That's a lot of trouble to go to for a man so well-liked But OJ really convicted himself. The day after the murders, detectives asked him how he got those multiple cuts on his hand, and he answered, "I don't know. You guys haven't told me anything." What person doesn't recall the event that caused them to bleed heavily (and undoubtedly caused pain) and was severe enough to leave lasting scars? And when he was fleeing in Cowlings' Bronco with a disguise, a passport, over $9,000 in cash, and a gun, why would he say (on the car phone while threatening to commit suicide), "I deserve this"? That's practically an admission of guilt in and of itself. And why did he lie so much? He denied owning a pair of Bruno Magli shoes (because shoe prints at Nicole's matched those shoes as well as his exact size), and later over 30 photos were found in numerous print sources of him wearing those same shoes! Many were published months before the murders even occurred. And yet, when confronted with this fact, he insisted that all of the photos had been tampered with. Did all of those reporters have ESP and decide to also frame him in advance of the crime? I know this post seems like I'm all gung-ho prosecution--and I'm not, but real life is not like a CSI episode. The pieces never fall perfectly into place, and imperfect humans are the ones in charge of evidence. But you pair what did go right with Simpson's own behavior, both past and present (who else had ever been violent toward Nicole? And why would he trash talk Ron Goldman, someone who heroically tried to save the mother of Simpson's children from death, if he had no personal animosity toward him? An innocent person would have been grateful for Goldman's efforts)--and it all points squarely to Simpson and to no one else.

Came here to say the same thing. Bugliosi was a MASTER at his profession, winning 105 of his 106 prosecutorial cases, 21 of which were murder trials. Not only is his book fascinating, clearly explained, and--yes--a trip to the woodshed, but it also gives the reader a glimpse of his incredibly wry sense of humor, which I adore. Highly recommend. Respectfully, I differ with you on most of this. I've read the entire transcripts of both cases, and while Simpson was certainly no walk in the park, the Manson case was incredibly complex. Bugliosi had to try the case mostly on his own--he was the lead prosecutor and after his assistant prosecutor was dismissed from the trial, he had only Stephen Kay to help him, a prosecutor who was pretty inexperienced at the time (I don't believe he'd ever been on a murder case before). Bugliosi was trying not only Manson but three other defendants alongside him, who all had their own defense attorneys who were shuffled around at Manson's whim. One of those defense attorneys went missing during the trial (he was later found dead) and had to be replaced. As soon as he finished simultaneously trying those four defendants, he immediately went into another trial of a fifth defendant involved in the case. There were also seven murder victims instead of two, which meant evidence and exhibits up the wazoo, and Bugliosi had to sell the jury on a complicated motive involving Manson's plans for a race war while simultaneously arguing for both Manson's psychological hold over the other defendants as well as their own culpability and willing participation in the murders. And even though cable TV wasn't around in 1970, the media circus was as extensive and pervasive as it could possibly be at the time. The case also involved celebrities (on the victim side) who were well-connected in Hollywood. Paparazzi captured footage of all the celebs in attendance at the funeral; some of it is available on YouTube. Wild rumors began circulating, and Angelinos began buying guns in record numbers and locking their doors for the first time. It was considered the trial of the century at the time and was on the TV news constantly as well as in every newspaper. As with the Simpson trial, jurors had to be sequestered for months because there was so much talk. In fact, it was such a circus that President Richard Nixon was asked his opinion on it during an unrelated press conference (unheard of and presumptuous at the time) and almost caused a mistrial when, after he opined that Manson was guilty, newspapers around the country splashed the headline "Manson Guilty, Nixon Declares!" on their front pages. It was a circus all right--the biggest one in U.S. history until OJ came along.

Same for me, Simon. I was about 20 when this all went down, and it honestly doesn't seem 20 years removed from the present. I lived in Los Angeles, and the fact that this was happening practically in my backyard was so surreal. I also appreciated the footage of Rodney King and the riots, as those events were still fresh in our minds in L.A. I mean, in '94 and '95, I was still driving past the burnt remains of buildings that were lost during the riots. I'm glad that the show is emphasizing these connections and the racial tension/police brutality that permeated the city and ushered in the circumstances surrounding this case for some of the younger viewers who may not be wholly familiar with it. I also loved this episode and sat enthralled the entire time, nodding in remembrance at various points. I thought they were spot-on in much of their casting. Schwimmer was excellent as Robert Kardashian, as were the actors who played Marsha Clark, Christopher Darden, Kato Kaelin, Johnny Cochran, and the detectives Vannatter and Lange. Even the little actors who played OJ's young children looked just like them at that time! I wasn't feeling Cuba at first (his lack of stature and height immediately threw me off), but when he went into his rages, I was sold. Great acting. I loved John Travolta purely for the camp factor. I have no problem with him--he gave me a few chuckles that contrasted nicely with the tension the show managed to create. I'd been looking forward to this for so long, and I was well-pleased with the result.

Yes, they supposedly saw the blood on/in the parked Bronco and thought there might have been a triple homicide, with Nicole's murderer also having attacked her ex-husband. At that point (according to the officers), it turned into a "check the welfare" call, and since no one responded to the gate buzzer, they proceeded inside to make sure OJ wasn't dead or dying.

For a moment, I thought that was Charlie Manson with the beard, who, from what I understand, actually had saner approaches to child-rearing than the Duggars. Think about that, Jim-Boob and MEchelle.

Yes to all of this! But I must mention that she's not wearing a crucifix, just a plain cross. Crucifixes are for heathen, idolatry-loving Catholics, don't you know. Good, righteous J'Christians wear civilized and proper symbols of torture and death as adornment. /s

Jesus wept.

Right, exactly. Some people like for their neighborhoods to look homogeneous (and I'm not necessarily one of those people): similar paint colors, landscaping, etc. And if someone has a persistently barking dog or there's another neighborhood issue, the parties involved can take it to the HOA rather than to the police, so the HOA can serve as a nice mediation. I totally get why some people wouldn't mind a neon green house, but others do desire a more "planned" look for personal aesthetics as well as property values, because lots of people like neat, well-tended, sedate-looking neighborhoods. Different strokes, and all that. ON TOPIC: I looked through the Zillow photos of Farrah's house and, at first glance, I thought the ballerina silhouettes on the wall in Sophia's room were either exotic dancers or those silhouettes of women that you see on the flaps of big rigs. With Farrah, I wouldn't have been at all surprised if she deemed either of those appropriate decor for a kindergartner!

I've had an HOA for a couple of different properties, and I loved it. First, it prevented neighbors from painting their houses neon green (as some of the TMs would certainly be tempted to do) or to put up a banner over the garage with the website ordering information for Farrah's prosthetic buttholes. Sometimes, HOAs take care of trash and snow removal. And if the neighborhood has parks, trails, or golf courses, they become privatized for the HOA community's use. My HOA fees also included security guards who patrolled the neighborhood around the clock, which made me feel safe. Of course, nothing could incite me to move into a community that housed Farrah, no matter how many perks the HOA offered.

So he took his child--er, little woman--to Sears, huh? I bet he played it up like it was Lord & Taylor or Harrods and told her she could buy anything she wanted ($10 or under) from the clearance bin.

I'd be happier if just a couple of non-Nielsen people from this forum watch and then report back to the rest of us. I absolutely want these specials to do horribly. I can't ever remember wishing such spectacular failure upon anyone before in my life.

Yes to all this. Not to mention that the frontal lobe in our brains aren't even fully developed until around the age of 25. Although Nikki may have been able to work to help support her family and begin post-secondary education in the Philippines, her cognitive abilities are not fully developed. I was a great example of that. "Mature" enough at 17 to have a full-time job and rent my own apartment but completely immature into my twenties about my romantic relationships and thinking that at 23 I was ready to have a baby (I wasn't). Looking back two decades later, I see that all of the experiences I've had since then have made me a much wiser and--dare I say--more mature person that I could have ever imagined at Nikki's age. I wish I could have a do-over as my more mature self! As you say, it's virtually impossible for her and Mark to be on the same cognitive footing. Although he certainly acts immature, he has a whole lifetime's worth of experience on her. I must add, lavenderpenguin, that I never would have guessed that you're 23! I'm so very impressed at YOUR maturity and insight! You bring a lot to this conversation, and I very much enjoy reading your posts. But possibly that's because the gap in our ages is much, much less than that of Mark and Nikki's...

Who on this show is being dismissive of the U.S. (or, as you are phrasing it, the entire continents of America)? This strikes me as policing of people's preferences and mistaking admiration for diverse cultures as somehow "un-American." I'm a U.S. citizen by birth, and yet, since visiting Japan a few years ago, I tend to rave on and on about I much I loved it there and miss it and would like to return someday for another visit. And I'm not even Japanese, nor do I know anyone there! Being able to admire and love other cultures doesn't mean you love this one any less; in fact, it's an extremely valuable thing to observe how things work in other places (such as universal healthcare and employment benefits) and think about what it would mean to incorporate diverse practices to improve this nation. Everyone benefits when we can put aside hyper-nationalism and learn about how others do things. We'd probably also gain a better understanding of Nikki's circumstances and perhaps some empathy for this young person doing whatever she deems necessary to improve her life (and since it's her life, that's for her to decide. She has a sponsor, and she's not breaking any laws.).

Jessa and Bin probably think it's the rod he used to "discipline" his son during blanket training.

MarysWetBar and Arwen Evenstar posted some hilarious Duggar haikus (which the latter dubbed "Smug-kus") on another thread. I thought I'd post a couple of mine here, at another poster's suggestion, since this seems like the proper forum for them: Wear mustard sweater, Long denim skirts, and flip-flops To avoid NIKE The headship Jim-Bob Loves hairspray and "Hey, hey, hey." Big head with no brain Let's see some more!

Good point, Micks Picks! Moving my "Smug-ku" there. :)

Dying at this gem from a leg-humper: "In March of this year, I was attacked by people who serve satin." I'm picturing Jo-Ann's employees wrapping this commenter in bolts and bolts of multicolored fabric while he fervently prays for God's protection from the evil temptations of rainbow-hued, sensuously silky satin.

"Apart"...Bwahahahaha, definite Freudian slip there, Jill, you genius...er, jenius! Or just another example of the poor education she received at the SOTDRT. Most likely, it's both.

I have these fears too. I feel almost certain that there's clues in the Book of Revelation about the end times that reference Duggars. Like Jim Bob is the antichrist (false prophet). Or that 666 can be decoded to spell out 'DUGGAR.'

I purpose that there's something phallic about the circle around that subforum. Get behind me, Satan...RU, SAVE ME!!!!!!

They'd probably go for Aimee's last name, McPherson, seeing as how they've gravitated toward choosing the most gawd-awful last name they could think of for a first name. Of course, they could possibly go for Semple as a baby girl's first name, in honor of poor, simple Michelle.

Just got a chance to look at the wedding photos. With the exception of the first photo on Starcasm (which I think may have just been an unfortunate angle), Catelynn looks fantastic, IMO. But when I saw that first picture, I feared for a moment that Delta Dawn and/or Leah from TM2 had gotten ahold of Catelynn's hair--her bangs appeared to be severely slicked down in the signature style of Elkview, WV. I also think Amber looks positively fantastic (and healthy), and I'm one who likes her with her glasses. But it appears that she and adoption counselor Dawn decided to wear matching outfits, for some strange reason. Maci...GAWD. That outfit is just godawful. Does she really not know by this age that wearing white to someone else's wedding is, well, unconventional? Or was it her intent to underscore some self-perceived unconventionality? And that photo of her and her man...Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, what a pair of bobble-heads! And having such a huge head only highlights Maci's poor, unfortunate receding hairline. At least Taylor (?) had the wherewithal to dress appropriately for a wedding; could he not have taken Maci aside before they left home and given her a few fashion and etiquette tips? Agree that Kaitlyn was way too casual; again, Javi was nicely dressed in a suit, and she looked like she was ready to go have a soda at the Peach Pit. She would have been fine in even a simple sheath. I mean, I guess I should just be glad that these men give a rat's ass about how they publicly present themselves, because it's the opposite in my neck of the woods. April looked the best I've ever seen, and I liked the black-and-white photo of Butch and Tyler/Butch Jr. They're so solemn that it really looks like they're from another era; it has a real old-timey vibe. Butch is looking old, too, and of course he had to ruin the vibe in the very next shot of him in his World Gym spaghetti-strap tank. Love that Tyler wore tails; it's so rare to see men dressed so elegantly. My takeaway is that my eyes must be starved for well-dressed men (as Butch so wisely portends), because I enjoyed this scene way more than I ever thought I would.

Or "South East Seewald," since that's their neck of the woods. Using the opposite direction demonstrates how much more godly they are then the Kardashians in the righteous path to God's Country (Arkansas) they have chosen to take. The alliteration works too.

I think they both seem sweet, and I hope it's just that the notoriously lame TLC producers are just whispering in Aleksandra's ear each episode that she needs to remind everyone of her general "badness" for that most damming of all sins--dancing energetically to pop music. Every time I see Josh onscreen, I get flashbacks of Johnny Depp in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. This resemblance to me in no way is meant to throw shade on his sexuality or supposed heteronormative/hegemonic feminine traits (all men have "feminine" traits to varying degrees, and it's nothing to be ashamed of); it's just that I see such a strong resemblance! I think it's the mouth, but possibly the eyes as well.

How about we "purpose" to designate just one of us to read the story and then report back? Let's not give them any more page hits than necessary for snarking.