Full Case Discussion: If It Doesn't Fit, You Must Acquit

[helenamonster]

Prior to the OJ trial, Marcia Clark was the prosecutor in the Rebecca Schaeffer case, an actress who was stalked and murdered by a "fan." Clark got him put away for life and the case led to an increase in privacy laws to protect those in the public eye, although I'm not sure how involved Clark was with that. I think the similarity in the cases may have been a factor in landing her the job. But it does seem like she looks at it as an open/shut case.

 

Ok, thank you. I feel like the general feeling I get from people in my life who are old enough to remember the trial is that Clark botched the whole thing single-handedly, which I think is a little unfair. She had to have some clout within the criminal justice system to be assigned the case. But yes, I think her hubris might have gotten in the way of a conviction. The first episode shows her confident that the whole thing was open and shut; she didn't have a firm grasp on exactly how big of a celebrity he was, the police were already messing things up before she was even assigned, and we even hear her saying things like "he murdered his wife" before he was even arrested. I'm seriously so interested to see how Paulson plays this arc out.

 

 

To clear things up, the theory is Kato heard OJ coming back over the fence of his property, stashed some evidence and then pretended like he'd been home the whole time. My question is, did OJ walk/run to Bundy? I don't remember anyone seeing his cars leave or enter the driveway and it appears a limo was waiting there for quite a while.

 

It seems he drove the Bronco. There was that scene in the episode of a woman telling the police that he almost cut her off coming out of Bundy, and then yelled at her as if it was her fault. The Bronco was parked on his street, not in his driveway. The limo driver said it wasn't there when he came to pick OJ up but it was when they were driving to the airport.

 

I don't know the layout of his property but I'm assuming he parked the Bronco on the street then scaled his own fence, potentially bumping Kato's air conditioner on his way down.

[Umbelina]

According to the limo driver (and Kato's later recollection) the Bronco was NOT there when the Limo pulled in to pick up OJ.  It WAS there when the Limo pulled out with OJ to go to the airport.

 

In Kato's civil testimony Petrocelli asked him a very good series of questions.  When they left in the Bentley to go get food they left through the Rockingham Gate.  The lawyer asked if Kato remembered if he normally looks both ways even if someone else is driving (like most of us do.)  He said yes, it was his habit as well.  Petrocelli (the Brown's lawyer) then asked him "Did you see the Bronco?"  Kato realized he did not, and he would have noticed that.  When they got home Kato thought OJ was coming with him into the house, but OJ remained silently standing at the Bentley.  Kato realizes he's not coming in, changes directions and goes around to his own room, OJ not saying a word.  Later, OJ during his homecoming from police questioning says to the room full of friends and family "Kato knows I came back in the house, we were together."  Kato's like, Uhhhh, no, you stood by the Limo the whole time dude.

 

So the Bronco  was parked somewhere else (probably the Ashford side) BEFORE the murders, but then on the Rockingham side when he got home.  Then thumps.  Then Kato finally goes outside with his pen-light flashlight, but he's very scared, things had been really off all night, the thumps capped it.  So he only gets partway down the narrow, spider filled walkway before he turns back, shaking.  He sees the Limo, wonders why OJ hasn't buzzed the Limo in, lets in the Limo guy, asks him if there was an earthquake, tells him about the thumps, asks if he has a flashlight.  (Sees OJ running into the house out of the corner of his eye) sees the golf clubs, sealed up in a travel bag, loads them into the Limo, OJ appears then.

 

It was a corner property, picture a scoop out of one corner, that made two entries to one semi-circular driveway.  Or like a shark bite.  See how close Salinger's house is?  That's where Kato's back wall was, only less trees then.  I think the Rockingham gate is on the bottom right, the Ashford gate is on the bottom left of this photo.

 

Edited February 5, 2016 by Umbelina

[rho]

Thank you!! All of that makes sense now. I took another look at the Rockingham property and now I realize the driveway had two entrances. I read Kato's depo but I was so distracted by the attorney's arguing, I couldn't understand what they were getting at it.

[VanillaBeanne]

Seriously?! I can't even imagine how her family dealt with that. They must have superhuman levels of self-control.

Yeah, I remember reading that the mom made the non-Denise sister call OJ after the acquittal. No one wanted to talk to him but they knew they needed to for the kids sake. Eventually, the mom would talk to him too and he'd ask for parenting advice about the kids. Don't remember if the dad or Denise ever spoke to him, b/c it doesn't sound like it was a comfortable situation for anyone, but everyone just focused on the kids.

Edited February 5, 2016 by VanillaBeanne

[Umbelina]

UMBELINA: since you are the super sleuth of all things OJ, can you find the documentary about the civil trial called " Juror number 5"? It was riveting. Hope it was ok to post this here. And, thanks a million for the links to all the transcripts,etc. you are my hero!

Hardly a super sleuth, I just remember that trial being so difficult to watch, it was a sad time.  Then I lucked on a couple of really good websites.  Haven't found the documentary yet, but there are several articles about it.

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/26/entertainment/ca-40974

http://variety.com/1999/voices/columns/juror-unveils-unseen-o-j-trial-scenes-1117502493/

 

There are also several You Tubes up, the civil verdict, a Brown sister meeting with an OJ juror, etc.

 

Thank you!! All of that makes sense now. I took another look at the Rockingham property and now I realize the driveway had two entrances. I read Kato's depo but I was so distracted by the attorney's arguing, I couldn't understand what they were getting at it.

That sight is amazing, not just for the Rockingham stuff, it goes into every single blood drop, etc.  Very comprehensive.

 

Did OJ even really write if I DID IT?  I read that he said someone else wrote it and gave him $600,000 to put his name on it and do some press.  ??  I've read both things, that he had a ghost writer, but spoke, and then that he didn't even talk to the author(s) until it was done.  Anyone know?

[Avaleigh]

In the civil depositions there IS no judge.  Lawyers are objecting, and the witness must still answer all questions.  So, those other names are probably OJ's lawyers, and what they say means absolutely nothing.  A judge later decides what's admissible, which is why they are SO much more informative than the criminal trial, where Ito grandstanded and was fame-struck, and where most of these conversations were private between judge/attorney.

 

They do have the criminal trial transcripts up at the top of that page.  For anyone who many not know, obviously not guilty at the criminal trial, but guilty at the civil trial.  OJ testified at the civil trial, not the criminal trial.  His lawyers knew better than to put him and his ego on that stand.

Okay, now I'm super confused. I thought Baker was a judge because it seemed like he kept making rulings where Petrocelli seemed like he had to ultimately respect Baker's decisions and not only that but they specifically address judges robes and how Petrocelli wasn't interested.

I definitely believe you considering you seem like you've read everything about it that there is to read but I still want to post the quotes later that made me think there was a judge involved.

[Umbelina]

Okay, now I'm super confused. I thought Baker was a judge because it seemed like he kept making rulings where Petrocelli seemed like he had to ultimately respect Baker's decisions and not only that but they specifically address judges robes and how Petrocelli wasn't interested.

I definitely believe you considering you seem like you've read everything about it that there is to read but I still want to post the quotes later that made me think there was a judge involved.

No Baker is OJ's attorney, one of many.  They are all listed at the top of each page.

 

Also, at the bottom of the list of lawyers there is an "also present" thing.

It's very interesting which depositions OJ shows up at, and how he is obviously trying to intimidate some of the witnesses with his complete NOT allowed comments.  Imagine how scary it must be to testify negatively about someone who is a murderer, no matter what that jury said the first time.  <shudder>

 

At first the endless objections were bugging me too, then I started to pay a bit more attention just to see how many were spurious and meant to scare or change testimony, or with friendly witnesses, to "coach" them into saying or not saying something.  Then they got less annoying.  Baker does both.  A LOT.

[rho]

That sight is amazing, not just for the Rockingham stuff, it goes into every single blood drop, etc.  Very comprehensive.

I don't know that I need to get sucked down that rabbit hole today (or ever). I'll watch the show for now and poke around here and maybe dig around if my questions aren't answered. 

 

 

Did OJ even really write if I DID IT?  I read that he said someone else wrote it and gave him $600,000 to put his name on it and do some press.  ??  I've read both things, that he had a ghost writer, but spoke, and then that he didn't even talk to the author(s) until it was done.  Anyone know?

I never read the book and it's doubtful I ever will but I know the ghostwriter is a well known as a writer and script doctor. In fact, he testified for the prosecution in OJ's trial. My guess, if anything, is the publisher paid OJ to throw his name on it. 

 

Okay, now I'm super confused. I thought Baker was a judge because it seemed like he kept making rulings where Petrocelli seemed like he had to ultimately respect Baker's decisions and not only that but they specifically address judges robes and how Petrocelli wasn't interested.

Baker was OJ's lawyer. I believe they were arguing over the ruling and since there is no judge, Baker objected and Petrocelli tried to overrule it and that's when the "robes" conversation was introduced.

Edited February 5, 2016 by rho

[Umbelina]

Yeah, I haven't, nor do I intend to read everything on that site, I found it when I was confused reading the transcripts and googled "Rockingham diagrams."  However, it also contains a very out there theory of who killed Nicole.  Love the photos though.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Umbelina

[CeeBeeGee]

 

 

Also, at the bottom of the list of lawyers there is an "also present" thing.

It's very interesting which depositions OJ shows up at, and how he is obviously trying to intimidate some of the witnesses with his complete NOT allowed comments.  Imagine how scary it must be to testify negatively about someone who is a murderer, no matter what that jury said the first time.  <shudder>

 

How can you tell which depositions he attended?

 

And this is awesome (from Fred Goldman's civil testimony):

 

 

 

Q. You are going to have to tell me what you mean by "a little money here and there." Mr. Petrocelli is a very wealthy man, and his idea of –

 

MR. PETROCELLI: Let the record reflect howling laughter by me.

[Umbelina]

How can you tell which depositions he attended?

 

And this is awesome (from Fred Goldman's civil testimony):

At the top of each page they list all lawyers representing various clients.  Then they list which lawyers are present, and who they represent.  Right after that there may be an "also present" and that is where OJ's name shows up here and there. 

Edited February 5, 2016 by Umbelina

[CeeBeeGee]

This is absolutely wild. I'm reading Kato's testimony and he mentions one of the married couples that my ex told me about (that was at the dinner party ex attended with OJ and Nicole. Mind = blown.

[red12]

I haven't thought about this case in a long time. But, I always wondered if maybe OJ's oldest son Jason did it and OJ helped "clean up" / dispose of the murder weapon. OJ was so iconic at the time, maybe he thought he could stand trial and be acquitted, but his son could not.

 

That scenario would also explain why OJ couldn't pass the lie detector test, but was so arrogant about the chances of conviction.

 

If I'm not mistaken the LAPD even questioned his son, but once they thought they had OJ, they stopped investigating and focused on convicting him. Jason also has a violent streak with women and some treatment for mental issues I think.

[Umbelina]

I haven't thought about this case in a long time. But, I always wondered if maybe OJ's oldest son Jason did it and OJ helped "clean up" / dispose of the murder weapon. OJ was so iconic at the time, maybe he thought he could stand trial and be acquitted, but his son could not.

 

That scenario would also explain why OJ couldn't pass the lie detector test, but was so arrogant about the chances of conviction.

 

If I'm not mistaken the LAPD even questioned his son, but once they thought they had OJ, they stopped investigating and focused on convicting him. Jason also has a violent streak with women and some treatment for mental issues I think.

So he set up an alibi with Kato because he knew Jason was going to kill Nicole? 

 

He was arrogant because he was a "star" and felt above the law, just as he did during his latest crime. 

 

So you think Jason, who had a great relationship with Nicole, loved her, admired her, thought she was a "wonderful mother" and a big sister to him, stopped by often even after the separation with his dad, who never beat her up, let alone regularly beat her up physically or emotionally is a more likely killer than OJ?  Jason never ran, never threatened suicide, didn't try to set up a fake alibi, just went home when he COULD have gone to his girlfriends, just did what he did every Sunday, worked the chef job at the restaurant because the chef took Sunday's off, and Jason, the sous chef would take over on those days, is a more likely killer?  Because Nicole changed the dinner plans?

 

His "mental issue" that people refer to is epilepsy, and he takes medication for that.  BTW, his deposition in the civil trial is also on that page, it's interesting reading. 

 

Edit, this is in another thread, but I'll put it here because of the golf ball comments.

 

For an OJ golf ball to hit Kato's wall he would have to somehow shoot through or OVER his neighbors house.  Kato never used the front door, that add-on addition had it's own doors, and the door TO the house was locked and protected by a security code.  Kato, Arnell's, and Jason (when he was a kid before he moved out) had rooms in that addition.

 

By the way, the house has been bulldozed, so if you google earth it, you will see the property lines, tennis court, etc, but the house is gone, they rebuilt.  Now that I know the owner of this site thinks OJ is innocent, I kind of want to find a new site, but there is a lot of good stuff there, timed the drive to Bundy, etc.  Basically 2 minutes max.

 

Edited February 5, 2016 by Umbelina

[SinInTheCamp]

 

By the way, the house has been bulldozed, so if you google earth it, you will see the property lines, tennis court, etc, but the house is gone, they rebuilt.  Now that I know the owner of this site thinks OJ is innocent, I kind of want to find a new site, but there is a lot of good stuff there, timed the drive to Bundy, etc.  Basically 2 minutes max.

 

 

 

Yes, I've made the drive myself between Bundy and Rockingham (after the new house had been rebuilt), and it took probably 3 minutes max. That was on a Saturday afternoon with fairly busy traffic. So it would have been a very brief trip for OJ to return home from Bundy, especially with the way he was speeding, as observed by that one witness he cut off. My own visits to the sites were about 3 years ago...now I'm thinking about taking another drive out there to actually time it.

[Avaleigh]

There isn't anything in OJ's character that makes me think he'd take the fall for anyone. The guy is a selfish, egotistical, narcissist. I can't see him taking the rap for Jason for one second.

[psychoticstate]

I posted this in the episode thread but it seems more appropriate here.

 

Also wanted to add that out of all the egregious mistakes Ito made (and there were plenty), I think the worst thing he did was to allow Simpson to make a statement to the court.  WITHOUT BEING ON THE STAND.  I've never heard of such in my life.  That is unprecedented and is a gross allowance. 

I agree that the jury, regardless of makeup, would have acquitted. They had their bags packed before beginning deliberations so they had no intent of spending much time deliberating guilt or innocence. I think they were also afraid of riots, given what had happened in LA 2 years prior. Furthermore, one member of the jury stated afterward that they did not understand the DNA evidence and so tossed it out when deliberating.

 

That is galling and shocking. The DNA evidence should have closed the case up. How can Simpson (or anyone) explain how Ron Goldman's blood got in his Bronco? Sure, they can come up with some tale about how Nicole's blood got there; they were married, had children, blah, blah, blah. But Simpson had no previous connection with Ron. And Simpson's blood from the crime scene to the street and then from his Bronco to his front door? And a serious and deep cut to his left hand - - matching evidence at Bundy - - that he could not explain?

 

Judge Ito didn't help matters either. He was a p*ssy and awestruck with celebrity. Who else would have a VIP section in their courtroom and court the media? He also allowed things into evidence that had no place there, like race. These murders had zero to do with race. Zero. It was domestic violence, plain and simple.

 

As far as reasonable doubt, I disagree. I think the defense threw everything they could at the wall to see what would stick. It made no sense to me that the same cops that were invited over to Simpson's to hang out and who walked away after numerous domestic violence calls would then plot to frame him. It was pure speculation with no basis and to me, it shows the defense was more desperate than crafty. Simpson had no alibi, he had a history of domestic abuse and things were tense between him and Nicole at the time she was killed - - so blame the police for planting evidence.

 

That's not to say that the prosecutors did a flawless job. They abandoned Fuhrman on the stand when they should have stuck behind him and proven how impossible it would be for him to conspire (along with two other detectives he had never worked directly with before) to frame Simpson. (And why would he have done this? At that point, none of the detectives knew where Simpson was or what his alibi might have been.) They dropped Jill Shively like a hot potato once she sold her story to the Enquirer. Shouldn't have mattered; she still saw Simpson racing from Nicole's condo at the time of the murders. They also kept people on the stand too long - - the DNA expert should have been there for a day, not five.

 

Regardless, Simpson's acquittal is one of the worst miscarriages of justice I've heard.

 

 

[psychoticstate]

I really dont want to even get into it here but I cant just keep my mouth shut - it is clearly full of hate and biased opinions so I just want to state some of the facts in this case which it sounds like this one sided slaughter is not showing to its audience. 

First - Mark Furman not only was caught on tape making racial remarks BUT he took the fifth when asked if he tampered with the evidence in this case. That is like saying he did or else why not answer? So if we are to assume (which is what most of this case in here is  being based on assumptions ) lets say that it is safe to assume he did tamper with the evidence in this case- who knows what and how much ? Second - Why is it okay to punish this man for a crime that he was found not guilty of with a much lesser crime that he was clearly provoked into? This is NOT how the American Justice System is suppose to work - if we bend the rules with one case then whats to stop from bending with any other case? Would you like it if yourself or family member was getting the rules bent to punish them or you? 

 

Next just some of the facts from the evidence in this case - real life evidence.

Blood samples were not handled properly – not stored properly and detectives and forensic dept actually took samples home for days.

Head of the criminal collection division admits in court to returning 2 weeks after crime to collect blood off fence at crime scene.

1st cops to search OJs house did not find bloody glove after a 2 hour search – it was only discovered after Mark Furman arrived at home.

 The bloody glove, sock and blood in Bronco were found by Mark Furman.

Blood expert McDonald testifies that the blood soaked through the socks all the way through proving no foot was in sock when blood was put on sock.

1.5 centimeters of (OJs) blood collected went missing from the 8 centimeters collected in evidence.

 ETA was detected in the blood samples on sock which is used to preserve blood samples.

Blood soaked glove found without any blood around it or leading up to it.

 Cut was found on Ojs hand but neither glove had a tear in it so how could hand be cut?

 Knife bought by OJ and said to be thought the weapon at his home was found not to have ever been used by testing its finishing oil.

There was not blood leading up to his house – nor was there any large amount of blood other than small drops very small drops like eyedropper size found at his residence.

Would you be willing to give up your own freedom or a loved one if you are wrong in saying guilty? Because if you truly believe he did it it should not be a problem to consider if not then there is doubt and you can not expect to take a mans freedom and his life from him if you are not sure he is guilty. And this has been done to him as the time he is now doing does not fit the crime he did commit and everyone is ok because they think he deserves it on the first crime. This is not how our justice system is supposed to work in our country – shameful.

For every man out there that has any domestic violence in your past - you should pray that it does not come back on you and put you in a position where you are viewed as a killing animal - God help you if you do cause our justice system will probably fail you too.

ArizonaGrown,

 

The Fuhrman tapes never should have been allowed into evidence because the crime itself had zero to do with race.  That said, the tapes were Fuhrman allegedly speaking in terms of a screenplay and not truth.  Make of that what you will but there were never any accusations of wrongdoing against Fuhrman during his career.  In fact, most people said he was an exemplary detective.  I don't know him so I have no dog in the fight but why on earth would Fuhrman plant anything?  He had nothing against Simpson, who wasn't considered a suspect at that point and neither he nor Lange or Vannatter knew where Simpson was.  Furthermore, the three of them had never worked together previously so it's hard to fathom these three would quickly decide to frame Simpson. 

 

As far as taking the Fifth goes - - it's like pleading no contest.  It's not an admission of guilt, it's the equivalent of not arguing the point.  And you can't pick and choose what questions you'll answer and what you'll take the Fifth on.  It's an all or nothing. 

 

The blood evidence - - there are issues and errors at most crime scenes. However, any type of "contamination" usually makes it LESS likely to match a defendant, not more so.  The blood that went missing from Simpson's sample - - no one could say for sure that it was EXACTLY 8 centimeters collected.

 

The cut in Simpson's hand likely happened after the glove was ripped from his hand - - my guess is by Ron Goldman, attempting to protect himself.  Nicole had a very precise cut to her neck; Ron suffered with multiple stab wounds so it would make sense that his killer might accidentally cut himself during these stabs.

 

No blood leading to house . . . it's not like he was bleeding profusely and he would not have been drenched in the victims' blood.  Nicole's throat was likely cut from behind her, so the bleeding would have run out and away from her and her killer.  I suspect that his killer got Ron's blood on him in places but Simpson was wearing black knit clothing which would easily hide and absorb some levels of blood. 

 

I've posted this before but it bears repeating . . . how can Simpson explain Ron Goldman's blood in his vehicle?  There is no innocent explanation for it to be there.  Why was Simpson so all over the place during his interview with the detectives?  He couldn't nail down what time he parked the Bronco - - 7, 8, 9.  Which is it?  Why couldn't he explain when and how he cut his finger?  Why didn't he ask HOW Nicole had died when he was notified?  Why would he mock and demean Ron Goldman, who should have been a hero to him for trying to save the mother of his children?  Why deny ownership of those "ugly ass" shoes, that disappeared immediately following the murders?  Why was he speeding away from Nicole's condo during the time of the murders when he claimed he was asleep at Rockingham?  How was his Bronco not parked on the street when Alan Park arrived and yet was there when Simpson finally came out of the house? 

 

I don't understand your next to last paragraph but regarding the paragraph about domestic violence . . . if anyone's spouse (or former spouse) is murdered, it's common sense that the police will be knocking on your door first.  That's flat out statistics.  That said, if you're abusive or have been abusive, you'd be a damn fool not to think you'd be a suspect.  As well you should be.

Edited February 6, 2016 by psychoticstate

[Umbelina]

 

Another earlier take on the murder, animation, without Ron rushing in to save her, but already there, and taken out first.

[Avaleigh]

I haven't thought about this case in a long time. But, I always wondered if maybe OJ's oldest son Jason did it and OJ helped "clean up" / dispose of the murder weapon. OJ was so iconic at the time, maybe he thought he could stand trial and be acquitted, but his son could not.

 

That scenario would also explain why OJ couldn't pass the lie detector test, but was so arrogant about the chances of conviction.

 

If I'm not mistaken the LAPD even questioned his son, but once they thought they had OJ, they stopped investigating and focused on convicting him. Jason also has a violent streak with women and some treatment for mental issues I think.

Anytime the idea of a different killer is floated I just think Occam's Razor. If the killer isn't OJ then a person has to accept that it was a massively complicated conspiracy in addition to needing at least two people to essentially be clairvoyant. As has been mentioned already, how would Fuhrman or somebody else know that OJ didn't have a rock solid alibi before trying to frame him?

As far as complaints about the jury---It's shocking to me that this was considered to be a jury of his peers. It's like, I'm sorry, how the heck can that be?

The more I read about this case the more upset and disgusted I feel. The impression that I'm getting overall regarding the seeming lack of empathy from the jurors is simply blood chilling.

[Umbelina]

In one of those depositions, but now they are all running together for me, no, it's Cora's, Nicole's self described "best friend" she mentioned that Nicole's keys went missing 2-3 days before the murder. 

 

They would run pretty much every morning, and Nicole would toss her keys into a planter just inside the gate.  Now anyone observing her, and Nicole claimed OJ was following her, spying on her, and even once told Kato to assume they are being recorded and filmed at all times by OJ, would have known that about the keys.

 

I wonder if OJ was already inside waiting, and Ron DID happen on them.  I don't think Cora told anyone about the keys during the first trial.  (I'm not positive about that, but she didn't seem to volunteer anything to the prosecution team at all, according to her civil deposition.)

[psychoticstate]

The more I read about this case the more upset and disgusted I feel. The impression that I'm getting overall regarding the seeming lack of empathy from the jurors is simply blood chilling.

 

 

I think the jurors could not relate to Nicole, did not like her and simply didn't care.   The jury consultants supposedly told Marcia Clark the women didn't like her and they thought Nicole was a white bitch that stole a brother. 

 

That is horrible enough but it breaks my heart further to think of Ron.  It's like the jury, along with most of the media, forgot all about him.  Even if certain jurors didn't like Nicole, her lifestyle, whatever (and not saying that's justified) . . . what about poor Ron?  He really had nothing to do with anything other than going out of his way to do a good deed and then losing his life trying to save someone else's. 

 

Just sickening that Simpson got away with murdering both of them but what he and Johnnie Cochran did to the Goldman family after will make me always despise both.  Kim Goldman said in her book that both of them turned toward her after the verdict and mouthed "Gotcha!" at her.  It's almost too gross to contemplate. 

[psychoticstate]

I wonder if OJ was already inside waiting, and Ron DID happen on them.  I don't think Cora told anyone about the keys during the first trial.  (I'm not positive about that, but she didn't seem to volunteer anything to the prosecution team at all, according to her civil deposition.)

 



The buzzer on Nicole's gate was supposedly broken so I think Simpson showed up, rang the bell at the door and went around the corner, waiting for Nicole to open the door and come out.  I think he attacked her then, knocking her unconscious before killing her. 

 

I think that's when Ron showed up, seeing Nicole on the ground.  I think Simpson hid while Ron kneeled over Nicole to see if he could help and that's when Simpson stabbed him in the neck.  The angles work that way and that one wound was what did Ron in.  I think if Simpson had come at him while Ron was standing and alert, Ron may very well have kicked his ass.  The autopsy report says that the blood from the neck wound was on his shirt but also stained a leg of his pants pretty thoroughly; if Ron was standing, his pants leg wouldn't be stained.  If he was bent down when the wound happened it would make sense that the blood would drip onto his pants.  Anyhow, once Simpson got that first blow in, it was a done deal.

 

I also recall reading that some of Nicole's blood was found on Ron's jeans so, again, it would make sense that he was kneeling by her body.

[Umbelina]

The ex-wife of attorney Johnnie Cochran, the head of O. J. Simpson's defense team, reveals how she suffered his philandering, physical abuse, and infidelity before she found the strength to leave him.  

Life After Johnnie Cochran: Why I Left the Sweetest-Talking, Most Successful Black Lawyer in L.A.

http://www.amazon.com/Life-After-Johnnie-Cochran-Sweetest-Talking/dp/0465039650

 

Hmm, let's talk about Johnnie Cochran a bit, or do we need a few individual threads here?  I thought his wife, mother of his child was white, so I was surprised to see that in the show last night.  Much like OJ, apparently he had his first wife Barbara, black, and his girlfriend/baby momma, white, whom he later married. 

 

More interesting were the revelations in a Los Angeles Times Magazine article, which, in the midst of the Simpson-madness, reported that Cochran’s first wife, Barbara had sought a restraining order against him for beating her. In her 1977 divorce petition, the former Ms. Cochran stated that, “During the course of our marriage (Cochran has) without any reasonable cause … physically struck, beat and inflicted severe injury upon the person of the Petitioner. …”

 

Cochran told the Times that it was all a mistake, that the statements were made “for legal reasons. She knows they are not true and will be happy to talk to you about it.” But when the reporter went to see her, Cochran’s former wife refused to recant, saying that she would not discuss the matter.

The following day, Barbara Cochran appeared on the Geraldo Rivera show. Accompanying her was a teary-eyed woman who identified herself as Patricia Cochran. On the show, Patrician Cochran was identified as having been Johnnie Cochran’s mistress for the past 18 years. She is the mother of his son, Jonathan, born in 1973. Cochran still supported both mother and son, to the tune of $4,000 a month.

Frequently stopping to break into tears, Patricia Cochran told the viewers that just prior to her appearance on the show, Cochran had threatened to cut her off financially if she went public. When asked if Cochran had ever been violent, Patricia recounted an incident where Cochran had shown up at her home with cuts and scratches following an altercation with his then-wife. “He said something about a knife,” recalled Patricia, “and that he’d had a fight with Barbara over a candy bar called a Peanut Patty.” (At this point there were audible snickers from the audience.) For the remainder of the show, a bleary-eyed Patricia painted a picture of Cochran as a vicious, mean-spirited womanizer who would do and say anything to get whatever he wanted. Her testimonial was interrupted by frequent breakdowns, during which the ever-sympathetic Rivera bowed his head and patted Patricia on the shoulder.

 

The most interesting thing about the appearance of Patricia Cochran was not so much what she had to say, but what the past 18 years had done to her face. In photos and home movies interspersed throughout her interview, we saw a thin, attractive blonde with a pleasant, if somewhat characterless countenance. That face — now beset by crows feet, elephantine eye-bags, double chins, and a wattle of sagging skin around the neck — was wrecked.

 

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/1998/10/4805/#2DR2sILXjJGdIhfW.99

 

This is the original LA times article.

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-01-29/magazine/tm-26758_1_johnnie-cochran/5

 

How did I ever not know about the abuse claims against JC?

[Avaleigh]

Second - Why is it okay to punish this man for a crime that he was found not guilty of with a much lesser crime that he was clearly provoked into?

I'm sure 'If I did it' OJ thinks that he was "provoked" into killing Nicole and Ron.

Am I honestly supposed to feel sorry for this guy because he was supposedly provoked and unfairly sentenced? To me the implication is that he's a victim because he got caught again breaking the law but he should get *another* slap on the wrist (or get out of jail card) because that's supposedly what most people would get.

It's OJ's own fault that his arrogant, violent, murderous, ass is in jail right now.

Meanwhile, people use the justice system to point out that he was found "not guilty" while ignoring the verdict in the civil hearing that makes it clear that he's liable.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Avaleigh

[Avaleigh]

I think the jurors could not relate to Nicole, did not like her and simply didn't care. The jury consultants supposedly told Marcia Clark the women didn't like her and they thought Nicole was a white bitch that stole a brother.

That is horrible enough but it breaks my heart further to think of Ron. It's like the jury, along with most of the media, forgot all about him. Even if certain jurors didn't like Nicole, her lifestyle, whatever (and not saying that's justified) . . . what about poor Ron? He really had nothing to do with anything other than going out of his way to do a good deed and then losing his life trying to save someone else's.

Just sickening that Simpson got away with murdering both of them but what he and Johnnie Cochran did to the Goldman family after will make me always despise both. Kim Goldman said in her book that both of them turned toward her after the verdict and mouthed "Gotcha!" at her. It's almost too gross to contemplate.

I agree with you that this is probably a big part of it. My thing is, I have next to nothing in common with Nicole Brown or Ron Goldman. However, to relate to either of them on a human level all one needs to do is remember that these were good human beings who were loved by their families. Nicole was a loving mother to two small children. How does that not reach through to a person when they're contemplating the fact that people were murdered? Nicole was somebody's daughter. Ron was somebody's 25 year old son with his whole life in front of him. That stuff all gets pushed to the side because the Rodney King verdict is a recent memory? Very sad and depressing. Edited February 6, 2016 by Avaleigh

[chlban]

A couple questions for people who weren't in diapers like I was when this was going on...

In the first episode, Kardashian mentioned how OJ had a good relationship with the police, which I assume was true. Did the prosecution ever try to use this to their advantage? Like OJ was cool with the police and they were still convinced he was the murderer? Just curious.

Also, does anyone know Clark's record/reputation before this trial? She must have been somewhat competent to be assigned to such a high-profile case. Based on the trailer for this show, the way it seems like they might be portraying it was that she was overwhelmed by the publicity and maybe assumed too quickly that a conviction would be a slam dunk.

The police connection is totally valid and I always wondered why the defense didn't pursue that more. My question was always why on earth would the cops want to frame OJ.

For you young uns, it is hard to overstate how popular OJ was. Especially with men. He was obviously a sports hero, and his persona was Mr. Nice guy. It would be like cops wanting to frame Magic Johnson. It just makes no sense, never did.

[FuriousStyles]

I was about 7 at the time. I know OJ more for this murder trial than him as a football player and definitely not as a movie star and Im actually an avid sports/football fan. Sometimes, announcers will bring his name up in passing, whenever a running back does something similar or is approaching a record OJ has or something, and every single time I cringe. Because the *first* thing I think about is the murders.

Ive been thinking about how beloved OJ must have been given how much all of you "older" posters have tried to convey it. I guess Michael Jordan would be the closest? But I honestly cant think of any athlete that had similar crossover success. I mean these days, athletes are all over commercials, hawking everything from underwear to socks to health insurance and everything inbetween. But not many big name (former) athletes are also starring in blockbuster movies.

I was obsessed with the Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman trials and they were regular people. I probably would have lost my mind if I was old enough to really grasp OJ's trial. I mean, right now im having to beg people/co-workers to watch Making a Murderer so I can talk about it and most people are like "meh, maybe later". I gather that was not the case in 1994? Everybody and their mother was engrossed with this?

[Bronzedog]

Part of the reason people were engrossed in it was because it was on tv all the time. The trial was on during the day and programming was interrupted to show the bronco chase which in DC was during the evening. I didn't really want to watch it all the time, it's what was on. If you didn't have cable, you had no choice if the tv on. I remember getting tired of all the coverage.

[rho]

FuriousStyles, we were probably about the same age and I share the exact feeling. I don't associate anything with him other than the murder trials. Even when I hear his name in the football commentary, it makes me shudder. To his credit, OJ was one of the first athletes to really build a brand and continue working outside of coaching/commentating. The only other athlete that comes to mind is Shaq. I think he had multiple rap albums and a clothing line at one point. He has an acting career, although he usually plays a version of himself. That's my guess, but maybe someone who has a better grasp of the 90s can weigh in.

[BoogieBurns]

To his credit, OJ was one of the first athletes to really build a brand and continue working outside of coaching/commentating. The only other athlete that comes to mind is Shaq.

 

Hello fellow youngins who are as lost as I am. I was talking to my dad trying to figure out what OJ's fame was like before the murders. After a lot of discussion, he said "If Beyonce played sports," and it clicked for me. This guy was super likeable and had tons of crossover success in other industries. Obviously Beyonce doesn't have a history of violence or two ex spouses, but you get it. He was crazy famous.

 

(I am in no way saying Beyonce is like OJ. I hope the Illuminati doesn't come looking for me.)

[SinInTheCamp]

I was about 7 at the time. I know OJ more for this murder trial than him as a football player and definitely not as a movie star and Im actually an avid sports/football fan. Sometimes, announcers will bring his name up in passing, whenever a running back does something similar or is approaching a record OJ has or something, and every single time I cringe. Because the *first* thing I think about is the murders.

Ive been thinking about how beloved OJ must have been given how much all of you "older" posters have tried to convey it. I guess Michael Jordan would be the closest? But I honestly cant think of any athlete that had similar crossover success. I mean these days, athletes are all over commercials, hawking everything from underwear to socks to health insurance and everything inbetween. But not many big name (former) athletes are also starring in blockbuster movies.

I was obsessed with the Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman trials and they were regular people. I probably would have lost my mind if I was old enough to really grasp OJ's trial. I mean, right now im having to beg people/co-workers to watch Making a Murderer so I can talk about it and most people are like "meh, maybe later". I gather that was not the case in 1994? Everybody and their mother was engrossed with this?

 

For me, the closest comparison--but alas, if OJ is before your time, this will be wayyyyy before your time as well--is Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Super popular (especially in L.A., where I'm from), star college athlete at UCLA; later one of the most beloved professional basketball players of all time. Had some bit film roles, but some of those ended up being cult classics, like Airplane! and Game of Death with Bruce Lee. Also appeared on numerous TV shows. Very intelligent, and even now has a career as a writer (he's excellent at that, too, by the way). All-around likable, charismatic, talented philanthropist and athlete-turned-actor. A long-time beloved public persona who worked hard and began with nothing, like OJ. But Kareem has never murdered anyone--just want to make that clear!

And yes, everyone and their mother was engrossed in this. Mine certainly was! There was just so much to talk about in regards to this case, as we can see even now with just a taste of it from the first episode of this show.

Edited February 6, 2016 by SinInTheCamp

[Tippi]

I remember seeing OJ play football and he was an electric player--a magnificent running back who could make big plays and really turn on the "juice."  He was very handsome and charismatic and exuded an amazing amount of charm and likability.  It was stunning news when he was accused of the crime and the case really did take over the 24 hour news cycle--in fact, it probably was the genesis of the 24 hour saturation story.  My mind always goes back to Nicole and Ron.  And I have not done a great deal of reading on the case, but is it the accepted theory that he went over to Nicole's with the intention of killing her?  Did he think his trip to Chicago would give him an ironclad alibi?  I have my private theory that he was extremely angry at her that day and maybe went over to her house to scare her (not kill her,) maybe do something like slash her tires? And when he saw Ron walk up his jealousy was so extreme that he killed them both in a fit of rage?  It's such an eerie and haunting crime scene.  No one conclusively saw or heard anything as the crime occurred.  People walked by the crime scene that evening and didn't notice anything.  The dog howling, with bloody paws, and Nicole lying there with her throat savagely cut. 

 

I recall all the photos produced during the civil trial with OJ wearing Bruno Magli shoes.  Wasn't there testimony that the gloves were the same brand and size as a pair that Nicole had bought for him?

[psychoticstate]

I agree with you that this is probably a big part of it. My thing is, I have next to nothing in common with Nicole Brown or Ron Goldman. However, to relate to either of them on a human level all one needs to do is remember that these were good human beings who were loved by their families. Nicole was a loving mother to two small children. How does that not reach through to a person when they're contemplating the fact that people were murdered? Nicole was somebody's daughter. Ron was somebody's 25 year old son with his whole life in front of him. That stuff all gets pushed to the side because the Rodney King verdict is a recent memory? Very sad and depressing.

Oh, I agree.  Besides the Rodney King connection maybe the jury felt like they had to choose - - Nicole and Ron or Simpson.  It's sad that these two people - - mother, daughter, sister, son and brother - - have been essentially forgotten as the true victims in this (along with their loved ones.) 

 

 

As has been said, if you only know Simpson from the murder trial you cannot understand how likable he was perceived to be.  This trial was really the first one that involved an honest to goodness celebrity as a murder suspect and then defendant.  As if that wasn't enough, the case absolutely polarized people and divided the races.   And while athletes being on tv shows or in movies or pitching products is pretty much par for the course today, it wasn't that common when Simpson was doing it.  The only person I can think to compare him to from roughly the same generation is Joe Namath.

[psychoticstate]

I remember seeing OJ play football and he was an electric player--a magnificent running back who could make big plays and really turn on the "juice."  He was very handsome and charismatic and exuded an amazing amount of charm and likability.  It was stunning news when he was accused of the crime and the case really did take over the 24 hour news cycle--in fact, it probably was the genesis of the 24 hour saturation story.  My mind always goes back to Nicole and Ron.  And I have not done a great deal of reading on the case, but is it the accepted theory that he went over to Nicole's with the intention of killing her?  Did he think his trip to Chicago would give him an ironclad alibi?  I have my private theory that he was extremely angry at her that day and maybe went over to her house to scare her (not kill her,) maybe do something like slash her tires? And when he saw Ron walk up his jealousy was so extreme that he killed them both in a fit of rage?  It's such an eerie and haunting crime scene.  No one conclusively saw or heard anything as the crime occurred.  People walked by the crime scene that evening and didn't notice anything.  The dog howling, with bloody paws, and Nicole lying there with her throat savagely cut. 

 

I recall all the photos produced during the civil trial with OJ wearing Bruno Magli shoes.  Wasn't there testimony that the gloves were the same brand and size as a pair that Nicole had bought for him?

 

I never saw Simpson play during his football era but I recall friends talking about his games during the trial - - they said he was actually FASTER running side to side than straightaway.  He was clearly a gifted athlete.  And a killer.

 

In any event, I think he went over to Nicole's that night to kill her.  She had given him the final brush off, her family apparently was also brushing him off to an extent, Nicole was happy and looked good, Paula had broken up with him earlier in the day, Simpson had threatened to turn Nicole over to the IRS for lying about her residence.  He was enraged with her because she dared to go on with her life without him.  He carried a knife and he wore dark knit clothing, along with a ski cap - - in mid-June in southern California. He also attempted to set up an alibi via Kato.  I can't vouch for this 100% but I heard that the spare tire cover or "bag" that came with Ford Broncos from that time was missing from Simpson's Bronco, and he had a shovel in the back.  The idea being that he planned to go to Nicole's, kill her and then dump her somewhere.  I don't think he intended to leave her out front where his children could find her and he certainly didn't anticipate Ron Goldman showing up on the scene.  I think Ron's arrival caused Simpson to panic and abandon his thoughts about taking Nicole's body elsewhere (along with the fact that he probably arrived at her place later than planned because of Kato.) 

 

So yes, I think he thought the Chicago flight would be his alibi along with the burger run via Kato.  I also think he's a big enough narcissistic fuckwit to assume that everyone would believe whatever he said because he was O.J. 

[chlban]

I'm sure 'If I did it' OJ thinks that he was "provoked" into killing Nicole and Ron.

Am I honestly supposed to feel sorry for this guy because he was supposedly provoked and unfairly sentenced? To me the implication is that he's a victim because he got caught again breaking the law but he should get *another* slap on the wrist (or get out of jail card) because that's supposedly what most people would get.

It's OJ's own fault that his arrogant, violent, murderous, ass is in jail right now.

Meanwhile, people use the justice system to point out that he was found "not guilty" while ignoring the verdict in the civil hearing that makes it clear that he's liable.

I could not care less if OJ was sentenced too harshly for his more recent crime. The verdict in his murder trial was a travesty and everyone knows it. His confession/book had to have convinced anyone that was still in denial. I hope he dies in prison, but if he does get paroled he will renain one of the most hated men on the planet and that really has to burn. Edited February 6, 2016 by chlban

[elzin]

Thinking about the timeline and how (to me) it was clearly Nicole as the intended victim and Ron having the worst timing, it's really chilling to realize that if the bodies weren't found so quickly he really would have had a fairly solid alibi. Time of death would have been more broad and there would be so much "Well, he was on the plane for 2/3 of the window..." We're arguing and debating this now knowing how much time he had, but had they been found later, it would have caused even more wiggle room for his defenders, more leeway for benefit of the doubt.

[Bronzedog]

Jenny McCarthy and Donny Wahlburg were on ET tonight. They both believe OJ is innocent. Nice that they found each other and saved two other people.

[GHScorpiosRule]

So after watching the two specials last night, I wonder if the show will give us the other attorney, Douglas? He was the one who questioned Ron Shipp during the criminal trial.  So far, we've met everyone, except for Bailey, who will appear next week.

 

As for how the murders happened, the forensic pathologist in Autopsy laid it out, how Nicole was killed, how Ron was and that Ron probably tried to pull OJ off of Nicole.  There was a stab wound in Ron's left thigh at "an odd angle" and the pathologist surmised that Ron, who was a Black Belt, may have been in the middle of a kick.  And that there were blood stains on Nicole's back, that weren't hers, and probably Ron's. Ignoring the reenactments, and just focusing on what the pathologist said, had me riveted. And also gave me nightmares, as he also showed how they were killed and that Nicole was practically decapitated. There was so much RAGE that went into her murder.

 

I didn't know that OJ had been abusing her from almost the beginning. They were together for 8 years before they married, and now I am wondering how her family didn't know.  Because after the murders were first reported, both Nicole's father and sister, appeared on Good Morning America I think it was, and were supporting him.

 

And now I'm wondering how long after he killed them, did the Bronco chase happen. Because I know I was here in the states to see it unfold, but I didn't return from India (where I'd been for almost a year) until July. 

[psychoticstate]

GHScorpio, Ron and Nicole were murdered on a Sunday night and the Bronco chase was on Friday. 

 

FWIW, my understanding is that her family did know about the abuse and encouraged her to try and make it work with Simpson because he handed her father a Hertz dealership and was paying for her sisters' educations.  If true, that's horribly sad.  And it sounds somewhat believable given that during the last weeks and months of her life, Nicole was calling a battered women's shelter for help and not her family.

[Bama]

 

But I honestly cant think of any athlete that had similar crossover success. I mean these days, athletes are all over commercials, hawking everything from underwear to socks to health insurance and everything inbetween. But not many big name (former) athletes are also starring in blockbuster movies.

The closest contemporary comparison I can think of is Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.

 

Johnson obviously wasn't the Heisman Trophy winning, record breaking, Hall of Famer football player  that OJ Simpson was but he did have pretty massive wrestling success and he definitely fits the bill for the crossover to big blockbuster movie and TV roles.

[suomi]

Thank you, Umberlina, for the many links you have posted. As an old-timer (44 in '94) everything about this case is familiar to me and I'm glad that you are providing context for those who are just now coming to it. I've heard and read from some (both then and now) who hear Ashford and Rockingham and think the house was at a T-intersection with one driveway. So I think the property diagrams are especially useful.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that Simpson was exceptionally handsome, and people with pleasantly arranged facial features have a finger tipping the evaluation scale. He had a megawatt smile and was rarely seen by the public without it. Playing for USC in '67, he ran 64 yards for a touchdown against UCLA, which tied the game, and then 'SC won by one point. I can still see and hear my grandfather standing and screaming about that. It was one of the greatest football games ever, nationwide, and especially so in SoCal because of the cross-town rivalry. The dour (but still handsome) face in the courtroom is not the face seen by millions on TV and movie screens for nearly 30 years (30 years!) before the murders.

[Mittengirl]

How did Robert Shapiro get involved in the case? The show never gave any hint as to who called him. Kardashian? Was Shapiro a friend of OJ's previously?

I was in my late twenties when this all went down and had forgotten many details. I had thought there was more time between the murders and O.J. becoming an official suspect and then the car chase was even further along.

Was the car chase Bronco the same one that was parked on Rockingham? Wouldn't the police have held that as evidence because of the blood found in/on it?

[suomi]

His first attorney Howard Weitzman introduced Shapiro to the case. Because, Weitzman quickly realized that OJ was guilty and Shapiro was The Master of Plea Bargains in El Lay cases.

[biakbiak]

For anyone who wasn't alive, doesn't remember, or does and is just interested you should watch ESPN's 30 for 30 June 17th, 1994 a great documentary that contains no narration or talking heads but is just footage across networks of the Bronco chase and the various sporting events going on that day. It's really captivating to get what newscasters, sportscaster and even networks (by their decisions of when to break in) were thinking in real time on that day.

Edited February 6, 2016 by biakbiak

[ArizonaGrown]

I have a hard time believing that someone who ran 9 miles every morning (per the autopsy special) was using. I have never done hard drugs but that seems to indicate a level of personal discipline that would preclude regular drug use, no? I'm going to ask the ex if he knew anything about that.

 

 

Yes, the narration for the Scandal special was awful. His actions that night are enough to characterize him as a vicious POS. Don't bring his upbringing into it--the projects had nothing to do with this. If anything his previous incredible success proved he had overcome whatever disadvantages he'd had growing up. And who knows if he was "bad" all along? What do we know about his marriage to his first wife--did he beat her?

 

 

Four words--If I Did It. In a way I was so relieved when that came out--finally we can stop pretending he's "not guilty." He just admitted he did it. And whoever said what a terrible thing to put his kids through (again)--yes! If you were innocent, why would you drag all that up again? I can't imagine how messed up those poor kids must be, under it all. I know they're adults now but it's heartbreaking. They lost both parents. And then he took them away from their mother's family as well,

 

 

Also remember OJ's vow to "find the real killer" after his acquittal. Yet he never hired an investigator, nothing, nada. If your spouse, even an ex that you claim to still have a good relationship with, the mother of your children was brutally murdered, wouldn't you want to see the real killer brought to justice? As far as the If I did it book, take a read if you haven't, he basically outlines how he committed the crime, step by step. Um, really? What an odd thing for an innocent man to do, particularly for one who had been accused and many believe was guilty despite the acquittal. 

 

I believe he did it. I think he was a man with rage, fueled by drugs, who was endlessly pissed that the woman who he thought was his forever, had the gall the spurn him that day. Remember, Nicole was very young and came from nothing. OJ supported not only Nicole, but her entire family. Then she had the nerve to dump him and enter into other relationships in a public way. Add in coke or whatever and you have a timebomb just waiting to explode.

 

Did the police screw up?  Oh yes, Furhman should have never been allowed to be a cop after everything he did prior to the case, the crime lab were a bunch of keystone cops, the trial was a media circus with a starstruck judge and a prosecutor's office that was outmoneyed and outgunned.   Add that to terrible longstanding racial tensions that had been exacerbated by the Rodney King beating and trial and who could be surprised at the verdict? 

 

Did either one of you ever hear the name Glenn Rodgers? He too has put a good narrative out there as to how he killed them. And guess what he is now in prison for the many murders he committed in the same fashion with a knife. And what do you know he was doing work on Nicoles house around the time of the murder- and he sent his mother a angel pin (Nicole was pictured with said pin on at recital the night of murder) which his mother wore and was pictured wearing at his trial later once captured for his crime spree. He was pictured shortly before the murders with Nicole and Fay Resnick out partying and told his brother that he was going to kill them. 

 

Really do you think if Oj did this he would risk this book? He knew everyone was pissed that thought he got off - and maybe he was trying to play with them but I really think he needed the cash. And I would not be surprised to find out that some of the same "friends" of his that approached him when this Vegas thing went down had something to do with the book idea. What I am saying is that Oj was not the smartest person when it came to his friends - we know this from the way his "good" friends sold him down the river regarding the Vegas case and seemed to encourage him during the said crime but were able to save their own hide by turning on him. So I think it is safe since this person was his quote friend for many years unquote to assume he had lots of friends who only were worried about exploiting him for their own gain and did. I truly do not believe he is so arrogant as to write this if he did it. Also if he did I would ask you how he was able oto control his anger and emotions to precisely and deliberately kill these two and make it home and on plane within 20 minutes of murder? I have not read the book which is speculation as is the confession of Glenn Rodgers but I have read the trial transcripts and gone over the evidence at the criminal trial.

 

What I think most people dont understand is the amount of blood found at home , Bronco and on his socks was a very very small amount of blood. Most just run on the sensationalized media stories who claim there was a trail leading to his house - this is not the case. Dontcha think who ever did this had to have a significant amount of blood on them? Not just eyedropper size amount of blood here and there?  

 

I think Oj may have arrived after she was killed and did step in the blood and fled. Glenn Rodgers said he killed Nicole because Oj had agreed to pay him for it- and he said that Oj wanted to see after it was done. Along with witness that saw bronco in area that evening there was a truck described just like the one Rodgers had been driving at time of murders as well seen that night. 

 

My huge problem is with the way some are content with the pay for first crime with the second theory - this is not ok because of the fact it is Oj. Like it or not he was not found guilty in criminal trial but was in civil court. He has had to pay for this loss monetarily- which is the way our courts are set up to work. To say that he should sit it prison for 30 years for the Vegas thing does not show a just system which America is prided on being. One crack in the system will grow to a canyon if allowed to happen - we all have to follow the laws of our justice system but it too should not be biased and is suppose to remain fair with accordance of crime committed clearly this has not happened here. If you think about it for a few minutes with the shoe being on your foot or a family member  how would you feel?  A system tipped refusing to hear or be fair about the case before them - I did not think this was suppose to happen here. 

 

Lastly again I will ask you if you all are so sure he did this that you would be willing to give up your own freedom if you were proven to be wrong? This is what you are taking from him when you say that he deserves this treatment so I really wonder if you truly would stand behind what you say to be his truth? So sure now? 

 

Here is some other links other than Kato stories ( who was a serious drug addict at time ) which state facts not made up stories.

 

http://web2.airmail.net/marjo/bosco.htm

 

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cas62.htm

 

Also note that two of Ron Goldmans friends and co workers at restaurant he was employed that evening were also murdered - in exactly same way one year after.

[ArizonaGrown]

Also Mark Furman took plea agreement to felony charges of perjury for his testimony in the Oj Simpson case - that is more than name calling or past racism. 

 

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/case63.htm

[ArizonaGrown]

ArizonaGrown,

 

The Fuhrman tapes never should have been allowed into evidence because the crime itself had zero to do with race.  That said, the tapes were Fuhrman allegedly speaking in terms of a screenplay and not truth.  Make of that what you will but there were never any accusations of wrongdoing against Fuhrman during his career.  In fact, most people said he was an exemplary detective.  I don't know him so I have no dog in the fight but why on earth would Fuhrman plant anything?  He had nothing against Simpson, who wasn't considered a suspect at that point and neither he nor Lange or Vannatter knew where Simpson was.  Furthermore, the three of them had never worked together previously so it's hard to fathom these three would quickly decide to frame Simpson. 

 

As far as taking the Fifth goes - - it's like pleading no contest.  It's not an admission of guilt, it's the equivalent of not arguing the point.  And you can't pick and choose what questions you'll answer and what you'll take the Fifth on.  It's an all or nothing. 

 

The blood evidence - - there are issues and errors at most crime scenes. However, any type of "contamination" usually makes it LESS likely to match a defendant, not more so.  The blood that went missing from Simpson's sample - - no one could say for sure that it was EXACTLY 8 centimeters collected.

 

The cut in Simpson's hand likely happened after the glove was ripped from his hand - - my guess is by Ron Goldman, attempting to protect himself.  Nicole had a very precise cut to her neck; Ron suffered with multiple stab wounds so it would make sense that his killer might accidentally cut himself during these stabs.

 

No blood leading to house . . . it's not like he was bleeding profusely and he would not have been drenched in the victims' blood.  Nicole's throat was likely cut from behind her, so the bleeding would have run out and away from her and her killer.  I suspect that his killer got Ron's blood on him in places but Simpson was wearing black knit clothing which would easily hide and absorb some levels of blood. 

 

I've posted this before but it bears repeating . . . how can Simpson explain Ron Goldman's blood in his vehicle?  There is no innocent explanation for it to be there.  Why was Simpson so all over the place during his interview with the detectives?  He couldn't nail down what time he parked the Bronco - - 7, 8, 9.  Which is it?  Why couldn't he explain when and how he cut his finger?  Why didn't he ask HOW Nicole had died when he was notified?  Why would he mock and demean Ron Goldman, who should have been a hero to him for trying to save the mother of his children?  Why deny ownership of those "ugly ass" shoes, that disappeared immediately following the murders?  Why was he speeding away from Nicole's condo during the time of the murders when he claimed he was asleep at Rockingham?  How was his Bronco not parked on the street when Alan Park arrived and yet was there when Simpson finally came out of the house? 

 

I don't understand your next to last paragraph but regarding the paragraph about domestic violence . . . if anyone's spouse (or former spouse) is murdered, it's common sense that the police will be knocking on your door first.  That's flat out statistics.  That said, if you're abusive or have been abusive, you'd be a damn fool not to think you'd be a suspect.  As well you should be.

 

 

Again please read this -http://www.lectlaw.com/files/case63.htmso Mark Furman was charged with felony perjury and pled guilty not perfect record - sorry. 

As for Rons blood my guess is that since a portion of Mr Simpsons blood went missing after collection by police department it would have been really easy for a portion of Ron Goldmans to go missing from same lab. You can get the rest of where Im going 

Edited February 6, 2016 by ArizonaGrown

[LIMOM]

I haven't thought about this case in a long time. But, I always wondered if maybe OJ's oldest son Jason did it and OJ helped "clean up" / dispose of the murder weapon. OJ was so iconic at the time, maybe he thought he could stand trial and be acquitted, but his son could not.

 

That scenario would also explain why OJ couldn't pass the lie detector test, but was so arrogant about the chances of conviction.

 

If I'm not mistaken the LAPD even questioned his son, but once they thought they had OJ, they stopped investigating and focused on convicting him. Jason also has a violent streak with women and some treatment for mental issues I think.

Jason had an air tight alibi.

Did you by any chance watch the documentary which attempts to prove that theory?

[jenrising]

OJ, didn't realize you had internet access. Wait, should I call you Juice? ;)