O.J.: Made In America - Part 3

[Decider]

Denise was the sister who was screaming.  She was also the sister who testified at the trial.

[candle96]

3 minutes ago, Decider said:

Denise was the sister who was screaming.  She was also the sister who testified at the trial.

Thanks, I must have missed that. I still think it's strange that the 2 sisters would seem to have such different views of OJ. I have two sisters myself. If one of us believed one's husband was capable of murdering her, you bet the other would know about it. But every family is different.

[Bastet]

Tanya was younger (she was seven when she first met O.J.), and said Denise told her after the murder that the reason Nicole had never told Tanya any of what was going on was because of her age; she was a teenager for most of the marriage.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Bastet

[Milburn Stone]

On June 16, 2016 at 8:42 AM, RemoteControlFreak said:

The film is not "Ron Goldman: Made in America."  It's not about him.  What bearing do the details of Ron and Nicole's relationship have on the story of OJ Simpson?

I can imagine it has some bearing. If OJ was aware that Goldman was not just an "innocent bystander," but had a relationship of some sort with Nicole, it could help explain why he murdered him in a jealous rage.

Now, there seems to be a widespread misunderstanding that those who are troubled by these sorts of omissions are saying, in effect, "Nicole and Ron deserved to die." No.

[Milburn Stone]

On June 16, 2016 at 9:51 AM, RemoteControlFreak said:

Ezra Edelman has done an outstanding job telling this story.  Without the use of narrator, he relies entirely on images, often just with music as the soundtrack, and interviews with primary sources.  For people familiar with the Simpson case, many of these characters (Ron Shipp, Gil Garcetti, Mark Fuhrman, Fred Goldman, etc. etc.) have been seen many times.  Edelman was able to elicit a level of revelation and emotion that no other documentarian of this case has achieved.

I agree with this. (Even though I just carped about the omission of potentially relevant information.) This was the episode in which I became consciously aware of the absence of a narrator. And I don't think there's a soul who wouldn't agree that this show is adding important information and insight to what was known.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Milburn Stone

[Hanahope]

1 hour ago, Bastet said:

Tanya was younger (she was seven when she first met O.J.), and said Denise told her after the murder that the reason Nicole had never told Tanya any of what was going on was because of her age; she was a teenager for most of the marriage.

Just as another example of how poorly Ito controlled his courtroom, it is reported that on at least one occasion, Tanya was 'making out' with her boyfriend during trial testimony, in full view of the jurors.

[DangerousMinds]

OJ had never met Ron Goldman before the night he butchered him to death.

[smiley13]

3 hours ago, DangerousMinds said:

OJ had never met Ron Goldman before the night he butchered him to death.

It has been reported that OJ had seen Ron driving Nicole's white sports car that was given to her by OJ.  

And if OJ ever ate at Mezzaluna, they may have crossed paths.

[psychoticstate]

Anything is certainly possible and if Ron and Simpson met, Simpson would never admit it.  However, I would think if they had met before June 12, 1994, Simpson would have been abrasive and rude.  Mainly because if they had met, it would have been because Ron was having coffee or a meal with Nicole or driving her car.  All things which would have set off a controlling narcissist like Simpson.  If that had happened, surely Ron would have mentioned it to a friend, co-worker, his sister . . . somebody.  No one has ever come forward to say that.

And if they had met, is it possible that Ron would have recognized Simpson that night?  And maybe addressed him by name?  A witness heard the "Hey . . .hey . . hey!" which more than likely were Ron's last words but if he had been introduced to Simpson at some point would he have addressed him by name? 

[JeezumCrow]

On June 16, 2016 at 11:11 AM, smiley13 said:

I have no issue with the staging of the house.  It was brilliant on Cochran's part.

He can't be faulted for playing the game better than Marcia.

I definitely have an issue with the defense lying to the jury by staging the house. Visiting OJ's home is hardly relevant to begin with, but if it's deemed relevant, it is so the jury can see his home, not the home the defense team felt would make him look best. They didn't even just rearrange his own possessions, they brought in items from elsewhere. That's not playing the game, it's a flat-out lie. 

[WayneK]

On 6/16/2016 at 4:33 PM, RCharter said:

They would have processed the blood away from the scene, in fact I believe they towed the Bronco to get the blood evidence.  If it was in police custody it could have been tampered with.  OJ's blood at the crime scene can be explained by tampering.  I can't remember if his blood was mixed with NS/RG.

I think its more complex than people choosing to believe bullshit. 

The killer dripped blood from the left side of his body as he left the scene.  Did the police sneak into OJ's house and inflict a deep cut on his left hand finger?  The killer wore extremely rare size 12 Bruno Magli shoes.  Did the police sneak into OJ's closet, take the shoes, and return to the crime scene to plant the shoe prints?  OJ denied he owned such shoes but photos later surfaced of him wearing them.

I could go on and on.  He should have been easily convicted even if there were no blood evidence.  So no, it's not more complicated than people believing bullshit.

Edited July 1, 2016 by WayneK

[DangerousMinds]

Amen, WayneK.

[DangerousMinds]

I can't remember - did Ron Shipp testify for the prosecution in the criminal trial? Rewatching this, I found his account of OJ telling at least three different explanations for the deep cut on his hands within the course of a couple hours to be quite powerful. He knew right then that OJ killed them.

[biakbiak]

Yes he testified.

[piccadilly83]

On 7/1/2016 at 6:58 AM, WayneK said:

The killer dripped blood from the left side of his body as he left the scene.  Did the police sneak into OJ's house and inflict a deep cut on his left hand finger?  The killer wore extremely rare size 12 Bruno Magli shoes.  Did the police sneak into OJ's closet, take the shoes, and return to the crime scene to plant the shoe prints?  OJ denied he owned such shoes but photos later surfaced of him wearing them.

I could go on and on.  He should have been easily convicted even if there were no blood evidence.  So no, it's not more complicated than people believing bullshit.

When did OJ say he didn't own those shoes? Was that in the criminal trial? I thought Marcia Clarke said he didn't testify in his defense so they couldn't get him on the record perjuring himself. That doesn't of course do away with the fact that the shoes were rare, but I though I'd ask.

And speaking about perjury I would just like to mention that Christopher Darden was on Oprah a few years back when she still had her regular show.  He point blank said that Johnnie Cochran told him not to put Mark Furmahn on the stand. I guess Darden and Clarke had no idea why at the time, but dude, I couldn't believe Cochran just gave them a mulligan like that and they missed it.

[JeezumCrow]

3 hours ago, piccadilly83 said:

When did OJ say he didn't own those shoes? Was that in the criminal trial? I thought Marcia Clarke said he didn't testify in his defense so they couldn't get him on the record perjuring himself. That doesn't of course do away with the fact that the shoes were rare, but I though I'd ask.

I'm pretty sure the shoes weren't brought up in the criminal trial because the found photos of OJ wearing the shoes were uncovered after the verdict (but before the civil trial). In the civil trial tapes he adamantly insisted he would never own "those ugly-ass shoes" and it is so satisfying to see his reaction when faced with the photo evidence. 

[GreatKazu]

What O.J. said at the deposition when Petrocelli asked him about the shoes: http://abcnews.go.com/US/oj-simpson-tapes-shocking-things-rarely-deposition-tapes/story?id=33924968

On 6/23/2016 at 4:11 PM, smiley13 said:

It has been reported that OJ had seen Ron driving Nicole's white sports car that was given to her by OJ.  

And if OJ ever ate at Mezzaluna, they may have crossed paths.

Reported by whom? The tabloids? There was no direct and legit source to back up this claim. If I am wrong, correct me, please.

As for eating at Mezzaluna, possibly they crossed paths, but Ron was in a relationship with a woman and had been for at least a year. They broke up three months before he was killed by Simpson. Ron and Nicole did hang out together. I don't believe Simpson killed Ron out of jealousy or some sort of anger for being with Nicole. That would mean Simpson had to know that Ron would show up at Nicole's home at that precise moment in order to kill them both. It is known Ron showed up to drop off a pair of glasses. He came upon the murder of Nicole and Simpson had to kill him to silence the only witness or kill him because Ron put up a fight.

[smiley13]

16 hours ago, GreatKazu said:

Reported by whom? The tabloids? There was no direct and legit source to back up this claim. If I am wrong, correct me, please.

As for eating at Mezzaluna, possibly they crossed paths, but Ron was in a relationship with a woman and had been for at least a year. They broke up three months before he was killed by Simpson. Ron and Nicole did hang out together. I don't believe Simpson killed Ron out of jealousy or some sort of anger for being with Nicole. That would mean Simpson had to know that Ron would show up at Nicole's home at that precise moment in order to kill them both. It is known Ron showed up to drop off a pair of glasses. He came upon the murder of Nicole and Simpson had to kill him to silence the only witness or kill him because Ron put up a fight.

The LA Times.....

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-oj-anniv-goldman-story.html

[GreatKazu]

3 hours ago, smiley13 said:

The LA Times.....

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-oj-anniv-goldman-story.html

I meant, where is the source that Simpson saw Ron Goldman in the Ferrari. It was rumored that Simpson had seen Goldman in Nicole's car and that was one possible reason for Ron's murder.

[GreatKazu]

14 hours ago, auntl said:

In the book "If I Did It" where OJ basically confesses, OJ said that he could tell that Nicole was preparing for a date when he peeked into her windows. When Ron showed up, OJ mistakenly assumed that he was the date. He wasn't. He was just returning the glasses. OJ started arguing with Ron. Nicole came out and tried to get OJ to leave. OJ attacked Nicole. Ron could have run and saved his own life but didn't. He tried to help Nicole and OJ killed him too. This was all out of OJ's own mouth. OJ did say that his whole story was hypothetical, but I think it's what really happened.

That reads like second degree murder rather than first degree murder.

Simpson peeking in windows to watch Nicole doesn't sound like something he did that night. He did that on previous occasions for which there is proof. As for that particular night, Simpson planned to murder Nicole. Why? Because he had his alibi prepared - being in Chicago. From what I remember, someone had to buzz in for Nicole to open her gate to the patio, which is where the murders took place. Nicole apparently had a set of keys missing to her condo. A key was found in the Bronco that would later be a key that opens the gate to Nicole's condo. That is how Simpson entered her patio area without having to use the buzzer to get in. He was also dressed in a way as to avoid detection and disguise himself. He also had a knife. Simpson would not need a knife to go spy on his ex wife through her windows. Looking through the windows this particular night would have been solely to make sure there was NO ONE else in the condo and to ensure his kids were asleep before he killed Nicole.  

Simpson's description of "how he would have done it"  seems to be downplaying first degree murder into a heat of passion crime. As if somehow that sounds much better.