The counter-intel worked to help mitigate white anger. 1 man sits in prison for 33 yrs on a misunderstanding that should have been no more than 18 mos. The recorder & planner gets no time,GTFOH! I'd recommend you get "PURSUIT OF EXHIBIT 35 in the OJ Simpson Murder Trial" by T.H. Johnson, OMIG investigative team leader, or DOUBLE CROSSED FOR BLOOD by Dr. H.S. Johnson, & certainly view "Serpents Rising: An Independent Investigation of the OJ Simpson Murder Trial" all available at amazon dot com.
THEN TAKE A LOOK AT HER WHORE SISTER DENISE. SHE HUNG OUT WITH FISHY CHARACTERS, MIND CONTROLLED THEY SAY, I DONT KNOW, BUT SHE WAS A TOY FOR A RICH CRIMINAL, LOOK THAT UP! FLORIDA MOBSTER, FORGOT NAME. ALSO PHONE RECORDS, CHECK THEM, WHY WERE THEY NOT ADMITTED. JUDITHA SAID SHE CALLED NICOLE AT 11PM, OJ ON THE PLANE TAKING OFF. ITS ON YOU TUBE, BOTH AGREED NOT TO BRINK RECORDS INTO COURT RECORDS UNTIL YEARS LATER. IM DONE HERE.
@sanzibar76 you are so off with your evidence and you speak of internet video crap. Oj left all the blood,hair,fiber and gloves and shoe prints leaving the scene. His Bronco was seen leaving, speeding away from the scene. Nicoles and Rons hair in Bronco, OJ bleeding from the murder scene to his home via the Bronco. His actions after, his lies before anyone knew she was dead except the killer of course prove he was there,cut and bleeding leaving the scene. Your just gullible or racist.
PEOPLES TEMPLE AND OJ. OJ WAS A CHILD WHILE HE LIVED WITH HIS MOTHER WHILE SHE WORKED AS A NURSE AT THE PSYCHIATRIC FACILITY JIM JONES GOT MENTAL PATIENTS FOR HIS CIA RACIAL EXPERIMENT. check that information out. THEY SAY HE WAS MIND CONTROLLED LIKE TIGER WOODS. TIGER WOODS MIND CONTROL ON YOU TUBE. SEARCH INTERNET FOR MIND CONTROL AND OJS MOM WORKING FOR JIM JONES.
OJ WAS WARNED ABOUT NICOLE DRUG HABIT, LOOK INTO THE PAINTER WHO PAINTED HER HOUSE DAYS BEFORE, ARRESTED AS A SERIAL KILLER LATER ON, SAME GUY IN THE CLUB W HER NIGHT BEFORE WITH MAFIOSO'S THAT DEALT COCAINE OUT OF THE CLUB. NICOLE AND HER FRIEND WERE DEEP IN DEPT TO DEALERS. OJ WAS WARNED. THEY TOLD HIM SHE WOULD BE TAKEN OUT IF SHE DID NOT PAY. LOOK INTO WHO AL COWLINGS WORKED FOR, FOLLOW THE MONEY! OJ WAS FALL GUY, THAT IS WHY HE GOT OFF.
OK HERE WE GO, OJ KILLED TWO PEOPLE, CUTTING THEIR NECKS FROM EAR TO EAR (COLUMBIAN NECKTIE). TWO JUGULAR VEINS THAT WILL SPURT LIKE A WATER GUN, RON GOLDMAN PUT UP A HELL OF A FIGHT, BRUISED NUCKLES, DEFENSE WOUNDS. AND OJ GOT ONE SMALL CUT. NO CUT ON THE GLOVE. AND A FEW BLOOD DROP SMEARS THAT HAD A PRESERVATIVE IN IT. NEXT TIME YOU ARE IN A LAB, LOOK AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SPECIMEN TUBE, THAT IS THE PRESERVATIVE, YELLOW MATTER AT BOTTOM. COPS TAKING BLOOD HOME. YOU STILL ARE SURE?
@sanzibar76 your facts are very wrong. OJ had one major cut and 7 abrasions. The throat cutting was from behind as his training with the Navy Seals in closed quarter attacks dictated and only two drops that were collected very late in the process had trace elements that could have been edta in them The blood trail,the Bronco blood and the blood in his foyer had NO EDTA! Yes I am absolutely positive. BLood trail,hair,fiber and more all point to OJ. Heck he still has no idea how he got cut!
@jjjonse I watched it every day. I also made 1,500 tee shirts that had a map on one side tracing the distance from his house to Nichole condo. Sold them in New Orleans in a deli. Distance was about 2 miles if I rem correctly. I I went to the location more than once. I couldn't believe it when they said Not Guilty. DNA was new , Some believed finger prints were more proof then DNA... Hes sitting his ass right where it belongs , as he did get away with the murder of two innocent people.
about the gloves and cut finger, where is the cut on the gloves? DIVORCED 1992 MURDERED 1994 coincidence? 1:20 bloody socks? 1:41 That can be a different cut from doing labor...oj murdered her because his feelings overwhelmed but oj could have other women and he has...so was she on her way out the door, did someone ring her doorbell? where was blood on oj's bronco outside? they showed murky films of the inside...how can one old man with a knife kill a younger man and woman? did he have a cup?
@sanzibar76 not really there was no where near the amount of physical evidence against Casey. Nothing to connect her to the crime scene because she waited so long to bury tell anyone she was missing. No doubt she did it but the evidence was not there. OJ on the other hand left enough physical evidence to prove it to anyone outside of LA.
That was not my question. Do you think he would tell the truth if he were on the stand? My guess is you would believe him no matter what and you would distrust the police.
Which is a stronger fact? Him in pictures wearing the same model glove several times over the two years prior. Or him acting as if they didnt fit despite they are on his hands in the court room. We know that he had alot riding on them fitting, when the need to wear the gloves was important he made it look like they did not fit. When no one was paying attention the gloves were on his hands. Your believing they dont fit only shows your lack of common sense. What a joke!
it would be easier to hunt down killers if we had the kill awards. "Now who killed him? win your prize for the kill of the year?" guy walks up "I WON! I WON!"
I am so sick of hearing blood was planted.. No way you can plant OJ's blood at the scene before you even arrest him. Even is you think some was planted the stuff that was there the first night matched. Shoe prints matched, he owned the same gloves they brought in VIsa records of the purchase, he owned the same style shoe,blood in his car, cuts on his hand, hair from the knit cap matched OJ. He wrote a suicide note. As for him killing two people.. He did it.
@mjmitch33 It wasn't planted , How could his finger be cut & the same glove that fits that hand had a slice through the leather of that glove? The gloves were found before OK ever got back from Chicago , they did not know he had a cut finger till he returned to LA, It just SO happened that the $250.00 size 13,Bruno Mollie shoes at the scene with blood dripping down to the left of the shoe prints from his hand as he left.
@mitch 33 I don't know how the man could sleep with himself. How can you look your babies in the eyes knowing you killed the mother of your kids. He is such a pathetic bottom breeder. He's really really gross... He's , trashy.. trying to be classy. I was at his house on Rocking-ham. My friends granddaughter lived two doors down from them and were friends with his daughter. Stayed at each others house over night etc. But again... he was trashy.
@onstageagain well dude the jury said not guilty hes not and for all you know it could have been a different person how do you know the only reason that this man is pointed as the bad guy is cause all the media refrences and jokes This man was proven innocent go OJ
@kenpachiZarrakix 1) Innocent & Not Guilty are two very different definitions. OJ Simpson Killed boththese people.
OJ was found NOT GUILTY! 2) Not guilty means the person was not convicted. The reason? Because the prosecution failed to prove their case sufficiently.
Read this carefully: 3) Someone may be innocent & still get convicted. INNOCENT means someone DID NOT commit a crime. 4) OJ did kill these people & the evidence was overwelmaning . His DNA was all over the bodies.
@kenpachiZarrakix You have got to be some type of moron if you believe he did not commit the murders. There is so much evidence that was put in that only a person who was afraid to say guilty or one that was so racially biased themselves wanted try and correct history. No doubt in my mind many African Amercian suspects have been convicted for crimes they had nothing to do with, but his blood,his injuries,his running from the police tell me he did it.
@mitch 33 I understand you know the truth about OJ. I was not in conflict with you. I was reinforcing your opinion. He did it, there's no question! Shapiro wanted OJ to take a plea.Johnny Cochran wanted to turn it around & make it a racist thing. Shapiro left & turned it over to Johnny Cochran. OJ admitted it to Rosie Greer, & some of his friends believe he confessed to Robert Shapiro. There was so much evidence, the prosecution fucked it up. Looking back we can see how they did that.
@mjmitch33 What kinda shit did you smoke. The system found O.J. innocent. Everybody knows Mark Furhman killed those people and tried to frame O.J. He's got the mote and the passion to do that. LOl.
@why2lie Yeah ok, The cops committed a murder and decided to frame OJ. You think Elvis is alive too? How about Biggie and Tupac? lol OJ committed these murders left enough evidence to get convicted by a jury in any other non racially charged town. It is hard to find a case with more evidence without video where the person got off. You just cannot trust the LA juries.
@mjmitch33 The man went through the system like everyone else. He was found innoncent...pure and simple. Which part of that don't you understand? What did O.J. gain out of those murders? Nothing. Only people like Furhman would have the motive, drive and passion to commit such a crime and blame it on a black successful rich man like O.J. You know that too so stop denying it.
@why2lie its kind of an obscure conspiracy theory to say furman did it the more mainstream theorys are a drug gang did it or some one killed ron goldman because he was queer ron goldmans father is convinced oj did it he was in barnes and noble plugging his book they filmed it for americas most wanted
@mjmitch33 Yes, there were evidence. But the evidence were planted by Furhman as it was proven to be. You're jealous...just like Furhman. Who do you think Furhman would try to frame next if the dream team hadn't discover his deed? Tigerwood? Jordan? Obama?
@why2lie Tell me the evidence then smart ass. All of it was what if and opportunity. No one saw him do it and all the other cops testified to the same thing. Johnny is burning in hell and OJ is in jail. Furhman is retired in northern California. You heard innocent but you lost the case pal. lol
@mjmitch33 It's too bad that you're hurt. A black man was finally given justice after 200 years of injustice and you're hurt. Lol. Have you heard of the Golden Rule---Do to others as you want done to you? you just can't accept the fact that O.J. was found innocent by the system. If he was guilty, he would have been in jail all this time, right? Tell you what...why don't you call Furhman up and see if you could work with him in bringing down all the famous blacks in America....lol.
@why2lie I do not care about the famous blacks just the guilty ones. If he was white,left his blood,hair,gloves and shoe prints I would feel the same. Murder is murder. The second issue was him getting his kids back. Even if you think the case was not proven, him getting his kids was the worst ending to a bad story. At least the kids were smart enough to grow up and realize he was guilty and avoided him after. I am happy for that. They should not suffer for him being mad his wife went back white
@mjmitch33 I don't care what you say but please stick to the truth. O.J was found innocent by the court for those murders. Furhman, on the contrary, was found guilty for perjury. Who killed NBS and RG? Furhman.
@why2lie I dont care what the courts say, OJ killed them and Furhman was innocent of everything short of calling a nigger a nigger. That is the facts. They never proved he planted anything and in fact none of your DREAM TEAM ever even accused him of it. They know how stupid it looks when everyone at the scene testified that only one glove was found at the scene. You can throw results of the court system all you want. I am more interested in the actual crime and educated americans say guilty!
@mjmitch33 I know where you're coming from and I know how you feel. But have a little respect for our legal system. The system found OJ innocent. It's a fact. This...you can't argue with. Furhman did a good job planting evidence and planting this belief in people's mind that OJ is somehow guilty of the murders. How much do you know about Furhman?
@why2lie Our legal system is only as solid as our people in it. I currently have doubt that scientific evidence can be taught to people without a certain level of education. It is no coincedence that both the prosecution and the defense bring in DNA lawyers to present evidence. That tells me that if a lawyer with a very high level education does not know how to argue something that our jury has to be on that level to understand it. That is very simple for you to understand.
@why2lie Suggesting that 90% of juries are. In many cases when science is not a large part of the case we can do with the average voter/juror. In cases where the evidence is so much about the understanding of a co plex thing like DNA a scientific jury is needed. Just as DNA lawyers are brought in I think it is fair to ask for a level of education. I also think some adjustments need to be made to make sure a lawyer such as Johnny did cannot mention witnesses and theories and then rest without
@mjmitch33 there is no such thing as a scientific jury both sides get to pick jurors every once in a while they toy witht idea of having paid professional jurors but they could get bored and become too chummy witht the prosecutor expert witnesses educate the jurors
@why2lie even calling that witness or introducing evidence to back the theory. In this case Johnny mentioned several witnesses and what they would testify to and then never called them. Jurors heard about Columbian drug lords by one person, Johnny. That is crazy. Attorneys are not on the stand and are not under oath but there is no doubt in my mind that Johnny added testimony that he could not justify with anything and could not be crossed for perjury. If Furhman lied, so did Johnny.
@why2lie Again there is no evidence that Furhman planted anything. In fact there is no where near the amount of evidence of that in comparison to the murder evidence. Throw in all the evidence that Johnny presented evidence in the opening statement that was never entered and the closing jury nullification that you can argue the case is a steaming pile. That is why I need not to respect anything about the case especially the results.
@mjmitch33 Alot of people think O.J. committed the murders. I don't blame them. You know why? Dig into Furhman's background and read his books. Furhman was a corrupt untrustworthy unreliable prejudice detective. And because he was a detective, he understood human psychology and was able to convince most Americans---by planting evidence--- that O.J. committed the murders. He got you naive people completely fooled. But not the court.
@mjmitch33 There was no evidence that is what I am saying.. no evidence that anyone did anything improper by the police. You can say he found the glove but everyone seen only one glove at the scene so there is no proof or testimony saying he planted it. So you say they planted evidence.. explain to me your theory. Cause the rest of the educated world knows otherwise.
@mjmitch33 There was testimony that the blood matched OJ's DNA. There was testimony that his vehicle was seen at the murder scene, was not at his house the time of the murders and that he was injured that night and could not even tell the police how it happened. So my point it, there is much more evidence that OJ killed these two and only finger pointing that there was any misconduct by the police.
@spacepatrolman He felt betrayed and was angry that his wife had moved on and his family was moving on. He had no ex wife and his current lady was banging Michael Bolton.
Scientific juries would have been able to realize that just one drop of blood that had no edta was enough to convict with all the other evidence. They would also be able to understand what a reasonable doubt actually is. With all the facts in this case anyone with no bias would have seen guilt beyond all doubt.
@spacepatrolman Like Randy from Scream said, "Motives are incidental."
Also, the prosecution doesn't have to prove WHY OJ killed Nicole and Ron, just that he did. OJ could've killed Nicole because she wore white after Labor Day. It doesn't matter WHY he did it. Murder is terrible no matter what.
@meginmd the prosecution does have to prove motive method and oportunity in a murder case in another type of crime they dont but the jury probably wants to know the reason why or they will just sit there and say to themselves why would this person do this
"Although a prosecutor will almost certainly want to prove that the defendant had a motive...proving motive is not essential to proving criminal liability."
So I don't HAVE TO say why a killed b or explain his motives, just that he could have done it. Again: In the U.S., proving motive is not necessary to convict someone of a crime. But juries do like to know why a person on trial would do what they are accused of doing.
@meginmd What are you quoting it is essential to prove motive method and oportunity in a murder case you need beyond a reasonable doubt evidence which is 99.9%evidence
"Motive is the emotional urge which induces a person to say or do something. It is different from intent, for a person may intend to steal property or kill someone, and will be guilty of the theft or homicide irrespective of what his motive was.
"...motive is never an element of the corpus deliciti of any crime."
"Therefore, the prosecution *NEVER* (author's emphases) has to prove motive."
"I've put people on death row without knowing for sure what their....
@meginmd BUGLIOSI wrote a book on presedent kennedys assasination paraphrasing the warren commision report saying that it was right and most people in the know say he is right I dont know where he is coming from saying the prosecution doesnt have to prove motive unless california is a state where you dont have to prove the motive some states you have to prove the motive and some states you dont
@spacepatrolman today a kid in New Hampshire killed his parents and had a party. Up until now everyone involved thought the family was a model family. The kid admitted to the murder but he has no idea why he did it. Can they get him for murder? Sure they can prove he did it... why is only details.
@mjmitch33 it depends how the laws are in that state in new jersey you dont have to prove a motive in a murder case but you might need one because you have to prove that the defendant intended to kill someone you used to have to have a dead body in a murder case to prove some one was killed but they changed the law you dont need a body ,in new jersey a guy killed his parents with a hammer because they through him out because he was a drunk his brothers tied him up nude in the basement and
@spacepatrolman beat him for 3 days until he confessed and told were the bodies were buried the guy in new hampshire may have killed them because he wanted to have a party that could be enough of a motive even though its kind of unusaul more usual would be for money like the melendez brothers people have been murdered to see what its like to kill somebody or to see if they could get away with it like leopold and loeb or because somebody was a pest
@spacepatrolman 2 guys murdered each other because they found out they will never be rock stars and might have to get a job the familys sued judas priest for backwards messages saying to comitt suicide but the judge through it because there was a backwards message but it didnt say to commit suicide so the judge said there is no proximity
@spacepatrolman this is a man who had given his family the best life a man can give. His wife was divorcing him and his girlfriend was banging Michael Bolton in Vegas. That night he went to a thing for his daughter and was not even asked to dinner after. They were in his car using his money and with his kids.. heck what man would not be mad?
@spacepatrolman lol it was a total evacuation of his family that culminated with his exwife who he thought would always be there and his kids not being accessible because his ex wife that could not let him in because her new man was either there or on his way. That door being closed to him was the icing on the cake. It was not one thing it was all of them. He was shut out on many levels that night and Nicole was the last straw. Make sense?
@spacepatrolman Does not matter if Ron was queer (although he was not) OJ walked into a delivery of glasses that Nicole knew would blow into jealous rage which is exactly what happened. Now chances are Nicole brought the knife to the party, chances are OJ went to get laid and was totally shocked that Nicole over reacted and that took him to the rage.. but it happened. His blood,hair,fiber and guilty reactions proved it.
@mjmitch33 he was queer and he was delivering glasses but how did nicole know that would make him blow into a jealous rage why would oj go there to get laid with somebody he was divorced from
@spacepatrolman OK so OJ was going there to see his kids... and couldn't because Nicole was going to try and get laid and after calling the police 9 times in the past when OJ tried to beat her ass she decided she would stand up to him with a knife... We know OJ was a raging lunatic when angry from his record. We know he had beaten Nicole many times..
@spacepatrolman The prosecution did call witnesses about OJ and his stalking of Nicole. As well as a man that OJ confronted about having sex with Nicole in his house with the kids there. That is why Nicole knew that OJ would freak yet again if he bumped into Ron that night. Turns out she was right. Somehow that night the three ended up in the same place and the end was the worst. It was only a matter of time....
@spacepatrolman Keep in mind the two witnesses that could have been called to their intent that night were killed. However Nicole had told cops before that he was going to kill her. She had told family he would kill her and get away with it. She left photos of how bad he beat her and she told the police on one call. HES BACK I THINK YOU KNOW HIS RECORD... yep that was OJ.
@mjmitch33 all this your saying is inadmissable hearsay if it wasnt for the hearsay rule some one could say you killed somebody in utah and you could get the death penalty without ever having been in utah
@spacepatrolman Her words cannot be hearsay they were recorded. again you try to diminish the fact that he had major issues with his temper that were documented. We also had testimony that Nicole was being watched and he did buy a disguise weeks prior to the murders. Fake Mustache and glue.. Again testimony on that as well. By the way all of that was in the case and was testified to.
@mjmitch33 They dont usually allow prior incidents in the current trial it would be inadmissable even a prior crimminal record which he didnt have any anyway
@spacepatrolman OK calling you a moron just became easier. I watched the trial, I have read the transcripts and yes it was part of the trial. The judge did allow the abuse although not all of it. If you go read the transcripts you can get confirmation for yourself. They are available also.
Your next argument will be that does not mean he would kill her however I bet if he had never laid a finger on her Cochran would have made sure the fact that he had not was part of the trial. lol
@spacepatrolman I am stating things from the case. I can quote you or lead you to the transcripts if you like. I have them saved on my computer. Let me know what you would like to read. I could care less if you think I am a moron. Fact is if we voted on this your side would show to be the moronic side. Nicole screamed he was going to kill her and he did. He left blood,apologies,hair, guilty statements and many other items to prove it. You can ignore all the science and words but he did it.
@spacepatrolman that does not change the fact that he did it. No matter what the jury said god will have the last word and I am willing to bet that he heads south, not north.
@mjmitch33 he may have done it but it is not a proven fact with out eye witnesses that he did if you look at the fred goldman video at the bottom of the playlist next to this video he is doing damage control for a book he didnt write when he had his own book he was plugging it in barnes and noble and they were filming him for americas most wanted anyone would sympathise with his anguish over his loss of a loved one but after the fact psuedo fact books dont prove it beyond a reasonable doubt .
@spacepatrolman so if he was convicted and no one saw him... would he still be guilty? You are just trying to justify the judgement while I am arguing evidence. Science proved his guilt and we do not need a witness. He told us with the evidence and despite your lack of knowledge in this case even you know that he did it. We know that because you make the same silly arguments that Johnny did which are not worth a hill of beans if you understand DNA and do not play dumb. Guilty beyond all doubt!
@mjmitch33 its possible to convict someone with circumstatial evidence [ anything that isnt a witness is circumstantial blood dna footprints tire tracks ... ] and no witnesses if there is enough of it and it is linked together properly but they didnt seem to have enough and there were contradictions like the glove didnt fit its not true that i know for sure he did it I wasnt there a british book on american law stated that white americans nivariably think he is guilty and black americans
@spacepatrolman Your opinion that the glove doesnt fit tells me a ton. You have proof of his wife buying him the same gloves in the same size,pictures of him wearing the same model glove, testimony from a Isotoner rep identifying the glove, his blood with no edta on the glove and the glove being on his hand in the court room. Where do you get that it did not fit? There are no less than 5 testimonial facts saying he not only could wear the glove but that he had in the past. Answer that..
@spacepatrolman I am more amazed by your feelings on this than any other moron I have debated.You are completely out of touch with how reasonable doubt is determined and how to weigh testimony and the evidence to come up with the actual corroborated evidence.There is so many pieces of evidence that show the gloves were his and that he had wore them comfortably in the past and that he acted it up that they did not fit you offer as reasonable doubt.Calling you a simple moron is an insult to morons
@spacepatrolman You really seem hung on the word queer big guy. I will tell my wife and kids you think I am queer. lol I do not care what Law books you read and the fact you are on juries only shows me the jurist prudence is in bad hands every day not just in LA>
Facts remain you have ten times more evidence that the gloves were both used by OJ in the past and taken to the crime scene that night and you allow him to out weigh it by trying it on with his hand open. You need to read more books.
@mjmitch33 you go around insulting people but you dont like it if somebody rams it down your throat you sound like a 9 year old how many volumnes of jurist prudence did you read
@spacepatrolman the queer thing is never more apparent than that last comment. However I am asking you why you believe OJ would tell the truth? Why the glove demonstration means so much to you even though you know he has so much at stake that he needed to make it not fit.? Why do you believe that so strongly?
@mjmitch33 the glove evidence is the make it or break it prosecution evidence a witness could be unreliable a lot of people look the same and a person could be miisdentified i see people that look like charles bronson all the time so hard phsical evidence could be better than a witness wasnt the only witness they had kato kalin an ear witness that heard somebody run into an airconditioner
@spacepatrolman OK lets try this again. Do you think that OJ would have told the truth had he been called to testify? Can you just answer that question?
Because you are lending more weight to OJ pretending the glove did not fit than you are all the other proof that he had owned and wore the gloves in the past. Again, do you think that OJ would have told the truth if he took the stand?
@spacepatrolman Do you think OJ would tell the truth if he were on the stand? Would you assume he is truthful or look at all the facts to see if it added up to physical and common sense evidence? Just curious?
@mjmitch33 he doesnt have to take the stand and its not supposed to be considered any admission of guilt if he doesnt if he does he can be cross examined and if he is lieing he wont withstand the scrutiny in perry mason the defendant always gets tripped up by cross examination and confesess on the witness stand that almost never happens in real life the jury can pick up the vibe that he is lieing if he is lieing they seem to have been horrified by the crime scene photos then the trial
@mjmitch33 My turn for a question. Why did OJ debate on suicide? Was it his incredible love for Nicole? Was it he was afraid he was being framed? Was it he wanted to be with her? What was the reason for the gun,disguise,change of clothes and large sum of cash? Why did he have all that cash on him?
@mjmitch33 ive been on juries orientation lectures and judges explain the fine points about reasonable doubt to the jurors this is the first i heard abourt michael bolton blood is circumstantial evidence anything that isnt a witness is circustantial evidence
@spacepatrolman Circustantial? OK... actually it is scientific evidence. If OJ's blood was a DNA match for the blood left by a injured person that was at the scene during the murder, went in the direction of the white SUV seen by a neighbor, the blood in the Bronco matched OJ and both victims, he wore gloves that were left at the scene, hair and fiber from both him and his Bronco was on the victims,the gloves and the hat left at the scene. He contemplated suicide, ran and lied to police. Hello
@mjmitch33 i type to fast its circumstantial unless your cussing out the judge which would cause a misstrial although you cant get a misstrial if you disrupt your own trial when oj ran and they had the moving road block was that admissable i donrt remmber that in the trial, some of what your saying l is true but a jury of scientific eggheads is not going to make a differance
@spacepatrolman You do not think a scientific jury would have realized that it would have been impossible for the DNA to be a statistical match and the lack of EDTA in one sample of blood proves that OJ was injured and bled at the scene of the crime? Come on.. an educated jury with no fear of riots would have put OJ away for life. No doubt about it.
As for admissible, yes the chase was however the prosecution did not enter in the suicide note or the police interview.
@mjmitch33 I dont know what no fear of riots is i was in a riot at the newport jazz festival that was incited by the police every once in a while they toy with the idea of having paid professional jurrors but what if they get to chummy with the prosecutorit wouldnt be fair scientists with phds act like shitheads sometimes ive had them say they are better than me and better than MDs they might convict somebody just because they think they are superior to everybody else
O.J. didn't do it, his son Jason did, but O.J. helped cover it up and should be an accomplice to the crime. William Deal's 6 year investigation into Jason Simpson reveals the shocking truth!
This is the documentary of the century: /watch?v=nVtToEWG640&feature=share
I remember exactly where and when I first heard that OJ was accused of killing his former wife. I said....No way!! I mean, I remembered him from the 70's! He was so good looking! I remembered his commercial. I waited for the trial. I was open minded. TRust me. Until I heard "all" of the evidence, I made up my mind. And I was so sad and confused and disappointed. But nothing hit me like the verdict hahaha!!! That took the cake! I finally saw racism real racism in large numbers. WHoo..
Am i the only one who remembers that he was a great football player and i dont think he did it everyone can suck my dick ok i dont care if black white for just oj to comeback but im not stupid he did do the robbery i seen it on the telli
WHO THE HELL CALL THIS, CRIME OF THE CENTURY? O.J SIMPSON WAS CLEARED OF THIS CRIME SO YOU ARE WRONG, BESIDE YOUR RACIST OPINION MADE 9/11 WHERE THOUSANDS DIED AS A JOKE. WHT ABOUT THE SHOOTING OF INNOCENT SCHOOL CHILDREN BY ANOTHER STUDENT AND MANY MORE. WHY ARE WHITES SO BLINDED BY RACISM TO ACTUALLY SEE THINGS FROM THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE. YOU'VE ALL LOST UR SENSES AND REASONING. MAY YOUR GOD HELP YOU TO TAKE CONTROL OF UR LIVES BEFORE U ALL GO TOTALLY MAD. YOU ARE DESTROYING UR RACE.
@mobile Are you crazy ? What is all this dribble ... and the Caps ...like your screaming at someone... what the hell is your problem ? What the hell does racism have to do with OJ? Majority did not want OJ to be found guilty. But he evidence was overwhelming ... he killed these people.
They found OJ's blood at the crime scene, and Ron and Nichol's blood in OJ's Ford Bronco..........Case closed!!! Any one else, the trial would have been over in 3 days.
@spreadeagle311 very good. the blood was drops if you stab two people to death and drive away i your car it would be coverd in blood as would your shoes and your clothes, not just drops! drops indicate a planted evidence! How did he kill them both? did one watch and wait? remember ron g was a 3rd degree black belt! furman hated OJ and most planted the evidence. watch csi and get a clue!
@Updehill Your car wouldn't be covered in blood if you changed 2- there were smears of blood through out the bronco 3- drops of blood on the driveway came from the cut on his finger 4-kill them both?, most likely Ron walked up upon Oj. What good is a black belt, when a 200 pounder comes raging at you with a knife in hand. How could he of planted oj's blood they didn't get their blood sample from him until after the murders. get a clue!
@starsfound 1) no evidence of oj entering the house as he would have needed time to clean up( no fiber or bleach found from clean up) and would have known he was going to kill 2 people so where would he have changed? 2)No blood form oj was found on the at the muder site (a common mis-conception read the case notes). 3 You no nothing about martial artsI have a 2nd degree black belt in shotokan and i could handel 2 oj's with a knife in each hand! MF had a 3rd degree! 4) Do some reading!
@Updehill AHH but grasshopper- he didn't know he was going to kill two people! Who said he would of had to enter the house to change?? He could of did that in the driveway! You do some reading cuz his blood was at the murder site! You have no idea what I know or don't know about martial arts. Let me tell ya this It wouldn't matter what a power house you are if someone slits you with a knife in the right place it would immobilize you. Get a clue!
@Updehill I have ocean front property to see you...
There was a blood trail dude, hair fibers and the glove. There was a trail of his blood leaving the scene. EDTA was checked and the only edta was on the fence post which is painted... enamel paint is known to have edta in it.. the gloves fit, he owned the same shoes.. same size shoes, it was a rage killing.. not a drug hit.. OJ trained with the military to kill for the frogman movie.. he ran.. threatened suicide.. all for a murder he didnt do
@mjmitch33 My man, OJ did kill these two people. It was the very first trial where DNA was presented. The jury most were black " did not understand the evidsence of DNA" they also were star struck with a hero. I went to the sene " as I live in LA, I also went to OJ's house. I made tee shirst & sold them to people at the court house while the trial was going on. OJ confessed to Rosie Greer, that he had done this, Rosie was a old football buddy, turned Preacher.
@onstageagain Black people did not understand DNA evidence? WTF. the Physics don’t add up Neighbour who saw 3 guy’s of Hispanic descent fleeing the crime seen. That was never followed up! All of the evidence was planted! The murder glove didn’t fit and the DNA inside the glove did not match OJ. place your Racial stereotypes aside ...it facts dont not add up!
@Updehill OJ's white Bronco was seen leaving Nicoles house by a neighbor, the DNA that you say did not match OJ was not DNA it was degraded AB blood from Nicole. It was not able to be DNA tested it was only found to be a B chain that often happens when AB blood is diluted or mixed with other body fluids. You do not speak of facts. You cannot plant evidence like blood if you do not have it yet. The blood that was pulled from the scene was done before OJ was even back in Cali..
@mjmitch33 Your another Utube prowler speaking on a subject you have no knowledge of. OJ did write the book If I Did it. O.J. Says He Wrote 'If I Did It' For $ . In the interview,Simpson, 59, said he deserved harsh criticism for his role in the project, he denied committing the murders, disputed his publisher's contention that the book amounts to a confession, said the title was not his idea & the hypothetical sections were written by a ghostwriter with his aproval.
@Updehill How can you say the glove didn't fit? The largest size of the model glove OJ was wearing in the pictures,videos and even in the courtroom was on his hand. Did it fit perfect with a surgical glove on and a person who had to make it look like it didn't fit putting it on... duh!
The facts add up nicely. His blood at the scene, his blood at his house, gloves,shoes and training to kill via military training done 6 months prior... guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
@mitch 33 Rosie was the 1st to visit OJ after arrested. OJ was crying to Rosie, the policeman in the same room heard the conversation , but Rosie,a preacher claimed conversation was confidential. The policeman testified in the pretrial,Judge Ito did not allow it in the trial .OJ took a lie detector test, failed , he said because he had dreams of killing Nichole. 36 officers at the scene before Mark Fuhrman arrived, all saw 1 glove, the whole police dept. would have to be in on this cover up.
@Updehill he just changed clothes and the only injuries that would spew blood was the throat being slashed which was testified to be done from behind. There was plenty of evidence and Johnny Cochran is burning in a hot place right now for his part in this crime. Justice was served for both, delayed but eventually served.
@Updehill This is OJ book on how he did it. I moved past the front door of Nicole's condoto take a closer look. There were candles burning inside, I could hear faint music playing. It was obvious Nicole was expecting company. I wondered who the f--k it was this time. I wondered if maybe Faye was coming over with some of her boy-toys so they could all get wild and dirty while my kids were sleeping upstairs.
Just as I was beginning to get seriously steamed, the back gate squeaked open.
@Uphill As for the gloves, both Leather Gloves were blood soaked. Once a barrel rodeo rider in my 20's. I've had plenty of leather gloves. If you get leather wet...it shrinks . OJ also had a pair of plastic gloves on while trying the gloves on in court. Many photos shown in the pre trial of OJ wearing these gloves. The brand of gloves size L, was verified Nichole had purchased these gloves on a Visa for. A spokesman for the Co, verified the purchase with paperwork. They were OJ's gloves.
@Uphill I am a true crime fanatic... I've written many short stories on True Crime. Ive been to prisons & visited many people . I live in the the LA area, Newport Beach , Ca. I was at the court house & visited all crime sites in 95, OJ did this!
I'm not trying to convince you, Personally I'm always ready to learn, although I don't always like being taught. You remind me of A fanatic who can't change his mind & won't change the subject. Nothing to do with the facts or truth.
@Updehill A guy came walking through like he owned the f--king place. He saw me & froze. Young, good-looking, I tried to place him, I'd never seen him before. "Who the f--k are you? I said. I, uh--I just came by to return a pair of glasses,he replied, stammering. Really? A pair of glasses, huh?
OJ describes himself soaked in blood, holding a knife, Ron & Nicole dead, Strips to his socks before re-entering his Bronco. If I Did It: Confessions of a Killer, p. 128
@Updehill Maybe she went out to keep OJ from coming in they started arguing.. he KO'd her like he had done many times in the past. Ron comes out and is attacked,fight to his death... she starts coming to and he slits her throat. Think about is she was killed and when he was told he never asked if his kids were ok... why he knew they were in bed! What man knows his wife was murdered and does not ask if his kids are ok... a guilty one!
@mjmitch33 1) Dr. Henry Lee stated there was something wrong with the evidence “for a person to have committed two murders then drove home why so little blood in the car” The blood of Oj’s found at the scene was older that the murders?? 2)The coroner Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran's testimony “ I could not rule out multiple weapons & mulitple killers in this case! “ Ron Goldman(black belt 3rd degree) also fought his attackers.. but no wounds consistent with a fight were found on OJ Simpson”.
@Updehill Somfing Vong.. paid person on trial to refute testimony. He made over 100,000 to come on and say that. They made a big deal about the blood on both sides of the sock... Yet the blood would still be wet they themselves argued that it would take up to two hours for blood to dry even more when the person is prefusely sweating as he was in the limo remember.. so the sock was laying down and the blood transfered through to the other side.. Dr Lee says something wrong.. I say makes sense.
@Updehill Of course you cannot rule out multiple weapons there was a slice to the throat that could be by either a single sided blade and a double edged blade. Stab wounds were with one sided blade. You cannot prove that the slice across her throat done from behind like the Frogmen taught him (avoiding the projectile blood also) was done with a single edge blade or double.. your running out of excuses... I have plenty of facts!
@Updehill You mention DNA was mixed, Not all DNA was mixed. The blood drops on the side of the shoe prints was oj's from his finger. The blood in the Bronko was OJ's Ron was not a Black Belt In Karate, he was trained in karate. Goldman had bruises on his knuckles indicating that he had pummeled his assailant. He had 35 wounds , 4 fatal wounds any one that would have killed him. many on his hands & arms from defensive wounds.
Cont.Ron Goldman had almost all the stab wounds-58 stab wounds. Blood from nicole was found in him and non of him in her which means she died 1st! But the evidence shows they were both there at present during the murders So your saying Ron waited while she was killed?. Point 2 no neighbours heard the blood screeam of 2 people being stabed to death! Point 3 how do you muffle two people unless as you are 2 or more people.
OJ is guilty as hell of the double homicide, but I gotta tell you the truth folks, this whole shit that he pulled in vegas, when he got put away for 30 years it pissed me off, becuase I say this if you get away with murder, you should be able to get away with anything.... I used to be so disgusted by the man, but you know what after that last run in I was pulling for him! In the words the weirdo on the 405 back in the day that held the banner GO JUICE GO!!! GO JUICE GO!!! LMAO!!!
@Starfound "They just wouldn't convict him cuz he's a brother."
That wasn't the case, they wouldn't convict cuz of very poor prosecution, evidence planting and a brilliant defense team. the tow truck driver"didn't notice any blood in or on the bronco" or the forensic expert " blood on socks appear to be poured on, SOMETHING WRONG".
This my friend is why he was aquitted....not cuz hes a bro. "When the gloves didn't fit, they had to aquitt.
Doubt was cast on all evidence presented. OJ did it.
@stuckinthe70sfunk The tow truck driver did not testify that there was no blood. He testified that he did not see any blood.
Sock was on a man who was seen sweating terribly only a few minutes later. The blood could have been splash from someone who fell in a puddle and was splashed onto the sock.
Even without the sock you have gloves,shoe prints and his blood at the scene. Go no further that is enough.
Evidence is not a chain where one link breaks the chain it is a rope.. several strands.
I thought that after he was found not guilty (a sham) he was supposed to devote all his efforts to finding the REAL killers. Apparently he started looking at the golf course. Sadly, he didn't get any leads so he decided to play golf for life. Then he went to Vegas. Oops. He could've called the police to enlist their help. Instead he decided to take care of it himself. Was he that arrogant he didn't realize that if he was ever arrested breaking any law anywhere that they'd throw the book at him?
@rhcp800 and the Haliburton government contracts to rebuild the country of Iraq that were given to the company who just happened to have a CEO names Dick Cheney. Your right that may be the crime of the century.
lol @ people living in the past.
Xmaggot93X 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The counter-intel worked to help mitigate white anger. 1 man sits in prison for 33 yrs on a misunderstanding that should have been no more than 18 mos. The recorder & planner gets no time,GTFOH! I'd recommend you get "PURSUIT OF EXHIBIT 35 in the OJ Simpson Murder Trial" by T.H. Johnson, OMIG investigative team leader, or DOUBLE CROSSED FOR BLOOD by Dr. H.S. Johnson, & certainly view "Serpents Rising: An Independent Investigation of the OJ Simpson Murder Trial" all available at amazon dot com.
brotherap 3 months ago
Stop the arguing and just read "If I Did It" where he flat out confesses. Flip to Chapter 6 if you want the truth quickly.
End of discussion. He did it.
Just go to Google and type in "If I Did It pdf", first link.
MrTimJr 3 months ago 2
@MrTimJr I think he's currently writing his next book "If I Got Away With It"
videoizer 3 months ago
THEN TAKE A LOOK AT HER WHORE SISTER DENISE. SHE HUNG OUT WITH FISHY CHARACTERS, MIND CONTROLLED THEY SAY, I DONT KNOW, BUT SHE WAS A TOY FOR A RICH CRIMINAL, LOOK THAT UP! FLORIDA MOBSTER, FORGOT NAME. ALSO PHONE RECORDS, CHECK THEM, WHY WERE THEY NOT ADMITTED. JUDITHA SAID SHE CALLED NICOLE AT 11PM, OJ ON THE PLANE TAKING OFF. ITS ON YOU TUBE, BOTH AGREED NOT TO BRINK RECORDS INTO COURT RECORDS UNTIL YEARS LATER. IM DONE HERE.
sanzibar76 4 months ago
@sanzibar76 you are so off with your evidence and you speak of internet video crap. Oj left all the blood,hair,fiber and gloves and shoe prints leaving the scene. His Bronco was seen leaving, speeding away from the scene. Nicoles and Rons hair in Bronco, OJ bleeding from the murder scene to his home via the Bronco. His actions after, his lies before anyone knew she was dead except the killer of course prove he was there,cut and bleeding leaving the scene. Your just gullible or racist.
mjmitch33 3 months ago
@sanzibar76 love how not relevant her sister being a whore is (y) nice going man :')
jaiimeeS 3 months ago
PEOPLES TEMPLE AND OJ. OJ WAS A CHILD WHILE HE LIVED WITH HIS MOTHER WHILE SHE WORKED AS A NURSE AT THE PSYCHIATRIC FACILITY JIM JONES GOT MENTAL PATIENTS FOR HIS CIA RACIAL EXPERIMENT. check that information out. THEY SAY HE WAS MIND CONTROLLED LIKE TIGER WOODS. TIGER WOODS MIND CONTROL ON YOU TUBE. SEARCH INTERNET FOR MIND CONTROL AND OJS MOM WORKING FOR JIM JONES.
sanzibar76 4 months ago
OJ WAS WARNED ABOUT NICOLE DRUG HABIT, LOOK INTO THE PAINTER WHO PAINTED HER HOUSE DAYS BEFORE, ARRESTED AS A SERIAL KILLER LATER ON, SAME GUY IN THE CLUB W HER NIGHT BEFORE WITH MAFIOSO'S THAT DEALT COCAINE OUT OF THE CLUB. NICOLE AND HER FRIEND WERE DEEP IN DEPT TO DEALERS. OJ WAS WARNED. THEY TOLD HIM SHE WOULD BE TAKEN OUT IF SHE DID NOT PAY. LOOK INTO WHO AL COWLINGS WORKED FOR, FOLLOW THE MONEY! OJ WAS FALL GUY, THAT IS WHY HE GOT OFF.
sanzibar76 4 months ago
OK HERE WE GO, OJ KILLED TWO PEOPLE, CUTTING THEIR NECKS FROM EAR TO EAR (COLUMBIAN NECKTIE). TWO JUGULAR VEINS THAT WILL SPURT LIKE A WATER GUN, RON GOLDMAN PUT UP A HELL OF A FIGHT, BRUISED NUCKLES, DEFENSE WOUNDS. AND OJ GOT ONE SMALL CUT. NO CUT ON THE GLOVE. AND A FEW BLOOD DROP SMEARS THAT HAD A PRESERVATIVE IN IT. NEXT TIME YOU ARE IN A LAB, LOOK AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SPECIMEN TUBE, THAT IS THE PRESERVATIVE, YELLOW MATTER AT BOTTOM. COPS TAKING BLOOD HOME. YOU STILL ARE SURE?
sanzibar76 4 months ago
@sanzibar76 your facts are very wrong. OJ had one major cut and 7 abrasions. The throat cutting was from behind as his training with the Navy Seals in closed quarter attacks dictated and only two drops that were collected very late in the process had trace elements that could have been edta in them The blood trail,the Bronco blood and the blood in his foyer had NO EDTA! Yes I am absolutely positive. BLood trail,hair,fiber and more all point to OJ. Heck he still has no idea how he got cut!
mjmitch33 3 months ago
wild animal monkey is almost where he belongs...he should be dead...but locked up in a cage will have to do...scumbag KILLER!
vikingbrett4 4 months ago
If the gloves dont fit you must acquit, If you're mentally unfit then you leave your child in a pit.
flameburner 5 months ago
I wish, I could have seen the whole trial, but was just a child then.
jjjonse 6 months ago
@jjjonse I watched it every day. I also made 1,500 tee shirts that had a map on one side tracing the distance from his house to Nichole condo. Sold them in New Orleans in a deli. Distance was about 2 miles if I rem correctly. I I went to the location more than once. I couldn't believe it when they said Not Guilty. DNA was new , Some believed finger prints were more proof then DNA... Hes sitting his ass right where it belongs , as he did get away with the murder of two innocent people.
onstageagain 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@onstageagain like i said before- you are a sheep.
jjjonse 5 months ago
about the gloves and cut finger, where is the cut on the gloves? DIVORCED 1992 MURDERED 1994 coincidence? 1:20 bloody socks? 1:41 That can be a different cut from doing labor...oj murdered her because his feelings overwhelmed but oj could have other women and he has...so was she on her way out the door, did someone ring her doorbell? where was blood on oj's bronco outside? they showed murky films of the inside...how can one old man with a knife kill a younger man and woman? did he have a cup?
MichaelHansenFUN 6 months ago
CASEY ANTHONY. WE ARE EVEN IN THE INJUSTICE , DONT YA THINK!
sanzibar76 6 months ago
@sanzibar76 not really there was no where near the amount of physical evidence against Casey. Nothing to connect her to the crime scene because she waited so long to bury tell anyone she was missing. No doubt she did it but the evidence was not there. OJ on the other hand left enough physical evidence to prove it to anyone outside of LA.
mjmitch33 4 months ago
That was not my question. Do you think he would tell the truth if he were on the stand? My guess is you would believe him no matter what and you would distrust the police.
mjmitch33 6 months ago
Which is a stronger fact? Him in pictures wearing the same model glove several times over the two years prior. Or him acting as if they didnt fit despite they are on his hands in the court room. We know that he had alot riding on them fitting, when the need to wear the gloves was important he made it look like they did not fit. When no one was paying attention the gloves were on his hands. Your believing they dont fit only shows your lack of common sense. What a joke!
mjmitch33 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
William Deal's 6 year investigation into O.J. Simpson's son, Jason Simpson, reveals the shocking truth!
This is the documentary of the century: /watch?v=nVtToEWG640&feature=share
arminvb05 7 months ago
it would be easier to hunt down killers if we had the kill awards. "Now who killed him? win your prize for the kill of the year?" guy walks up "I WON! I WON!"
ThePeteAwesome 1 year ago
Have fun in the bootyhouse OJ
melfaery 1 year ago
It was the niggers son and oj
CommanderThsh 1 year ago
The Crime of the century is being perpetrated by the governments of the world! Watch what happens next. OJ got what he had coming to him. Karma!
messagemon 1 year ago
OJ killed these two people , all other evidence and media crap is just that...
onstageagain 1 year ago
Look at 1:39 and watch the video of OJ trying on the gloves in court. They fit the same!
PiscesGal 1 year ago
i really thaught it was a penis lol
Pimminos 1 year ago
I am so sick of hearing blood was planted.. No way you can plant OJ's blood at the scene before you even arrest him. Even is you think some was planted the stuff that was there the first night matched. Shoe prints matched, he owned the same gloves they brought in VIsa records of the purchase, he owned the same style shoe,blood in his car, cuts on his hand, hair from the knit cap matched OJ. He wrote a suicide note. As for him killing two people.. He did it.
mjmitch33 1 year ago 7
@mjmitch33 It wasn't planted , How could his finger be cut & the same glove that fits that hand had a slice through the leather of that glove? The gloves were found before OK ever got back from Chicago , they did not know he had a cut finger till he returned to LA, It just SO happened that the $250.00 size 13,Bruno Mollie shoes at the scene with blood dripping down to the left of the shoe prints from his hand as he left.
& many many more things ... but he did it
onstageagain 1 year ago
@mitch 33 I don't know how the man could sleep with himself. How can you look your babies in the eyes knowing you killed the mother of your kids. He is such a pathetic bottom breeder. He's really really gross... He's , trashy.. trying to be classy. I was at his house on Rocking-ham. My friends granddaughter lived two doors down from them and were friends with his daughter. Stayed at each others house over night etc. But again... he was trashy.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@onstageagain well dude the jury said not guilty hes not and for all you know it could have been a different person how do you know the only reason that this man is pointed as the bad guy is cause all the media refrences and jokes This man was proven innocent go OJ
kenpachiZarrakix 1 year ago
@kenpachiZarrakix 1) Innocent & Not Guilty are two very different definitions. OJ Simpson Killed boththese people.
OJ was found NOT GUILTY! 2) Not guilty means the person was not convicted. The reason? Because the prosecution failed to prove their case sufficiently.
Read this carefully: 3) Someone may be innocent & still get convicted. INNOCENT means someone DID NOT commit a crime. 4) OJ did kill these people & the evidence was overwelmaning . His DNA was all over the bodies.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@kenpachiZarrakix You have got to be some type of moron if you believe he did not commit the murders. There is so much evidence that was put in that only a person who was afraid to say guilty or one that was so racially biased themselves wanted try and correct history. No doubt in my mind many African Amercian suspects have been convicted for crimes they had nothing to do with, but his blood,his injuries,his running from the police tell me he did it.
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@mitch 33 I understand you know the truth about OJ. I was not in conflict with you. I was reinforcing your opinion. He did it, there's no question! Shapiro wanted OJ to take a plea.Johnny Cochran wanted to turn it around & make it a racist thing. Shapiro left & turned it over to Johnny Cochran. OJ admitted it to Rosie Greer, & some of his friends believe he confessed to Robert Shapiro. There was so much evidence, the prosecution fucked it up. Looking back we can see how they did that.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@mjmitch33 What kinda shit did you smoke. The system found O.J. innocent. Everybody knows Mark Furhman killed those people and tried to frame O.J. He's got the mote and the passion to do that. LOl.
why2lie 9 months ago
@why2lie Yeah ok, The cops committed a murder and decided to frame OJ. You think Elvis is alive too? How about Biggie and Tupac? lol OJ committed these murders left enough evidence to get convicted by a jury in any other non racially charged town. It is hard to find a case with more evidence without video where the person got off. You just cannot trust the LA juries.
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 The man went through the system like everyone else. He was found innoncent...pure and simple. Which part of that don't you understand? What did O.J. gain out of those murders? Nothing. Only people like Furhman would have the motive, drive and passion to commit such a crime and blame it on a black successful rich man like O.J. You know that too so stop denying it.
why2lie 9 months ago
@why2lie its kind of an obscure conspiracy theory to say furman did it the more mainstream theorys are a drug gang did it or some one killed ron goldman because he was queer ron goldmans father is convinced oj did it he was in barnes and noble plugging his book they filmed it for americas most wanted
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@mjmitch33 Yes, there were evidence. But the evidence were planted by Furhman as it was proven to be. You're jealous...just like Furhman. Who do you think Furhman would try to frame next if the dream team hadn't discover his deed? Tigerwood? Jordan? Obama?
why2lie 9 months ago
@why2lie Tell me the evidence then smart ass. All of it was what if and opportunity. No one saw him do it and all the other cops testified to the same thing. Johnny is burning in hell and OJ is in jail. Furhman is retired in northern California. You heard innocent but you lost the case pal. lol
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 It's too bad that you're hurt. A black man was finally given justice after 200 years of injustice and you're hurt. Lol. Have you heard of the Golden Rule---Do to others as you want done to you? you just can't accept the fact that O.J. was found innocent by the system. If he was guilty, he would have been in jail all this time, right? Tell you what...why don't you call Furhman up and see if you could work with him in bringing down all the famous blacks in America....lol.
why2lie 9 months ago
@why2lie I do not care about the famous blacks just the guilty ones. If he was white,left his blood,hair,gloves and shoe prints I would feel the same. Murder is murder. The second issue was him getting his kids back. Even if you think the case was not proven, him getting his kids was the worst ending to a bad story. At least the kids were smart enough to grow up and realize he was guilty and avoided him after. I am happy for that. They should not suffer for him being mad his wife went back white
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 I don't care what you say but please stick to the truth. O.J was found innocent by the court for those murders. Furhman, on the contrary, was found guilty for perjury. Who killed NBS and RG? Furhman.
why2lie 9 months ago
@why2lie I dont care what the courts say, OJ killed them and Furhman was innocent of everything short of calling a nigger a nigger. That is the facts. They never proved he planted anything and in fact none of your DREAM TEAM ever even accused him of it. They know how stupid it looks when everyone at the scene testified that only one glove was found at the scene. You can throw results of the court system all you want. I am more interested in the actual crime and educated americans say guilty!
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 I know where you're coming from and I know how you feel. But have a little respect for our legal system. The system found OJ innocent. It's a fact. This...you can't argue with. Furhman did a good job planting evidence and planting this belief in people's mind that OJ is somehow guilty of the murders. How much do you know about Furhman?
why2lie 9 months ago
@why2lie Our legal system is only as solid as our people in it. I currently have doubt that scientific evidence can be taught to people without a certain level of education. It is no coincedence that both the prosecution and the defense bring in DNA lawyers to present evidence. That tells me that if a lawyer with a very high level education does not know how to argue something that our jury has to be on that level to understand it. That is very simple for you to understand.
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 I understand you and somewhat agree with you on that matter. But are you suggesting that the jury was uneducated?
why2lie 9 months ago
@why2lie Suggesting that 90% of juries are. In many cases when science is not a large part of the case we can do with the average voter/juror. In cases where the evidence is so much about the understanding of a co plex thing like DNA a scientific jury is needed. Just as DNA lawyers are brought in I think it is fair to ask for a level of education. I also think some adjustments need to be made to make sure a lawyer such as Johnny did cannot mention witnesses and theories and then rest without
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 there is no such thing as a scientific jury both sides get to pick jurors every once in a while they toy witht idea of having paid professional jurors but they could get bored and become too chummy witht the prosecutor expert witnesses educate the jurors
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@why2lie even calling that witness or introducing evidence to back the theory. In this case Johnny mentioned several witnesses and what they would testify to and then never called them. Jurors heard about Columbian drug lords by one person, Johnny. That is crazy. Attorneys are not on the stand and are not under oath but there is no doubt in my mind that Johnny added testimony that he could not justify with anything and could not be crossed for perjury. If Furhman lied, so did Johnny.
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@why2lie Again there is no evidence that Furhman planted anything. In fact there is no where near the amount of evidence of that in comparison to the murder evidence. Throw in all the evidence that Johnny presented evidence in the opening statement that was never entered and the closing jury nullification that you can argue the case is a steaming pile. That is why I need not to respect anything about the case especially the results.
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 Alot of people think O.J. committed the murders. I don't blame them. You know why? Dig into Furhman's background and read his books. Furhman was a corrupt untrustworthy unreliable prejudice detective. And because he was a detective, he understood human psychology and was able to convince most Americans---by planting evidence--- that O.J. committed the murders. He got you naive people completely fooled. But not the court.
why2lie 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 There was no evidence that is what I am saying.. no evidence that anyone did anything improper by the police. You can say he found the glove but everyone seen only one glove at the scene so there is no proof or testimony saying he planted it. So you say they planted evidence.. explain to me your theory. Cause the rest of the educated world knows otherwise.
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 There was testimony that the blood matched OJ's DNA. There was testimony that his vehicle was seen at the murder scene, was not at his house the time of the murders and that he was injured that night and could not even tell the police how it happened. So my point it, there is much more evidence that OJ killed these two and only finger pointing that there was any misconduct by the police.
mjmitch33 9 months ago
@mjmitch33 what is ths motive for him killing his wife
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman He felt betrayed and was angry that his wife had moved on and his family was moving on. He had no ex wife and his current lady was banging Michael Bolton.
Scientific juries would have been able to realize that just one drop of blood that had no edta was enough to convict with all the other evidence. They would also be able to understand what a reasonable doubt actually is. With all the facts in this case anyone with no bias would have seen guilt beyond all doubt.
mjmitch33 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman Like Randy from Scream said, "Motives are incidental."
Also, the prosecution doesn't have to prove WHY OJ killed Nicole and Ron, just that he did. OJ could've killed Nicole because she wore white after Labor Day. It doesn't matter WHY he did it. Murder is terrible no matter what.
meginmd 7 months ago
@meginmd the prosecution does have to prove motive method and oportunity in a murder case in another type of crime they dont but the jury probably wants to know the reason why or they will just sit there and say to themselves why would this person do this
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
wrong.
"Although a prosecutor will almost certainly want to prove that the defendant had a motive...proving motive is not essential to proving criminal liability."
So I don't HAVE TO say why a killed b or explain his motives, just that he could have done it. Again: In the U.S., proving motive is not necessary to convict someone of a crime. But juries do like to know why a person on trial would do what they are accused of doing.
meginmd 7 months ago
@meginmd What are you quoting it is essential to prove motive method and oportunity in a murder case you need beyond a reasonable doubt evidence which is 99.9%evidence
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman You're missing my point completely.
A's motive was anger. Great, right, okay.
As a prosecutor, I don't have to PROVE that A was angry.
Let's say that A kills B in the dead of night and we have no motive only A's DNA and fingerprints.
I can still convict A, even though we don't know A's motive.
meginmd 7 months ago
Let me let a lawyer explain it:
"Motive is the emotional urge which induces a person to say or do something. It is different from intent, for a person may intend to steal property or kill someone, and will be guilty of the theft or homicide irrespective of what his motive was.
"...motive is never an element of the corpus deliciti of any crime."
"Therefore, the prosecution *NEVER* (author's emphases) has to prove motive."
"I've put people on death row without knowing for sure what their....
meginmd 7 months ago
cont:
...motive was--that is, why they did it."
But I see your point:
"However, even though the prosecution doesn't have any legal burden to prove motive, it is always better if it can."
Quotes taken from Outrage by Vincent Bugliosi
meginmd 7 months ago
@meginmd BUGLIOSI wrote a book on presedent kennedys assasination paraphrasing the warren commision report saying that it was right and most people in the know say he is right I dont know where he is coming from saying the prosecution doesnt have to prove motive unless california is a state where you dont have to prove the motive some states you have to prove the motive and some states you dont
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman You know what? Bugliosi has been a lawyer a LONG time. I'm going to believe a lawyer over some dude on the internet.
meginmd 7 months ago
@meginmd your not a lawyer your just misquoting books
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman Actually, I'm not. Read the damn thing yourself and you'll see.
meginmd 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman What I'm saying is this:
Let's say A and B are married. A thinks B is cheating, so A buys a gun and blows B away. A killed B because he was angry/suspicious.
I can argue in court that A killed B and why; but I don't have to *prove* why. I don't have to prove that A was angry.
meginmd 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman today a kid in New Hampshire killed his parents and had a party. Up until now everyone involved thought the family was a model family. The kid admitted to the murder but he has no idea why he did it. Can they get him for murder? Sure they can prove he did it... why is only details.
mjmitch33 7 months ago
@mjmitch33 it depends how the laws are in that state in new jersey you dont have to prove a motive in a murder case but you might need one because you have to prove that the defendant intended to kill someone you used to have to have a dead body in a murder case to prove some one was killed but they changed the law you dont need a body ,in new jersey a guy killed his parents with a hammer because they through him out because he was a drunk his brothers tied him up nude in the basement and
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman beat him for 3 days until he confessed and told were the bodies were buried the guy in new hampshire may have killed them because he wanted to have a party that could be enough of a motive even though its kind of unusaul more usual would be for money like the melendez brothers people have been murdered to see what its like to kill somebody or to see if they could get away with it like leopold and loeb or because somebody was a pest
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman 2 guys murdered each other because they found out they will never be rock stars and might have to get a job the familys sued judas priest for backwards messages saying to comitt suicide but the judge through it because there was a backwards message but it didnt say to commit suicide so the judge said there is no proximity
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman this is a man who had given his family the best life a man can give. His wife was divorcing him and his girlfriend was banging Michael Bolton in Vegas. That night he went to a thing for his daughter and was not even asked to dinner after. They were in his car using his money and with his kids.. heck what man would not be mad?
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 he went to his daughters ballet performance thats right so why didnt he kill michael bolton it doesnt add up
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman lol it was a total evacuation of his family that culminated with his exwife who he thought would always be there and his kids not being accessible because his ex wife that could not let him in because her new man was either there or on his way. That door being closed to him was the icing on the cake. It was not one thing it was all of them. He was shut out on many levels that night and Nicole was the last straw. Make sense?
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 what new man ron goldman is queer i dont know what total evacutaion of his family is if his son was still cooking him swordfish steaks
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman Does not matter if Ron was queer (although he was not) OJ walked into a delivery of glasses that Nicole knew would blow into jealous rage which is exactly what happened. Now chances are Nicole brought the knife to the party, chances are OJ went to get laid and was totally shocked that Nicole over reacted and that took him to the rage.. but it happened. His blood,hair,fiber and guilty reactions proved it.
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 he was queer and he was delivering glasses but how did nicole know that would make him blow into a jealous rage why would oj go there to get laid with somebody he was divorced from
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman OK so OJ was going there to see his kids... and couldn't because Nicole was going to try and get laid and after calling the police 9 times in the past when OJ tried to beat her ass she decided she would stand up to him with a knife... We know OJ was a raging lunatic when angry from his record. We know he had beaten Nicole many times..
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 how come there was no testimony to that effect in the trial [ nicole was going to get laid with a queer that doesnt sound right]
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman The prosecution did call witnesses about OJ and his stalking of Nicole. As well as a man that OJ confronted about having sex with Nicole in his house with the kids there. That is why Nicole knew that OJ would freak yet again if he bumped into Ron that night. Turns out she was right. Somehow that night the three ended up in the same place and the end was the worst. It was only a matter of time....
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman Keep in mind the two witnesses that could have been called to their intent that night were killed. However Nicole had told cops before that he was going to kill her. She had told family he would kill her and get away with it. She left photos of how bad he beat her and she told the police on one call. HES BACK I THINK YOU KNOW HIS RECORD... yep that was OJ.
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 all this your saying is inadmissable hearsay if it wasnt for the hearsay rule some one could say you killed somebody in utah and you could get the death penalty without ever having been in utah
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman Her words cannot be hearsay they were recorded. again you try to diminish the fact that he had major issues with his temper that were documented. We also had testimony that Nicole was being watched and he did buy a disguise weeks prior to the murders. Fake Mustache and glue.. Again testimony on that as well. By the way all of that was in the case and was testified to.
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 They dont usually allow prior incidents in the current trial it would be inadmissable even a prior crimminal record which he didnt have any anyway
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman OK calling you a moron just became easier. I watched the trial, I have read the transcripts and yes it was part of the trial. The judge did allow the abuse although not all of it. If you go read the transcripts you can get confirmation for yourself. They are available also.
Your next argument will be that does not mean he would kill her however I bet if he had never laid a finger on her Cochran would have made sure the fact that he had not was part of the trial. lol
Guilty man!
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 Your trying to present yourself as some kind of sequestered jurror or witness and your not your just making yourself sound like a moron
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman I am stating things from the case. I can quote you or lead you to the transcripts if you like. I have them saved on my computer. Let me know what you would like to read. I could care less if you think I am a moron. Fact is if we voted on this your side would show to be the moronic side. Nicole screamed he was going to kill her and he did. He left blood,apologies,hair, guilty statements and many other items to prove it. You can ignore all the science and words but he did it.
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 they dont have trial by internet where everybody votes on it the jurrors are the last word they were there you werent
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman that does not change the fact that he did it. No matter what the jury said god will have the last word and I am willing to bet that he heads south, not north.
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 he may have done it but it is not a proven fact with out eye witnesses that he did if you look at the fred goldman video at the bottom of the playlist next to this video he is doing damage control for a book he didnt write when he had his own book he was plugging it in barnes and noble and they were filming him for americas most wanted anyone would sympathise with his anguish over his loss of a loved one but after the fact psuedo fact books dont prove it beyond a reasonable doubt .
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman so if he was convicted and no one saw him... would he still be guilty? You are just trying to justify the judgement while I am arguing evidence. Science proved his guilt and we do not need a witness. He told us with the evidence and despite your lack of knowledge in this case even you know that he did it. We know that because you make the same silly arguments that Johnny did which are not worth a hill of beans if you understand DNA and do not play dumb. Guilty beyond all doubt!
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 its possible to convict someone with circumstatial evidence [ anything that isnt a witness is circumstantial blood dna footprints tire tracks ... ] and no witnesses if there is enough of it and it is linked together properly but they didnt seem to have enough and there were contradictions like the glove didnt fit its not true that i know for sure he did it I wasnt there a british book on american law stated that white americans nivariably think he is guilty and black americans
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman invariably think he is innocent that is not true they [ the writers of the book ] werent there either
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman Your opinion that the glove doesnt fit tells me a ton. You have proof of his wife buying him the same gloves in the same size,pictures of him wearing the same model glove, testimony from a Isotoner rep identifying the glove, his blood with no edta on the glove and the glove being on his hand in the court room. Where do you get that it did not fit? There are no less than 5 testimonial facts saying he not only could wear the glove but that he had in the past. Answer that..
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 He tried it on in the court room and it didnt fit that is reasonable doubt
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman I am more amazed by your feelings on this than any other moron I have debated.You are completely out of touch with how reasonable doubt is determined and how to weigh testimony and the evidence to come up with the actual corroborated evidence.There is so many pieces of evidence that show the gloves were his and that he had wore them comfortably in the past and that he acted it up that they did not fit you offer as reasonable doubt.Calling you a simple moron is an insult to morons
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 You sound like a queer that gets off on exposing his own stupidity I read volumnes of law books and i was on jurys
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman You really seem hung on the word queer big guy. I will tell my wife and kids you think I am queer. lol I do not care what Law books you read and the fact you are on juries only shows me the jurist prudence is in bad hands every day not just in LA>
Facts remain you have ten times more evidence that the gloves were both used by OJ in the past and taken to the crime scene that night and you allow him to out weigh it by trying it on with his hand open. You need to read more books.
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 you go around insulting people but you dont like it if somebody rams it down your throat you sound like a 9 year old how many volumnes of jurist prudence did you read
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman the queer thing is never more apparent than that last comment. However I am asking you why you believe OJ would tell the truth? Why the glove demonstration means so much to you even though you know he has so much at stake that he needed to make it not fit.? Why do you believe that so strongly?
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 the glove evidence is the make it or break it prosecution evidence a witness could be unreliable a lot of people look the same and a person could be miisdentified i see people that look like charles bronson all the time so hard phsical evidence could be better than a witness wasnt the only witness they had kato kalin an ear witness that heard somebody run into an airconditioner
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman OK lets try this again. Do you think that OJ would have told the truth had he been called to testify? Can you just answer that question?
Because you are lending more weight to OJ pretending the glove did not fit than you are all the other proof that he had owned and wore the gloves in the past. Again, do you think that OJ would have told the truth if he took the stand?
mjmitch33 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mjmitch33 you don´t even know, what the truth is!
jjjonse 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman Do you think OJ would tell the truth if he were on the stand? Would you assume he is truthful or look at all the facts to see if it added up to physical and common sense evidence? Just curious?
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 he doesnt have to take the stand and its not supposed to be considered any admission of guilt if he doesnt if he does he can be cross examined and if he is lieing he wont withstand the scrutiny in perry mason the defendant always gets tripped up by cross examination and confesess on the witness stand that almost never happens in real life the jury can pick up the vibe that he is lieing if he is lieing they seem to have been horrified by the crime scene photos then the trial
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@spacepatrolman went on so long maybe they forgot that but there werent any pictures of him doing anything wrong
spacepatrolman 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 My turn for a question. Why did OJ debate on suicide? Was it his incredible love for Nicole? Was it he was afraid he was being framed? Was it he wanted to be with her? What was the reason for the gun,disguise,change of clothes and large sum of cash? Why did he have all that cash on him?
mjmitch33 6 months ago
@mjmitch33 ive been on juries orientation lectures and judges explain the fine points about reasonable doubt to the jurors this is the first i heard abourt michael bolton blood is circumstantial evidence anything that isnt a witness is circustantial evidence
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman Circustantial? OK... actually it is scientific evidence. If OJ's blood was a DNA match for the blood left by a injured person that was at the scene during the murder, went in the direction of the white SUV seen by a neighbor, the blood in the Bronco matched OJ and both victims, he wore gloves that were left at the scene, hair and fiber from both him and his Bronco was on the victims,the gloves and the hat left at the scene. He contemplated suicide, ran and lied to police. Hello
mjmitch33 7 months ago
@mjmitch33 i type to fast its circumstantial unless your cussing out the judge which would cause a misstrial although you cant get a misstrial if you disrupt your own trial when oj ran and they had the moving road block was that admissable i donrt remmber that in the trial, some of what your saying l is true but a jury of scientific eggheads is not going to make a differance
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
@spacepatrolman You do not think a scientific jury would have realized that it would have been impossible for the DNA to be a statistical match and the lack of EDTA in one sample of blood proves that OJ was injured and bled at the scene of the crime? Come on.. an educated jury with no fear of riots would have put OJ away for life. No doubt about it.
As for admissible, yes the chase was however the prosecution did not enter in the suicide note or the police interview.
mjmitch33 7 months ago
@mjmitch33 I dont know what no fear of riots is i was in a riot at the newport jazz festival that was incited by the police every once in a while they toy with the idea of having paid professional jurrors but what if they get to chummy with the prosecutorit wouldnt be fair scientists with phds act like shitheads sometimes ive had them say they are better than me and better than MDs they might convict somebody just because they think they are superior to everybody else
spacepatrolman 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mjmitch33
O.J. didn't do it, his son Jason did, but O.J. helped cover it up and should be an accomplice to the crime. William Deal's 6 year investigation into Jason Simpson reveals the shocking truth!
This is the documentary of the century: /watch?v=nVtToEWG640&feature=share
arminvb05 7 months ago
I remember exactly where and when I first heard that OJ was accused of killing his former wife. I said....No way!! I mean, I remembered him from the 70's! He was so good looking! I remembered his commercial. I waited for the trial. I was open minded. TRust me. Until I heard "all" of the evidence, I made up my mind. And I was so sad and confused and disappointed. But nothing hit me like the verdict hahaha!!! That took the cake! I finally saw racism real racism in large numbers. WHoo..
44musicluvr 1 year ago
Am i the only one who remembers that he was a great football player and i dont think he did it everyone can suck my dick ok i dont care if black white for just oj to comeback but im not stupid he did do the robbery i seen it on the telli
actingish 1 year ago
WHO THE HELL CALL THIS, CRIME OF THE CENTURY? O.J SIMPSON WAS CLEARED OF THIS CRIME SO YOU ARE WRONG, BESIDE YOUR RACIST OPINION MADE 9/11 WHERE THOUSANDS DIED AS A JOKE. WHT ABOUT THE SHOOTING OF INNOCENT SCHOOL CHILDREN BY ANOTHER STUDENT AND MANY MORE. WHY ARE WHITES SO BLINDED BY RACISM TO ACTUALLY SEE THINGS FROM THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE. YOU'VE ALL LOST UR SENSES AND REASONING. MAY YOUR GOD HELP YOU TO TAKE CONTROL OF UR LIVES BEFORE U ALL GO TOTALLY MAD. YOU ARE DESTROYING UR RACE.
omoibile 1 year ago
@mobile Are you crazy ? What is all this dribble ... and the Caps ...like your screaming at someone... what the hell is your problem ? What the hell does racism have to do with OJ? Majority did not want OJ to be found guilty. But he evidence was overwhelming ... he killed these people.
onstageagain 1 year ago
FREE OJ!
ogdroadsong 1 year ago
there's been worse crimes this century...
TheDeadlyCakes 1 year ago
@TheDeadlyCakes but who got away with any of the other crimes?
videoizer 1 year ago
@videoizer Bush and Cheney did
neilzep 1 year ago
@videoizer 9/11 -_-
AweSomo84 7 months ago
They found OJ's blood at the crime scene, and Ron and Nichol's blood in OJ's Ford Bronco..........Case closed!!! Any one else, the trial would have been over in 3 days.
spreadeagle311 1 year ago
@spreadeagle311 very good. the blood was drops if you stab two people to death and drive away i your car it would be coverd in blood as would your shoes and your clothes, not just drops! drops indicate a planted evidence! How did he kill them both? did one watch and wait? remember ron g was a 3rd degree black belt! furman hated OJ and most planted the evidence. watch csi and get a clue!
Updehill 1 year ago
@Updehill Your car wouldn't be covered in blood if you changed 2- there were smears of blood through out the bronco 3- drops of blood on the driveway came from the cut on his finger 4-kill them both?, most likely Ron walked up upon Oj. What good is a black belt, when a 200 pounder comes raging at you with a knife in hand. How could he of planted oj's blood they didn't get their blood sample from him until after the murders. get a clue!
starsfound 1 year ago
@starsfound 1) no evidence of oj entering the house as he would have needed time to clean up( no fiber or bleach found from clean up) and would have known he was going to kill 2 people so where would he have changed? 2)No blood form oj was found on the at the muder site (a common mis-conception read the case notes). 3 You no nothing about martial artsI have a 2nd degree black belt in shotokan and i could handel 2 oj's with a knife in each hand! MF had a 3rd degree! 4) Do some reading!
Updehill 1 year ago
@Updehill blah blah
starsfound 1 year ago
@Updehill AHH but grasshopper- he didn't know he was going to kill two people! Who said he would of had to enter the house to change?? He could of did that in the driveway! You do some reading cuz his blood was at the murder site! You have no idea what I know or don't know about martial arts. Let me tell ya this It wouldn't matter what a power house you are if someone slits you with a knife in the right place it would immobilize you. Get a clue!
starsfound 1 year ago
@Updehill I have ocean front property to see you...
There was a blood trail dude, hair fibers and the glove. There was a trail of his blood leaving the scene. EDTA was checked and the only edta was on the fence post which is painted... enamel paint is known to have edta in it.. the gloves fit, he owned the same shoes.. same size shoes, it was a rage killing.. not a drug hit.. OJ trained with the military to kill for the frogman movie.. he ran.. threatened suicide.. all for a murder he didnt do
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@mjmitch33 My man, OJ did kill these two people. It was the very first trial where DNA was presented. The jury most were black " did not understand the evidsence of DNA" they also were star struck with a hero. I went to the sene " as I live in LA, I also went to OJ's house. I made tee shirst & sold them to people at the court house while the trial was going on. OJ confessed to Rosie Greer, that he had done this, Rosie was a old football buddy, turned Preacher.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@onstageagain Black people did not understand DNA evidence? WTF. the Physics don’t add up Neighbour who saw 3 guy’s of Hispanic descent fleeing the crime seen. That was never followed up! All of the evidence was planted! The murder glove didn’t fit and the DNA inside the glove did not match OJ. place your Racial stereotypes aside ...it facts dont not add up!
Updehill 1 year ago
@Updehill OJ's white Bronco was seen leaving Nicoles house by a neighbor, the DNA that you say did not match OJ was not DNA it was degraded AB blood from Nicole. It was not able to be DNA tested it was only found to be a B chain that often happens when AB blood is diluted or mixed with other body fluids. You do not speak of facts. You cannot plant evidence like blood if you do not have it yet. The blood that was pulled from the scene was done before OJ was even back in Cali..
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@mjmitch33 Your another Utube prowler speaking on a subject you have no knowledge of. OJ did write the book If I Did it. O.J. Says He Wrote 'If I Did It' For $ . In the interview,Simpson, 59, said he deserved harsh criticism for his role in the project, he denied committing the murders, disputed his publisher's contention that the book amounts to a confession, said the title was not his idea & the hypothetical sections were written by a ghostwriter with his aproval.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@onstageagain Not sure why you are coming at me like that I never said anything about him not writing the book? Think you have the wrong guy?
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@Updehill How can you say the glove didn't fit? The largest size of the model glove OJ was wearing in the pictures,videos and even in the courtroom was on his hand. Did it fit perfect with a surgical glove on and a person who had to make it look like it didn't fit putting it on... duh!
The facts add up nicely. His blood at the scene, his blood at his house, gloves,shoes and training to kill via military training done 6 months prior... guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@mitch 33 Rosie was the 1st to visit OJ after arrested. OJ was crying to Rosie, the policeman in the same room heard the conversation , but Rosie,a preacher claimed conversation was confidential. The policeman testified in the pretrial,Judge Ito did not allow it in the trial .OJ took a lie detector test, failed , he said because he had dreams of killing Nichole. 36 officers at the scene before Mark Fuhrman arrived, all saw 1 glove, the whole police dept. would have to be in on this cover up.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@Updehill he just changed clothes and the only injuries that would spew blood was the throat being slashed which was testified to be done from behind. There was plenty of evidence and Johnny Cochran is burning in a hot place right now for his part in this crime. Justice was served for both, delayed but eventually served.
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@Updehill This is OJ book on how he did it. I moved past the front door of Nicole's condoto take a closer look. There were candles burning inside, I could hear faint music playing. It was obvious Nicole was expecting company. I wondered who the f--k it was this time. I wondered if maybe Faye was coming over with some of her boy-toys so they could all get wild and dirty while my kids were sleeping upstairs.
Just as I was beginning to get seriously steamed, the back gate squeaked open.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@onstageagain The OJ book was written by someone else it was not pened by him! He just took the cheque!
Updehill 1 year ago
@Uphill As for the gloves, both Leather Gloves were blood soaked. Once a barrel rodeo rider in my 20's. I've had plenty of leather gloves. If you get leather wet...it shrinks . OJ also had a pair of plastic gloves on while trying the gloves on in court. Many photos shown in the pre trial of OJ wearing these gloves. The brand of gloves size L, was verified Nichole had purchased these gloves on a Visa for. A spokesman for the Co, verified the purchase with paperwork. They were OJ's gloves.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@Uphill I am a true crime fanatic... I've written many short stories on True Crime. Ive been to prisons & visited many people . I live in the the LA area, Newport Beach , Ca. I was at the court house & visited all crime sites in 95, OJ did this!
I'm not trying to convince you, Personally I'm always ready to learn, although I don't always like being taught. You remind me of A fanatic who can't change his mind & won't change the subject. Nothing to do with the facts or truth.
onstageagain 1 year ago
@Updehill A guy came walking through like he owned the f--king place. He saw me & froze. Young, good-looking, I tried to place him, I'd never seen him before. "Who the f--k are you? I said. I, uh--I just came by to return a pair of glasses,he replied, stammering. Really? A pair of glasses, huh?
OJ describes himself soaked in blood, holding a knife, Ron & Nicole dead, Strips to his socks before re-entering his Bronco. If I Did It: Confessions of a Killer, p. 128
onstageagain 1 year ago
@Updehill Maybe she went out to keep OJ from coming in they started arguing.. he KO'd her like he had done many times in the past. Ron comes out and is attacked,fight to his death... she starts coming to and he slits her throat. Think about is she was killed and when he was told he never asked if his kids were ok... why he knew they were in bed! What man knows his wife was murdered and does not ask if his kids are ok... a guilty one!
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@mjmitch33 1) Dr. Henry Lee stated there was something wrong with the evidence “for a person to have committed two murders then drove home why so little blood in the car” The blood of Oj’s found at the scene was older that the murders?? 2)The coroner Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran's testimony “ I could not rule out multiple weapons & mulitple killers in this case! “ Ron Goldman(black belt 3rd degree) also fought his attackers.. but no wounds consistent with a fight were found on OJ Simpson”.
Updehill 1 year ago
@Updehill Somfing Vong.. paid person on trial to refute testimony. He made over 100,000 to come on and say that. They made a big deal about the blood on both sides of the sock... Yet the blood would still be wet they themselves argued that it would take up to two hours for blood to dry even more when the person is prefusely sweating as he was in the limo remember.. so the sock was laying down and the blood transfered through to the other side.. Dr Lee says something wrong.. I say makes sense.
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@Updehill Of course you cannot rule out multiple weapons there was a slice to the throat that could be by either a single sided blade and a double edged blade. Stab wounds were with one sided blade. You cannot prove that the slice across her throat done from behind like the Frogmen taught him (avoiding the projectile blood also) was done with a single edge blade or double.. your running out of excuses... I have plenty of facts!
mjmitch33 1 year ago
@Updehill You mention DNA was mixed, Not all DNA was mixed. The blood drops on the side of the shoe prints was oj's from his finger. The blood in the Bronko was OJ's Ron was not a Black Belt In Karate, he was trained in karate. Goldman had bruises on his knuckles indicating that he had pummeled his assailant. He had 35 wounds , 4 fatal wounds any one that would have killed him. many on his hands & arms from defensive wounds.
onstageagain 1 year ago
Cont.Ron Goldman had almost all the stab wounds-58 stab wounds. Blood from nicole was found in him and non of him in her which means she died 1st! But the evidence shows they were both there at present during the murders So your saying Ron waited while she was killed?. Point 2 no neighbours heard the blood screeam of 2 people being stabed to death! Point 3 how do you muffle two people unless as you are 2 or more people.
Updehill 1 year ago
OJ is guilty as hell of the double homicide, but I gotta tell you the truth folks, this whole shit that he pulled in vegas, when he got put away for 30 years it pissed me off, becuase I say this if you get away with murder, you should be able to get away with anything.... I used to be so disgusted by the man, but you know what after that last run in I was pulling for him! In the words the weirdo on the 405 back in the day that held the banner GO JUICE GO!!! GO JUICE GO!!! LMAO!!!
heydudedolfan13 1 year ago
@Starfound "They just wouldn't convict him cuz he's a brother."
That wasn't the case, they wouldn't convict cuz of very poor prosecution, evidence planting and a brilliant defense team. the tow truck driver"didn't notice any blood in or on the bronco" or the forensic expert " blood on socks appear to be poured on, SOMETHING WRONG".
This my friend is why he was aquitted....not cuz hes a bro. "When the gloves didn't fit, they had to aquitt.
Doubt was cast on all evidence presented. OJ did it.
stuckinthe70sfunk 1 year ago
@stuckinthe70sfunk The tow truck driver did not testify that there was no blood. He testified that he did not see any blood.
Sock was on a man who was seen sweating terribly only a few minutes later. The blood could have been splash from someone who fell in a puddle and was splashed onto the sock.
Even without the sock you have gloves,shoe prints and his blood at the scene. Go no further that is enough.
Evidence is not a chain where one link breaks the chain it is a rope.. several strands.
mjmitch33 1 year ago
I thought that after he was found not guilty (a sham) he was supposed to devote all his efforts to finding the REAL killers. Apparently he started looking at the golf course. Sadly, he didn't get any leads so he decided to play golf for life. Then he went to Vegas. Oops. He could've called the police to enlist their help. Instead he decided to take care of it himself. Was he that arrogant he didn't realize that if he was ever arrested breaking any law anywhere that they'd throw the book at him?
pig5689 1 year ago
who clicked this thinking the finger was a fucked up penis
nickringer 2 years ago 24
!!LOL!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!
exactly why I chose that image :)
videoizer 2 years ago 4
@nickringer you should admit your addiction to penis
southplnk 1 year ago
@nickringer fucking fagot,,,,i came in here because i wanted to see dead bodies, not someones penis......I LOVE WATCHING PUSSY
FullBloodedHmoob 1 year ago
I think that the real "crime of the century" is George W. Bush's election.
rhcp800 2 years ago
@rhcp800 and the Haliburton government contracts to rebuild the country of Iraq that were given to the company who just happened to have a CEO names Dick Cheney. Your right that may be the crime of the century.