# O.J. Simpson Case



## Aunt Marg (Oct 30, 2020)

Aside from myself, is there anyone else who believes the outcome was a farce?


----------



## Lewkat (Oct 30, 2020)

I watched that entire trial on t.v. and was enraged throughout.  The judge was a jerk of the first order.  The prosecutors looked like amateurs and the jury was a joke.


----------



## RadishRose (Oct 30, 2020)

I'm still too angry to even discuss it.


----------



## Keesha (Oct 30, 2020)

He admitted to it once he was off criminal charges just to make more money but lost his civil case brought forth by the family


----------



## Aunt Marg (Oct 30, 2020)

Lewkat said:


> I watched that entire trial on t.v. and was enraged throughout.  The judge was a jerk of the first order.  The prosecutors looked like amateurs and the jury was a joke.


I couldn't have said it better, Lew.


----------



## Keesha (Oct 30, 2020)

Lewkat said:


> The judge was a jerk of the first order.


A paid off jerk!


----------



## Sassycakes (Oct 30, 2020)

Lewkat said:


> I watched that entire trial on t.v. and was enraged throughout.  The judge was a jerk of the first order.  The prosecutors looked like amateurs and the jury was a joke.



*Lewkat.I agree with you 100%.*


----------



## Pepper (Oct 30, 2020)

From the start, the prosecution killed their own case.  There was no reason to arrest him so fast before building their evidence properly.  Their case lasted too long and bored everyone to tears.  The glove didn't fit, so the jury did acquit.


----------



## Aunt Bea (Oct 30, 2020)

I've always believed that it was a domestic dispute/confrontation that got out of hand and that OJ was guilty.  Being guilty and being proved guilty are two very different things. 

I also believe that Al Cowlings was present or had more knowledge of what happened than ever came to light.


----------



## Mike (Oct 30, 2020)

I don't really know all the details of the case, other
than what we were told on the news here, but there
are people like him all over the World, who think that
they are above the law and only the rich ones get away
with it!

Mike


----------



## Nathan (Oct 30, 2020)

Aunt Marg said:


> Aside from myself, is there anyone else who believes the outcome was a farce?



Regarding the judge, Judge Lance Ito was clearly intimidated by Simpson's defense team, and possibly aware that there could be a replay of the L.A. riots after the police were acquitted, in the Rodney King arrest. Simpson's lead attorney, Johnny Cochran (who was  Rodney King's counsel as well)
was "in charge" at all times throughout the trial, which I watched gavel to gavel on CourtTV.     Judge Ito allowed Cochran to hand pick a synpathetic jury, who apparently committed jury nullification*** and voted to acquit despite the evidence on hand.

***


> Jury Nullification
> 
> A jury's knowing and deliberate rejection of the evidence or refusal to apply the law either because the jury wants to send a message about some social issue that is larger than the case itself, or because the result dictated by law is contrary to the jury's sense of justice, morality, or fairness.
> Jury nullification is a discretionary act, and is not a legally sanctioned function of the jury.  It is considered to be inconsistent with the jury's duty to return a verdict based solely on the law and the facts of the case.  The jury does not have a right to nulification, and counsel is not permitted to present the concept of jury nullification to the jury.  However, jury verdicts of acquittal are unassailable even where the verdict is inconsistent with the weight of the evidence and instruction of the law.


----------



## win231 (Oct 30, 2020)

O.J. should thank the Los Angeles police department for his acquittal.  It was very easy to provide the "Reasonable Doubt" necessary by proving racism, evidence tampering, evidence planting & lies by police officers; even without officer Mark "Jerk: Fuhrman's perjury.


----------



## Tish (Oct 30, 2020)

Aunt Marg said:


> Aside from myself, is there anyone else who believes the outcome was a farce?


Nope, it was a farce.


----------



## dobielvr (Oct 30, 2020)

Poor Mark Fuhrman, he's the one who turned out to be the bad guy.

jmo


----------



## win231 (Oct 30, 2020)

dobielvr said:


> Poor Mark Fuhrman, he's the one who turned out to be the bad guy.
> 
> jmo


"Opinion?"  If you heard what he said on tape, it wouldn't be an opinion.  He_* is*_ a bad guy; one of many in police departments.  And he's more responsible for a double murderer's acquittal than O.J.'s attorneys.  They simply used what he provided for them on a serving platter.....along with the prosecuting attorney's apathy & incompetence.


----------



## 911 (Nov 1, 2020)

Judge Ito never had control of the trial. There were way too many sidebars allowed by the defense. This was done to manipulate the judge’s mind, what little he had. By the time Cochran and Shapiro took turns working over the judge and then when Ito looked out at the defense table and saw Kardashian, Dershowitz and Bailey still sitting in the bull pen, he had to be so intimidated that he probably couldn’t spit, even if he had wanted to.

Just 3 years prior, Rodney King had his clock cleaned by the LAPD. That was followed by rioting and beatings in the streets. Keeping this in mind, it was (is) my opinion that the jury was very much intimidated that if O.J. was found innocent, L.A. may again suffer the same consequences.

I don’t think the jury was going to need a lot of testimony that may have been tainted to find “reasonable doubt” and allow him to go free. I believe that to some degree, the jurors felt they were doing the people of L.A. a favor.

Mr. Goldman and the Brown family never received justice for the killing of their family members.


----------



## 911 (Nov 1, 2020)

dobielvr said:


> Poor Mark Fuhrman, he's the one who turned out to be the bad guy.
> 
> jmo


I doubt if anyone would argue that Fuhrman was a true racist. This made him easy meat for Cochran.

Fuhrman was also involved in the Martha Moxley case a few years later. Some credit him with solving it and some don’t. That was another case that got all messed up due to a mixture of law enforcement and legal errors. This can happen when a relative of a Kennedy is involved.


----------



## dobielvr (Nov 1, 2020)

What I meant, not that I have to explain...but I will.   

They tried to take so much of the guilt away from OJ for the killing s by dumping all this racist shift on Furhman...any and every diversion was used to take the focus off the real killer.    jmo


----------



## RadishRose (Nov 1, 2020)

911 said:


> I doubt if anyone would argue that Fuhrman was a true racist. This made him easy meat for Cochran.
> 
> Fuhrman was also involved in the Martha Moxley case a few years later. Some credit him with solving it and some don’t. That was another case that got all messed up due to a mixture of law enforcement and legal errors. This can happen when a relative of a Kennedy is involved.


I read Fuhrman's book about Moxley's murder years ago. "Murder In Greenwich" and the mistakes made by the Greenwich police.

Connecticut prosecutors are closing the door on the 45-year-old murder case involving Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel, who was previously accused of bludgeoning to death his 15-year-old neighbor Martha Moxley in Greenwich.

Chief State's Attorney Richard Colangelo Jr. said Friday — exactly 45 years after Moxley's death — that the state will not seek a second trial for Skakel.

During a hearing in Stamford Superior Court, Chief State's Attorney Richard Colangelo filed what is known as a "nolle" — a legal declaration allowing for the case in question to be dismissed after 13 months, his office confirmed to NPR.

A Connecticut prosecutor says the Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel, shown here, will not face a second trial in the 1975 murder of teenager Martha Moxley in Greenwich.
                   Seth Wenig/AP

Coincidentally, this occurred just day before yesterday,10/31/20

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/30/9294...y-kennedy-cousin-in-martha-moxley-murder-case


.


----------



## Aunt Marg (Nov 1, 2020)

RadishRose said:


> I read Fuhrman's book about Moxley's murder years ago. "Murder In Greenwich" and the mistakes made by the Greenwich police.
> 
> Connecticut prosecutors are closing the door on the 45-year-old murder case involving Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel, who was previously accused of bludgeoning to death his 15-year-old neighbor Martha Moxley in Greenwich.
> 
> ...


I remember the Moxley case.

Thanks for posting this, RR.


----------



## RadishRose (Nov 1, 2020)

Well, actually I realized later than this thread is about OJ, not Moxley. It's just that Mark Fuhrmann whom I admire after reading his book was mentioned. Sorry.


----------



## Aunt Marg (Nov 1, 2020)

RadishRose said:


> Well, actually I realized later than this thread is about OJ, not Moxley. It's just that Mark Fuhrmann whom I admire after reading his book was mentioned. Sorry.


Doesn't matter, it all lumps into great conversation.


----------



## Butterfly (Nov 2, 2020)

Pepper said:


> From the start, the prosecution killed their own case.  There was no reason to arrest him so fast before building their evidence properly.  Their case lasted too long and bored everyone to tears.  The glove didn't fit, so the jury did acquit.



I agree -- way too much detail about the DNA issue (probably fascinating to forensics guys, but unintelligible and boring to the jury).  I also think the biggest mistake the prosecution made was the glove thing.  They should have known that a leather glove that had once been soaked with blood would shrink when it dried and wouldn't fit if it had been OJ's.


----------



## Butterfly (Nov 2, 2020)

As to Judge Ito, I seriously doubt he was "paid off" as some have suggested.  People always want to think judges are paid off, but in actuality it almost never happens.  WAY too much at stake for the judge involved, who would be risking his career, his license, his family, his reputation and, of course, jail to boot, as well as the career of his wife, who was a high ranking office in the police force.  It would have taken one hell of a lot of money to pay him off in the first place, and would have been relatively easy to discover via scrutiny of his finances.  And you can bet that there were people looking.

I think he made a lot of mistakes in the trial, which have been documented in the press ad nauseum, but I don't think for a minute he was paid off.


----------



## Lewkat (Nov 2, 2020)

RadishRose said:


> I read Fuhrman's book about Moxley's murder years ago. "Murder In Greenwich" and the mistakes made by the Greenwich police.
> 
> Connecticut prosecutors are closing the door on the 45-year-old murder case involving Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel, who was previously accused of bludgeoning to death his 15-year-old neighbor Martha Moxley in Greenwich.
> 
> ...


Her mother moved to NJ later and was still bothered by the press if it slipped out where she lived.  We tried to shield her from them whenever they snooped around.  I read the article a couple of days ago, Radish that he's off the hook.


----------



## Lewkat (Nov 2, 2020)

As for OJ's case, I thought the forensic scientist's explanation was extremely interesting, but to someone not in the scientific field it can be off putting due to lack of education in that area.  

When OJ was asked to try on the glove, it was stiff and had shrunk.  Plus, good leather has to be pulled on to form and fit your fingers perfectly.  This simply did not happen in the courtroom.  He pulled it on and went through a silly motion of seemingly to attempt at getting it all the way on and gave up while Cochran was spewing forth," if it don't fit, acquit."  Puleeze, OJ was an actor folks.  

By the way, when Furhman left the crime scene and proceeded to OJ's house, it was alleged that he had the glove in his pants pocket and later planted it.  Well, I  recall vividly that when he got out of his car, he was wearing a pair of tailored, well fitted slacks and I can assure you that glove would have bulged so obviously from his pocket.  Not one person caught that at all.  I wanted to throw my shoe at the TV.  Furhman's reputation was sullied when he denied using the N word.  OJ may have been found not guilty, but that does not mean he is innocent.  Big difference.


----------



## Pepper (Nov 2, 2020)

@Butterfly 
Judge Ito was star-struck.

@Lewkat 
Yes, OJ was an actor but not a very good one.


----------



## Lewkat (Nov 2, 2020)

It got him off, Pepper.


----------



## Pepper (Nov 2, 2020)

Lewkat said:


> It got him off, Pepper.


No.  What got him off was the incompetence of the prosecution and police, not forgetting the years OJ was beloved by all--kinda like Bill Cosby!


----------



## Lewkat (Nov 2, 2020)

It was a combination of all these things except the beloved part.  I never thought of him as beloved.  Admired, yes.  He was some football player in his day.


----------



## StarSong (Nov 2, 2020)

The DA's office was outgunned, plain and simple.  LAPD's star-struck behavior during the early hours of the investigation led to plenty of mistakes that the defense capitalized on.  Mark Fuhrman's racist comments didn't help, and the glove antics sealed the deal. 

OJ was indeed beloved in Los Angeles. He was an affable, approachable, extremely high-profile superstar while at USC. His acting and announcing careers post football kept him very much in the public eye.


----------



## Pepper (Nov 2, 2020)

I liked his Hertz Rental Cars the best.  I think his mama was in it.


----------



## win231 (Nov 2, 2020)

Another issue with the idiotic glove test:  Besides the glove shrinking, OJ was also wearing rubber gloves while trying them on.  Even a perfect-fitting glove would be very difficult to put on over rubber gloves.


----------



## Aunt Marg (Nov 2, 2020)

win231 said:


> Another issue with the idiotic glove test:  Besides the glove shrinking, OJ was also wearing rubber gloves while trying them on.  Even a perfect-fitting glove would be very difficult to put on over rubber gloves.


I recall watching OJ trying on the glove and I thought to myself, _he's manipulating his hand to make it harder to pull the glove on, why is he crooking and clawing his hand to pull the glove on._

Just so unorthodox. No one I know pulls gloves on like he was trying to do.


----------



## StarSong (Nov 2, 2020)

Aunt Marg said:


> I recall watching OJ trying on the glove and I thought to myself, _he's manipulating his hand to make it harder to pull the glove on, why is he crooking and clawing his hand to pull the glove on._
> 
> Just so unorthodox. No one I know pulls gloves on like he was trying to do.


It was a blunder by the prosecution and it wasn't the only one they made.  
It was their case to lose and they did so. As others have pointed out, being found not guilty due to the evidence presented is a lot different than being found innocent. 

I believe Nevada threw the book at him to make up for the flawed judgment in the murder cases.


----------



## Aunt Marg (Nov 2, 2020)

StarSong said:


> It was a blunder by the prosecution and it wasn't the only one they made.
> It was their case to lose and they did so. As others have pointed out, being found not guilty due to the evidence presented is a lot different than being found innocent.
> 
> *I believe Nevada threw the book at him to make up for the flawed judgment in the murder cases.*


I have always believed the same, Star.


----------



## Pepper (Nov 2, 2020)

Aunt Marg said:


> I have always believed the same, Star.


Ditto.  That was wrong.  Legally speaking that is.


----------



## StarSong (Nov 2, 2020)

Pepper said:


> Ditto.  That was wrong.  Legally speaking that is.


Sometimes the universe lends a helping hand to sort out karma.


----------



## win231 (Nov 2, 2020)

StarSong said:


> It was a blunder by the prosecution and it wasn't the only one they made.
> It was their case to lose and they did so. As others have pointed out, being found not guilty due to the evidence presented is a lot different than being found innocent.
> 
> I believe Nevada threw the book at him to make up for the flawed judgment in the murder cases.


I doubt it.  He was released after serving 9 years of a 33 - year sentence.  And he still received his $24,000.00/month pension - which is forever.


----------



## Pepper (Nov 2, 2020)

StarSong said:


> Sometimes the universe lends a helping hand to sort out karma.


Dharma, not Karma.  It was a path he chose.


----------



## StarSong (Nov 2, 2020)

Pepper said:


> Dharma, not Karma.  It was a path he chose.


Thank you - I never knew the distinction before.  I'm always learning new and interesting tidbits here on SF!


----------



## Pepper (Nov 2, 2020)

StarSong said:


> Thank you - I never knew the distinction before.  I'm always learning new and interesting tidbits here on SF!


Well, it's like a Shakespearean tragedy.  Within the man is what causes his destruction, not what's outside.


----------



## Aunt Marg (Nov 2, 2020)

StarSong said:


> Thank you - *I never knew the distinction before*.  I'm always learning new and interesting tidbits here on SF!


I never knew either, but was too embarrassed to ask.


----------



## Giantsfan1954 (Nov 2, 2020)

Lewkat said:


> As for OJ's case, I thought the forensic scientist's explanation was extremely interesting, but to someone not in the scientific field it can be off putting due to lack of education in that area.  When OJ was asked to try on the glove, it was stiff and had shrunk.  Plus, good leather has to be pulled on to form and fit your fingers perfectly.  This simply did not happen in the courtroom.  He pulled it on and went through a silly motion of seemingly to attempt at getting it all the way on and gave up while Cochran was spewing forth," if it don't fit, acquit."  Puleeze, OJ was an actor folks.  By the way, when Furhman left the crime scene and proceeded to OJ's house, it was alleged that he had the glove in his pants pocket and later planted it.  Well, I  recall vividly that when he got out of his car, he was wearing a pair of tailored, well fitted slacks and I can assure you that glove would have bulged so obviously from his pocket.  Not one person caught that at all.  I wanted to throw my shoe at the TV.  Furhman's reputation was sullied when he denied using the N word.  OJ may have been found not guilty, but that does not mean he is innocent.  Big difference.


He also didn’t take his arthritis medicine and his hands were swollen.


----------



## Lewkat (Nov 2, 2020)

In which case, the gloves never would have fit.


----------



## Ruthanne (Nov 2, 2020)

It was a terrible thing what happened to Nicole and Ron.  I watched the entire trial on tv and it kept my attention.  I found both sides of the argument of guilt or not to be fascinating as to how the attorneys and prosecution handled it.


----------



## Camper6 (Nov 3, 2020)

Thanks to all for posting your comments.

It does give me a better understanding of the case.

I do think that television coverage tainted the case from the very beginning because people play up to the camera.


----------



## StarSong (Nov 3, 2020)

Although OJ himself avoided justice for those terrible murders, the argument could be made that in the past 75 years tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands, of African Americans were unjustly or disproportionately punished for other crimes.  Judges, juries and lynch mobs have not historically erred in favor of Black men in this country. 

On a micro level I was unhappy with the verdict; on a macro level I was not.


----------



## win231 (Nov 3, 2020)

StarSong said:


> Although OJ himself avoided justice for those terrible murders, the argument could be made that in the past 75 years tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands, of African Americans were unjustly or disproportionately punished for other crimes.  Judges, juries and lynch mobs have not historically erred in favor of Black men in this country.
> 
> On a micro level I was unhappy with the verdict; on a macro level I was not.


Many races, religions, cultures have not escaped racism, prejudice & murder.
After the O.J. verdict, a black co-worker made a similar comment.  She said, "It's just payback for how black people were treated in the past."
I said, "Hmmmm, OK.  There was a holocaust; millions of Jews were kidnapped, imprisoned, tortured & murdered.  Does that entitle me to two free murders?"  Should an Armenian get away with murder because of Armenian Genocide?


----------



## JimBob1952 (Nov 3, 2020)

I'm sure Simpson spends all his time looking for the real killer.  

What a pathetic excuse for a human being.


----------



## StarSong (Nov 3, 2020)

Please understand what I meant by being unhappy with the verdict on a micro level  - I felt OJ should have been brought to justice for those murders.  However, his defense was superior to the DA's prosecution - they made some crucial errors, LAPD made a mess of the investigation, and the glove antic was the topper.  Not to mention that people are deemed innocent until proven guilty.  Lots of what made the news was not permissible in court.

On a macro level, the US justice system has been and remains undeniably tilted against Black men.  I was also relieved that our city didn't erupt into riots.


----------



## jerry old (Dec 24, 2020)

Put Aunt Marg's Detective agency on the case, she'll get him in the chai


----------



## fmdog44 (Dec 24, 2020)

He never paid any of the highest earning lawyers in the country. A fitting end to a great joke.


----------



## rgp (Dec 25, 2020)

JimBob1952 said:


> I'm sure Simpson spends all his time looking for the real killer.
> 
> What a pathetic excuse for a human being.




 Agree here.


----------



## Butterfly (Dec 25, 2020)

StarSong said:


> The DA's office was outgunned, plain and simple.  LAPD's star-struck behavior during the early hours of the investigation led to plenty of mistakes that the defense capitalized on.  Mark Fuhrman's racist comments didn't help, and the glove antics sealed the deal.
> 
> OJ was indeed beloved in Los Angeles. He was an affable, approachable, extremely high-profile superstar while at USC. His acting and announcing careers post football kept him very much in the public eye.


Strongly agree.  The prosecution was WAY outgunned.  It wouldn't have mattered who was the judge, IMHO.  The prosecution was ineffective and poorly planned; and you couple that with their obvious mistakes (the glove thing and the fqact that the prosecution didn't investigate Fuhrman thoroughly enough to find out about the infamous tapes wherein he used the "N word") and the fact that OJ was a local hero, and the result was a foregone conclusion.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Feb 18, 2021)

fmdog44 said:


> He never paid any of the highest earning lawyers in the country. A fitting end to a great joke.




The NY Times reported that he paid $5 million for his defense by selling memorabilia.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Feb 18, 2021)

There have been several players on the Buffalo Bills team that have been involved in domestic violence fatalities over the years.  Strangely, Jim Dunaway was also accused of killing his wife just  after the time of the OJ trial:


Jim Dunaway - Wikipedia


The local sheriff refused to charge him with a crime so his children sued him in civil court:

Former Bills Star Jim Dunaway Forced to Pay $500,000 After His Ex Wife Was Found Dead in a Swimming Pool (sportscasting.com)



Virtually the same crime yet not a fraction of the  controversial publicity or attention behind the trial.


----------

