OJ Simpson is Dead

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Westheim

RIP to O.J., who I knew first as an actor, then as a guy accused of murder, and finally as football player. Comes with being European.

Funny. I asked some 20 yr olds a few years ago do they think of Will Smith, LL Cool J, Queen Latifah & Ice T as artists or actors & they all didn't know they used to rap.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by low

His son did it. He was a lunatic who hated Nicole. OJ was going to fall on the sword for him, but got off. I will die on this hill.

Anyways, good riddance, I guess.

I've never heard this angle and am completely ignorant to it. But you have my attention. Why? Because it would answer a question I had about the entire event that I couldn't understand.

One of the biggest reasons people believed he did it was the car chase. Why are you not stopping? There are multiple reasons we can think of, but a really good reason is to draw people to him. To make everyone believe he did it.

I'm not saying I believe one way or the other. I have no clue. I haven't looked into this angle yet.

[BaseballMan]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

lmao who is possibly going to defend OJ Simpson?

Unfortunately plenty of idiots.
If a jury is stupid and biased enough to declare him not guilty then I know there are those who will defend him.
They seem to think hat the not guilty verdict means he was innocent.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by BaseballMan

Unfortunately plenty of idiots.
If a jury is stupid and biased enough to declare him not guilty then I know there are those who will defend him.
They seem to think hat the not guilty verdict means he was innocent.

Not guilty does not mean innocent. But the Jury has to weigh what they are given.

I have to believe OJs life as he knew it ended after that trial. Everyone thought he did it. He was sued civilly, lost, and it was all downhill from there. Hell, restaurants kicked him out.

[monkeyman576]

Simpson had the benefit of the trial being in the wake of the Rodney King riots so racial tensions were very high at the time and all you need is one not guilty.

[pilight]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Not guilty does not mean innocent. But the Jury has to weigh what they are given.

I have to believe OJs life as he knew it ended after that trial. Everyone thought he did it. He was sued civilly, lost, and it was all downhill from there. Hell, restaurants kicked him out.

His life as he knew it ended when he was arrested. The media spent months repeating everything the prosecution said as if it was gospel and thus convinced millions that it was an open-and-shut case. When it wasn't, because the prosecution actually had very little hard evidence, the jury reached the only decision they could.

[low]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

I've never heard this angle and am completely ignorant to it. But you have my attention. Why? Because it would answer a question I had about the entire event that I couldn't understand.

One of the biggest reasons people believed he did it was the car chase. Why are you not stopping? There are multiple reasons we can think of, but a really good reason is to draw people to him. To make everyone believe he did it.

I'm not saying I believe one way or the other. I have no clue. I haven't looked into this angle yet.

Read up on his son Jason. He had mental health issues and a known hatred for Nicole.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by monkeyman576

Simpson had the benefit of the trial being in the wake of the Rodney King riots so racial tensions were very high at the time and all you need is one not guilty.

This. LA did not want a repeat of the aftermath of Rodney King. Had he been declared guilty, there would’ve been riots. Just watch footage on Oprah when the verdict was read, the stark contrast of those celebrating and those in disbelief.

[Cobra Mgr]

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that criminal racist cops & known fabricated evidence created reasonable doubt?

The inner city rioting over OJ getting sent to jail is laughable. Most minorities didn't like OJ. What many minorities liked was seeing the crooked system used to put innocent POC behind bars came back to bite them in the rear end. Now that crooked system was used to put a guilty POC on the street.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that criminal racist cops & known fabricated evidence created reasonable doubt?

The inner city rioting over OJ getting sent to jail is laughable. Most minorities didn't like OJ. What many minorities liked was seeing the crooked system used to put innocent POC behind bars came back to bite them in the rear end. Now that crooked system was used to put a guilty POC on the street.

You’re either young or naive. Or both.

[JerryShoe]

A jury did find him culpable. The prosecution in the criminal matter was saddled with inept investigators along with their own erros, but in the civil plain old did-he-or-didn't-he trial, they said he did. Sorry for the dupe, trying to remove this

[JerryShoe]

A jury did find him culpable. The prosecution in the criminal matter was saddled with inept investigators in addition to their own errors but in the civil plain old did-he-or-didn't-he trial, they said he did.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by pilight

His life as he knew it ended when he was arrested. The media spent months repeating everything the prosecution said as if it was gospel and thus convinced millions that it was an open-and-shut case. When it wasn't, because the prosecution actually had very little hard evidence, the jury reached the only decision they could.

If you want to get specific, even before the arrest. He was convicted in the court of public opinion during the car chase. A trial wasn't necessary to convince anyone.

[pilight]

Originally Posted by JerryShoe

A jury did find him culpable. The prosecution in the criminal matter was saddled with inept investigators in addition to their own errors but in the civil plain old did-he-or-didn't-he trial, they said he did.

The jury in the civil trial was completely tainted by the non-stop coverage of the criminal trial. Simpson had no shot at a fair trial in that case.

[pilight]

Originally Posted by mytreds

You’re either young or naive. Or both.

Says the guy defending LA cops against the notion of institutional racism...

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by mytreds

You’re either young or naive. Or both.

Neither. I'm not naive to believe a guy who did the things OJ did post-murder wasn't guilty. But that wasn't evidence. Once the police & prosecutors were caught for being what they were, everything they brought up @ trial became suspect. And the jury was instructed to come back w/a guilty verdict if there wasn't any reasonable doubt. Any fair person would look @ what the police & prosecution did could not come out of that jury room & say they didn't have doubts in their minds. Only people who had made up their minds beforehand could say he was guilty or not based on what they heard from the DA's office.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by pilight

The jury in the civil trial was completely tainted by the non-stop coverage of the criminal trial. Simpson had no shot at a fair trial in that case.

A fair trial would have convicted him. You are absolutely correct. It was NOT a fair trial. It was tried in the press, in Simpson's favor.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that criminal racist cops & known fabricated evidence created reasonable doubt?

The inner city rioting over OJ getting sent to jail is laughable. Most minorities didn't like OJ. What many minorities liked was seeing the crooked system used to put innocent POC behind bars came back to bite them in the rear end. Now that crooked system was used to put a guilty POC on the street.

Yeah, one thing that seems to be forgotten now is how much OJ was liked by white people. He was never, like, an Allen Iverson type. He always had a front facing presence that was non combative and fun and he got a lot of gigs doing commercial and TV color commentary because inoffensive former superstars was what the public wanted at the time.

Of course, the trial changed all of that, but I also remember people at the time being like “now, I’m not saying OJ is innocent but this wouldn’t be the first time the LAPD manufactured evidence.” I do think the defense, who by and large were pretty bad too (except for Barry Scheck, who did an incredible job as the DNA expert lawyer for that team), did prove reasonable doubt by obfuscation and making the focus on Fuhrman. I also think he did it but that’s not the bar we have in our legal system.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by pilight

The jury in the civil trial was completely tainted by the non-stop coverage of the criminal trial. Simpson had no shot at a fair trial in that case.

The civil trial also had a much different standard; basically it came down to who had a more credible story, Simpson or the Goldman family. There was no more doubt based on reason, to paraphrase Bugliosi’s explanation, it was just 50% + 1. Frankly I think my belief in his guilt is… well, by now it’s near 100% but even at the time it was more than 50%.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by JerryShoe

A jury did find him culpable. The prosecution in the criminal matter was saddled with inept investigators in addition to their own errors but in the civil plain old did-he-or-didn't-he trial, they said he did.

The standard for conviction is much lower in a civil case. In a criminal trial, the standard is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil trial, the standard is guilty based on a preponderance of the evidence, or in some cases, clear and convincing evidence.