• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The O.J. Simpson trial is fascinating as hell

Glix

Member
I was like 8 when the trial was on but I remember this being a huge part of the case. Fuhrman was a blatant, documented racist and then after he plead the 5th to planting evidence it was too much for the prosecution to overcome. He kind of screwed the whole trial.

You'd almost think they'd learn, too. But based on whats going on in Baltimore (100's of convictions being overturned due to cops on video planting evidence), I guess PD's across the country decided its more important to have a bunch of racist assholes on the docket, than to have convictions that stick. Convictions! Ha! See what I did there!

My mind is currently being blown at Americans not knowing he was a football player

Football player? He was american hero, Lt. Nordberg. Survived multiple gunshot wounds!
 

AlexMogil

Member
It should be required watching for everyone. One of the finest documentaries ever made.

Completely agreed - the whole thing is heartbreaking. It's nice that it's in episodes because it gives you time to digest. Also I would suggest after the episode that covers the actual murder and immediate aftermath to watch June 17, 1994 - my favorite documentary ever. It covers the media spectacle with the good and the bad, with no narration and some background music, interlaced with unedited clips of broadcasts of the surrounding days. A great piece to study 1990's US media.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
I was on the "didn't do it" side during that trial.

Of course, years later, I accept that I was an idiot.


Wat


Even the OJ supporters I knew, knew he did it.

It was fascinating for me because it was happening when I emigrated to the US.

It was hypnotic.

There's never been a more obviously guilty guy since Charles Manson.

I can't even
 

Baraka in the White House

2-Terms of Kombat
The pissing contest between Cochran, Shapiro, and Bailey led to some amusing drama on the defense side, too. Cochran usually won those battles but the egotism and pettiness of it all revealed a lot about each of them.

It was a parade of assholes.

Did it ever explain why he led the police on a freeway chase ". I mean he was suppose to turn himself in at 11am. But instead he ran from the police.

He was preparing to commit suicide when he felt like the cops were closing in but wanted to say goodbye to his mother first.

Dude clearly flipped out when he felt trapped.
 

Voidwolf

Member
I'm currently watching Netflix series and I'm hooked, just got done with episode 7 last night. I've always known about this but not the details, I was far too young when it happened. I'll definitely watch the documentary everyone keeps mentioning next.
 

John Dunbar

correct about everything
is it true that cochran wasn't specifically talking about the gloves when he said that "if it doesn't fit" line? if so, my life has been a lie.
 

Baraka in the White House

2-Terms of Kombat
is it true that cochran wasn't specifically talking about the gloves when he said that "if it doesn't fit" line? if so, my life has been a lie.

I don't remember that. I just remember Darden basically giving the defense a gift by asking O.J. to try on the gloves. They knew the gloves wouldn't go on easily and O.J. himself made quite the show of it.

I think Cochran just seized on that in the moment.
 

akileese

Member
Can you imagine the trial happening today with Trump tweeting? Lol

This trial is one of the main reason that mainstream news is the way it is. The ratings were astronomical, and even only being 11 at the time, that trial was all anyone was talking about. School, social events, going to friends houses. I didn't even live on the west coast. It was the perfect storm of "people care about celebrities so we need to shove them down their throats" and "if it bleeds it leads".
 

Christian

Member
I watched the FX show, but where can I stream the documentaries? I could swear they were on Netflix or Hulu, but I can't even find them on WatchESPN right now.
 

Dalek

Member
I watched the FX show, but where can I stream the documentaries? I could swear they were on Netflix or Hulu, but I can't even find them on WatchESPN right now.

I believe it was on Hulu recently, but I don't see it there now. I watched it on ESPNnow when it aired.
 

adj_noun

Member
They turned on the trial at school when they read the verdict.

To put it mildly, I was surprised.

Looking back, I wouldn't have a (non-war/terrorism related) WTF shock like that again until the 2016 election.
 
I don't remember that. I just remember Darden basically giving the defense a gift by asking O.J. to try on the gloves. They knew the gloves wouldn't go on easily and O.J. himself made quite the show of it.

I think Cochran just seized on that in the moment.

Didn't he try on another (new) pair later on - without the rubber gloves on – and it did fit. The jury just didn't care.

Was it really the prosecutions fault – Or was it that this trial shows how flawed the US juror system really is.

I mean you have a juror that, in 2016 stand by that she acquitted him because of Rodney King.
 
You'd think Mark Furhman would have been disgraced and faded into utter obscurity.

But no, he's on Fox News.

Murica

So is Ollie North. The day President Pence signs Trump's pardon, he will get a job offer from Fox that afternoon.

It's pretty amazing that these are the kinds of guys who misinform so much of America. As a kid, we thought things were cool, I remember getting into my friend's father's van as a kid and hearing Rush Limbuahg and already knowing he was full of shit.
 
Did it ever explain why he led the police on a freeway chase ". I mean he was suppose to turn himself in at 11am. But instead he ran from the police.

The prosecution didn't even bring up the fact in court that there were "proof" in the car that he was going to leave the country. If I remember it properly.
 

SRG01

Member
Wasn't there this conspiracy theory where he was trying to cover up for someone else? I kind of remember that idea floating around.
 
All I really remember from when I was a child was that my grandma was convinced the butler/maid did it. No idea if they even had one, but thats what she thought lol
 

Stranya

Member
For anyone who wants to read an incredibly detailed, no holds barred account of the trial by a top former prosecutor, I highly recommend Outrage by Vincent Buigliosi (who prosecuted Charles Manson, and wrote the equally excellent Helter Skelter). He absolutely goes to town on the OJ prosecutors, who made a complete shitshow of the entire thing from start to finish.
 

SpaceWolf

Banned
Wasn't there this conspiracy theory where he was trying to cover up for someone else? I kind of remember that idea floating around.

Not to give the conspiracy theory any credence, but I believe some believe he was trying to cover up for his son.
 

zeemumu

Member
But that doesn't make any sense because he was technically on trial for not getting away with it and all the evidenced pointed to him being guilty, but he did get off (or away) on charges.

I think what she was saying was that he would've left behind far more conclusive evidence. Still doesn't make for a good justification but whatever.
 

Tagyhag

Member
The only good thing that came out of the obviously wrong verdict was that people were ready to riot if OJ was considered guilty.

So at least they indirectly saved some lives.
 
Didn't he try on another (new) pair later on - without the rubber gloves on – and it did fit. The jury just didn't care.

Was it really the defence fault – Or was it that this trial shows how flawed the US juror system really is.

I mean you have a juror that, in 2016 stand by that she acquitted him because of Rodney King.

I think you mean, was it the prosecutions fault, and the answer was a resounding yes. However it's to the defenses's credit they were capable of poking so many holes into them.

As one of the lawyers on the OJ defense said, "So the defense presented a credible case, [and we were] able to show that the prosecution's case was full of lies. That doesn't mean that ultimate truth was on one side or the other, but the defense got the jury to focus on the lies of the prosecution rather than on the innocence or guilt of the defendant. "
 

ryseing

Member
I watched People v. OJ last year and while I know it's fictional, I thought it did a really good job of presenting the outside factors of the case, especially the Rodney King trial.

With the history of the LAPD in the back of everyone's minds, a conviction was going to be difficult enough. But when one of your lead detectives is an admitted racist? No way you're getting a conviction. I obviously believe he did it but the prosecution failed to convince beyond a reasonable doubt.
 

Pilgrimzero

Member
I remember being at work at a grocery store deli and we all watched tv or listened to a radio to get constant updates on the whole mess.

It was a big deal back in the day.
 

Weckum

Member
It also led to some of the best book covers the world has ever seen:

41ldWUv38mL._AC_UL320_SR194,320_.jpg


If_I_did_It_2.png
 

Baraka in the White House

2-Terms of Kombat
I watched People v. OJ last year and while I know it's fictional, I thought it did a really good job of presenting the outside factors of the case, especially the Rodney King trial.

With the history of the LAPD in the back of everyone's minds, a conviction was going to be difficult enough. But when one of your lead detectives is an admitted racist? No way you're getting a conviction. I obviously believe he did it but the prosecution failed to convince beyond a reasonable doubt.

The crazy thing about Furhman? Aside from being a monster, he hardly had anything to do with the actual investigation. He was there for like the first 30 minutes on scene before real forensics folks arrived.
 

Baraka in the White House

2-Terms of Kombat
Enough time to plant the gloves.

That's certainly the kind of picture the defense painted. They managed to make LAPD look bumbling and ineffective yet capable of elaborate cover-ups and frame jobs.

But even the idea of the police framing him is flimsy considering how much of the LAPD he had hosted or entertained in the past, plus the fact that they handled the initial investigation/arrest with obvious star-struck kid gloves.
 
That's certainly the kind of picture the defense painted. They managed to make LAPD look bumbling and ineffective yet capable of elaborate cover-ups and frame jobs.

But even the idea of the police framing him is flimsy considering how much of the LAPD he had hosted or entertained in the past, plus the fact that they handled the initial investigation/arrest with obvious star-struck kid gloves.

The prosecution showed there was some evidence planting by the LAPD. I believe one of the examples was blood stains put in a certain spot that wasn't there in the initial investigation.
 

Kettch

Member
The prosecution showed there was some evidence planting by the LAPD. I believe one of the examples was blood stains put in a certain spot that wasn't there in the initial investigation.

Also didn't help that one of the detectives was clearly racist. Yeah, he said he reformed and all that, but you don't give a racist officer sensitivity classes and keep him as a detective regardless.

Just sucks that the department's bullshit came back to bite them in the form of a murdering millionaire going free. :/
 
Top Bottom