Support NeoGAF

[OokieSpookie]

Why people still obsess over this is beyond me.
If he did it, more power to him he got away with it.
The bottom line is, in a court of law he was acquitted.
"I will stand by the courts ruling as long as it is the one that I think that it should be!"
The judicial system in america is a complete joke and this is just one of many many examples.
People get away with things like this weekly if not daily.
Doesn't make it right, but all things like this to do is keep giving O.J. attention.

 

[harSon]

Let's hear the argument in defense of OJ.

I did a while ago:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9286116&postcount=42

- The blood under his wife's finger nails were not from OJ Simpson, they are from an unidentified person.
- His socks that had his wife's blood on them were quite odd. The blood stains on both socks were the same, meaning that they were possibly stacked on one another when blood got on them.
- The blood on the gloves matched OJ Simpsons, his wife, and Goldbergs. Even though they were soaked there were no trails leading to or from the house.
- The detective that took a sample of OJ Simpson's blood had no explanation for taking so long to turn the blood in. It is against protocol to hold on to the blood for extended periods of time.
- There was 1.5 cc's of blood missing from the initial 8 cc's taken from OJ Simpson.
- Los Angeles Police Detective Mark Fuhrman, the man who 'found' the gloves, socks, etc.., pleaded the 5th Amendment to avoid questioning.
- A collection of evidence by LAPD criminologist Dennis Fung came under criticism. He admitted to "having missed a few drops of blood on a fence near the bodies," but said that he "returned several weeks afterwards to collect them" on the stand. He also admitted to not using gloves when collecting the evidence.

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

well in criminal cases you have to prove guilt beyond a resonable doubt, right? well here - and putting race aside (as hard as that is in america) - you have two peices of irrefutable evidence: the DNA, and OJs past actions. lets face it, the dude was a violent creep and all signs were pretty much there

BUT its not too far fetched that a jury could find a reasonable doubt. i mean, i think its pretty much there, set in stone that if anybody was going to harm nicole and ron, it'd be him. and the DNA is really should solidify that. but, allegedly, the jury found a reasonable doubt. i personally think they were just starstruck, and add that with good defense attorneys, there you go, not guilty.

edit: the above is good evidence supporting reasonable doubt. but the dna is still there, though. even if ron and nicole's was too

 

[plovie]

I did a while ago:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9286116&postcount=42

I think this just shows that the cops were incompetent. Even if the cops were crooked and attempted to frame OJ, I'd still think that he he did.

 

[worldrunover]

I didn't care much that he got away with murder since I don't live in the same state as OJ (thank God), but a black man didn't beat the system, a rich man did and people didn't understand that apparently.

Damn richers!

Spoiler

now there's a South Park reference we can get behind amirite?

 

[harSon]

I think this just shows that the cops were incompetent. Even if the cops were crooked and attempted to frame OJ, I'd still think that he he did.

That makes absolutely no sense. That says more about your revulsion for the man then it does his guilt.

 

[Revengeance]

Wow, this possibly the least credible source EVAR.

A drug dealer claims that Simpson confessed while high, and so he's writing a book about it!?

Seriously?

He would have been laughed out of court, but of course, there's no money to be made in going to court (unless of course, you use the sensational trial to launch your mediocre entertainment career)

 

[ZeoVGM]

:lol :lol :lol
people still think he did it?

This is a joke post, right?

NO ONE is that stupid.

 

[PoliceCop]

That makes absolutely no sense. That says more about your revulsion for the man then it does his guilt.

Forgive me for being condescending, but I think your race is clouding your judgement. The cops most definitely wanted to nail OJ for the crime, it's even likely that some shady business went down. But Simpson most definitely had a hand in those murders and to denying that involves foregoing pretty much all rational analysis of the situation and personnel.

 

[plovie]

That makes absolutely no sense. That says more about your revulsion for the man then it does his guilt.

What doesn't make sense? Just because the cops were a bunch of cunts doesn't mean that OJ didn't commit murder. It just means that OJ committed murder and the cops tried to plant evidence to ensure his conviction.

And yes I do have a great deal of revulsion for murderers.

 

[Threi]

Forgive me for being condescending, but I think your race is clouding your judgement.

How so? He was asked to make an argument in the defense of OJ and he did. He already stated that he doesn't have an opinion on the matter. I think that is a bit of a stretch to say that his race is clouding his judgment.

 

[harSon]

Forgive me for being condescending, but I think your race is clouding your judgement. The cops most definitely wanted to nail OJ for the crime, it's even likely that some shady business went down. But Simpson most definitely had a hand in those murders and to denying that involves foregoing pretty much all rational analysis of the situation and personnel.

What the fuck? I'm half black (as far as I know, don't know my biological father) 25% Spanish 25% Japanese.

 

[Gattsu25]

What the fuck? I'm half black (as far as I know, don't know my biological father) 25% Spanish 25% Japanese.

His post had too much of a blatant "pot meet kettle" vibe to be anything but sarcastic.

 

[Dot50Cal]

:lol :lol :lol
people still think he did it?

When you pen a book thats title is "IF I DID IT" it kinda puts to rest any doubt. Really, just think about it. If you are charged with murder but are innocent, would you make a book about what you would have done if you killed the person? Hell no.

 

[laserbeam]

When you pen a book thats title is "IF I DID IT" it kinda puts to rest any doubt.

OJ was the luckiest man in the world got away with murder due to racial tensions and fear of LA burning some more.

The catch is OJ is the dumbest motherfucker out there. You get away with murder the last thing you want to do is bring attention to yourself.

 

[Tenden]

But one of the investigating officers was a racist.

Don't you people have your priorities straight?!?!

Some people say cucumbers taste better pickled...

 

[typhonsentra]

OJ was the luckiest man in the world got away with murder due to racial tensions and fear of LA burning some more.

The catch is OJ is the dumbest motherfucker out there. You get away with murder the last thing you want to do is bring attention to yourself.

To be fair, it's not like there's a person in this country that wouldn't know about that trial even if he had disappeared for good afterwards. Yanno?

 

[darkiguana]

It's my understanding that he could be retried if they had new evidence, they just couldn't use anything they used in the first trial.

Nope, OJ could call a press conference tomorrow and say"I did it and I enjoyed it" and the authorities could not touch him. I don't think they could even get him for perjury since he did not actually testify at the trial. Now they could nail him for other crimes, such as the incident in Vegas. But he can never go to jail for the murder of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson, since he was acquitted of those crimes.

 

[laserbeam]

Nope, OJ could call a press conference tomorrow and say"I did it and I enjoyed it" and the authorities could not touch him. I don't think they could even get him for perjury since he did not actually testify at the trial. Now they could nail him for other crimes, such as the incident in Vegas. But he can never go to jail for the murder of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson, since he was acquitted of those crimes.

Correct the Double Jeopardy Clause protects him

 

[Phoenix]

It's my understanding that he could be retried if they had new evidence, they just couldn't use anything they used in the first trial.

The double jeopardy rule arises from the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the relevant clause of which reads
“ nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb ”

This clause is intended to limit abuse by the government in repeated prosecution for the same offense as a means of harassment or oppression. It is also in harmony with the common law concept of res judicata which prevents courts from relitigating issues which have already been the subject of a final judgment.

They would have had to have dropped the case before the verdict was read. At this point any attempt to retry him would have issues. They'd have to come up with another crime.

 

[Andokuky]

Everyone knows he did it. This just sounds like some fool trying to make money.

Karma always works its magic though. His trial for that Las Vegas robbery won't start until September but he will be doing some real time for that shit.