- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: OJ Simpson: Made in America 30 for 30
Posted on 6/19/16 at 8:11 pm to JuiceTerry
Posted on 6/19/16 at 8:11 pm to JuiceTerry
The trial was lost the moment the DA decided to have it downtown instead of Santa Monica. Period.
0
Posted on 6/19/16 at 9:49 pm to Fus0623
The series could have been cut in half. All of the race stuff prior to Rodney King didn't need to be there. For example, the Chinese clerk (a fellow minority) killing a black woman. I wish more time was spent on OJ after he was acquitted like the opening scene of the documentary where present day OJ is shown. OJ didn't kill Nicole because of any of those events. The jury voted because of those events.
This post was edited on 6/19/16 at 10:21 pm
Posted on 6/20/16 at 1:44 am to lsuwontonwrap
quote:
Not at all. You can't really compare a documentary and a mini-series about the case. I thought both were excellent for what they were.
The mini series really wasn't very good overall, in my opinion.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 9:01 am to JabarkusRussell
quote:You mean the shooting that happen 2 weeks after the Rodney King incident? Yeah, they definitely didn't play a role in the toxic environment that was the LAPD vs low class citizens...
The series could have been cut in half. All of the race stuff prior to Rodney King didn't need to be there. For example, the Chinese clerk (a fellow minority) killing a black woman.
quote:I'm starting to wonder if you actually paid attention while watching this doc.
I wish more time was spent on OJ after he was acquitted like the opening scene of the documentary where present day OJ is shown. OJ didn't kill Nicole because of any of those events. The jury voted because of those events.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 10:41 am to JabarkusRussell
quote:
The series could have been cut in half. All of the race stuff prior to Rodney King didn't need to be there.
Not sure what you watched then.
I kind of said this to myself as i watched the first 2 shows, but once you get to the trial you realize why they spend 2+ hours showing you all the race stuff with the LAPD, and mainly how OJ wanted nothing to do with the black movement at the time, how he pretty much wanted to be viewed as OJ, almost as white, not a black guy. But once the trial started, he's all of a sudden a black guy. Can you not see how this was all tied together, and why it was presented this way?
The changing of the pictures in his house when the jury visited had a huge part in this trial, and the judge is a pos for letting that happen.
This post was edited on 6/20/16 at 10:42 am
Posted on 6/20/16 at 11:05 am to TeddyPadillac
the only interviews I wish the doc had would have been...OJ's first wife, Darden, and maybe Ito. I'd especially like Ito to be asked why he allowed some of the things to go on that he did.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 11:39 am to BilJ
OJ's first wife would have been good for the series to get some more background.
No way Darden was going to be a part of it or Ito.
Amazing how he changed once he was accepted into the glamor lifestyle of LA.
No way Darden was going to be a part of it or Ito.
Amazing how he changed once he was accepted into the glamor lifestyle of LA.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 11:48 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:Can you show any proof that the judge "let that happen". Because in all honesty, it was a good move by the defense.
The changing of the pictures in his house when the jury visited had a huge part in this trial, and the judge is a pos for letting that happen.
This post was edited on 6/20/16 at 11:53 am
Posted on 6/20/16 at 11:52 am to JBeam
quote:
Can you show any proof that the judge "let that happen". Because in all honesty, it was a genius move by the defense.
The field trip to Rockingham was pure nonsense, and POS Ito approved that. Changing the pictures was the hugely unethical cherry on top. But it's like they say, lawyers lie for a living.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 11:58 am to Spock's Eyebrow
I forgot the name of the guy. But he apparently is a pastor at the AME Church. The few segments where he was interviewed were spot on with his comments about OJ,LA & the trial.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 12:03 pm to JBeam
yeah he wasn't used much, but anytime they did he nailed it. He seemed pretty disgusted with using OJ as a face for civil rights.
I also got the feeling Cochran used the extremely light skinned civil rights leader to keep whipping up the masses.
Also not sure what purpose the woman who labeled herself as an "activist" brought to the table for the doc.
I hated anytime OJ's childhood friend was interviewed, that voice was terrible.
I also got the feeling Cochran used the extremely light skinned civil rights leader to keep whipping up the masses.
Also not sure what purpose the woman who labeled herself as an "activist" brought to the table for the doc.
I hated anytime OJ's childhood friend was interviewed, that voice was terrible.
This post was edited on 6/20/16 at 12:09 pm
Posted on 6/20/16 at 12:04 pm to JBeam
quote:
Can you show any proof that the judge "let that happen".
well the trip there served absolutely no purpose, other than giving the defense another opportunity to manipulate the jury
Posted on 6/20/16 at 12:22 pm to JBeam
Re the comment about the judge letting it happen, the prosecutor did file a motion to prevent it from happening according to the documentary. The judge denied the motion. So interpret that as you will. The prosecution argued against the whole trip, as OJ's house had absolutely nothing to do with his guilt or innocence or anything to do with the trial, period. As for the judge himself, as the Goldman's said, when the judge in the civil suit ruled to keep TV's out of the courtroom, OJ's whole demeanor changed & the "actor" was not in the courtroom at all.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 12:54 pm to Keltic Tiger
Posted on 6/20/16 at 1:14 pm to BilJ
quote:
the only interviews I wish the doc had would have been...OJ's first wife, Darden, and maybe Ito.
OJ's first wife may have been interesting. I think Darden is done talking about this case for the most part. I would love to see someone question Ito in a hard way, but I think Ito will go to his grave not discussing this case as well he should.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 1:26 pm to BilJ
quote:Are you talking about Danny Blakewell? He's been activist out in the Southern CA area for decades. I might be biased (He's a family friend) but I don't think Cochran had too much to do with the outside elements on this case. Like others have said, this was on CNN 24/7 for more than a year. Picking sides in the OJ trial was pretty cut and dry.
I also got the feeling Cochran used the extremely light skinned civil rights leader to keep whipping up the masses.
Question, this might be mixing the TV series & the doc. But didn't they find a trail of blood leading into OJ's house from the white bronco.
This post was edited on 6/20/16 at 1:28 pm
Posted on 6/20/16 at 1:45 pm to JBeam
I just finished watching last night. Pretty much as I remembered except for one thing, I had not remember Shaprio throwing Johnny C and F. Lee under the bus after the verdict.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 1:52 pm to JBeam
quote:
but I don't think Cochran had too much to do with the outside elements on
one woman said point blank, Johnny wanted asked her to be out at the trial. So I really wouldn't be shocked if he were using Blakewell to keep beating the drum for him.
Blakewell is a family friend? Sorry but he also came off as a pretty shitty person.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 4:02 pm to Gris Gris
The juror mentioned the defense team playing games and Cochran wearing something in particular. Anybody know what that was? Sounded like kintaclaw but I have no clue.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 4:13 pm to Winkface
quote:They basically said that the defense was playing to the black jurors. Then the documentary flashes to a Tim Meadows skit.
The juror mentioned the defense team playing games and Cochran wearing something in particular. Anybody know what that was? Sounded like kintaclaw but I have no clue.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News