- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: ESPN 30 for 30: O.J. Made In America
Posted on 6/18/16 at 12:42 am to Asgard Device
Posted on 6/18/16 at 12:42 am to Asgard Device
quote:
I didn't watch it because I imagine it's got a SJW tinge to it
You're like the 5th person on here to say they're not watching because it must be a SJW race baiting piece
It's simply not. It's just an overall great documentary that shows what happened and interviews the people directly involved. It's not just random journalists giving their opinion on crap
This post was edited on 6/18/16 at 12:45 am
0
Posted on 6/18/16 at 1:01 am to WestCoastAg
quote:
He enjoyed being a respected member of the African American community as a result of how successfully he played the race card to get a guilty client off.
right. he created a narrative based off his background and the social environment at that time to get his client off. that was his job. do whatever the frick he had to do, within the law, to get OJ acquitted. who cares how he did it. the fact is he did. and that was his job
quote:
If you cross over from using your skill like everyone else to set yourself up as a moral pillar society? When the opposite is closer to the truth? That does deserve criticism.
and i have no problem if you want to criticize cochran for ultimately being a hypocrite. my only issue comes from when people act like hes some piece of shite for getting OJ acquitted. that was his job. hes a defense attorney. we can argue all we want about whether or not there is some moral ramifications on defending such a blatantly guilty man, but i cant fault the guy for doing his job and doing it well given the circumstances of the trial
quote:
But a person with a sense of decency probably just can't be a defense attorney I guess
there probably is some truth to this. however, there was a poster maybe 5 or 6 pages back who wanted to make it outright illegal for defense attorneys to represent clients who they believe are guilty. thats pretty ridiculous and thats more of the people i was responding to
I hope it was clear from my comments I have no problem with him being just another lawyer but when he crossed over to using race as a weapon and pretending to be something more than a guy after his own fame and glory then he deserved to be viewed as an amoral hypocrite.
He was a brilliant lawyer and politician, and a scumbag (like many other lawyers). But he could have been something so much more consequential. He could have changed the legal and political system for the better if he had the vision.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 1:01 am to WestCoastAg
quote:
He enjoyed being a respected member of the African American community as a result of how successfully he played the race card to get a guilty client off.
right. he created a narrative based off his background and the social environment at that time to get his client off. that was his job. do whatever the frick he had to do, within the law, to get OJ acquitted. who cares how he did it. the fact is he did. and that was his job
quote:
If you cross over from using your skill like everyone else to set yourself up as a moral pillar society? When the opposite is closer to the truth? That does deserve criticism.
and i have no problem if you want to criticize cochran for ultimately being a hypocrite. my only issue comes from when people act like hes some piece of shite for getting OJ acquitted. that was his job. hes a defense attorney. we can argue all we want about whether or not there is some moral ramifications on defending such a blatantly guilty man, but i cant fault the guy for doing his job and doing it well given the circumstances of the trial
quote:
But a person with a sense of decency probably just can't be a defense attorney I guess
there probably is some truth to this. however, there was a poster maybe 5 or 6 pages back who wanted to make it outright illegal for defense attorneys to represent clients who they believe are guilty. thats pretty ridiculous and thats more of the people i was responding to
I hope it was clear from my comments I have no problem with him being just another lawyer but when he crossed over to using race as a weapon and pretending to be something more than a guy after his own fame and glory then he deserved to be viewed as an amoral hypocrite.
He was a brilliant lawyer and politician, and a scumbag (like many other lawyers). But he could have been something so much more consequential. He could have changed the legal and political system for the better if he had the vision.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 1:09 am to Bench McElroy
Just finished the 5th one and have to say that whoever produced this series did a fanstasitc job all the way around.
And
O.J.
And
O.J.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 1:53 am to BananaHammock
I am glad I recorded these on my DVR.
The producers of this 5 part documentary must have gone through 1000s of hours of videos and interviews, etc. to put this all together very well and not coming off as trying to push some SJW ulterior motive.
Personally, I think the lawyers are scum, but they just did their job.
I lay the whole mess of the acquittal on the jurors. I don't give a rat's arse who you think was unfairly treated in the past, what people have been wrongly treated, you are required to look only at the evidence and deliberate accordingly.
And they did none of that. Not one damn bit.
The producers of this 5 part documentary must have gone through 1000s of hours of videos and interviews, etc. to put this all together very well and not coming off as trying to push some SJW ulterior motive.
Personally, I think the lawyers are scum, but they just did their job.
I lay the whole mess of the acquittal on the jurors. I don't give a rat's arse who you think was unfairly treated in the past, what people have been wrongly treated, you are required to look only at the evidence and deliberate accordingly.
And they did none of that. Not one damn bit.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 3:55 am to East Coast Band
F. Lee Bailey trapped the frick out of Fuhrman. He had one job, and he did it perfectly.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 7:37 am to tigerpimpbot
OJ's defense team was absolutely savage. They just dismantled Shipp and Fuhrman. As slimy and disgusting and repulsive as they were, they had one job to do; get OJ off. And they did it.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 8:20 am to BCMCubs
From what I can tell, there were two white jurors. Was the verdict unanimous? Did the crackers just succumb to the others or did not want to spend anymore of their lives sitting in that jury?
This post was edited on 6/18/16 at 8:21 am
Posted on 6/18/16 at 8:22 am to cuyahoga tiger
quote:
From what I can tell, there were two white jurors. Was the verdict unanimous? Did the crackers just succumb to the others or did not want to spend anymore of their lives sitting in that jury?
Yes.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 8:35 am to cuyahoga tiger
quote:
Was the verdict unanimous?
Has to be.
quote:
From what I can tell, there were two white jurors. Did the crackers just succumb to the others or did not want to spend anymore of their lives sitting in that jury?
Yes. IMO, they are slightly worse than the others who had some other motive. They could have stood their ground, ended up with a hung jury which would have resulted in a mistrial, and that would have been that. If the black jurors let him off as payback for Rodney King, the white jurors let him off because they were tired of being there. On some level that is even more despicable.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 8:39 am to slackster
quote:
On some level that is even more despicable
Agreed.
Marcia Clark, I thought, did a great closing. Separating the hyperbole from the facts...yet the white folks still let that travesty happen. Could they not see past the Cochran race baiting BS?
Posted on 6/18/16 at 8:45 am to cuyahoga tiger
Reading online it appears a hung jury can be declared after anywhere from a day to a week of deliberation. After nearly 11 months what is another day or even a week?
Posted on 6/18/16 at 8:53 am to cuyahoga tiger
quote:
Marcia Clark, I thought, did a great closing
Yes she did... But for most of the trial she sucked badly.........
Posted on 6/18/16 at 8:56 am to slackster
quote:
After nearly 11 months what is another day or even a week?
You can't tell me you're honestly shocked that the people who were selcted for that jury didn't really give a frick and just wanted to go home.
ETA: and don't forget, one of Oj's lawyers, I believe, said the typical thinking is that a jury will deliberate one day for every week the trial lasts. Everyone was shocked. Cochran and his wife went to Napa because they thought they would have at least one day.
This post was edited on 6/18/16 at 8:58 am
Posted on 6/18/16 at 9:06 am to McCaigBro69
quote:
You can't tell me you're honestly shocked that the people who were selcted for that jury didn't really give a frick and just wanted to go home.
Nah I'm not shocked, I'm just pointing out that it only takes one juror to stand their ground and get a mistrial. The black Panther juror and the others who voted as payback are one thing, but that wasn't the case with all the jurors. The rest either weren't convinced he was guilty or weren't encouraged enough by the prosecution to actually hold firm, so they caved with minimal pressure and that was that.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 9:12 am to slackster
How does the DNA guy not having gloves on mean that screwed up all the places where the blood/DNA was found? Don't just say "contamination". I am struggling to see how exactly does glove versus no glove change those facts.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 9:24 am to tigerskin
quote:
I am struggling to see how exactly does glove versus no glove change those facts.
You serious, baw?
Posted on 6/18/16 at 9:28 am to McCaigBro69
What if he just grabbed that envelope without gloves (and it still wasn't completely obvious that was the envelope) and grabbed every other sample with gloves? What DNA got transferred then? Who cares if his DNA was on the envelope. He isn't a suspect.
DNA evaluator had his DNA on some samples in Duke rape case. That didn't change anything.
DNA evaluator had his DNA on some samples in Duke rape case. That didn't change anything.
This post was edited on 6/18/16 at 9:30 am
Posted on 6/18/16 at 9:44 am to tigerskin
What if Fuhrman never did those tapes and testified?
Posted on 6/18/16 at 9:48 am to biggsc
In essence that was the issue. Cochrane had to come up with an explantion for everything and Clark didn't have the ability to explain away anything.
Page 45 of 60
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News