re: The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story series long thread

quote:

---

And he is just wrong about the bronco. There was NOT a lot of blood in it. There was a smudge above the drivers door handle, about 4 smudges on the console and a few drops on the carpet from my recollection,

---

What was introduced at trial:

Driver door interior
Instrument panel
Driver side carpet
Steering wheel
Center console (item 30)
Center console (item 31)
Driver side wall
Driver side carpet
Center console (combination of 3 below)
Center console (item 303)
Center console (item 304)
Center console (item 305)

quote:

---

in no way was it consistent with someone fleeing those murders.

---

It was entirely consistent with someone who had attacked and killed the victims from behind, such that they didn't get as much blood on themselves, especially on their backside.

quote:

---

but they could only determine the blood type

---

Honost to freakin God.NO ONE HAS EVER MADE THIS ARGUEMENT!!

Where in the holy fuq are you getting this?Your ignorance on the trial and subject is beyond
belief.

quote:

---

it was entirely consistent with someone who had attacked and killed the victims from behind, such that they didn't get as much blood on themselves, especially on their backside.

---

LINK

Ron Goldman put up a helluva fight, he didn't just get stabbed in the back...

quote:

---

He didn't get stabbed in the back

---

He got his freakin throat slit from freakin behind and his body fell forward.

Its unbelievably simplistic to understand.

quote:

---

He got his freakin throat slit from freakin behind and his body fell forward.

Its unbelievably simplistic to understand.

---

So you didn't look at the link I just provided showing his hands?

The fatal wound may have been from behind and certainly he had many stabs to the back but it was a fight and Goldman damaged someone...

quote:

---

Goldman damaged someone

---

No,he did not and 2 different pathologist determined his hand scraps were from him falling down,

I get it,you are DETERMINED to think Oj is innocent no matter what evidence is presented.

You've done nothing to present your case other than regurgitate every talking point from the OJ defense team.
You've made up your mind 20 years ago and sticking to your guns no matter what.

quote:

---

Unbelievable,read ANY number of qoutes from him post trial.Shapiro NOT Kardashian is the skeptic throughout the trial on the TV special

---

Again, my conclusions aren't drawn from this person or that one.

I believe what I believe. You believe what you believe, I'm ok with that.

quote:

---

Well, I worked nights at a sports bar that basically became an OJ Trial bar. We watched all the coverage on about half of the 20 tvs in the joint and argued/discussed it all night. During the day, I followed the trial. Our jury took 15 minutes, same verdict.

---

I was a runner for a prestigious law firm at the time. I had the trial on in the background practically all the time. Of course not when I was filling suits or running other errands.

My Father was a judge for the 19th JDC. My Uncle was a attorney in Baton Rouge, and was Senior partner at the Firm where I was employed. I couldn't work for my Dad, that would be Nepotism. So my Dad did the next best thing, he got me a job working for my Uncle. When the trial was over I asked my Dad. "Do you think OJ did it?" He replied "Hell yes!"

I then asked him, "What did you think of Judge Ito?" He said, "He's a moron for allowing the cameras in the courtroom." He proceed to tell me the other errors in his opinion that Judge Ito made. Which I can't really remember what they were. It was twenty years ago.

I asked him what the other Judges thought. He replied that they all thought he was guilty except one. He called him "Dumb Dougie No. 2". A moniker he had used before. I assume that "Dumb Dougie No 1" agreed with him. I'm not sure if they thought he should have been convicted in a court of law or not. I really don't remember. I don't think I asked.

I asked him what did you think of the mistakes that were made by the police and the prosecution? He said this. The Police are used to run of the mill cases. Not a case of this magnitude. They usually collect enough evidence until they think it will be an easy case to convict. Usually, that is sufficient to do the job. They aren't use to people doubting their word. They are for the most part, arrogant. They also have many more cases on the books than just that one. The prosecution was equally as arrogant and clueless as the police. They thought the trial would be a slam dunk. They weren't used to the amount work they would have to do. He called them lazy and indolent.

I then asked my Uncle if he thought OJ was guilty or not. He also replied in the affirmative. I said what about the other attorneys in the firm. He said they all agreed with him. He was senior partner, I really can't verify if they all really agreed with him or not. Or were just trying to appease him or not look like a dumb arse.

I then discussed it with my friends. Most of who were in law school. Some would enter law school later. I had very few friends who weren't in law school, who were regular Joe's so to speak. They all thought he was guilty. At least that's how I remember the theoretical outcome.

So that's 11 Judges who thought OJ was guilty. 1 against. 20+ attorneys who thought he was guilty. And all my friends.

I really haven't studied the trial after fact. Until it came on TV. Even now I haven't. So I can't attest to the facts one way or the other. I can only tell you what I thought at the time. I really thought that the jury got it wrong at the time. I'm rather shocked and amused that some people still think he's innocent.

So in summation, my Judges and attorneys trump your OJ Trial bar.

quote:

---

quote:
it was entirely consistent with someone who had attacked and killed the victims from behind, such that they didn't get as much blood on themselves, especially on their backside.



LINK

Ron Goldman put up a helluva fight, he didn't just get stabbed in the back...

---

That doesn't change my point.