OJ Interview
 

Anyone watch it tonight with Katie?

Even after 10 years the guy still looks guilty as sin....turned my stomach to listen to him but watched the whole thing...

I hope you collected the names of all the sponsors, so I can put their products on my 'do not buy' list.

is he still hunting for the killers using his private investigators?

He may look guilty but a jury of his peers said he was innocent. I don't think he killed them but I think he may have had something to do with it.

If I remember correctly most of the jury thought he was guilty but let him go because of Furman.

The man DID IT with out a doubt.

He managed to skate due to Johnny Cochran's skillful use of the Chewbacca defense.

I caught about 2 minutes of it before I got tired of his crap and turned it off. Granted I didn't see the whole thing, but what I did see was simply a re-hash of everything that's passed before. The guy isn't worth my time.

Now Katie Couric on the other hand.....

He might have just been watching very closely. That would explain OJ's blood at the crime scene and the victims blood in OJ's car, on his socks, in his house. I'm sure it was just an amazing coincidence.

And what's the fuss about this DNA stuff all about? It's not like a fingerprint, right?

It was a botched case. Their was way too many inconsistencies.

Kato heard thumping on a wall. A wall in which no blood was found. Next, why would he jump the wall to his own residence when he can go through the gate. I find it hard to believe he performed this by himself in the timeframe provided. I believe he had help if he did it. I have also seen the route and with no traffic and high speed he is a minimum of 8-12 minutes away. If he broke all the traffic laws, someone would have seen a white Bronco shooting through major intersections.

The defense won the case by exposing loopholes and using race as a tactic but overall their is some doubt in the case and any reasonable doubt gets a not guilty vote in our system.

Also, just out of curiosity how does a criminal be declared not guilty in a criminal murder trial but guilty for wrongful death in a civil trial. I would think one trial would take precedence over the other.

A criminal trial has a higher level of "proof"or "reasonable doubt". In a civil trial a person can be found guilty simply by the "opinion" of the jury.

OJ's blood at the crime scene.
OJ's size 12 Bruno Magli footprints at the scene.
Victims blood in OJ's car.
Victims blood in OJ's house.
Victims blood in OJ's freakin' socks!

Wow. If there was not enough evidence in that case, then no one is guilty of anything. Ever. If I'm ever in trouble. I want you on my jury.

Despite all the evidence linking O.J. to the murders his defense team provided the jury with enough information (testimony and evidence) to cause them to have some doubt as to his guilt. In my opinion Clark and her team were simply out classed. She botched that trial big time.
The really pathetic part is the fact his kids are with him. The courts saw fit to return them to him, but I hope everytime he looks his kids in the eyes that he is reminded that HE murdered thier mother and an innocent Ron Goldman who was a better person than he is.

LOL, i like your sarcasm
:D

black man murders white woman (and friend).

if he wasn't a wealthy celebrity with high-powered attorneys, he would've been hung from a tree(figure of speech, of course)... and spend life in prison, no parole, maybe even death row.
there's always a separate standard of justice when it comes to the rich/powerful.

being black actually helped his case.

and for those that still think OJ is innocent, all i gotta say is:

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHH

:D

This country was built with and on the allmighty dollar. It allways amazes me when someone comes to the realization that everything, even justice, has it's price.

on-ramp: "being black actually helped his case."

I have to agree.

Although OJ's charismatic celebrity transcended race. In fact, OJ took great pains to be more green (wealthy) than black until it became convenient to reclaim his blackness.

Most of the jury came from a pool that witnessed a lifetime of unfairness on the part of LAPD, and were happy at the chance to return the favor.

Someone could probably write a book on the subject... oh wait.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0380730596/102-7182296-1575359?v=glance

How did he cut his finger again....I forgot?

Someone did see OJ in the Bronco racing home..she testified before the Grand Jury and then sold her story not realizing it excluded her from testifying during the trial.

Also Jerry Spence said the knife was hidden in the next door neighbors trash barrel. He gleaned that information from statements made by OJ's friend Al Cowling. when OJ was busted by the police for beating up his wife, OJ jumped the back fence and hid his drugs in the neighbors trash barrel. Cowling later had to go and retrieve them for OJ. So do something once do it twice. That accounts for the knock on Cato's wall and the glove they found back there. Makes sense.

BTW: I believe there can be a number of coindences and a person can still be innocent. But when so many start to add up...like getting a cut on the finger at the very time your wifes murdered and the killer is cut on the same hand and finger during the act.

One other thing when the police went to OJ's house they had no idea of where he was or what he was doing. Sure a ex husband is the most logical suspect, but I don't believe they went there to frame him. After all he could have been throwing a big party and have an airtight alibi. Then what are you going to do with the glove you were planning on planting? That scenerio doesn't add up.

do you remember the "Bronco" chase with all those cops?

and the suicide note?

why do all that if you're innocent. Innocent people don't do stuff like that.
same with Scott Peterson, caught trying to flee to Mexico, changed hair color, ghotti, brother's ID, and $10,000 cash, HAHAHAHA
how more guilty do you need to be? again, a high profile case with high-powered attorneys, with a greater chance of getting off than your average joe of killing his wife. happens every day, and the media is partially to blame, good ratings for them.

And.... dont forget that the Limo Driver was sitting in his Limo after ringing the bell over and over for OJ...who didnt answer.

So hes sitting there looking at the door, and he sees a black male dressed in black, approximately 6 foot tall...walk out of the bushes across the driveway and into the house.

The limo driver rings and rings again....5 minutes later OJ answers and says that he will down in a minute...


http://web2.airmail.net/marjo/park3.htm

I am counting on there being one more judge (no jury) that will pass sentance on OJ. The penalty he receives will be worse than life without parole. Count on it.

I dunno Sing, he says that everywhere he goes people adore him and treat him like royalty.

Wouldn't it have been great if, halfway through the interview, Katie just said, "Sorry to cut you off, OJ, but everyone knows you murdered the mother of your children." *cut to a commercial for a battered woman's help-line*

or something..

Everyone treated Hitler like royalty and adored him too.

"I am counting on there being one more judge (no jury) that will pass sentance on OJ. The penalty he receives will be worse than life without parole. Count on it."

I agree with Singpilot 100%. OJ will get his and the punishment will be much worse than anything we could do to him. The day he was acquitted was the day I lost all confidence in our criminal justice system!

I believe one of the criminal case jurors actually said something like "Hey, once you throw out the blood and DNA, what else did they have?"

No kidding? Classic.

This is an interview with Nicole's sister. The sicko OJ took his kids to Benihana to celebrate their mom's birthday. You know, the place with knives aplenty.

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040608140109990006

The police somehow lost 10cc(?) of the blood that they drew from OJ several hours after the murders. Sad to say, but this would have caused any jury doing its job to "throw out the blood and the DNA". When your entire case is based on blood evidence, (no witnesses/weapon/etc.), and the police "lose" some of the accused person's blood, you have no case.

I am angry that OJ got away w/ murder, it sucks, but people get away w/ murder every day. The astonishing thing about this case is the depth of the general public's ignorance about the case itself and what it takes to convict someone of a crime like murder. It is not enough to dislike the defendant, or have a gut feeling that "he/she did it" when sitting on a jury, you need evidence.

All anger about that verdict should be directed at the world's most inept investigation and prosecution, not the jury. OJ's lawyers were not even that good, for the most part. There have been murder cases won by the defense w/ much stronger evidence than the OJ trial.

Once again, for anyone who is a little slow: when your entire case is built on a shaky "timeline" and blood evidence, and the dip***** cops "lose" some of the defendant's blood, that is what defense lawyers call a "can't lose" case. In other words, you could not lose it if you were trying. And OJ's lawyers almost did, that's how inept they were. :cool: