OJ Simpson dead

[VitaMan]

Surprisingly little coverage by the media.



A lot of people don't even know he is dead.

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Surprisingly little coverage by the media.



A lot of people don't even know he is dead.

If you have an email account on Yahoo, Gmail, AOL or watch ESPN you would know. Probably the University of Southern California's best running back to have ever played. Many think he was the second best running back in the NFL all time (behind Jim Brown). Unfortunately for him later on in life he had some issues.

In an interview with Joe Namath in the 1970's, Namath asked Simpson how did he like acting. Simpson said acting was a challenge for him just like school, football came easy. It sure did.

[Levianon17]

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0168137/?ref_=fn_al_nm_5

[CreatedInSpace]

The worst standard ever set by a jury, effectively making it ok for white people to be killed by black people. Everyone knows he killed Goldman and almost chopped off his ex wive’s head, but the black community and their apologists wanted their pound of flesh for Rodney King and got it.

Unfortunately for him later on in life he had some issues.

Chopping up two people in the street is now considered having “some issues”. That’s quite a forgiving description of what he did.

[Salty Again]

... It WAS rather unfortunate for O.J. to have those issues
later in life - and surely MORE unfortunate for the Dead people.

And O.J. there didn't think that HE was good at acting?!

... From what video clips I saw of the trial - I surely thought
O.J. was a great actor...

#### Salty

[winn dixie]

I wonder in the years to come. Will someone find a diary written by oj with the truth?

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by CreatedInSpace

That’s quite a forgiving description of what he did.

Most people may think he did it. Most people think Ms Anthony was guilty too ( A famous trial in Florida regarding forbiden topic)

1. It is very difficult to win a conviction when the weapon is not found. Ask any prosecutor or defense attorney you know.

2. In both trials (Simpson/Anthony) the defense side had slightly better lawyers than the prosecution side. In the Simpson case prosecutor Marcia Clark was undefeated as a prosecutor before the Simpson case.

3. In the Simpson case the prosecution could not get around certain facts, that led to an element of doubt.
- The gloves did not fit.
- The blood drops that were found was not clotted blood.
- No weapon was ever found.
- On the same day in the afternoon Simpson attended a dance recital for their daughter. There were no problems at that event.
- It would be very difficult for anyone to go from Nicole's house back to Simpson's house and then get to L.A. Airport in under 40-45 minutes. Do you know how far Brentwood (where O.J. lived) is from L.A. airport? It's not close. Simpson was on a flight that night at 11:00 pm. No unusual behavior of Simpson was observed on that flight.

People can think what they want to think. With the Simpson and Anthony cases no one knows for sure.

I am not a Lawyer or para legal. I am familiar with the U.C.L.A campus. Brentwood is right next to U.C.L.A.

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... It WAS rather unfortunate for O.J. to have those issues
later in life - and surely MORE unfortunate for the Dead people.

And O.J. there didn't think that HE was good at acting?!

... From what video clips I saw of the trial - I surely thought
O.J. was a great actor...

#### Salty

Simpson did not testify. So how could you tell he was acting?

[winn dixie]

Originally Posted by adav8s28

Simpson did not testify. So how could you tell he was acting?

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... It WAS rather unfortunate for O.J. to have those issues
later in life - and surely MORE unfortunate for the Dead people.

And O.J. there didn't think that HE was good at acting?!

... From what video clips I saw of the trial - I surely thought
O.J. was a great actor...

#### Salty

It was one of his best works.

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by Levianon17

It was one of his best works.

His only work where he did not have a speaking part.


In both cases (Simpson\Anthony) the prosecution failed to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

[CreatedInSpace]

Originally Posted by adav8s28

Most people may think he did it. Most people think Ms Anthony was guilty too ( A famous trial in Florida regarding forbiden topic)

1. It is very difficult to win a conviction when the weapon is not found. Ask any prosecutor or defense attorney you know.

2. In both trials (Simpson/Anthony) the defense side had slightly better lawyers than the prosecution side. In the Simpson case prosecutor Marcia Clark was undefeated as a prosecutor before the Simpson case.

3. In the Simpson case the prosecution could not get around certain facts, that led to an element of doubt.
- The gloves did not fit.
- The blood drops that were found was not clotted blood.
- No weapon was ever found.
- On the same day in the afternoon Simpson attended a dance recital for their daughter. There were no problems at that event.
- It would be very difficult for anyone to go from Nicole's house back to Simpson's house and then get to L.A. Airport in under 40-45 minutes. Do you know how far Brentwood (where O.J. lived) is from L.A. airport? It's not close. Simpson was on a flight that night at 11:00 pm. No unusual behavior of Simpson was observed on that flight.

People can think what they want to think. With the Simpson and Anthony cases no one knows for sure.

I am not a Lawyer or para legal. I am familiar with the U.C.L.A campus. Brentwood is right next to U.C.L.A.

Either that or flaming leftist Garcetti did everything he could to insure defeat, including getting the trial moved so the jury would have the preferred skin tone. Everyone knows the guy did it. A juror even admitted they all knew too but wanted payback. Like it or don’t, OJ got off because he was black and the victims were white.

https://twitter.com/wayotworld/statu...ob41ujZWjlYysQ

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by CreatedInSpace

Either that or flaming leftist Garcetti did everything he could to insure defeat, including getting the trial moved so the jury would have the preferred skin tone. Everyone knows the guy did it. A juror even admitted they all knew too but wanted payback. Like it or don’t, OJ got off because he was black and the victims were white.

https://twitter.com/wayotworld/statu...ob41ujZWjlYysQ

90% is not enough to convict. At best there should have been a hung jury. Then the D.A. gets to decide to retry the case. The lack of a weapon and the fact that the gloves did not fit were a major problem for the prosecution.

The juror said 90% thought he did it. That's a big difference from actually knowing. No one else was at the scene. So no one really knows. Prior incidents of domestic violence is not proof that the defendant committed the crime. If you want to play the "R" card there were four jurors on the jury who were not Black. It would only take one of the four to get a hung jury.

https://twitter.com/LibertyMatter77/...83422870008066

[CreatedInSpace]

You’re making assumptions. Sounds more like 10% thought he was actually not guilty, everyone else agreed because he was black.

And of course the gloves didn’t fit. That’ll happen to leather after they’ve soaked in the blood of the people you’ve just sliced up. The entire fiasco is anchored in racism, any white guy would’ve got strung up for killing his ex.

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by CreatedInSpace

The entire fiasco is anchored in racism, any white guy would’ve got strung up for killing his ex.

You're making assumptions. If the defendant had the same amount of resources as Simpson, the outcome of the trial could have been the same. Again, very difficult to win a conviction when the weapon was never found. Plus, the state of Calif does not have the death penalty. So, your statement is flawed in multiple ways.