(03-30-2016 01:19 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Not a doubt in my mind that he did it. The suicide note and Bronco chase all but cinches it. Those were not the actions of an innocent man. Not to mention he all but confessed to it in his book.

What does "8th day", "Mosaic Law" and "Temple Ceremony" have in common?

(03-30-2016 12:07 PM)GreenWave16 Wrote:  I do not believe O.J. did it anymore. I remember watching the trial in 95 and gathering all the facts and back in those days it was the cool thing to say O.J. was guilty. After last night's episode and seeing that horrible human being Mark Furhman, it all came back to me. O.J. was framed by racist cops and they almost got away with it. Thank the universe for Johnny Cochran and for him exposing the truth. All politics aside, everyone knows he was framed.

Hahahaha, good one!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

(03-30-2016 06:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-30-2016 03:59 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The Bruno Magli evidence came to light after the criminal trial IIRC.

It's not enough to support a murder conviction. Nor is it when added to all the other evidence.

Didn't say that. Just saying that to me, it was the final nail that proved his guilt to me and many others.

(03-31-2016 09:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-30-2016 06:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-30-2016 03:59 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The Bruno Magli evidence came to light after the criminal trial IIRC.

It's not enough to support a murder conviction. Nor is it when added to all the other evidence.

Didn't say that. Just saying that to me, it was the final nail that proved his guilt to me and many others.

I understand. I was just making the point that in a legal sense it doesn't really prove anything.

http://mashable.com/2016/03/31/martin-sh...XKdNB8kuqg

Looks like I am not the only one.

The trial went on too long and the jury was pissed off. They blamed the prosecution for their lives being ruined.

(03-30-2016 12:10 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  I know you are a worthless troll, but since the topic interests me I'll bite.

I wrote a paper for a high school class in defense of Simpson based on fringe evidence that was presented but not focused on. Out of the 15 people in my class I was the only one to write in defense of Simpson and the only one to get an A.

That said, He did it or arranged to have it done.

This and it's merely poetic justice that he eventually wound up behind bars.

(04-01-2016 03:38 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  The trial went on too long and the jury was pissed off. They blamed the prosecution for their lives being ruined.

Did you see that crazed juror try to jump and escape the room during the FX series/special?

Edit: Also I don't want to make another post because how large my sig is today. Someone should have made an April Fools joke about them finding Nicole and Ron's real killer.

(04-01-2016 03:38 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  The trial went on too long and the jury was pissed off. They blamed the prosecution for their lives being ruined.

I think jury fatigue did have something to do with it. Id blame the makeup of the jury for most of it. The State had a lock tight case and really did not care that it was a predominately black jury. This case was an example of never taking anything for granted. My Son in Law that graduated from Wake Law said that this case was used over and over trial law classes as examples of "how NOT to prepare for a case and pick a jury."

(04-01-2016 07:24 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 03:38 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  The trial went on too long and the jury was pissed off. They blamed the prosecution for their lives being ruined.

I think jury fatigue did have something to do with it. Id blame the makeup of the jury for most of it. The State had a lock tight case and really did not care that it was a predominately black jury. This case was an example of never taking anything for granted. My Son in Law that graduated from Wake Law said that this case was used over and over trial law classes as examples of "how NOT to prepare for a case and pick a jury."

jury selection is more important than the arguments or evidence....jury of peers in this case is correct...

The amount of justice you receive in court is directly proportional to the amount of money you have to mount a defense. This case was the benchmark of that.

Which goes to show why historically African-American clients never stood a chance, because of the lack of funds for competent counsel. OJ was just the opposite.

(04-03-2016 10:42 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Which goes to show why historically African-American clients never stood a chance, because of the lack of funds for competent counsel. OJ was just the opposite.

No argument here. If your defense attorney is paid for by the very people that are prosecuting you?...Good luck.

(04-02-2016 08:59 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 07:24 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 03:38 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  The trial went on too long and the jury was pissed off. They blamed the prosecution for their lives being ruined.

I think jury fatigue did have something to do with it. Id blame the makeup of the jury for most of it. The State had a lock tight case and really did not care that it was a predominately black jury. This case was an example of never taking anything for granted. My Son in Law that graduated from Wake Law said that this case was used over and over trial law classes as examples of "how NOT to prepare for a case and pick a jury."

jury selection is more important than the arguments or evidence....jury of peers in this case is correct...

I have to agree regarding Jury selection, but jury of peers means randomly selected citizens.

As far as selection I read where in DC prosecutors wanted older black women on a jury since they were so fed up with violence in their neighborhood they wanted anyone put away that may be a problem.

Could be a separate thread, but also when I had Jury duty, I worked in IT with a lot of people from India who would always pepper me with questions about it. In one conversation when out smokinging I was going on about how you had to give up a day,the $3 did not even cover the round trip metro fare, blah blah blah - and he was jumping up and down yelling yes but "Jury by your peers". When it sunk in I said - well yes, that to.

(04-03-2016 10:46 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2016 10:42 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Which goes to show why historically African-American clients never stood a chance, because of the lack of funds for competent counsel. OJ was just the opposite.

No argument here. If your defense attorney is paid for by the very people that are prosecuting you?...Good luck.

I would say anyone without the money which does proportionally impact minorities who cannot afford bail.

(04-03-2016 02:33 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 08:59 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 07:24 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 03:38 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  The trial went on too long and the jury was pissed off. They blamed the prosecution for their lives being ruined.

I think jury fatigue did have something to do with it. Id blame the makeup of the jury for most of it. The State had a lock tight case and really did not care that it was a predominately black jury. This case was an example of never taking anything for granted. My Son in Law that graduated from Wake Law said that this case was used over and over trial law classes as examples of "how NOT to prepare for a case and pick a jury."

jury selection is more important than the arguments or evidence....jury of peers in this case is correct...

I have to agree regarding Jury selection, but jury of peers means randomly selected citizens.

As far as selection I read where in DC prosecutors wanted older black women on a jury since they were so fed up with violence in their neighborhood they wanted anyone put away that may be a problem.

Could be a separate thread, but also when I had Jury duty, I worked in IT with a lot of people from India who would always pepper me with questions about it. In one conversation when out smokinging I was going on about how you had to give up a day,the $3 did not even cover the round trip metro fare, blah blah blah - and he was jumping up and down yelling yes but "Jury by your peers". When it sunk in I said - well yes, that to.

that system is going to have to change eventually as well....

I more for paid employees that are heavily monitored in jurisprudence....

as the cultural landscape changes, so do 'old standards' need to as well...