The prosecution and LAPD did an absolutely atrocious job on this case virtually all around. He deserved the acquittal in my book as much as I think it was possible that he was at least involved or at least aware of the two murders.
The main evidence against him was the DNA. Damaging evidence for sure, but the chain of custody and how the initial cops preserved the crime scene was just so beyond a joke you couldn't put full stock in it. The cops literally covered the two bodies with bed sheets from a hamper if you can believe that.
Whoever killed Goldman should've been covered in blood. He was stabbed 30 plus times and fought his murderer to the point where he had bruising all over his knees and knuckles. He was a 6'2" 200 plus pound karate instructor in his 20's and 55 year old OJ dusts him and only ends up with a small scratch on his palm, a few droplets of blood on him and a few partial bloody footprints at the scene?
It's really only possible if there were more than one attacker working in well a coordinated manner. OJ certainly could've been one of those attackers and he certainly could've visited the crime scene at some point but it seems almost impossible given the 25 minute window of opportunity and the fact that the Nicole Brown murder seems premeditated but then OJ supposedly does the deed while waiting for his limo to come pick him up for the airport? How can it be premediated and hasty at the same time and yet there isn't a mountain of evidence against OJ if he was the perpetrator?
All this. I also remember the blood vial taken from a prior DUI was nearly empty, and the blood spatter tested on the back gate was found to contain the same preservative as the DUI test vial.
I was watching in a crowded room at work the day they announced the murders and started convicting OJ in the media with LAPD evidentiary talking points. Popular opinion had him hands down guilty right there.
I however disagreed. “Have you never seen Perry Mason?” I asked.
I won a $100 bet when he was acquitted. Clarke and Durden were inept. The evidence was mishandled, etc.
Add to all that my personal knowledge of OJ’s pad being an LAPD party house. Lots of drugs, sex, drinking were going on. Rumors swirled that Nicole was having an affair with a certain detective figuring prominently in the investigation. Nicole and Faye were dealing kilos of powder and had crossed the line with their suppliers. Goldman was allegedly involved with the dealing as well.
Nicole and Ron were killed by the cartel they owed 100’s of thousand in cocaine debt. They were amateur coke dealers to the elite in brentwood. Bad money management and she constantly wanted OJ to payoff her debts. Once he stopped paying they came and did what they do.
Whoever killed her was pretty clearly sending a message and this is basically the theory I head that had the most evidence behind it. She was a known habitual user among other drugs.
Prosecutors and cops alike have gotten extremely lazy. Rather than do their job well, they over-rely on technology, but more directly they rely on the jury selection process to be tilted in their favor and supply a compliant jury pool that's easy to manipulate.
I'm inclined to believe they tanked the case against OJ. There are plenty of credibly conspiracy theories involving drug trafficking that make exponentially more sense than "jealous celebrity goes on killing spree against ex wife."
It's also not only the sloppy case that gets my Spidey sense going, it's the totally fake "high speed" Bronco chase that was clearly orchestrated by the LAPD and mainstream media. Once you fake that and play it up anything is possible. Lots of parallels to both the Floyd case and Rodney King in that a lot of what is presented in the media is exaggerated, skewed and just plain complete bullshit.
There's a lot of circumstantial evidence tying Nicole Brown at least indirectly to organized crime and drug dealing, one of the prevalent theories that seemed credible was about the restaurant she was invested in (and Goldman worked at) dealing cocaine and/or laundering money. At the bare minimum she was involved with people through investments that were involved in organized crime. OJ was as well without question. That's enough for me to think the whole thing was likely at least partially a charade.
I read Bugliosi's book about it, and one of the funny things he points out is that Marcia Clark helped sabotage the prosecution because she was painting him as a wife beater, which was more tolerated at the time in the black community. She wouldn't listen to shit, she was going to ramrod the wife beating aspect come hell or high water.
Not to mention that Judge Ito was a shithead.
I totally agree on Clark, but Darden was no genius either. Honestly a huge mistake to put Clark out front and center to begin with on a couple different levels.
However, to be fair- wthout the wife beater angle they basically have no motive that they are presenting. The motive they went with was not very solid at all and pretty much hinged on OJ being a psycho jealous person who would kill her in a moment of passion. Which is a pretty convoluted story to be telling a jury in my opinion in the context of the actual alleged timeline of the murders.
The prosecution and LAPD did an absolutely atrocious job on this case virtually all around. He deserved the acquittal in my book as much as I think it was possible that he was at least involved or at least aware of the two murders.
I concur.
Proof BEYOND a reasonable doubt is the constitutional standard.
The main evidence against him was the DNA. Damaging evidence for sure, but the chain of custody and how the initial cops preserved the crime scene was just so beyond a joke you couldn't put full stock in it. The cops literally covered the two bodies with bed sheets from a hamper if you can believe that.
Whoever killed Goldman should've been covered in blood. He was stabbed 30 plus times and fought his murderer to the point where he had bruising all over his knees and knuckles. He was a 6'2" 200 plus pound karate instructor in his 20's and 55 year old OJ dusts him and only ends up with a small scratch on his palm, a few droplets of blood on him and a few partial bloody footprints at the scene?
It's really only possible if there were more than one attacker working in well a coordinated manner. OJ certainly could've been one of those attackers and he certainly could've visited the crime scene at some point but it seems almost impossible given the 25 minute window of opportunity and the fact that the Nicole Brown murder seems premeditated but then OJ supposedly does the deed while waiting for his limo to come pick him up for the airport? How can it be premediated and hasty at the same time and yet there isn't a mountain of evidence against OJ if he was the perpetrator?
All this. I also remember the blood vial taken from a prior DUI was nearly empty, and the blood spatter tested on the back gate was found to contain the same preservative as the DUI test vial.
I was watching in a crowded room at work the day they announced the murders and started convicting OJ in the media with LAPD evidentiary talking points. Popular opinion had him hands down guilty right there.
I however disagreed. “Have you never seen Perry Mason?” I asked.
I won a $100 bet when he was acquitted. Clarke and Durden were inept. The evidence was mishandled, etc.
Add to all that my personal knowledge of OJ’s pad being an LAPD party house. Lots of drugs, sex, drinking were going on. Rumors swirled that Nicole was having an affair with a certain detective figuring prominently in the investigation. Nicole and Faye were dealing kilos of powder and had crossed the line with their suppliers. Goldman was allegedly involved with the dealing as well.
Nicole and Ron were killed by the cartel they owed 100’s of thousand in cocaine debt. They were amateur coke dealers to the elite in brentwood. Bad money management and she constantly wanted OJ to payoff her debts. Once he stopped paying they came and did what they do.
Whoever killed her was pretty clearly sending a message and this is basically the theory I head that had the most evidence behind it. She was a known habitual user among other drugs.
Prosecutors and cops alike have gotten extremely lazy. Rather than do their job well, they over-rely on technology, but more directly they rely on the jury selection process to be tilted in their favor and supply a compliant jury pool that's easy to manipulate.
I'm inclined to believe they tanked the case against OJ. There are plenty of credibly conspiracy theories involving drug trafficking that make exponentially more sense than "jealous celebrity goes on killing spree against ex wife."
It's also not only the sloppy case that gets my Spidey sense going, it's the totally fake "high speed" Bronco chase that was clearly orchestrated by the LAPD and mainstream media. Once you fake that and play it up anything is possible. Lots of parallels to both the Floyd case and Rodney King in that a lot of what is presented in the media is exaggerated, skewed and just plain complete bullshit.
Could be. I'll never dismiss out of hand the idea that the police could be involved in drug trafficking. Especially in southern California.
Lots of people have lots of $$reasons$$ to look the other way, even if they're not directly involved.
There's a lot of circumstantial evidence tying Nicole Brown at least indirectly to organized crime and drug dealing, one of the prevalent theories that seemed credible was about the restaurant she was invested in (and Goldman worked at) dealing cocaine and/or laundering money. At the bare minimum she was involved with people through investments that were involved in organized crime. OJ was as well without question. That's enough for me to think the whole thing was likely at least partially a charade.
I read Bugliosi's book about it, and one of the funny things he points out is that Marcia Clark helped sabotage the prosecution because she was painting him as a wife beater, which was more tolerated at the time in the black community. She wouldn't listen to shit, she was going to ramrod the wife beating aspect come hell or high water. Not to mention that Judge Ito was a shithead.
I totally agree on Clark, but Darden was no genius either. Honestly a huge mistake to put Clark out front and center to begin with on a couple different levels.
However, to be fair- wthout the wife beater angle they basically have no motive that they are presenting. The motive they went with was not very solid at all and pretty much hinged on OJ being a psycho jealous person who would kill her in a moment of passion. Which is a pretty convoluted story to be telling a jury in my opinion in the context of the actual alleged timeline of the murders.