|
Post by Admin on Mar 31, 2017 1:05:16 GMT
What is the significance of one of them being a moderator? That is what you're taking away from this?! It's all I'm interested in here, and my question was not a statement.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 1:32:21 GMT
Definitely. The only reason he got off, is because of the american jury system, where anyone can be a jury member, even how stupid or uneducated they are. It's because they stupidly put Fuhrman on the stand, where he pleaded the fifth to whether or not he planted evidence. I'm 99.5% sure OJ did it, but as a juror, could I say beyond "a shadow of a doubt" after that? No. That, and the fact that the LAPD let evidence leave the chain of custody for over 16 hours. That keeps me from 100% conviction of his guilt. That whole trial was just one sh!t show after another from the prosecution.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 31, 2017 13:15:33 GMT
That is what you're taking away from this?! It's all I'm interested in here, and my question was not a statement. I don't know why you are avoiding the issue at hand. You are going out of your way to avoid addressing him. You even went out of your way and took that part of my post out of your comment. You have done a good job at keeping this place clean, but have some blind spot with this guy. He must be a friend. If he's not, your reaction is just plain bizarre.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 31, 2017 17:29:03 GMT
It's all I'm interested in here, and my question was not a statement. I don't know why you are avoiding the issue at hand. It seems you and I have different issues at hand here.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 31, 2017 17:39:26 GMT
I don't know why you are avoiding the issue at hand. It seems you and I have different issues at hand here. You just proved the very point I made. Again. You were even nice enough to quote it, all while selectively responding once again. You won't even mention poelzig by name. There's definitely something going on here.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 31, 2017 17:50:05 GMT
It seems you and I have different issues at hand here. You just proved the very point I made. Again. You were even nice enough to quote it, all while selectively responding once again. You won't even mention poelzig by name. There's definitely something going on here. For now, all I want to know is what I asked. There is nothing else "going on here."
|
|
deeznutz
Sophomore
@deeznutz
Posts: 561
Likes: 92
|
Post by deeznutz on Apr 25, 2017 3:24:27 GMT
Seriously, I think yes
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on May 2, 2017 18:34:22 GMT
As for the verdict in the trial, the prosecution didn't present a strong case and Judge Ito disallowed some potential evidence that could've helped their case.
As for OJ being guilty, they proved his guilt in the civil case case. One of the particularly damning pieces of evidence was the bloody footprints of his shoes at the crime scene. The soles were from custom designer limited edition shoes. He was the only person in the state of California who owned a pair.
|
|
|
Post by fartyfartsalot on May 2, 2017 19:06:10 GMT
No, he was an oppressed black guy framed by the evil LAPD
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 0:04:20 GMT
As for the verdict in the trial, the prosecution didn't present a strong case and Judge Ito disallowed some potential evidence that could've helped their case. As for OJ being guilty, they proved his guilt in the civil case case. One of the particularly damning pieces of evidence was the bloody footprints of his shoes at the crime scene. The soles were from custom designer limited edition shoes. He was the only person in the state of California who owned a pair. He saw the aftermath. Doesn't mean he killed anyone.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on May 3, 2017 19:43:32 GMT
As for the verdict in the trial, the prosecution didn't present a strong case and Judge Ito disallowed some potential evidence that could've helped their case. As for OJ being guilty, they proved his guilt in the civil case case. One of the particularly damning pieces of evidence was the bloody footprints of his shoes at the crime scene. The soles were from custom designer limited edition shoes. He was the only person in the state of California who owned a pair. He saw the aftermath. Doesn't mean he killed anyone. Then why weren't there other footprints that could've belonged to other suspects?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 23:54:24 GMT
He saw the aftermath. Doesn't mean he killed anyone. Then why weren't there other footprints that could've belonged to other suspects? It's a tile floor, where traffic would have been and the killers were behind. OJ may have even sent these thugs in. It will be revealed. All things are known.
|
|
|
Post by darkknightofgotham on May 4, 2017 12:33:03 GMT
Of course he did it. The evidence was overwhelming. The only reason he was aquitted was because racial tensions were high at the time. Rodney King happened only a couple years prior, and they didn't want to risk any more riots.
|
|
|
Post by Sandman on May 4, 2017 17:08:57 GMT
Blood drops were found with Simpson's genetic markers. He had a cut on his hand. The bloody shoe prints matched a size 12. Simpson wears size 12 shoes. Gloves found at scene were same kind his wife got him. Bloody socks found at the foot of Simpson's bed had the genetic markers of Simpson and his ex-wife. Blood found on Simpson's Ford Bronco matched his wife's and Ron's.
With that being said I would bet my IRA, 401K, My house, All my savings in my bank, My new car and truck that Simpson murdered his wife and Ron Goldman. He got away with murder as did Casey Anthony.
|
|
Dana
Freshman
@dana
Posts: 54
Likes: 24
|
Post by Dana on May 4, 2017 17:10:38 GMT
I don't know for certain obviously, but I don't believe that he did it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2017 22:52:55 GMT
I don't know for certain obviously, but I don't believe that he did it. Neither do I. As someone else pointed out, the prosecution came up lame. There are high racial tensions like never before now. Race was not even mentioned in the case.
|
|
|
Post by Sandman on May 4, 2017 23:04:40 GMT
I don't know for certain obviously, but I don't believe that he did it. Come on. Common sense tells you he did it. This alone proves he did it: Blood found on Simpson's Ford Bronco matched his wife's and Ron's.Don't always agree with Geraldo Rivera but I sure did when he said this. After Simpson was found not guilty he said he would spend the rest of his life looking for whoever killed his wife. Geraldo Rivera said if you really want to find out who killed her just look in the mirror.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2017 23:53:12 GMT
LOL yeah because everyone who was at a scene was the killer. But whatever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2017 2:10:44 GMT
All the lies he told during the civil trail shows his guilt
|
|
|
Post by Sandman on May 6, 2017 16:32:59 GMT
Definitely. The only reason he got off, is because of the american jury system, where anyone can be a jury member, even how stupid or uneducated they are. And it's not just the jury system in the US that is flawed. At the time the jurors were picked a reporter said as soon as they were selected Simpson was a free man. Here was their makeup. 2 whites 1 Hispanic 9 blacks With those jurors they could have had Simpson on tape killing his wife and Ron and they would have still found him not guilty.
|
|