Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 15:34:46 GMT
Oh! Well then, I'm convinced. A man who loves his kids doesn't batter their mother The theatrics you throw out there, good grief. You don't get it. Never will. He's not a role model and not perfect but he's not what the media has told you. And I don't have any stakes in this or dogs in the race. I never knew of him until 1994. The liars and murderers are great in numbers; the faces of what people hold as peers in society.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 18:52:02 GMT
Oh! Well then, I'm convinced. A man who loves his kids doesn't batter their mother The theatrics you throw out there, good grief. You don't get it. Never will. He's not a role model and not perfect but he's not what the media has told you. And I don't have any stakes in this or dogs in the race. I never knew of him until 1994. The liars and murderers are great in numbers; the faces of what people hold as peers in society. Theatrics? Look who's talking. There are good reasons why he was on trial for murder and the jury in the civil trial found him liable. People with common sense know that a man who stalks, beats his wife, leaves blood evidence at the scene and was the only one Nicole was afraid of is the one who killed her
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on May 8, 2017 19:38:14 GMT
Tin foil hat is just the modern way of saying that the whole thing comes off sounding very conspiracy theory. But (#1) someone is easily offended, and (#2) the fact that you find things I've said ridiculous when it's all been based on facts and court case evidence says something about your credibility as far as reasoning ability... and it's not good. Especially since all you've offered in return is your personal opinion founded on theories (none of which has received any legal attention or consideration after all these years). So go ahead and scream about your hurt feelings you wear on your sleeve. And wear that tin foil hat proudly! You're already flailing. You lost the debate the minute you started on the name-calling. You are easily offended as people can see by your immediate response of name-calling in an attempt to shut down your opponent. And number two, I never used the word ridiculous toward you. Insecurity must run deep in you to be so angry as if you knew those people personally. Finally, I've offered the reality of what I know and what I saw to my mind. It was a vivid image and I have done this before with other events. I'm not about to apologize for what I have and what I know. There are no theories that I spoke. Just simple deduction on what I knew from then on. As for your desperate tin foil insults that you wish to drive into the ground... wear your sour face in the public eye while chickening out and hiding behind your masks in the end. Your skills are lame. Facts are indisputable. The minute you start arguing facts you've lost. I just gave you facts. He was at the scene of the crime during the time period when the murder occurred and there was no evidence that anyone else was there during that time period. Saying someone else did it because that's you believe doesn't prove anything. He had DNA and forensic evidence that tied him to the victims. Fact. Last time I checked there wasn't any members of the mob who could levitate off the ground or could create a biological barrier between them and their targets of murder. You're arguing against facts with no facts. And frankly only a fool would do so. If you went into court with this argument you'd be laughed at and thrown out! I guarantee you that you would! On that fact alone you've lost all credibility. And then you're actually delusional enough to think that you've won this debate. Lol 😂 You actually thought I was insulting you by saying your theory was tin foil hat? Tin foil hats do exactly what you do! They actually think that conjured theories are more factual than facts..... I repeat... you would get laughed out of a court of law! And I find you just as comically absurd as they would! 😂 Can't even take you seriously anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 0:02:32 GMT
You're already flailing. You lost the debate the minute you started on the name-calling. You are easily offended as people can see by your immediate response of name-calling in an attempt to shut down your opponent. And number two, I never used the word ridiculous toward you. Insecurity must run deep in you to be so angry as if you knew those people personally. Finally, I've offered the reality of what I know and what I saw to my mind. It was a vivid image and I have done this before with other events. I'm not about to apologize for what I have and what I know. There are no theories that I spoke. Just simple deduction on what I knew from then on. As for your desperate tin foil insults that you wish to drive into the ground... wear your sour face in the public eye while chickening out and hiding behind your masks in the end. Your skills are lame. Facts are indisputable. The minute you start arguing facts you've lost. I just gave you facts. He was at the scene of the crime during the time period when the murder occurred and there was no evidence that anyone else was there during that time period. Saying someone else did it because that's you believe doesn't prove anything. He had DNA and forensic evidence that tied him to the victims. Fact. Last time I checked there wasn't any members of the mob who could levitate off the ground or could create a biological barrier between them and their targets of murder. You're arguing against facts with no facts. And frankly only a fool would do so. If you went into court with this argument you'd be laughed at and thrown out! I guarantee you that you would! On that fact alone you've lost all credibility. And then you're actually delusional enough to think that you've won this debate. Lol 😂 You actually thought I was insulting you by saying your theory was tin foil hat? Tin foil hats do exactly what you do! They actually think that conjured theories are more factual than facts..... I repeat... you would get laughed out of a court of law! And I find you just as comically absurd as they would! 😂 Can't even take you seriously anymore. You never brought facts to the table, just outright judgement of a man that was found not guilty. Those seem to be facts you're ignoring because you've let public opinion sway you and of course fake news which has been going on for a long time. And your ridiculous hyperbole with your "levitate" analogy proves you've got nothing. You're the one arguing against facts. I simply deducted. And finding DNA at a place where he lived is easy but still does NOT prove guilt. You're the delusional one acting out your rage and losing debates. By your bold font insults you already lost the debate. FACT. And talk about conspiracy theories! You're full of them since nothing you've said proves anything and heavily relies on circumstantial evidence. You've been drinking the Kool-Aid of what MSM has fed you. Laughing in a court of law? Me? You seem very insecure with your childish retort and assumptions. It seems that the lawyers weren't laughed out of court and that they seemed to have a backstory of the whys and whatnot, all the while following the law. So whatever this kangeroo court you've got going there where people who disagree with you is to be laughed at shows the fascist attitude you have. I haven't taken you seriously though, so I guess we're even. A guy who dresses in Star Wars costumes would be laughed at in more places than a courtroom. But the reality is, he was black and had that line of black thinking and they tend to be violent, however, he didn't kill her. It was two thugs of a lowlife drug cartel. He's guilty of hiding these criminals but he never aided them. I have no problem with you remaining ignorant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 0:08:14 GMT
The theatrics you throw out there, good grief. You don't get it. Never will. He's not a role model and not perfect but he's not what the media has told you. And I don't have any stakes in this or dogs in the race. I never knew of him until 1994. The liars and murderers are great in numbers; the faces of what people hold as peers in society. Theatrics? Look who's talking. There are good reasons why he was on trial for murder and the jury in the civil trial found him liable. People with common sense know that a man who stalks, beats his wife, leaves blood evidence at the scene and was the only one Nicole was afraid of is the one who killed her Ah look. More MSM bullshit. Wish they would have included the context of the clip but no... they got a story to sell and a diversion to attend to. Gotta protect their interests.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 0:39:45 GMT
Theatrics? Look who's talking. There are good reasons why he was on trial for murder and the jury in the civil trial found him liable. People with common sense know that a man who stalks, beats his wife, leaves blood evidence at the scene and was the only one Nicole was afraid of is the one who killed her Ah look. More MSM bullshit. Wish they would have included the context of the clip but no... they got a story to sell and a diversion to attend to. Gotta protect their interests. Seems like someone can't face the truth. What can you expect from someone who defends a sociopath. You keep on defending a wife beating murderer, that's how he got acquitted, from people like you who are so impressed by a celebrity that they're blinded to the truth
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 1:27:59 GMT
Ah look. More MSM bullshit. Wish they would have included the context of the clip but no... they got a story to sell and a diversion to attend to. Gotta protect their interests. Seems like someone can't face the truth. What can you expect from someone who defends a sociopath. You keep on defending a wife beating murderer, that's how he got acquitted, from people like you who are so impressed by a celebrity that they're blinded to the truth Seems like someone doesn't like anyone not falling for the lies your "celebrity" reporters tell you to believe. His fame has nothing to do with me. Or my attitude towards him. But since you are so blinded by hate and murder and resentment and everything wrong in your life, I can remind you again that I never knew of him until 1994. Even then it wasn't anything that swayed me. So while you accuse me of being "impressed" by "famous" people, you should check yourself in a mirror.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 2:54:23 GMT
Seems like someone can't face the truth. What can you expect from someone who defends a sociopath. You keep on defending a wife beating murderer, that's how he got acquitted, from people like you who are so impressed by a celebrity that they're blinded to the truth Seems like someone doesn't like anyone not falling for the lies your "celebrity" reporters tell you to believe. His fame has nothing to do with me. Or my attitude towards him. But since you are so blinded by hate and murder and resentment and everything wrong in your life, I can remind you again that I never knew of him until 1994. Even then it wasn't anything that swayed me. So while you accuse me of being "impressed" by "famous" people, you should check yourself in a mirror. That's Simpson you're describing, I've never murdered anyone. I'm not falling for lies, you're the deluded one who thinks the mob killed Nicole and Ron which is ridiculous. You don't have an ounce of proof and yet think you're right because you can't see the obvious. You have no proof that reporters are lying, it's just your delusions and thinking you have some gift. Only people who can't reason and prefer to believe evidence that isn't there and disbelieves evidence that is there thinks Simpson didn't do it. You're only convincing yourself
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 6:54:05 GMT
Seems like someone doesn't like anyone not falling for the lies your "celebrity" reporters tell you to believe. His fame has nothing to do with me. Or my attitude towards him. But since you are so blinded by hate and murder and resentment and everything wrong in your life, I can remind you again that I never knew of him until 1994. Even then it wasn't anything that swayed me. So while you accuse me of being "impressed" by "famous" people, you should check yourself in a mirror. That's Simpson you're describing, I've never murdered anyone. I'm not falling for lies, you're the deluded one who thinks the mob killed Nicole and Ron which is ridiculous. You don't have an ounce of proof and yet think you're right because you can't see the obvious. You have no proof that reporters are lying, it's just your delusions and thinking you have some gift. Only people who can't reason and prefer to believe evidence that isn't there and disbelieves evidence that is there thinks Simpson didn't do it. You're only convincing yourself That's yourself you're describing, I've never murdered anyone or chose to see something I have. I'm not falling for lies, you're the deluded one who thinks O.J. killed Nicole and Ron which is ridiculous. You don't have an ounce of proof and yet think you're right because you can't see the obvious or even think for yourself and wish to get all your info from MSM who are exposed liars. You have no proof that reporters are telling the truth, it's just your delusions and thinking you have some insight because you were told what to believe. Only people who can't reason and prefer to believe evidence that isn't there and disbelieves evidence of a court of law's verdict thinks Simpson did it. You're only convincing yourself. Have fun with your game. I've already knocked every accusation you've thrown at me to the curb. I wonder what you'll come up with next.
|
|
|
Post by Waxer-n-boil on May 9, 2017 7:34:34 GMT
Facts are indisputable. The minute you start arguing facts you've lost. I just gave you facts. He was at the scene of the crime during the time period when the murder occurred and there was no evidence that anyone else was there during that time period. Saying someone else did it because that's you believe doesn't prove anything. He had DNA and forensic evidence that tied him to the victims. Fact. Last time I checked there wasn't any members of the mob who could levitate off the ground or could create a biological barrier between them and their targets of murder. You're arguing against facts with no facts. And frankly only a fool would do so. If you went into court with this argument you'd be laughed at and thrown out! I guarantee you that you would! On that fact alone you've lost all credibility. And then you're actually delusional enough to think that you've won this debate. Lol 😂 You actually thought I was insulting you by saying your theory was tin foil hat? Tin foil hats do exactly what you do! They actually think that conjured theories are more factual than facts..... I repeat... you would get laughed out of a court of law! And I find you just as comically absurd as they would! 😂 Can't even take you seriously anymore. You never brought facts to the table, just outright judgement of a man that was found not guilty. Those seem to be facts you're ignoring because you've let public opinion sway you and of course fake news which has been going on for a long time. And your ridiculous hyperbole with your "levitate" analogy proves you've got nothing. You're the one arguing against facts. I simply deducted. And finding DNA at a place where he lived is easy but still does NOT prove guilt. You're the delusional one acting out your rage and losing debates. By your bold font insults you already lost the debate. FACT. And talk about conspiracy theories! You're full of them since nothing you've said proves anything and heavily relies on circumstantial evidence. You've been drinking the Kool-Aid of what MSM has fed you. Laughing in a court of law? Me? You seem very insecure with your childish retort and assumptions. It seems that the lawyers weren't laughed out of court and that they seemed to have a backstory of the whys and whatnot, all the while following the law. So whatever this kangeroo court you've got going there where people who disagree with you is to be laughed at shows the fascist attitude you have. I haven't taken you seriously though, so I guess we're even. A guy who dresses in Star Wars costumes would be laughed at in more places than a courtroom.But the reality is, he was black and had that line of black thinking and they tend to be violent, however, he didn't kill her. It was two thugs of a lowlife drug cartel. He's guilty of hiding these criminals but he never aided them. I have no problem with you remaining ignorant. I brought out facts that came out, some in the criminal trial, and all in the civil trial. He was found guilty in the civil trial. So much for your theory of using rumors and public opinion. Do you understand what facts really are? Once again you've invested in a big speech to try and deconstruct what I've said, but you've offered no facts or proof or evidence or legal action or criminal investigation to support your theory. Just a hypothesis. Actually calling it a hypothesis is giving your theory too much credit. A hypothesis is a scientific guess, and there's no science in your theory. Just hyperbole and innuendo. You probably think that there was a second gunman on the grassy knoll. There's living aliens from outer space being kept at Area 51. Tupac is still alive. And Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson were both aliens who took human form. - You really take people's avatar is being a literal representation of their public identity? More evidence that I'm dealing with a tin foil hat crackpot. - OJ had that black line of thinking that tends to be violent? That explains why every time I walk past a black man in a mall I get punched out and mugged! That explains why 100% of white women at Walmart get purse snatched by black men! Poor Mariah Carey! All those bruises and broken bones weren't from her falling down the steps. She divorced Nick Cannon because it came from him. But that's just a cultural thing coming from Nick! 😂 - And the evidence of these 2 mob thugs was? Who did the criminal investigation? What are there names? And if the mob is that good that they can kill Ron Goldman and Nichole Simpson without a shred of evidence being tied back to them, not even suspicion, and perfectly frame OJ; why didn't they kill OJ to make sure he didn't talk (especially since he went to prison for another charge)? This would be the part where you ignore all of these facts and sound logic and claim that I'm drinking the KoolAid. Then reclaim your tin foil hat theory rumor is a fact because you say so and believe so.... Can't top that kind of evidence! 🙄
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 9:12:56 GMT
That's Simpson you're describing, I've never murdered anyone. I'm not falling for lies, you're the deluded one who thinks the mob killed Nicole and Ron which is ridiculous. You don't have an ounce of proof and yet think you're right because you can't see the obvious. You have no proof that reporters are lying, it's just your delusions and thinking you have some gift. Only people who can't reason and prefer to believe evidence that isn't there and disbelieves evidence that is there thinks Simpson didn't do it. You're only convincing yourself That's yourself you're describing, I've never murdered anyone or chose to see something I have. I'm not falling for lies, you're the deluded one who thinks O.J. killed Nicole and Ron which is ridiculous. You don't have an ounce of proof and yet think you're right because you can't see the obvious or even think for yourself and wish to get all your info from MSM who are exposed liars. You have no proof that reporters are telling the truth, it's just your delusions and thinking you have some insight because you were told what to believe. Only people who can't reason and prefer to believe evidence that isn't there and disbelieves evidence of a court of law's verdict thinks Simpson did it. You're only convincing yourself. Have fun with your game. I've already knocked every accusation you've thrown at me to the curb. I wonder what you'll come up with next. Hahahaha! What a child. Yes, it's ridiculous that this madman would kill her
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 9:46:45 GMT
You never brought facts to the table, just outright judgement of a man that was found not guilty. Those seem to be facts you're ignoring because you've let public opinion sway you and of course fake news which has been going on for a long time. And your ridiculous hyperbole with your "levitate" analogy proves you've got nothing. You're the one arguing against facts. I simply deducted. And finding DNA at a place where he lived is easy but still does NOT prove guilt. You're the delusional one acting out your rage and losing debates. By your bold font insults you already lost the debate. FACT. And talk about conspiracy theories! You're full of them since nothing you've said proves anything and heavily relies on circumstantial evidence. You've been drinking the Kool-Aid of what MSM has fed you. Laughing in a court of law? Me? You seem very insecure with your childish retort and assumptions. It seems that the lawyers weren't laughed out of court and that they seemed to have a backstory of the whys and whatnot, all the while following the law. So whatever this kangeroo court you've got going there where people who disagree with you is to be laughed at shows the fascist attitude you have. I haven't taken you seriously though, so I guess we're even. A guy who dresses in Star Wars costumes would be laughed at in more places than a courtroom.But the reality is, he was black and had that line of black thinking and they tend to be violent, however, he didn't kill her. It was two thugs of a lowlife drug cartel. He's guilty of hiding these criminals but he never aided them. I have no problem with you remaining ignorant. I brought out facts that came out, some in the criminal trial, and all in the civil trial. He was found guilty in the civil trial. So much for your theory of using rumors and public opinion. Do you understand what facts really are? Once again you've invested in a big speech to try and deconstruct what I've said, but you've offered no facts or proof or evidence or legal action or criminal investigation to support your theory. Just a hypothesis. Actually calling it a hypothesis is giving your theory too much credit. A hypothesis is a scientific guess, and there's no science in your theory. Just hyperbole and innuendo. You probably think that there was a second gunman on the grassy knoll. There's living aliens from outer space being kept at Area 51. Tupac is still alive. And Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson were both aliens who took human form. - You really take people's avatar is being a literal representation of their public identity? More evidence that I'm dealing with a tin foil hat crackpot. - OJ had that black line of thinking that tends to be violent? That explains why every time I walk past a black man in a mall I get punched out and mugged! That explains why 100% of white women at Walmart get purse snatched by black men! Poor Mariah Carey! All those bruises and broken bones weren't from her falling down the steps. She divorced Nick Cannon because it came from him. But that's just a cultural thing coming from Nick! 😂 - And the evidence of these 2 mob thugs was? Who did the criminal investigation? What are there names? And if the mob is that good that they can kill Ron Goldman and Nichole Simpson without a shred of evidence being tied back to them, not even suspicion, and perfectly frame OJ; why didn't they kill OJ to make sure he didn't talk (especially since he went to prison for another charge)? This would be the part where you ignore all of these facts and sound logic and claim that I'm drinking the KoolAid. Then reclaim your tin foil hat theory rumor is a fact because you say so and believe so.... Can't top that kind of evidence! 🙄 You spew yet again. You have no evidence. You haven't proven anything. And all you have is an insult to throw out when you are confronted with someone who isn't buying into your bullshit. You also cling to tin foil words much for someone who claims to not be wearing one yourself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 9:50:10 GMT
That's yourself you're describing, I've never murdered anyone or chose to see something I have. I'm not falling for lies, you're the deluded one who thinks O.J. killed Nicole and Ron which is ridiculous. You don't have an ounce of proof and yet think you're right because you can't see the obvious or even think for yourself and wish to get all your info from MSM who are exposed liars. You have no proof that reporters are telling the truth, it's just your delusions and thinking you have some insight because you were told what to believe. Only people who can't reason and prefer to believe evidence that isn't there and disbelieves evidence of a court of law's verdict thinks Simpson did it. You're only convincing yourself. Have fun with your game. I've already knocked every accusation you've thrown at me to the curb. I wonder what you'll come up with next. Hahahaha! What a child. Yes, it's ridiculous that this madman would kill her Childish is someone who's parroted MSM lo these many years. What's more is that you need someone to help you bully someone who disagrees with you and your stomping around and both of you having a hissy fit over me is telling me that I must be on the right track. Ironically there were two. As well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 10:45:42 GMT
Hahahaha! What a child. Yes, it's ridiculous that this madman would kill her Childish is someone who's parroted MSM lo these many years. What's more is that you need someone to help you bully someone who disagrees with you and your stomping around and both of you having a hissy fit over me is telling me that I must be on the right track. Ironically there were two. As well. Keeping informed isn't childish, saying you know something without one shred of evidence is childish "And finding DNA at a place where he lived is easy but still does NOT prove guilt. " Finding his blood drops at the scene does not prove guilt? You're too moronic to even bother with
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 12:05:28 GMT
Childish is someone who's parroted MSM lo these many years. What's more is that you need someone to help you bully someone who disagrees with you and your stomping around and both of you having a hissy fit over me is telling me that I must be on the right track. Ironically there were two. As well. Keeping informed isn't childish, saying you know something without one shred of evidence is childish "And finding DNA at a place where he lived is easy but still does NOT prove guilt. " Finding his blood drops at the scene does not prove guilt? You're too moronic to even bother with And yet you keep harping on and on and on with your moronic rage and insistence. Stomping away. Blood drops? Wow remind people to not bleed at any place they live or to learn to clot properly. You'd find anyone guilty of murder if they looked at you sideways! Now run along little kid. Stay in your bubble. Find a safe space or something. Not all black people have murdered someone. That's just a myth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 16:43:52 GMT
Keeping informed isn't childish, saying you know something without one shred of evidence is childish "And finding DNA at a place where he lived is easy but still does NOT prove guilt. " Finding his blood drops at the scene does not prove guilt? You're too moronic to even bother with And yet you keep harping on and on and on with your moronic rage and insistence. Stomping away. Blood drops? Wow remind people to not bleed at any place they live or to learn to clot properly. You'd find anyone guilty of murder if they looked at you sideways! Now run along little kid. Stay in your bubble. Find a safe space or something. Not all black people have murdered someone. That's just a myth. Rage? Stomping? You're a joke. His blood was next to his bloody footprints at the murder scene, genius. You really know nothing
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 22:57:51 GMT
And yet you keep harping on and on and on with your moronic rage and insistence. Stomping away. Blood drops? Wow remind people to not bleed at any place they live or to learn to clot properly. You'd find anyone guilty of murder if they looked at you sideways! Now run along little kid. Stay in your bubble. Find a safe space or something. Not all black people have murdered someone. That's just a myth. Rage? Stomping? You're a joke. His blood was next to his bloody footprints at the murder scene, genius. You really know nothing You've expressed plenty of rage. Lots and lots. You really know nothing. It's you who can't wrap your head around the fact the story was spun and he could not say what he really saw. He was there but too late. Now if you're quite done, you're too moronic to bother with. You want to beat a dead horse, skull of steel. Or I mean bums. Same thing though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 0:39:57 GMT
Rage? Stomping? You're a joke. His blood was next to his bloody footprints at the murder scene, genius. You really know nothing You've expressed plenty of rage. Lots and lots. You really know nothing. It's you who can't wrap your head around the fact the story was spun and he could not say what he really saw. He was there but too late. Now if you're quite done, you're too moronic to bother with. You want to beat a dead horse, skull of steel. Or I mean bums. Same thing though. No, the story was not spun and he saw nothing but the two people he was murdering. If he was there and saw someone else killing them he would have been killed too, or does the mob normally leave witnesses? Don't bother replying because you can't and won't
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 1:53:39 GMT
Theatrics? Look who's talking. There are good reasons why he was on trial for murder and the jury in the civil trial found him liable. People with common sense know that a man who stalks, beats his wife, leaves blood evidence at the scene and was the only one Nicole was afraid of is the one who killed her. I just had a listen to this and I think the dispatcher did a great job at getting Nicole to stay on the line. She knew all the right things to say and got her talk and open up and was genuinely compassionate. That would be a difficult job to do. What that clip shows is OJ's rage at the time, it however doesn't provide any "absolute" proof of his guilt regarding her murder. People can go off at others all the time and don't kill them. I also don't believe that Nicole herself was squeaky clean and it is her death that tends to bring on bleeding hearts. Her boyfriend was killed as well, yet for some reason, Nicole tends to get all the sympathy votes. Goldman didn't know her for long and whatever their relationship was, or how dubious it was, or he himself may have been, his death could still be considered equally tragic. I think Nicole just gets all the pity because she was female and the domestic abuse aspect of her relationship with OJ got all hyped up by the media. She made a conscious decision to get with him, she was young and naive at the time, but that is on her onus. She paid a big price and if she wasn't with Goldman, would things have escalated like they did? What did she want from him? Yes, it doesn't show absolute proof, the blood evidence does that. Nicole had called the restaurant they were at because her mother left her glasses there. She asked Ron if he would drop them off and that's why he showed up. Yes, Nicole did eventually get with him but wouldn't have known it would cost her her life
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 7:59:23 GMT
You've expressed plenty of rage. Lots and lots. You really know nothing. It's you who can't wrap your head around the fact the story was spun and he could not say what he really saw. He was there but too late. Now if you're quite done, you're too moronic to bother with. You want to beat a dead horse, skull of steel. Or I mean bums. Same thing though. No, the story was not spun and he saw nothing but the two people he was murdering. If he was there and saw someone else killing them he would have been killed too, or does the mob normally leave witnesses? Don't bother replying because you can't and won't I WILL fucking reply because I can! You keep throwing your own spin on it when I've already pointed it out. He wasn't there WHEN they were killed. He came after. He also knows who they were. The mob is just another word for thugs who kill on orders. Why don't you just get a clue and stop listening to the media?
|
|