I really don’t see how someone could ask this question unless they still want proof that no one was on the Grassy Knoll, too. As Vincent Bugliosi and others have shown, there’s a relatively simple, straightforward and believable sequence of events and actions, based on evidence, that should have sent any culprit to prison after a ten-day trial… and then there are endlessly convoluted ideas that begin with “Simpson must be innocent” and then selectively throw out and distort evidence to bolster that conclusion.
Only a year of ever-deepening and nationally-televised bullshit obscured the simplicity and obviousness.
While I believe that OJ Simpson (for all that it matters now) did kill his wife and Ron Goldman, I don’t believe that he dropped the glove in his backyard. I think that it was “found” by a troubled detective who was looking to make a name for himself in a high profile case.
Why?
The glove was in Simpson’s backyard. He could have easily walked outside, turned on his exterior lights and searched for the glove if he thought that he had dropped it. He clearly knew that he had left the glove’s mate at the crime scene (he had to take it off) so if he was unaware of the location of the other glove he could have spent 10-15 minutes looking in his vehicle and around his former home searching for it.
The limo was waiting on him and there were other later flights that he could have caught.He also could have driven to Mexico that night if he was uncertain that his alibi would have held up as that is only 2.5-3 hours away. Or even bought a ticket at the airport to a foreign destination and never returned to the US.
The glove has never “fit” into the case.
The prosecutors fucked up the case by rushing it to trial without:
[ol]
[li]Finding Ron Goldman’s blood anywhere else besides the crime scene -Nicole’s blood could be anywhere as she was OJ’s wife. Ron Goldman’s blood couldn’t be nywhere BUT at the crime scene.[/li][li]Nailing Kato Kaelin’s testimony down - If Kato had said that he either heard OJ leave or come back home at/around the time of the murders, the case would have been a slamdunk. As it it was, there was no one at the Rockingham home to confirm that OJ was not there.[/li][li]Eyewitnesses or video evidence - No one walking a dog or jogging and saw OJ in the area. No one saw him at Nicole’s home or leaving. None of the homes along the route between the two homes had a video security system which recorded a vehicle matching Simpson’s driving past at/around the time of the murders.[/li]
[/ol]
The prosecution went after a rich man with a weak case. They could have waited and built a stronger one; but Gil Garcetti was determined to show that the wealthy and famous pay for their crimes just like everybody else.
They didn’t seem to learn from this case as six years later Robert Blake walked away from an even more obvious murder.
His “back yard” was a fairly dense forest of bushes etc.; even if he retraced his steps (and who knows that he didn’t) he might not have seen a black glove on dark ground.
He was also under a tremendous time crush; he had to distance himself in a possible reconstruction by being in the limo and gone at the earliest possible moment. It’s probable that the unexpected appearance of Goldman and the ensuing fight both slowed him up and freaked him out enough to start the chain of screwups. He did not have time to turn on putative yard lights (we don’t know that the area BEHIND the keeper’s house was even lit) and search.
Nor would he have any plausible reason to be doing so, should anyone see him.
Nor did he necessarily know where he had dropped either glove; retracing his steps all the way to the bloody courtyard would not have been a good idea for his plans.
Really, Fuhrman might be several kinds of LAPD asshole, but the attempt to frame him for the glove etc. is right up there with having the limousine driver shoot JFK.
Yes, Mr. Limo Driver, I’m late because I just woke up, but excuse me for a moment, I need to spend 15 minutes searching my back yard for something, why don’t you and Kato stay RIGHT HERE IN THE DRIVEWAY while I search alone.
:walks away nonchalantly, nothing interesting to see here:
Pretty sure - I was trying to find pic, but on my iPad and it is a pain sometimes.
If memory serves correctly this was a large rubber glove - the type you’d use to scrub really dirty toilets with I suppose. I think it went a good bit up the arm. If the point was simply to leave fingerprints - and especially just for the elevator - you have much better options - including some that are invisible to video.
They were there for a while and no one else was seen (that I know of) wearing one of these. If the point was solely to prevent leaving fingerprints - at least a dozen or so other people weren’t using that method.
And the point couldn’t have been that OJ dropped the glove on the way into his house. If memory serves - and the map I linked to supports - this was a narrow alley behind the guest house. The type of alley that might exist if you were to build right on the property line.
The theory was OJ went back there to hide the glove and saw the AC unit - tried to open it - and dropped it in the process (left it there) - or running late for flight just decided that was a better place for it.
It was his backyard. He didn’t need a reason to be out in it. If you go outside of your house,turn on your lights and look around unless you have exceptionally curious neighbors, no one is going to care what you are doing out there. At that time of night the majority of them would be sleeping or watching television anyway.
And the courtyard was hardly “bloody.” Some drops of blood (his) on his driveway or in his courtyard wouldn’t have attracted anyone’s attention unless they were in fact looking for blood. Since, according to the narrative where the glove wasn’t planted, he wasn’t a suspect why would they have been looking anyway?
If we presume that he had enough presence of mind to get rid of all of his clothing , including what were an expensive pair of loafers but then failed to look for the mate to a glove that he left at the crime scene then we have to also presume that his “plan” could have been changed to allow him to look in his backyard for that glove.
I won’t even go into the fact that vegetative matter from the location of the glove should have been found inside his home if he indeed tromped through that area prior to his getting into the limo and being taken to the airport. It wasn’t and that makes the glove’s presence even more suspicious.
Also, there was no “fight” with Goldman. Simpson attacked Goldman (a younger man) with a knife, was able to disable him and then cut his throat. A “fight” implies that Goldman was able struggle with Simpson and possibly injure him instead of simply being surprised and then killed.
Finally, comparing this with the JFK assassination is a false analogy at its worst. Nobody ever assumed that the limo driver had anything to do with the assassination; nor is it probable that he could have. It is, however, very conceivable that a detective picked up some evidence and put it down in an attempt to make himself into a hero.
Again, while I do think that OJ Simpson did commit the murders, I don’t think that glove was dropped by him.
Apparently you don’t take too many limos. Wealthy people don’t need to provide limo drivers with excuses as to why they aren’t ready to go when the driver arrives. They simply tell them (if they choose to) that they aren’t ready and that the driver needs to wait. If the driver has a problem with that, then they can either suck it up or call their bosses and complain.
Guess which happens more often?
Simpson could have walked back into his house, gone out into his backyard and looked around for as long as he felt the need to do so. If he felt like making up an excuse, he could have claimed that he dropped a piece of jewelry (a believable excuse) and was trying to find it. Again, since it was his backyard, he didn’t even need to do that.
All of which would have been entered into evidence as suspicious behavior, and maybe he doesn’t find the glove at all. And, he just slashed two people’s throats, maybe he was a bit distracted and didn’t have the benefit of hindsight to guide his actions.
WRT to Furman making a “name” for himself on a “high profile” case. With absolutely no evidence pointing towards OJ, this is not a high profile case. The risk involved in stealing evidence in a murder investigation, to plant it on a guy who is highly recognizable, and likely to have an alibi, given his fame, man that risk is off the charts. For all Furman knew, OJ was in Chicago during the murder, or NYC, or Florida filming a commercial.
I have a hard time coming up with a stupider plan to frame someone, unless it involves framing someone who you already know has a solid alibi.
This was a high profile case as the police knew almost as soon as they discovered the victims who Nicole Brown was. Also Brentwood is an tony area of Los Angeles, so that would mean that a double homicide there would have been considered to be “high profile" regardless of who was involved.
There’s also the fact that OJ was cuffed as soon as he arrived at his wife’s house;this was shown on television. Unless he was considered to be a suspect, there would no need to to cuff him, as they would have to first ascertain if he had an alibi. The LAPD clearly suspected Simpson from the beginning and then later attempted to alter the public perception of events to fit their narrative of the crime.
Why are we presuming intelligence in the case of Mark Fuhrman? On the stand he took the Fifth instead of simply answering direct questions about having planted the glove or not. While taking the Fifth doesn’t imply guilt, guilt can be inferred when a law enforcement officer with no reason to lie invokes it rather than simply reciting truthful testimony as to what he found and where.
Mark Fuhrman seems to be,at best, an average detective, who had a propensity to lie when the circumstances suited him. From what I remember about the case, no one was calling him a “super cop” or playing up his investigative skills before or during the trial. It was almost as if the prosecution was hoping that the glove would have fallen into the background and that their other evidence would be enough to dazzle the jury.
Frankly, police misconduct is nothing new. Chicago,Philadelphia, Dallas and even Los Angeles have had to pay out tens of millions in damages and legal fees over the last two decades for numerous coerced confessions and wrongful prosecutions caused by police officers either planting evidence or simply lying at trial. There’s no reason to believe that this didn’t happen here as the glove’s presence in the matter is so odd that it is almost incongruous when the entire matter is reviewed in hindsight.
Like I said, I believe that OJ “did it.” The fact that his hunt for “the real killers” seemed to tail off right after his acquittal is more than enough proof that if he had continued his search it probably would have led directly back to him. I do, however, have and have always had, problems with the “lone glove” and how it was found.
an elaborate, fragile construct of chance happenings, deep-rooted malice that supersedes every other personal and professional concern, and extraordinary luck, over -
an absolutely straightforward case of yet one more guy who thought he was clever enough (+famous enough, +liked enough, +believable enough) to plan and get away with murder, then screwed it up just enough to ruin his plan -
okay. Play the lottery with those odds and see what happens.
There’s just nothing odd about the glove, any more than there is about the deep cut on his finger, right where he would hit himself while trying to hold someone and cut their throat. He bundled all the evidence back with him while trying to sneak home and get outta Dodge, and dropped one item. In his rush and panic, he may not have ever noticed the glove wasn’t in his bundle to get rid of. It takes real gymnastics to believe any other possibility.
Yes, it’s that hard to believe that they would choose to frame a high-profile person like him, a person capable of paying for an expensive defense, over some poor bum who happened to be in the general vicinity.
If you choose to ignore decades worth of evidence concerning police misconduct and corruption in favor or a narrative that falls apart when it’s looked at too closely, then that’s your right.
This is America after all and freedom of choice is one of the cornerstones of our way of life.
Also, the cut wasn’t “deep” as it would have required either stitches or have still been bleeding when Simpson voluntarily came back from Chicago if it were. That’s yet another example of bending the narrative to support your beliefs rather objectively looking at the facts.
What takes real gymnastics is to believe that a troubled department like the LAPD (which was undergoing several scandals at the time including a rogue unit which was executing criminals and a gang unit which was planting false evidence and engaging in corruption) would somehow be “above” planting evidence in other areas. When you are telling the story, you get to invent the facts. If people dispute those facts, it’s often well after the story has been believed.
Yes. Read Bugliosi - a man who was a prosecutor under the specific jurisdiction where the crime occurred and one of the better criminal law minds writing popular opinions.
The timeline, evidence, admissions and personalities all work against any kind of frame-up. Too many people have to be in the right place, with the right thoughts, and do exactly the right thing within a very narrow range of possibilities. There weren’t hours for the cops (Fuhrman alone, or any group) to figure out a frame when they had no idea where Simpson was or what his alibis might be. There were windows of a few minutes and no room to make any mistakes.
Unless you’re going to posit that the frame goes all the way to instigating the murders, the accusations make absolutely no sense and are either completely contrary to the evidence or slide through the thinnest windows - multiple windows - of possibility.
Yes, LAPD has a history of being corrupt - so what? That by itself is not a basis for believing a fantastically complicated alternative theory, any more than wishing away the idea of a lone nut means some large JFK-hating group did it instead.
There was never any evidence that the LAPD looked for any other suspects besides Simpson. Even the testimony that they gave at trial was tailored to exclude the possibility that any other suspect was possible (referring to the murders as “overkills” for example).
When Simpson returned to LA and was handcuffed it was clear that the LAPD thought that he was the prime suspect. The narrative from that point became convicting of the crime rather than looking at multiple possibilities. That didn’t change throughout the ineptly handled trial and for the detectives and prosecutors who are still alive, it hasn’t changed.
While I personally think that Simpson is guilty, I also believe that aspects of his case were mishandled and that Mark Fuhrman’s “discovery” was more intention than luck or solid police work.
[ol]
[li]Believing in police corruption means that most people would have address the fact that the justice system is flawed - That might mean that wrongful executions have taken place,that innocents are currently serving time for crimes that they didn’t commit and that criminals,especially murderers,are walking the streets free to commit crimes and to kill again. That’s high level cognitive dissonance and most people avoid that like the plague.[/li][li]It would mean that people would have to address their racial biases and they are loath to do that- Let’s face it: If Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman had been Black, this case would have barely been a blip on the collective radar. Yes, OJ’s role in it would have prevented it from being in the back pages after the first few days. But it would have never received the levels of notoriety that did if the assailant wasn’t Black and the victims weren’t White. Most people don’t want to face that fact.[/li][li]If the police are willing to frame the wealthy, why wouldn’t they do the same to anyone else? - The police are largely unregulated in our society. If people thought that they couldn’t trust them (and really, unless they give you a reason to do so, you can’t) then how do you think that most of them would sleep at night? Not much point in having guardians who have limited interest in “guarding” you.[/li][/ol]
Police corruption isn’t a fantasy; it’s an expensive reality.
To presume that it doesn’t exist simply because you think that it doesn’t, is poor critical thinking. To also presume that it didn’t have a role in a matter because you can’t “see” that role is even worse critical thinking.
Eh, I find it kinda interesting to discuss cases like this after passions have calmed and details can be discussed with some impartiality. That said, I am always surprised how many people on the OJ did side will not give in inch in terms of their understanding and interpretation of the evidence. The passion this case inspires is just really surprising to me given the number of murder trials involving famous people that occurred before and since.
