Justice should never be left up to the whim of a mob.
I swear I typed my last post right after reading UncleBill’s post, but then a friend came over and by the time I got back to it I seem to be repeating what others have just said.
DNA, shmee-en-ay. What’s DNA, anyway? Just three little letters. Probably stands for, “Did Not Attack”.
– Dana Carvey, when he was funny
Actually my favorite quote from the crimelab.com site was from Cochran:
Kinda makes you say “Whaa?”, and it worked too!
I remember reading somewhere that for the police to frame O.J., over sixty policemen would have had to organize that framing in a very short period of time – ten minutes, perhaps.
The previously printed photo of the shoes sealed it as far as I am concerned.
I hate to continue to be vague, but someone mentioned on television, if my husband understood correctly, that Johnny Cochran has said that he isn’t so certain now of Simpson’s innocence. Wouldn’t it be unethical for an attorney to say that about his client?
One thing is for certain, the jury did not follow the instructions to “deliberate.”
What are you talking about, OJ was telling the truth on that one. The next morning he got up and said “I’m going to find the real killer today.” He then proceeded to go to his bathroom to shave, looked in the mirror and said “Wow, that was easy. Guess I’ll take up golf now.” 
To me the biggest, biggest, mistake was to get blood from OJ before all the tests of the blood on the crime site and OJ’s home were completed. Once you had a match in all of them, I would then have OJ choose to confess or allow the authorities to take a sample out of him. It would have been impossible to plant all those doubts about mixing DNA and all that.
I still wonder why this did not occur. Have the LAPD changed the timing on when to acquire blood samples of suspects?
The best argument, for me, that it would have been impossible to frame Simpson is that the police would have to know absolutely that Simpson did not have an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the murders. What if, at the time of the murders, he was with his daughter and Kato Kaelin, who both lived with him? Entertaining guests? Making telephone calls?
P.S. My brush with fame: In 1999 I invited Kato to a party in North Hollywood – and he came.
I certainly agree.
I think it can be partly explained this way. Almost immediately, some working the case probably “knew” it was OJ, some “knew” it wasn’t and some held both views at once.
Remember the public image we had of OJ BEFORE the murders, it was hardly believeable he could have been involved. The motivation of how things were done was a mixture of these ideas, we have our man, we can obviously exclude him by the blood test and we need the blood as a lead.
The process was bungled at the beginning because the views of the police and investigators were so different.
Read Dominick Dunne on the subject, and all will be clear.
For me, the compelling evidence was the DNA. If I recall correctly, the photos of Simpson in the shoes did not surface until after the trial. Whether or not that would have swayed the jury is anybody’s guess, my opinion is that the jury could have had a video tape of Simpson commiting the crimes and would still have found him not guilty.
The prosecution blew it- they should have waited to collect Simpson’s blood until the crime scene processing was completed. They should have researched for pictures of Simpson wearing the shoes and gloves. And they should never have agreed to the glove fit test. As Hail Ants pointed out, you can’t put leather gloves over latex gloves! Too much friction between latex and leather.
Come and listen to my story about shoes and the jury. I served on a jury about 10 years ago in a burglary case, and one of the pieces of evidence presented was (I’m not kidding you) photos of prints left behind by the burglar. It seems he had trodden through a puddle and left some very nice, clear shoe prints behind which matched perfectly the pattern of the shoes the defendant was wearing when apprehended a few minutes later and a couple of blocks away. We’re all deliberating the importance of this when the foreman notices that the shoes on the table look very familiar. He raises one foot up onto the table and said (jokingly), “Well, I just hope we aren’t planning to convict this guy based on nothing but his shoes!” He was wearing the exact same make and model of shoes.
Thanks to this ridiculously melodramatic and utterly meaningless coincidence, two jurors became unalterable in their opinion that absolutely anybody could have committed the crime, and we wound up sending this guy to jail for much less time than he deserved on a lesser included charge (possession of stolen goods or something like that, I don’t remember exactly).
Or maybe the police and news media just seem to focus on him unfairly just because of his past and who he is.
Hey Autz,
OJ is 100% innocent.
Thanks for your time,
Lizzie Borden
The police found blood evidence linking OJ to the murders at about 8:00am. They drew blood from OJ at about 2:30pm the same day.
Read OJ’s note - the one he wrote before the Bronco chase. He thanks the police for the way he was treated.
An innocent man would know that the police had framed him. A guilty man would know they had not.
I am as certain of OJ’s guilt as if I had seen him kill Denise and Ron with my own eyes.
Regards,
Shodan
I was looking on the web too & found that the strongest evidence that OJ was guilty is probably his web site:
"www SLASH SLASH oj " 
Handy, It’s no wonder why you have over 13,000 posts!
I’m going to have to remember to start posting more dumb old jokes, or meaningless comments. Hey, I did it!
I hereby proclaim that slow moving white Bronco jokes are not allowed in this thread!
E3
I was one of the few that didn’t follow this case closely. So the argument for the defense was that a racist cabal of cops framed OJ? Was this based solely on Furhman(sp) using the “N” word?
The defense had three lines: racism, a race to judgment and general police/lab incompetence. The defense did a good job of blurring which was which, so each theory reinforced the other. They were helped greatly by the police, investigators, lab folks and prosecution.
There were a long list of blunders, mistakes or simple procedures that weren’t well explained in hindsight.
Funny, I thought his most glaring mistake was stabbing Ron Goldman and nearly decapitating his ex-wife.