If not, do you have your own theory as to who may have done the crime?
2006-07-03 12:27:28 · 26 answers · asked by LeAnne 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Oh yeah, OJ did it. His getting off in the criminal trial was one of the biggest black eyes ever delivered to our criminal justice system.
2006-07-03 12:30:41 · answer #1 · answered by DR 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, silly, Nicole Simpson slipped and fell onto OJ's knife repeatedly! And, as for his being found liable at the civil trial (using a different legal standard -- "preponderence of the evidence" rather than "beyond a reasonable doubt"), pay no mind to that!
Gosh, everyone just wants to pick on this poor, innocent soul!
Seriously, the moment of the verdict was one I'll never forget. I was a law student and we were all crowded around a huge TV next to the law school cafeteria. When he was acquitted, a roar went up, followed by a sudden silence: virtually every black cheered and virtually every white was furious -- we all just stopped and looked at one another in amazement. Neither group could believe the reaction of the other. To this day, that division over OJ along racial lines continues.
2006-07-03 21:11:30 · answer #2 · answered by JSKingston 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My gut tells me he probably did, but that damn glove not fitting certainly raised reasonable doubt in my mind. Since the standard in the US is "beyond a reasonable doubt" I'd have to vote the way that the jury did. Putting that allegedly racist cop on the stand certainly wasn't a smart move on the prosecution's part either.
2006-07-03 19:36:10 · answer #3 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. Read Vincent Bugliosi's "Outrage" to see how the prosecution completely screwed up the trial.
Little things they missed, like telling the jury that DNA can become degraded, but it can't change into someone else's DNA.
2006-07-03 19:36:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course, how else did Ron Goldman's blood get into O.J.'s Bronco? He and Goldman had never had any contact and did not know each other. Too bad this testimony was withheld from the jury.
2006-07-03 19:34:16 · answer #5 · answered by correrafan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course he was guilty ! It just makes me spitting mad how he got away with it too. If he was so innocent,why did he flee in the Bronco and why was he ordered to return the Heisman trophy ?
2006-07-03 19:31:44 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes for sure he payed off so many people to not go to jail nobody admitted it but there was so much evidance against him then again i did hear that the cops planted evidance so i think he did but it hard to tell
2006-07-03 19:32:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO!! his 2 kids told him that they saw a black man running from the backyard. why did the police when they were told they chose not to follow up. even the glove that was found did not fit.
2006-07-03 19:36:47 · answer #8 · answered by lil_blaster 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He did it. I watched a lot of those trials. There was enough of the victims' blood in his vehicle and entrance to his house to make it obvious. And they even proved that 'dirty cop' didn't have access to his house so that argument didn't wash.
2006-07-03 19:32:09 · answer #9 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That case demonstrates that "reasonable doubt" is relative to the amount of legal grandstanding you can finance.
Punitive system is so corrupt.
2006-07-03 22:29:27 · answer #10 · answered by -.- 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋