2006-10-03 13:04:44 · 5 answers · asked by jon w 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Because they made the right decision. He wasn't proven beyond a resonable doubt. Many things were brought up that could have altered the blood samples, and the defence did an excellent job of bringing this out and others. It is against the law to vote guilty when you are doing it on your belief and not on weather its beyond a resonalbe doubt or not.
2006-10-03 15:04:38 · answer #1 · answered by panchorific 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is awfully old news, and an old controversy, but here goes.......
Anyone who has worked with forensics will explain how difficult it is to get blood off - there is no way that Simpson could have personally committed the murders and gotten cleaned up in the time available.
The only "linkage" between Simpson and the murders was evidence clearly planted, clumsily, by the most notoriously racist police officer in the LAPD, Fuhrman.
The conduct of the trial by the prosecutor, Marcia Clarke, is an embarrassment to all trial lawyers. Unprofessional, incompetent - a total quack.
The jurors followed the judge's instructions. I think Judge Ito should have given an instructed verdict, but it was his call.
2006-10-03 20:30:13 · answer #2 · answered by Prof. Cochise 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You question assumes they reached the wrong decision. If you were not there to see the evidence and to hear the testimony of every witness, and deli berate in the jury room, then I think it's wrong to presume those jurors did not do the right thing. If most (or all) of your infomation came from the many TV reports, you don't have the whole story. TV reporters do try to do a good job of reporting what happened each day, but that is no substitute for being in the room.
2006-10-03 22:12:08 · answer #3 · answered by Carlos R 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They didn't say he was innocent.....they said they found him not guilty because of the evidence presented to them and the manner in which it was presented.
I think they sleep just fine.
2006-10-03 20:13:27 · answer #4 · answered by daljack -a girl 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why, he is innocent. OJ didn't do it. In fact, OJ himself said that he was attempting to find the real killer or killers. I believe the OJ man, he's in the hall of fame. Hall of famers don't kill or lie.
Go team OJ.
have a nice day.
2006-10-03 20:07:52 · answer #5 · answered by mjtpopus 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋