English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If you had sat on that jury, would you have found him guilty? Why or why not?

2006-12-16 18:01:25 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

20 answers

He's guilty as sin. Remember after the trial he said he wasn't going to stop till he found the culprit? Well, apparently he thinks its a golf caddie in Florida.

2006-12-16 18:36:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If I had sat on the jury I would have found him not guilty because it was obvious that evidence was planted.

How esle would there be EDTA in the blood drops found at OJ's house. If they planted the blood, what else did they plant? A glove maybe?

Also, the key witness that found all of the evidence was impeached very effectively. So effectively that he invoke the 5th amendment.

The "Court of Public Opinion" is not a "Court of Law" so they should just shut up. The prosecution botched the case and the police planted evidence. The jury was right to find OJ Not Guilty.

Thank you for the question.

2006-12-16 18:26:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Guilty

2006-12-16 18:06:50 · answer #3 · answered by ? 7 · 1 0

Hello,

I never thought he was innocent.

In 1992, I was a paralegal student at Mt. San Antonio College in Walnut, CA. After I received my degree, I applied for an internship at the West Covina Dist Atty Office.

One day, one of the D.A.s showed me a black and white book full of murder photos. I looked at it and thought, no big deal. Then, he handed me some color photos to thumb through of a woman with her head almost cut off in a pool of blood. Then, this D.A. asked me who I thought that woman was, I said I did not know. He looked me in the eyes and said that is Nicole Brown Simpson.

I remember that day I was wearing my blue suit and white blouse with a matching headband and black high heels. I still remember to this day I began feeling very dizzy, like the room was spinning and I wanted to faint, and my vision began to blur. I remember grabbing the seat of a nearby desk to sit down where I put my head down in my hands and my heart began to palpatate.

Those were the most disturbing and gross photos of a murder scene I have ever seen and what made it worse was that this case had become so personal to me. Well everyone who witnessed the trial I am sure it became personal them as well.

My feelings and emotions were like that of a friend or loved one. I can't even begin to really comprehend what The Brown's and Goldman's have to deal with every single day of their lives. But, I am sure the images they say were the same ones I saw.

So, yes, I think he is still guilty as sin and his conscience is screaming to tell someone the truth. But, because he is a narcissist, he will always have the upper hand and cause chaos wherever he goes.

Hope this helps you.............................. :- O

2006-12-16 18:45:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

My opinion is convinced he develop into accountable of both murders. yet once you look on the information and all the information presented contained in the case it seems he develop into in truth ..... accountable as sin. imagine about this. The protection claimed the police framed OJ by technique of planting blood information. And the jury believed it. I recognize it truly is feasible the police took Nicole and Goldman's blood from the crime scene and planted it on OJ's stuff. yet tell me this. How did they get OJ's blood to plant on the scene of the crime, on his shoes, clothing, motor vehicle and in his abode. Did they have a secret stash of OJ blood to apply that OJ doesn't keep in ideas giving them? Or did they take the blood samples at the same time as OJ develop into on a plane flying to Chicago? the answer is a lot worse. the entire l. a. police stress, such as their forensic branch, the DA's place of work and the police labs and the self sufficient labs who did the try on the blood are all conspiring mutually to deliver an innocuous guy to detention center because they're ALL racist. in case you've self belief that you're both 4 years previous or rather stupid. if you're that stupid then i'm right here to allow you to recognize your direction to Paradise demands you supply all of your funds and cloth possessions to me.

2016-11-26 23:48:38 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

No, I don't believe he did it. If we all stop and think of the number of 'perfect crimes' where it misleads the jury and public that a particular person did it, when in fact it was conspiratorial (such as Mafia killings). This is what I believed happened.

In addition, OJ would've gone to the insane asylum by now if he truly murdered them and would have to face the supposed lies all his life without severe health and personal destructions. But he is still the same.

2006-12-16 18:26:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

It is really hard to say, I think he did it but then I don't. I don't know for sure if he did it himself or had it done. I would think he would have had someone else do it. Why would he do that to his kids? I would not have found him guilty because I don't trust the police investigation. I think some things were planted to make him look guilty.And the glove did not fit. If he wanted her killed he would have hired someone to do it when he was FAR FAR away. He had the money to hire some one to do it. But I still don't really know.

2006-12-16 18:15:40 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 1 0

Im in limbo on this, I gotta say when he admitted to making blood money on his if I did it book, he raised a good point that others who made money off the case did make blood money.

Yet here it is the others who made blood money never admitted they were doing it but OJ Simpson admitted to it when he also pointed out yes he did that but others did so to.

I actually appreciate that he did have the courage to even admit to the blood money thing.

2006-12-16 18:45:13 · answer #8 · answered by MrCool1978 6 · 1 0

No because there is not way a dagger could have made the wounds on Nicole and Ron. It had to have been done by a machete or e-tool. But Marines are the only ones that sharpen and use e-tools for weapons.
Machetes are the weapons of choice by Colombians because of gun control.
I think it was done because they had not paid their drug bill to the drug lords.

2006-12-16 18:18:40 · answer #9 · answered by JUAN FRAN$$$ 7 · 1 1

I would have found him guilty. It was obvious to any one who had a brain that he did it. If his lawyers hadn't played the race card he would be sitting on death row, instead of on a beach in Florida.

2006-12-16 18:09:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers