Do you think OJ Simpson did it?

Question

Seriously, i am curious if there is anyone who thinks he is innocent? Being as all the people on camera who cheered when the NOT GUILTY verdict came out....Do you think they were cheering because they really believed his innocence, or was it was it viewed as justice for African Americans?

(I am being serious, and not trying to offend anyone).

Answer 1

I believe the prosecution failed to prove their case against him, and I also think that they were played like a fine tuned violin before the TV cameras! It was a great spectacle, but a lousy job of prosecution. The truth is that I heard a police officer with family in Philadelphia that the police obtained some evidence illegally and were unable to use it; that's why they were were so certain of his guilt... but they made the mistake of obtaining it ILLEGALLY, and could not use it in trial. If the police and the prosecution had played by the rules of evidence and played fairly, they would've convicted OJ.

I am saddened that so many people took it as a "race" issue. OJ had long turned his back on his own kind, and he was always dating women that were NOT Black, but only White. I also think OJ was used and taken advantage of by the deceased and her family for the longest, and I think they squeezed a lot of money from him! And I also think that they were reasonably upset over the loss of a family member (a sister, a daughter) but they also lost their meal ticket... OJ's money! I think it was a crime of passion, he was paying something like $19,000 a month in alimony plus child support to his ex-wife while she was flaunting her affairs in public and humiliating him after he supported her and her family in grand style for YEARS. He simply "lost it," and I believe it was an accumulation of events that led to the killings. That's what I believe; I am not excusing his actions nor am I justifying them; I am expressing an opinion and belief on what I suspect happened.

I am not trying to offend anyone; I repeat, I am merely expressing my beliefs and my opinion based on what I heard from someone who was present during the investigation! Curious, though, I don't hear much talk about Robert Blake, also accused of his wife's murder and also acquitted... hmmmm.... I wonder why?

Answer 2

It doesn't matter if we think he did it or not... what's more important when it comes to the O.J. Simpson verdict is realizing the fact that the criminal justice system is based on the theory of "reasonable doubt." This means the defense attorneys do not have to prove innocence for their client, they simply have to prove that there is a reasonable doubt that he may be guilty.

When you review all of the material administered into this case, you can't deny the fact that a lot of crucial evidence was mishandled by the LAPD. I work for the criminal justice system and I know that there are very strict rules for handling evidence and if those rules and guidelines are not followed than said evidence may not even be administered during trial. And although Judge Ito ignored this and still allowed a lot of this tainted evidence to be entered, the defense team did their job by pointing out to the jury that the evidence was never handled the way it should have been, leaving open the possibility that some of the evidence may have been planted.

Then you have to remember that Mark Fuhrman, the chief investigating officer in this case, was a known racist who had made it well known that not only was he not fond of African Americans, he certainly didn't care for them marrying white women and moving into predominately white neighborhoods. The defense had a good amount of material to throw at that jury to let them know Det. Fuhrman did not even so much try to hide his racist tendancies. This too chipped holes in the prosocutions arguements.

I think O. J. was a violent prick who most certainly abused his former wife and it is very likely he may have been responsible in one way or the other for her death and the death of Ron Goldman. However, I also think our justice system is set up to where it is not easy to frame an innocent man. "Reasonable Doubt" exists for this sole purpose. And in my opinion it is better to let ten guilty men walk then to let one innocent man hang.

Answer 3

Some people were neutral, others had a variety of emotions.
One way to approach the verdict is to consider some of what the jury saw and heard in court.
1) Tapes containing extreme racist comments against blacks were stated by the investigator who "found" the glove - proving that he lied under oath.
2) The chief investigator over the entire case admitted that he took a vial of OJ's blood and carried it into the crime scenes.
- The jury likely had problems concerning the credibility of some of those with the responsibility of investigating the case.
3) The "found" glove didn't fit - wrong size (heat shrinks, moisture doesn't)
- What was Simpson's state-of-mind that day?
4) The jury saw a video taken by paparazzi of OJ, Nicole, Denise and the women's parents talking in a nice peaceful manner after attending OJ/Nicole's daughter's dance recital, all were getting along well - Denise even kissed and hugged OJ (just a few short hours before the crime).
- The jury was taken to visit Simpson's house and hardly saw anything connected to the crime. OJ's slow speed drive at 30 mph to his own house is not indicative of guilt.
Top forensics scientist Dr. Henry Lee in his book "cracking cases" provides compelling scientific points that OJ is highly unlikely to be the one who did this unfortunate crime.

Simpson's book may be tacky but "if i did it" deals with one chapter that is hypothetical and labeled fiction - a great part of the book likely is Simpson defending himself against false allegations. The book does not contain a confession nor does the chapter contain the actual attack by whoever committed the crime. Possibly the "If i did it" title and chapter was decided by the publisher for the sensational value which they thought would translate into higher book sales. It was the publisher who brought the deal to OJ and offered the money. The rare opportunity to earn any income was likely taken to help provide for his family members - Simpson is paying the costs to put his kids through college etc. OJ has always maintained his innocence.

Answer 4

Guilty

Answer 5

Is The Sky Blue? Come on - he most certainly committed the crime. The only reason he got off was because of lack of evidence from the prosecuting attorneys.

Yeah I would have to say most of the cheers was because he was an African American male who beat the system.

Now all of a sudden he wrote a book titled "If I Did It" The perfect time for him to write this book as you cannot be tried twice for the same case again after being exonerated from his crime. This is basically his confession.

What happened to the search for the "real killers"?

Take a look in the mirror buddy - guilt is written all over your face.

Answer 6

Everyone should read the book by Mr. Dear called OJ is Guilty but Not of Murder. It lays out a methodical case with proof. It was brilliant and proved to me that OJ didn't do it but who did really do it. Check it out. No i am not the author or affiliated with any book company.

Answer 7

Yeah, I think it's pretty clear he did it.

However, the L.A. justice system is so corrupt, they really put enough of a doubt in people's minds (Mark Furman etc etc). Because of that, they lost all credibility and gave away the ability to convict him.

I was disgusted by the cheering. It had NOTHING to do with his being guilty or not guilty, it was viewed as a victory for the race. Which I think is a shame, because I would have wanted him convicted REGARDLESS of his race.

He murdered his wife and got away with it.

Answer 8

There is not one single doubt in my mind that OJ murdered his wife and Ron Goldman. Unfortunately, a large number of people in the black community were angry about the (videotaped) beating of Rodney King by the LAPD. It was a racist trial and verdict. Good thing the LA County courts are not the final judgement for Mr Simpson.

Answer 9

He was one of my heros back in the day, but even before the verdict was read, I was forced to believe he was guilty. I'm not going to dare to answer the rest of your question, because I can't speak for what other people believe.

Answer 10

I think he is guilty but of course there must be people who wants to believe the opposite as in Michael Jackson trial, and there is a percentage of people who turns everything in a race problem so those people also want to believe he is innocent! :)