Doesn't it seem odd that this man was found innocent and yet not a single law enforcement agent (Black or White) has spent so much as a seconds time in search for the real killer? Also, why has not a single news agency asked this question of the police? If he did not do it ,who did? and why is no one trying to find them?
2007-06-26 08:44:19 · 12 answers · asked by Jsensei99 1 in News & Events ➔ Other - News & Events
Oj is still looking; he's looked on every golf hole in Florida for starters and checking some twice...
(He did it.)
2007-06-26 08:46:46 · answer #1 · answered by wizjp 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
There is an old saying, "When you know your guilty, put the other guy (Prosecutor) on trial! That is exactly what OJ's attorneys did. They brought the court trial system to an all time low. I was working in Holland at the time of the trial and the Dutch people thought the USA had gone crazy. The judge was a bad joke. The prosecutors were a couple of light weights. This is all conjecture at this point, but had a person with less clout and money gone up on the same charges they would have been executed by now or had become accustom to prison stripes. OJ's lawyers made many of the prosecution wittinesses look very foolish. The blood samples removed from the crime scene were suspect because of possible mishandling. The bloody sock in OJ's house. Not creditable? The American public has seen way too much miscarriage of Justice in high profile court cases. Slick Willie was allowed to interpret his definition of sex. He pulled it off and stayed in office. Money and influence takes you anywhere you want to go. Guilty or not!
2007-06-26 16:41:40 · answer #2 · answered by William D 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Regardless of whether or not OJ Simpson was found innocent, it is well documented that the probability exists of his having murdered his wife and her friend. Law enforcement agents are unlikely to search for another person to charge with the crime, because they believe beyond a doubt that he is guilty of the crime. The fact that he was found innocent of the actual charges against him, in no way proves that he was actually not guilty...just that he was found innocent of those particular charges. There was also a great deal of mismanagement of the case. High profile cases are often difficult to pin on those responsible, and money can buy the best lawyers available. If you recall, he was found culpable in the civil case.
2007-06-26 16:03:13 · answer #3 · answered by Darke Angel 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He wasn't found "innocent", he was found Not Guilty. Also, if there is no evidence pointing any other direction, where exactly can they look?
And didn't you hear that OJ hired PI's to hunt down the 'real killer" a decade ago?
2007-06-26 16:34:57 · answer #4 · answered by DeAnna 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
OJ is guilty, they just couldn't prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. He bang his hand so the glove didn't fit. He had athritis in his kneeso they thought he couldn't run that fast.
He couldn't have been strong enough, there must have been two men.
If I was a jury member i would have voted guilty.. No one but an enraged OJ could move that fast and killed. No doubt in my mind.
2007-06-26 16:02:18 · answer #5 · answered by whoopswhosfault 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good question jsensei99.
The answer must be that he is NOT innocent.
And he's free as a bird to go play golf and try to sell a book about how he "would have" killed her (if he did).
What a jerk.
2007-06-26 18:29:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
OJ is. He's dillegently searching every golf courst, bar, restaurant, and hot spot he can find.
2007-06-26 18:30:13 · answer #7 · answered by jorst 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
OJ didn't killed those people !!
and he is innocent
why 'em jew still going after him
2007-06-27 02:01:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suggest you look into this a little closer and then you'll changed your mind and see the "whys" of it.
2007-06-28 07:00:29 · answer #9 · answered by cowboydoc 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He is looking and he found the murder when he looked in the mirror
2007-06-26 16:11:12 · answer #10 · answered by sandrathelover 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋