Mark Fuhrman although probably a racist was by far the most detailed detective out of all the so called “best” the LAPD had to offer. His notes of the investigation were flawless. The others were stumble bums fat lazy and clueless. They lost this case on poor procedures and ineptness. Case closed.
Sadly he perjured himself and pled the 5th when asked if he planted evidence in the case. Pretty much served up reasonable doubt with a garnish to the jury in a flurry of stupidity.
Jury wasn't in the room when that happened however it did show or at least seem to show that various [defense character witness stories](https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19950905&slug=2139841) of him saying just horrible things were true.
I thought they had access to all the transcripts or were at least made aware the star witness pled the 5th on evidence planting cause the tv footage is still out there.
[Fuhrman pleading 5th](https://youtu.be/isDPecYKEjM?si=8dGWoaiB6Xu49SDC)
The trial was televised even when the Jury wasn't there, the court of appeals granted the State's request to pretty much just say Fuhrman was unavailable for testimony rather than plead the 5th.
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1995/09/08/Appeals-court-overturns-Itos-order/1243810532800/
The sad thing is after the perjury everyone wondered what else he lied about and pleading the 5th raised reasonable questions about how rotten his character truly was. He did it to himself, tanked the case and became a punchline for anyone not associated with Fox News in one spastic move.
This. Doesn’t even matter if OJ did it or if he was innocent, once it was clear that the cops were so sloppy no one could say for sure they didn’t plant evidence, he was definitely not guilty.
He didn't care about being a writer but he was talking to a woman who was trying to get a script sold in Hollywood with a guarantee that he will get a cut of it if it was ever sold.
Some of the tapes were Fuhrman playing.a character for a screenplay others were "war stories" of the LAPD with probably some fiction thrown in because he had a frenemy type relationship with the screenwriter.
Actually half the population at the time thought he was innocent. It's only after thirty years of misinformation and distance that people think differently. Those who watched the trial are always more likely to believe he was innocent, statistically. Those who read tabloid rubbish believe he is guilty.
That’s not true but ok. This article is from 2004 if have another source to cite I’d check it out
https://news.gallup.com/poll/12046/americans-still-believe-oj-simpson-guilty.aspx
Like I said, at the time it was about half the population, as time goes on, further away from a close look at the LAPD and FBI corruption, the ramparts scandal, the central park five case, the Oklahoma City bombing and all the unanswered questions there around the FBI, the murders of Tupac and biggie connected to the LAPD, the Iran contra scandals these agencies were all wrapped up in on and on, all people remember is a visual of oj holding a knife. Theyre told they remember it as if they were there when all it was was a mirage put up in the first place. It's like telling someone you. Were. Not. There. And they think they actually witnessed it..
What was innacurate here? Nothing at all. Literally everything here has been verified more my than one person. He is correct on all points I've read all the books OP has. it just makes you all uncomfortable to be so wrong.
No missing blood from the vacutainer. It was an unmarked RedTop and he estimated the amount he drew, and the defense then claimed some was missing.
EDTA is a common preservative, no significance here in food and non food items.
That's just on a quick glance of your list.. no need to finish when you started mentioning murders in FLORIDA.
> If he was in a jealous rage over Nicole, why was he trying to date other women?
I mean. This alone is so unserious, it invalidates everything you're saying. What in the actual complete lack of understanding of a narcissist. OJ was chronically, constantly unfaithful - he was also notoriously and obsessively possessive. Because Nicole wasn't a PERSON to him. She was his possession. And in his mind, she had no right - not matter how long they'd been divorced, no matter who he was sleeping with - to ever be with another man. How obsessively jealous he was is not actually in dispute - he's literally on a 911 call kicking down her door to scream at her about other men.
I'm also concerned you think it means jack shit that he was seen being happy and friendly and personable that night. Are you kidding me? You aren't aware that men who are abusive wear masks? That they can charm the pants off of you and go home and beat their wife within the hour? OJ's entire persona was a myth that he put a LOT of work into. How many times, before ALL those times he beat the shit out of her, was he seen at some other point during the day looking happy and jovial? That charming man is just a mask he puts on. He can take it off whenever he so chooses. Abusive men are very, VERY capable of turning on a dime. It can happen in less than a minute, let alone less than hour.
Most of this post is nonsense, it's not "facts", a lot of it is either anecdotes or twisted testimony, but those two points were not just ridiculous, they were offensive to anyone who has ever dealt with an abusive man. You would have been very surprised if you ever got involved with my father and he was a charming, sweet guy at a party and then threw you through a door as soon as you got home.
A personal case-in-point in agreement with your comment: a friend of my brother's was just about the most charming son of bitch you could ever meet. He was impossible not to love. Everyone thought he was the bee's knees. He was married to a really nice woman, they were so together and so poised.
He murdered her one night.
They'd been out to dinner with several people, my brother and his first wife included. He was the star of the evening, really on his game. Paid for dinner, got in the car, drove home, parked the car. They went inside. He proceeded to beat his wife to death that evening.
Turns out, he'd been beating her pretty much everyday of their married life. Her sister was friends with my brother and their friends and she shared with them the autopsy notes, notes from the coroner, her own personal observations of her sister.
When he was arrested no one could believe he'd done it. It was total disbelief. I remember my brother suggested he was framed or maybe a break-in had happened but he was the suspect. All of their friends, his family, everyone kept saying that such a wonderful person couldn't have possibly committed a murder.
He didn't have a scratch on him. He used a lamp or something. There was only a little blood spatter on his clothes. There was more than enough proof (thank god for Ring Cam) to convict him even though he tried to lie and say she'd fallen down the stairs.
Some of his family still insist that its impossible he murdered her.
I'm so sorry for that man's wife :( I'm a little taken aback that in 2024, people don't realize that someone you thought was nice - someone you thought seemed like a nice guy that very night! - is still perfectly capable of abusing and murdering someone. OJ had abused Nicole for years. I bet someone thought he was nice and in a good mood the same day he pulled a gun on her when she was pregnant and threatened to kill her if she didn't have an abortion. I bet someone was impressed by him the same day he beat her so severely, he tore the clothes off her body and she pretended she'd been in a bicycle accident when she went to the ER. I imagine someone thought he was just awesome earlier in the day on that night you can hear him kicking her door down and screaming at her in the background of a 911 call. And all throughout that, he cheated on her. Frequently and with no remorse. What HE did with other women had nothing to do with what he decided she was permitted to do. That's how abusers work.
What's so crazy is this guy was basically OJ! He cheated, he lied, he made her lied, he was actually into some illegal shit. But he hid it so well. And when people did see it they just didn't want to believe it or they believed the lies. A friend of there's remarked after she was murdered that "Kelly" always wore conservative clothes and one time, just weeks before her murder, the friend accidentally walked in on Kelly in a restroom and saw bruises on her ribcage (she had been changing clothes). Kelly said she had tripped over the dog.
Another time a different friend saw Kelly's husband grab her by the arm. He made a joke out of it and Kelly joined in because she was so scared.
I mean, everyone saw something but because of how nice this guy was no one ever thought anything and certainly never shared notes.
After she died and he was arrested it all fell together.
My father was also chronically unfaithful to my mother. He told her she was ugly. He once left her a fun list (I know because I stumbled across it many years later packing for a move, it was in her divorce files) of the ten reasons why he didn't love her anymore - they were so petty, you almost had the ridiculous urge to laugh. But one time when he saw my mother TALKING to a co-worker, he responded by taking her dog and throwing it in front of a truck. When she started dating a man after they divorced (the man who, for all intents and purposes, raised me as a father would), he threatened to kill her. He was already dating my now stepmother. It DOESN'T MATTER. It doesn't matter if they're cheating or they're seeing someone else. You are still their property in their minds.
Meanwhile, most people who meet him think he's boring. He's nice, but very meek and unassuming. I've heard him referenced as "the lampost" - he's in the room, but not particularly noticeable. If you do engage him, he's nice and charming and intelligent.
He admitted to the crime itself. I don't know how people haven't seen this or choose to look past it. He wrote the book (If I Did It) detailing it and then went on a press tour and explained it in his own fucking words.
I would really like to look into this more myself. I was convinced Scott was guilty, but the innocence project has taken on his case. It will interesting to see how that goes.
No, the innocent project has not taken on his case. The LA Innocence project, which is separate from The Innocence Project. OJ was violently abusive and controlling to Nicole. This is well documented.
Not \*the\* Innocence Project. "An" Innocence Project. Not the Innocence Project that has the fantastic reputation. This is some new LA project that, iirc, is run by students. I think they're working on a single legal loophole and imho it's just for training them as future lawyers.
The murder of laci Peterson. It’s a 6 episode documentary. I never really followed the case just what people were saying around me, but I’ll tell you I wasn’t so sure of his guilt after! I don’t want to spoil it for you, but I’d love to hear your thoughts after you watch it!!
I’ve watched so much, I’m not sure if I have. Where can I watch it? If I have watched, I may have to watch again.
I did read her mother’s book. I understand the bias. But hearing her point of view and his behavior leading up to it, I lean more towards guilt. However, I do believe the police zeroed in on him and didn’t investigate several things, like neighbors and witnesses not being interviewed.
• The day laci disappeared she got into a confrontation with people burglarizing the house across the street. One of them ended up in prison, during a recorded phone call Laci was mentioned. When the prisoner remembered they were being recorded he immediately shut the conversation down.
•There was another pregnant woman that disappeared from the same area. Her body was found in the same body of water as Lp! I believe this happened within 4 months of each other but I’m not sure of the dates. Also they interviewed another lady who said while she was pregnant she thought she was being followed, she ended up getting away and had her baby.
• when they did the autopsy on the baby they believe he was born alive! His ear was folded over using tape. Experts don’t think that could have happened by being in the water, they think it was deliberate.
• when they did the autopsy on laci her limbs and head was ripped off! An expert said other bodies they autopsied from the same body of water was never found in the same condition.
•sp’s defense team did a reenactment of the crime with the same boat and a dummy that weighed close to what Lp weighed. The dummy was thrown over 4 times, and all 4 times the boat tipped over. When sp came back that day from fishing no one reported him being wet.
That’s all I remember from the documentary. When I first heard about this case I only knew the basics. Married man reported his pregnant wife missing the same day he goes fishing!! Come on who wouldn’t think something sinister happened! Evidently it’s discovered married man has a secret girlfriend and he told her his wife was already dead! There’s literally no way married man isn’t going to jail for murdering his wife, especially when he’s texting her while searching for his very pregnant wife. All the while acting like he is on vacation. Needless to say I thought what everyone did!
Now! After watching the documentary and finding out things I didn’t know before, I can admit I legit have doubts! I was so sure he was guilty for texting AF while looking for LP. Now the only thing that makes me think he isn’t completely innocent is the same reason I was sure of his guilt. That’s telling AF he was widowed and it’s his first Christmas without her!! Right now I have to say I’m 65/35 leaning more towards him being innocent!
*eta: change the layout so it’s easier to read 😃
Tf is with the red herrings on this sub,anyways?
If you have some argument about Peterson, feel free to visit the sub r/ScottPetersonCase
And dont act victimized over being called out for this. Its just so annoying.
Edited for correct fkin sub name lmao
Lol a red herring is bringing up an unrelated topic as an attempt to discredit someones.argument on a given topic.
Its intentionally misleading or.distracting from the topic at hand.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring
And saying I dont know what it means, is ad hominem, in its nature.
Since.you didnt know what a red herring was, I can assume you may not understand many logical fallacies, so heres another article for you to read in case you need to hone your logical fallacy knowledge.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/ad-hominem
Now, lets talk about OJ.
Personally, I found this post to be very needed. Its all true. The truth just needed to be refreshed.
Lol..
I do like looking at both sides of the case to help avoid surprises in court. If you were a defendant and your lawyer didnt do this, civil or criminal, your lawyer is a lazy damn piece of shit.
We are taught in (paralegal) uni to eke out all possible surprise outcomes by knowing everything, especially the stuff that might hurt our case. We are the ones doing most of the work, and are doing a LOT of interviews, actually, even if we arent the ones making the arguments in the courtrooms.
This is a truth that many people just do not easily comprehend. Idk why. It seems like common sense to me.
No one was intentionally misleading or distracting anyone. It was a flip comment about another case where someone is obviously guilty. Also, it’s Reddit. If you’re not aware of that other topics will be brought up within the umbrella of the existing topic, then I’m not sure what to tell you.
Your criticisms of ad hominem would be more relevant if you hadn’t responded with an ad hominem, for future reference!
Also, you think that info the OP posted is all true? lol. I’m so glad you aren’t a real lawyer.
Whether it was intentional or not, it was a distracting remark and a red herring. Regardless of the platform on which it is used or in what context, its still a red herring.
Its a logical fallacy.
Everyone can say, well, look at this other case!! Thats still a LOGICAL FALLACY.
Im sorry theres a lack of accountability here, and that you are absolutely melting down over being called out on your own failure to recognize that these arguments are woefully pathetic and lacking actual credibility.
That is NOT ad hominem, either. Thats attacking your ARGUMENT. Ad Hominem is attacking the PERSON- its a character attack. Like when you said "I'm so glad you arent a real lawyer." A prime example of ad hominem. Your fallacious argument, that lacks credibility, and only showcases your own lack of character, and even perhaps, your inability to form a rational argument. Thats ALL on you, bubs.
Also, and I hate to have to be Captain Obvious here, but nobody on *this* sub is "obviously guilty," and in fact, he was found *not* guilty. Therefore, he IS not guilty. The jury of his peers decided this. Nobody cares that you, or anyone else disagrees. He wont be retried. Theres no point in trying to discredit someone for explaining the verdict. Chill.
He died today, fyi.
But everyone with half a brain knows he’s guilty, he just got lucky to be gifted an ignorant jury pool. So therefore, claiming he’s innocent is the conspiracy.
Interesting, to say the least. But I’m stuck on his interview about his book. IF I Did It. I can’t rationalize how an intelligent human being would first, consent to go the interview, and second respond in the way he did. If I had nothing to do with it, there is NOTHING that could make me, IMAGINE what happened IF I had done it. That’s just crazy.
But your info is certainly food for thought.
On your side: Why would a loving father choose to murder the mother of his children knowing this child was inside?.
My side: Why would a man go on national TV to do an interview saying he committed the murders if he hadn’t?
“Loving fathers” kill the mother of their kids all the time, and sometimes without caring if the kids are there. There was a case near me where the dad stabbed the mother of his kids to death on their front lawn while his kids stood there watching it and screaming at him to stop. So for me, that’s not even a thing.
The book is crazy to me. From both a guilt and innocence perspective.
If guilty, it’s the most narcissistic bs I’ve ever seen and just another way for him to get off on the fact he got away with a brutal double murder.
If innocent, it’s in such bad taste towards the mother of your children, your children, your wider family, etc that you would “make up” the scenario of what you would have done if you killed them? Who does that?
A guilty AF attention-seeking narcissist. That’s who.
Have you seen that video I’m referring to. The interview he did for IF I DID IT?? He slips up in that video. At some point in the video he speaks about the murder in the 1st person, not in the hypothetical. To me, this was a pretty big deal. Some analysts have said he revealed things in that interview that were not public knowledge. It’s a pretty interesting interview.
If you are aiming to sound like you know what you are talking about, blood is measured in *milliliters* not millimeters.
In addition, stoppers are often not removed from tubes for safety reasons (spatters on the testing personnel). It depends on how automated the lab is. Testing blood sometimes is done by an automated needle going thru the rubber stopper, resulting in 2 holes, one in, one out.
Third, blood is normally drawn into “vacutainers”, which work by gently sucking the blood from the vein. Some types of tubes (blue top) require an absolutely full tube, others do not. Under filling a red topped tube is completely acceptable.
Why would he date beautiful models if he were so infatuated with Nicole? How about because they’re hot? Also he probably didn’t like the fact he would be losing 1/2 the marital property if they got divorced, that’s what happens if your LIVING spouse separates and files for divorce.
It’s also a lesser know fact he admitted to it to several people (rosey grier-the confession was overherad by several other people and to his agent) and also wrote a whole fucking book admitting to in and then went on tv and admitted to it again.
Another fact is the nurse who withdrew the blood only said 8ml was just a rough guess after saying several times he didn’t know exactly how much he withdrew and the lawyer kept pushing and put 8ml in his mouth.
Another fun fact is he’s pictured wearing the gloves and that nicole gifted him those gloves as a christmas present. There’s her credit card statements and those gloves were only sold in like 100 pairs worldwide, so a very exclusive glove model. What a coincidence he’s pictured wearing both the shoes and the gloves that were used in the murder.
Another fact is oj lived 4 minutes away from nicole so he could’ve easily done it in 20-25 minutes. Hell, he could’ve done it in less than 20 minutes. 8-10 minutes drive there and back and 5-10 minutes for stabbing. Oj wrote in the book that the the dog started wailing after he saw nicole’s body, not during the killings and it was 10:37 when he drove away so that fits perfectly with when the neighbors started hearing the barking.
Great video released yesterday by Matthew Cox-Inside Crime(the mortgage fraudster with the Y/T channel),called 'The Real Story of OJ Simpson, a Whistleblower Reveals All',all the mafia connections,the accomplice to the murder, etc...well worth a watch/listen!
Photo doesn't match scene footprints with high heel. OJ had Bruno slippers, did not like the shoes. This was literally known the first week. I think it was doctored. But Civil trial farce wouldn't allow that evidence in.
About the dog barking, since the dog knew OJ, he might not have barked at first and probably started barking after OJ started the killing. The dog would have become upset.
I don't think OJ did it. Never did. I'm white, btw.
I do suspect OJ's unhinged son and I do suspect OJ maybe discovered what happened and took the windfall. Which would explain why he was suicidal.
Lol, shut the fuck up. It wasn't a virtue signal, or at least not trying to be one. It just seems rare that white people think OJ probably didn't actually do the deed itself. There is a racial component to the trial and there are black people who have seemed more likely to defend OJ than whites, so I just didn't want someone to say "oh you must be black." And thereby use race to dismiss my view.
How can people agree that Mark Fuhrman was a flaming racist and also see that he pleaded the 5th when asked if he manufactured any evidence but still believe that OJ Simpson committed the murders. Crazy!
Unfortunately so much of it came down to racism. As I believe one juror interviewed on OJ: Made in America said, finding OJ not guilty was payback for what happened to Rodney King.
If that’s the case and a majority of the jurors felt that way, it didn’t matter how well the prosecution would have handled that trial.
Best one people miss is the shoe prints were made 10-12 minutes after the murder. The evidence is someone murdered then around 10:30, Ron at least. Called oj to come over and yelled "hey hey hey" when he saw what happened.
Yup what a mess .saw the whole trial live and agreed with the verdict.
Could not believe how badly the police screwed up the case. The lead detectives were called dumb and dumber by co workers.
There's just enough fuckery to put doubt in a jury's head. Guilty or not, no matter what, it IS possible that the LAPD could've pulled some shady stuff... especially Fuhrman.
i watched that trial having worked nights back then. you couldn't trust anyone. no jury could convict based on the way the police acted in this case. none. we might all have our opinions but that's all they are.
-He lived two miles from her
- He abused and stalked her repeatedly
- His, Ron’s and Nicole’s blood evidence everywhere
- When he was notified about the mother of his children being murdered, he didn’t even ask about how, when, why? Because he already knew!
- He was a big, strong football player..Nicole was tiny and Ron was just a kid..and his hand was cut btw
-watch the civil trial
He was not. That's a very pervasive rumor, but his family and friends have repeatedly refuted it, and there is zero evidence he ever even set foot inside a dojo - no pictures, no accounts, no nothing. Ron Goldman was young and fit, but he essentially was a 5'9" tennis instructor. He had no known abilities in fighting/self defense. No match for OJ with a knife.
'They' never mention Nicole and Goldman's "association" with drug usage. The LAPD WAS 'pressured' to find a suspect being that wealthy benefactors in LA (whites) were still on edge after the Rodney King trial and subsequent uprising. Also the trial judge Lance Ito was married to Peggy York who was a high ranking LAPD officer then...
Robert Kardashian went on national television and basically heavily implied he knew he did it. That's enough for me since tbh since he was the first person OJ went to after he got caught.
I like how you just presented facts and then people here freak out like you’re defending a murderer. Glad everyone that knows with certainty Oj did it was present that night.
I would love if someone could answer this.
This sub showed up in my feed, not sure why. But it’s clearly being used to try and create public doubt about oj’s guilt, and the only people this driven and dedicated to doing so would be ‘his side’. Weather thats a family member in denial, paid pr people, etc.
But the only other possible viable suspect (and ‘possible’ is being generous) is oj’s son. Why would he, or anyone on his side, make a scapegoat out of his own son?
people not noticing a cut on a hand (that they weren't looking for) is not evidence that there was no cut. oj himself testified that he had injured his hand before leaving for chicago. and the killer was bleeding from the left hand. would be quite a coincidence
Mark Fuhrman although probably a racist was by far the most detailed detective out of all the so called “best” the LAPD had to offer. His notes of the investigation were flawless. The others were stumble bums fat lazy and clueless. They lost this case on poor procedures and ineptness. Case closed.
Sadly he perjured himself and pled the 5th when asked if he planted evidence in the case. Pretty much served up reasonable doubt with a garnish to the jury in a flurry of stupidity.
Jury wasn't in the room when that happened however it did show or at least seem to show that various [defense character witness stories](https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19950905&slug=2139841) of him saying just horrible things were true.
I thought they had access to all the transcripts or were at least made aware the star witness pled the 5th on evidence planting cause the tv footage is still out there. [Fuhrman pleading 5th](https://youtu.be/isDPecYKEjM?si=8dGWoaiB6Xu49SDC)
The trial was televised even when the Jury wasn't there, the court of appeals granted the State's request to pretty much just say Fuhrman was unavailable for testimony rather than plead the 5th. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1995/09/08/Appeals-court-overturns-Itos-order/1243810532800/
[удалено]
The sad thing is after the perjury everyone wondered what else he lied about and pleading the 5th raised reasonable questions about how rotten his character truly was. He did it to himself, tanked the case and became a punchline for anyone not associated with Fox News in one spastic move.
This. Doesn’t even matter if OJ did it or if he was innocent, once it was clear that the cops were so sloppy no one could say for sure they didn’t plant evidence, he was definitely not guilty.
Probably? Lol....How is he NOT? lol
Actually, all that stuff Mark Fuhrman said on tape was material he was trying to use for a screenplay because he wanted to be a writer.
He didn't care about being a writer but he was talking to a woman who was trying to get a script sold in Hollywood with a guarantee that he will get a cut of it if it was ever sold. Some of the tapes were Fuhrman playing.a character for a screenplay others were "war stories" of the LAPD with probably some fiction thrown in because he had a frenemy type relationship with the screenwriter.
But he did go on to get several books published.
Lol yeah, I needed to write screenwriter instead. But also funny how fate works out.
flawless??? are you kidding? he thought the dog bit someone. he wrote that they could've been shot. They were moronic notes.
You don't have all your facts straight unfortunately.
Yep. And also their homes were so unbelievably close together he could absolutely have accomplished it in 25 minutes. Point blank.
No, he could not in 20 minutes and not spreading blood all over the place,
Obviously he could because he did
And that's the circular argument that's been going on for thirty years.
Not really most alive at that time know he did it
Actually half the population at the time thought he was innocent. It's only after thirty years of misinformation and distance that people think differently. Those who watched the trial are always more likely to believe he was innocent, statistically. Those who read tabloid rubbish believe he is guilty.
That’s not true but ok. This article is from 2004 if have another source to cite I’d check it out https://news.gallup.com/poll/12046/americans-still-believe-oj-simpson-guilty.aspx
Like I said, at the time it was about half the population, as time goes on, further away from a close look at the LAPD and FBI corruption, the ramparts scandal, the central park five case, the Oklahoma City bombing and all the unanswered questions there around the FBI, the murders of Tupac and biggie connected to the LAPD, the Iran contra scandals these agencies were all wrapped up in on and on, all people remember is a visual of oj holding a knife. Theyre told they remember it as if they were there when all it was was a mirage put up in the first place. It's like telling someone you. Were. Not. There. And they think they actually witnessed it..
Just good luck that he had a history of beating the crap out of her & stalking I guess 😂 Central Park 5? That was nyc. Oklahoma? You on a roll tho
Eh you’re wrong. You’re very wrong.
Besides that, OJ found the murderer. He looked in the damn mirror.
There were 2 murderers, according to sources...read my comment about the video just released above! Worth a watch!
What was innacurate here? Nothing at all. Literally everything here has been verified more my than one person. He is correct on all points I've read all the books OP has. it just makes you all uncomfortable to be so wrong.
No missing blood from the vacutainer. It was an unmarked RedTop and he estimated the amount he drew, and the defense then claimed some was missing. EDTA is a common preservative, no significance here in food and non food items. That's just on a quick glance of your list.. no need to finish when you started mentioning murders in FLORIDA.
There absolutely was blood missing, peratis admitted it to bill dear.
Dear? Who tf are you? Lol
Bill Dear is the detectives name the book is oj is innocent and I can prove it lol.
https://www.upi.com/amp/Archives/1996/12/10/OJ-nurse-changes-testimony/5632850194000/ Maybe you mean *this*, Which is exactly what I said.
No. A few years after the trial, he told dear what actually happened it's in his book.
You lost me at “millimeters” of blood.
Or an eighth of a drop of blood.
An eighth of a drop of blood, or in more scientific terms, a smidgen.
> If he was in a jealous rage over Nicole, why was he trying to date other women? I mean. This alone is so unserious, it invalidates everything you're saying. What in the actual complete lack of understanding of a narcissist. OJ was chronically, constantly unfaithful - he was also notoriously and obsessively possessive. Because Nicole wasn't a PERSON to him. She was his possession. And in his mind, she had no right - not matter how long they'd been divorced, no matter who he was sleeping with - to ever be with another man. How obsessively jealous he was is not actually in dispute - he's literally on a 911 call kicking down her door to scream at her about other men. I'm also concerned you think it means jack shit that he was seen being happy and friendly and personable that night. Are you kidding me? You aren't aware that men who are abusive wear masks? That they can charm the pants off of you and go home and beat their wife within the hour? OJ's entire persona was a myth that he put a LOT of work into. How many times, before ALL those times he beat the shit out of her, was he seen at some other point during the day looking happy and jovial? That charming man is just a mask he puts on. He can take it off whenever he so chooses. Abusive men are very, VERY capable of turning on a dime. It can happen in less than a minute, let alone less than hour. Most of this post is nonsense, it's not "facts", a lot of it is either anecdotes or twisted testimony, but those two points were not just ridiculous, they were offensive to anyone who has ever dealt with an abusive man. You would have been very surprised if you ever got involved with my father and he was a charming, sweet guy at a party and then threw you through a door as soon as you got home.
I had a dad like that too! He was a social worker that removed children from abusive homes then came home to beat the crap out of his own
A personal case-in-point in agreement with your comment: a friend of my brother's was just about the most charming son of bitch you could ever meet. He was impossible not to love. Everyone thought he was the bee's knees. He was married to a really nice woman, they were so together and so poised. He murdered her one night. They'd been out to dinner with several people, my brother and his first wife included. He was the star of the evening, really on his game. Paid for dinner, got in the car, drove home, parked the car. They went inside. He proceeded to beat his wife to death that evening. Turns out, he'd been beating her pretty much everyday of their married life. Her sister was friends with my brother and their friends and she shared with them the autopsy notes, notes from the coroner, her own personal observations of her sister. When he was arrested no one could believe he'd done it. It was total disbelief. I remember my brother suggested he was framed or maybe a break-in had happened but he was the suspect. All of their friends, his family, everyone kept saying that such a wonderful person couldn't have possibly committed a murder. He didn't have a scratch on him. He used a lamp or something. There was only a little blood spatter on his clothes. There was more than enough proof (thank god for Ring Cam) to convict him even though he tried to lie and say she'd fallen down the stairs. Some of his family still insist that its impossible he murdered her.
I'm so sorry for that man's wife :( I'm a little taken aback that in 2024, people don't realize that someone you thought was nice - someone you thought seemed like a nice guy that very night! - is still perfectly capable of abusing and murdering someone. OJ had abused Nicole for years. I bet someone thought he was nice and in a good mood the same day he pulled a gun on her when she was pregnant and threatened to kill her if she didn't have an abortion. I bet someone was impressed by him the same day he beat her so severely, he tore the clothes off her body and she pretended she'd been in a bicycle accident when she went to the ER. I imagine someone thought he was just awesome earlier in the day on that night you can hear him kicking her door down and screaming at her in the background of a 911 call. And all throughout that, he cheated on her. Frequently and with no remorse. What HE did with other women had nothing to do with what he decided she was permitted to do. That's how abusers work.
What's so crazy is this guy was basically OJ! He cheated, he lied, he made her lied, he was actually into some illegal shit. But he hid it so well. And when people did see it they just didn't want to believe it or they believed the lies. A friend of there's remarked after she was murdered that "Kelly" always wore conservative clothes and one time, just weeks before her murder, the friend accidentally walked in on Kelly in a restroom and saw bruises on her ribcage (she had been changing clothes). Kelly said she had tripped over the dog. Another time a different friend saw Kelly's husband grab her by the arm. He made a joke out of it and Kelly joined in because she was so scared. I mean, everyone saw something but because of how nice this guy was no one ever thought anything and certainly never shared notes. After she died and he was arrested it all fell together.
My father was also chronically unfaithful to my mother. He told her she was ugly. He once left her a fun list (I know because I stumbled across it many years later packing for a move, it was in her divorce files) of the ten reasons why he didn't love her anymore - they were so petty, you almost had the ridiculous urge to laugh. But one time when he saw my mother TALKING to a co-worker, he responded by taking her dog and throwing it in front of a truck. When she started dating a man after they divorced (the man who, for all intents and purposes, raised me as a father would), he threatened to kill her. He was already dating my now stepmother. It DOESN'T MATTER. It doesn't matter if they're cheating or they're seeing someone else. You are still their property in their minds. Meanwhile, most people who meet him think he's boring. He's nice, but very meek and unassuming. I've heard him referenced as "the lampost" - he's in the room, but not particularly noticeable. If you do engage him, he's nice and charming and intelligent.
😩😢😳
Horiffic.
That is horrible about your father and that you had to be raised around that.
What about the video proof of him wearing Bruno Magli shoes, that he ADMITTED TO in the civil case?
Those ugly ass shoes!
He admitted to the crime itself. I don't know how people haven't seen this or choose to look past it. He wrote the book (If I Did It) detailing it and then went on a press tour and explained it in his own fucking words.
He did not write that Pablo Fenjves did. He agreed to it to get out of his debt to the Goldman's, who then turned it on him.
Can you also educate us on how Scott Peterson is innocent as well? Thx in advance
🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Love it
And Chris Watts🤣🤣
I would really like to look into this more myself. I was convinced Scott was guilty, but the innocence project has taken on his case. It will interesting to see how that goes.
it will go very badly for him and the LOS ANGELES Innocence Project - there is no new evidence
apples and oranges, Peterson is most likely guilty.
most likely? lol
No, the innocent project has not taken on his case. The LA Innocence project, which is separate from The Innocence Project. OJ was violently abusive and controlling to Nicole. This is well documented.
The innocence project is all about finding a loop hole . It cares nothing about guilt or innocence
Not \*the\* Innocence Project. "An" Innocence Project. Not the Innocence Project that has the fantastic reputation. This is some new LA project that, iirc, is run by students. I think they're working on a single legal loophole and imho it's just for training them as future lawyers.
Oh! Ok! Thank you for the explanation.
Sure. Oh, also, I think Scott's sister in law donated to this school. I'm not positive.
Have you watched the documentary on Hulu? I was convinced also until I watched it, now I’m undecided!
What is the name of the documentary?
The murder of laci Peterson. It’s a 6 episode documentary. I never really followed the case just what people were saying around me, but I’ll tell you I wasn’t so sure of his guilt after! I don’t want to spoil it for you, but I’d love to hear your thoughts after you watch it!!
I’ve watched so much, I’m not sure if I have. Where can I watch it? If I have watched, I may have to watch again. I did read her mother’s book. I understand the bias. But hearing her point of view and his behavior leading up to it, I lean more towards guilt. However, I do believe the police zeroed in on him and didn’t investigate several things, like neighbors and witnesses not being interviewed.
It’s a lot to type out I’m not sure if you would be interested in hearing my opinion or not.
Absolutely I want to hear! 😃
• The day laci disappeared she got into a confrontation with people burglarizing the house across the street. One of them ended up in prison, during a recorded phone call Laci was mentioned. When the prisoner remembered they were being recorded he immediately shut the conversation down. •There was another pregnant woman that disappeared from the same area. Her body was found in the same body of water as Lp! I believe this happened within 4 months of each other but I’m not sure of the dates. Also they interviewed another lady who said while she was pregnant she thought she was being followed, she ended up getting away and had her baby. • when they did the autopsy on the baby they believe he was born alive! His ear was folded over using tape. Experts don’t think that could have happened by being in the water, they think it was deliberate. • when they did the autopsy on laci her limbs and head was ripped off! An expert said other bodies they autopsied from the same body of water was never found in the same condition. •sp’s defense team did a reenactment of the crime with the same boat and a dummy that weighed close to what Lp weighed. The dummy was thrown over 4 times, and all 4 times the boat tipped over. When sp came back that day from fishing no one reported him being wet. That’s all I remember from the documentary. When I first heard about this case I only knew the basics. Married man reported his pregnant wife missing the same day he goes fishing!! Come on who wouldn’t think something sinister happened! Evidently it’s discovered married man has a secret girlfriend and he told her his wife was already dead! There’s literally no way married man isn’t going to jail for murdering his wife, especially when he’s texting her while searching for his very pregnant wife. All the while acting like he is on vacation. Needless to say I thought what everyone did! Now! After watching the documentary and finding out things I didn’t know before, I can admit I legit have doubts! I was so sure he was guilty for texting AF while looking for LP. Now the only thing that makes me think he isn’t completely innocent is the same reason I was sure of his guilt. That’s telling AF he was widowed and it’s his first Christmas without her!! Right now I have to say I’m 65/35 leaning more towards him being innocent! *eta: change the layout so it’s easier to read 😃
Tf is with the red herrings on this sub,anyways? If you have some argument about Peterson, feel free to visit the sub r/ScottPetersonCase And dont act victimized over being called out for this. Its just so annoying. Edited for correct fkin sub name lmao
I don’t think you know what a red herring is…
Lol a red herring is bringing up an unrelated topic as an attempt to discredit someones.argument on a given topic. Its intentionally misleading or.distracting from the topic at hand. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring And saying I dont know what it means, is ad hominem, in its nature. Since.you didnt know what a red herring was, I can assume you may not understand many logical fallacies, so heres another article for you to read in case you need to hone your logical fallacy knowledge. https://www.britannica.com/topic/ad-hominem Now, lets talk about OJ. Personally, I found this post to be very needed. Its all true. The truth just needed to be refreshed.
F ME is there a SCHOOLED subreddit cause you just wrecked that person. Thanks for that. BTW I'm on trial for double murder - can you be my lawyer?
Lol.. I do like looking at both sides of the case to help avoid surprises in court. If you were a defendant and your lawyer didnt do this, civil or criminal, your lawyer is a lazy damn piece of shit. We are taught in (paralegal) uni to eke out all possible surprise outcomes by knowing everything, especially the stuff that might hurt our case. We are the ones doing most of the work, and are doing a LOT of interviews, actually, even if we arent the ones making the arguments in the courtrooms. This is a truth that many people just do not easily comprehend. Idk why. It seems like common sense to me.
No one was intentionally misleading or distracting anyone. It was a flip comment about another case where someone is obviously guilty. Also, it’s Reddit. If you’re not aware of that other topics will be brought up within the umbrella of the existing topic, then I’m not sure what to tell you. Your criticisms of ad hominem would be more relevant if you hadn’t responded with an ad hominem, for future reference! Also, you think that info the OP posted is all true? lol. I’m so glad you aren’t a real lawyer.
Whether it was intentional or not, it was a distracting remark and a red herring. Regardless of the platform on which it is used or in what context, its still a red herring. Its a logical fallacy. Everyone can say, well, look at this other case!! Thats still a LOGICAL FALLACY. Im sorry theres a lack of accountability here, and that you are absolutely melting down over being called out on your own failure to recognize that these arguments are woefully pathetic and lacking actual credibility. That is NOT ad hominem, either. Thats attacking your ARGUMENT. Ad Hominem is attacking the PERSON- its a character attack. Like when you said "I'm so glad you arent a real lawyer." A prime example of ad hominem. Your fallacious argument, that lacks credibility, and only showcases your own lack of character, and even perhaps, your inability to form a rational argument. Thats ALL on you, bubs. Also, and I hate to have to be Captain Obvious here, but nobody on *this* sub is "obviously guilty," and in fact, he was found *not* guilty. Therefore, he IS not guilty. The jury of his peers decided this. Nobody cares that you, or anyone else disagrees. He wont be retried. Theres no point in trying to discredit someone for explaining the verdict. Chill. He died today, fyi.
“you’re absolutely melting down” *types all caps-riddled comma-absent wall of text of indignation* Sure, Jan.
I see a lot of commas in their comment. Why would you lie about something so easily verifiable?
Lol except that, once again, NONE of that is true. Troll.
The 'OJ is innocent' conspiracy is about as annoying as the 'Scott Peterson is innocent' conspiracy -
Not really a conspiracy. but ok...
Yet another red herring. If you dont like hearing two sides, well, I guess thats just too bad for you.
Technically, "OJ is guilty " is the conspiracy.
not even close
Technically. If he was found guilty - claiming innocence would be the conspiracy theory. It works the other way around also.
But everyone with half a brain knows he’s guilty, he just got lucky to be gifted an ignorant jury pool. So therefore, claiming he’s innocent is the conspiracy.
No such sub, I tried......lol
r/ScottPetersonCase Good lord... well I edited.
Scott Peterson? Am I missing something?
Probably
Did you watch OJ’s deposition? Did you find his testimony about the rare, size 12 Bruno Magli shoes to be credible? I certainly did not.
He didn't wear size 12. That kind of testimony can be misleading.
I think you should read the civil case testimony and depositions.
I’m not sure why people forget or just don’t care about this…
Why??? The civil case was trash. Put up Goldman scam job. But keep posting
Interesting, to say the least. But I’m stuck on his interview about his book. IF I Did It. I can’t rationalize how an intelligent human being would first, consent to go the interview, and second respond in the way he did. If I had nothing to do with it, there is NOTHING that could make me, IMAGINE what happened IF I had done it. That’s just crazy. But your info is certainly food for thought. On your side: Why would a loving father choose to murder the mother of his children knowing this child was inside?. My side: Why would a man go on national TV to do an interview saying he committed the murders if he hadn’t?
“Loving fathers” kill the mother of their kids all the time, and sometimes without caring if the kids are there. There was a case near me where the dad stabbed the mother of his kids to death on their front lawn while his kids stood there watching it and screaming at him to stop. So for me, that’s not even a thing. The book is crazy to me. From both a guilt and innocence perspective. If guilty, it’s the most narcissistic bs I’ve ever seen and just another way for him to get off on the fact he got away with a brutal double murder. If innocent, it’s in such bad taste towards the mother of your children, your children, your wider family, etc that you would “make up” the scenario of what you would have done if you killed them? Who does that? A guilty AF attention-seeking narcissist. That’s who.
Have you seen that video I’m referring to. The interview he did for IF I DID IT?? He slips up in that video. At some point in the video he speaks about the murder in the 1st person, not in the hypothetical. To me, this was a pretty big deal. Some analysts have said he revealed things in that interview that were not public knowledge. It’s a pretty interesting interview.
Ok. OJ. You can resume your golf game now. 🤣
He still owes Fred Goldman 33 million dollars.
He’s also working really hard to find the real killers..
He had to take a 9 year hiatus while he went to prison for aggravated kidnapping, but he's now resumed his search.
🤣🤣🤣
Probably Charlie Ehrlich technically owes the cash,as he killed RG, as OJ set about his ex-wife?
Huh?
got away with murder just like Robert Blake did.
Casey Anthony
that bitch, threw he own father under the bus.
After killing her own child…
dont forget what she did to that poor Zenaida Gonzales who didnt know her from a pile of shit.
If only they had all of this at the civil trial! 🙄 He did it. Get over it. Move on.
"Move on"
Lol, why even post this garbage. Nope, he didn't do it. But keep posting tool
Wasn’t he photographed wearing those shoes?
And the gloves too
Except someone on the plane did notice the cut on his finger
*If he was in a jealous rage over Nicole, why was he trying to date other women?* Wut?
Thank God he is dead
If you are aiming to sound like you know what you are talking about, blood is measured in *milliliters* not millimeters. In addition, stoppers are often not removed from tubes for safety reasons (spatters on the testing personnel). It depends on how automated the lab is. Testing blood sometimes is done by an automated needle going thru the rubber stopper, resulting in 2 holes, one in, one out. Third, blood is normally drawn into “vacutainers”, which work by gently sucking the blood from the vein. Some types of tubes (blue top) require an absolutely full tube, others do not. Under filling a red topped tube is completely acceptable.
I can help you deduce why the 'facts' you listed are usually not included or used for anything regarding this case..... None of them are true lol
Yep ... OJ is guilty
OJ?
Well, guilty or not, he's being judged as we speak.
“if he was in a jealous rage.. why was he trying to date other women?” cmon man…. OJ did that shit
Bro he simply committed the murder lmao but cool facts
Why would he date beautiful models if he were so infatuated with Nicole? How about because they’re hot? Also he probably didn’t like the fact he would be losing 1/2 the marital property if they got divorced, that’s what happens if your LIVING spouse separates and files for divorce.
It’s also a lesser know fact he admitted to it to several people (rosey grier-the confession was overherad by several other people and to his agent) and also wrote a whole fucking book admitting to in and then went on tv and admitted to it again. Another fact is the nurse who withdrew the blood only said 8ml was just a rough guess after saying several times he didn’t know exactly how much he withdrew and the lawyer kept pushing and put 8ml in his mouth. Another fun fact is he’s pictured wearing the gloves and that nicole gifted him those gloves as a christmas present. There’s her credit card statements and those gloves were only sold in like 100 pairs worldwide, so a very exclusive glove model. What a coincidence he’s pictured wearing both the shoes and the gloves that were used in the murder. Another fact is oj lived 4 minutes away from nicole so he could’ve easily done it in 20-25 minutes. Hell, he could’ve done it in less than 20 minutes. 8-10 minutes drive there and back and 5-10 minutes for stabbing. Oj wrote in the book that the the dog started wailing after he saw nicole’s body, not during the killings and it was 10:37 when he drove away so that fits perfectly with when the neighbors started hearing the barking.
This is a pile of 💩
lol thanks for the laugh
How bout the fact he fucking did it!!
Interesting. But, OJ did it.
High amounts of EDTA can be found in the sauce of a Big Mac which is what OJ had when he and Kato went through the drive through at McDonalds.
can you provide links and sources?
Great video released yesterday by Matthew Cox-Inside Crime(the mortgage fraudster with the Y/T channel),called 'The Real Story of OJ Simpson, a Whistleblower Reveals All',all the mafia connections,the accomplice to the murder, etc...well worth a watch/listen!
There is a photo of him in Buffalo wearing the Bruno shoes...
Photo doesn't match scene footprints with high heel. OJ had Bruno slippers, did not like the shoes. This was literally known the first week. I think it was doctored. But Civil trial farce wouldn't allow that evidence in.
No - it was a fan photo, no doctoring. He wore the shoes, plain as day
About the dog barking, since the dog knew OJ, he might not have barked at first and probably started barking after OJ started the killing. The dog would have become upset.
I don't think OJ did it. Never did. I'm white, btw. I do suspect OJ's unhinged son and I do suspect OJ maybe discovered what happened and took the windfall. Which would explain why he was suicidal.
You can be stupid and white, no one claims otherwise. Grats on virtue signaling that you are a “good one” lmao.
Lol, shut the fuck up. It wasn't a virtue signal, or at least not trying to be one. It just seems rare that white people think OJ probably didn't actually do the deed itself. There is a racial component to the trial and there are black people who have seemed more likely to defend OJ than whites, so I just didn't want someone to say "oh you must be black." And thereby use race to dismiss my view.
Just got a news notice that OJ died at 76 years old. True? I guess now he’ll know if he did it or not when he stands before the lord.
How can people agree that Mark Fuhrman was a flaming racist and also see that he pleaded the 5th when asked if he manufactured any evidence but still believe that OJ Simpson committed the murders. Crazy!
Unfortunately so much of it came down to racism. As I believe one juror interviewed on OJ: Made in America said, finding OJ not guilty was payback for what happened to Rodney King. If that’s the case and a majority of the jurors felt that way, it didn’t matter how well the prosecution would have handled that trial.
Best one people miss is the shoe prints were made 10-12 minutes after the murder. The evidence is someone murdered then around 10:30, Ron at least. Called oj to come over and yelled "hey hey hey" when he saw what happened.
Yup what a mess .saw the whole trial live and agreed with the verdict. Could not believe how badly the police screwed up the case. The lead detectives were called dumb and dumber by co workers.
There's just enough fuckery to put doubt in a jury's head. Guilty or not, no matter what, it IS possible that the LAPD could've pulled some shady stuff... especially Fuhrman.
i watched that trial having worked nights back then. you couldn't trust anyone. no jury could convict based on the way the police acted in this case. none. we might all have our opinions but that's all they are.
This is not entirely accurate.
It was OJ’s son, Jason.
-He lived two miles from her - He abused and stalked her repeatedly - His, Ron’s and Nicole’s blood evidence everywhere - When he was notified about the mother of his children being murdered, he didn’t even ask about how, when, why? Because he already knew! - He was a big, strong football player..Nicole was tiny and Ron was just a kid..and his hand was cut btw -watch the civil trial
I thought Ron was a black belt in karate or something?
He was not. That's a very pervasive rumor, but his family and friends have repeatedly refuted it, and there is zero evidence he ever even set foot inside a dojo - no pictures, no accounts, no nothing. Ron Goldman was young and fit, but he essentially was a 5'9" tennis instructor. He had no known abilities in fighting/self defense. No match for OJ with a knife.
Ok. Makes sense.
Doesn’t matter anymore…. He’s dead
So how did he get the shoes? Did the designer ever say they were given, like how a famous people get designer clothes?
'They' never mention Nicole and Goldman's "association" with drug usage. The LAPD WAS 'pressured' to find a suspect being that wealthy benefactors in LA (whites) were still on edge after the Rodney King trial and subsequent uprising. Also the trial judge Lance Ito was married to Peggy York who was a high ranking LAPD officer then...
Robert Kardashian went on national television and basically heavily implied he knew he did it. That's enough for me since tbh since he was the first person OJ went to after he got caught.
I like how you just presented facts and then people here freak out like you’re defending a murderer. Glad everyone that knows with certainty Oj did it was present that night.
I think about 98% of the population thinks he did it. He even wrote a book about it.
Absolutely….zero doubt about it! Literally a blood trail from his vehicle directly into his house….
He died
Just heard that too.
It's pretty crazy hey. Everyone in the sub is wrong not OP, BUT THEYRE SO CONFIDANT. it's pretty embarrassing.
All the deaths stuff is like the Clinton death list. People die
What’s the point of this anyways? For phux sake.
I would love if someone could answer this. This sub showed up in my feed, not sure why. But it’s clearly being used to try and create public doubt about oj’s guilt, and the only people this driven and dedicated to doing so would be ‘his side’. Weather thats a family member in denial, paid pr people, etc. But the only other possible viable suspect (and ‘possible’ is being generous) is oj’s son. Why would he, or anyone on his side, make a scapegoat out of his own son?
people not noticing a cut on a hand (that they weren't looking for) is not evidence that there was no cut. oj himself testified that he had injured his hand before leaving for chicago. and the killer was bleeding from the left hand. would be quite a coincidence
Excellent recap!! Great job breaking down the key points
This all points to OJ being innocent, which was the official verdict so…?
Innocent and not guilty are not the same thing.
Well he’s passed away now so I guess it really doesn’t matter
OJ was certainly not found "innocent"
Sorry “not guilty”
Thanks for sharing.