![[Image: 35541.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v675/DjTenacity/35541.jpg)
Quote: (02-07-2016 09:13 PM)Dusty Wrote:
Watched the first episode. Pretty good.
Casting is a bit puzzling though. Cuba Gooding Jr is a curious choice. He looks too small to be OJ.
Quote:Quote:
A Texas private investigator claims he knows who really killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman in 1994. And it wasn't OJ Simpson.
In a new book, 'OJ is Innocent and I Can Prove It,' William C. Dear alleges Simpson went on trial, and was acquitted of murder, in an effort to deflect attention from the true killer: His son Jason.
Dear says Simpson was at the crime scene -- but not until after his ex-wife and her friend had been stabbed to death.
After a 17-year investigation, Dear says he has found circumstantial evidence that links Jason Simpson, 41, to the murders.
The private eye claims he dug through Jason Simpson's garbage and his abandoned storage locker in search of new evidence, the New York Post reported.
In the search, Dear says he found a hunting knife that forensic experts say is the murder weapon that was never recovered during the police investigation.
He also found photographs of Jason Simpson wearing a knit cap, similar to one that was discovered at the crime scene.
Prosecutors were unable to definitely link the hat to OJ Simpson, though hairs similar to his were found inside.
Dear calls Jason Simpson 'the overlooked suspect' and produced a documentary film released in 2010 detailing the accusations that he is the real culprit behind the murder.
...
Despite these alleged findings, Jason Simpson's DNA and fingerprints were never compared to those found at the crime scene. He was never interviewed by police, either, the Post reports.
No arrests other than Simpson's were made in the murders.
OJ Simpson was the prime suspect for the murders because he helped to cover up his son's crimes and, in effect, allowed himself to take the fall, the book claims.
'The LA PD and the district attorney had made a rush to judgement,' Mr Dear said.
At the time of the trial, Judge Lance Ito said from his bench: 'Those who say the criminal justice system itself is on trial may be right.'
The Post could not reach Jason Simpson, who is working as a chef in Miami, for a comment.
The paper reports his phone line as disconnected.
Quote: (02-08-2016 05:22 PM)TheSearcher Wrote:
I always thought his son did it.
Quote: (02-12-2016 11:23 AM)PUA_Rachacha Wrote:
Word has it that Cuba Gooding Jr. overacted his part. Any truth to it?
I may watch it if it comes out on Netflix. I'm a huge Bills fan and was crestfallen that one of our greats is a murderer*
* I have no doubt that he murdered Nicole Brown
Quote: (02-12-2016 05:15 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:
Quote: (02-12-2016 11:23 AM)PUA_Rachacha Wrote:
Word has it that Cuba Gooding Jr. overacted his part. Any truth to it?
I may watch it if it comes out on Netflix. I'm a huge Bills fan and was crestfallen that one of our greats is a murderer*
* I have no doubt that he murdered Nicole Brown
I guess that I am more interested in your footnote rather than the actual OJ show.... hahahahaha
What's your theory on how he did it?
Was it him alone, and was it the same as the prosecutions theory that he came to the front door, and confronted Nicole and possibly killed her at that time, and then Goldman arrived and then he overpowered Goldman, or do you have another theory?
Ultimately, a rage of uncontrolled jealously, and OJ also may have been a bit of a spoiled brat, always wanting to have his way and to control things, which he did when he dished out capital punishment, whether initially intentional or not? Maybe at first, he just wanted to go teach her a lesson, but things got out of control? I guess there is a difference in the law whether the murder was premeditated or not.
Quote: (03-03-2016 08:04 PM)Kish Wrote:
Great series. The guy playing Cochran is amazing. I laughed so hard when Cochran whispers to Darden..."Nigga please".
![[Image: popcorn2.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/popcorn2.gif)
Quote:Quote:
Evidence presented to the jury
The prosecution offered circumstantial evidence to show Simpson's guilt.[43]
DNA analysis of blood found on a pair of Simpson's socks found in his bedroom identified it as Brown's. The blood had DNA characteristics matched by approximately only one in 9.7 billion, with odds falling to one out of 21 billion when compiling results of testing done at the two separate DNA laboratories.[19][43]
Both socks had about 20 stains of blood.[19] The blood made a similar pattern on both sides of the socks. Defense medical expert Dr. Henry Lee of the Connecticut State Police Forensic Science Laboratory testified that the only way such a pattern could appear was if Simpson had a "hole" in his ankle, or a drop of blood was placed on the sock while it was not being worn. Lee also testified that the collection procedure of the socks could have caused contamination.[44]
DNA analysis of blood found in, on, and near Simpson's Bronco revealed traces of Simpson's, Brown's, and Goldman's blood.[45]
Strands of hair consistent with Simpson's were found on Goldman's shirt.[45]
Several coins were found along with fresh blood drops behind Brown's condo, in the area where the cars were parked.
DNA analysis of blood on a left-hand glove, found outside Brown's home, was claimed to be a mixture of Simpson's, Brown's, and Goldman's. Although the glove was soaked in blood, there were no blood drops leading up to, or away from the glove. No other blood was found in the area of the glove except on the glove.[45][not in citation given]
The gloves contained particles of hair consistent with Goldman's hair and a cap contained carpet fibers consistent with fibers from Simpson's Bronco.[10]
A black knit cap at the crime scene contained strands of African-American hair.[10] Several strands of dark blue cotton fibers were found on Goldman, and the prosecution presented a witness who said Simpson wore a similarly-colored sweat suit that night.[10]
The left-hand glove found at Brown's home and the right-hand glove found at Simpson's home proved to be a match.[46]
The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office and the Medical Examiner's Office could not explain why 1.5 cm³ of blood was missing from the original 8 cm³ taken from Simpson and placed into evidence.[47][not in citation given](correction: "Mr. Matheson [a prosecution witness and the chief chemist of the Los Angeles Police Department] did not dispute the defense's mathematics. Nor did he seem perturbed by what it implied. The way in which the blood was measured was necessarily inexact"[48]
Officers found arrest records indicating that Simpson was charged with beating spouse Brown. Photos of Brown's bruised and battered face from that attack were shown.
Much of the incriminating evidence — bloody glove, bloody socks, blood in and on the Bronco — was discovered by Los Angeles Police Detective Mark Fuhrman. He was later charged with perjury for falsely claiming during the trial that he had not used the word "nigger" within 10 years of the trial. Later during the trial, with the jury absent, he pleaded the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination when asked "did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?"[47] However, Alan Dershowitz implied in a 2016 interview that Detective Philip Vannatter (not Detective Fuhrman) may have planted evidence on socks based upon the presence of anti-coagulant in the blood discovered on the socks.[49] Dershowitz further stated that the jury may have concluded that if the bloody socks evidence was fabricated by the police, then other evidence may have been fabricated as well.[49] F.B.I expert testimony appeared to show that the defense exaggerated the significance of the presence of the anti-coagulant.[50]
The bloody shoe prints at the crime scene were identified by FBI shoe expert William Bodziak as having been made by a pair of extremely rare and expensive Bruno Magli shoes, of which it was reported that only 299 pairs were sold in the United States.[10] The large size 12 (305 mm) prints matched Simpson's shoe size.[10] In the criminal trial, Simpson's defense attorneys said the prosecution had no proof Simpson had ever bought such shoes,[10] however, then freelance photographer E.J. Flammer claimed to have found a photograph he had taken of Simpson in 1993 that appeared to show him wearing a pair of the shoes at a public event, which was later published in the National Enquirer. Simpson's defense team claimed that the photograph was doctored, although other pre-1994 photos appearing to show Simpson wearing Bruno Magli shoes were later discovered and published.[51] It should be noted that none of these photos appeared until late in the trial and not during the "big shoe debate".[52]
Evidence collected by LAPD criminalist Dennis Fung came under criticism. He admitted to "having missed a few drops of blood on a fence near the bodies", but on the stand he said that he "returned several weeks afterwards to collect them".[47]
Fung admitted that he had not used rubber gloves when collecting some of the evidence,[47] although the blood that was tested ruled out Fung within published guidelines.
LA Police Detective Philip Vannatter testified that he saw photographs of press personnel leaning on Simpson's Bronco before evidence was collected.[47]
Evidence not presented to the jury
At the June 1994 grand jury hearing, Ross Cutlery provided store receipts indicating that Simpson had purchased a 12-inch (305 mm) stiletto knife six weeks before the murders. The knife was determined to be similar to the one the coroner said caused the stab wounds.[3] The prosecution did not present this evidence at trial after discovering that store employees had sold their story to The National Enquirer for $12,500.[3] The knife was later collected from Simpson's residence by his attorneys who presented it to Judge Ito and subsequently was sealed in a manila envelope to be opened only if brought up at trial. It turned out not to be the murder weapon because tests on the knife determined that an oil used on new cutlery was still present on the knife indicating the knife had never been used. The police searched Simpson's Rockingham estate three times and could not find this knife. Simpson told the attorneys exactly where it was in the house and it was promptly recovered.[53]
Jill Shively testified to the 1994 grand jury that she saw a white Ford Bronco speeding away from Bundy Drive in such a hurry that it almost collided with another car at an intersection.[3] She talked to the television show Hard Copy for $5,000, after which prosecutors declined to use her testimony at trial.[3]
A women's shelter, Sojourn, received a call from Brown four days prior to the murders saying that she was scared of her ex-husband, whom she believed was stalking her.[3] The prosecution did not present this in court because they thought that Judge Ito would rule the evidence to be hearsay.[3] In addition, friends and family indicated that Brown had consistently said that Simpson had been stalking her.[3] She claimed that everywhere she went, she noticed Simpson would be there, watching her. Her friends Faye Resnick and Cynthia Shahian said she was afraid because Simpson had told her he would kill her if he ever found her with another man.[3]
Former NFL player and pastor Rosey Grier visited Simpson at the Los Angeles County Jail in the days following the murders. A jailhouse guard, Jeff Stuart, testified to Judge Ito that at one point Simpson yelled to Grier that he "didn't mean to do it", after which Grier had urged Simpson to come clean.[3] Ito ruled that the evidence was hearsay and could not be allowed in court.[3]
The Bronco chase, the materials in the Bronco including the cash, handgun, and disguise, were also not presented to the jury. Simpson's apparent suicide note and statement to the police were also left out by the prosecution.
A few months before the murders in 1994, Simpson completed a film pilot for Frogmen, an adventure series, in which he starred. Although the prosecution investigated reports that Simpson, who played the leader of a group of former United States Navy SEALs, received "a fair amount of" military training—including use of a knife—for Frogmen, and there is a scene in which he holds a knife to the throat of a woman, it was not introduced as evidence during the trial.[54]
The testimony of Rosa Lopez was recorded on videotape but not shown to the jury.
