OJ’s trial goes beyond his innocence or guilt. His trial was racially charged and cannot be understood outside this context. I don’t think those who celebrated his acquittal believed in his innocence as much as they saw it a victory that a black man used his privilege and resources to escape justice the way so many white criminals had in the past. Not justice, but equality, American style.
For white America, it came as quite a shock that a rich black celebrity could leverage race tensions to escape accountability. This was such a singular event it resonates 30years later. If you’re black, you don’t need a long memory to see justice betrayed behind some racist bullshit.
I think a major factor was also that the police apparently tried to frame him. It’s unfortunate that this resulted in the jury not believing the actual evidence, but the blame lies with the police for that.
Yeah the absolutely botched detective work and diareagrd for crime scene discipline caused a total overhaul of how crime scenes are handled today. The first cops on scene treked through the blood and took vloddy footprints across the house before the detectives showed up to start gathering evidence.
I find it weird how everyone acts like he absolutely 100% did it, when we know that the police investigation was racist, explicitly corrupt, and incompetent, and the evidence we do have points more heavily at his son Jason having done it.
deleted by creator
Oh wow, a convicted felon accepted $600k for a book deal. He also tried to setup a robbery of a trading and collectables dealer, all that’s evidence of is that OJ wanted money.
Your failure to provide a reliable source for your claims is not my problem.
If you cannot provide a reliable source of your claims, your claim will be dismissed.
it’s true that it was close to impossible for the jury to remain unaffected by the political situation in LA at the time.
But the police and prosecutors did such a bad job it was almost impossible to convict him beyond reasonable doubt. He was convicted easily in the civil case later.
There was something that you touched on that goes unnoticed in your presentation. The context also includes the media cycle. OJ’s case was HIGHLY publicized. It was unlike any other trail in history. There was constant coverage of a former NFL superstar turned into a movie star under a murder charge that he ran away from in a high speed freeway chase. We literally watched the verdict being read in highschool where everyone could hear it. The scale was phenomenal and I don’t feel it has been followed the same since.
This is probably the most succinct I’ve ever heard it described.
This is a really good point.
If this opinion is indeed common, it is so fucked up. “Yes, he is criminal, but he is my race criminal, so I am glad that he could escape accountability because he is rich (while I am not)”. This seems to me just insane, or at very least deeply immoral.
Taking the above comment at face value:
The meaning you see in this is that the world is now a worse place because a guilty man walked free.
The meaning they see is that maybe this means the world is only fucked up in a classist way and not in both a classist way and a racist way.
I think it’s insane to view the first as more moral, it just seems more surface level to me, it’s not examining what this means about how our broader system functions. It also seems to accept the LAPD investigated evidence and theory at face value.
Well, if jury was predominantly white, I would agree with you. But if anything his acquittal was also based race, at least it can be interpreted that way. So, celebrating that blacks can be racist too is not something I would do.
He wasnt acquitted by an all black jury, and the acquittal was not an act of racism, it was an act of logic given the incompetent police investigation.
Again, if it happened when jury was predominantly white, I would agree with you. As such your statement is unproven speculation.
From Wikipedia about Simpson trial:
After the verdict, polling showed that 75 percent of White Americans thought Simpson was guilty while 70 percent of Black Americans thought he was innocent.
If you think that somehow Black juries were immune to that, you have to provide strong evidence of that.
Sounds like 70% of Black Americans had a view of our police force that white Americans only recently woke up to.
So, you are confirming my point that acquittal was racially motivated?
While I totally agree that the rich (regardless of color) are not treated the same by our system of justice, he was so beyond all doubt guilty that it actually hurt the Black community. Whites and other peoples of color were disappointed that any person regardless of the tint of their skin was not held accountable for the obvious brutal murder of 2 people. And how sad that at this point we still make judgements based on how light or how dark a person’s skin is.
That sounds like white racist people being racist because they were racist.
I think the folks who were happy to see him get off were more interested in the (not legal)indictment of the LAPD and admission of their corruption:
That was a good read, thanks for posting it.
Thanks for taking the time. He’s a great follow if you’re on Mastodon.
It’s the perfect example of what happens when your police department is so corrupt and racist that they try to frame a guilty man.
Question one, who the fuck thought this?
Essentially nobody now, there has been decades of right wing spin trying to make everyone forget just how badly the LAPD compromised the case with insane overt racism and mishandling evidence. The reason OJ Simpson was found not guilty wasn’t because the jury was hypnotized or just wanted to let him go, it was because of police misconduct.
DNA evidence was also very new, and wasn’t trusted by the larger population yet.
Oddly enough, there’s reason to doubt DNA evidence from that era for not being robust enough
An awful lot of people at the time, especially black people, believed he was framed by the LAPD. And they tried to, despite the fact he actually did it, which came out during the trial.
In retrospect, most people realize that he was definitely guilty, but that, because of the corruption of the LAPD, the racism during the trial, and how mishandled everything was, the trial was totally fucked. As a result, OJ got off.
Why does everyone feel the need to reiterate that he did it when we literally do not know whether or not he did?
The only source you have is an explicitly racist LAPD investigation that admitted to following up on no other leads and fabricating evidence.
Meanwhile we have a private investigator who spent years investigating the case and came up with ample evidence pointing to his son Jason, including the fact that OJ got a defense attorney for Jason before anyone else.
The motherfucker wrote a book telling you he killed her. And he got away with it because of double jeopardy laws. I wish there was a heaven and hell because then he could be judge guilty. Because he was just fucking cops fucking even that up.
Well, I’m not clicking a link to Reddit, and don’t expect many people on lemmy to.
Second, the evidence in the case was overwhelmingly against OJ, if you can wade past the massive amount of bullshit that occurred during the trial. He was, very obviously, guilty as shit.
He murdered those two people without a doubt. The evidence proves it unquestionably.
But the spectacle of the case, the plotting and corruption of the LAPD, the bungling of the investigation, the fervor in LA after the Rodney King fiasco, the massive bungling of the prosecution and Marsha Clark, the national media frenzy surrounding the case, the loss of perspective by Judge Ito, soooo many factors at play, and it just became unhinged… nothing was real anymore.
I remember watching it all happen, and I knew, before the trial even began, that it would never be a real fair trial. It would be a tv show, and no justice would happen. And it was exactly that. The public got what they wanted: a ridiculous circus, and a disgusting thing that everyone would live to regret— except, of course, the monster who got free.
But fine, from /u/redroverdover on /r/unpopularopinion
OJ Simpson didn’t kill Nicole and Ron. It was his son, Jason.
Jason was a sous chef. He quite literally had a set of knives on him that very night.
Jason had a punch out ticket to clock out at work. But that night he didn’t use it. His time that he left was written in for the first time ever. This means no one knows when he actually really left.
Jason lied about his whereabouts and said he was with his girlfriend. It later came out during the civil deposition that he had lied. He then claimed he was home alone after work. He had absolutely no alibi for the time of the murders. None. When this line of questioning took place, Jason got very nervous and the lawyer asked what was going on, and they immediately took a break. Came back from break and this line of questioning was not revisited.
Jason was supposed to cook for Nicole and the kids that night, and Nicole changed her mind and went to another restaurant instead. This would have ticked him off. Why would it have ticked him off? He had rage issues and a possible crush on Nicole, as well as disdain. A lot of weird feelings.
Jason, at the time of the murders, was on probation for threatening a prior boss with a knife. Seriously.
Jason had threatened suicide to a girlfriend in an argument and stabbed himself.
Jason attended the Army and Navy Academy, was trained with a knife.
Jason had been taking depakote for his rage. He was off his meds at the time.
Jason when he was much younger as a teen was in charge of his youngest sister swimming in the pool with no one else around. She drowned to death. OJ and his wife broke up soon after, splitting the family apart. From here, OJ would end up wifing Nicole. This context is very important.
Whoever killed Nicole and Ron would have been covered in blood. Remember, Ron put up a fight. Getting into a car certainly would have meant more than a few drops of blood. We never got to see Jason’s Jeep. But we do know that it was left out in the rain uncovered after the murders.
The only person on this planet OJ Simpson would have covered for what have been his son. Really think about that. Not anyone else but his son, whom he also felt he had failed in life. He felt responsible for him, paid his way through life, and this was his first son.
So the theory is that Jason in his rage went to Nicole’s home to confront her about dinner. He realized what was happening with Ron. He went back and got a knife from his Jeep and came back and killed them in rage. Jason didn’t give a shit that his step brother and sister were in the house sleep. He just raged out.
these were the earlier days of cell phones. And the cops never looked at cel phone records. Jason called his dad on his cell phone and told him he needed to come over. OJ showed up, saw what Jason did and split his hand open in anger hitting something. He ordered Jason to go home and clean up and get rid of the clothes and he would go home as well and pretend like nothing happened. That night he also called a lawyer for Jason. Yes, the next day Jason already had a lawyer. Fact. No one else but Jason already had a lawyer. And when the police tried to question him they were rebuffed. But they didn’t try hard. Christopher darden wanted to go after him but was rebuffed. The focus was to be entirely on OJ.
Jason Simpson got away with murder and OJ Simpson got away with messing with the crime scene and accessory to murder at worst.
The knit cap that OJ supposedly wore had dog hairs in it that were unexplained.
There are pictures of Jason wearing the same knit cap, or a variation of it with his dog. https://www.altereddimensions.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/image120.png
https://i.insider.com/4f870efe69bedd1f1300000a?width=800&format=jpeg&auto=webp
Look at this guy. He has the build and he was youthful enough to do this. OJ could have very easily gifted the pair of shoes to his son.
And there is more. Much more.
there’s more that points Jason to the death than OJ for sure.
we know at the time that he had a set of knives on them and was unaccounted for. we know who you was on probation for attacking someone with a knife. We know he was off his depakote meds for his intermediate rage disorder. We know he was angry with Nicole. We know he wore these knit caps. knives, violence, rage, trained with a knife.
This is your guy.
The riage behind OJ is so pronounced that people will never admit their mistakes. The race issue is so deeply embedded. You say OJ didn’t do it and people lose their minds. but once you follow down the rabbit hole about his son Jason you realize that everyone was wrong. OJ wasn’t guilty of murder but he surely wasn’t innocent either.
Check out the book by Bill Deer. Look at the facts for yourself. The actual facts. Read the civil deposition yourself. You will see something is horrifically wrong here.
EDIT:
So you guys are confused here about his schooling. I apologize. Ill explain. This is not about West Point or the Naval Academy.
Yes there is Army and Navy Academy.
Army and Navy Academy is a college-preparatory boarding school for boys, grades 7–12, in Carlsbad, California. It was founded in 1910.
This is where he got field knife training and hand to hand combat training.
Interesting never heard any of this. But last time I checked there is not satistory on murder so how come Jason still walking free?
Wow, that’s some down-the-rabbit-hole conspiracy theory stuff. Loony tunes!
Prove it— from a reliable source.
Will you accept any source that isn’t what you saw in a racist trial? Cna you cite which books youve read on the subject?
But keep on going with your white pledge of allegiance, always reiterating that you know OJ did it without ever having actually looked into it beyond the evidence collected by a racist cop.
Those are the facts as presented and published by William Dear, a private investigator who worked on the case. Do we know without a doubt that Jason killed her? No. But we also don’t know without a doubt that he didn’t, and we do know without a doubt that the evidence collected and presented at trial was incredibly flawed and in some cases outright fabricated.
I’m not the one trying to prove a point here so I do t see why I should do your work for you. If you can’t cite any other source than Reddit, then that’s not my problem.
And if all you can do if feebly pull the race card because you can’t cite a better source than Reddit, well that’s speaks more about you than me.
Well, I’m not clicking a link to Reddit, and don’t expect many people on lemmy to.
Then I’m not going to read your comment and I don’t expect anyone on Lemmy to read the comment of someone who didn’t even bother to read the link but still wanted to hear themselves type.
You can read the link and respond to the substance of it, or don’t bother responding.
There’s taking a pointless stand, and then there’s taking a pointless stand. Jesus Christ learn how to use Tor if you’re going to be that dogmatic.
Wow, such a tantrum over something you claim isn’t a big deal, lol.
Removed by mod
Your response didn’t have substance because it was a Reddit link.
That’s not me being a dick, that’s you not reading the room. Where do you think you are?
There was a huge disparity in opinion between black and white communities at the time of the trial: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2015/09/Simpson-Public-Opinion.png
I find it weirder that so many people are so convinced he did it without knowing jack shit about the case. Feels like a lot of white rage carried down.
No one I knew though he was innocent, but a lot of people thought he was going to be found innocent because Fuck The Police was a big deal.
No one objected to the outcome of the civil suit.
Parts of the official story make no sense.
He killed two people, got rid of ALL the clothes he was wearing, got rid of the murder weapon, but somehow left one glove behind and took the other one home?
Then there was the bloody fingerprint:
"An important bloody fingerprint located on the gateway at Nicole Brown’s house was not properly collected and entered into the chain of custody when it was first located. Although it was documented in his notes by Detective Mark Fuhrman, one of the first to arrive on the scene, no further action was taken to secure it.
The detectives who took over Fuhrman’s shift apparently were never aware of the print and eventually, it was lost or destroyed without ever being collected."
It’s pretty clear the cops fucked it up. It’s not possible to say if he was guilty or not because of the police fuckery.
Another good piece… cops found a bloody sock in his home and the blood was found to be from both himself and Nicole…
Problem was it also contained the preservative police labs use to keep blood liquid, and it had soaked through from one side of the sock to the other and down to the carpet,meaning it had been poured on the sock from above in the Simpson home:
No one who watched the trial in real actual time thought that he was innocent at all
OP thinking that Lemmy is popular enough with the boomers that someone is going to answer this.
Was anyone on Lemmy, except me, alive at the time of the trial?
Hello I was alive. They made a joke out of that judge with the Dancing Itos, and made the whole thing into a circus. The victims got entirely swallowed up. Nicole Brown Simpson had called the cops for his actions nine times.
I’m in my 40s. Yeah, I was.
You’re 17 days old, how could you have been alive in 1995?
I was a young adult at the time (born in 66 so GenX for whatever it’s worth). My take is the LAPD as a whole were despised and not just along racial lines. Watch any documentary on the early SoCal punk scene and you’ll see what I mean
I was, but I was very young and on the other side of the planet. All I remember is allegations that he was on sedatives during thebtrial, as he seemed so calm and composed about it all.
I mean, he confessed to the murder after the trial ended. Even wrote a book about it. There shouldn’t be anyone left who thinks he didn’t do it.
I mean… someone else wrote that book, and then offered him $600,000 to endorse it… and $600,000 is a lot of money.
It was fun watching the whole legal lawsuit with that book thing… it’s actually technically called ‘if I did it’ but something something… People sued or whatever and now legally the ‘if’ is in very very very very small print and the ‘I did it’ is extremely large and I think that’s pretty cute
No he did not confess to it.
“at the time of the trial”
Yeah, and I’m saying everyone who thought he was innocent at the time of the trial has later changed their mind.
Wasn’t one of the reasons because the jury was worried about a reaction similar to the Rodney King riots?
I had heard this at the time, but someone correct me if I’m wrong
I’m never sure whether that’s a serious concern or just “I didn’t agree with the jury’s ruling. Am I out of touch with the evidence? No, it’s the jury that’s wrong!”
Think about this: he never killed anyone else. You think a murderer would be able to just one-and-done like that after getting away with it?
Clearly he was innocent all along.
You’re kidding right?
My logic is impeccable.
