O.J. Simpson dies of cancer at age 76

Regardless of why they didn't...or why you think they didn't...

...the prosecution did not successfully meet the burden imposed upon them by the law.

The jury did not find him "innocent"...it found him "not guilty."

People who watched the entire trial were much more likely to vote "not guilty." Most personally thought OJ committed the crime, but did not think the prosecution proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Those who would have voted "guilty" were less likely to have watched the trial. They just wanted him convicted.

The pro-Trump people already think he is not guilty of the indictments and the anti-Trump people think he is guilty. Neither side has heard any evidence at a trial.
 
https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/86/573.html




Facts

In a prior criminal trial, Simpson was acquitted of the murders of Nicole and Ronald. In the present civil trial, the jury concluded that Simpson killed Nicole and Ronald. Simpson does not contend on appeal that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the jury's verdict. He contends, however, that the judgments should be reversed for a new trial on the grounds that evidence was erroneously admitted or excluded and the award of damages is excessive.

No exhaustive summary of the underlying facts is necessary. Factual details relating to admission or exclusion of the disputed items of evidence are addressed in the discussion of those issues. The following summary is sufficient to give context to the legal discussion that follows.

Nicole and Ronald were stabbed to death on the night of June 12, 1994, in front of Nicole's home on Bundy Drive in Los Angeles.

Plaintiffs contended that Simpson, Nicole's ex-husband, had the motive to kill Nicole in a rage. On several prior occasions during their marriage Simpson had physically abused Nicole. In 1992 they separated. In May 1993 they agreed to try for a year to see if they might reconcile. In April 1994 Simpson was encouraged they would reconcile. But on May 22, 1994, Nicole terminated the relationship. Simpson retaliated by threatening to cause serious income tax problems for Nicole concerning their arrangement [86 Cal. App. 4th 583] regarding his residence on Rockingham Avenue in Los Angeles. On June 7, 1994, Nicole telephoned a battered women's shelter hotline and stated she was frightened because her ex-husband was stalking her, and she sought advice whether it might be safer to move back in with him. By the end of that conversation she decided not to move back with him. On June 12, 1994, Simpson's and Nicole's young daughter performed in a dance recital. Simpson flew from New York to Los Angeles to attend it. Simpson was in a foul mood that day. At the dance recital, Simpson and Nicole sat apart and did not interact. When the recital ended, Nicole excluded Simpson from a post-recital family dinner.

Ronald was a waiter at the restaurant where the dinner occurred. Afterwards, Nicole telephoned the restaurant about a pair of eyeglasses left at the dinner. Ronald may have been killed because he encountered the murder of Nicole while delivering the eyeglasses to her home.

Shortly after the killings, Nicole's and Ronald's bodies were found in front of her residence. Police responded to the scene and collected physical evidence. Numerous drops of blood at the scene were proved by DNA evidence to be Simpson's. There was a left-hand leather glove, of a rare make that Nicole had previously purchased for Simpson, that matched the right-hand glove later found at Simpson's residence. Bloody footprints at the scene were made by distinctive luxury shoes similar to those worn by Simpson in the past. A knit cap at the scene contained hair fibers matching Simpson's hair. Ronald's shirt contained hair fibers matching Simpson's hair, and cloth fibers matching bloodstained socks found at Simpson's residence.

Other physical evidence from Simpson's Ford Bronco and Simpson's home on Rockingham pointed to Simpson as the murderer. The Bronco contained blood from Simpson, Nicole, and Ronald. Simpson's freshly dripped blood was found on his driveway. Simpson had recent cuts and abrasions on his hands. The right-hand glove matching the left-hand glove from the crime scene was found on a path next to Simpson's house. This glove contained Simpson's blood, Nicole's blood, Ronald's blood, Nicole's hair, and Ronald's hair. A pair of socks found in Simpson's bedroom contained Simpson's and Nicole's blood.

Faced with overwhelming physical evidence, the defense suggested that some evidence was planted by police officers or ineptly contaminated during collection, storage, or testing.

Simpson testified and claimed that he was at home on Rockingham during the time of the killings, prior to being picked up by a limousine driver for a [86 Cal. App. 4th 584] ride to the airport to fly to a previously scheduled event in Chicago. Plaintiffs presented evidence that Simpson had time to commit the murders, go home, catch his ride to the airport, and dispose of evidence in a small bag that he would not allow the limousine driver to handle and which was never seen again. On the flight back to Los Angeles after being notified of Nicole's death, Simpson told a passenger that there were two victims killed in the garden area of Nicole's house, although those details had not been provided to him in the notification. After being informed that police were going to arrest him, Simpson and a friend fled in Simpson's Bronco. Simpson had his passport, a fake goatee and mustache, $8,000 to $9,000 in cash, and a loaded gun. Simpson talked about committing suicide.
 
People who watched the entire trial were much more likely to vote "not guilty." Most personally thought OJ committed the crime, but did not think the prosecution proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Those who would have voted "guilty" were less likely to have watched the trial. They just wanted him convicted.

The pro-Trump people already think he is not guilty of the indictments and the anti-Trump people think he is guilty. Neither side has heard any evidence at a trial.

The defense maligned a brand new type of Blood evidence



The science is still accepted today


The defense fooled people
 
People who watched the entire trial were much more likely to vote "not guilty." Most personally thought OJ committed the crime, but did not think the prosecution proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Those who would have voted "guilty" were less likely to have watched the trial. They just wanted him convicted.

The pro-Trump people already think he is not guilty of the indictments and the anti-Trump people think he is guilty. Neither side has heard any evidence at a trial.

But OJ was a murderer right?
 
He got away with the vicious murder he committed, because a jury of whitey-hating black racists let him off.

The reason they did that was because they hate white people.

Especially white ho's who take their black men.

And as such, they felt the white bitch deserved it.

No Sir!

This is an example of how High Priced lawyers can shift the focus of the crime, BY PUTTING THE JUSTICE SYSTEM on trial, CREATE DOUBT, and get an acquittal in a case.

Remember, all it takes is one juror to disagree to get an acquittal! In OJ's case, the single Black Man on the Jury, clenched his fist as a victory sign to the defense lawyers after the verdict was read and as he left the court room!

This is how most people viewed this crime and it's trial- REGARDLESS TO THEIR RACE, CREED, OR COLOR.

This is an example of how a Chief Investigator in the case, who investigated the crime, had a history of being a racist by using the "N" word openly amongst his fellow officers, for many years before this crime ever happened, and that became evidence presented to the MIX-RACED Jury in the trial.

This worked for OJ, and now DOnald Trump and his expensive lawyers are now using these same tactics to shift the focus of his crimes, and creating doubt, by putting the focus on the Justice Department and our Judiciary system on trial in the minds of his cult following.

Donald Trump has now spent over 100 million dollars already in defending himself, so far, in his pending cases that haven't even gone to trial yet!

The OJ Lawyers used racism as a motivating factor by the investigators, and Donald CHUMP is using politics as a motivating factor in the investigation in his case!

It is just proof of how our Justice system has been horribly damaged by the racial and political divides that exist within our Country.

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE ROGUE NEFARIOUS MALEVOLENT CHARACTERS LIKE DONALD TRUMP AND OJ SIMPSON THAT WILL TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THE RACIAL AND POLITICAL DIVIDES IN AMERICA TO TRY AND GET BY WITH THEIR CRIMES.
 
Last edited:
You just pretend all the black professionals in government don’t exist?



That’s why you assholes want trump to stop it from going further

I did not say that. I said the white people who are criminals are running things. Of course there are Black criminals helping them. Most likely Asian criminals too. Happy?
 
Yeah, and I'm sure that if some rich, ghetto thug rapper murdered a member of your family, then hired a high priced legal team and got acquitted by an all black jury, you'd be saying the same thing.

Hypocrite SJW douchebag.

Fuck you very much.
 
https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/86/573.html




Facts

In a prior criminal trial, Simpson was acquitted of the murders of Nicole and Ronald. In the present civil trial, the jury concluded that Simpson killed Nicole and Ronald. Simpson
does not contend on appeal that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the jury's verdict. He contends, however, that the judgments should be reversed for a new trial on the grounds that evidence was erroneously admitted or excluded and the award of damages is excessive.

No exhaustive summary of the underlying facts is necessary. Factual details relating to admission or exclusion of the disputed items of evidence are addressed in the discussion of those issues. The following summary is sufficient to give context to the legal discussion that follows.

Nicole and Ronald were stabbed to death on the night of June 12, 1994, in front of Nicole's home on Bundy Drive in Los Angeles.

Plaintiffs contended that Simpson, Nicole's ex-husband, had the motive to kill Nicole in a rage. On several prior occasions during their marriage Simpson had physically abused Nicole. In 1992 they separated. In May 1993 they agreed to try for a year to see if they might reconcile. In April 1994 Simpson was encouraged they would reconcile. But on May 22, 1994, Nicole terminated the relationship. Simpson retaliated by threatening to cause serious income tax problems for Nicole concerning their arrangement [86 Cal. App. 4th 583] regarding his residence on Rockingham Avenue in Los Angeles. On June 7, 1994, Nicole telephoned a battered women's shelter hotline and stated she was frightened because her ex-husband was stalking her, and she sought advice whether it might be safer to move back in with him. By the end of that conversation she decided not to move back with him. On June 12, 1994, Simpson's and Nicole's young daughter performed in a dance recital. Simpson flew from New York to Los Angeles to attend it. Simpson was in a foul mood that day. At the dance recital, Simpson and Nicole sat apart and did not interact. When the recital ended, Nicole excluded Simpson from a post-recital family dinner.

Ronald was a waiter at the restaurant where the dinner occurred. Afterwards, Nicole telephoned the restaurant about a pair of eyeglasses left at the dinner. Ronald may have been killed because he encountered the murder of Nicole while delivering the eyeglasses to her home.

Shortly after the killings, Nicole's and Ronald's bodies were found in front of her residence. Police responded to the scene and collected physical evidence. Numerous drops of blood at the scene were proved by DNA evidence to be Simpson's. There was a left-hand leather glove, of a rare make that Nicole had previously purchased for Simpson, that matched the right-hand glove later found at Simpson's residence. Bloody footprints at the scene were made by distinctive luxury shoes similar to those worn by Simpson in the past. A knit cap at the scene contained hair fibers matching Simpson's hair. Ronald's shirt contained hair fibers matching Simpson's hair, and cloth fibers matching bloodstained socks found at Simpson's residence.

Other physical evidence from Simpson's Ford Bronco and Simpson's home on Rockingham pointed to Simpson as the murderer. The Bronco contained blood from Simpson, Nicole, and Ronald. Simpson's freshly dripped blood was found on his driveway. Simpson had recent cuts and abrasions on his hands. The right-hand glove matching the left-hand glove from the crime scene was found on a path next to Simpson's house. This glove contained Simpson's blood, Nicole's blood, Ronald's blood, Nicole's hair, and Ronald's hair. A pair of socks found in Simpson's bedroom contained Simpson's and Nicole's blood.

Faced with overwhelming physical evidence, the defense suggested that some evidence was planted by police officers or ineptly contaminated during collection, storage, or testing.

Simpson testified and claimed that he was at home on Rockingham during the time of the killings, prior to being picked up by a limousine driver for a [86 Cal. App. 4th 584] ride to the airport to fly to a previously scheduled event in Chicago. Plaintiffs presented evidence that Simpson had time to commit the murders, go home, catch his ride to the airport, and dispose of evidence in a small bag that he would not allow the limousine driver to handle and which was never seen again. On the flight back to Los Angeles after being notified of Nicole's death, Simpson told a passenger that there were two victims killed in the garden area of Nicole's house, although those details had not been provided to him in the notification. After being informed that police were going to arrest him, Simpson and a friend fled in Simpson's Bronco. Simpson had his passport, a fake goatee and mustache, $8,000 to $9,000 in cash, and a loaded gun. Simpson talked about committing suicide.

See
 
He lied BIG TIME in the civil trial deposition.

the killer left a bloody size 12 Bruno Magli shoeprint at the scene of the crime.
“I know that Bruno Magli makes shoes that look like the shoes they had in court that’s involved with this case, I would have never worn those ugly-ass shoes,” Simpson says in the deposition.
Except Simpson was photographed wearing Bruno Magli shoes nine months before the murders in a picture first published by The National Enquirer.
https://people.com/crime/oj-simpsons-reaction-to-photo-of-bruno-magli-shoes-in-deposition-tapes/Still going with that?

We were talking about the murder trial. I never heard OJ lie even once in that trial. Yeah, he did not testify, which is what most defendents do in big trials. It is what I expect fat-assed Trump to do in his.

I did hear two detectives lie.
 
Back
Top