Stop the presses, OJ Simpson is now on Twitter, 25 years after the murder of his ex-wife and her boyfriend

Avatar image for ad1x2
#1 Posted by ad1x2 (7563 posts) -

Fresh out of jail for armed robbery, former NFL star and accused murderer OJ Simpson just jumped on Twitter. So far, he is at 193,000 followers, to include a few celebrities.

I’m sure that his feed will be full of laughs, to include this gem:

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#2 Posted by Solaryellow (4950 posts) -

Not surprising. Back in June of '94 there had to be 100k+ idiots on the streets supporting him as he went by.

Avatar image for ad1x2
#3 Posted by ad1x2 (7563 posts) -

@Solaryellow said:

Not surprising. Back in June of '94 there had to be 100k+ idiots on the streets supporting him as he went by.

Honestly, I wouldn’t compare his supporters of today to his supporters in 1994. Back then, LA was only two years removed from a black man being beaten in the street by several white cops that were later found not guilty, which caused riots all over the country (to include my neighborhood in Atlanta). It was a lot easier for people back then to assume he was being framed by racist white cops than it is 25 years later with all of the facts out there and the internet to back it up.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#4 Edited by uninspiredcup (33682 posts) -

Yea saw that, almost removed his wife's head and here he is, a twitter celeb.

Avatar image for warmblur
#5 Posted by warmblur (2532 posts) -

I wish Dexter was real.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#6 Posted by Ezekiel43 (1610 posts) -

Is there a TLDR version of the Simpson case that will tell me why he's guilty? I've never cared to find out what happened and don't wanna read Wikipedia's essay.

Avatar image for br0kenrabbit
#7 Edited by br0kenrabbit (16076 posts) -

Something about karma...

Avatar image for npiet1
#8 Posted by npiet1 (2316 posts) -

@ezekiel43: the investigators f'ed the whole case up, they lost evidence like the gloves he used, that tied him to the scene. They then replaced the glove with another. So in court it didnt fit and I'm not sure on the rest but heard there's more. He also wrote a book called "if I did it" and he then messes up interviews about the book and pretty much says I did it.

Avatar image for ad1x2
#9 Edited by ad1x2 (7563 posts) -

@ezekiel43 said:

Is there a TLDR version of the Simpson case that will tell me why he's guilty? I've never cared to find out what happened and don't wanna read Wikipedia's essay.

With all of the evidence that was available at the time, it was highly unlikely many others in OJ’s situation would have been acquitted. Like any other citizen, he is going to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but the general public doesn’t have to abide by that standard and many people were not happy he was acquitted.

Fortunately for OJ, the crime happened when the Los Angeles Police Department was still recovering from a huge scandal involving the Rodney King beating and other corruption issues. Many minorities assumed racist cops tried to frame him and one of the detectives on the case (Mark Fuhrman) was caught on tape repeatedly using the N-word.

Avatar image for DEVILinIRON
#10 Posted by DEVILinIRON (4862 posts) -

I don't have a Twitter account... That's all.

Avatar image for Master_Live
#11 Posted by Master_Live (19558 posts) -

The Juice is loose!

Avatar image for Master_Live
#12 Edited by Master_Live (19558 posts) -

In an individual's formative years there is a list of like a dozen events that shape your life outlook above all others. Part of my cynicism comes from this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It

Avatar image for Master_Live
#13 Posted by Master_Live (19558 posts) -

If anyone is looking for the definitive account of the OJ Simpson story I would highly recommend OJ: Made In America.

Avatar image for davillain-
#14 Posted by DaVillain- (36927 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

If anyone is looking for the definitive account of the OJ Simpson story I would highly recommend OJ: Made In America.

Would you also recommend *The People vs O.J Simpson* that was played by Cuba Gooding jr as well?

Avatar image for Master_Live
#15 Edited by Master_Live (19558 posts) -

@davillain- said:
@Master_Live said:

If anyone is looking for the definitive account of the OJ Simpson story I would highly recommend OJ: Made In America.

Would you also recommend *The People vs O.J Simpson* that was played by Cuba Gooding jr as well?

I haven't seen it. But if anyone is interested The People vs O.J Simpson was a dramatic representation of the trial, OJ: Made In America is a documentary encompassing OJ's whole life, the trial, the civil lawsuit and the memorabilia incident.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#16 Edited by Solaryellow (4950 posts) -

@ad1x2 said:
@Solaryellow said:

Not surprising. Back in June of '94 there had to be 100k+ idiots on the streets supporting him as he went by.

Honestly, I wouldn’t compare his supporters of today to his supporters in 1994. Back then, LA was only two years removed from a black man being beaten in the street by several white cops that were later found not guilty, which caused riots all over the country (to include my neighborhood in Atlanta). It was a lot easier for people back then to assume he was being framed by racist white cops than it is 25 years later with all of the facts out there and the internet to back it up.

I know, right? It's not like there was convincing evidence (BARD) against him.

Destroying your own neighborhoods because someone was beaten up? The Einstein's were out in full force after acquittal. Major props to the Koreans for defending what was theirs!

Avatar image for shellcase86
#17 Posted by shellcase86 (4431 posts) -

@ad1x2 said:
@ezekiel43 said:

Is there a TLDR version of the Simpson case that will tell me why he's guilty? I've never cared to find out what happened and don't wanna read Wikipedia's essay.

With all of the evidence that was available at the time, it was highly unlikely many others in OJ’s situation would have been acquitted. Like any other citizen, he is going to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but the general public doesn’t have to abide by that standard and many people were not happy he was acquitted.

Fortunately for OJ, the crime happened when the Los Angeles Police Department was still recovering from a huge scandal involving the Rodney King beating and other corruption issues. Many minorities assumed racist cops tried to frame him and one of the detectives on the case (Mark Fuhrman) was caught on tape repeatedly using the N-word.

Well, planting evidence isn't exactly rare.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#18 Posted by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

The guy had bad knees from football and could barely walk properly at the time but somehow took out two people and one with martial arts training. Sure... People who think he's guilty don't use common sense.

Avatar image for Gaming-Planet
#19 Edited by Gaming-Planet (19965 posts) -

Lol he's saying he is going to set the record straight. Lmao guy still living with a guilty conscience.

People should send him memes of his crime.

Avatar image for Stranger_36
#20 Posted by Stranger_36 (666 posts) -

@warmblur said:

I wish Dexter was real.

Don't we all.

Avatar image for AFBrat77
#21 Edited by AFBrat77 (26722 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby:

Don't even go there, he is guilty as hell and anyone who saw the trial and is honest with himself/herself knows it.

But the money bought good lawyers, and the prosecutors made too many mistakes.

He thinks he can come back to convince the 18-35 crowd (who were barely alive, if at all) that he is just a regular guy who isn't guilty of anything. Don't fall for that crap. He's a liar, wife-beater, and murdering thug.

I saw a show where they asked him how he would kill them if he had been guilty. He got so into his answer and details that he seemed to forget to project innocence.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#22 Edited by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@AFBrat77 said:

@adingoatemybaby:

Don't even go there, he is guilty as hell and anyone who saw the trial and is honest with himself/herself knows it.

But the money bought good lawyers, and the prosecutors made too many mistakes.

He thinks he can come back to convince the 18-35 crowd (who were barely alive, if at all) that he is just a regular guy who isn't guilty of anything. Don't fall for that crap. He's a liar, wife-beater, and murdering thug.

I saw a show where they asked him how he would kill them if he had been guilty. He got so into his answer and details that he seemed to forget to project innocence.

I watched the trial and studied the case and testimony for many years. It's pretty clear he didn't do it.

First she committed adultery repeatedly so it's no surprise he lost his cool on the times the police were called. I don't blame him for getting physical, she was pretty trashy by all accounts.

Here we have a guy that was a 40+ year-old man who had history of bad knees from playing in the NFL and could barely walk at the time (backed up by medical evidence and has since had both knees replaced) at the time suddenly taking out two people without much of a struggle and one had martial arts experience. You must be joking.

Him hypothetically explaining his guilt doesn't mean anything as he was getting paid handsomely to write a book and do interviews. The public was eating it up at the time. I understand it's the popular thing to jump on the "he's guilty" bandwagon as it's virtually an overplayed meme at this point, but that's mostly the 18-35 crowd you speak of who weren't even old enough to know anything about the case besides what they have heard comedians say or some documentary claim.

Avatar image for Master_Live
#23 Posted by Master_Live (19558 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby said:

I watched the trial and studied the case and testimony for many years. It's pretty clear he didn't do it.

First she committed adultery repeatedly so it's no surprise he lost his cool on the times the police were called. I don't blame him for getting physical, she was pretty trashy by all accounts.

Here we have a guy that was a 40+ year-old man who had history of bad knees from playing in the NFL and could barely walk at the time (backed up by medical evidence and has since had both knees replaced) at the time suddenly taking out two people without much of a struggle and one had martial arts experience. You must be joking.

Him hypothetically explaining his guilt doesn't mean anything as he was getting paid handsomely to write a book and do interviews. The public was eating it up at the time. I understand it's the popular thing to jump on the "he's guilty" bandwagon as it's virtually an overplayed meme at this point, but that's mostly the 18-35 crowd you speak of who weren't even old enough to know anything about the case besides what they have heard comedians say or some documentary claim.

I see.

Avatar image for AFBrat77
#24 Edited by AFBrat77 (26722 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby:

Sorry brother but I can't believe you are even defending him or his physical abuse. He's guilty as hell and was quite capable, the abuse turned to murder. Guilty as Hell.

I believe the interview was after

his release from prison and nothing to do with a book, he simply forgot himself and put himself back in the moment....or he didn't give a crap because he wasn't going to be tried again for the same crime.

Avatar image for heirren
#25 Posted by Heirren (1537 posts) -

The media almost entirely, from what i remember(was only a kid at the time), took the guilty side. An easy side to take, too; jealousy goes back as far as anything. I dont remember if that was the angle they took, but the man did drive around in his suv for a couple hours--why would he do that?

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#26 Posted by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@AFBrat77 said:

@adingoatemybaby:

Sorry brother but I can't believe you are even defending him or his physical abuse. He's guilty as hell and was quite capable, the abuse turned to murder. Guilty as Hell.

I believe the interview was after

his release from prison and nothing to do with a book, he simply forgot himself and put himself back in the moment....or he didn't give a crap because he wasn't going to be tried again for the same crime.

Sorry I don't feel pity for someone who had numerous affairs and slept with her husbands friend. That's pretty low.

Also when it was medically proven that he wasn't physically capable of murdering two people outside a busy district without anyone knowing the "He's guilty as hell and was quite capable" doesn't mean much. He had no scratches besides a tiny one on his hand but the evidence showed there was a struggle. How do you explain that? Not only that but it actually points to more than one attacker.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#27 Edited by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@Master_Live said:
@adingoatemybaby said:

I watched the trial and studied the case and testimony for many years. It's pretty clear he didn't do it.

First she committed adultery repeatedly so it's no surprise he lost his cool on the times the police were called. I don't blame him for getting physical, she was pretty trashy by all accounts.

Here we have a guy that was a 40+ year-old man who had history of bad knees from playing in the NFL and could barely walk at the time (backed up by medical evidence and has since had both knees replaced) at the time suddenly taking out two people without much of a struggle and one had martial arts experience. You must be joking.

Him hypothetically explaining his guilt doesn't mean anything as he was getting paid handsomely to write a book and do interviews. The public was eating it up at the time. I understand it's the popular thing to jump on the "he's guilty" bandwagon as it's virtually an overplayed meme at this point, but that's mostly the 18-35 crowd you speak of who weren't even old enough to know anything about the case besides what they have heard comedians say or some documentary claim.

I see.

Apparently you can't if you believe habitual cheating is ok but are perplexed when someone loses their cool when their spouse cheats. Even legally it's a crime of passion and is understood by law.

Emotional abuse form cheating can be psychologically more demeaning and painful than anything physical.

Avatar image for heirren
#28 Posted by Heirren (1537 posts) -

Sorry couldnt bother reading the thread but what is the main point of interest for him being innocent?

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#29 Edited by MirkoS77 (14236 posts) -

Lol. Are there actually people ITT arguing OJ’s innocent? That’s some next level MJ apologist BS. It’s amazing the lengths some will go to to protect this idealistic image of their childhood heroes.

OJ is guilty as sin. Innocent people don’t run with a disguise and threaten to kill themselves.

Avatar image for SOedipus
#30 Posted by SOedipus (11513 posts) -

I know I'm late to the party but I was watching a video uploaded by an OJ parody account. The real OJ started threatening the parody account and using knife emojis. Haven't laughed that hard in awhile.

Avatar image for ad1x2
#31 Edited by ad1x2 (7563 posts) -

@SOedipus said:

I know I'm late to the party but I was watching a video uploaded by an OJ parody account. The real OJ started threatening the parody account and using knife emojis. Haven't laughed that hard in awhile.

I could be wrong, but that may just be another parody account he is arguing with. One of the parody accounts has an uppercase i to replace the lowercase L in the word real.

OJ may not be role model material anymore, but I would assume he’s smart enough to not violate his parole threatening to kill someone on Twitter.

Avatar image for SOedipus
#32 Posted by SOedipus (11513 posts) -

@ad1x2: That is very true. I did consider that and only did a brief google search on that (knowing how reliable that is nowadays). I found it funny nonetheless.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#33 Posted by Solaryellow (4950 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby said:
@AFBrat77 said:

@adingoatemybaby:

Don't even go there, he is guilty as hell and anyone who saw the trial and is honest with himself/herself knows it.

But the money bought good lawyers, and the prosecutors made too many mistakes.

He thinks he can come back to convince the 18-35 crowd (who were barely alive, if at all) that he is just a regular guy who isn't guilty of anything. Don't fall for that crap. He's a liar, wife-beater, and murdering thug.

I saw a show where they asked him how he would kill them if he had been guilty. He got so into his answer and details that he seemed to forget to project innocence.

I watched the trial and studied the case and testimony for many years. It's pretty clear he didn't do it.

First she committed adultery repeatedly so it's no surprise he lost his cool on the times the police were called. I don't blame him for getting physical, she was pretty trashy by all accounts.

Here we have a guy that was a 40+ year-old man who had history of bad knees from playing in the NFL and could barely walk at the time (backed up by medical evidence and has since had both knees replaced) at the time suddenly taking out two people without much of a struggle and one had martial arts experience. You must be joking.

Him hypothetically explaining his guilt doesn't mean anything as he was getting paid handsomely to write a book and do interviews. The public was eating it up at the time. I understand it's the popular thing to jump on the "he's guilty" bandwagon as it's virtually an overplayed meme at this point, but that's mostly the 18-35 crowd you speak of who weren't even old enough to know anything about the case besides what they have heard comedians say or some documentary claim.

If you watched the trial and studied it as you say, you would be aware there was a struggle between Simpson (presumably) and Goldman. What the hell are you talking about by saying "not much of a struggle?"

Avatar image for heirren
#34 Posted by Heirren (1537 posts) -

Lol some people just put themselves in check. Hilarious.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#35 Posted by Solaryellow (4950 posts) -

Clearly he was watching reruns of Ducktales back in '95 and not the Simpson Trial.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#36 Posted by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@Solaryellow said:
@adingoatemybaby said:
@AFBrat77 said:

@adingoatemybaby:

Don't even go there, he is guilty as hell and anyone who saw the trial and is honest with himself/herself knows it.

But the money bought good lawyers, and the prosecutors made too many mistakes.

He thinks he can come back to convince the 18-35 crowd (who were barely alive, if at all) that he is just a regular guy who isn't guilty of anything. Don't fall for that crap. He's a liar, wife-beater, and murdering thug.

I saw a show where they asked him how he would kill them if he had been guilty. He got so into his answer and details that he seemed to forget to project innocence.

I watched the trial and studied the case and testimony for many years. It's pretty clear he didn't do it.

First she committed adultery repeatedly so it's no surprise he lost his cool on the times the police were called. I don't blame him for getting physical, she was pretty trashy by all accounts.

Here we have a guy that was a 40+ year-old man who had history of bad knees from playing in the NFL and could barely walk at the time (backed up by medical evidence and has since had both knees replaced) at the time suddenly taking out two people without much of a struggle and one had martial arts experience. You must be joking.

Him hypothetically explaining his guilt doesn't mean anything as he was getting paid handsomely to write a book and do interviews. The public was eating it up at the time. I understand it's the popular thing to jump on the "he's guilty" bandwagon as it's virtually an overplayed meme at this point, but that's mostly the 18-35 crowd you speak of who weren't even old enough to know anything about the case besides what they have heard comedians say or some documentary claim.

If you watched the trial and studied it as you say, you would be aware there was a struggle between Simpson (presumably) and Goldman. What the hell are you talking about by saying "not much of a struggle?"

Of course there was a struggle. I'm saying OJ had no appearance of a struggle ever taking place which is impractical considering the crime scene. He had one tiny cut after the murders which could have been from anything.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#37 Edited by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:

Lol. Are there actually people ITT arguing OJ’s innocent? That’s some next level MJ apologist BS. It’s amazing the lengths some will go to to protect this idealistic image of their childhood heroes.

OJ is guilty as sin. Innocent people don’t run with a disguise and threaten to kill themselves.

Let me know again which piece of evidence points to him doing it? No physical signs of a struggle on OJ despite it being a complete massacre at the murder scene. Takes out two people with bad knees without anyone seeing it outside with neighbours all around.

And of course he would flee, they pretty much had the preconceived notion that he was guilty and accusing him of murder. I wouldn't go to prison over something I hadn't done either.

As for the apologist BS comment - that's just ignorant. Repeating what you heard others say isn't proof. Come with something better. You can even study the transcripts of the trial and then maybe you could come up with a better conclusion besides spouting dumb sheet.

No one is trying to protect some washed up football player and bit part movie actor. When I see that someone is most likely innocent, sure, I will defend them. Seems only right for other humans to try and help out other humans.

Now you wanna know who is guilty but got off? Casey Anthony! Now that c**t is someone who was let go when every sign pointed to her killing her kid.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#38 Edited by MirkoS77 (14236 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby said:
@MirkoS77 said:

Lol. Are there actually people ITT arguing OJ’s innocent? That’s some next level MJ apologist BS. It’s amazing the lengths some will go to to protect this idealistic image of their childhood heroes.

OJ is guilty as sin. Innocent people don’t run with a disguise and threaten to kill themselves.

Let me know again which piece of evidence points to him doing it? No physical signs of a struggle on OJ despite it being a complete massacre at the murder scene. Takes out two people with bad knees without anyone seeing it outside with neighbours all around.

And of course he would flee, they pretty much had the preconceived notion that he was guilty and accusing him of murder. I wouldn't go to prison over something I hadn't done either.

As for the apologist BS comment - that's just ignorant. Repeating what you heard others say isn't proof. Come with something better. You can even study the transcripts of the trial and then maybe you could come up with a better conclusion besides spouting dumb sheet.

No one is trying to protect some washed up football player and bit part movie actor. When I see that someone is most likely innocent, sure, I will defend them. Seems only right for other humans to try and help out other humans.

Now you wanna know who is guilty but got off? Casey Anthony! Now that c**t is someone who was let go when every sign pointed to her killing her kid.

The guy is guilty beyond all doubt.

1. The 9-1-1 call and the history of Simpson's violence directed at Nicole Brown.

2. Hair evidence: (1) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on cap at Bundy residence, (2) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on Ron Goldman's shirt.

3. Fiber evidence: (1) cotton fibers consistent with the carpet in the Bronco found on glove at Rockingham, (2) fibers consistent with the carpet from the Bronco found on cap at Bundy residence.

4. Blood evidence: (1) killer dropped blood near shoe prints at Bundy, (2) blood dropped at Bundy was of same type as Simpson's (about 0.5% of population would match), (3) Simpson had fresh cuts on left hand on day after murder, (4) blood found in Bronco, (5) blood found in foyer and master bedroom of Simpson home, (5) blood found on Simpson's driveway, (6) blood on socks in OJ's home matched Nicole's.

5. Glove evidence: (1) left glove found at Bundy and right glove found at Simpson residence are Aris Light gloves, size XL, (2) Nicole Brown bought pair of Aris Light XL gloves in 1990 at Bloomingdale's, (3) Simpson wore Aris Light gloves from 1990 to June, 1994.

6. Shoe evidence: (1) shoe prints found at Bundy were from a size 12 Bruno Magli shoe, (2) bloody shoe impression on Bronco carpet is consistent with a Magli shoe, (3) Simpson wore a size 12 shoe.

No evidence pointing towards him doing it? No fiber and hair evidence? No cuts on his hand? No blood in his foyer and master bedroom of his home? Or driveway? Or bloody footprints at the scene and in his car? (which he denied ever owning those "ugly ass shoes", only to be proven wrong when a photograph came out showing that he was before the murder took place)? This is not even taking into account behavior that points heavily to guilt: running afterwards, a history of beating Nicole to a pulp continually, obvious rage issues, and someone who was incredibly jealous and possessive.

Nicole was terrified of OJ and had made predictions on numerous occasions she knew her fate would be to die at his hands....and she was right. As for his knees, the man wasn't a cripple by any means. Adrenaline also negates pain, and the element of surprise gives someone an immense advantage, especially when they have a knife. He more than likely surprised and killed Ron before he even knew what hit him, then went after Nicole and ended up nearly beheading her. He left physical evidence everywhere, he ran because he knew he was ****ed, and he threatened suicide. But all of that, due to circumstances such as the power of celebrity, the proximity to the Rodney King incident and racial tensions of the time, the bungling from the prosecution, exposing officers involved in the case as racist, and finally him being able to afford the best the legal establishment had to offer to leverage and exploit all of that in his defense, he got off scott-free. Then he had the gall to put out this shit....

.....where you have to search for the "if" in the goddamn title, essentially rubbing what we all know to be true in our faces (except those too gullible who actually believe his lies). Then the braniac gets a prison sentence anyway, committing an armed robbery, probably feeling invincible after literally getting away with murder. There was even a member of his defense team (Kardashian) who came out years later and admitted he had serious doubts, precisely because of the blood evidence (a 99.5% match to the rest of the population), alongside a former friend who said that Simpson had confessed to him some period after the killings.

Seriously, how much more do you need? The only way you could think he's innocent is if he were framed due to a lack of integrity in the justice system, not because of a lack evidence. And if that's you're contention, considering the amount and variety of evidence, then you are seriously reaching. But at least it's good you can admit that Anthony is guilty.

OJ's nothing but a piece of murdering human filth, and the only "Juice" that should flowing through him is that which is coming from the electric chair.

Avatar image for ad1x2
#39 Edited by ad1x2 (7563 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:

Then he had the gall to put out this shit....

.....where you have to search for the "if" in the goddamn title, essentially rubbing what we all know to be true in our faces (except those too gullible who actually believe his lies).

To be fair, that wasn‘t the original cover of the book. This was the original cover:

When the Goldmans were awarded the rights to the book as part of their settlement from their wrongful death lawsuit, they had that cover made in order to intentionally minimize the word if and call it a confession.

Avatar image for kadin_kai
#40 Posted by Kadin_Kai (505 posts) -

@warmblur: A few people have actually tried to be Dexter in the past. I think they are all in prison now.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#41 Edited by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:
@adingoatemybaby said:
@MirkoS77 said:

Lol. Are there actually people ITT arguing OJ’s innocent? That’s some next level MJ apologist BS. It’s amazing the lengths some will go to to protect this idealistic image of their childhood heroes.

OJ is guilty as sin. Innocent people don’t run with a disguise and threaten to kill themselves.

Let me know again which piece of evidence points to him doing it? No physical signs of a struggle on OJ despite it being a complete massacre at the murder scene. Takes out two people with bad knees without anyone seeing it outside with neighbours all around.

And of course he would flee, they pretty much had the preconceived notion that he was guilty and accusing him of murder. I wouldn't go to prison over something I hadn't done either.

As for the apologist BS comment - that's just ignorant. Repeating what you heard others say isn't proof. Come with something better. You can even study the transcripts of the trial and then maybe you could come up with a better conclusion besides spouting dumb sheet.

No one is trying to protect some washed up football player and bit part movie actor. When I see that someone is most likely innocent, sure, I will defend them. Seems only right for other humans to try and help out other humans.

Now you wanna know who is guilty but got off? Casey Anthony! Now that c**t is someone who was let go when every sign pointed to her killing her kid.

The guy is guilty beyond all doubt.

1. The 9-1-1 call and the history of Simpson's violence directed at Nicole Brown.

2. Hair evidence: (1) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on cap at Bundy residence, (2) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on Ron Goldman's shirt.

3. Fiber evidence: (1) cotton fibers consistent with the carpet in the Bronco found on glove at Rockingham, (2) fibers consistent with the carpet from the Bronco found on cap at Bundy residence.

4. Blood evidence: (1) killer dropped blood near shoe prints at Bundy, (2) blood dropped at Bundy was of same type as Simpson's (about 0.5% of population would match), (3) Simpson had fresh cuts on left hand on day after murder, (4) blood found in Bronco, (5) blood found in foyer and master bedroom of Simpson home, (5) blood found on Simpson's driveway, (6) blood on socks in OJ's home matched Nicole's.

5. Glove evidence: (1) left glove found at Bundy and right glove found at Simpson residence are Aris Light gloves, size XL, (2) Nicole Brown bought pair of Aris Light XL gloves in 1990 at Bloomingdale's, (3) Simpson wore Aris Light gloves from 1990 to June, 1994.

6. Shoe evidence: (1) shoe prints found at Bundy were from a size 12 Bruno Magli shoe, (2) bloody shoe impression on Bronco carpet is consistent with a Magli shoe, (3) Simpson wore a size 12 shoe.

No evidence pointing towards him doing it? No fiber and hair evidence? No cuts on his hand? No blood in his foyer and master bedroom of his home? Or driveway? Or bloody footprints at the scene and in his car? (which he denied ever owning those "ugly ass shoes", only to be proven wrong when a photograph came out showing that he was before the murder took place)? This is not even taking into account behavior that points heavily to guilt: running afterwards, a history of beating Nicole to a pulp continually, obvious rage issues, and someone who was incredibly jealous and possessive.

Nicole was terrified of OJ and had made predictions on numerous occasions she knew her fate would be to die at his hands....and she was right. As for his knees, the man wasn't a cripple by any means. Adrenaline also negates pain, and the element of surprise gives someone an immense advantage, especially when they have a knife. He more than likely surprised and killed Ron before he even knew what hit him, then went after Nicole and ended up nearly beheading her. He left physical evidence everywhere, he ran because he knew he was ****ed, and he threatened suicide. But all of that, due to circumstances such as the power of celebrity, the proximity to the Rodney King incident and racial tensions of the time, the bungling from the prosecution, exposing officers involved in the case as racist, and finally him being able to afford the best the legal establishment had to offer to leverage and exploit all of that in his defense, he got off scott-free. Then he had the gall to put out this shit....

.....where you have to search for the "if" in the goddamn title, essentially rubbing what we all know to be true in our faces (except those too gullible who actually believe his lies). Then the braniac gets a prison sentence anyway, committing an armed robbery, probably feeling invincible after literally getting away with murder. There was even a member of his defense team (Kardashian) who came out years later and admitted he had serious doubts, precisely because of the blood evidence (a 99.5% match to the rest of the population), alongside a former friend who said that Simpson had confessed to him some period after the killings.

Seriously, how much more do you need? The only way you could think he's innocent is if he were framed due to a lack of integrity in the justice system, not because of a lack evidence. And if that's you're contention, considering the amount and variety of evidence, then you are seriously reaching. But at least it's good you can admit that Anthony is guilty.

OJ's nothing but a piece of murdering human filth, and the only "Juice" that should flowing through him is that which is coming from the electric chair.

Zero chance of guilt.

I don't have much time to waste before work so I'll try to be brief, all points you tried to make were dismissed in court and you obviously didn't fact check any of it.

Barry Scheck proved the DNA evidence was tainted, contaminated, planted. The EDTA in the blood proved it was planted. Johnny Conchran gets credit for the win with his rhetoric, but Scheck literally proved OJ was framed, with science.

The murder scene shoe prints were too small, only 11 1/2 inches long, while OJ’s feet were a full 12 inches without socks or shoes. They weren't his shoes.

Next the autopsy also shows bruises on Ron’s knuckles where he fought desperately for his life. But there’s no corresponding marks on OJ where Ron would have hit him.

The prosecution made a big deal out of the cut on OJ’s hand as if he had cut himself while knifing Nicole & Ron. Yet there is no cut or hole in the gloves corresponding to the cut in OJ’s hand.

He was not even in LA when Nicole & Ron were killed. Marcia Clark concealed the phone records showing Nicole was talking to her mother when OJ was already on a flight to Chicago.

A witness who never testified, same name as one of the police, Tom Lange, was an expert on car models and was present when the killers left in another car, that was not a Bronco.

Passengers on OJ’s flight to Chicago said they looked at OJ’s hands trying to find a super bowl ring (he never had one), and saw no blood or cut in his hands.

Even Mark Furhman took the 5th when asked if he framed OJ.

Can't believe people are still this gullible to think he did it lol.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#42 Edited by MirkoS77 (14236 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby: right. So basically it’s all a big conspiracy to frame OJ. Thanks at least for being predictable.

For future reference, we did land on the Moon, and the Earth is indeed round.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#43 Edited by MirkoS77 (14236 posts) -

@ad1x2 said:
@MirkoS77 said:

Then he had the gall to put out this shit....

.....where you have to search for the "if" in the goddamn title, essentially rubbing what we all know to be true in our faces (except those too gullible who actually believe his lies).

To be fair, that wasn‘t the original cover of the book. This was the original cover:

When the Goldmans were awarded the rights to the book as part of their settlement from their wrongful death lawsuit, they had that cover made in order to intentionally minimize the word if and call it a confession.

Even still, the three words "I DID IT" being in all bright red kind of begs the question as to why "IF" wasn't. What's the reason for that aside to isolate, through color, a statement to be able to make a blatant admission? If there is one, I'd love to hear it. Better marketing? More sensationalism? Punctuation, such as a period, is used to separate ideas and statements. Which is exactly what's going on here, the only difference is color is utilized instead.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#44 Edited by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:
@ad1x2 said:
@MirkoS77 said:

Then he had the gall to put out this shit....

.....where you have to search for the "if" in the goddamn title, essentially rubbing what we all know to be true in our faces (except those too gullible who actually believe his lies).

To be fair, that wasn‘t the original cover of the book. This was the original cover:

When the Goldmans were awarded the rights to the book as part of their settlement from their wrongful death lawsuit, they had that cover made in order to intentionally minimize the word if and call it a confession.

Even still, the three words "I DID IT" being in all bright red kind of begs the question as to why "IF" wasn't. What's the reason for that aside to isolate, through color, a statement to be able to make a blatant admission? If there is one, I'd love to hear it. Better marketing? More sensationalism? Punctuation, such as a period, is used to separate ideas and statements. Which is exactly what's going on here, the only difference is color is utilized instead.

A fictitious and hypothetical book that he got paid handsomely for despite not writing it.

  • "Hey, they offered me $600,000 not to dispute that I [wrote] the book." "That's cash." I said, "They're going to think you wrote it." He said, "So? Everybody thinks I'm a murderer anyway. They're not going to change their mind just because of a book."

Yes, it's sensationalism and you apparently bought into it.

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#45 Edited by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:

@adingoatemybaby: right. So basically it’s all a big conspiracy to frame OJ. Thanks at least for being predictable.

For future reference, we did land on the Moon, and the Earth is indeed round.

Are you purposely acting this retarded?

It's not me saying it, it was science that proved he didn't do it by the planted DNA evidence that was found, hence the not guilty verdict.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#46 Edited by Solaryellow (4950 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby said:
@Solaryellow said:

If you watched the trial and studied it as you say, you would be aware there was a struggle between Simpson (presumably) and Goldman. What the hell are you talking about by saying "not much of a struggle?"

Of course there was a struggle. I'm saying OJ had no appearance of a struggle ever taking place which is impractical considering the crime scene. He had one tiny cut after the murders which could have been from anything.

First off, I find discussing the murder and subsequent events to be quite fascinating. The trial can be talked about in depth for ages and it really is an interesting topic. With that said, Ron Goldman has his ass handed to him. Period. He wasn't Bruce Lee or Chuck Norris or Pat Johnson or Jim Kelly. He tried defending himself (as the wounds showed) but was on the losing end. The defensive wounds were numerous and obviously O.J. had the upper hand. His bad knees and old(er) age was remedied by the knife he was wielding. I wouldn't expect Simpson to look worse for wear all things considered.

Mirko pretty much summed it up.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#47 Edited by MirkoS77 (14236 posts) -

@adingoatemybaby said:
@MirkoS77 said:

@adingoatemybaby: right. So basically it’s all a big conspiracy to frame OJ. Thanks at least for being predictable.

For future reference, we did land on the Moon, and the Earth is indeed round.

Are you purposely acting this retarded?

It's not me saying it, it was science that proved he didn't do it by the planted DNA evidence that was found, hence the not guilty verdict.

Hey, I forgot. Let me know when Simpson's attempts to find Nicole and Ron's killer bear fruit. We all know how after the murder all that time on the golf greens really spoke volumes about his determination to seek justice for the real killer, as he stated he had after his proclaimed "innocence".

Avatar image for adingoatemybaby
#48 Posted by ADingoAteMyBaby (63 posts) -

@Solaryellow said:
@adingoatemybaby said:
@Solaryellow said:

If you watched the trial and studied it as you say, you would be aware there was a struggle between Simpson (presumably) and Goldman. What the hell are you talking about by saying "not much of a struggle?"

Of course there was a struggle. I'm saying OJ had no appearance of a struggle ever taking place which is impractical considering the crime scene. He had one tiny cut after the murders which could have been from anything.

First off, I find discussing the murder and subsequent events to be quite fascinating. The trial can be talked about in depth for ages and it really is an interesting topic. With that said, Ron Goldman has his ass handed to him. Period. He wasn't Bruce Lee or Chuck Norris or Pat Johnson or Jim Kelly. He tried defending himself (as the wounds showed) but was on the losing end. The defensive wounds were numerous and obviously O.J. had the upper hand. His bad knees and old(er) age was remedied by the knife he was wielding. I wouldn't expect Simpson to look worse for wear all things considered.

Mirko pretty much summed it up.

You wouldn't expect OJ to have any wear at all despite Goldman having bruises on his hands from defending himself? Apparently he got them from punching air.

Imagine denying that the evidence found was planted and proven.

OJ a pigeon toed and bow legged football player who had a limp from a football injury did all this simply because he had a knife? Oh, and lets not forget he took out his wife by himself too while no one was really alerted. He must be something else. How is any of this logical to anyone?

Mirko did sum it up quite nicely though with his copy-and-paste job in which all of his points were proven to be invalid by law especially the blood samples, shoe and glove size. Not to mention multiple witnesses that corroborated that OJ wasn't injured nor the testimony that he wasn't even in LA at the time.

I can't even fathom being you guys. So brainwashed by media it's unbelievable. I can't even be bothered to respond to this hogwash. I shouldn't even responded in the first place, I'm here to talk about gaming and tech stuff not to try and defend someone who was proven innocent.

Have a good one.