15 Years Ago OJ Got Away with Murder
The picture above shows Oj Simpson’s relief and glee that he managed to escape justice for murdering his wife and boyfriend. I remember listening to the verdict while sitting in my car waiting to go into a building for a job interview. I can’t remember what the job was for, but I do remember not liking it and ultimately refusing the offer for something better. But this verdict was the first in a long line of justice failures in California.
A video of the debacle is below:
Thanks to Ed of Right Rant for reminding me about the anniversary.
Yes, the evidence especially DNA was enough to have convicted O.J. Simpson beyond a reasonable doubt. But he was acquitted. Whether he did it or not, his acquittal should have been the end, though 1 can believe he committed double murder. There are smart people who believe O.J. Simpson is innocent.
The late R.J. Wagner was an engineer who saw the 1995 double murder trial and he did not believe OJ Simpson did it but had visited the crime scene 15 to 20 minutes after the double murder happened. The late R.J. Wagner believes the murder was done by underworld and that it took multiple killers. If Mr. Wagner’s theory is right, then it would explain DNA (after the fact visit) and the coroner testified that he could not rule out the possiblity of multiple killers.
Yes, the DNA against OJ Simpson is his and don’t believe the cops tampered with proof as defense says. But it’s possible OJ Simpson’s didn’t do it even with the DNA proof and here’s other possiblities. 1st, it’s possible that Waiter Ron Lyle Goldman was the intended victim with Nicole Brown Simpson losing her life as only the killer(s) know why it happened and Ron Goldman had most of stab wounds. We have heard many times that it was a jealous ex husband who killed her with Ron Goldman being @ wrong place, but it’s possible why it happened could be different.
The coroner Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran first testified to prosecution’s theory that the double murder could’ve happened in matter of minutes and that 1 knife could’ve been used. He said the coroner Dr. Golden had made as many as 30 errors but that they were insignificant and didn’t change conclusion. On cross examination, Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran said that he couldn’t rule out multiple killers as he couldn’t rule out that multiple knives were used. There are enough doubts about the case that 1 can believe it was done by more than 1 killer.
Yes the DNA was strong but here’s how it’s possible. Late engineer Dr. RJ Wagner saw the entire 1995 murder trial believes OJ Simpson visited the crime scene around 15 to 20 minutes after it happened after being lured by the killers. There was too little blood in the Bronco and the timeline was too short in his view for OJ Simpson to have killed 2 people that quickly and wash up. Late RJ Wagner believes that it was done by the Mob who lured OJ Simpson to visit the crime scene after it happened. F. Lee Bailey wanted OJ Simpson to testify but his other lawyers advised him against this because perhaps they believed that his story of visiting the crime scene after it happened wouldn’t be believed by a jury.
Yes, the prosecution did prove case beyond a reasonable doubt with DNA, but it’s still possible that OJ Simpson’s innocent because of short timeline, not enough blood, possibility murder was done by more than 1 killer and if OJ Simpson visited the crime scene after it happened as the late RJ Wagner said, then it explains why his DNA was found @ the scene.
Marcia R. Clark, Christopher A. Darden, and others involved in the case both prosecution, defense and the detectives wrote books and got rich from this-When Detectives Fuhrman, late Van Atter & Lange did this that defeated idea of what public service is-when they became cops, their job was to arrest those they think committed crimes such as OJ Simpson and help prosecutors prove they’re guilty. But when they wrote books about this case and got rich, they defeated the idea of what public service is because cops and prosecutors job is to serve public and not get rich from crimes they investigate and solve-cops can’t accept rewards for catching criminals as it’s their job to do this. Marcia R. Clark made millions writing a book about the Simpson case and again, it defeats the idea of public service. Marcia Rachel Clark and Christopher A. Darden’s job was to prove that OJ Simpson committed a double murder to a jury. If there was a conviction, then punishment would’ve been done by a judge but if there’s an acquittal which there was then that should be end of it whether he was innocent or guilty.
CA Darden and Marcia R. Clark’s job on the Simpson murder trial ended with the acquittal. If they, Detective Fuhrman, etc. want to talk about the case to the media as to why they believe he committed murder, then that’s 1 thing, but to write books and get rich was again wrong and against public service idea.
Fred Goldman’s behavior for a long time has no longer been that of a mourning father but some1 who is interested in money as he too has gotten rich while Denise Brown to my knowledge isn’t profiting from her sister’s murder. The conduct of both Kimberly E. Goldman & Fred Goldman seems to be about exploiting their Ron for money. Kimberly E. Goldman has reacted to accusations that her murdered brother Ron L. Goldman was a drug dealer by denying this. Was Ron L. Goldman a drug dealer, such as did he have money problems where he sold them or got involved with them? We know that the restaurant where Ron L. Goldman waited was run by Mob. Yes, you can make accusations about a man after he is dead. You also don’t always know a secrets a person has in life & if the allegation about him being a drug dealer is true, then he likely kept that a secret from his friends & family.
In criminal cases, you need beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond any possible doubt. I didn’t find the jealous ex husband theory of the prosecution to be credible because if anything, it’s my view OJ Simpson had lost interest in his ex-wife, but only he knows.I have no problem with Det. Mark J. Furhman telling his side of story as long as he did it w/o making any money. Again, I don’t believe he planted proof & I don’t think Det. Mark J. Furhman did anything wrong in the OJ Simpson case, but when he profited from the case, I doubt his sincerity because he didn’t become a cop to become rich. He became a cop to protect public, stop criminals, arrest criminals and help the prosecution prove them guilty in a court of law. He could get a pension after his law enforcement career’s over (I don’t think he committed perjury) but his main interest is to get rich.
Now if he wants to say he did this for money, then it’s his right, but let’s be honest about what he, the prosecutors and the Goldman family are in it for-the money. The Brown family isn’t profiting from this, so Denise Brown is sincere while others want money. Incidentally, while Denise Brown believes OJ Simpson’s guilty, Nicole Brown’s parents continued to see OJ Simpson for years after the acquittal in family gatherings with OJ Simpson’s kids (their grandchildren). It’s possible Nicole Brown’s parents have doubts about whether OJ Simpson murdered their daughter but only they know.
Goldman family’s behavior for a long time been of those interested in money as they’ve has gotten rich while Denise Brown (Nicole Brown’s sister) to my knowledge isn’t profiting from her sister’s murder. When the hypothetical If I did it was released in 2006, Denise Brown had asked the book not be published as did Fred Goldman, but after Fred Goldman got the rights to the book, rather than end publication, he decided that it be sold and took the profits of a book that he says he was against, so it’s about money. Goldmans were against the book being published until they got the rights to this.
Marcia Rachel Clark, Christopher Allen Darden, and others involved in the case both prosecution, defense and the detectives wrote books and got rich from this-When Detectives Mark J. Fuhrman, late Van Atter & Lange did this that defeated idea of what public service is-when they became cops, their job was to protect public, stop crimes, arrest those they think committed crimes and help prosecutors prove they’re guilty. But when they wrote books about this case and got rich, they defeated the idea of what public service is because cops and prosecutors job is public service and not get rich from crimes they investigate.
Only saying that let’s be honest about what it’s about. When you start profiting from a case, then I think we have a right to know what you care about-justice or money. Goldmans repeatedly said they weren’t interested in money but whenever they got a chance to make $, they did it. Detective Mark J. Furhman did not do anything illegal when he got rich from the OJ Simpson case, but after he did that, he should forfeit his retirement pension-he should never be allowed to work in law enforcement again because he got rich. I was against Detective Mark J. Furhman being convicted of felony perjury and believe his conviction should be reversed. But to repeat, what he did profiting from the OJ Simpson case defeated the idea of what police work is-public service.
Late engineer Richard J. Wagner (died 2003) who saw the 1995 murder trial and believes in OJ Simpson’s innocence had a website where he explained by his science knowledge as an engineer why he believed in OJ Simpson’s innocence, but he didn’t make any money. Whether the late RJ Wagner is right or wrong-he is sincere and didn’t make $, so @least we can’t accuse him of profiting. If the late engineer RJ Wagner wrote a book on why he believed OJ Simpson’s innocent, he would’ve been condemned as profiting from a double murder and even accused of saying what he didn’t believe for $.