OJ didnt do this either (riiiiiiight!)

[irishgrl]

Simpson named suspect in armed robbery

By KATHLEEN HENNESSEY and LINDA DEUTSCH, Associated Press Writers 6 minutes ago

LAS VEGAS - O.J. Simpson says he only went into a casino hotel room to retrieve memorabilia that he felt was stolen from him. But police are investigating it as an armed robbery and named the fallen football star as a suspect Friday in yet another surprising chapter to his legal saga.
ADVERTISEMENT

In an interview with The Associated Press, Simpson insisted there were no guns involved and he only went to the room at the Palace Station casino to retrieve stolen mementos that included his Hall of Fame certificate and a picture of the running back with J. Edgar Hoover.

"It's stolen stuff that's mine. Nobody was roughed up," Simpson told the AP.

Las Vegas Metro Police Capt. James Dillon said the confrontation was reported as an armed robbery involving guns. But he said no weapons had been recovered and stressed that the investigation was in its "infancy."

Simpson was questioned by police immediately after the incident late Thursday and a formal interview was being arranged, Dillon said. No charges had been filed and no one was in custody.

Simpson said auction house owner Tom Riccio called him several weeks ago to say some collectors "have a lot of your stuff and they don't want anyone to know they are selling it."

Simpson, who was in Las Vegas for a friend's wedding, said he arranged to meet Riccio at the hotel. Riccio had set up a meeting with collectors under the guise that he had a private collector interested in buying Simpson's items.

"We walked into the room," Simpson said in the telephone interview. "I'm the last one to go in and when they see me, it's all 'Oh God.'"

Simpson said he was accompanied by several men he met at a wedding cocktail party, and they took the collectibles.

Simpson said he wasn't sure where the items were taken.

Dillon said some of the items had been recovered. He did not specify which collectibles were located.

A message left for Riccio was not immediately returned.

Police spokesman Jose Montoya said when officers talked to Simpson, he "made the comment that he believed the memorabilia was his. We're getting conflicting stories from the two sides."

One of the collectors in the room was Alfred Beardsley, a real estate agent and longtime collector of Simpson memorabilia, some of which he has been ordered to turn over as part of the Goldman's lawsuit.

"I'm OK. I'm shaken up," Beardsley told the AP by phone, but wouldn't comment further, citing the police investigation.

Bruce Fromong, a collector who testified at Simpson's civil trial, said he was in the room when Simpson barged in with other men.

"Him and some of his guys come busting through the door," Fromong told the celebrity gossip site TMZ.com. "They came in with guns, hollering and screaming."

Fromong, who reportedly tried to sell the suit Simpson wore when he was acquitted of murder, described him as a former close friend and said he couldn't explain the behavior.

"O.J.'s in enough trouble. For him to come and do this kind of thing, I don't know what's wrong with O.J. This is stupidity."

Simpson is considered a suspect in the case, Montoya said. He was released after he and several associates were questioned, and he remained in Las Vegas.

"We don't believe he's going anywhere," Montoya said.

The Las Vegas district attorney's office will decide whether to pursue charges in the casino case.

The Heisman Trophy winner, ex-NFL star and actor lives near Miami and has been a tabloid staple since his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ron Goldman were killed in 1994. Simpson was acquitted of murder charges, but a jury later held him liable for the killings in a wrongful death lawsuit.

Simpson has had to auction off his sports collectibles, including his Heisman Trophy, to pay some of the $33.5 million judgment awarded in the civil trial.

On Thursday, the Goldman family published a book about the killings that Simpson had written under the title, "If I Did It," about how he would have committed the crime had he actually done it. After a deal for Simpson to publish it fell through, a federal bankruptcy judge awarded the book's rights to the Goldman family, who retitled it "If I Did It: The Confessions of the Killer."

Fred Goldman, Ron's Goldman's father, said he was stunned by the news from Las Vegas.

"I'm overwhelmed and amazed," Fred Goldman told the AP. "If it turns out as it is currently being played, I think this shows more of who he is. He is proving over and over and over again that he thinks he can do anything and get away with it."

Goldman's lawyer, David Cook, said he would seek a court order on Tuesday to get whatever items Simpson took in Las Vegas.

The Palace Station, an aging property just west of the Las Vegas Strip, is one of several Station Casinos-owned resorts that cater to locals. The 1,000-room hotel-casino, with a 21-story tower and adjacent buildings, opened in 1976.

A company spokeswoman did not immediately return a call for comment.

Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press.

he didnt do it I tell ya! :lol:

[Beachwood Mac]

BREAKING NEWS
NBC News and news services

LAS VEGAS - Las Vegas police arrested O.J. Simpson on Sunday in connection with an alleged armed robbery of sports memorabilia, NBC News reported.

The arrest of the former football star followed questioning Sunday morning. Simpson has said the items, reportedly stolen from a hotel room earlier in the week, belonged to him, and police questioned him earlier in their investigation.

Another suspect was also arrested before Simpson. The man, detained Saturday night, was arrested on two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon, two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a deadly weapon, police Lt. Clint Nichols said. Two firearms were seized.

He was not identified. Nichols said police were seeking other suspects.

“There may be as many as five outstanding (suspects),” he said, confirming that Simpson was among those five.

Police executed two search warrants early Sunday morning on private residences, Nichols said. The weapons and other evidence were seized at the first location.

“It was evidence of a crime that was committed,” Nichols said. “And I believe we recovered some clothing that the individual was wearing in the commission of the robbery.”

The man is accused of being among a group of people that went to the room of memorabilia dealers at the Palace Station casino-hotel on Thursday and seized items. Simpson has said the items belonged to him, and police have questioned him once in their investigation.

'It just becomes a story about O.J.'
Simpson told The Associated Press on Saturday that he did he did not even consider calling the police to help reclaim personal items he believed were stolen from him, because he has found the police unresponsive when he needed help ever since his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, were killed in 1994.

Another suspect was also arrested before Simpson. The man, detained Saturday night, was arrested on two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon, two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a deadly weapon, police Lt. Clint Nichols said. Two firearms were seized.

“The police, since my trouble, have not worked out for me,” he said, noting that whenever he has called the police “It just becomes a story about O.J.”

“I’m at the point where I don’t rely on the police and this is not a police issue anyway,” he said, expressing hope that it will soon be resolved.

Simpson, 60, said he was just trying to retrieve memorabilia, particularly photos of his wife and children. There were no guns and no break-in, he said.

As police try to determine what happened in the hotel room, they must unravel the contorted relationships between the erstwhile athlete and a cadre of collectors that has profited from his infamy since the slayings of his ex-wife and Goldman. He was acquitted of murder in 1995, but was found liable for their deaths in a civil case.

[irishgrl]

that man is so pathetic. I'll just leave it at that.

[Tango]

Perhaps we'll get a "Leave OJ ALONE" video. He'll be out on bail in a New York minute.

[Steviefan49]

Maybe he will come out with "There were different tracks on the bottom of my shoes" - line again?! LOLOLOL:shrug:

[irishgrl]

OJ is being charged with multiple (!!) felonies!!

LAS VEGAS - O.J. Simpson was arrested Sunday and faces multiple felony charges in an alleged armed robbery of collectors involving the former football great's sports memorabilia, authorities said.
ADVERTISEMENT

Simpson was arrested shortly after 11 a.m., Capt. James Dillon said.

The charges against Simpson will include robbery with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a firearm, all felonies, Dillon said. More charges could be brought against him, he said.

Simpson was being held at Las Vegas police offices pending the arrival of his lawyer, who was expected later Sunday, Dillon said.

"He was very cooperative, there were no issues," Dillon said.

At least one other person has been arrested and police said Sunday that as many as six people could be arrested in connection with the alleged armed robbery that occurred in a room inside the Palace Station casino-hotel on Thursday.

Simpson, 60, has said he and other people with him were retrieving items that belonged to him. Simpson has said there were no guns involved and that he went to the room at the casino only to get stolen mementos that included his Hall of Fame certificate and a picture of the running back with J. Edgar Hoover.

Simpson told The Associated Press on Saturday that he did not call the police to help reclaim the items because he has found the police unresponsive to him ever since his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, were killed in 1994.

"The police, since my trouble, have not worked out for me," he said, noting that whenever he has called the police "It just becomes a story about O.J."

The Heisman Trophy winner, ex-NFL star and actor lives near Miami and has been a tabloid staple since his ex-wife and Goldman were killed in 1994. Simpson was acquitted of murder charges, but a jury later held him liable for the killings in a wrongful death lawsuit.

Police said two firearms and other evidence were seized at a private residence early Sunday.

Walter Alexander, 46, of Arizona, was arrested Saturday night on two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon, two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a deadly weapon.

He was released without bail on Saturday night, Dillon said.

Besides the two firearms, police said they seized other evidence during early morning searches of two residences, Lt. Clint Nichols said.

"It was evidence of a crime that was committed," Nichols said. "And I believe we recovered some clothing that the individual was wearing in the commission of the robbery."

Simpson said auction house owner Tom Riccio called him several weeks ago to say some collectors were selling some of his items. Riccio set up a meeting with collectors under the guise that he had a private collector interested in buying Simpson's items.

Simpson said he was accompanied by several men he met at a wedding cocktail party, and they took the collectibles.

Alfred Beardsley, one of the sports memorabilia collectors involved in the alleged robbery, has said he wants the case dropped and that he's "on O.J.'s side."

[irishgrl]

laff out loud funny :nod:

borowitzreport (http://www.borowitzreport.com/archive_rpt.asp?rec=6769&srch=)

O.J. Authors “If I Robbed Them”
New Book Explores Hypothetical Armed Robbery

Just days after being arrested for armed robbery of sports memorabilia, former football great O.J. Simpson announced today that he was the author of a new book entitled, “If I Robbed Them.”

Speaking at a press conference in Las Vegas, Mr. Simpson described his latest literary venture, which he called “an attempt to get inside the mind of someone who would commit armed robbery of sports memorabilia.”

“Personally, participating in armed robbery of sports memorabilia is something that I would never do,” Mr. Simpson said. “That’s what made writing this book such a challenge, imagination-wise.”

Legal experts questioned the wisdom of Mr. Simpson’s decision to author this latest tome, since the publication of a book about a hypothetical incident of armed robbery of sports memorabilia could potentially make a jury suspect that Mr. Simpson himself had participated in such a crime, should his case someday go to trial.

But the former Heisman trophy winner’s new book received a vigorous defense from its publisher, Judith Regan, who said she came out of retirement to publish Mr. Simpson’s latest effort.

Sitting by Mr. Simpson’s side at the press conference, Ms. Regan said that readers of “If I Robbed Them” would recognize the “honesty and forthrightness that have become synonymous with O.J. Simpson.”

“I’ve been a publisher for a long time, and I’ve never encountered an author as truthful as O.J.,” she said. “Well, maybe James Frey.”

Elsewhere, one week after the New England Patriots stole signals from the New York Jets, Patriots coach Bill Belichick was still unable to explain why anyone would want to steal signals from the Jets.

[GODDESS6]

seeing him cuffed on the news gave me such pleasure~ i was reading mark furhman's (*sp) book on the oj murders & i had to stop, i was so angry at his obvious guilt & the investigation that let him off, talk about travesty:distress:~

[irishgrl]

I read Marcia Clark's book on the trial, as far as Im concerned, the L.A. DA's office was unfairly criticized as botching the prosecution, when in reality, the outcome of the case was pretty much decided when the defense was able to get that change of venue granted. OJ should have been tried by his ACTUAL peers (ie, the Beverly Hills crowd) not his hand-picked "race card" jurors IMO. That whole trial was a travesty.

for another editorial on that topic, go here (http://www.suntimes.com/news/roeper/560699,CST-NWS-roep17.article)
or just read it here!
New O.J. book does nothing for his cause

(If he didn't do it, he probably wouldn't have written it)

September 17, 2007
BY RICHARD ROEPER Sun-Times Columnist
While O.J. Simpson was participating in a "sting operation," posing for laugh-it up photos and getting arrested in Las Vegas over the weekend, his non-confessional confessional was rocketing to No. 1 on the Amazon.com best-seller list.
Ha, the joke's on him.

Wait, maybe it's on us.

The book is titled If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer, but the "If" is in tiny letters embedded in the "I," so from even a short distance, the title appears to be:

I DID IT: Confessions of the Killer

With Exclusive Commentary "He Did It" by the Goldman Family

So what we have is a book written by O.J. Simpson and a ghostwriter in which he offers a hypothetical scenario for how he would have murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. (We also get commentary from the Goldman family.) Ninety percent of the proceeds go to the Goldmans and 10 percent is available to the Browns -- but the Browns don't want the "blood money" and wish the book had never been published.

In the meantime, "the real killers" remain at large. For the 13th year.


Immoral to buy it?
There's been a lot of talk about the ethics of publishing this book, and the morals of buying it.
Barnes & Noble initially said it wouldn't stock copies of the book in stores but they'd be selling it online, which seemed like a pretty wobbly stance in the first place. Then they said they would be stocking it -- because they were getting a lot of customer requests.

Guess it wasn't much of an ethical issue in the first place. They changed their minds, because they had visions of customers bypassing Barnes & Noble and going to Borders to buy the book.

Some independent booksellers said they wouldn't stock the book. I wonder if they refuse to sell other books about murder and terrorism and crime and other ugly realities of life.

Granted, we're delving into new territory when a murder suspect who was found not guilty offers up an utterly believable chain of events that would make him guilty -- but there are a lot of books that exploit tragedy.

I just don't get why so many people find this particular book so morally reprehensible. In fact, it could be argued that the publication of If I Did It is a victory of sorts for those who believe Simpson is a double murderer.


Partial vindication
Here we have a book with a confession, albeit a fictional one. There's nothing that paints Simpson in any kind of positive light. The proceeds go to the Goldmans.
What's wrong with that?

If Simpson thought this book would help his cause, he's sorely mistaken. Describing his life and his relationship with Nicole, he comes across as narcissistic, mean-spirited and in denial.

Then there's the chapter titled "The Night in Question," in which Simpson details a hypothetical version of the night Nicole and Ron were murdered.

Ticked off at Nicole and intending to frighten her, Simpson and his friend "Charlie" arrive at her condo with a knife. He encounters Ron Goldman, who's returning eyeglasses Nicole had left at the restaurant where Goldman works.

A confrontation ensues, with Nicole coming at O.J., losing her balance and hitting her head against the stoop.

Goldman takes a defensive stance -- and the next thing Simpson remembers, he's standing there covered in blood.

"I know what happened but I can't exactly tell you how. . . . I again looked down at my blood-soaked clothes, and noticed the knife in my hand. . . . I wondered how I had gotten blood all over the knife."

Simpson goes on to detail his return to his Brentwood home, the trip to Chicago, his plans for what to say when questioned by the police, etc. It all rings true.

It seems entirely possible that in the real world, Simpson went to the condo with confrontation, but not murder, in mind. That things went from bad to worse. That he blacked out the memory from the worst moments of his rage. And that this whole exercise is some sort of psychologically twisted attempt to confess without confessing.

What seems impossible is a man writing a fictional confession to the murder of two people, including the mother of his children, when he had nothing to do with the killings and was falsely accused of the murders.

That would be sick. Not as sick as actually committing the crimes, but deeply, disturbingly, frighteningly sick.

[buckymcnix]

The jury didn't have OJ try on those gloves.
The jury didn't bring Mark Furman as it's witness and have him lie under oath.

[irishgrl]

The jury didn't have OJ try on those gloves.
The jury didn't bring Mark Furman as it's witness and have him lie under oath.
That "glove" demonstration was the most blatant bit of theatre in the whole mistrial.

What did Fuhrman "lie" about?

Regardless, the prosecution could have proved its case 10 times over and that jury would STILL have found him innocent. FACT.

[JWS]

That "glove" demonstration was the most blatant bit of theatre in the whole mistrial.

What did Fuhrman "lie" about?

Regardless, the prosecution could have proved its case 10 times over and that jury would STILL have found him innocent. FACT.


This is true. It was payback for Rodney King verdict.

Furman lied about having used negative racial lanquage.

[buckymcnix]

That "glove" demonstration was the most blatant bit of theatre in the whole mistrial..

and yet the prosecution wasn't smart enough to realize that asking him to try them on would be a mistake. Anyone can make gloves look like they don't fit especially with an extra latex glove on. I am just refuting your original point that the prosecution was unjustly criticized. This combined with furman's lies was enough to trigger some folks "reasonable doubt" threshold and both were presented by the prosecution not the defense. I don't agree with these juror's conclusions but i can see their line of thinking that led them there.

What did Fuhrman "lie" about?.
Using racial slurs to begin with.
Many of these jurors don't trust the police to begin with, so why would you put up a cop that is so easily made to look shady? a bad decision.

Regardless, the prosecution could have proved its case 10 times over and that jury would STILL have found him innocent. FACT.
you can not call that a fact. I am sorry. The fact is the prosecution made many mistakes that contributed to the innocent verdict.

A sound prosecution certainly had a chance at getting a guilty verdict. The jurors could have been presented with a cohesive prosecution instead of the one they were presented.

Though i do think that the Judge allowed some things to happen that made the prosecutor's job very difficult, I believe it was their case to lose.
I have read Marcia's book as well as furman's, Darden's, shapiro's etc etc . . .just so you know that i am not just winging this.
It is their job to REACH the jury no matter who comprises that jury, not just the beverly hill type juries.

This is true. It was payback for Rodney King verdict.

Furman lied about having used negative racial lanquage.

Well I certainly believe the city was bubbling with racial tension, but i still believe the jury could have been reached if the truth were presented in a better fashion. Though once again I feel the need to state that Judge Ito bears much of the responsibility for the verdict as well.

[irishgrl]

Furman lied about having used negative racial lanquage.

Oh, ok. I wasnt sure if buckymcnix meant something a bit more substantial, but apparently not :shrug:

Fuhrman's use of racial slurs had no factual bearing on the case and was brought up solely to prejudice the jury and further solidify their intent to exonerate OJ. (as if there was ever any doubt). That doesnt excuse Ron's poor judgement, and Im not suggesting as much either.

edited to add:

I am just refuting your original point that the prosecution was unjustly criticized. This combined with furman's lies was enough to trigger some folks "reasonable doubt" threshold and both were presented by the prosecution not the defense. I don't agree with these juror's conclusions but i can see their line of thinking that led them there.

I say again, that verdict was pre-destined the minute OJ managed to get a change of venue. The jury dynamics drastically changed once the case was moved to a different part of L.A. The majority of that jury was black. NO WAY were they going to convict OJ, even if evidence was stacked to the ceiling. OJ lived in Beverly Hills, associated with high society, and was generally seen as a status seeker all around. So, all of a sudden, he remembers he's BLACK when he's charged with a double homicide? I think he knew he would have been convicted and manipulated the system to avoid justice.

[buckymcnix]

Fuhrman's use of racial slurs had no factual bearing on the case .

of course it did.
he was presented as someone who found a key piece of evidence.
he was also proven to be lying under oath.
why do you think that that shouldn't taint the other things he said or a juror's overall impression of his testimony?

Both prosecution and defense try to shake the credibility of the opposing side's witnesses. It is nothing new.

[irishgrl]

of course it did.
he was presented as someone who found a key piece of evidence.
he was also proven to be lying under oath.
why do you think that that shouldn't taint the other things he said or a juror's overall impression of his testimony?

Both prosecution and defense try to shake the credibility of the opposing side's witnesses. It is nothing new.
his use of racial slurs does not negate his finding of key evidence :shrug:
nor does it explain away the blood in OJ's car, the blood in OJ's house, the missing clothes, the fact that he had a disguise, and was planning to leave via airplane for other destinations, his threat of suicide, the knife, or any other HARD evidence. Does it account for what one of the kids saw/heard? NO. Does it explain away the fact that Nicole's breasts were slashed and her implants removed? NO.

Mark Fuhrman's use of racial slur had no bearing on anything other than to prejudice the jury as I said. If a jury could ignore all the other HARD evidence, and focus instead on the fact that a detective used racial slurs, then they werent concentrating on justice for two murdered people, but rather allowing themselves to be manipulated. No wonder attorneys think juries are stupid.

[irishgrl]

found this on a blog (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.oj-simpson/browse_thread/thread/19a8560f9c4d41e6/6d91047a78665e58?hl=en%06d91047a78665e58)


Reasons Why The OJ Trial Is The Most Absurd Event in the History of America


Jamie Lednik
[From Spy mag.]

101-200 of 1001

101. Police concluded it would have been all but impossible for Fuhrman
to have taken a glove from the crime scene and plant it at OJ's house.
102. According to testimony by Robert Riske, the first officer at the
crime scene, police had noticed all of the evidence before Fuhrman had
arrived.
103. All of the evidence samples had been collected and logged before OJ
ever gave police his blood sample.
104. Fourteen officers arrived at the crime scene long before Fuhrman
and saw no glove for him to abscond with.
105. Fuhrman was never out of sight of other officers.
106. Video footage showed that Fuhrman was not wearing his jacket during
the investigation, making it impossible to conceal a bloody glove.
107. Kato Kaelin reported hearing three loud thumps on his wall near
where the glove was found, thumps that he heard before police knew of
the murders.
108. Fuhrman had no way of knowing whether Simpson would have an alibi
for the time when the murders occurred.
109. Furhman did not even know whether eyewitnesses might emerge to say
they saw the crimes committed.
110. Fibers on the glove were later found to be consistent with those
from the inside of OJ's car, a fact that Fuhrman could not have
predicted when he reported finding the glove.
111. OJ's book has a photograph of his son Jason wearing OJ's LAPD
baseball cap, given to him by the force.
112. Ron Shipp, a former LAPD officer, often played tennis at OJ's
estate.
113. Against policy, he introduced 40 autograph-hungry cops to the star.
114. One of the security guards helping then-murder suspect OJ elude
photographers at Nicole's funeral was Sgt. Dennis Sebenik, an off-duty
LAPD officer.
115. Although OJ was the sole suspect at the time, LAPD officials agreed
to let him turn himself in after the murders.
116. The gun that OJ held to his head during the Bronco chase was
registerd to Earl C. Paysinger, a respected LAPD cop.
117. He had bought the gun for OJ for his own security prior to the
murders.
118. After the 1989 incident, Det. John Edwards allowed OJ to go back
inside his home, unaccompanied, to get dressed before being taken into
custody.
119. Instead, OJ jumped into his Bentley and fled the scene.
120. Prior to 1989, police responded to Nicole's calls at least seven
times, yet OJ was not arrested and no report was taken.
121. Black Police chief Willie Williams: "The idea that you could get
detective from several different units, police officers, civilian
technicians . . . and who knows what else together and contrive a plot
and keep it secret is unbelievable . . . . It's too fanciful to
imagine. It's something that belongs in Disneyland."
122. OJ had pressured Nicole to get breast implants, then worried that other men would look at her breasts. Her body was found with her breasts slashed.
123. Six days before the murders, Nicole discovered that a spare set of
keys to her condo -- including the security gate from the street -- was
missing.
124. On the flight to Chicago, OJ got up to use the bathroom every 15
minutes.
125. Forensic expert Henry Lee, who disputed many of the prosecutions's
blood evidence, was at Kardashian's house with OJ and AC the night
before they made their escape.
126. The two women lawyers brought in to coach OJ during mock trial
sessions told the Dream Team that OJ would be no match for Clark on the
stand.
127. On the day of the murders, OJ phoned Playmate Traci Adell, whom he
had never met, and told her about the end of his rlationship with
Nicole: "I've had enough. I've lived my life."
128. Adell said, "I think he knew that he would lose it if he didn't
stop soon."
129. The night of the murders, OJ left a message for Gretchen Stockdale,
a former LA Raiders cheerleader: "Hey, Gretchen, sweetheart, it's
Orenthal James, who is finally at a place in his life where he is, like,
totally, totally unattached with everybody. Hah! Hah!"
130. Four days before the murders, OJ rented a pay-per-view porn film
called _The Genesis Chamber,_ in which a blond woman is raped at
knifepoint.
131. Less than two weeks before the murders, Navy SEALs taught OJ the
"Silent Kill" knife attack technique for his TV pilot _Frogman._
132. In the weeks before the murders, OJ still referred to Nicole as "my
wife."
133. An LA drug dealer came forward and testified under polygraph that
he had sold OJ and Kato $100 worth of crystal meth -- a drug with
notoriously violent side effects -- shortly before the murders occurred,
which they snorted in OJ's Bentley in a Burger King parking lot.
134. At first, Kato refused to tell his friends what he knew, saying,
"It's too big."
135. When OJ visited the crime scene to identify Nicole's body, officers
reported he was cool and calm.
136. OJ never asked the police how, where, or when Nicole had been
killed when they called him.
137. At the funeral, Nicole's mother asked if OJ had anything to do with
the murders. He responded: "Oh! Oh! Oh! Judi, I loved her. I loved
her too much."
138. As she lay in the casket, OJ pulled up Nicole's dress and pulled
down her collar to look at the wounds.
139. As the casket was lowered into the ground, a woman next to OJ
moaned. OJ whispered to her, "**** happens."
140. Another woman alleges that OJ was trying to hit on her at the
funeral.
141. The defense contends there was a massive struggle, but Nicole's
children slept through the murders.
142. OJ on giving the police a fake name when arrested as a youth: "I
was really putting one over, a teenage black kid fooling the
Establishment."
143. Kardashian picked OJ up at the airport and drove him home the day
after the murders.
144. Several pieces of OJ's luggage ended up at Kardashian's home.
145. Later they re-emerged, empty, inside OJ's closet.
146. Kardashian was not an active-status lawyer at the time of the
murders, but he paid the fees to reinstate his active status.
147. By activating his status and becoming a member of the the Dream
Team, Kardashian sought to dodge testifying on the grounds of
attorney-client privilege.
148. OJ took his golf clubs to Chicago, left them in the trunk of a
Hertz employee's car, then requested the clubs be flown to LA
immediately.
149. Rather than send someone to get the clubs, he and Kardashian went
to the airport to retrieve them.
150. If the knife had been in the golf bag, it wouldn't have set off the
airport metal detector.
151. When police tried to get documents regarding OJ's wife-beating from
his office, he was blocked by one of the defense and a court-appointed
master who was supervising the search of the office.
152. When the officer returned three weeks later, OJ's personal
assistant, Cathy Randa, had shredded them.
153. Robert Shapiro claimed they were merely "pamphlets" and
"brochures."
154. 6/13/94 Police notice cuts on OJ's hands. Shapiro later described
them as "paper cuts."
155. 6/17/94 DA Gil Garcetti refuses to blame the LAPD for OJ's escape:
"How many members of the media have been surrounding Mr. Simpson's house and he was able to get away somehow?"
156. 6/18/94 Defense attorney Johnnie Cochran on whether he will take
the case: "I just think the way I feel about him would preclude me from
giving him the best representation possible."
157. As AC Cowlings is released on $250,000 bail, he pushed past
reporters, cursing and snarling "Don't you have no respect?"
158. 6/19/94 Shapiro on OJ's state: "[He] started to cry, and said, 'I
wish I could spend Father's Day with my children.'"
159. 6/19/94 Shapiro added that he had delivered a "special message"
from the Rev. Billy Graham to OJ.
160. 6/23/94 The US Senate begins its day with a prayer for OJ from
Rev. Richard Halverson.
161. "We pray for OJ . . . . Whether he is innocent or guilty rests with
our system of justice. But our hearts go out to him in his profound
loss."
162. Halverson never prays for or even mentions either victim.
163. 6/24/94 The grand jury is dismissed because members may have been
tainted by broadcasts of Nicole's 911 calls, freeing OJ from indictment.
164. 6/27/94 A courthouse camera mike inadvertently picks up OJ's
comment to a baliff: "I'll do anything to stay out of that cell."
165. 6/29/94 OJ is moved to a new cell, so that he and cellblock
neighbor Erik Menendez will not be able to overhear each other's
conversations.
166. 6/30/94 Shapiro resists the prosecution request for 40-100 of OJ's
haris from comparison to those found on the knit hat at the crime scene,
and offers only one hair.
167. A man walks into court wearing one of the special badges that
identifies him as a member of the defense team, claiming to be "a good
friend of OJ's and Shapiro's"
168. Shapiro told deputies, "I've never seen him in my life," and they
hustled the man out.
l69. Kardashian and Leroy "Skip" Taft, OJ's business attorney, are so
mobbed by reporters that they run for a bus to go to a restaurant for
lunch.
170. The two lawyers hitched a ride in a squad car to return.
171. 7/1/94 Steven Schwab, who found Kato the Akita with bloody paws,
testified that he knew exactly when he had gone for the walk because he
timed it to be between _The Dick Van Dyke Show_ and _Mary Tyler Moore._
172. 7/5/94 Defense atty. Uelmen questions Det. Mark Fuhrman's ability
to recognize the blood on OJ's Bronco, asking whether dried blood
"look[s] different that dried taco sauce?"
173. Fuhrman retorts: "I don't take too much note of dried taco sauce,
so I couldn't really say."
174. 7/6/94 Shapiro contests Det. Vannatter's claim that police became
concerned when nobody answered the door at OJ's house, because they had
been told he had a live-in maid: "Does a full-time, live-in maid to you
mean 7 days a week, 24 hours a day?"
175. Vannatter snorts at the wealthy attorney: "I don't know, sir. I've
never had a maid."
176. 7/7/94 When Marcia Clark objects to Shapiro's questionaing of
Vannatter about his alleged mishandling of OJ's Bronco, he retorts, "I
haven't even finished. It gets better."
177. 7/8/94 Shapiro
...

[buckymcnix]

his use of racial slurs does not negate his finding of key evidence :shrug:
nor does it explain away the blood in OJ's car, the blood in OJ's house, the missing clothes, the fact that he had a disguise, and was planning to leave via airplane for other destinations, his threat of suicide, the knife, or any other HARD evidence. Does it account for what one of the kids saw/heard? NO. Does it explain away the fact that Nicole's breasts were slashed and her implants removed? NO.

Mark Fuhrman's use of racial slur had no bearing on anything other than to prejudice the jury as I said. If a jury could ignore all the other HARD evidence, and focus instead on the fact that a detective used racial slurs, then they werent concentrating on justice for two murdered people, but rather allowing themselves to be manipulated. No wonder attorneys think juries are stupid.

It has to do with him LYING about his using racial slurs.
Under oath.
The rationale being that if he would lie about one thing, then he could be lying about another.

and it also came out that he also was telling an author how you can set people up in law enforcement. I am not saying that he actually did those things, but he certainly seemed to know alot about how to do it, and it was enough to push an already suspicious jury to the other side.

I didn't say it explained away anything other than that it triggered "reasonable doubt" for some of the jury who were already inherently suspicious of the police. The prosecution did a terrible job of explaining the point you are now making to the jury. which was my original point right? that the prosecution was justifiably criticized for it's case presentation.

[buckymcnix]

found this on a blog (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.oj-simpson/browse_thread/thread/19a8560f9c4d41e6/6d91047a78665e58?hl=en%06d91047a78665e58)


none of the things you highlighted deal with him lying under oath.

I never said that I believed that he set up OJ or planted evidence, just that the prosecution did a piss poor job of rehabilitating him (i think marcia called him evil) once it was proven that he lied under oath, so i am not sure what point you are arguing with this post.

[irishgrl]

this bears repeating:

Mark Fuhrman's use of racial slur had no bearing on anything other than to prejudice the jury as I said. If a jury could ignore all the other HARD evidence, and focus instead on the fact that a detective used racial slurs, then they werent concentrating on justice for two murdered people, but rather allowing themselves to be manipulated. No wonder attorneys think juries are stupid.

the blog highlights referred to just a fraction of the hard evidence, as well as the fact that Fuhrman was not the guilty party, OJ was. Pretty clever of the defense to put Fuhrman on trial eh? To cast doubt on HIS character or his actions as if he was somehow responsible??

AGAIN: that Jury was more than willing to be sit there and focus on something entirely OFF TOPIC so as not to have to face the sorry fact that one of "their own" had actually murdered two innocent people.

[JWS]

Thanks for all the details. It doesn't matter. OJ confessed confidentailly to Al Cowlings that he killed Nicole and Goldman. This has been broadcast on ESPN radio years ago. ESPN couldn't put this on national TV but could discuss on local radio talk shows....talk radio vs, hard news. Note: ESPN radio is not in all markets, mostly the big cities like NY, LA Atlanta, etc.

The book "If I did it" is a confession of just how Simpson did it. Who is worse..Simpson or this dog killer Michael Vick.:mad: Well Simpson of course, but he was already out of football. It seems like many NFL players are just plain thugs and criminals. I'll give the new NFL commissioner Roger Goodell a lot of credit..he is cracking down on thug behavior and suspending these guys from the league.

I'm hoping OJ goes to prison for this latest bizzare behavior.:(

[irishgrl]

Thanks for all the details. It doesn't matter. OJ confessed confidentailly to Al Cowlings that he killed Nicole and Goldman. This has been broadcast on ESPN radio years ago. ESPN couldn't put this on national TV but could discuss on local radio talk shows....talk radio vs, hard news. Note: ESPN radio is not in all markets, mostly the big cities like NY, LA Atlanta, etc.

The book "If I did it" is a confession of just how Simpson did it. Who is worse..Simpson or this dog killer Michael Vick.:mad: Well Simpson of course, but he was already out of football. It seems like many NFL players are just plain thugs and criminals. I'll give the new NFL commissioner Roger Goodell a lot of credit..he is cracking down on thug behavior and suspending these guys from the league.

I'm hoping OJ goes to prison for this latest bizzare behavior.:(
I dont know that I'd say it doesnt matter, but I do believe (tho I didnt hear it on ESPN) that OJ confessed to Al, and that his book is another confession. I dont think he'll get any peace from it tho, because while he "confesses" with one side of his mouth, he denies with the other.

If he had a conscience, I'd expect it to be torturing him every waking moment of his life.

Who knows? perhaps he's just on a self destructive kick because he subconsciously believes he deserves it? :shrug:

[buckymcnix]

this bears repeating:



the blog highlights referred to just a fraction of the hard evidence, as well as the fact that Fuhrman was not the guilty party, OJ was. Pretty clever of the defense to put Fuhrman on trial eh? To cast doubt on HIS character or his actions as if he was somehow responsible??

AGAIN: that Jury was more than willing to be sit there and focus on something entirely OFF TOPIC so as not to have to face the sorry fact that one of "their own" had actually murdered two innocent people.

Ok then - well this bears repeating:
He lied. He lied under oath in front of the jury. Hard Evidence. It wasn't clever of the defense to point this out because, as i stated, both defense and prosecution try to get at the opposing witnesses's credibility. Standard operating procedure. The prosecution should have expected it.

fuhrman was guilty of lying under oath.
the defense pointed it out.
the prosecution couldn't rehabilitate their own witness.
AGAIN- that was what we disagreed on, whether the prosecution did a good job or not. You said they were unjustifiably criticized. I didn't agree with you and feel that they are in many ways responsible for the innocent verdict.


Now you seem to want to shift the argument to the jury being clueless, easily manipulated and worried about the fate of "one of their own" over justice. I think the prosecution didn't reach them and when it did, it wasn't in a good way (the glove demo).

Maybe when the prosecution took a lying racist and put him under oath and then were surprised when it blew up in their faces proves as a good example of my original point - they blew it.

It is not "OFF TOPIC" to consider the consequences of a lying witness.
Can you really not see that?

[irishgrl]

again: it doesnt negate the REST of the prosecution's case. the knife, the blood, the trip down the freeway, the DV 911 calls, the threats, the disguise, etc.

Mark Fuhrman's credibility is only a SMALL piece of the whole pie. *edited out comment*

FYI: The prosecution didnt lose that case because of one compromised witness--there was no way in HELL the prosecution was going to reach THAT PARTICULAR JURY. The verdict was a done deal once the change of venue was granted. *edited out the "FACT" comment, because actually its my OPINION.*

[buckymcnix]

again: it doesnt negate the REST of the prosecution's case. the knife, the blood, the trip down the freeway, the DV 911 calls, the threats, the disguise, etc.

Mark Fuhrman's credibility is only a SMALL piece of the whole pie. You are no better than that jury if you cant see that.

FYI: The prosecution didnt lose that case because of one compromised witness--there was no way in HELL the prosecution was going to reach THAT PARTICULAR JURY. The verdict was a done deal once the change of venue was granted. FACT.

I didn't claim to be better than anyone at all, but for the record, agreeing or not with you will NEVER be a rating scale in my life.

on topic:
i do not agree with the jury's conclusions, i am only saying that i can see how they got there. and my contention was the prosecution did a poor job presenting it's case and that played a hand in it. i believe that the change of venue changed the dynamics of the case but i do not hold the cynical view that the jury was only out to save "one of their own" and couldn't be reached.

You remove all blame from the prosecution and want to pin it solely on the jury as some form of racism. I disagree whole-heartedly. I believe there are plenty of reasons why the verdict came down as it did and not solely because of the change of venue.

I have really tried to have a reasoned discussion with you, but I really don't think you read or understand what i write, because i find myself repeating basic things.
That's all for me on this.

[irishgrl]

Im not asking you to agree with me, Im merely pointing out that that case was more than just Mark Fuhrman's gaffe. The jury couldnt get past it? I submit that it never mattered anyway, that with that jury, OJ was never in jeopardy. A ROOM full of evidence wouldnt have swayed that jury. IMO.

In the end, whether I stated it as such originally or not, I am only stating an OPINION. I edited my previous post to reflect that.

I found some interesting facts on OJ's jury From the UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY (UMKC) SCHOOL OF LAW: here (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/Jurypage.html)

The racial composition of the initial jury pool differed considerably from the racial compostion of the final jury. The pool was 40% white, 28% black, 17% Hispanic, and 15% Asian. (the final jury makeup was 9 blacks, 2 whites and 1 hispanic)

The racial composition of the jury was strongly influenced by the decision of the prosecution to file the Simpson case in downtown Los Angeles rather than--as is usually the case-- in the judicial district where the crime occurred-- in this case, Santa Monica. Had the case be filed in Santa Monica, the Simpson jury would have been mostly white instead of, as was the case, mostly African-American. With poll data showing that most whites believed Simpson to be guilty and most blacks believing him to be not guilty, the decision to file the case in Santa Monica may have been the biggest mistake the prosecution made. Vincent Bugliosi, the celebrated prosecutor in the Charles Manson case, said the mistake "dwarfed anything the defense did."


here is a nicely laid out page on the timeline/trial/etc:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/Evidence.html
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.

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.

7. Other evidence: (1) flight in Bronco, (2) strange reaction to phone call informing him of Nicole Brown's death, etc.
October 2, 1995 After less than four hours, jury announces that it has reached a verdict. (after 6 months of evidence????)

an acquittal in spite of all this evidence proves my point that the prosecution would NEVER have "reached" that particular jury.
Back to the ORIGINAL topic, I wonder if OJ isnt operating under some sort of psychological impetus to atone for past wrongs???

[DavidMn]

Funny, but the last time I checked, O.J still owes the Goldman's/Brown's 33 million dollars. And if I'm correct whatever money or **** he owns save his home and NFL pension goes to those 2 families until that money is paid in full. So the way I see it, none of that memorabilia actually belongs to him!

[irishgrl]

Funny, but the last time I checked, O.J still owes the Goldman's/Brown's 33 million dollars. And if I'm correct whatever money or **** he owns save his home and NFL pension goes to those 2 families until that money is paid in full. So the way I see it, none of that memorabilia actually belongs to him!
Ron Goldman actually petitioned the court for possession, I believe....

[Wildheart82]

I didn't claim to be better than anyone at all, but for the record, agreeing or not with you will NEVER be a rating scale in my life.

on topic:
i do not agree with the jury's conclusions, i am only saying that i can see how they got there. and my contention was the prosecution did a poor job presenting it's case and that played a hand in it. i believe that the change of venue changed the dynamics of the case but i do not hold the cynical view that the jury was only out to save "one of their own" and couldn't be reached.

You remove all blame from the prosecution and want to pin it solely on the jury as some form of racism. I disagree whole-heartedly. I believe there are plenty of reasons why the verdict came down as it did and not solely because of the change of venue.

I have really tried to have a reasoned discussion with you, but I really don't think you read or understand what i write, because i find myself repeating basic things.
That's all for me on this.


You have the patience of Job!!!!!!!!!!

[buckymcnix]

You have the patience of Job!!!!!!!!!!

and poor eyesight too i guess - lol

[irishgrl]

oh well, I always liked Magoo :shrug:

[buckymcnix]

oh well, I always liked Magoo :shrug:


yes - i am sure you meant it as a compliment and not an insult right?


and as to the question in your sig that points to the picture and asks "what is this?"

Any chance it is the not-quite-banned thread you are hanging on by around here?

[irishgrl]

yes - i am sure you meant it as a compliment and not an insult right?


and as to the question in your sig that points to the picture and asks "what is this?"

Any chance it is the not-quite-banned thread you are hanging on by around here?
why Job! you wouldnt be BAITING me by any chance would you????

tsk tsk. :distress:

perhaps if you'd supported your position with something a bit more substantial than "Fuhrman lied" I might have seen just why you felt like the prosecution deserved to be criticized.

I (as I usually do) went looking for material which supported my position. I found that many others, including Bugliosi (whom I quoted) agreed with me that the change of venue was the single most deciding factor in the outcome of that case. I actually came across some valid points that you failed to mention that would have perhaps given me reason to take another look at what you had to say. Unfortunately you did not go there. You committed the same sort of short-sighted(!!) error that that jury did. It was apparently easier for some folks to make Fuhrman the scapegoat.

I am willing to admit, after reading some of the material I found, that perhaps the DA's office could have done things differently, but then hindsight is usually 20/20. Ultimately, however, I still maintain, that no matter HOW the case was handled, regardless of the mountain of evidence, there was NO WAY OJ would have been convicted with THAT JURY.

cute sig by the way.

and: thats a wrap.