It IS that simple, but it's also true that it was clear that jury wasn't going to convict a successful, black celebrity who'd "made it" in 1994 Los Angeles. They were looking for any reason to have "doubt" and Cochran handed "reasons" to them they could understand - racist cops, sloppy CSI, and calling the victim a drugged up *****.

They also didn't understand the DNA evidence ao they chose to ignore it.

Clark and Darden made mistakes but it SHOULD have been enough.

quote:

---

sloppy CSI, and calling the victim a drugged up *****.

They also didn't understand the DNA evidence ao they chose to ignore it.

---

Sloppy CSI in today's world means it not allowed so without the evidence from OJ's, there's no trial. Of course they didn't understand the dna, it was sloppily collected so they did what Ito should have done, ignored it. This is a failure of the da to understand their audience and their education levels.

There were minor mistakes in some of the forensics but nothing that should have been thrown out of court. There are minor mistakes in cases that are tried today. You do the best with what you have.

Looking back it's clear OJ wasn't going to get convicted. The racial atmosphere of LA at that time was too poisoned.

Everybody on the state's side blew it. From Ito to cops to lab techs. But it still should have been enough. OJ bought the best and they turned the case for him.

The thing that struck me in the show is how the LA public servants were outmanned and outgunned at every point. They were little leaguers playing in the pros. I really felt for Marcia. She was crucified.

quote:

---

The thing that struck me in the show is how the LA public servants were outmanned and outgunned at every point. They were little leaguers playing in the pros.

---

Please watch the Duke 30/30. Sometimes pros are the way to go if you can afford it.

quote:

---

It IS that simple, but it's also true that it was clear that jury wasn't going to convict a successful, black celebrity who'd "made it" in 1994 Los Angeles. They were looking for any reason to have "doubt" and Cochran handed "reasons" to them they could understand - racist cops, sloppy CSI, and calling the victim a drugged up *****.

They also didn't understand the DNA evidence ao they chose to ignore it.

Clark and Darden made mistakes but it SHOULD have been enough.

---

I would not disagree with the bolded....but I think it is very important to add "Without an Eye Witness or a murder weapon"

Celebrity goes a long way. This was not Mike Tyson or Floyd Mayweather on trial. This was someone the equivalent of Emmit Smith or Michael Strahan. OJ was admired by everyone before 1994.

quote:

---

Celebrity goes a long way. This was not Mike Tyson or Floyd Mayweather on trial. This was someone the equivalent of Emmit Smith or Michael Strahan. OJ was admired by everyone before 1994.

---

This is always hard to wrap my head around. I vaguely remember the white bronco chase. Not really any details I can just remember the white bronco on tv and everyone watching it, because as my dad says "that was the only damn thing on tv." I was born in '87 so to me OJ has always been the guy from the murder trial. It's weird seeing him in the Naked Gun movies. My brain doesn't associate him with football or acting or anything besides murdering folks.

How many murders actually have unimpeachable eyewitness testimony though? Certainly that would have helped, but there were 2 witnesses to him returning to Rockingham after the murders. Their testimony corroborated each other.

There was also a witness (who wasn't used) who saw him flying through an intersection fleeing Bundy.

We'll never know, but I'm hard pressed to believe THAT jury would have convicted even with eyewitness testimony in 1994 Los Angeles.

My family is originally from western Ny so we have all kinds of pictures of my brothers in 32 Bills jerseys. OJ was a BIG deal and his image was very marketable.

quote:

---

How many murders actually have unimpeachable eyewitness testimony though? Certainly that would have helped, but there were 2 witnesses to him returning to Rockingham after the murders. Their testimony corroborated each other.

There was also a witness (who wasn't used) who saw him flying through an intersection fleeing Bundy.

We'll never know, but I'm hard pressed to believe THAT jury would have convicted even with eyewitness testimony in 1994 Los Angeles.

My family is originally from western Ny so we have all kinds of pictures of my brothers in 32 Bills jerseys. OJ was a BIG deal and his image was very marketable.

---

A lack of a murder weapon or eye witness will cause many prosecutors to seek a plea deal against the defendant.
Most defendants will take 30 to 50 years over the chance of a life or death sentence. Especially since they can be eligible for parole in half of that time.

Most defendants that are convicted of a murder charge are done in by an eye witness (many times a snitch or a former partner in crime), confession, or possession of the murder weapon.

I wish they wouldn't have shown what was in the garment bag since it is unknown what was in it.

You're welcome


Anybody watching tonight?

Didn't expect a complete episode on jury.... I'm impressed tho.... Kinda whiny, but decent concept

Slow episode IMO

This is slow? Think about how that jury felt. Ito let this happen.

I guess my next step is YouTube, but did fong really shake the hands of the defense on his way out?

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/Fung.htm

quote:

---

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/Fung.htm

---

WOW

He held up well for Marcia but Scheck tore him up.

In her book, Clark is most disdainful of Ito and Scheck. She knew Fung wasn't one of the better criminalist and there were mistakes, but he didn't deserve the contempt that Scheck took out on him.

The shots of the jury tuning out during DNA were subtle and telling. That and OJ's white friends abandoning him after the DNA was presented.

I wonder why they've chosen not to show Kris Jenner was pregnant during the trial - she actually wore Nicole's old maternity clothes during the trial. Seems odd to leave out that actual kardashian tie-in and create fictional ones.

Anyone catch how they cut to OJ praising an episode of Seinfeld at the poker game right after the scene of the black and white jurors divided between Martin and Seinfeld? Just another subtle reminder of how OJ had abandoned the black community.

quote:

---

Love the sound track this episode.

---

Folk Implosion - Natural One
Queen - Another One Bites the Dust
Public Enemy - Fight the Power

I may have missed one or two.

If you download the fx app, they carry all episodes from the season....


Also, they used a sheet from Nicole's condo to cover her body? Was this bc the fuzz on the scene wasn't familiar w DNA?

I totally understand showing a murder victim respect & that is was 1994, but wow..... That's a pretty big **** up.... How does crime scene wagon not have clean sheets?

quote:

---

LOL cochran agreeing that black people like ross more than target was hilarious

---

Loved that.

quote:

---

If you download the fx app, they carry all episodes from the season....


Also, they used a sheet from Nicole's condo to cover her body? Was this bc the fuzz on the scene wasn't familiar w DNA?

I totally understand showing a murder victim respect & that is was 1994, but wow..... That's a pretty big **** up.... How does crime scene wagon not have clean sheets?

---

One of my friends who's a lawyer was actually talking about this the other day...apparently the neighbor who found Nicole and called 911 didn't want his kids or anyone to walk by and see the bloody body so he grabbed a blanket from inside and covered her.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If you download the fx app, they carry all episodes from the season....


Also, they used a sheet from Nicole's condo to cover her body? Was this bc the fuzz on the scene wasn't familiar w DNA?

I totally understand showing a murder victim respect & that is was 1994, but wow..... That's a pretty big **** up.... How does crime scene wagon not have clean sheets?

---

One of my friends who's a lawyer was actually talking about this the other day...apparently the neighbor who found Nicole and called 911 didn't want his kids or anyone to walk by and see the bloody body so he grabbed a blanket from inside and covered her.

---

No. It was an LAPD investigator.....from the LA Times article in 1995.....

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-04-06/news/mn-51592_1_crime-scene

quote:

---

On the defense: Having undermined Fung's credibility, Scheck effectively attacked his competence. His questions highlighted mistakes made by Fung and others during the investigation. Among the noteworthy gaffes: Fung failed to secure O.J.'s Bronco as part of the Rockingham crime scene and an investigator used a blanket from Nicole Simpson's condo to cover her, thereby risking the transfer of innocent hair or fiber traces left by O.J. on the blanket to the Bundy crime scene.

---

...there is more in that article about Schecks cross of Fung and the jury panel as well....

http://www.ew.com/recap/the-people-v-oj-simpson-american-crime-story-episode-8

This recap has some great hyperlinks to contemporary interviews, including ones with the dismissed jurors. Jeannette Harris' sympathy for Simpson is insane, while she admits to tuning out to the scientific evidence.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

If you download the fx app, they carry all episodes from the season....


Also, they used a sheet from Nicole's condo to cover her body? Was this bc the fuzz on the scene wasn't familiar w DNA?

I totally understand showing a murder victim respect & that is was 1994, but wow..... That's a pretty big **** up.... How does crime scene wagon not have clean sheets?

---

One of my friends who's a lawyer was actually talking about this the other day...apparently the neighbor who found Nicole and called 911 didn't want his kids or anyone to walk by and see the bloody body so he grabbed a blanket from inside and covered her.

---

No. It was an LAPD investigator.....from the LA Times article in 1995.....

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-04-06/news/mn-51592_1_crime-scene

---

Oh wow, i'll let her know!

Word on the street is that the Goldman familiy and the Brown family do not like each other. The Browns think the Goldmans are media *****s.

The Browns were less than cooperative during the investigation and trial. OJ financially supported Nicole's parents and they didn't want her to divorce him. Their daughter started dating a married OJ when she was 17...very odd dynamic in that family from what Clark described in her book.

I could understand why the Goldmans felt compelled to use the media. Their son was brutally murdered and they watched his murderer's trial turn into a farce. The media talked about OJ and Nicole and race and Mark Fuhrman....and Ron was a footnote. i dont think you can question their genuine grief and suffering and their sense of injustice.