OT: OJ Simpson: Made in America 5 part series

[madvillian]

I just finished watching all 5 parts and so many thoughts are flooding through my head.

For CENTURIES, black men have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit, simply because (for example) a WHITE woman said he raped her, or a WHITE man said he stole from him. It didn't matter if it was true or not...if a WHITE person said it, that's all that mattered. It WAS true!

The O.J. trial and the verdict that followed was a manifestation of all those years blacks were falsely accused and lynched for having done nothing wrong. So at some point, the trial became less about O.J. and more of a referendum on years of bias against Black Americans. Blame the end result on a history of national racism and corrupt police departments that actively promoted it.

I won't get into if O.J. really did it or not, since everybody has their own opinions. However, just as White America cheered the day the cops who beat Rodney King were found not guilty, they found out how it felt to be on the opposite end of a court decision. Blacks cheered because they'd heard "GUILTY" for so long...even when the black man or woman wasn't guilty. For once, "NOT GUILTY" was a celebration.

Was O.J. the wrong person to be the face of this moment of black vindication? Perhaps. Is it sad that 2 people died brutally on the day Nicole and Ron were killed? Absolutely! However, after YEARS of being beat down physically, mentally and emotionally, did Black America need this brief moment of feeling as if THEY had finally won? You better believe it!

I'll never understand why the black community chose OJ as their martyr. A guy that wanted nothing to do with the black community and that surrounded himself with as many white friends as possible.

It's incredibly ironic.

[Knick4Real]

I just finished watching all 5 parts and so many thoughts are flooding through my head.

For CENTURIES, black men have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit, simply because (for example) a WHITE woman said he raped her, or a WHITE man said he stole from him. It didn't matter if it was true or not...if a WHITE person said it, that's all that mattered. It WAS true!

The O.J. trial and the verdict that followed was a manifestation of all those years blacks were falsely accused and lynched for having done nothing wrong. So at some point, the trial became less about O.J. and more of a referendum on years of bias against Black Americans. Blame the end result on a history of national racism and corrupt police departments that actively promoted it.

I won't get into if O.J. really did it or not, since everybody has their own opinions. However, just as White America cheered the day the cops who beat Rodney King were found not guilty, they found out how it felt to be on the opposite end of a court decision. Blacks cheered because they'd heard "GUILTY" for so long...even when the black man or woman wasn't guilty. For once, "NOT GUILTY" was a celebration.

Was O.J. the wrong person to be the face of this moment of black vindication? Perhaps. Is it sad that 2 people died brutally on the day Nicole and Ron were killed? Absolutely! However, after YEARS of being beat down physically, mentally and emotionally, did Black America need this brief moment of feeling as if THEY had finally won? You better believe it!

I'll never understand why the black community chose OJ as their martyr. A guy that wanted nothing to do with the black community and that surrounded himself with as many white friends as possible.

It's incredibly ironic.

The black community did not choose O.J. as a martyr at all. It wasn't about a person, it was about a movement...especially in light of the Rodney King beating. O.J. just happened to be in the right place at the right time to become the "face" of the movement Black America was already waging against a corrupt police system.

[Knick4Real]

Furman was a jerk and Cochran was a jerk.

Like it or not, Cochran was a damn good attorney. Regardless if OJ did it or not, Cochran's job was to defend his client and get an acquital -- and he did his job better than probably anybody could.

[Drun53]

The "If Nicole hadn't come out with a knife, she'd still be alive" quote that OJ apparently said to his agent was pretty freaky. Plus, he'd always reference which way he would have gone IF he did it, as if he had this whole thing planned out.

I think the jury and the court of the law got it right in acquitting him based on the awful prosecution and terrific job by the defense attorneys, but I'm >95% sure that OJ did it.

I also think that Fuhrman is certainly enough of a scumbag to plant the glove, and he very well might have. But there was still enough evidence regardless to prove him guilty had the prosecution been competent.

[Luv those Knicks]

Furman was a jerk and Cochran was a jerk.

Like it or not, Cochran was a damn good attorney. Regardless if OJ did it or not, Cochran's job was to defend his client and get an acquital -- and he did his job better than probably anybody could.

He'll always be a jerk in the eyes of millions for his insensitivity for the Hitler comment. There were millions of ways he could have made that final statement without going there and I know it wasn't just his decision and he didn't write the closing statement solo. He actually was kind of dumb to say it. It probably hurt his career.

Yes, he's a good lawyer, and he's a jerk, until he apologizes to jews. Saying the N word is wrong, and people who say it should apologize. Comparing someone to Hitler is wrong and Coc'khran should apologize, not to Fermin, but he should apologize to people who were much more affected by Hitler than your average black person was affected by the LAPD. It's not the same.

and, how smart is he, if he gets someone like me, who's mostly anti cop, to get offended by what he said about cops? There is such a thing as exageration to the point of hurting your argument and I believe that's waht he did. (he and the other lawyer who helped him write the closing statement).

[Luv those Knicks]

May I ask a question? Why were people upset at Johnny?

It's a way for some folks to obfuscate their real sentiment about race with specious arguments.

I can't get past the Hitler speech. To me, that's it. If he hadn't gone there, I'd be fine with him. I could get past getting a rich guy off. That's his job. Lawyers have been doing that for years. I hate George Zimmerman, but I even kind of like his defender. He seemed like a good guy. I think Coc'k needs to appologize for his hitler speech. Concentration camps are worse than using the N word by an order of about 50 magnitudes. To draw a comparison is wrong, wrong, wrong, forever wrong to me. That's why I don't like Johnny.

I'm honestly not sure what "Obfuscate their real sentiment about race with specious arguments" means. I don't think I'm doing that.

What it comes down to with "Johnny" is whether you forgive him for the Hitler comment or you don't. And, not forgiving him for the Hitler comment is perfectly valid. You're not automatically a racist if you don't forgive him for that. My father nearly died fighting the Nazis. Millions did die. Some things I take personally and that's one of them.

[Greenie]

May I ask a question? Why were people upset at Johnny?

It's a way for some folks to obfuscate their real sentiment about race with specious arguments.

I can't get past the Hitler speech. To me, that's it. If he hadn't gone there, I'd be fine with him. I could get past getting a rich guy off. That's his job. Lawyers have been doing that for years. I hate George Zimmerman, but I even kind of like his defender. He seemed like a good guy. I think Coc'k needs to appologize for his hitler speech. Concentration camps are worse than using the N word by an order of about 50 magnitudes. To draw a comparison is wrong, wrong, wrong, forever wrong to me. That's why I don't like Johnny.

I'm honestly not sure what "Obfuscate their real sentiment about race with specious arguments" means. I don't think I'm doing that.

What it comes down to with "Johnny" is whether you forgive him for the Hitler comment or you don't. And, not forgiving him for the Hitler comment is perfectly valid. You're not automatically a racist if you don't forgive him for that. My father nearly died fighting the Nazis. Millions did die. Some things I take personally and that's one of them.

I take slavery and Jim Crow personally.

[Luv those Knicks]

I still think Johnnie Cochran's a scumbag for the Hitler thing, and one lesson of the trial that's not been given enough attention is that rich people with good lawyers can do terrible things and get away with it. But I still think overall the trial was good for the country because it did bring some things to the surface.

Not only that, but he basically outright said, It's time for you to pick a side. I guess you can't blame a defense lawyer for doing anything he possibly can to get his client off. But what a repugnant, unethical thing to say.

I think Johnnie's a great lawyer who did a lot of positive things over his career, but I lost a lot of respect for him after hearing that.

At any rate, I thought the most telling comment of the whole documentary was from one of the preachers near the end. That wasn't a victory for the black community. It was just a rich dude named OJ who used his money to beat the system.

If we'd seen a positive shift in the system or attitudes after that trial, I'd agree with you. But it doesn't seem like much of anything has changed in terms of systemic racism in America -- the predatory court system in Ferguson is just one of about 10,000 examples you can come up with -- so I fail to see anything positive that came from it.

Maybe I'm wrong, but "Pick a side" doesn't bother me. I don't think he's saying "Pick a side, white or black", though I suppose it could be determined that way.

He was saying Pick a side, LA Cops framed him or status quo, and if that's the choice, (while I don't think the cops framed OJ at all and that entire argument was rooted in fantasy-land), arguing against the LA cop status quo wasn't wrong. . . . I don't know. The whole thing is a sticky situation. Blaming all cops gets us nowhere and that's what Johnny did. The Hitler comparison, still sounds foul to me. Just wrong. It wasn't Johnny's job to defend good cops, but that's what needs to be done in such public situations and this was a very public venue for him to take such an extreme approach.

Many shades of grey in this one. It's easy to understand why Johnny said what he said, and it wasn't all him, he was part of a team, he wasn't this one guy taking this approach. It's also easy to criticize Johnny for what he said and contrary to people who like him, that criticism if very fair. On a personal note, I will never like the man. I will never forgive him for the Hitler comment, but I understand where he was coming from. I still think he owes the world an apology though, even if he ended up doing some good by exposing LA PD, he did good in a way he knew would be hurtful and he did good by lying. He knew the cops didn't set up OJ and he helped get a murder off, which was his job, but is never respected. Nobody ever says, oh, you're a defense lawyer who gets murderer's off, good for you. People say "you're a defense lawyer who gets murderers off, you scumbag. How do you sleep at night? Anyone (not you but others) who praise Coc'k as a good lawyer and think that ends the conversation somehow, are missing the point.

[Luv those Knicks]

I take slavery and Jim Crow personally.

OK, let me add something to this re-reading your post.

You're right to take slavery and Jim Crow personally, absolutely. You're right to take the wrong actions of LAPD personally.

where we veer off in our points of view, is our opinions of Johnny Cochran, and to me, I can't forgive what he said. I understand why he said it, but he got a murderer off and he called a cop Hitler in the process, and he knew, he absolutely KNEW that the cops didn't frame OJ but he said they did anyway. (and I said I'm fine with him going after cops cause they deserved being gone after), but taken as a whole, the Hitler comment being the dog poop on top of the cake. I can't like a man who does that.

Asking me to like Johnny would be like me asking you to like . . . (oh, I don't know, examples escape me, asking you to like Woodrow Wilson perhaps). We have a right to dislike people for saying things we disagree with. That's a human right. That much shouldn't be controversial.



original response follows.

OK, now you've lost me. Was slavery a defense in the OJ trial? See, I think you're the one who's Obfuscating. It's not people who dislike Johnny who are.

Are you saying that because of slavery, we have to agree and approve every time a black person calls a white person Hitler for using the N word? How about we approve of neither? I'm going to stand by my original point of view. Fermin was a jerk and Johnny was a jerk.

and look, I'm anti 1980s/90s LAPD tactics. We're on the same side there. That doesn't mean I have to like Johnny Cochran.

[Greenie]

I take slavery and Jim Crow personally.

OK, now you've lost me. Was slavery a defense in the OJ trial? See, I think you're the one who's Obfuscating. It's not people who dislike Johnny who are.

Are you saying that because of slavery, we have to agree and approve every time a black person calls a white person Hitler for using the N word? How about we approve of neither? I'm going to stand by my original point of view. Fermin was a jerk and Johnny was a jerk.

and look, I'm anti 1980s/90s LAPD tactics. We're on the same side there. That doesn't mean I have to like Johnny Cochran.

I don't think you comphrend his argument.
People like Hitler start off like Fuhrman. They spew hate and plant a seed. If allowed to grow and prosper....especially when they wield some form of power already, people like Furhman can become Hitler like.

[Greenie]

You don't have to like Johnny. He's dead and gone anyway.

When will Blacks get an apology for slavery and Jim Crow?

[Luv those Knicks]

I don't think you comphrend his argument.
People like Hitler start off like Fuhrman. They spew hate and plant a seed. If allowed to grow and prosper....especially when they wield some form of power already, people like Furhman can become Hitler like.

People like Hitler don't start off like Fuhrman though. (seems I've been misspelling his name, I should have checked).

I've read a bit about Hitler, he was always passionate, almost religious zealot level. He used to give speeches in trenches in WW1 to his fellow soldiers about nationalism to anyone who'd listen. Furhman was nothing like that. Nowhere near that driven.

Spew hate and plant a seed sounds poetic, but Furhman didn't give speeches and urge people to join his point of view. He was just a racist, likely in part, hardened by his years on the force, but nothing like Hitler. A like I heard quoted, from a cop, I never forgot it because there was a lot of truth to it, he said "When I worked in a black district I hated black people and when I worked in a white district, I hated white people". . . . not that that's here nor there, but I liked the quote.

Hitler never started out by wielding power, he was a political activist for over a decade, helping spread the word of the Nazi party. He didn't win any government power till he was elected in 1932 in German congress in 1932. Political activism isn't anything like being a policeman with some authority. Hitler was a very aggressive, very driven personality. Furhman wasn't that.

His argument, while entertaining, was simply wrong. Furhman is too simple to ever have become Hitler.

While you might not like the comp, in terms of style and personality, Cochran was much more similar to Hitler. Driven, passionate, single minded, intelligent. Furhman was just a bully. Hitler was much more than just a bully.

[Luv those Knicks]

You don't have to like Johnny. He's dead and gone anyway.

When will Blacks get an apology for slavery and Jim Crow?

I apologize for slavery and Jim Crow. On behalf of white people everywhere, we were monsters. What many of us and our ancestors did, many times, throughout history was brutal and shameful. The way we thought was wrong. We were selfish and mean and hurtful and even warlike at times and many of us stuck (and some still stick to) the wrong attitude. I apologize for my race's history. . . . not that an apology covers it, but, for what it's worth, I think it's owed.

But asking Cochran for an apology is different. He actually said the Hitler comp. (I didn't realize he was dead).

- - - anyhoo, I feel like I'm kind of going on a bit too long here. I still don't like Cochran, but I recognize that he had reasons for the things he said.

[Greenie]

I don't think you comphrend his argument.
People like Hitler start off like Fuhrman. They spew hate and plant a seed. If allowed to grow and prosper....especially when they wield some form of power already, people like Furhman can become Hitler like.

People like Hitler don't start off like Fuhrman though. (seems I've been misspelling his name, I should have checked).

I've read a bit about Hitler, he was always passionate, almost religious zealot level. He used to give speeches in trenches in WW1 to his fellow soldiers about nationalism to anyone who'd listen. Furhman was nothing like that. Nowhere near that driven.

Spew hate and plant a seed sounds poetic, but Furhman didn't give speeches and urge people to join his point of view. He was just a racist, likely in part, hardened by his years on the force, but nothing like Hitler. A like I heard quoted, from a cop, I never forgot it because there was a lot of truth to it, he said "When I worked in a black district I hated black people and when I worked in a white district, I hated white people". . . . not that that's here nor there, but I liked the quote.

Hitler never started out by wielding power, he was a political activist for over a decade, helping spread the word of the Nazi party. He didn't win any government power till he was elected in 1932 in German congress in 1932. Political activism isn't anything like being a policeman with some authority. Hitler was a very aggressive, very driven personality. Furhman wasn't that.

His argument, while entertaining, was simply wrong. Furhman is too simple to ever have become Hitler.

While you might not like the comp, in terms of style and personality, Cochran was much more similar to Hitler. Driven, passionate, single minded, intelligent. Furhman was just a bully. Hitler was much more than just a bully.

In my opinion, Fuhrman being a cop made his potential worse. LAW ENFORCEMENT. I'm not saying he was on the level of Hitler at the time of the trial or that he would ever get there, so please don't misunderstand on that.

What Fuhrman was, was this idea. Hitler started off as an idea. Hitler followed through on his idea and for whatever reason was allowed to. Fuhrman was snuffed out. As all racists should be.


Now, as far as Johnny knowing for a fact that OJ did it is a reach. I don't even like the guy and I'm not sure. I really do think that crap was planted and they tried to set him up for all the times he whooped Nicole's ass. Remember Fuhrman was one of the cops that was sent to the house on one of Nicole's calls. OJ should have pulled time for that alone in my book. Murder? I'm not sure. Was he capable? Possibly. I wouldn't put it past him.

[Greenie]

You don't have to like Johnny. He's dead and gone anyway.

When will Blacks get an apology for slavery and Jim Crow?

I apologize for slavery and Jim Crow. On behalf of white people everywhere, we were monsters. What many of us and our ancestors did, many times, throughout history was brutal and shameful. The way we thought was wrong. We were selfish and mean and hurtful and even warlike at times and many of us stuck (and some still stick to) the wrong attitude. I apologize for my race's history. . . . not that an apology covers it, but, for what it's worth, I think it's owed.

But asking Cochran for an apology is different. He actually said the Hitler comp. (I didn't realize he was dead).

- - - anyhoo, I feel like I'm kind of going on a bit too long here. I still don't like Cochran, but I recognize that he had reasons for the things he said.

I actually agree to a certain extent. Maybe Johnny should have elaborated his point more than he did. Especially being that he brought up something so damn vulger and evil.

[Greenie]

One thing I'm appreciating about this thread is that we aren't acting wild and cussing each other out even though we may not agree. It's refreshing.

[Sedale Threatt]

Furman was a jerk and Cochran was a jerk.

Like it or not, Cochran was a damn good attorney. Regardless if OJ did it or not, Cochran's job was to defend his client and get an acquital -- and he did his job better than probably anybody could.

Now this I don't dispute at all. I guess my big takeaway from all this, is that the law is a scummy, scummy business.

[Sedale Threatt]

I still think Johnnie Cochran's a scumbag for the Hitler thing, and one lesson of the trial that's not been given enough attention is that rich people with good lawyers can do terrible things and get away with it. But I still think overall the trial was good for the country because it did bring some things to the surface.

Not only that, but he basically outright said, It's time for you to pick a side. I guess you can't blame a defense lawyer for doing anything he possibly can to get his client off. But what a repugnant, unethical thing to say.

I think Johnnie's a great lawyer who did a lot of positive things over his career, but I lost a lot of respect for him after hearing that.

At any rate, I thought the most telling comment of the whole documentary was from one of the preachers near the end. That wasn't a victory for the black community. It was just a rich dude named OJ who used his money to beat the system.

If we'd seen a positive shift in the system or attitudes after that trial, I'd agree with you. But it doesn't seem like much of anything has changed in terms of systemic racism in America -- the predatory court system in Ferguson is just one of about 10,000 examples you can come up with -- so I fail to see anything positive that came from it.

Maybe I'm wrong, but "Pick a side" doesn't bother me. I don't think he's saying "Pick a side, white or black", though I suppose it could be determined that way.

He was saying Pick a side, LA Cops framed him or status quo, and if that's the choice, (while I don't think the cops framed OJ at all and that entire argument was rooted in fantasy-land), arguing against the LA cop status quo wasn't wrong. . . . I don't know. The whole thing is a sticky situation. Blaming all cops gets us nowhere and that's what Johnny did. The Hitler comparison, still sounds foul to me. Just wrong. It wasn't Johnny's job to defend good cops, but that's what needs to be done in such public situations and this was a very public venue for him to take such an extreme approach.

Many shades of grey in this one. It's easy to understand why Johnny said what he said, and it wasn't all him, he was part of a team, he wasn't this one guy taking this approach. It's also easy to criticize Johnny for what he said and contrary to people who like him, that criticism if very fair. On a personal note, I will never like the man. I will never forgive him for the Hitler comment, but I understand where he was coming from. I still think he owes the world an apology though, even if he ended up doing some good by exposing LA PD, he did good in a way he knew would be hurtful and he did good by lying. He knew the cops didn't set up OJ and he helped get a murder off, which was his job, but is never respected. Nobody ever says, oh, you're a defense lawyer who gets murderer's off, good for you. People say "you're a defense lawyer who gets murderers off, you scumbag. How do you sleep at night? Anyone (not you but others) who praise Coc'k as a good lawyer and think that ends the conversation somehow, are missing the point.

I'd have to go back and watch again, but I promise you it was absolutely inferred. I mean, they'd only been beating that drum for months. Of course that's what he meant.

And hey, it worked. I guess, in a bizarre way, you can argue that our justice system actually worked. Everybody's entitled to a fair trial, and under the rules and parameters established, however obviously flawed they are, O.J.'s team was able to secure his freedom.

But as you said, how could you sleep at night? All of those attorneys were brilliant. There's no way he or anybody else on that team thought he was innocent. Again, it's the system, but the lack of ethics is astounding.

And to be fair, it's not isolated to just this case, or just one side. How many instances have we seen of DAs and police officers corrupting justice, as evidenced by how difficult it is to even get an indictment, let alone a conviction, in situations of obvious misconduct? (Again, the Rice situation just blows me away.)

But that doesn't make it any less repugnant when you see clear cases.

[Sedale Threatt]

I also don't think he did it. At most, I think he hired someone to do it.

I'd be really, really curious to hear how you can reach this conclusion. The DNA evidence, the gloves, the shoes, the history of abuse, the lack of reaction when told of Brown's murder, the timeline, his subsequent behavior and comments...you can almost go forever. I guess I can see how somebody would think this back in the day. But after watching all of that? Of course he did it.

[Greenie]

I also don't think he did it. At most, I think he hired someone to do it.

I'd be really, really curious to hear how you can reach this conclusion. The DNA evidence, the gloves, the shoes, the history of abuse, the lack of reaction when told of Brown's murder, the timeline, his subsequent behavior and comments...you can almost go forever. I guess I can see how somebody would think this back in the day. But2 after watching all of that? Of course he did it.

No. Who found the glove? Where's the murder weapon? Got a witness?