OT: OJ Simpson: Made in America 5 part series

[Dr. Detfink]

Watching this min-series was a time warp. I remember, I just starting working in a hospital as I was paying my way through college. When that verdict was released, you could hear the shock and mixed emotions as I wheeled a patient down to X-ray.

As a kid, I loved OJ Simpson but I had no idea what was going on in his personal life or who he was as a person. Today, EVERY THING is in the public's eye, for better or for worse.

I really enjoyed the acting in the FX mini-series on the case but it really did NOT give OJ any dimension. It was more about the battle between the lawyers...and I found that fascinating.

But this ESPN special painted OJ Simpson as a scumbag and rightfully so. It's interesting how the jurors chose to let a scumbag walk just to get back at the LAPD.

[Johnny Hoops]

Simply GREAT TV -- I expect this series will win MANY awards.

[spaceballer]

I just can't bring myself to care or watch any OJ Simpson stuff. Living through the media circus and over-saturation the first time around was enough for me.

[Fat Kat]

Mark Furman is truly a steaming POS.

[Greenie]

Mark Furman is truly a steaming POS.

THIS.
The simple fact that he was the one to find the glove gives doubt of credibility.

[Carl_Karlson]

I had heard a lot of hype from ESPN about this so I decided to pass, because f*ck ESPN. Besides, I got really into the FX series about The Juice and I didn't think I needed that much OJ.

But all the rave reviews from my homies on RealGM made me check it out and I'm glad I did. At the time, I was starting high school when the trial was ending. I remember my family thinking OJ was innocent. I was in class when the verdict came through and the teacher stopped class and turned on the TV so we could see. When the verdict came through both of the white teachers were pissed and so were the white students. All the Chicano students (like me) were cheering. It was quite the scene and I remember being immersed in the real life speculate and I still remember it all vividly today. Lol.

[Greenie]

I finished all the parts...I can't even say he got off because of race anymore.

The police and prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME. They did nothing to prove guilt and everything they tried to present was shot down 0-100 like and would have been shot down by any competent lawyer.

Examples of screw ups:
What dumb ass cops would go inside of a house, bring out a blanket and place it over the victim that's outside thus contaminating the area the blanket is covering...AKA the victims body?
Who the fuq collects evidence without having gloves on?

Examples of set ups:
Who the hell brings a suspects blood samples back to the crime scene?
Out of all the people to find the "smoking gun"...it's damn near a KKK member?

OJ was supposed to walk. If there is any shred of doubt that he did it then it's a not guilty verdict.

Why have OJ try on a glove? What did that even prove?
Why did we ever even meet the scum that is Mark Furhman?
As a prosecution, are you not supposed to thoroughly investigate you star witness? They were supposed to know exactly how Mark got down and made adjustment to their approach. He was NEVER supposed to be a witness.

The prosecution even fuqed up the cross. Rule #1 in cross is that you lead the witness, you don't let them lead you. Asking anything other than closed ended questions is beyond stupid for a case that has the 1995 backdrop of race in it with a majority minority jury. Especially when the witness you are crossing is the defenses witness to strip your star witness of all credibility.

What the hell were they doing?

[Phish Tank]

I finished all the parts...I can't even say he got off because of race anymore.

The police and prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME. They did nothing to prove guilt and everything they tried to present was shot down 0-100 like and would have been shot down by any competent lawyer.

Examples of screw ups:
What dumb ass cops would go inside of a house, bring out a blanket and place it over the victim that's outside thus contaminating the area the blanket is covering...AKA the victims body?
Who the fuq collects evidence without having gloves on?

Examples of set ups:
Who the hell brings a suspects blood samples back to the crime scene?
Out of all the people to find the "smoking gun"...it's damn near a KKK member?

OJ was supposed to walk. If there is any shred of doubt that he did it then it's a not guilty verdict.

Why have OJ try on a glove? What did that even prove?
Why did we ever even meet the scum that is Mark Furhman?
As a prosecution, are you not supposed to thoroughly investigate you star witness? They were supposed to know exactly how Mark got down and made adjustment to their approach. He was NEVER supposed to be a witness.

The prosecution even fuqed up the cross. Rule #1 in cross is that you lead the witness, you don't let them lead you. Asking anything other than closed ended questions is beyond stupid for a case that has the 1995 backdrop of race in it with a majority minority jury. Especially when the witness you are crossing is the defenses witness to strip your star witness of all credibility.

What the hell were they doing?

there's a reason most of the prosecution basically stopped practicing law afterwards.

They basically defied the basic principles of criminal investigation. Hell, I think kids in middle school were taught better than them. It was an awful prosecution.

[Greenie]

I finished all the parts...I can't even say he got off because of race anymore.

The police and prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME. They did nothing to prove guilt and everything they tried to present was shot down 0-100 like and would have been shot down by any competent lawyer.

Examples of screw ups:
What dumb ass cops would go inside of a house, bring out a blanket and place it over the victim that's outside thus contaminating the area the blanket is covering...AKA the victims body?
Who the fuq collects evidence without having gloves on?

Examples of set ups:
Who the hell brings a suspects blood samples back to the crime scene?
Out of all the people to find the "smoking gun"...it's damn near a KKK member?

OJ was supposed to walk. If there is any shred of doubt that he did it then it's a not guilty verdict.

Why have OJ try on a glove? What did that even prove?
Why did we ever even meet the scum that is Mark Furhman?
As a prosecution, are you not supposed to thoroughly investigate you star witness? They were supposed to know exactly how Mark got down and made adjustment to their approach. He was NEVER supposed to be a witness.

The prosecution even fuqed up the cross. Rule #1 in cross is that you lead the witness, you don't let them lead you. Asking anything other than closed ended questions is beyond stupid for a case that has the 1995 backdrop of race in it with a majority minority jury. Especially when the witness you are crossing is the defenses witness to strip your star witness of all credibility.

What the hell were they doing?

there's a reason most of the prosecution basically stopped practicing law afterwards.

They basically defied the basic principles of criminal investigation. Hell, I think kids in middle school were taught better than them. It was an awful prosecution.

They don't need to. They are not good at it. I believe Wingo said one is teaching law somewhere...
As I said before, I was little. I don't remember any of this. Right now, watching this...

...and Goldman's father....jeez dude, I know you just lost your son and I feel bad for him and his family along with Nicole's, but what you need to really look at is how the state presented that case instead of harassing a man PROVEN INNOCENT in the court of law. It was presented like trash. Bottom line. Being upset that defense attorneys exploited the hell out of states screw ups? They are defense attorneys. If I was the families of the two victims I would question if OJ did do it too!!! Why were there so many mistakes in the handling of that case? That becomes the real question. I can honestly say that I believe that there COULD have been someone else that killed them. That's how bad this case was presented. During this series before we got to the trial episodes I thought that OJ did it. They painted a good picture of this self centered, cunning, ego maniac character and I truly believed it. After I witnessed that farce of a trial though...

[spree8]

I finished all the parts...I can't even say he got off because of race anymore.

The police and prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME. They did nothing to prove guilt and everything they tried to present was shot down 0-100 like and would have been shot down by any competent lawyer.

Examples of screw ups:
What dumb ass cops would go inside of a house, bring out a blanket and place it over the victim that's outside thus contaminating the area the blanket is covering...AKA the victims body?
Who the fuq collects evidence without having gloves on?

Examples of set ups:
Who the hell brings a suspects blood samples back to the crime scene?
Out of all the people to find the "smoking gun"...it's damn near a KKK member?

OJ was supposed to walk. If there is any shred of doubt that he did it then it's a not guilty verdict.

Why have OJ try on a glove? What did that even prove?
Why did we ever even meet the scum that is Mark Furhman?
As a prosecution, are you not supposed to thoroughly investigate you star witness? They were supposed to know exactly how Mark got down and made adjustment to their approach. He was NEVER supposed to be a witness.

The prosecution even fuqed up the cross. Rule #1 in cross is that you lead the witness, you don't let them lead you. Asking anything other than closed ended questions is beyond stupid for a case that has the 1995 backdrop of race in it with a majority minority jury. Especially when the witness you are crossing is the defenses witness to strip your star witness of all credibility.

What the hell were they doing?

there's a reason most of the prosecution basically stopped practicing law afterwards.

They basically defied the basic principles of criminal investigation. Hell, I think kids in middle school were taught better than them. It was an awful prosecution.

They don't need to. They are not good at it. I believe Wingo said one is teaching law somewhere...
As I said before, I was little. I don't remember any of this. Right now, watching this...

...and Goldman's father....jeez dude, I know you just lost your son and I feel bad for him and his family along with Nicole's, but what you need to really look at is how the state presented that case instead of harassing a man PROVEN INNOCENT in the court of law. It was presented like trash. Bottom line. Being upset that defense attorneys exploited the hell out of states screw ups? They are defense attorneys. If I was the families of the two victims I would question if OJ did do it too!!! Why were there so many mistakes in the handling of that case? That becomes the real question. I can honestly say that I believe that there COULD have been someone else that killed them. That's how bad this case was presented. During this series before we got to the trial episodes I thought that OJ did it. They painted a good picture of this self centered, cunning, ego maniac character and I truly believed it. After I witnessed that farce of a trial though...

The prosecution screwed up a lot, but that doesn't mean OJ didn't do it. Those are two different things. And besides that theory about his oldest son from his first marriage doing this, who would've had the motive for something that seemed so personal and gruesome? Not only that, but the long history of domestic violence, her fear of him killing her, him admitting he's had dreams of killing her, no alibi, cut on his finger that he lied about numerous times, blood inside his house and inside the car, etc...lets be honest here. Plus, weren't there like 15 cops at Nicole's house before Ferman? How'd he get the glove and leave the scene to go plant it at OJ's? And Kato heard someone in that exact spot around the time of the murder. There's way too much more here to list.

[Phish Tank]

I finished all the parts...I can't even say he got off because of race anymore.

The police and prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME. They did nothing to prove guilt and everything they tried to present was shot down 0-100 like and would have been shot down by any competent lawyer.

Examples of screw ups:
What dumb ass cops would go inside of a house, bring out a blanket and place it over the victim that's outside thus contaminating the area the blanket is covering...AKA the victims body?
Who the fuq collects evidence without having gloves on?

Examples of set ups:
Who the hell brings a suspects blood samples back to the crime scene?
Out of all the people to find the "smoking gun"...it's damn near a KKK member?

OJ was supposed to walk. If there is any shred of doubt that he did it then it's a not guilty verdict.

Why have OJ try on a glove? What did that even prove?
Why did we ever even meet the scum that is Mark Furhman?
As a prosecution, are you not supposed to thoroughly investigate you star witness? They were supposed to know exactly how Mark got down and made adjustment to their approach. He was NEVER supposed to be a witness.

The prosecution even fuqed up the cross. Rule #1 in cross is that you lead the witness, you don't let them lead you. Asking anything other than closed ended questions is beyond stupid for a case that has the 1995 backdrop of race in it with a majority minority jury. Especially when the witness you are crossing is the defenses witness to strip your star witness of all credibility.

What the hell were they doing?

there's a reason most of the prosecution basically stopped practicing law afterwards.

They basically defied the basic principles of criminal investigation. Hell, I think kids in middle school were taught better than them. It was an awful prosecution.

They don't need to. They are not good at it. I believe Wingo said one is teaching law somewhere...
As I said before, I was little. I don't remember any of this. Right now, watching this...

...and Goldman's father....jeez dude, I know you just lost your son and I feel bad for him and his family along with Nicole's, but what you need to really look at is how the state presented that case instead of harassing a man PROVEN INNOCENT in the court of law. It was presented like trash. Bottom line. Being upset that defense attorneys exploited the hell out of states screw ups? They are defense attorneys. If I was the families of the two victims I would question if OJ did do it too!!! Why were there so many mistakes in the handling of that case? That becomes the real question. I can honestly say that I believe that there COULD have been someone else that killed them. That's how bad this case was presented. During this series before we got to the trial episodes I thought that OJ did it. They painted a good picture of this self centered, cunning, ego maniac character and I truly believed it. After I witnessed that farce of a trial though...

i was 5-6 when this happened, so I really knew almost nothing as well.

With any normal prosecution, OJ would be in jail. That's why he was given 33 years for the robbery, when any other judge would sentence anyone else to like 3-5 years.

Everything came back full circle with OJ, so I can't really feel bad for him in the end.

[Luv those Knicks]

They don't need to. They are not good at it. I believe Wingo said one is teaching law somewhere...
As I said before, I was little. I don't remember any of this. Right now, watching this...

...and Goldman's father....jeez dude, I know you just lost your son and I feel bad for him and his family along with Nicole's, but what you need to really look at is how the state presented that case instead of harassing a man PROVEN INNOCENT in the court of law. It was presented like trash. Bottom line. Being upset that defense attorneys exploited the hell out of states screw ups? They are defense attorneys. If I was the families of the two victims I would question if OJ did do it too!!! Why were there so many mistakes in the handling of that case? That becomes the real question. I can honestly say that I believe that there COULD have been someone else that killed them. That's how bad this case was presented. During this series before we got to the trial episodes I thought that OJ did it. They painted a good picture of this self centered, cunning, ego maniac character and I truly believed it. After I witnessed that farce of a trial though...

I don't know. Yes it's the defense attorney's job to defend their client, but if the defense attorney gets a guilty guy off, they deserve all the public criticism they get. Certainly if it was me, I'd be pissed at OJ first and the defense attorney's 2nd, I wouldn't vent at the prosecution not doing their job. (though that was arguably true too).

[Greenie]

there's a reason most of the prosecution basically stopped practicing law afterwards.

They basically defied the basic principles of criminal investigation. Hell, I think kids in middle school were taught better than them. It was an awful prosecution.

They don't need to. They are not good at it. I believe Wingo said one is teaching law somewhere...
As I said before, I was little. I don't remember any of this. Right now, watching this...

...and Goldman's father....jeez dude, I know you just lost your son and I feel bad for him and his family along with Nicole's, but what you need to really look at is how the state presented that case instead of harassing a man PROVEN INNOCENT in the court of law. It was presented like trash. Bottom line. Being upset that defense attorneys exploited the hell out of states screw ups? They are defense attorneys. If I was the families of the two victims I would question if OJ did do it too!!! Why were there so many mistakes in the handling of that case? That becomes the real question. I can honestly say that I believe that there COULD have been someone else that killed them. That's how bad this case was presented. During this series before we got to the trial episodes I thought that OJ did it. They painted a good picture of this self centered, cunning, ego maniac character and I truly believed it. After I witnessed that farce of a trial though...

The prosecution screwed up a lot, but that doesn't mean OJ didn't do it. Those are two different things. And besides that theory about his oldest son from his first marriage doing this, who would've had the motive for something that seemed so personal and gruesome? Not only that, but the long history of domestic violence, her fear of him killing her, him admitting he's had dreams of killing her, no alibi, cut on his finger that he lied about numerous times, blood inside his house and inside the car, etc...lets be honest here. Plus, weren't there like 15 cops at Nicole's house before Ferman? How'd he get the glove and leave the scene to go plant it at OJ's? And Kato heard someone in that exact spot around the time of the murder. There's way too much more here to list.

And all of that can be negated in theory having a guy like Furhman on the case. Motive? Serial Killers are real. Domestic Violence? Yes that is a very good angle but we do know she backtracked her stories and that puts a damper on it in court especially when she is publicly calling people OJ works for telling them what was reported did not happen. Fear for someone doing something is irrelevant court and so are his dreams. No alibi? So? You don't always need an alibi if they can't prove without a reasonable doubt that you did it. Noises? ....

The cut on his finger? Good one. Can you prove he cut it during the murders? Do you have the weapon? No? Do you have witnesses? No? Ok. So you're dealing in circumstantial evidence.

How did the investigators miss the glove at Nicole's house long enough for Fuhrman to grab it and move it? You tell me. How did they miss blood of OJ's on the back of the gate? Why was OJ's vile of blood taken to the crime scene? It took them two months to notice OJ's socks had blood on them...while they were sitting in the crime lab? Why were they leaving evidence samples in cars to be overheated? Why were they collecting evidence without gloves? Why were they were not keeping detailed notes? Why were they covering the victims bodies with contaminated sheets? On and on and on.

Seems to me that they didn't know how to function within a crime scene. They didn't know how to collect evidence or where to look for evidence. So is it really beyond their scope that a racist detective could walk off with a glove other CSI's missed and plant it where he pleased? They missed those socks. They missed that blood on the gate. So it's safe to say that they missed what Mark was doing too.

[Luv those Knicks]

I finished all the parts...I can't even say he got off because of race anymore.

The police and prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME. They did nothing to prove guilt and everything they tried to present was shot down 0-100 like and would have been shot down by any competent lawyer.

Examples of screw ups:
What dumb ass cops would go inside of a house, bring out a blanket and place it over the victim that's outside thus contaminating the area the blanket is covering...AKA the victims body?
Who the fuq collects evidence without having gloves on?

Examples of set ups:
Who the hell brings a suspects blood samples back to the crime scene?
Out of all the people to find the "smoking gun"...it's damn near a KKK member?

OJ was supposed to walk. If there is any shred of doubt that he did it then it's a not guilty verdict.

Why have OJ try on a glove? What did that even prove?
Why did we ever even meet the scum that is Mark Furhman?
As a prosecution, are you not supposed to thoroughly investigate you star witness? They were supposed to know exactly how Mark got down and made adjustment to their approach. He was NEVER supposed to be a witness.

The prosecution even fuqed up the cross. Rule #1 in cross is that you lead the witness, you don't let them lead you. Asking anything other than closed ended questions is beyond stupid for a case that has the 1995 backdrop of race in it with a majority minority jury. Especially when the witness you are crossing is the defenses witness to strip your star witness of all credibility.

What the hell were they doing?

1994 was still quite early in DNA testing. It wasn't that unusual for cops to not wear gloves even in 1994. DNA testing was used in that trial but it was still suspect and met with skepticism. A few years later and it would have been seen as rock solid, but 1994 it was still new and not standard procedure.

[Greenie]

there's a reason most of the prosecution basically stopped practicing law afterwards.

They basically defied the basic principles of criminal investigation. Hell, I think kids in middle school were taught better than them. It was an awful prosecution.

They don't need to. They are not good at it. I believe Wingo said one is teaching law somewhere...
As I said before, I was little. I don't remember any of this. Right now, watching this...

...and Goldman's father....jeez dude, I know you just lost your son and I feel bad for him and his family along with Nicole's, but what you need to really look at is how the state presented that case instead of harassing a man PROVEN INNOCENT in the court of law. It was presented like trash. Bottom line. Being upset that defense attorneys exploited the hell out of states screw ups? They are defense attorneys. If I was the families of the two victims I would question if OJ did do it too!!! Why were there so many mistakes in the handling of that case? That becomes the real question. I can honestly say that I believe that there COULD have been someone else that killed them. That's how bad this case was presented. During this series before we got to the trial episodes I thought that OJ did it. They painted a good picture of this self centered, cunning, ego maniac character and I truly believed it. After I witnessed that farce of a trial though...

i was 5-6 when this happened, so I really knew almost nothing as well.

With any normal prosecution, OJ would be in jail. That's why he was given 33 years for the robbery, when any other judge would sentence anyone else to like 3-5 years.

Everything came back full circle with OJ, so I can't really feel bad for him in the end.

Yeah, she through the book at him. Oh well, I'm not sorry. Fuq OJ to be very honest.

[NY2TheBay]

I havent watched it all yet. But the two investigators that questioned OJ shortly after were absolutely horrible. This set the ground work for what came on after, imo.

They had a chance to pin the guy down before he got things figured out. OJ was all over the place and they let him ramble. Ridiculous. His celebrity had them off guard without a doubt.

[Luv those Knicks]

The whole thing was a contaminated process. Everyone knew he did it and still it got played out like a game. One of the things I found hurtful at the time was a few black people (not many, but a handful) wishing he would be acquitted as if that would atone for other sins against black people. He was a very sick man and the trial was allowed to become a circus and it was very sad. He should have been put away for life.

For older folks OJ was even stranger because he was previously considered a pretty dapper and charming guy. He was always on the TV and in tons of commercials like the one where he is sprinting thru the airport hurdling luggage (for Samsonite I think). He truly was one of the greatest football players ever and then made it to Hollywood. He had it all going for him but he turned out to be mentally ill and very dangerous and the public had no clue.

Race should have never been allowed to play a role in his defense but it was used by his attorney and it worked.

Not to defend OJ, but I wonder if head trauma was part of it. NFL head trauma is a serious issue that was largely un-diagnosed in the 90s.

and I remember that too, one image really stuck with me, a homeless person had written a sign that said "OJ is innocent, I believe in the American Justice system now" - it was so strange how race/divided the opinions were on that trial, which in a way was a good thing, it pointed out a racial divide in America, but it was ridiculous that OJ got off when he obviously was guilty.

Everybody liked OJ. The cops were friendly with him when Nicole would call 9-11. I still remember him fondly from his roles in the Naked Gun Movies and the airport commercials (and watching him play football).

[spree8]

They don't need to. They are not good at it. I believe Wingo said one is teaching law somewhere...
As I said before, I was little. I don't remember any of this. Right now, watching this...

...and Goldman's father....jeez dude, I know you just lost your son and I feel bad for him and his family along with Nicole's, but what you need to really look at is how the state presented that case instead of harassing a man PROVEN INNOCENT in the court of law. It was presented like trash. Bottom line. Being upset that defense attorneys exploited the hell out of states screw ups? They are defense attorneys. If I was the families of the two victims I would question if OJ did do it too!!! Why were there so many mistakes in the handling of that case? That becomes the real question. I can honestly say that I believe that there COULD have been someone else that killed them. That's how bad this case was presented. During this series before we got to the trial episodes I thought that OJ did it. They painted a good picture of this self centered, cunning, ego maniac character and I truly believed it. After I witnessed that farce of a trial though...

The prosecution screwed up a lot, but that doesn't mean OJ didn't do it. Those are two different things. And besides that theory about his oldest son from his first marriage doing this, who would've had the motive for something that seemed so personal and gruesome? Not only that, but the long history of domestic violence, her fear of him killing her, him admitting he's had dreams of killing her, no alibi, cut on his finger that he lied about numerous times, blood inside his house and inside the car, etc...lets be honest here. Plus, weren't there like 15 cops at Nicole's house before Ferman? How'd he get the glove and leave the scene to go plant it at OJ's? And Kato heard someone in that exact spot around the time of the murder. There's way too much more here to list.

And all of that can be negated in theory having a guy like Furhman on the case. Motive? Serial Killers are real. Domestic Violence? Yes that is a very good angle but we do know she backtracked her stories and that puts a damper on it in court especially when she is publicly calling people OJ works for telling them what was reported did not happen. Fear for someone doing something is irrelevant court and so are his dreams. No alibi? So? You don't always need an alibi if they can't prove without a reasonable doubt that you did it. Noises? ....

The cut on his finger? Good one. Can you prove he cut it during the murders? Do you have the weapon? No? Do you have witnesses? No? Ok. So you're dealing in circumstantial evidence.

How did the investigators miss the glove at Nicole's house long enough for Fuhrman to grab it and move it? You tell me. How did they miss blood of OJ's on the back of the gate? Why was OJ's vile of blood taken to the crime scene? It took them two months to notice OJ's socks had blood on them...while they were sitting in the crime lab? Why were they leaving evidence samples in cars to be overheated? Why were they collecting evidence without gloves? Why were they were not keeping detailed notes? Why were they covering the victims bodies with contaminated sheets? On and on and on.

Seems to me that they didn't know how to function within a crime scene. They didn't know how to collect evidence or where to look for evidence. So is it really beyond their scope that a racist detective could walk off with a glove other CSI's missed and plant it where he pleased? They missed those socks. They missed that blood on the gate. So it's safe to say that they missed what Mark was doing too.

Those are good questions you raised, but it all boils down to whether it was a random murderer or OJ. We know the verdict, but we don't know what really happened. I'm of the belief it was him based on the stats of domestic violence cases that result in murder. Plus his constant stalking of Nicole makes this all the more likely imo.

[Greenie]

I finished all the parts...I can't even say he got off because of race anymore.

The police and prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME. They did nothing to prove guilt and everything they tried to present was shot down 0-100 like and would have been shot down by any competent lawyer.

Examples of screw ups:
What dumb ass cops would go inside of a house, bring out a blanket and place it over the victim that's outside thus contaminating the area the blanket is covering...AKA the victims body?
Who the fuq collects evidence without having gloves on?

Examples of set ups:
Who the hell brings a suspects blood samples back to the crime scene?
Out of all the people to find the "smoking gun"...it's damn near a KKK member?

OJ was supposed to walk. If there is any shred of doubt that he did it then it's a not guilty verdict.

Why have OJ try on a glove? What did that even prove?
Why did we ever even meet the scum that is Mark Furhman?
As a prosecution, are you not supposed to thoroughly investigate you star witness? They were supposed to know exactly how Mark got down and made adjustment to their approach. He was NEVER supposed to be a witness.

The prosecution even fuqed up the cross. Rule #1 in cross is that you lead the witness, you don't let them lead you. Asking anything other than closed ended questions is beyond stupid for a case that has the 1995 backdrop of race in it with a majority minority jury. Especially when the witness you are crossing is the defenses witness to strip your star witness of all credibility.

What the hell were they doing?

1994 was still quite early in DNA testing. It wasn't that unusual for cops to not wear gloves even in 1994. DNA testing was used in that trial but it was still suspect and met with skepticism. A few years later and it would have been seen as rock solid, but 1994 it was still new and not standard procedure.

Even if it was seen as solid in 1994 the way it was collected messed it up.

This was a trial of circumstance. There was no weapon nor witness. You are trying to tie together evidence that is not direct. Once the credibility of who and how it was collected comes under fire you're done.

[spree8]

The whole thing was a contaminated process. Everyone knew he did it and still it got played out like a game. One of the things I found hurtful at the time was a few black people (not many, but a handful) wishing he would be acquitted as if that would atone for other sins against black people. He was a very sick man and the trial was allowed to become a circus and it was very sad. He should have been put away for life.

For older folks OJ was even stranger because he was previously considered a pretty dapper and charming guy. He was always on the TV and in tons of commercials like the one where he is sprinting thru the airport hurdling luggage (for Samsonite I think). He truly was one of the greatest football players ever and then made it to Hollywood. He had it all going for him but he turned out to be mentally ill and very dangerous and the public had no clue.

Race should have never been allowed to play a role in his defense but it was used by his attorney and it worked.

Not to defend OJ, but I wonder if head trauma was part of it. NFL head trauma is a serious issue that was largely un-diagnosed in the 90s.

and I remember that too, one image really stuck with me, a homeless person had written a sign that said "OJ is innocent, I believe in the American Justice system now" - it was so strange how race/divided the opinions were on that trial, which in a way was a good thing, it pointed out a racial divide in America, but it was ridiculous that OJ got off when he obviously was guilty.

Everybody liked OJ. The cops were friendly with him when Nicole would call 9-11. I still remember him fondly from his roles in the Naked Gun Movies and the airport commercials (and watching him play football).

Yup I was gunna say the same thing about the effects of football on his brain. We all know what that can do.