Well, to be clear, there were accusations of romantic entanglement. Made all that much odder by the fact that they were divorced. Actually, I think the most official version we have that has OJ guilty -- the prosecutor's theory -- is that OJ was jealous of his ex-wife's new bf. That is the only motive we have.
Was he messed up in the head, yeah thanks to both his upbringing by his father and the industry.
Was he a pedo? All evidence points to no because the way they 'got him' was thanks to the stupid way Californian legal system works, the civil court case was before the criminal case.
Him and his lawyers settled the civil case without disclosing ANY defence so when the criminal case came up, the prosecution was blindsided by all the receipts he had to show he wasn't a pedo. But public went 'then why did he settle if he was innocent?' so that's why he is still tarred as one.
Even if he was guilty, the conduct of the LAPD was so terrible and corrupt you might have needed to let him go. They were literally planting evidence at one point.
Despite what this juror says, I thought he didn't do it and there's more evidence he may have been covering for the one that did.
Basically this could be another Michael Jackson in that he was innocent but public opinion still finds him guilty.
His wife was cheating on him. He wrote a book, backhandedly admitting to it.
Sounds like justifiable homicide.
If it weren't premeditated.
I'm actually OK with that too. If "you cheat, you die" was a cultural norm maybe people would take marriage more seriously.
It's all philosophical of course; the legal system doesn't excuse killing your wife because she cockolded you, unfortunately.
I'm confused. I thought it was his ex-wife, and how could she be cheatin gon him?
I'm going by memory. I'm no O.J historian. So you probably know better than me.
Well, to be clear, there were accusations of romantic entanglement. Made all that much odder by the fact that they were divorced. Actually, I think the most official version we have that has OJ guilty -- the prosecutor's theory -- is that OJ was jealous of his ex-wife's new bf. That is the only motive we have.
He was never innocent.
Was he messed up in the head, yeah thanks to both his upbringing by his father and the industry.
Was he a pedo? All evidence points to no because the way they 'got him' was thanks to the stupid way Californian legal system works, the civil court case was before the criminal case.
Him and his lawyers settled the civil case without disclosing ANY defence so when the criminal case came up, the prosecution was blindsided by all the receipts he had to show he wasn't a pedo. But public went 'then why did he settle if he was innocent?' so that's why he is still tarred as one.
Yes he was covering for Charlie. In his book he said Charlie was the demon that took over his body when he was high on cocaine.
Even if he was guilty, the conduct of the LAPD was so terrible and corrupt you might have needed to let him go. They were literally planting evidence at one point.