What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

ESPN 30 for 30: O.J. Made in America (1 Viewer)

I think it was one of the jurors who said that the prosecution never (or hardly ever) objected to what the defense was doing. And according to the doc, it sure seemed that way. The prosecution lost this case, plain and simple. A travesty of justice.

 
Rirruto said:
To believe evidence was planted on the night of the crime, you have to believe that whoever planted it knew the bloody trail at the crime scene belonged to Simpson. If it belongs to someone else Nicole is banging, a jealous ex of Ron, or some random gangbanger, your career is over and you go to jail. If OJ has an alibi, you go to jail. And for what? To take a case with a strong chance of conviction over the top. This isn't CSI, you don't get DNA results in 5 minutes.
Click to expand...
Not really. Whoever planted the glove could also have mixed the samples of the blood trail so that the DNA would come back to match OJ. No risk. 

The jury believed everything was planted to frame oj. There's nothing inconsistent in their minds, all the evidence that comes back with ojs name must be fake. 

 
Billy Bats said:
Wow I'm getting even angrier while watching part 5. The pastor, of all people, quoting Martin Luther King after the verdict. Unless there's something else more disgusting to be said, that is the most offensive thing I've heard through this whole documentary. What a disgrace. 
Click to expand...
I also for some reason didn't catch the 5th one until a couple days after it premiered, really put a button on the whole thing. 

Ghost Rider had a spot on post a few up. 

 
Philo said:
The jury believed everything was planted to frame oj. 
Click to expand...
Maybe. Although we have a juror on record saying that the verdict was payback for Rodney King and that she thought 90% of the jurors felt that way. It's not payback for anything if you think he's innocent.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like they had a lot of blood evidence

Did all of the OJ blood at the crime scene come from the cut on his finger (the cut that he changed his story on a few times) or were there other cuts found on OJ than no one seems to talk about?

 
fantasycurse42 said:
Anyone who says with the evidence they would've voted not guilty:

Explain to me any logical reason Fuhrman had the gloves that they had proof Nicole bought? The shoes, the footprints (299 pairs made)?

This beyond the trail of evidence OJ took home from the murder scene and the DNA everywhere. Even if you want to bite on the ridiculous frame job story, you can't explain the gloves which they could tie to OJ through receipts.

It defies logic and common sense.
Click to expand...
Defense: Did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?

Fuhrman: I assert my 5th amendment privilege

What was the jury supposed to think after that exchange? Should they have ignored it?

 
Psychopav said:
Fuhrman jumped the wall and was on OJs property unsupervised. Just like the blood could have been planted, he could have taken gloves or shoes.  I'm not saying he did, and I wouldn't even have considered it absent the lies and incompetence, but there is reasonable doubt here imo.

eta: I am 99.9% sure that OJ did it.  But I believe the jury's job is to consider reasonable doubt.  And with the case the prosecution presented, that 0.1% is reasonable.  It just is.
Click to expand...
True, but jurors are also expected to not bring into the courtroom any prejudices or preconceived notions.  One juror, that old lady (juror #8 or #9 I think) admitted that her reason for acquittal was "pay back" for the Rodney King verdict a few years earlier.  And another, after the verdict was read and they were being filed out of the courtroom, throws up the "black power" salute to OJ, and come to find out he's a "former" Black Panther.

 
Sinrman said:
True, but jurors are also expected to not bring into the courtroom any prejudices or preconceived notions.  One juror, that old lady (juror #8 or #9 I think) admitted that her reason for acquittal was "pay back" for the Rodney King verdict a few years earlier.  And another, after the verdict was read and they were being filed out of the courtroom, throws up the "black power" salute to OJ, and come to find out he's a "former" Black Panther.
Click to expand...
It's not good but how many times have some white person gotten off a crime against black people?  Especially in LA?  It's quite easy to see why those jurors feel the way they feel and did what they did.  It's not a black panther thing it's a corrupt criminal justice system in the first place.

 
Just watched the whole thing and though it was fantastic.

Fascinating, well versed in the surrounding events and the interviews with the actual people were very effective.

A must see. 

 
krista4 said:
 And I was particularly disappointed in remembering Barry Scheck's part in this - he is (was?) one of the people I admire most due to his work with the Innocence Project.
Click to expand...
i had this take-away also. Big supporter of the Innocence Project, and so was flummoxed to listen to Scheck in this. Freeing the innocent and convicting the guilty would seem to be two sides of the same justice coin. Scheck knew, he HAD to know, that he was not serving justice here.

p.s. don't need the reminder that lawyers serve their clients, not necessarily justice. i get that.

 
Random question:

Regardless of whether or not you feel OJ was guilty, or whether you believe jurors chose "innocent over guilty" despite the evidence (strictly because of race)...

As we, as a society, better off because of the actual overcome, or would we be in a better place now if OJ had been found guilty and the aftermath of that alternative result would have taken place? 

 
Onions said:
Random question:

Regardless of whether or not you feel OJ was guilty, or whether you believe jurors chose "innocent over guilty" despite the evidence (strictly because of race)...

As we, as a society, better off because of the actual overcome, or would we be in a better place now if OJ had been found guilty and the aftermath of that alternative result would have taken place? 
Click to expand...
It depends on whether the treatment of blacks at that time in LA would have continued. Something had to change there at some point as it was so one sided against them for a long time. 

 
Mr. Mojo said:
It depends on whether the treatment of blacks at that time in LA would have continued. Something had to change there at some point as it was so one sided against them for a long time. 
Click to expand...
I guess your responses lines up directly with my question/thinking...

Did this verdict, even though it seems fairly clear OJ was guilty, actually result in a net positive for society in general?

 
Onions said:
I guess your responses lines up directly with my question/thinking...

Did this verdict, even though it seems fairly clear OJ was guilty, actually result in a net positive for society in general?
Click to expand...
Being found Not Guilty has not changed a damn thing in that regard.

Not a thing.

On a positive note what it did do is become a case study of what "not to do" when gathering DNA evidence.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just finished part three.  I am loving this.  To this day I had no clue how NOT black OJ was, and how hilarious it is that it was a black vs. white debate at that time, and even still to this day when I talk to people (both black and white) about it.  I don't think anyone at the time or even now realize that OJ didn't even care for black people very much.

His defense was ####### money.  :moneybag:

That defense team, outside of video evidence of the crime, was getting him out of anything no matter what.  Can't wait to get to part 4 to see the guts of the trial. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
fantasycurse42 said:
Agree, but the evidence was the evidence, no matter how it was spun.
Click to expand...
It is but again the problem is all the defense needed was reasonable doubt. That's it. And the prosecution put forward the following:

1. Lying cops

2. A racist cop who perjured himself and then in order to prevent further perjuring took the fifth instead of denying he planted evidence.

3. Bumbling incompetent handling of the evidence.

Again, Not Guilty is absolutely the only verdict I could've rendered and I definitely believe O.J. did it because there was reasonable doubt all over this case based on how the case was presented by the prosecution and the way the defense responded. The prosecution was horrible. They took a slam-dunk murder case and with the help of the three points above mucked it all to hell. The fact Marcia Clarke to this day blames everyone but herself for the verdict speaks volumes about her arrogance and incompetence in my opinion. A little more honest self-evaluation and she would realize how badly she messed this thing up.  

 
Yenrub said:
Defense: Did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?

Fuhrman: I assert my 5th amendment privilege

What was the jury supposed to think after that exchange? Should they have ignored it?
Click to expand...
Nope. I've always found it hilarious that so many of the people connected to this case who are so outraged by the verdict are the ones most responsible for it like Clarke and Darden and Fuhrman and the other two lead cops on the case who also lied to the jury.  

 
Millions of dollars = freedom in this legal system.  Plain and simple.  There are so many cases out there where witnesses would be destroyed (maybe not as bad as Fuhrman was, but bad) if the defense had some sort of 50 grand a day budget. 

 
I do think it was pretty funny how the jury just didnt give a #### and reached the verdict so fast.  They should also probably sue for emotional damage from being away so long with no contact with the outside world.  Jesus H Christ.  Did they seriously just do court all day then sit in a hotel room with nothing to do for almost a year?

 
ghostguy123 said:
I do think it was pretty funny how the jury just didnt give a #### and reached the verdict so fast.  They should also probably sue for emotional damage from being away so long with no contact with the outside world.  Jesus H Christ.  Did they seriously just do court all day then sit in a hotel room with nothing to do for almost a year?
Click to expand...
Yup. Pretty much. 

 
Gun to my head, I think OJ did it...but the bungling by the prosecutors / evidence gatherers not only opened the door for doubt, but for reasonable doubt.  Great job by the defense, but they all come off as smarmy self-righteous (a) holes.  Shapiro seems to be the only one that feels the slightest bit of remorse that they helped a murderer go free.

Fred Goldman, enough is enough.  It's over.  You won.  Quit making me feel sorry for OJ.  

I had forgotten what a pathetic character OJ was at the end of it all, but it was just sad.  I remember feeling glad when I heard that he'd lost the civil trial, that justice had finally been served.  But I got no joy out of watching his descent into his self made hell.  That mad, desperate attempt to stay in the spotlight...what a train wreck.

 
Statorama said:
Gun to my head, I think OJ did it...but the bungling by the prosecutors / evidence gatherers not only opened the door for doubt, but for reasonable doubt.  Great job by the defense, but they all come off as smarmy self-righteous (a) holes.  Shapiro seems to be the only one that feels the slightest bit of remorse that they helped a murderer go free.

Fred Goldman, enough is enough.  It's over.  You won.  Quit making me feel sorry for OJ.  

I had forgotten what a pathetic character OJ was at the end of it all, but it was just sad.  I remember feeling glad when I heard that he'd lost the civil trial, that justice had finally been served.  But I got no joy out of watching his descent into his self made hell.  That mad, desperate attempt to stay in the spotlight...what a train wreck.
Click to expand...
It's never over when your son was brutally murdered. Never.

 
I need to youtube that entire rap video he did.  Holy ####. 

Son of a B.  I could only find the song but no video.  Someone get on this.  All hands on deck.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123 said:
I need to youtube that entire rap video he did.  Holy ####. 

Son of a B.  I could only find the song but no video.  Someone get on this.  All hands on deck.
Click to expand...
It appeared on ALF's album, "A Time For A--" (unreleased). Snoop Dogg also appeared on a couple songs. Some of the tracks if I recall correctly-

"Alien Love Pole"

"Lemme Eat Yo' Cat"

"Lickin' My Fur"

 
Sconch said:
Saddest part is that those two jurors still don't get it 20+ years later...and that nutty broad that just came down to watch.
Click to expand...
Just now Hippling this thread.  The older juror admitted this was payback for Rodney King.  I think the younger one knew he was guilty, and was making excuses about how the prosecution screwed it up to make herself feel better.

 
Ministry of Pain said:
Are you serious? You watch commercials and breaks on DVR?
Click to expand...
No. I fast forward until the show is back on, which started with the warning every single time. 

 
Found Carl Edwards to be particularly slimy  He's like right out of central casting.  He should have been on The Wire.

Loved how truly indignant he was at Darden for his assertion that the N-word would affect the jury too much.  Next minute Edwards is like we have to get all these pictures of white people out of OJ's house because the jury won't like that.

Danny Bakewell cracked me up.  He was basically complaining about "driving while black."  Dude is whiter then me.  His everyday must be interesting.  Like a Chappelle skit.

Amazing they never found the photos of the Bruno Magli during the criminal trial.  I wonder what the story is behind the finding of them prior to the civil trial.

You have Vannatter inexplicabaly taking OJ's blood to the crime scene.  You have one of the first cops on the scene spouting the N-word pleading the 5th.  You have a forensic team dragging a blanket from inside all over the crime scene.  You allowed the fitting of the glove to be framed as such.  This whole thing was a ####-show.  It's not surprising he got off.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Watched parts of this again. Still found it completely compelling. Carl Douglas was so slimy, as mentioned above. OJ was a sociopath, with tons of charisma. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Raider Nation
ESPN's 30 for 30- Buffalo Bills episode premieres 12/12
10 11 12
Replies
577
Views
21K
belljr
belljr
GregR
Greg's Useless Trivia #50 - 100 questions (75 greatest hits, 25 new)
Replies
19
Views
3K
GregR
GregR
BobbyLayne
The 25 Greatest Films of the 21st Century So Far
2 3 4
Replies
155
Views
13K
El Floppo
El Floppo

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top