Bob Magaw
Footballguy
LMN (253 DirecTV, related to Lifetime channel?) Wed 9/30
A&E (265 DirecTV) Thurs 10/1
Check local listings and times (around 6 PM in the evening in LA, in some cases, shown multiple times). I'm actually not sure these are two different documentaries, but think so based on descriptions.
Reminded of the Bruno Magli shoes (bloody prints of that kind in his size left at scene of crime IDed by FBI forensics expert). Only like 250 pairs of that type/style were sold in his size in the US, he denied ever having them, prosecution in criminal trial could never provide smoking gun-type proof he owned them. Before or during the civil trial, 20-30 photos surfaced in which he was clearly wearing Bruno Magli shoes. His story was he was in the picture, but they were not his shoes. Okey dokey, pokey.
With probably close to 250-300 million US population at that time, maybe something like a literal 1 in a million shot somebody else randomly was wearing a pair at the scene of the crime (maybe Fuhrman planted the prints, as well as the glove, blood evidence at the scene, in the Bronco and his home, etc.)? Which reminds me of another odds scenario. The defense noted, actually not that many spousal beatings lead to murders. The prosecution turned it around, and noted of those spouses that are later murdered after earlier spousal abuse charges, a large percentage were by the spouse. One of the jurors made it a point in interviews to state specifically she ignored all spousal abuse evidence, which would have been directly in violation of Judge Ito's jury instructions.
The shoes were one of the key pieces of evidence Vincent Bugliosi identified in the criminal trial post-mortem, Outrage. He was the former lead DA in LA that successfully prosecuted the Manson trial, one of the biggest in city/county history prior to Simpson. Other prosecution mistakes he noted, in his opinion, that led to the verdict:
1) Switching the venue from Santa Monica.
2) Not pushing to admit the "suicide letter" and Bronco footage chase - by themselves not conclusive, but helped establish a mosaic and pattern.
3) He claimed to work through countless drafts of his final summation so he was as prepared as possible, it looked to him like they (Darden and Clark) were up all night, fumbling and winging it, he basically thought they were incompetent (though it sounds like the trial was already lost by this point due to the accumulation of prior errors?).
A&E (265 DirecTV) Thurs 10/1
Check local listings and times (around 6 PM in the evening in LA, in some cases, shown multiple times). I'm actually not sure these are two different documentaries, but think so based on descriptions.
Reminded of the Bruno Magli shoes (bloody prints of that kind in his size left at scene of crime IDed by FBI forensics expert). Only like 250 pairs of that type/style were sold in his size in the US, he denied ever having them, prosecution in criminal trial could never provide smoking gun-type proof he owned them. Before or during the civil trial, 20-30 photos surfaced in which he was clearly wearing Bruno Magli shoes. His story was he was in the picture, but they were not his shoes. Okey dokey, pokey.
With probably close to 250-300 million US population at that time, maybe something like a literal 1 in a million shot somebody else randomly was wearing a pair at the scene of the crime (maybe Fuhrman planted the prints, as well as the glove, blood evidence at the scene, in the Bronco and his home, etc.)? Which reminds me of another odds scenario. The defense noted, actually not that many spousal beatings lead to murders. The prosecution turned it around, and noted of those spouses that are later murdered after earlier spousal abuse charges, a large percentage were by the spouse. One of the jurors made it a point in interviews to state specifically she ignored all spousal abuse evidence, which would have been directly in violation of Judge Ito's jury instructions.
The shoes were one of the key pieces of evidence Vincent Bugliosi identified in the criminal trial post-mortem, Outrage. He was the former lead DA in LA that successfully prosecuted the Manson trial, one of the biggest in city/county history prior to Simpson. Other prosecution mistakes he noted, in his opinion, that led to the verdict:
1) Switching the venue from Santa Monica.
2) Not pushing to admit the "suicide letter" and Bronco footage chase - by themselves not conclusive, but helped establish a mosaic and pattern.
3) He claimed to work through countless drafts of his final summation so he was as prepared as possible, it looked to him like they (Darden and Clark) were up all night, fumbling and winging it, he basically thought they were incompetent (though it sounds like the trial was already lost by this point due to the accumulation of prior errors?).
Last edited by a moderator: