If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Fred Goldman says that OJ's lawyer Robert Kardashian had evidence that would have easily convicted OJ of the murders of Goldman's son and Nicole Brown   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 49
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

12370 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jun 2014 at 9:09 AM (10 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-06-10 08:22:57 AM
7 votes:
The prosecutors had enough evidence to easily convict OJ, but they botched it all to Hell and back.
2014-06-10 10:20:03 AM
6 votes:
Just me but, I always thought that O J was found innocent only because a few years earlier a jury in the Rodney King case let some white cop off the hook which resulted in the six day long LA riots ( 50+ dead, 2300+ injured and a billion dollars in property damages)
The jury was afraid of another riot, and personal safety, and decided finding OJ not guilty was the easy way out.
I do remember that the LAPD at the time had a really bad relationship with the black community.
/ just my feeling at the time.
2014-06-10 09:54:38 AM
4 votes:
I don't see what difference more evidence would have made. The verdict was a result of jury nullification and incompetent prosecution. The jury wanted to find OJ not guilty and the blunders the prosecution made gave them an out.
2014-06-10 09:42:00 AM
4 votes:
The investigation was handled adequately.  The proof was there, he was guilty beyond any doubt.  Any of a dozen pieces of evidence alone should have convicted him.  Fuhrman did an exemplary job, and that was his mistake.  In order to free OJ, Fuhrman had to be destroyed, because the evidence he had found was irrefutable.  So a good officer had his career destroyed to save a murderer.
2014-06-10 09:32:08 AM
4 votes:
Attorney/client privilege, biatch.

And yes. the prosecution should have had more than enough to convict.  Police were sloppy with the handling of the evidence.  The trial was mishandled by Judge Ito not to mention Marsha Clark and Christopher Darden were short yellow bus frequent riders..  Mark Fuhrman was the only person to be convicted of any charges relating to the case.
2014-06-10 09:22:32 AM
4 votes:
Of course, NOW is the time to bring this to light.

I think it's pretty well consiered now that everyone knows OJ was guilty.  But there was no way for the prosecution to make their case "beyond reasonable doubt".  The one attorney that walked off the case before it was decided actually said with no other explanation, "sometimes it's necessary to let a guilty man go free so that an innocent man doesn't go to jail."

And, unfortunate as it turned out in this case, I'd have to agree with him.

OJ won that case because the prosecution messed things up.  So badly to a point that they couldn't prove their case.  That's pretty much it.
2014-06-10 09:20:27 AM
4 votes:
Shame the LAPD had to try to frame a guilty man.
2014-06-10 09:11:56 AM
3 votes:

ArkAngel: Defense attorneys are required to turn over any evidence in their possession to the prosecution for testing. Not doing so is a charge of obstruction.


not sure if serious, but you have it backwards.  It's the prosecution that has to turn over any evidence to the defense
2014-06-10 02:02:40 PM
2 votes:
Go back over the newsreel clips and you will clearly see Kardashian striding down OJ's driveway right past the cops, a briefcase in one hand, a clothing bag slung over his shoulder.
2014-06-10 12:36:00 PM
2 votes:
Was the Bronco ride a distraction for the police for OJ's friends and family to remove evidence from the house?  Does an innocent man go on the Bronco ride and hold a gun to his own head for hours?  I remember when the verdict came out and how my office was so split... the African-Americans were cheering and high-fiving and the rest of us stood there in shock, like Kardashian.    Yes, the black community and the LA Riots influenced the verdict.  The whole thing is one big cluser fark.
2014-06-10 11:16:50 AM
2 votes:

bluorangefyre: Everytime I see a Kardashian I wonder how a father THAT ugly could have a hand in producing non-ugly children


Hmmmm, maybe you need better glasses? I mean, I think those girls are just as ugly as the dad (and fat, too).
KIA
2014-06-10 10:48:40 AM
2 votes:
A lot of evidence was excluded from the criminal trial that came in during the civil trial. Examples: OJ had a long straight cut on the back if his left hand when police caught him. They didn't document it but later said it looked like a knife cut. OJ said he knocked over a glass in the bathroom and cut himself cleaning it up. How does one cut oneself on the back if knees hand picking up broken glass?

The Bruno Malia shoes which OJ denied ever wearing were finally found in a photo which showed OJ wearing the exact pair that matched all of the footprints.

Blood on the Explorer in several places, blood in the shower drain, there was a ton of stuff. Read "Triumph of Justice" bu Daniel Petrocelli, one if the civil case attorneys. It's fascinating.
2014-06-10 10:47:12 AM
2 votes:
Robert Kardashian, OJ Simpson's trusted confidant and member of his "Dream Team" of lawyers, carried away evidence in a suitcase from the former footballer's home the night his ex-wife Nicole Brown-Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman were viciously stabbed to death - and took the secret of where it is to his grave.

 Well, that's awfully convenient.

cig-mkr: Just me but, I always thought that O J was found innocent only because a few years earlier a jury in the Rodney King case let some white cop off the hook which resulted in the six day long LA riots ( 50+ dead, 2300+ injured and a billion dollars in property damages)
The jury was afraid of another riot, and personal safety, and decided finding OJ not guilty was the easy way out.
I do remember that the LAPD at the time had a really bad relationship with the black community.
/ just my feeling at the time.


Regardless of what the jury felt, the LAPD dropped the ball by turning the crime scene and the Bronco into sideshows. DNA evidence is worthless when you don't control the scene and anyone could have planted it there, regardless of if they ACTUALLY planted it there. I would say that if there was any doubt, the jury would err on the side of caution...
2014-06-10 09:46:26 AM
2 votes:
Not likely.  Could have shown that jury a video of OJ smiling and waving at the camera as he was killing Nicole and Goldman and that group still would have acquitted him.
2014-06-10 09:45:19 AM
2 votes:

Nabb1: The prosecutors had enough evidence to easily convict OJ, but they botched it all to Hell and back.


Judge Ito wasn't exactly demonstrating jurisprudence, either.  He got too starry-eyed with all of the televised coverage in the courtroom.
2014-06-10 09:32:45 AM
2 votes:
I think the legal stand of "reasonable doubt" needs to be revisited.  People, on the whole, are much more stupid now than they were a hundred years ago.
2014-06-10 09:32:21 AM
2 votes:
Hope living as a bitter old man fascinating about prison rape is worth it, Freddie. Ain't gonna bring back your son.
2014-06-10 09:31:57 AM
2 votes:

drivingsouth: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x306]

I don't think anyone was as surprised at the verdict more than Kardashian.


That's exactly how I remember it, too. Dude looked completely aghast when the verdict was read that morning.
2014-06-10 09:28:32 AM
2 votes:
How wrong is it that when I saw the pic of the small kardouchians, I wished that they could have died in childhood.

/actually, I prefer the window seat.
2014-06-10 10:43:32 PM
1 votes:

stonicus: FTFA: OJ Simpson's trusted confidant and member of his "Dream Team" of lawyers, carried away evidence in a suitcase from the former footballer's home the night his ex-wife Nicole Brown-Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman were viciously stabbed to death.

Where does Goldman get this information from?



I remember seeing this on tv -- at the time, there was video on CNN of Kardashian walking past reporters with a large suitcase, coming from OJ's house. I think they even shouted "what's in the suitcase?" to him and he just smiled and walked past.

This wasn't some big secret and isn't a big reveal today, so I don't know what Goldman is talking about. At the time, people did ask questions about it -- but without the internet being in full swing there wasnt an outcry or a petition to sign, and the inane media never got on board with questions about the suitcase. I guess there was too much going on with the case to focus on any one thing.

About a month (week? year?) later, Kardashian answered the questions by bringing the suitcase to court, or somewhere, I can't recall, where he opened it, showed that it was empty, and said "see, there wasn't anything in here at all" basically.

I've always thought that OJs bloody clothes and maybe even the murder weapon(s) were in the suitcase, stashed in his house until Kardashian could abscond with them. To me, it was the most egregious thing that this lawyers did, and that's a long, long list.
2014-06-10 08:48:07 PM
1 votes:
Woo, got to block a bunch of dudes for telling the father of a murdered man to "get over it"! Let's see you try, schmucks.

Basically the Simpson trial is a giant wreck at the intersection of Long-Standing Racial Issues Boiling Over and Tiered Justice System That Favors The Rich And Famous, Especially In L.A.. At that time, in that place, you could not have found him guilty of murder even if you caught it on camera. The racial issues are still there, the Blue Code of Silence is still there. They're still widespread, and you catch the public in the right mood with the right cops getting off for the right thing, and it'll be riots again.

And the rest of it is completely unchanged and nobody in this country is smart enough or mad enough to want to change it, because they've been trained since birth to keep their lips glued firmly to the asses of "celebrities." How many times did Lohan slither out of drug charges that would've ruined your life or mine? How often do spoiled little shiats get away with pretty much anything short of murder? What infuriates me is that time after time people fail to be upset about that- either everyone else should get the cushy sentences or rich assholes should do hard time. Recently a judge actually used the term "affluenza" in his opinion when letting some rich kid skate. And nobody cares. There should be guillotines and torches and Frankenstein rakes over shiat like that. And nobody cares.
2014-06-10 02:08:32 PM
1 votes:

KIA: Examples: OJ had a long straight cut on the back if his left hand when police caught him. They didn't document it but later said it looked like a knife cut.


Then it might as well not have been there.

It's like science:  If you didn't write it down, it didn't happen.  You arrest someone and you don't document their injuries?  That's pretty farkin' stupid.

CSB:  I got arrested once*.  The guy they were processing next to me had a cut on his thumb with a couple of stitches in it.  The cop documented it, and pointedly asked him if it was caused by the police (it wasn't).  And that was for some piddly misdemeanor-type arrest.


*Long story short:  I was supposed to go to court for a speeding ticket, but the company command in my unit didn't notify me of the date and time.  So I didn't go.  Which the court took a dim view on.  It got straightened out, but not before I got the shiat scared out of me.
2014-06-10 01:56:44 PM
1 votes:

Already Disturbed: Stretching a minor?


Funny thing, if they had given Jackson a long prison term he would still be alive.

Goldman said he KNEW OJ was raped in prison not he thought OJ was raped. To me that sounds more like he paid someone to fark him not that he was fantasizing about it.

Kardashian hid or destroyed the clothes and shoes OJ had been wearing the night of the murder, the socks had already been found by police. The news stations at the time pretty much said that's what had happened it's not like any of this is a secret at all.

They went to the airport with 3 bags and came back with 2, does not take a genius to figure out what happened.
2014-06-10 12:45:40 PM
1 votes:

Repack Rider: The investigation was handled adequately.  The proof was there, he was guilty beyond any doubt.  Any of a dozen pieces of evidence alone should have convicted him.  Fuhrman did an exemplary job, and that was his mistake.  In order to free OJ, Fuhrman had to be destroyed, because the evidence he had found was irrefutable.  So a good officer had his career destroyed to save a murderer.


**eyeroll**
2014-06-10 12:19:44 PM
1 votes:

dpzum1: And we have OJ to thank for the fact that we now have the KardASSSSSSSSSSians splattered across our TV's...


I think that's the greater crime.
2014-06-10 12:13:12 PM
1 votes:

JDJoeE: syrynxx: cig-mkr: The jury was afraid of another riot, and personal safety, and decided finding OJ not guilty was the easy way out.

Nah, some members of the jury were just stupid.  There was evidence that the blood samples matched OJ's DNA.  One jury member post-verdict said "Lots of people have the same blood type", indicating a complete misunderstanding of DNA matching.

Or an inability of the prosecution to explain DNA matching to someone with an education track that may have stopped in the 6th grade.


But being a juror is an honored duty in our society.  Professionals of all stripes anxiously await their notices to serve each and every year, and everybody makes sure that they clear off their schedule to serve on a jury. Businesses give full pay and benefits to those chosen for this duty. How could they have not found 12 intelligent men and women willing to serve on this most sacred trust?
2014-06-10 11:56:08 AM
1 votes:

drivingsouth: I just clicked on the link.F Lee Bailey is still alive? I thought he died about 10 years ago.


Shhh. Nobody told him. A zombie F Lee Bailey is a better lawyer than most entire law firms.
2014-06-10 11:44:37 AM
1 votes:

fireclown: dryknife: Kardashian was a big ass?

[www.chinola.net image 850x740]
/what a Kardashian ass might look like with a ton of plastic surgery.

youthleaderstash.com
2014-06-10 11:17:42 AM
1 votes:

Nabb1: Alright, CSB, but I heard this story during a break in a deposition I was in with an attorney who worked with Cochran, but apparently the whole trying-on-the-glove disaster was because F. Lee Bailey goaded Christopher Darden into it. The defense team had discussed the issue of the gloves and Cochran said there was no way Darden was dumb enough to have OJ put the gloves on because there was too much risk that they might not fit after months in the evidence room. Bailey actually bet Cochran he could make Darden do it. On their way to court that morning, outside the elevator, Bailey asks Darden (knowing the gloves will be introduced in evidence that day) if he is going to get OJ to try them on, and Darden says most likely not, and F. Lee Bailey said to him, "Yeah, Johnny thought you would, but I told him you didn't have the balls God gave a titmouse to pull something like that." And we all know what happened that day.



"Alright now, just leave me the hell out of this!"

birds.audubon.org
2014-06-10 11:16:37 AM
1 votes:
OJ is responsible for at least one of the Kardashians, i'm pretty sure the one with the enormous chin is actually his kid.
2014-06-10 10:57:26 AM
1 votes:

Mugato: Mateorocks: drivingsouth: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x306]

I don't think anyone was as surprised at the verdict more than Kardashian.

That's exactly how I remember it, too. Dude looked completely aghast when the verdict was read that morning.

He looks more shocked than this but it's the best still I could find. Only the video does it justice (no pun intended).

[www.cnn.com image 258x240]

So if OJ hadn't killed those people, would we not have the Kardashians foisted upon us or was it inevitable?


Not sure, but I lean toward the former. Vanity Fair had an interesting article about how OJ begat the Kardashians, Real Housewives and the Hills. For that reason alone, he should have been executed.
2014-06-10 10:53:56 AM
1 votes:

Nabb1: The prosecutors had enough evidence to easily convict OJ, but they botched it all to Hell and back.

, but none of that mattered and neither would have any other evidence presented, no matter how incriminating, because this verdict was revenge for the Rodney King verdict.

FTFY
2014-06-10 10:47:57 AM
1 votes:

dragyne: He seems to be descending into madness before our very eyes.

 ArkAngel: Defense attorneys are required to turn over any evidence in their possession to the prosecution for testing. Not doing so is a charge of obstruction.

Negative. Burden of proof is always on the prosecution.  If they miss something in their investigation that is on them.


Correct, but the defense can't hide, move, tamper with, or in any other way assist with the concealment of the evidence.
2014-06-10 10:36:26 AM
1 votes:

cig-mkr: The jury was afraid of another riot, and personal safety, and decided finding OJ not guilty was the easy way out.


Nah, some members of the jury were just stupid.  There was evidence that the blood samples matched OJ's DNA.  One jury member post-verdict said "Lots of people have the same blood type", indicating a complete misunderstanding of DNA matching.
2014-06-10 10:35:40 AM
1 votes:

cig-mkr: Just me but, I always thought that O J was found innocent only because a few years earlier a jury in the Rodney King case let some white cop off the hook which resulted in the six day long LA riots ( 50+ dead, 2300+ injured and a billion dollars in property damages)
The jury was afraid of another riot, and personal safety, and decided finding OJ not guilty was the easy way out.
I do remember that the LAPD at the time had a really bad relationship with the black community.
/ just my feeling at the time.


And the people most hit by these riots? Poor blacks, Hispanics, and Korean shop owners. Congrats on sticking it to the man
2014-06-10 10:35:11 AM
1 votes:

JackieRabbit: "I'm not sayin' that OJ should have killed Nichole, but I understand."


You do? Because that would make you a really farked-up person.

/I know, it's a "joke."
//Worst joke ever. Fark you, Chris Rock.
2014-06-10 10:33:17 AM
1 votes:

Repack Rider: The investigation was handled adequately.  The proof was there, he was guilty beyond any doubt.  Any of a dozen pieces of evidence alone should have convicted him.  Fuhrman did an exemplary job, and that was his mistake.  In order to free OJ, Fuhrman had to be destroyed, because the evidence he had found was irrefutable.  So a good officer had his career destroyed to save a murderer.


Being tape recorded saying the N-word and then lying about it on the stand is your definition of a good police officer?  As the current owner of the Clippers has also found out, being recorded on tape being a racist douche bag is never a good idea.

Now, admittedly, maybe such testimony shouldn't have been allowed in the first place, with the blame lying on the judge and prosecution here.

The defense did their job-getting their client off.  The prosecution didn't.
2014-06-10 10:29:24 AM
1 votes:
OJ later wrote a book called something like "IF I did it". I'm pretty sure it was pulled out of circulation but I did find an internet copy of it and read it. If you can locate it, it's totally worth reading. In short, it seems to be nothing short of a confession.
2014-06-10 10:16:42 AM
1 votes:
OJ is guilty, no doubt about it
But I think goldman should console himself with the wreckage that is oj
and hound him into his early grave

the law wasn't capable of helping, but karma seems to have it covered
2014-06-10 10:04:40 AM
1 votes:

RminusQ: Fat Man Of La Mancha: gfid: ArkAngel: Defense attorneys are required to turn over any evidence in their possession to the prosecution for testing. Not doing so is a charge of obstruction.

not sure if serious, but you have it backwards.  It's the prosecution that has to turn over any evidence to the defense

If the prosecution ask for evidence then the defense is obligated to turn it over. Refusal to do so may be charged with obstruction of justice. Of course the prosecution has to know about it first.

I don't think it works that way.

"Hey, defense attorney, has your client said where he was on the night of the murder?"
"Why don't you go eat your own ass?"


That would fall under the fifth amendment. The defense has to turn over bloody glove evidence, it is not required to force the defendant to tell the truth.
2014-06-10 09:35:41 AM
1 votes:

gfid: ArkAngel: Defense attorneys are required to turn over any evidence in their possession to the prosecution for testing. Not doing so is a charge of obstruction.

not sure if serious, but you have it backwards.  It's the prosecution that has to turn over any evidence to the defense


If the prosecution ask for evidence then the defense is obligated to turn it over. Refusal to do so may be charged with obstruction of justice. Of course the prosecution has to know about it first.
2014-06-10 09:29:45 AM
1 votes:
Ron looked like a total douchebag.
2014-06-10 09:28:32 AM
1 votes:
They did have evidence to convict OJ, but what allowed the defense to poke holes in the case and cast doubt was the evidence relating to OJ's accomplice, such as the glove, along with the sleaziness of the LAPD.  Plus the prosecutor's Jheri curl was weird.
2014-06-10 09:26:09 AM
1 votes:

This text is now purple: Shame the LAPD had to try to frame a guilty man.


They were looking for a change of pace.
2014-06-10 09:24:44 AM
1 votes:
didn't this happen in 1995? Who gives a fark
2014-06-10 09:21:44 AM
1 votes:
Does he have evidence of this evidence?
2014-06-10 09:19:23 AM
1 votes:
He seems to be descending into madness before our very eyes.

 

ArkAngel: Defense attorneys are required to turn over any evidence in their possession to the prosecution for testing. Not doing so is a charge of obstruction.


Negative. Burden of proof is always on the prosecution.  If they miss something in their investigation that is on them.
2014-06-10 09:17:12 AM
1 votes:
I just hope his time in prison has helped in his search for the real killers.
2014-06-10 08:21:57 AM
1 votes:
Goldman believes Simpson was raped by a fellow prisoner

Wow he's got all kinds of killer inside info.  Way to find a great source of knowledge, daily fail!
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report