Badmovies.org Forum

O.J. has been found guilty (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/04/oj.simpson.verdict/index.html) on all 12 counts - including gems like armed robbery and kidnapping - for his capers in that Las Vegas hotel room.  This happened 13 years to the day after he was acquitted in that other trial.

Good job, jurors.  :thumbup:

Seems that there's a god after all.  :teddyr:

And thus the karmic balance of the universe is restored!   :drink:

He should've used the Chewbacca Defense

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUP5GzHIojU

I was pretty disappointed over his murder trial. It seemed the prosecution had more than enough evidence, but there whole plan had so many holes in it, they just didn't get all their crap straight. Personally, I think he was guilty, but the prosecution sure left room for reasonable doubt, so all in all I think the jury did the right thing for what they had to work with.

Darn, now he won't be able to continue the search for his wife's killers. 

Why, they don't let you have mirrors in prison.  :bouncegiggle:

I bet that if he goes for any decent length of time, He'll "learn the truth" about the murders from a bunch of inmates, it'll probably involve some conspiracy on the part of law enforcement.

His gloves fit this time, they couldn't acquit.

I don't know...
I've read several articles that suggest that only two people could have committed the murders.  If I can find them again, I'll post the links here.

During and after that trial, I didn't know what to think.  Part of me thought he was guilty while the other half of me thought he was innocent.
What did look bad was blood found in his truck and other somewhat incriminating evidence.
But if you closely examine the murder scene, it becomes apparent that O.J. probably could not have handled it by himself.
If he did do it, he had an accomplice.  Or he hired two guys to do it.

Or he really is innocent.

Yea, and that case was a perfect example of why it is so important for investigators to cross every T and dot every I: The paperwork said they took X cc of blood from him, but the examples brought to trial had somewhat less in them, which is where the defense got it's start in getting the jury to believe he was framed, and that the "missing" blood from the samples was what someone PLANTED to frame him. Make the lead investigator out to seem like a racist, ,and it's an easy road to lead the jury down.

Now, take it from the other end, supposing the court/juries come to ACCEPT sloppy paperwork, and you are being investigated, and the take 10CCs of blood, but only 7CCs gets admitted into evidence and gets easily dismissed as sloppy paperwork, you see the fatal flaw in the system, and a very unnecessary one.

The bad part IMO is that people blame OJ getting off on the lawyers, as people often do, but at times it is the investigators or prosecutors that didn't cover all the bases. It's a tough one when someone gets away with something like that, but, we do live in an imperfect world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyoJ_okNxZI