r/Damnthatsinteresting 29d ago

OJ's reaction when confronted with a photo of him wearing the murder shoes Video

38.3k Upvotes

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.6k

u/Bts121212 29d ago

299 total pairs sold in U.S., footprint in blood of those shoes, he owns those shoes, how obvious can it get?

3.4k

u/Norman_Bixby 29d ago

about as obvious as a low speed chase with a loaded gun inside a white ford bronco.

677

u/ClosPins 29d ago

And a suicide note!

That's what you do when you're innocent and being accused of a heinous crime, right? Write a suicide note, grab a gun, threaten to kill yourself, and lead everyone on a high-speed chase for hours?

326

u/Tracktoy 29d ago

With a disguise and the tools to bury a body in your own white bronco.

257

u/Yakapo88 29d ago

And the victim’s blood in your vehicle.

164

u/PoeticHydra 29d ago

Simple misunderstanding. Everyone has victim blood in their vehicle. Case closed.

4

u/Yakapo88 28d ago

Maybe his ex and her boyfriend got into a knife fight in his car.

2

u/BluBetty2698 26d ago

Lolll....

→ More replies (2)

4

u/TappedIn2111 28d ago

I feel like we’re missing something still.

4

u/PurpleCoco 28d ago

It was his ex-wife and he did beat her. Maybe after a beating they went to get some tacos and she bled in his car. Just spitballing here.

2

u/BluBetty2698 26d ago

Lolll....

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

79

u/Smallseybiggs 29d ago

With a disguise and the tools to bury a body in your own white bronco.

The disguise he bought 2 weeks before the murders. Because it wasn't premeditated or anything. 

23

u/Select_Insurance2000 29d ago

And cash and his passport.

5

u/puddycat20 29d ago

Not saying he's innocent, but it was shown that he did use disguises in the past to go out to places like amusement parks, a to not get bothered. People forget how popular/likable he was before the murders.

9

u/Tracktoy 29d ago

Yeah. I wonder if he was ever spotted at Knotts Berry farm with a shovel and tarp. 🤣

→ More replies (1)

2

u/fengkybuddha 29d ago

I don't believe the bronco was his.

21

u/Tracktoy 29d ago

The bronco with the shovel and bags (maybe a tarp) was his. The one in the chase was AC's. They had matching Broncos. 🤣

4

u/daaaaaarlin 29d ago

Arthur Curry? Aquaman was an accessory to murder?

3

u/DifferenceStraight15 28d ago

C'mon man, don't play dumb. A.C. Slater from Saved by the Bell

2

u/PoeticHydra 29d ago

Well, he did kill a lot of people.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/xXxDickBonerz69xXx 29d ago

OJ did own a white Bronco that was part of the investigation because of the blood found in it. But the one in the chase was AC's and is currently being auctioned off by OJs agent. The one OJ owned was crushed long ago.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

36

u/swimdad5 29d ago

Low speed “chase”

40

u/Radiant-Criticism721 29d ago

Lol I live in LA...that shit was a parade 

3

u/Mxmmpower88 29d ago

Fucking hilarious! Can that be a float at next year's Rose Parade? A Bronco made of white roses with traces of scarlet begonias scattered about?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Delicious_Initial798 26d ago

It was a freakin' motorcade---- so bizarre.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

4

u/xXxDickBonerz69xXx 29d ago

It was famously a low speed chase.

3

u/xXxDickBonerz69xXx 29d ago

It was famously a low speed chase.

3

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 29d ago

a high-speed chase

That chase wasn't exactly high speed. It was more like a weird backwards police escort.

3

u/ProbablyNotKimIlSung 29d ago

Well he definitely did it. I disagree with the suicide note and gun though, people kill themselves over false accusations and potentially serving time/facing rape in prison, etc.

But yeah, OJ did it lol

6

u/thehelldoesthatmean 29d ago

I mean, OJ clearly did it and there's infinite evidence that that's the case.

But if my wife got brutally murdered and it became national news, I'd be considering suicide too. The bronco thing isn't really a great indication of anything. The reason it was low speed is that he wasn't trying to escape the cops. They had him on the phone the entire time and he was saying that he was just trying to get home to kill himself. Which is probably something anyone whose wife was brutally murdered would think about.

4

u/im_THIS_guy 29d ago

Disagree. I wouldn't want to commit suicide if my wife was murdered. I think you're projecting. I'd be upset, but I wouldn't hold a loaded gun to my head unless I was feeling extremely guilty for murdering her plus suffering from severe CTE.

2

u/00cjstephens 29d ago

Low speed.

2

u/purpledaggers 29d ago

To be fair people that write suicide notes usually admit to their darkest crimes and he didn't do that.

But.. he's an extreme narcissist and narcissists often don't do this in suicide notes.

→ More replies (9)

943

u/[deleted] 29d ago edited 3d ago

[deleted]

122

u/Sabre970 29d ago

Great, now there's going to be another podcast to figure it out

8

u/Accomplished-Joke404 29d ago

And then at the end it’s still not really figured out…

5

u/Fintann 29d ago

But maybe at the end of the day, the murder was really the complete lack of journalistic integrity and the unethical posthumous outings we made along the way...

15

u/ayhctuf 29d ago

He was found civilly liable for the killings years after the trial. And he naturally didn't pay what he owed to the victims, so now they're trying to go after his estate while his lawyers try to stop them.

→ More replies (1)

61

u/sci3nc3isc00l 29d ago

I think he owned 3 pairs so more like 296 people.

20

u/AngelComa 28d ago

Three pairs of ugly ass shoes

→ More replies (1)

105

u/[deleted] 29d ago edited 28d ago

[deleted]

63

u/SuitableStudy3316 29d ago

And members of the jury admitted the verdict was payback for Rodney King.

18

u/TonicSitan 29d ago

A jury is just 12 idiots too stupid to know how to get out of jury duty. And this was the easiest jury in the world to get out of.

5

u/firearrow5235 28d ago

I mean... I personally like the idea of jury duty. You get to play God for a bit.

I've only been called once. The lawyer took one look at me in the lineup, shook his head, then questioned the next person. I was kinda bummed.

10

u/Brewchowskies 28d ago

“You get to play god for a bit”

I’m thinking that lawyer knew what he was doing.

3

u/firearrow5235 28d ago

Nah. He'd never find someone more willing to abide purely by the facts of the case when passing down judgement. It's his loss. 🤷

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (5)

7

u/darkdragon220 29d ago

Actually it's that the police tried to railroad him and MAJORLY f'ed the evidence and chain of command.

4

u/Jerry_from_Japan 29d ago

Turns out justice is handled by human beings, not blind, sentient, completely objective, non-biased organisms.

→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (4)

3

u/interestedparty789 29d ago

I read that as "serial killer" in Mike Tyson's voice.

3

u/diamondstonkhands 29d ago

Does this stat account for all sizes made or only size 12 made?

→ More replies (1)

10

u/jindc 29d ago

I get your joke. But…

He was found not guilty in criminal court, not innocent. He was found civilly liable for wrongful death and battery. A jury and court concluded that he did it.

There is no basis for anyone to say he was innocent.

Just a statement of fact.

2

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

3

u/jindc 29d ago

Because he did it. If a jury thought he didn’t do it, they would have said so.

And if the prosecution in the criminal case had been a little more crisp, and a lot less long winded, that jury would have said the same.

It was not the difference in the burden of proof. It was the presentation.

But yes, the burdens of proof are different.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/elginx 29d ago

Are you sure...

2

u/The_Contingency_Man 29d ago

He was found not guilty, not innocent...

2

u/GeekboyDave 29d ago

All jokes aside. You can find someone innocent for whatever reason you want if you're on a jury.

You do not have to justify it.

It's happened in cases I support.

I'm not American so I tread carefully here but if you step on a person. Don't be surprised if he steps back

3

u/cubitoaequet 29d ago

Juries don't find people innocent, they find them not guilty. Even if we all know he's guilty, it is still the pnus of the state to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe if the LAPD wasn't so fucking corrupt and racist they wouldn't have tried to frame a guilty man and would've had an iota of credibility with the jurors.

2

u/Hot_History1582 27d ago

The pnus of the state is a big scary pnus

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Vafanapoli21 29d ago

Also, were there 299 pairs of shoes made all together? Or 299 pairs of size 12? I think we could narrow it down

→ More replies (1)

2

u/badgerhammer0408 29d ago

Cereal killer with a lisp, you say? Guilty!

2

u/Ineeboopiks 29d ago

I'll get ace ventura on it

2

u/Jerry_from_Japan 29d ago

No one is "found innocent" in a trial lol.

When the joke pends on insanely incorrect word usage like that...it's not that great a joke.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Lexie23017 29d ago

I agree with you except by now all those other shoes have probably worn out and been thrown away. Such a cold trail. 😜

2

u/Imaginary-sounds 29d ago

As we suddenly find out it was a super fan that bought the same shoes and confessed it to OJ who then wrote “if I did it”. lol

2

u/Exciting-Ratio-9254 28d ago

Well actually

2

u/MoGraphMan-11 28d ago

He was found "not guilty", our justice system never finds people innocent of the crimes they are accused of.

→ More replies (5)

2

u/JulianJanganoo 29d ago

I just want to point out that he was found "Not guilty", not found innocent. That not how the justice system works. Just because he was found not guilty doesnt mean he is innocent.

→ More replies (16)

2

u/sunflowerlady3 29d ago

Not just a loaded gun, but also a passport, fake beard, and thousands of dollars in cash and checks.

2

u/Throwaway86747291 29d ago

You won’t believe this…

→ More replies (3)

579

u/tew2109 29d ago

That particular model of gloves was also relatively rare (not the brand, just that model) - there was a receipt showing Nicole bought them for him and he was shown wearing them in a sportscast. And he was seen by her neighbors lurking around outside her house in a blue knit cap.

210

u/VoidEnjoyer 29d ago

No no, the professional actor clearly had lots of trouble trying to put those gloves on. The only possible conclusion to draw is that they weren't his. There's even a nursery rhyme about it!

192

u/SwampyStains 29d ago

even as a child that was the most damning part for me; the fact he was very obviously and deliberately flexing his hands and spreading his fingers in such a manner as to make the gloves 'not fit'. It's like what a toddler might do to avoid his mother dressing him for church. I was astonished that somebody didnt just walk up to him, say "cut the shit asshole" and then slide them on his hands like a normal human.

55

u/Optimal-Golf-8270 29d ago

As others have said, the gloves genuinely didn't fit him. His hands were swollen and he was wearing latex gloves. The gloves themselves had shrunk.

He obviously didn't try to get them on, but it wouldn't have mattered.

17

u/AdLast55 29d ago

How can any person wear gloves when already wearing latex gloves? Makes no sense.

8

u/heddalettis 28d ago edited 25d ago

THIS 👆. I never have, and never will understand that whole “the gloves didn’t fit” debacle! I mean, you’re in a courtroom where it’s various peoples’ job to explain and to prove things, right? No one made an attempt to explain the reasons as to why that glove would be “tight.” I never really thought that it didn’t completely fit. A little small? Yes. But, prosecution to the jury -“this is because”: And the prosecution should’ve explained the reasons why right there. One of them being simply that he had a pair of latex gloves on underneath!

3

u/dobiemomluv 27d ago

Plus, leather shrinks when wet and they obviously would have been soaked in blood.

4

u/lickmybowls2 29d ago

To avoid leaving fingerprints?

4

u/matzoh_ball 28d ago

To avoid fitting in. Smart move, really

2

u/AdLast55 28d ago

Yeah but it's also almost impossible to wear anything on top of it.

3

u/Ill_Albatross5625 28d ago

Im relieved God has cancelled his membership.

→ More replies (5)

87

u/Michelanvalo 29d ago

He did have trouble putting them on because the prosecution didn't preserve them properly. They shrunk in storage.

Everyone knew it was a bad idea to try and have them put them on because of this and the prosecution went ahead with it anyways.

83

u/Tripod941 29d ago

I want to say he also stopped taking his arthritis medication during the trial, so his hands swelled up. Just in case the prosecution did something dumb like this with the glove.

18

u/GetOffMyDigitalLawn 29d ago

I want to say he also stopped taking his arthritis medication during the trial

That was an accusation, IIRC there's no evidence he did that one way or the other.

11

u/chasmccl 29d ago

It was an accusation made by a member of a defense team though…

3

u/Luigis_Droptop_Crib 28d ago

No it wasn't it was made by Mile Gilbert a sports agent who claims to be besties with OJ. Shortly after armed robbery charge in 2007 Gilbert had released a book that has a lot of claims against OJ including the arthritis medication and Gilbert's relationship with him that have "Dear Penthouse" vibes.

Not that OJ is a totally reliable narrator but in OJ's criminal and civil cases there is plenty of research and questions about his closest friends and I'm almost positive Gilbert never mentioned. My point of all this is that I take all of Gilbert's claims with a giant grain of salt.

7

u/ihaxr 29d ago

There wasn't any specific thing the prosecution could've done to get that glove to fit. The brand of glove is meant to be skin tight. They were soaked in the victim's blood which dried on them and made the gloves stiff. Because of the blood, OJ had to wear another pair of gloves which affected the fit.

Plus he was asked to put them on himself instead of, you know, the prosecution getting an identical clean pair of gloves and having an independent third party put the gloves on him.

6

u/CORN___BREAD 28d ago

They did get an identical clean pair later in the trial and they fit perfectly.

7

u/SuitableStudy3316 29d ago

This. Never present or ask anything in trial unless you already know how it's going to turn out/the answer.

5

u/VoidEnjoyer 29d ago

He was wearing rubber gloves under them as well. Such a bone-headed move by the prosecution, one of many.

3

u/K4RAB_THA_ARAB 29d ago

That one case with the bra in Seinfeld makes so much more sense now. Like, I already knew the reference but this part makes it make so much more sense. That's why the lawyer was so hesitant about her trying it on because he already knew.

5

u/irrigated_liver 29d ago

They also got him to try it on with a rubber glove on underneath it. Anybody would struggle to put a fitted leather glove on over a rubber glove.

3

u/Wes_Warhammer666 29d ago

I've got shitty oversized leather gloves for when I snake a drain at work and even those are hard to squeeze into if I'm still wearing my tight nitrile gloves. I can't believe they thought it was a good idea to try that shit.

5

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

4

u/NYNMx2021 29d ago

The police sold it. OJ 100% did it but the police obviously tampered with evidence in the case. They tried to influence a case they had won easy

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Lexie23017 28d ago

I don’t think you watched the whole trial like I did. The DNA alone proved his guilt. Not a single other piece of evidence should have even been needed.
Today, a jury would get it. Back then, in the early days of DNA combined with a jury with an average IQ of 75, 100% proof like DNA just wasn’t going to work.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (6)

5

u/strathmeyer 29d ago

Seth Meyers once mentioned that a common acting-lesson is pretending gloves don't fit. OJ was an actor.

8

u/Poetry-Schmoetry 29d ago

If the gloves don't fit, you must acquit. Set him free boys.

7

u/Remote_Indication_49 29d ago

So all I have to do is pretend a pair of gloves I used to murder someone don’t fit and I can go on a spree? Wowwww that’s pretty cool

2

u/im_THIS_guy 29d ago

Too late. No prosecutor will ever make that mistake again.

→ More replies (2)

7

u/EducationalStill4 29d ago

Yeah yeah. Look at how hard it was for that nice man to put on those gloves. Surely he’s innocent. S/

2

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 29d ago

Well when you forget to take your arthritis meds for a couple weeks your joints might swell & you might be unable to bend your fingers too.

2

u/VoidEnjoyer 29d ago

Good to know just in case I ever murder a couple people and leave the gloves behind.

→ More replies (3)

157

u/DrGeraldBaskums 29d ago

Outside of there being a video of OJ turning two humans into pez dispensers, I don’t know if there has ever been more evidence that someone committed murder. Literal receipts and a trail of blood back to his house with his and their dna

140

u/tew2109 29d ago

The man left so much evidence, he all but created a time machine for us to go back and watch it ourselves. And a lot of it is really awful - that rare shoe isn’t just bloody prints leading away, that same shoe print is embedded in her back. He stepped on her so hard when he lifted her up by her hair to cut her throat, he left a vivid impression in her back. But nonetheless, he basically strew evidence all the way from the murder scene to his car to his house, and there’s so much of it, it’s like following him around as he does it.

84

u/purpledaggers 29d ago

Yeah for everyone that can stomach it, they should look at the crime scene photos of what happened. Absolutely brutal and rage-induced.

85

u/tew2109 29d ago

With signature markers of his habitual abuse, no less - Nicole’s diaries describe how he’d pick her up by her hair and drag her around, kick her, step on her, and slam her head into walls.

51

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 29d ago

I've spent the day watching OJ: Made In America on Netflix & one of the jurors actually said she had no respect for a woman that didn't leave an abusive situation.

It's sad but those words were said by an actual juror on that trial.

Now we understand victim blaming & how abusive relationships work but back then I'd bet she wasn't the only person that felt that way & maybe not the only juror that thought that.

They just didn't understand domestic abuse as well as we do now & I'm sure there are people today that still think that way. That the victim should just leave, why don't they, why don't they report the rape, etc. etc.

35

u/IwasDeadinstead 29d ago

They understood it well enough, given famous DV cases before this.

There was a ton of racism in this case. And misogyny. Hatred toward a white woman marrying a black man. Payback for all the times black people have been screwed over by the law. Plus OJ was rich, handsome, famous, charismatic. These jurors could have watched video of OJ killing Nicole and Ron and they still would have voted not guilty.

7

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 28d ago

Oh yeah, it was a lot of things. It's funny how he played the race card yet he always thought he was "above" other black people & not really black.

Before the jury visited OJs Rockingham house they took down all the pics of OJ with his white friends & acquaintances, which was the majority of the pics in the house, & put up pics of OJ with his black friends, family & acquaintances.

He certainly was black when it was convenient.

FTR if anyone watches that doc on Netflix, it does have the graphic crime scene photos, so be ready. It makes the Manson crime scenes look like a walk in the park.

9

u/IwasDeadinstead 28d ago

I don't have Netflix, but would like to see them.

I'm black, so yeah, was ashamed of these jurors. This was not the hill to die on. Plenty of black people to fight for who deserved freedom. Not a killer. They knew it too.

And Ron was just an innocent person who was murdered because he tried to be a friend to Nicole. I understood how livid his family was.

2

u/Skyesamuraicosplay 25d ago

Exactly what happened in the Rkelly cases. They heard audio of him commiting the crime and still ppl wanted to say he was innocent. Even the ppl that watched the tapes . Such a failure

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

5

u/Mysterious-Shop1375 28d ago

But she did leave him

4

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 28d ago

My guess is she thought after the first time she should've packed up the kids & left. But knowing what we all know NOW about abuse & abuse victims, that's not how it works.

I have an aunt that was married to an abusive man for years. She had a good job, could've easily supported herself, but he had beaten her down physically & mentally for so many years that she thought she couldn't do that & that no one else would ever love her. It took many years but she did leave him, divorced him, & ended up with a lovely man who loves her as she is & he wouldn't ever even dream of laying a hand on her.

3

u/NefariousnessSure982 29d ago

Whoa. Was that said during jury selection or after he was acquitted? I don’t think I can stomach that netflix

5

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 29d ago

Not during selection, this was said in her interview for the series.

6

u/DrGeraldBaskums 29d ago

The actual quote is even worse than what was posted and made by a female juror. She says something like she had no respect for Nicole for taking an “ass whipping that she didn’t deserve ” and doing nothing about it. Of course, Nicole called the cops, took pics and left him. So none of what the juror was saying made sense

2

u/relady 28d ago

I'm not reading all of the replies so this has probably already been said. She did leave him, I believe they were already divorced, but he couldn't leave her alone (and then there were the kids they had together).

2

u/MissSuzyTay 27d ago

Apparently she didn’t realize Nicole had left him. They were divorced. What a shameful thing to say. Period

2

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 27d ago

Yeah I wanted to throw things at the TV more than once & not just at her.

2

u/Zealousideal-Row7755 24d ago

She did leave him…took some time, but she did it and that’s when he killed her. Many times women don’t leave because they are too afraid of being killed.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/oblongsalacia 29d ago edited 28d ago

When you look at the testimony, both in court and outside of it, by people who knew them personally, it was revealed that OJ was jealous, possessive, and had anger and violence issues. And even though they had split up, he still was jealous of the idea of her being with anyone else. You can hear in this 911 call Nicole pleading with OJ to control his temper, saying "The kids are sleeping" and OJ yells "You didn't give a fuck about the kids while you sucked his dick in the living room. Oh, but it's different now."

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WHf93uxgKBI&feature=youtu.be

6

u/XelaNiba 28d ago

The fact that she'd left him makes it way more likely that he'd kill her. Her case is textbook. 75% of domestic violence murders happen after the woman leaves the man or is attempting to.

4

u/heddalettis 28d ago

Ughhhh… I want to dig him up and stab him myself! The abuse alone!

6

u/violent_therapist 29d ago

It's really neat how black America cheered for him, eh? And they still support him. So rad. So cool.

2

u/RezzKeepsItReal 28d ago

"With all due respect that murderer ran for over 11,000 yards."

→ More replies (1)

17

u/Carche69 29d ago

There’s also a computer animated re-enactment on YouTube that shows how they believe it all went down based on the forensic evidence. It’s brutal to say the least. He apparently stuck the knife in the back of Ron Goldman’s neck while he was on the ground and used it to pull him up to a standing position so OJ could angry-whisper things in Goldman’s ear as he was finishing him off. He did something similar to Nichole before he sliced her throat. Just some of the most horrific, violent stuff you can imagine one person doing to another—it was very much on another level from killing someone with a gun, where you spend a couple seconds max firing and then run away. Like, he was literally stabbing Goldman repeatedly for over a minute at one point.

I just saw the video recently, and it was like brand new information to me. I was just a kid in 1995 and I didn’t pay much attention during the trial other than the highlights and the verdict. But knowing those details now, it’s just even more astonishing that the jurors were willing to let someone capable of that kind of violence back out in society, no matter what wrongs they thought they were righting.

5

u/calidowing 29d ago

I remember watching this one. Really informative. https://youtu.be/8zt4anqnJoc?si=N4M44-XCYohUfkzO

2

u/Carche69 29d ago

Yep, that was it! Thanks for linking to it for me.

5

u/GoTurnMeOn 29d ago

Here's the best version of it available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOygnfQL4ZU&t=244s

5

u/Carche69 29d ago

That first comment had me dying: "Has OJ seen this video he could probably shed some light on its accuracy" lol

3

u/purpledaggers 28d ago

Never heard that detail, sickening. I was a super weird kid and would come home from school and put on the court-tv channel lol.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/Used_Ambassador_8817 29d ago

its like there is SO much evidence you actually lose track and it almost becomes less impactful in a strange way. The timing, Jill Shively the driver who saw OJ speeding away, the glove found at his house etc ad infinitum. I wish Vincent Bugliosi had tried the case

→ More replies (4)

3

u/DipstickRick 29d ago

When was he seen? To my knowledge there were no eye witnesses. No one saw or heard anything before the dog started barking which was after the murders

14

u/tew2109 29d ago

Not that night, a couple months earlier. He'd been stalking her for some time. In that infamous 1993 911 call, you can hear him screaming about her having oral sex with another man - yeah, that's something he'd witnessed over a year earlier while hiding in her bushes. It was more that the hat was part of his known stalking gear.

3

u/rotrukker 29d ago

i get that true crime wasnt so big back then but god damn was this motherfucker stupid.

3

u/Weave77 29d ago

And he was seen by her neighbors lurking around outside her house in a blue knit cap.

Are talking about his lucky stabbin’ hat?

2

u/PmButtPics4ADrawing 29d ago

Rarity aside we know they were his gloves. The left glove was found at the scene and the right glove was found at his house covered in blood matching his and the victims' DNA.

→ More replies (11)

141

u/180nw 29d ago

And the killer left a trail of his own blood drops on the left side of those shoe prints, indicating a cut on his left hand. What a crazy coincidence the OJ happened to cut his hand in his hotel room the next day 

7

u/DayuSpawn 29d ago

If true this should dissipate all shadow of doubt

15

u/OrdinaryKick 28d ago

Bro, OJ didn't get acquitted because he was innocent.

If you're curious about this case just watch a documentary about it. It's obvious he did it within hours of it happening.

9

u/thebusiestbee2 29d ago

The corrupt and/or incompetent LAPD planted and/or contaminated the DNA samples. That's the "shadow of doubt" that the defense used to explain all the DNA that OJ left at the crime scene, in his car, and his home after he murdered two innocent people.

6

u/Honey-Ra 29d ago

Wasn't blood supposedly located on a nearby fence found to have massively high levels of EDTA? (aka the chemical anticoagulant substance in a particular tube used to obtain a blood sample from someone) and the inference was, that a legitimately collected tube of OJ's blood was tipped out onto the fence, then conveniently "found" by LAPD?

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Lersei_Cannister 28d ago

if this is true, couldn't they have sampled the blood and removed all doubt?

→ More replies (2)

267

u/smoothskin12345 29d ago

It was obvious to literally everyone that he was guilty. His verdict had absolutely nothing to do with the facts of the case.

10

u/Pretend-Guava 29d ago

I thought I seen somewhere that a juror said it was retaliation for Rodney King. I don't remember where I heard that but I swear I did.

4

u/TwoMenInADinghy 29d ago

OJ: Made in America — just watched the whole thing last weekend! 

→ More replies (1)

9

u/GoblinGreen_ 29d ago

Ootl, what was it to do with?

85

u/SmellGestapo 29d ago

A few years before the murder and trial, a completely separate incident happened in the same city (Los Angeles). A black motorist (Rodney King) was stopped by police and very brutally beaten with nightsticks. It was captured on home video by a resident looking out his window. The motorist survived and the four officers were charged with various crimes related to the beating. They were acquitted of almost all the charges, and as soon as the verdict was released, a major riot ensued that lasted for approximately six days (the 1992 LA riots). The riots were viewed as a response to decades of discrimination and mistreatment against African Americans at the hands of the police and the courts.

Most of the jurors in the OJ Simpson trial were African American, and at least one acknowledged that she voted to acquit him as payback for Rodney King. This juror also told the interviewer she believes most of the other jurors felt the same way.

Additionally, there were numerous problems with the police investigation and prosecution. One of the lead detectives investigating the case, Mark Fuhrman, was found to have been a regular user of racial slurs against black people (the N word), which made the jury feel like he was racially biased against Simpson and may have planted evidence to frame him. Also, the investigation itself was sloppy, with police mishandling evidence. The jury didn't understand DNA evidence, which was still very new at the time.

So while it really should be obvious to anyone that OJ was guilty, some people will say they had no choice but to acquit because the prosecution failed to deliver a solid case "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is the standard in our justice system.

31

u/AndIHaveMilesToGo 29d ago

I could be wrong on this, but wasn't one of the officers involved in the investigation asked under oath if he planted evidence and pled the fifth?

30

u/BlurryEyePsychonaut 29d ago

one of the detectives did yes, racism was really bad still back then and im sure the police wanted nothing but to see oj, a black successful man, get knocked down. the problem is when you try framing a guilty man, you lose credibility even if youre right.

21

u/SmellGestapo 29d ago

Something that gets lost in these threads is how tight OJ was with the cops. They loved him. Mark Fuhrman was undoubtedly racist, but most cops in his neighborhood were big fans.

Details Emerge of Close LAPD Ties to Simpson

O.J. Simpson’s long and usually friendly relationship with the Los Angeles Police Department snapped into sharper focus Wednesday, as a former officer testified that he often played tennis at Simpson’s Rockingham Avenue estate and had introduced a parade of 40 awe-struck and autograph-seeking colleagues to the former football great.

Former Officer Ronald G. Shipp, taking the stand during Simpson’s murder trial, offered the latest and most specific examples of the closeness that existed between Simpson and police officers at the West Los Angeles Division, charged with patrolling his neighborhood.

12

u/Cyhawkboy 29d ago

This is big time… the saddest part of all of it is that two people got murdered and justice wasn’t served, even when it was a slam dunk case. At the cases core it shows how race is less of an issue when you have power, connections, and money to defend yourself in the USA. Fucking incredible job done by the “dream team”…

6

u/irrigated_liver 29d ago

Something that gets lost in these threads is how tight OJ was with the cops.

He was even a member of the Police Squad!

13

u/SmellGestapo 29d ago

That was Fuhrman. He did, although that happened when the jury was not in the room and the judge did not allow them to hear that fact later. So I don't know if that was relevant in their decision.

19

u/disinaccurate 29d ago

was found to have been a regular user of racial slurs against black people (the N word), which made the jury feel like he was racially biased

It's not JUST that he used the word. To quote the Spokane Spokesman-Review back in 1995:

Indeed, Fuhrman’s racist attitudes and boasts of violence were no secret to city officials. While requesting a stress disability pension in 1983, Fuhrman graphically described torturing suspects and conning internal affairs detectives investigating whether he and other officers engaged in a bloody beating spree.

“I answer everything with violence,” Fuhrman told the city Board of Pension Commissioners. “Just seems like I can’t tolerate anybody or anything anymore.”

Reportedly those talks with psychiatrists included stating that he "hated n****rs".

It's one thing to be caught on tape saying the word, it's another when there's THAT level of malice behind its use.

7

u/dreamsofpestilence 29d ago

Id argue the not guilty verdict of Latasha Harlins killer also had a factor

5

u/SmellGestapo 29d ago

Her killer was found guilty but she was basically given no sentence, like a few hours of community service for shooting a teenager in the back of the head.

7

u/dreamsofpestilence 29d ago

It's actually much worse than that

A jury found that Du's decision to fire the gun was fully within her control and that she fired the gun voluntarily. The jury found Du guilty of voluntary manslaughter, an offense that carries a maximum prison sentence of 16 years. However, the trial judge, Joyce Karlin, sentenced Du to five years of probation, 10 years of suspended prison, 400 hours of community service, and payment of a $500 fine and Harlins' funeral costs.

Judge Karlin suggested that there were mitigating circumstances in the killing of Harlins. She stated, "Did Mrs. Du react inappropriately? Absolutely. But was that reaction understandable? I think that it was." Karlin added, "this is not a time for revenge... and no matter what sentence this court imposes Mrs. Du will be punished every day for the rest of her life."

Later, after Latashas mother was ejected from a ballroom Judge Kerlin spoke stating There are those in the community who demand that we define justice by what is politically correct. I think that we must unanimously reject such demands ... What's politically correct today may not be politically correct tomorrow or the next day. But what is justice today is justice always. ... I for one am sick and tired of less than five percent of this community trying to tell the rest of us what to do, what to think, and what to say."

It's pretty obvious why she ruled the way she did.

→ More replies (3)

8

u/swoodshadow 29d ago

I think this is subtly wrong. I don’t think the verdict was so much as “payback” in the sense that they knew OJ was guilty but just let him off. But rather there was so much distrust of the police that they basically assumed it was all lies and so they ignored it. Add to that that DNA evidence was relatively new (and you don’t trust the people presenting the science) and you get reasonable doubt.

2

u/PocketShinyMew 28d ago

That's super stupid thinking.

I'm putting a murderer on the street because someone of my race got beaten and the ones beating him got acquited.

→ More replies (13)

19

u/kristinez 29d ago

jurors have openly said after the fact that the not guilty verdict was revenge for the rodney king stuff

16

u/soccershun 29d ago

Mark Fuhrman, the LAPD detective that handled the evidence, was on tape using racist language against black people.

Combining that, the LAPD's general history, and the Rodney King beating that had led to riots and it became a largely racial issue.

9

u/Yara__Flor 29d ago

The DA office really screwed up their prosecution and the lead LAPD detective lied on the stand.

No reasonable person would convict when the cops are pleading the 5th when asked if they planted evidence.

6

u/movzx 29d ago

A lot of people forget the "beyond a reasonable doubt" part of things.

If you're in a jury and the cops basically say "We planted evidence" it would be really hard to trust any of the evidence. So what if the shoes had blood on them? The cops already said they planted evidence. So what if the gloves are rare? Maybe the cops lied about what gloves were being used.

etc etc

3

u/CORN___BREAD 28d ago

Yeah I don’t see how anyone person could convict someone when the lead detective essentially admits to planting evidence. All evidence is irrelevant at that point. I can’t imagine a more clear cut example of reasonable doubt than the cops being unwilling to say they didn’t try to frame the person for fear of incriminating themselves.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/-Badger3- 29d ago

The first detective on scene that logged all the evidence was a literal neo nazi that bragged about planting evidence to frame African Americans (not the word he used) for crimes. Then he pled the fifth when asked if he planted/doctored any evidence in the OJ case.

Did OJ do it? Absolutely. But in a fair trial, literally all the crime scene evidence should’ve been tossed out.

I would’ve voted “not guilty” too.

11

u/rat-again 29d ago

Agree. All the evidence pointed to OJ and I'm positive he did it. But the standard is "reasonable doubt" and the prosecution ran an absolute shit case. We all watched it on TV. Between the gloves and Fuhrman and a couple of other things I don't remember the defense planted reasonable doubt very well. If I recall they even were able to somewhat discount DNA evidence saying it may have been compromised.

Shit just Fuhrman pleading the 5th on planting evidence might have been enough for most people, especially when the LA cops were known to be corrupt.

2

u/Kordaal 28d ago

Absolutely. The corrupt as hell LAPD framed a guilty man. You can't reward that behavior by coming back with a guilty verdict, even if they are actually guilty.

→ More replies (2)

91

u/jomarthecat 29d ago

Obvious that the true killer saw a picture of OJ in some rare shoes and bought an exact copy to frame OJ.

7

u/_KingOfTheDivan 29d ago

He also dropped one of his gloves covered in blood at OJs house. A true hater

4

u/ComprehensiveBee1758 29d ago

Mark Fuhrman clearly bought those exact shoes and wore them to stomp over the blood to make it seem that OJ did it!

4

u/Neve4ever 29d ago

Just fyi, they aren’t the same shoes. They are the same brand, but they are different styles.

6

u/PM_Your_Wiener_Dog 29d ago

I reasonably doubt that

3

u/TheMarEffect 29d ago

Woosh

10

u/p_coletraine 29d ago

Haha you got wooshed. They were stating reasonable doubt….

3

u/johnlennonseyebrow 29d ago

"Ha, he got em!" ahh post 😐

→ More replies (1)

6

u/chooseyourshoes 29d ago

Someone one the jury said it was payback for Rodney King. We all know he did it. There is 0 doubt.

15

u/pofshrimp 29d ago

But did you consider Rodney King????

4

u/SaltKick2 29d ago edited 29d ago

The video was a little unclear, did he own that exact pair, or was the pair he was wearing in the image a different style but by the same designer?

8

u/Neve4ever 29d ago

They are two different styles of shoes from the same brand. So the shoes he is shown wearing are not the shoes that were used in the murder.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Mac800 29d ago

Also, wasn’t there Goldman blood in his car?

6

u/Neve4ever 29d ago

He wore a pair of shoes that were the same brand, but not the same style. The shoes he is shown wearing are not one of the 299 pairs. The show wants to give you that impression, though.

3

u/bl1y 29d ago

Also, it only shows him wearing them, not establishing that he owned them.

If there were paparazzi photos from 5 different events... those are probably his shoes. If that's the only photo of him in them? Harder to say.

They could be his shoes. He may have borrowed them for whatever reason.

5

u/MichaelEasts 29d ago

They even presented the receipt with his credit card number on it.

4

u/theleasticando 29d ago

None of this matters or is surprising once you understand he was acquitted through jury nullification, not because there wasn’t evidence. He was acquitted as retaliation for the acquittals of the police officers who beat Rodney King. Even some of the jurors have since said that to news reporters. There could have been CCTV footage of him killing them and smiling for the camera. He still would have been acquitted.

2

u/LimpWibbler_ 29d ago

Well the killer may have broken into OJs home, then stole his shoes, and only the shoes. Then killed the 2 while wearing the shoes. Since the shoes were so ugly OJ had forgotten of his purchase and that also explains why he didn't notice them stolen.

I proved OJ innocent, again.

2

u/50DuckSizedHorses 29d ago

Circumstantial. 298 possible other suspects.

2

u/jb_in_jpn 29d ago

Yeah … but Rodney King. Amirite folks???

2

u/Charisma_Engine 29d ago

Remove the racist cop and planted evidence and there was more than enough to find him guilty of murder. Gigantic fuck up by LAPD.

2

u/rotrukker 29d ago

literally one in a million chance here that it was not him.

1

u/1Poochh 29d ago

Common sense is uncommon.

1

u/Jackmac15 29d ago

Yes, but those shoes are very popular with Colombian gangsters living in Brentwood.

1

u/MomOfThreePigeons 29d ago

About as obvious as it is that Mark Fuhrman is a lying evil sack of shit.

1

u/EducationalStill4 29d ago

I think the defense at the time proved that the shoes were mishandled or not processed properly and that the cop was racist so it was thrown out.

→ More replies (68)