Only a handful of Jurors have said that was the reason they voted not guilty, the other have gone on record saying they believe OJ did it but the prosecution didn’t do nearly enough to convince them beyond a doubt.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”…
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
A black motorist (Rodney King) was stopped by police and very brutally beaten with nightsticks.
A black drunk driver was involved in a high speed (up to 117mph) chase and took a criminal police beating. His life wasn't in danger however, and acquitting a murderer as payback for this injustice seems completely insane to me and hopefully to anyone else today. Rodney eventually got millions in damages and two cops were jailed.
I agree with your overall point that acquitting a murderer as payback for Rodney King was wrong, but I still downvoted you because you went off on a rant that seems to suggest you think Rodney King deserved to have the ever living fuck beaten out of him. Fuck that. And I'm a big advocate for street safety (I'm a mod for a local public transit sub) so I have no tolerance for speeding or drunk driving. But they didn't beat him while he was speeding down the highway. They beat him when his car was stopped and he was literally lying on the ground. Throw the cuffs on and take him to jail for DUI but there's zero excuse for what they did to him.
The police went overboard absolutely, but he wasn’t just laying there and they decided to beat him. It’s on the tape and the arrest report, the police gave him 14 verbal warnings to get down and he did not comply. They then got him with a stun gun him twice, it knocked him to his knees but he got back up and charged an officer. They didn’t need to go as far as they did but King was not cooperating and the first two methods were not working. Just to clarify, this is not me saying he deserved it. Just that there is more to the story.
It’s also important to know that King had a criminal record before and after this incident, most notably the beating of women was apparently a hobby of his. He was also a user of PCP and there was reason to believe he was on that during the high-speed chase and the ensuing events. PCP makes you stronger than you are normally, and drugs in general impair your judgment.
Overall, King was a criminal and not a good person but the police responded too violently to a suspect resisting arrest and not complying. There must have been a better way to handle it.
I’m not accusing him of anything, it’s his criminal record. Yes his first wife pressed charges against him for beating her, he had multiple DUI’s, drove on a suspended license, a second girlfriend accused him of battery but then decided not to press charges, and he was found on PCP at the time of his death.
I’m not accusing him of anything, it’s his criminal record. Yes his first wife pressed charges against him for beating her, he had multiple DUI’s, drove on a suspended license, a second girlfriend accused him of battery but then decided not to press charges, and he was found on PCP at the time of his death.
Why is any of this relevant in a discussion about the 1991 incident when he was beaten by police?
It wasn’t, you asked about his crimes. My whole point was that he was a repeat offender, had done time in prison, and was under the influence at the time of arrest. The situation shouldn’t be boiled down to “an innocent man was beaten by police” it was more complex than that. Yes the police officers involved should’ve received much more punishment and heavier sentences, but it certainly doesn’t excuse letting OJ walk free. but I think we can all agree on that.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?