Serial Killer Claims Responsibility for OJ Simpson Murders: Do You Believe It?

Whatever one's argument the bungling prosecution & 4-months of fame seemingly more vital to Judge Ito than his responsibility to make sure blind & just guidelines are paramount in his court where the guilt or innocence of the accused is to be determined.

Thus, the responsibility ultimately falls to the Judge in his/her court to determine admissible evidence, witnesses(?), etc. & whether or not the system was above reproach from arresting officers, detectives, evidence handling and ultimately prosecution team.

The question never given a satisfactory answer was how one man albeit w/a knife used it to murder two people w/o anyone hearing a sound especially in the quiet peaceful neighborhood the crime took place. Evidence showed Goldman, a young & athletic man put up quite a fight yet not a sound.


I digress... The American Justice System, the reason for trials which determine the guilt or innocence of the accused is to give Society faith in the system. If and when the individuals who make up that system bungle, run their mouths and act as stupidly as the prosecution in the Simpson-Goldman, Brown case the prosecution deservedly loses the case.

It may not so much be American laws per se that give society civility but rather an assurance, increasingly quaint that any such law applies to all equally and the system is staffed at every level, every position by persons who are above reproach. Less would, does suggest we're already lost

It must make those blameless such as yourself feel quite well when looking in the mirror and convincing yourself that you're no scumbag like Simpson. For perspective think how Christ gave his life not just for a friend or a good man but for those as well who would despise him & hate him for whom he is and what desires in each of us. That is all we as individuals should be comparing ourselves to.

I am no particular fan Simpson or otherwise, however, as the crimes against the deceased go unsolved I find interesting that evidence emerged and will or has likely been smothered regarding the possibility of a different and unassociated killer.

Yes I agree with your premise on Judicial system in this country. You may have read other posts I have made on this thread, if not I invite you to. One point I made was the fact that so many lessons were learned about high profile cases and televised proceedings which reverberated throughout the country. Therefore the acquittal was worth every bit the mistakes these lessons have given us. Judge Ito and all.

That said, the abilities to over take someone of good size is simple. Ron was encountered separately, with the element of surprise. You put in a deadly weapon and the shock that sets in, leaves covering their mouths the only forethought. Oh and a psychopath personality. Clearly this was a crime of passion and a whole lot of it. OJ had a history. Another I said was the slow speed chase. You can dress a pig and lipstick, but OJ should never have walked with that evidence. Regardless of whether it was allowed or not. OJ created that piece of evidence albeit the court of public opinion mostly for that, it has to stick in the minds of jurors.

This trial shows all does not apply equally. Less may mean we are already lost, your right. I think there are a great many people we should be comparing ourselves to, with many in our era as well. I hope your not offended, but there are those who believe the sacrifice of Jesus is something a man may or may not have been a great many years ago. Many being put to death have had great tales of power or coming from power to enact a lesson on humanity in the future. You must accept other translations of history by sensible people if you accept yours, that is only fair.

Honestly I watched every day of the trial and have watched many others on Court TV.
The level of tangible evidence in this case was much more and held to a higher standard than most people would have been offered, just because of who he was. A defense puts up a case and if the person has means that case can take on life. This is why any lawyer will say there is no such thing as a slam dunk case.
I'm confident that OJ did it, as I am the day I was born. Solely.

Well if your theory is correct based upon a "show" perfectly explaining your point. Then the jurors would have had to come up with that in the 90 minutes they deliberated. Its makes no sense for the jury to be concerned with the ramifications for their decisions, but they made that decision based upon the beliefs they had sitting through the complete trial. This too was a mistake on their part. Jury instructions are explicitly given to them not to based any decisions on what was said during the trial but to first go over all evidence that has been allowed and apply it to the law in the state of California and ask for read back on any testimony that may have been given if necessary.

There were over 500 pieces of tangible evidence that could not have been reviewed in that short amount of time. What that jury did is whats called nullification. They disregarded the instructions and the law and made a decision based upon their personal beliefs to his innocence or guilt, because they were sequestered, tired and wanted to go home. The judge in this case seeing this nullification, made a cautious decision not to announce the verdict until the next morning to allow emotions to calm down and allow police to prepare for any protests. It was also said I believe that you could see it in OJ's face when the verdict was read, he already knew the verdict. It was leaked to him by the sheriffs dept back in his cell that night. Yes he had fans there as well.

The jury in Brentwood did the same nullification in acquitting the three police officers for the beating of Rodney King, but in that decision it opened wounds deep in the minority community seeing the police get away with the crimes they committed on video tape, knowing not one of them would ever get that break if it were a minority on video tape. Not even OJ Simpson. And if it were three minority cops beating on a white guy they would have probably been found guilty. A riot was inevitable.

When you brutally murder your wife and her friend in a crime of passion. There is no such thing as a race card. Only in the sensationalism by the media covering the case.
These lessons were learned by the courts and reverberated throughout the country for televised proceedings. Which made those lessons every bit worth the acquittal.

I'm sorry but you have been misinformed. But you were right my comprehension to your statement was probably wrong and you didnt make a racial slur. Sorry.