New OJ Simpson Tapes

With all this, the overwhelming revelation that we have yet to understand the whole story of what actually went down in this murder, and it is going to come up again, in a big way.

Like in so many other headliner events of the past 50 or so years,
There is History, and then there is what actually happened.

a reply to: charlyv

I think you are right. Next month's TV series is bound to rekindle interest. From what I've seen the show will be ludicriously biased in favor of what da people want to hear--he is guilty as The Debil himself--but necessarily all the problems with that theory will also get a fresh hearing.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Also, a preservative was found in the drops pf OJ blood at the crime scene. This substance is deposited onto the vials used to draw blood, and assumed to have come from a sample that the lead detectives had access to, subsequently planted.

Nowadays, we know a bit more about how dirty cops are.

Plus, the testimony of Furman where he said he saw "them" in reference to a single bloody glove, each at a separate place, one at the crime scene and one on OJ's lawn or whatever. Furman testi-lied describing "them" when he meant to refer to a single glove. See, he's the one who tossed the 2nd glove onto OJ's property, or the crime scene....or vice-versa...I'm not sure.

Pretty easy to picture a guy like Furman planting evidence. That's law enforcement's idea of "justice".

Actually I remember this part preservatives were not found in the blood samples. The OJ defense team mislead the jury on this claiming the FBI forged the data then destroyed the details for testing it. At the time there was no test for this but the FBI developed one and the lab at quantico didn't keep the notes on testing development.However now ion chromatography is a proven method to detect to detect EDTA and is not unusual and the results can be trusted. At the time the defense argued this was not the case and being the first time it was used helped OJ in his case.


If the tester did not take any notes, how can you possibly make that claim? It was (and probably still is) a very common if dishonest technique for crime labs to deny access to or simply not take notes when presenting testimony, so the defense can't challenge it. This was RIFE at the FBI at the time, and among labs across the country (which were primarily trained by--you guessed it--the FBI).

Forensic science and science, unfortunately, have very little to do with each other. One tries for objective truth. The other tries to put people behind bars as expeditiously as possible.
The socks and the gate did not contain EDTA.

Anybody watch the premier of The People v. OJ Simpson?

Is this just more race tension fuel being added to the fire or is it a legit series?

a reply to: LSU0408

wow, a year later, i think the tv show oj vs the peeps was very good. If we believed that 10 part series, i would consider oj simpson almost 75% insane. Put me in coach! .. What a joke.. I still would consider justin a suspect..

Bud316

a reply to: bronco60
I had a thread from way back when about his kid and the indication he commited the crime and OJ came in to help him out - you know blah blah blah - but it made sense at the time and I'm still in doubt about OJ - even though I can't stand him.

Let me see if I can find that thread and link it here.

peace

Edit to add: I just noticed this is a really old post, lol.