OJ Simpson has died at 76 after short cancer battle

I have to admit that during the trial I was rooting for OJ. Having recently gone through a rather nasty divorce I felt a certain amount of empathy for a dude that had murdered his ex-wife.
 

Nicole had been complaining to Police that her car tires were being slashed.

O.J. probably went to her house that night with a knife to slash her tires again...stumbled upon her and Goldman...then lost it and carved them up. In a panic, he dropped the glove right behind Kato's guest house to try and frame him.

The blood trail went from the crime scene...into his car...up the main staircase in his house...into his bedroom. And there are still people out there that consider him to be framed or not guilty. Go figure.
 
If O.J. did not in fact do it, I've always thought he knew who did.
In fact, I've often thought that MAYBE O.J. was up to possibly taking a fall for his son, Jason.

Jason Simpson was born in 1970, O.J.'s first son and second child from his first marriage to Marguerite L. Whitley.

Jason was just 7 years old when his father started dating Nicole Brown while still married to Jason’s mother. His parents divorced in 1979 and O.J. went on to marry and father two more children with Nicole.

It has been said, Jason began abusing alcohol, ecstasy, and cocaine as early as age 14 and medical records that show 3 recorded suicide attempts.

By the time the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman took place, Jason Simpson was grappling with mental health issues and a criminal record.

Police reports indicate Jason was arrested at least 4 times prior to the murders. These arrests include a DUI, driving with a suspended license, and most notably assault with a deadly weapon.

Jason had violently attacked one girlfriend with a knife, almost killing her, and had assaulted another in the years leading up to his stepmother’s death by stabbing. At the time of the murder, he was on probation for attacking his boss with a kitchen knife.

While it was alleged that O.J. was also a perpetrator of domestic violence, he wasn’t known to use weapons in his attacks.

Jason had been diagnosed with intermittent rage disorder which is commonly referred to as Jekyll and Hyde syndrome. This would make him prone to angry and violent outbursts.

Jason Simpson was known to blackout and had been committed to a hospital on several occasions after hearing voices in his head. While he was prescribed Depakote to cope with anger and seizures, and it's been said that he had stopped taking his medication in the months leading up to the murders.

It's been speculated Simpson’s motive for the killings was a fit of unexplained rage. Business Insider also states that on the night of the murders Brown was supposed to dine at the restaurant where Jason worked but changed her mind last minute, possibly without notifying her step-son.

There's also facts concerning found physical evidence that point to Jason ... A black knit “navy watch cap” found at the scene did not match any fibers found on O.J. The hat was also coated in dog hairs. O.J. did not own a dog but Jason did.

Photographs found in Jason’s storage locker show that Jason wore watch caps frequently. One image, dated 3/24/93, shows Jason sitting with his dog while wearing an identical cap to that found at the murder site.

jason-simpson-cap.jpg


The LAPD found 15 unknown fingerprints at Nicole’s Brentwood home where the murder took place, none of which matched O.J.’s prints. The police also failed to compare them to Jason’s prints.

There was also blood and skin found under Nicole’s fingernails that did not match O.J.’s DNA.

Ron Goldman, a 3rd-degree black belt, was found with bruised hands suggesting he had fought back against his attacker. O.J. stripped for LAPD a day after the murders and showed no signs of bruising. Jason’s DNA was never requested by the police nor was he interviewed by LAPD.

Jason had previously attended the Army and Navy Academy and a former classmate said that he had been trained in hand-to-hand combat as well as field knife training. O.J., on the other hand, was known to hate the sight of blood.

The LAPD determined that the murders took place between 9:45 pm and 10:05 pm. After 9:50 pm, Jason was alone and has no alibi that can be supported by someone else.

At the restaurant where he worked, Jason’s time card for the night of June 12 was handwritten even though the electronic time clock was working, meaning his alibi could be false.

Jason was known to have a love/hate relationship with the mother of his youngest siblings and was possibly infuriated that she hadn’t come to see him at work.

In the days after the murders, and four days before his own arrest, O.J. hired top criminal attorney Carl Jones to represent his oldest son. However, Jason had never even been interviewed by police nor was he being investigated for the murders.

If a client is wrongfully accused of murder the most logical argument for a defense lawyer is to suggest who, other than their client, could be responsible. Yet O.J.’s “dream team” defense made no attempt to do so. Is it possible that this is because O.J. was protecting his son from being incriminated?

Just some thoughts. Oh and Jason is 54 now and said to be working as a chef in Atlanta (as of 2018)
 
Famous lawyer Bugliosi who got Charles Manson convicted was quoted as saying about the O.J. trial "The ex-husband's blood is at the murder scene...it's over."

Bob Costas tonight on CNN thankfully admitted he felt O.J. was guilty of the two murders.
 
Jay Leno was hilarious after the verdict.

He had this prop that had binoculars attached to a golf club shaft...and said O.J. was continuing to look for the 'real' killers while on the golf course.
 
@Naturally, I had heard the theory that OJ's son did it. @CallMeKate My first reaction was "Wow" too when a friend texted me the link to the news. Isn't it rather rare these days for men to die from prostate cancer? It's supposed to be easily treatable. My husband had it and I know other men who had it. My husband and my sister's SO never had to take chemo. Maybe OJ ignored the symptoms for too long. Anyway, he sure made a mess of the time he was given on this earth. Such a shame, he was such a good looking man with a great career. After he was exonerated for the murders, he wound up in jail anyway for committing robbery.
 
@WhatInThe Having an extraordinary career and making a lot of MONEY (the ONLY thing that is valued in today's America) is not enough of an excuse to brutally beat and terrorize the mother of your children.

Once again, here we are in 'Murica saying anything bad he did is outweighed by his riches.

What the holy blank has happened to the thinking of our nation?
 
@Della Some people, especially those with personality disorders or who are plain old sociopaths, are unteachable. This is how I feel about my ex-husband. I highly doubt he is capable of learning anything relating to humility, shame, or empathy. I think he's just that screwed up inside and consistently refuses to seek professional help that is not wrapped up in the White Man's Bible Verses.
 
@MarkinPhx Re: your comment is just one more reason to really despise the NFL.

Speaking of CTE and the NFL, I wonder if the family will have an autopsy done on O.J.'s brain to see if he had CTE? Or will they refrain from doing that because if he did have it, that means the NFL is once again guilty of killing people by how it runs this sport?

Kathy Lee Gifford's late husband Frank had it. She had an autopsy done.
 
@oldman If you met my ex-husband I'll bet you'd like him too. But that doesn't excuse that my ex-husband is a criminal. Problem is, he's so frickin' charming and manipulative that everyone I have ever seen interact with him makes excuses for him. He doesn't even have to ask for their grace. They just give it to him because he is that charming.

Some men say that all women are manipulative charmers. They have that stereotype stuck in their brains. I wish they could meet my ex and see him in action. Then they would see that such sociopathic charm has nothing to do with gender.

You should read "The Sociopath Next Door". If you liked O.J. when you met him, he basically played you. You were looking at his surface persona only, which is precisely all he wanted you to see.
 
Naturally said:
If O.J. did not in fact do it, I've always thought he knew who did.
In fact, I've often thought that MAYBE O.J. was up to possibly taking a fall for his son, Jason.

Jason Simpson was born in 1970, O.J.'s first son and second child from his first marriage to Marguerite L. Whitley.

Jason was just 7 years old when his father started dating Nicole Brown while still married to Jason’s mother. His parents divorced in 1979 and O.J. went on to marry and father two more children with Nicole.

It has been said, Jason began abusing alcohol, ecstasy, and cocaine as early as age 14 and medical records that show 3 recorded suicide attempts.

By the time the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman took place, Jason Simpson was grappling with mental health issues and a criminal record.

Police reports indicate Jason was arrested at least 4 times prior to the murders. These arrests include a DUI, driving with a suspended license, and most notably assault with a deadly weapon.

Jason had violently attacked one girlfriend with a knife, almost killing her, and had assaulted another in the years leading up to his stepmother’s death by stabbing. At the time of the murder, he was on probation for attacking his boss with a kitchen knife.

While it was alleged that O.J. was also a perpetrator of domestic violence, he wasn’t known to use weapons in his attacks.

Jason had been diagnosed with intermittent rage disorder which is commonly referred to as Jekyll and Hyde syndrome. This would make him prone to angry and violent outbursts.

Jason Simpson was known to blackout and had been committed to a hospital on several occasions after hearing voices in his head. While he was prescribed Depakote to cope with anger and seizures, and it's been said that he had stopped taking his medication in the months leading up to the murders.

It's been speculated Simpson’s motive for the killings was a fit of unexplained rage. Business Insider also states that on the night of the murders Brown was supposed to dine at the restaurant where Jason worked but changed her mind last minute, possibly without notifying her step-son.

There's also facts concerning found physical evidence that point to Jason ... A black knit “navy watch cap” found at the scene did not match any fibers found on O.J. The hat was also coated in dog hairs. O.J. did not own a dog but Jason did.

Photographs found in Jason’s storage locker show that Jason wore watch caps frequently. One image, dated 3/24/93, shows Jason sitting with his dog while wearing an identical cap to that found at the murder site.

jason-simpson-cap.jpg


The LAPD found 15 unknown fingerprints at Nicole’s Brentwood home where the murder took place, none of which matched O.J.’s prints. The police also failed to compare them to Jason’s prints.

There was also blood and skin found under Nicole’s fingernails that did not match O.J.’s DNA.

Ron Goldman, a 3rd-degree black belt, was found with bruised hands suggesting he had fought back against his attacker. O.J. stripped for LAPD a day after the murders and showed no signs of bruising. Jason’s DNA was never requested by the police nor was he interviewed by LAPD.

Jason had previously attended the Army and Navy Academy and a former classmate said that he had been trained in hand-to-hand combat as well as field knife training. O.J., on the other hand, was known to hate the sight of blood.

The LAPD determined that the murders took place between 9:45 pm and 10:05 pm. After 9:50 pm, Jason was alone and has no alibi that can be supported by someone else.

At the restaurant where he worked, Jason’s time card for the night of June 12 was handwritten even though the electronic time clock was working, meaning his alibi could be false.

Jason was known to have a love/hate relationship with the mother of his youngest siblings and was possibly infuriated that she hadn’t come to see him at work.

In the days after the murders, and four days before his own arrest, O.J. hired top criminal attorney Carl Jones to represent his oldest son. However, Jason had never even been interviewed by police nor was he being investigated for the murders.

If a client is wrongfully accused of murder the most logical argument for a defense lawyer is to suggest who, other than their client, could be responsible. Yet O.J.’s “dream team” defense made no attempt to do so. Is it possible that this is because O.J. was protecting his son from being incriminated?

Just some thoughts. Oh and Jason is 54 now and said to be working as a chef in Atlanta (as of 2018)
Click to expand...
While I might disagree with you [and I do] You do make some very good points. Was Jason's body ever checked for bruises and or other marks from possible hand to hand combat ? If the son did it ? how was OJ's blood found at the scene ? Or could it have been Jason's [with markers from OJ] {being his father}

I'll stick with my opinion that he [OJ] was guilty but .... that is after all just my opinion. And If everything heard about the son was/is true ... it cannot be / should not have been ignored. Seems like several [rookie] mistakes made by LA/PD where there should not have been . Particularly in such a high profile murder case.

Does it really matter ? the two people are still dead, and after all this time, I doubt any case could be made against the son. I just sincerely hope that if it was him [the son] he doesn't go nuts on someone else .
 
I usually talk to my neighbor on the phone every day to check on her. She's 86 and lives alone and was recently diagnosed with macular degeneration in her left eye and has a hard time with balance.

Yesterday, we were talking and I asked her if she heard that OJ had died and she said yes. She asked me if I thought he did it and I said I did. To that, she got very vocal and said she didn't believe it and he had been unjustly accused. She said she believes Kato did it, not OJ. Everyone has a right to their opinion. Only God knows for certain who did it.

All I do know is that OJ left this world still owing Ron Goldman's family over $100M and he seemed to never shoulder life's responsibilities.
 
Naturally said:
If O.J. did not in fact do it, I've always thought he knew who did.
In fact, I've often thought that MAYBE O.J. was up to possibly taking a fall for his son, Jason.

Jason Simpson was born in 1970, O.J.'s first son and second child from his first marriage to Marguerite L. Whitley.

Jason was just 7 years old when his father started dating Nicole Brown while still married to Jason’s mother. His parents divorced in 1979 and O.J. went on to marry and father two more children with Nicole.

It has been said, Jason began abusing alcohol, ecstasy, and cocaine as early as age 14 and medical records that show 3 recorded suicide attempts.

By the time the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman took place, Jason Simpson was grappling with mental health issues and a criminal record.

Police reports indicate Jason was arrested at least 4 times prior to the murders. These arrests include a DUI, driving with a suspended license, and most notably assault with a deadly weapon.

Jason had violently attacked one girlfriend with a knife, almost killing her, and had assaulted another in the years leading up to his stepmother’s death by stabbing. At the time of the murder, he was on probation for attacking his boss with a kitchen knife.

While it was alleged that O.J. was also a perpetrator of domestic violence, he wasn’t known to use weapons in his attacks.

Jason had been diagnosed with intermittent rage disorder which is commonly referred to as Jekyll and Hyde syndrome. This would make him prone to angry and violent outbursts.

Jason Simpson was known to blackout and had been committed to a hospital on several occasions after hearing voices in his head. While he was prescribed Depakote to cope with anger and seizures, and it's been said that he had stopped taking his medication in the months leading up to the murders.

It's been speculated Simpson’s motive for the killings was a fit of unexplained rage. Business Insider also states that on the night of the murders Brown was supposed to dine at the restaurant where Jason worked but changed her mind last minute, possibly without notifying her step-son.

There's also facts concerning found physical evidence that point to Jason ... A black knit “navy watch cap” found at the scene did not match any fibers found on O.J. The hat was also coated in dog hairs. O.J. did not own a dog but Jason did.

Photographs found in Jason’s storage locker show that Jason wore watch caps frequently. One image, dated 3/24/93, shows Jason sitting with his dog while wearing an identical cap to that found at the murder site.

jason-simpson-cap.jpg


The LAPD found 15 unknown fingerprints at Nicole’s Brentwood home where the murder took place, none of which matched O.J.’s prints. The police also failed to compare them to Jason’s prints.

There was also blood and skin found under Nicole’s fingernails that did not match O.J.’s DNA.

Ron Goldman, a 3rd-degree black belt, was found with bruised hands suggesting he had fought back against his attacker. O.J. stripped for LAPD a day after the murders and showed no signs of bruising. Jason’s DNA was never requested by the police nor was he interviewed by LAPD.

Jason had previously attended the Army and Navy Academy and a former classmate said that he had been trained in hand-to-hand combat as well as field knife training. O.J., on the other hand, was known to hate the sight of blood.

The LAPD determined that the murders took place between 9:45 pm and 10:05 pm. After 9:50 pm, Jason was alone and has no alibi that can be supported by someone else.

At the restaurant where he worked, Jason’s time card for the night of June 12 was handwritten even though the electronic time clock was working, meaning his alibi could be false.

Jason was known to have a love/hate relationship with the mother of his youngest siblings and was possibly infuriated that she hadn’t come to see him at work.

In the days after the murders, and four days before his own arrest, O.J. hired top criminal attorney Carl Jones to represent his oldest son. However, Jason had never even been interviewed by police nor was he being investigated for the murders.

If a client is wrongfully accused of murder the most logical argument for a defense lawyer is to suggest who, other than their client, could be responsible. Yet O.J.’s “dream team” defense made no attempt to do so. Is it possible that this is because O.J. was protecting his son from being incriminated?

Just some thoughts. Oh and Jason is 54 now and said to be working as a chef in Atlanta (as of 2018)
Click to expand...
I never knew any of this. Thank you for the info.

Was OJ guilty? 12 jurors said no. I disagreed, but saw evidence and arguments during times they were excused from the room.

Since I was born in the 50s, egregious miscarriages of justice against Black Americans have been distressingly common. Truth is, if a guilty Black person is occasionally found innocent, it hardly balances the scales.

The not-guilty finding of the police officers who perpetrated that horrific Rodney King beating was quite shocking to most of us, especially since it was video taped and witnessed by citizens. Their trial was a mere three years before OJ's trial and was a timely reminder of America's badly tilted justice system.
 
Was talking with friends about this the other day. One guy (who is "always right) said OJ did not do the killings. I asked how he knew. I forget the exact response but was along line of he "had no reason to".
 
On a firearms forum I've been a member of since 2004, there are many members in law enforcement and law associated careers. Here is what those close to the murder trial had to say about it when Simpson's death was posted. All just opinions from their point of view of course. And nothing of what they said is about evidence in the case. The whole thing with the trial was just a complete circus IMHO ...

At the time of his trial, I had a buddy who worked in the LA DA's office and my buddy wasn't very kind to Marcia Clark or the DA Gil Garcetti.

It was well-known that Marci Clark wasn't the best DA for a murder case but she sold herself to Garcetti with the angle that she bonded with women jurors on other murder cases. She's correct that she had a 100% conviction rate with majority female juries but on this one, she begged for the case over other more skilled prosecutors. Her other cases were more slam dunk and she deluded herself into thinking it was a slam dunk here.

Bill Hodges, who started the prosecution, was a much more experienced and better skilled prosecutor, but he stepped aside during the case for health reasons and that gave us Chris Darden.

Clark simply wasn't the best and given the Dream Team of attorneys OJ had, she was out-gunned.

The other knock, again on the both of them, is the transferring the case from Santa Monica to DTLA. Since the murder took place in Brentwood, Santa Monica was the proper courthouse but Marcia argued that she had such a bond with women voters that no matter where it was heard, she could get the win. Garcetti agreed and they both liked the idea that the DA's office was in DTLA and they could bring the full effect of their office and their resources better there instead of in Santa Monica.

Neither were the best in the decision making, but if the DA had the perfect prosecutorial team, that jury still wasn't going to convict him. The evidence didn't matter to them.

... and ...

I was working very closely with members of the LADA's Santa Monica Office at the time. They'd handled plenty of "high profile" murder trials and could have easily handled this case, BUT the elected District Attorney (Garcetti) decided to make this a political matter by taking the case away from them and relocating it to the Criminal Courts Building downtown. There, it would be heard by a different jury pool (comprised of more African American juror) and a win would (in Garcetti's opinion) strengthen his base in the next election. Marcia Clark and Chris Darden were also chosen more for optics than actual abilities.

When Garcetti replaced the rule of law with a political narrative, he opened the door for what followed: A politicized jury that used "NULLIFICATION" to arrive at a verdict no less invalid than racist juries rendered in the South when white offenders who'd victimized black victims as members of the KKK escaped justice got a pass.

Strangely, members of the LAPD Robbery Homicide unit, had actually treated Simpson with far more difference than they'd have treated the average white suspect in such a horrific murder. I had an opportunity to review their entire interview of Simpson and to any experienced investigator, it was painfully obvious how starstruck they'd been. A simple question or two posed in the correct manner probably would have resulted in an admission of guilt, but they'd dropped the ball so easily pitched to them not because of "racism", but due to awe of Simpson's history and celebrity.

Years later, when I was retired and providing investigative and expert services to indigent defendants, I worked several cases with one of the members of the "Dream Team." He told me that he and other team members were actually shocked that the jurors rejected the prosecutors' case and came back with a Not Guilty verdict. They'd underestimated the amount of sway the "race card" had, and had expected at most a hung jury.

FWIW: He and other members of the defense team actually felt a degree of guilt for how things turned out. On one hand, they had a legal, moral, and ethical responsibility to provide their client with the best legal defense they could, but seeing someone they believed had actually killed these two victims get off? As human beings they were disgusted and disappointed.

... and ...

The prosecution dropped the ball, Clark was in over her head, Darden was for optics. Sorry, Clark looked like a prosecutor at the beginning of the case, by the end her hair, shoes and dresses were the focus of the media and she was all wrapped up in it. Darden was a junior ADA with little experience, he was there for optics and PCness. Judge Ito was all wrapped up in his celebrity, Jay Leno had the Lance Ito Dancers, too much fame. The defense was Sheck and Derschowicz and Shapiro, Cochran was a Personal Injury lawyer who was on LA TV all the time, ambulance chaser who never tried a Criminal case let alone a murder. However the defense took apart the case, reasonable doubt in the jury's mind was shown.
 
Everybody went through OJs trail, which turned out to be a trial of the L.A. Police Department. Once the P.D. admitted to rampant racism and unrestrained bias, that brought into question the validity of the evidence. Some of the jurors stated he was not legally convicted, but that didn't mean he was innocent.
The man evoked passions.
 
I don't think he was found "innocent" or even "not guilty" ... rather, wasn't he "acquitted" ??

Acquittal​

In common law jurisdictions, an acquittal means that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charge presented. It certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as criminal law is concerned. The finality of an acquittal is dependent on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the United States, an acquittal prohibits the retrial of the accused for the same offense, even if new evidence surfaces that further implicates the accused. The effect of an acquittal on criminal proceedings is the same whether it results from a jury verdict or results from the operation of some other rule that discharges the accused.
 
Last edited:
Naturally said:
I don't think he was found "innocent" or even "not guilty" ... rather, wasn't he "acquitted" ??

Acquittal​

In common law jurisdictions, an acquittal means that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charge presented. It certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as criminal law is concerned. The finality of an acquittal is dependent on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the United States, an acquittal prohibits the retrial of the accused for the same offense, even if new evidence surfaces that further implicates the accused. The effect of an acquittal on criminal proceedings is the same whether it results from a jury verdict or results from the operation of some other rule that discharges the accused.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure he was found not guilty.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top