@@bobnichols3233 why ? Because he was aggressively outting stone cold bigots ? This is one time racism did not work in the police favor. The begged to have the case moved, Ito was not about to help the state collude. He was guilty. Fuhrman blew it.
You don't have a brain. EDTA is found IN EVERYTHING. Your body has EDTA right now. Don't try to make excuses. OJ killed them that night. The way Nicole was killed......that was personal. We all know who was that angry at her. OJ said "she had it coming"
@@robskeys88 No, it’s not. Everything you eat, what you wash your clothes in, what you paint your walls with, has EDTA in it. We all have a certain amount of EDTA in our blood, depending on our diets. Research it. Look it up.
The question became is Furman capable of planting evidence. He said it himself that he had in the past. Now any person would have reasonable doubt after this testimony.
The moment there was tape of Furman admitting he would pull over black men with white women and 'find something' to pin on them doubt was established. Not to mention gody shots only to reduce bleeding and bruising being hard to find on N words. Oh and the EDTA in the blood! This thing was a wrap long before they got the 12-0 acquittal which was the absolute correct decision EVEN IF he did it. He is innocent until proven guilty and they did not prove anything except for the desperate lengths they would go to try and convict him.
@@ShinkuGouki oh he’s right Furhman definitely planted that glove and smeared the bloody glove in the bronco. I just didn’t know what head talking about with the tranquilizers and drugs. Wouldn’t surprise me if he was on drugs though Fuhrman is a total low life.
Why is Charlie Rose so aggressive in his questioning of these distinguished lawyers ? OJ may have done it IDK but what I do know is Furhman and the LAPD particularly Furhman planted evidence and the defense proved that. So, the not guilty verdict was correct period!
Kardashian who was friend of oj amd lawyer, fwot oj did it. He was never comfie with overwhelming evidence. The shies oj said he never wore..bruno...pict later showed he did wear them at a bills game.
This whole case was nothing but a circus from the start. I have much respect for Barry Scheck who to me was very clear and honest about his professional testimony.
David White The other lawyer...Neufeld alone with Scheck...are something else...these men along with rest of dream team...did a hell of....job. They represent the best in what attorneys should be and Jewish culture to boot! Thank God for them and thank God OJ had resources and Mr. Simpson showed that he is a brilliant man...such credibility with the way in which he took care of hai family and secured his future after a successful football career......excellent demonstration of excellent upbringing...excellent demonstration of a black man in America...an American not African American ..I might add..and once again look at Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer...two misogynistic rapist..woman haters. who could not possibly believe in his evidence when in fact all those type of men so is project..their male glibness all over the place...20 plus years ..it all came out of the closet! What more do we need to discuss?
@@strnglhld It was tampered with. Science Evidence started contradicts the case EDTA in the blood at 2000 ppm which is not in food and is dangerous, blood splatter shows there was no ankle in the socks as three wet transfers occurred . There was blood evidence that was even lost like Andrea Mazzola’s bindles that dates and initials never made it to lab. There was evidence that pointed away from him. Blood under the nails didn’t match , fingerprints at the scene didn’t match , and unidentified Caucasian male hair was found on the Rockingham Glove yet none of Simpson’s limb hairs were found in any of them .
@I whoever killed them must have been covered in blood. So OJ kills his wife and friend, cleans up, gets ready for his flight, gets there on time...do you know black people? 😂 wtf
@@pommiebears You are EXTREMELY racist. I say this because blood was planted, the lead detecrive was a racist, OJ did not have life and death wounds on his body that was indicative of a 15 minute struggle, his gloves didn't fit, and there's 4 more decisive factors i could list. Now despite this, and in the face of this your mind can't accept that a Black man didn't kill those 2...
This was the most "this are not the droids you are looking for" interview ever, this guys could blame global warming on surfers and get away with it in court
The Jury Instruction says: The defendant is accused in courts one and two of having committed the crime of murder, a violation of Penal Code Section 187. Every person who unlawfully kills a human being with malice aforethought is guilty of the crime of murder, in violation of Section 187 of the California Penal Code. In order to prove such crime, each of the following elements must be proved one, a human being was killed, two, the killing was unlawful, and, three, the killing was done with malice aforethought. The prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt each element of the crimes charged in the information and that the defendant was the perpetrator of any such charged crimes. The defendant is not required to prove himself innocent or to prove that any other person committed the crimes charged. Evidence has been received for the purpose of showing that the defendant was not present at the time and place of the commission of the alleged crime for which he is here on trial. If, after a consideration of all the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present at the time the crime was committed, you must find him not guilty. In the crimes charged in counts one and two, there must exist a union or joint operation of act or conduct and a certain specific intent or mental state in the mind of the perpetrator. Unless such specific intent and/or mental state exists, the crime to which they relate is not committed. An inference is a deduction of fact that may logically and reasonably be drawn from another fact or group of facts established by the evidence. Further, each fact which is essential to complete a set of circumstances necessary to establish the defendant's guilt, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, before an inference essential to establish guilt may be found to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, each fact or circumstance upon which such inference necessarily rests, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Elements of the crime of murder that must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt: [Motive is not an element in this case]. 1. A human being was killed - Self Evident 2. The killing was unlawful - Self Evident 3. MENS REA: The killing was done with malice aforethought - intentional and premeditated. 4. ACTUS REUS: The defendant killed the two victims and is the perpetrator of the crime. Further, the defendant was present at the time and place of the commission of the alleged crime for which he is here on trial For Actus Reus the Prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the following: 1. The inference (STORY LINE or THEORY ABOUT HOW THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE CRIME) essential to establish guilt of the Defendant must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. However, before an inference (STORY LINE or THEORY ABOUT HOW THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE CRIME) essential to establish guilt of the Defendant may be found to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, EACH FACT or circumstance upon which such inference necessarily rests, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. 3. Further, the Defendant was present at the time and place of the commission of the alleged crime for which he is on trial. The Defendant must not have a valid ALIBI. FACTS or circumstances upon which the inference (STORY LINE or THEORY ABOUT HOW THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE CRIME) necessarily rests which must be proved individually beyond reasonable doubt are the following: 1. The middle finger of OJ’s left hand was cut at the crime scene as the result of a violent struggle with either Nicole or Ron. Blood came out of this injured finger. Many witnesses who were never impeached testified not having seen any cut or bandage and blood dripping from his left hand middle finger. 2. OJ Blood was found at the crime scene: Bundy Walkway and the rear gate. The DNA of the blood samples at the Walkway were consumed by the microorganism which grew exponentially in numbers because the wet swabs were exposed to heat since the truck has no air-conditioning. This renders the blood samples at the Bundy walkway compromised evidence and susceptible to cross-contamination with OJ's blood which actually spilled when Yamauchi opened the collecting tube on the same table where the evidentiary blood samples was located. The blood found at the rear gate has EDTA and is not deteriorated despite having been allegedly unnoticed for 3 week. Also the blood was not in the video recorded the day after the crime was committed suggesting strongly that the blood was planted using the missing 1.5 ml of the reference blood sample of OJ 3. Blood of OJ, Nicole and Ron in the Bronco when OJ’s hands with his two victim’s blood were found on various locations inside his Bronco.The number of blood smears increased in number on the console and the same LAPD personnel who were present at the crime scene also entered the Ford Bronco after the incident transferring the blood from Bundy to the Bronco. 4. Upon reaching his residence OJ passed through the alleyway located at the perimeter and accidentally bumped his head on the air-conditioning unit and consequently he dropped his right hand glove with the blood of the two victims and his own blood. This evidence is very suspicious because: Fresh blood on the glove which should have been dried, The undisturbed leaves surronding the glove, The absence of blood drops on the alleyway, The gloves did not fit OJ, OJ's face was unmarked indicating he did not hit the air conditioning unit producing the 3 thumping sounds heard by Kato Kaelin The bloody right hand glove was planted by M Fuhrman. 5. Blood of OJ on his driveway. OJ claimed the blood drops came out from the hidden cuts on the sides of his fingers left hand) which was probably caused by pinching the golf chips. 6. OJ left the bloody sock in his room with the blood of Nicole which tainted his sock during the time when he was allegedly slashing the throat of Nicole. The blood on the sock had EDTA not normally found in the blood but EDTA is a blood preservative added into the collecting tube. The blood penetrated 3 surfaces which could not have happened when the blood splashed onto the sock while OJ was wearing it. The sock also has no sand particle which must have been aplenty if indeed there was a life and death struggle between Ron and OJ. The sock was also not present prior to each appearance hours later in a video clip suggesting strongly that it was planted evidence. Therefore, if anyone of the facts mentioned above is not proved beyond reasonable doubt or stating it in another way, if the Prosecution failed to defeat or overcome the reasonable doubt in just one fact mentioned above then the inference or STORY LINE or THEORY of the Prosecution must be rejected and the Defendant must be acquitted. The Defense was able to present reasonable doubt on each and every facts upon which the inference (STORY LINE or THEORY) necessarily rests but on the other hand the Prosecution was unable to overcome all of them. Further, the Defense was able to present unimpeachable witnesses which established the TIMELINE showing OJ just did not have enough time to commit the crime. The testimony of Alan, the Limo Driver, was shown to be too inconsistent on the major points. He failed to see the parked vehicle of Kato when it was established that indeed Kato's car was parked along Ashroft Street. It can then be concluded that he failed also to see the parked Bronco of OJ along Rockingham Street. He saw a second vehicle parked behind the Bentley when in fact Arnel's car was parked after OJ left his Rockingham residence. This is a clear case of FATIGUE very common to drivers. This alone is enough to justify OJ's acquittal.
Excellent analysis based on FACTS, you are spot on. With regard to #5, there where 5-6 driveway drops of OJ blood leading from the bronco to his front door. Since there was NO chronological record as to when these drops where accounted for or discovered, a more reasonable assumption would be that these drops where planted by Vannater (or someone) using OJ's reference vial and a syringe. Vannater had OJs blood in his pocket by 3pm at OJs estate that day. These driveway drops where not tested for EDTA, however there was no splatter pattern and they "dropped from a height of 2 feet". When the blood vial was booked into evidence the next day, we find the 1.5ccs missing. Low and behold, six months later we have the nurse who drew the OJ blood conveniently changing his testimony saying he did not draw the standard 8ccs (not under oath..but in a home video!). Oj wasn't at that crime scene and that's all there is to it. Furhman planted that glove, the LAPD went all in. The question is WHY did LAPD frame Simpson? It is my belief that Lang and Vannater knew that Furhman probably planted the glove. They where forced to frame OJ otherwise how the hell would they explain the glove? If it was shown that a black celebrity like OJ Simpson was, in fact, framed by one of their rogue detectives, the city would burn and the LAPD would cease to exist. They LAPD got lucky because if Ojs flight was just 45 minutes earlier there would be no trial of the century.
@@garethwilby4033 The defense do not need to prove anything, they just need to show that there is doubt with the prosecution case. I think this is what people miss, they think one side has to prove him guilty and the other side proves him innocent. No, he is innocent until proven guilty beyond any doubt and there was/is plenty of doubt all over the place. Furhman had a history of booking innocent people and found the glove and was alone when he found it. Did he plant it? Who knows? IS there now a suspicion that he planted it? Sure there is.
8:55 - 9:23 Why was the photo of Fuhrman pointing at the glove at 4 am significant? How does that show that Furhman planted the glove on OJ's property?
@@flunder50cops always point to what specifically in the photograph is important , look it up you will find thousands with the similar pointing hand gesture, this is nothing
@@treykennon1795 pay her no mind. She's just a older racist lady. She can't use her mind because the racism she suffers from gets in the way of her being objective.
These guys know that OJ did it. I have no respect for this kind of people. Now that for 30 years of attack we see how demoralized Los Angeles is and the police are told not to arrest anyone who is a known criminal anymore. Just let them go. Sad sad sad
@garethwilby4033 You can't trust ANY of that blood evidence! It was proven that blood was tampered with, planted and found weeks later by corrupt police officers like Mark Furman smh. Blood was also found with EDTA! like I said the Jury made the right decision they saw right though the prosecution's BS case
You can't trust ANY of that blood evidence! It was proven that corrupt police officers like Mark Furman tampered with and planted evidence. Evidence was found weeks later with EDTA, 1.5cc of Oj's missing blood, etc.. don't be naive
1-The presence of the glove(s) at the scene is, in itself, very damning. Of all the millions of gloves in the world, the killer just happened to own the same type of limited edition gloves that OJ owned. What are the chances of that? The police could have questioned ALL of the people who owned these gloves and I am sure that none of them even knew who Nicole was . I believe that the testimony was that there were 200 of these gloves sold 2. The presence of the African American hairs on the skull cap further reduces the pool of suspects. So of that very small group of people who owned these gloves, all of the white/Asian owners would be eliminated as suspects. The black population in the US is 15%, leaving 30-35 possible suspects. 3.Of those remaining suspects, only those with a reason to kill Nicole AND with a fresh cut on their left hand would remain as suspects. OJ would be the only one in that group.
It's worth watching these guys in court in the OJ Simpson case. Also rI read the 2nd court cases evidence that is interesting for the statements by Nicole's best friend Cora Fischman. Also the Furhman tapes, yikes. OJ came across there well in his deposition. Honest about his relationship with Nicole.
Use the Abduction Method of Reasoning which is the "Inference to the Best Explanation" to explain the following facts. 1. The right hand glove was still wet with blood almost 6 hours 45 minutes after allegedly having been dropped by OJ. If OJ planted the glove then the blood should have been completely dried by that time. 10:45 PM June 12 to 5:30 AM. 2. There was no blood on the ground around it which should have been consistent with the accidental dropping of the right hand glove drenched with blood of both Nicole and Ron. Thus, it must have been carefully placed there. 3. There were no blood drops along the driveway going to the alleyway and in the alleyway itself despite the Prosecution's allegation that OJ was bleeding with a cut on his left hand middle finger. Conveniently Marcia Clark claimed that the bleeding stopped at that time and resumed when OJ was about to go inside the house. 4. There was a hair of the underbelly of the dog Kato which could have been attached to the glove only when the glove is lying down the ground. Thus, it must have come from the ground at Bundy. 5. The same police officers who reported that they saw only one glove at Bundy also reported that the picture of Fuhrman pointing to the left hand glove was taken 7:00 AM when in fact it was taken 4:30 AM nighttime. What is the significance of this lie by the police officers and Fuhrman? If they reported the time at 7:00 AM then they can say it would have been impossible for Fuhrman to have taken the right hand glove at Bundy and planted it at OJ's residence since Fuhrman could not have second guessed what glove would be left at Bundy since the impression would be that he went to OJ's residence first. Thus, MF was lying when he said he did not plant the right hand glove at the alleyway. 6. Fuhrman has a coat and plastic bag (a standard issue to detectives) to store the right hand glove without anyone seeing him carrying the glove from Bundy to OJ's residence. The glove inside the plastic bag would have preserved the wetness of the blood since it is not exposed to the atmosphere causing quick drying. 7. Fuhrman saw the right hand glove at the alleyway and reported he went there the morning after the murder. He went to at the alleyway when he was supposed not to be searching for evidence as he has no search warrant yet at that time. 8. On the other hand there was no evidence or testimony to show that OJ was in the alleyway at the night of the murder. 9. OJ had no bruishes on his head putting doubt on Clark's allegation that he bumped his head against the air-conditioner thrice. The noise could have been the compressor. It would have been very unlikely that OJ persisted in moving forward thrice after the first time he allegedly bumped his head on the aircon unit. 10. Fuhrman was exposed as a liar having said the n-word and being heard on the audio tape uttering statements only a genocidal racist could have said and who planted evidence in the past. There are only two options: Either Mark Fuhrman or OJ planted the bloody right hand glove at the alleyway. The best explanation that can explain all the above evidence or facts of the case is that MF got the bloody right hand glove at Bundy and planted it at OJ's residence. Sherlock Holmes once said, "If you eliminate the impossible whatever remains no matter however improbable must be the truth." It's so elementary my dear Watson!
i think LAPD mishandled the DNA, therefore i would not convict a man to death because in this country you are innocent until proven guilty and it wasn't PROVEN he killed her with the DNA because it's tainted, it's garbage. I would not convict OJ to die, just like i would not convict you if it were you Johnny.
Fuhrman pleaded the 5th for every question they asked him that day, not just that one question. He decided to shut down because he got busted lying about using the n-word. If they would have asked him if he was an LAPD officer, he would have also pleaded the 5th. Look at the video of him doing it; he's looking at his lawyer and his lawyer is just instructing him to plead the 5th to every question. That isn't an indicator that he planted evidence.
*"OJ didn't do it, but it's not our job to find the real killer! Also, we have evidence that OJ is innocent, but due to attorney privilege we cannot tell you about it"* Lol, all these guys did in this hour long interview is convince me even more than ever that OJ is guilty.
The criminalist that collected the blood evidence at the crime scene testified that she put her initials on the bindles that were supposed to be sent to CellMark to identify the killers DNA. Low and behold, none of the bindles that arrived at CellMark had any initials on them. So what happened to the blood evidence that was collected at the crime scene?
@@josephswabe5584I suppose Vannatter, Lang, and Furhman, wore size 12 Bruno Magli shoe, and trampled through the evidence too lol! I suppose they also thought “oh, I’d love to set up a person of color…..I know, let’s set OJ Simpson up, even though it’s going to be heavily scrutinised and he can afford the very best lawyers, yes, we’re going to set up OJ Simpson and see if we get away with it” 😂
Scheck is making the most contentious remarks and interrupting Rose, so it's only natural that he would talk to him the most, plus he seems to be the more talkative of the two.
nomibe2911 Rose is inferior. and that is so obvious..and meanwhile. back then. I love watching his show but I did not watch this episode in real time at the time..
To quote my former boss who worked in forensics for 40 years, "The LAPD framed a guilty man." There isn't a person on this earth with a properly functioning brain that thinks OJ Simpson is innocent and that would include his legal team. Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld have done so much amazing work with wrongful convictions, but it makes me sick that they were largely responsible for getting a vicious murder off.
the glove belonged to Ron Goldman , the ring fingere was torned off and the blood in this glove matched Ron Goldman's blood one in 42 million it could not have been someone elses. this was told at the very beginning before the preliminary trial and they kept this information sealed.
Those gloves were of a limited produced type that were identified by a prosecution witness. There was also a receipt when Nicole purchased them for OJ. The reason Ron’s blood is all over the gloves is because Ron was stabbed 27 times by the person ( OJ ) wearing the gloves when he was killing Ron.
This interview is very different from the recent interview Barry did with Ezra Edelman. In the Ezra interview, Barry wouldn't answer the questions when he was asked if he thinks the LAPD planted evidence or if all the blood evidence had been cross-contaminated. I don't think Charlie knew all the specifics but he should of pushed back when they said the glove, the sock, the Bronco blood, and the Bundy blood drops were all of the evidence. There were fresh blood drops identified as OJ's in his driveway and in his foyer as well. Also, the EDTA thing is being deliberately misrepresented by Scheck/Neufeld and is misunderstood by most people. The test for EDTA on the sock blood and the blood on the back gate came back in the individual parts per million. The reference sample blood had EDTA in the parts per thousand. That's a 3 orders of magnitude difference. Charlie should've brought this up. The defense never tried to argue that any blood other than the blood on the sock and the back gate came from the reference sample because all of those other blood samples had already been collected/identified by the time OJ's blood was drawn. The only reason they were able to allege the blood on the sock and back gate had been planted was because they were not discovered until several weeks later. The defense argued that every single one of the other OJ blood samples (Bundy pathway, in/on Bronco, in his driveway, in his foyer) had all degraded and been cross contaminated in the LAPD lab. I hope everybody would agree that this is highly unlikely that every single one of the real killers blood samples had degraded and been cross contaminated with OJ's reference sample blood, causing a false positive. To believe OJ is innocent, you have to believe the following: 1. Fuhrman found a second glove at Bundy and planted it at Rockingham and all of the police officers who were on the scene before Furhman either didn't see it or lied about there being two. 2. All of the killer's blood drops found on the first day had degraded and due to sloppy work by Colin Yamaguchi, every one had been cross-contaminated with OJ's blood. 3. OJ's reference blood was planted on the back gate of Bundy and the sock and for a reason unbeknownst to science, the concentration of EDTA reduced by a factor of 1,000, causing the EDTA levels to be consistent with the levels of Roger Martz's own blood (he tested his own). 4. OJ, by coincidence, owned the exact same type and size of very rare shoes as the killer and could not account for his. 5. Nicole, by coincidence, had bought the exact same type and size of gloves as used by the killer and they could not be accounted for. 6. OJ, by coincidence, had hair that matched that of the killer. 7. OJ, by coincidence, had fibers from the rare type of upholstery in his Bronco, that matched those found on the glove found behind his house. 8. OJ, by coincidence, suffered deep cuts to his middle finger on his left hand the same night as the murders occurred, where the evidence is consistent with the killer bleeding from his left hand. 9. OJ, by coincidence, was seen to be wearing a dark blue sweatsuit, seen by Kato Kaelin, shortly before the murders occurred and dark blue cotton fibers were found at the murder scene. The sweatsuit could not be accounted for. 10. Somebody/something other than OJ made a noise behind Kato's room at the same time Alan Park was ringing the intercom and right before a person matching the description of OJ was seen entering the house by Alan Park. What is more likely, #1-10 are all true or OJ killed two people?
The strongest argument is always the simplest, and easiest to understand. Your EDTA argument, intentional or not, comes off as quibbling. Most people won't understand it. OTOH they will understand that EDTA isn't found in human blood, and that if it is found at the crime scene, there's a good chance the blood was planted there.
I agree. Science is complicated. It's easier for people to believe a conspiracy theory than it is to follow and correctly interpret the actual evidence. Not to mention when the people peddling the conspiracy theory are extremely persuasive. The more I learn about the case, the more clear to me it is that OJ was guilty; however it also has become more clear to me why he was acquitted and it's precisely for the kind of reason you identified. Thanks for the comment.
Science is complicated, but it can be simple too. For example, has EDTA ever been found naturally in human blood before? And has it ever honestly been present in blood found at the crime scene? If so, then I think that would be a very strong argument for the "OJ did it" crowd.
The answer to your question is yes and no. EDTA is not natural, so it does not occur naturally but it is present in trace amounts in blood because it is found in laundry detergent and other products and enters the body from these unnatural sources. If you recall, during the trial there was a lot of debate as to what the expected concentration of EDTA should be in human blood. They came to no consensus during the trail (the only literature on the subject was from the 1950s) and there remains no consensus to this day, to the best of my knowledge. That being said, detecting EDTA in and of itself is not super significant and only part of the equation. The concentration is the other big thing. As I stated previously, there was a 1000x difference in concentration between the blood tested and the blood of the reference sample. FBI agent Martz testified that he tested his own blood for EDTA and also got a positive result in a very low concentration. Another argument made was that the test was likely giving a false positive for EDTA at these very low concentrations. Below is the link to an article that describes the testimony better than I can: www.nytimes.com/1995/07/26/us/fbi-disputes-simpson-defense-on-tainted-blood.html
Martz did more harm than good because he testified for the defense that EDTA was present shared his testimony at the court recess with the prosecution and flipped on the defense stating EDTA wasn't present. But we also find out he erased the raw data from the computer. Rieders had much more experience than him reading the results as EDTA because when Marcia Clark told him the values Rieders said " He would bleed to death with 2000 parts per million." Martz own lab whistle blew on him that he committed perjury on the stand. Martz wasn't credible
this is true, and actually backed up by Nicole herself in a the 1993 911 call. By the way the 911 call was a verbal argument. Nicole was seen doing coke with Heidi Fliess in the home and also having oral sex with a known drug dealer in the home with OJs kids awake upstairs. Suffice it to say, he was upset.
Charlie Rose is playing Johnny Carson to Scheck and Neufeld's Jim Garrison. Amazing how similar this is to the 1968 Tonight Show episode with New Orleans DA Jim Garrison pursuing the assassins of President Kennedy
This is Charlie Rose’s style this is why he was popular he didn’t bullshit anybody he calls them out , he’s asking questions that were on peoples minds like he said
@@johnscanlon2598 Scheck and Nuefeld do a great job showing Charlie why Simpson was innocent, while Charlie shows his viewers what a brainwashed boob looks and acts like. Know anyone like Charlie?
If that case wasn't televised, it probably would have taken half as long and probably would have come back a hung jury or guilty. Television made it a joke.
Barry was the one who dismantled the prosecution case, although Fung and some other tech were so bad that it was much easier for Barry. He should have been given much more credit for the outcome of the trial.
28:18 Charlie was emotionally invested and was a victim of filtered news from pundits and commentators 😂 He is so wound up because he was exposed as being superficial.
Of all the many defence attourneys, these are the most credible. Their problem is they only address evidence allowed into the trial for the jury. But thats all required of lawyers in their position. They cast many aspersions on various evidence, but nothing convincing. Ironically Scheck was cited by polled jurors as the most effective defence attourney. I think the magnificent Innocence Project movements they initiated are bigger than this one case. If the cost of that significant justice was a rich black man going free - well who cares? Guilty white men and women buy their freedoms everyday, despite the iniquitous nature of the capitalistic justice system. If the price of all the IP exonerations is OJ making law enforcement look dumb - that's a good deal, bring it all on. The nationwide network of law schools and innocence projects has grown enormously, and they all do such good work. If losing the OJ trial was the price, consider it paid back. If OJ was white no one would have been paying attention, and the national movement for justice would not exist. America's biggest problem with OJ was that a black potential murderer got set free, what's annoying is what a shitty black man he was. The OJ aquittal pales in comparison with recent bizarre Grand Jury decisions to NOT charge guilty white cops. Since Zimmerman was aquitted, America appears to have had the popular judicial stuff passed over to a Klan-esque conspiracy. Since then every angry white male with dumb legally-owned guns had got pseudo-license to fire at and/or kill people of colour. What shocks me most is hoŵ few folks are challenging this lunacy! Is this the legacy our children deserve???
I care that anyone, let alone Project Innocent lawyers, would knowingly defend a man guilty of slaughtering two innocent people. It's abhorrent. They get plenty of funding elsewhere. They probably didn't even get what O.J. owed them. No, most white people are appalled that a murderer got away, whatever color, when their was a mountain of evidence against him. Smart, fair Oprah Winfrey could tell it from the start. People paid attention cause it O.J. was a big celebrity, and they were equally appalled that Robert Blake got aquitted and appalled that Phil Spector murdered that poor actress. Most white people are concerned, as well, that there is racial profiling, and quotas on arrests and poorly trained police that are allowed to chase after suspects who have minor infractions, such as expired license plates, selling lose cigarettes, etc. Witness the many whites who are in BLM; heck, a white man even started it.
It doesn't matter if they know or not. The fact is, L.A police have a history of police corruption against blacks. I don't know if Mark Fuhrman planted evidence or not but what I do know is, he's a racist. That alone should make the case that he INVESTIGATED! irrelevant against O.J.
Guys, some of that evidence was planted...that's just the truth. Some of the evidence and proof of OJs guilt is sound. But the planted evidence provided reasonable doubt. You can't expect the jury to sift through the evidence to determine what's forensics is good and what's planted. OJ got off because is the LAPD. Don't blame OJs lawyers because the LAPD planted evidence.
It's not about seeing that the verdict is correct,...it's about winning. Both sides want to win. The verdict is not always the correct one. Plenty of innocent people get convicted, some of the guilty get off. Sadly, it's as simple as that. Asking 12 people who have little understanding of what is being presented to them, to decide guilt or innocence is so wrong, hence, people get off...
Agree or disagree with Scheck and Neufeld, these are 2 brilliant minds. Why did I get the dumb end of the stick?! lol. RIP Juice. Whether you believe he was the killer or not (I think he was), he was someone’s father, grandfather, brother, friend
9:00 It just so happens that Furman had a set of gloves on him with OKs blood , set one at one scene , the other one at his estate ,which , was a matching set . The wool over the eyes of the jury was by the Defense , paid well to elivate their career . Remember this evidence was being collected all within 4 hours of the arrival to the crime scene . OJ s blood from him was not collected by a nurse til much later as he arrived from Chicago , these were being secured to crime scene specialist could tag and bag the evidence. Officers do not touch any evidence , it’s done by experts . The timeline is documented .
Leaving aside whether OJ is guilty or not (let's be real, he is) I'll never understand why criminal defense attorneys get blamed and told "you're going to hell" or "how can you sleep at night?" as if they committed the crimes. They did what they were paid to do, it's your client and you're supposed to defend even the guiltiest of people. That's their job and how they make the system work, whether you like it or not... it's a vital part of the American judicial system (defending the indefensible) & I just don't get the comments telling them they're going to hell as if they did it themselves, and yes when it comes to high profile cases and they have to give interviews they still have to be on the side of their clients, even if they're client was a murderer. I mean after all; defense lawyers risk their reputations and perhaps their careers when they go all-out for obviously guilty clients
O.J. didn't do it. At 4:00 pm June 13 1994 a video was taken with in O.J.'s bedroom and there were no socks there. about an hour later the bloody socks were in his bedroom. Not to mention all the blood evidence at Bundy had no EDTA in it until 3-4 months after the murders. This mean the evidence was contaminated and planted. The blood in the Bronco that was under the center console was in a place where O.J.s left hand couldn't have been which means it was planted. The blood at Simpson's home was LOCATED side by side which means a person would have to be bleeding from to sides of there body and everyone knows O.J. was bleeding from his left finger. Not to mention Ron & Nicole were fighting like hell for their life's if O.J> really did it he would have way more bruises and cuts then just a small cut on his finger.
@@garethwilby4033 witnesses claim the socks were there, then moved before the video was taken, then put back there afterwards, yet more reasons why that evidence should be thrown out.
21:30 No other evidence. These guys have a lot of nerve. 1-The presence of the glove(s) at the scene is, in itself, very damning. Of all the millions of gloves in the world, the killer just happened to own the same type of limited edition gloves that OJ owned. What are the chances of that? The police could have questioned ALL of the people who owned these gloves and I am sure that none of them even knew who Nicole was . I believe that the testimony was that there were 200 of these gloves sold 2. The presence of the African American hairs on the skull cap further reduces the pool of suspects. So of that very small group of people who owned these gloves, all of the white/Asian owners would be eliminated as suspects. The black population in the US is 15%, leaving 30-35 possible suspects. 3.Of those remaining suspects, only those with a reason to kill Nicole AND with a fresh cut on their left hand would remain as suspects. OJ would be the only one in that group.
Untrue 1. It was an Aris Istotoner - a common glove. 2. The hairs could not be DNA tested. The cap appeared to have been outside for a long period of time. 3. Oj cut his hand in his hotel room in Chicago. This was backed up by a half dozen witnesses and it cannot be rebutted. Nicole was seen by her neighbor arguing with 3 men in front of her condo abut an hour before the murders. Its my belief they had something to do with it.
@@Jim.Jim.32 ! Incorrect. There was significant testimony from Aris employees who testified that there were only 200 pairs of these gloves. 2. It was not DNA tested but it was undisputed that the hat contained hairs from a black man. I have no idea why you say the cap appeared to be outside for a long period of time. It was found right next to Ronald Goldman. 3. Incorrect again. OJ was questioned by Lange and Vanatter the day after the murder. They had discovered blood at OJ's house WHILE HE WAS IN CHICAGO. OJ admitted that he cut his hand at his house while he was running around before his trip to Chicago i.e. at the exact time of the murders. ruclips.net/video/r01cjxLc9rM/видео.html
1. has anyone you know ever borrowed a t-shirt, coat, gloves, scarf? The concept that only the things own ed by one person are used by one person is not based on reality in most social groups. 2. African American hair that did not match with OJ so just who was wearing that hat and why did they decide to leave it at the crime scene? Seems a bit silly no, to be leaving caps and gloves of blood laying round, why not put them in your pocket when fleeing? IF you do not see that as suspect then what can we do. 3. Airline pilot and autograph hunters at airport and on plane said he had not cut on his knuckle, was not bleeding and had no bruises on his face. Ron Goldman's knuckles were swollen and blue and his arms had lots of defensive wounds. Being a black belt karate and 21 years his junior in his phyisical prime in a knife fight to the death why is Simpson unmarked? Seems to me like you are rushing to judgement just like the LAPD did when it is clearly more nuanced that it seems.
@@TheInterestedObserver This is the type of hair splitting you get from OJ truthers. 1. No, it is not my experience that adult males share expensive gloves with each other. I have never done so and I have never had anyone let me wear their very expensive gloves. 2.The hair in the knit cap was not genetically matched to OJ, but it contained African American hairs, demonstrating that the person who killed Ron and Nicole was black. 3. The fact that there were airline passengers who did not detect a cut on OJ's hand is certainly not dispositive evidence that he did not have a cut on his hand. The police had already found blood at Rockingham WHILE OJ WAS IN CHICAGO. When confronted with the evidence, OJ admitted that he cut his hand the previous evening AT OR AROUND THE SAME TIME THAT RON AND NICOLE WERE KILLED. When asked how he cut his hand, he replied that he did not know. Did you listen to the interrogation? 4. Of course at the civil trial we found out that OJ did, in fact, own the very rare Bruno Magli shoes that the murderer wore, only 200 some were sold in the US(I suppose that you are going to tell me that OJ let a friend of his wear the shoes too) So you are saying that there is another black male who owns both these very rare Isotoner gloves AND these very Bruno Magli shoes who had a cut on his left hand and even knew , let alone had a reason to kill, Nicole.? This is of course just a small fraction of the evidence which directly points to OJ as the killer.
Fuhrman shouldn't have denied saying the n-word. Back then it wasn't the worst word in the world that only black Americans could use. It's so silly to behave that way about a word. I have never used it outside of reading or repeating it but he would've been believed if he hadn't lied about it. But after Rodney King no one in Los Angeles could touch that, especially in the LAPD. It's so silly. Words are words. That's free speech. Just being polite is what used to control our speech and not some bizarre thing like "hate speech". The wrong people get accused of such a thing.
Lawyers represent clients free for the marketing. It’s FREE MARKETING. Better than paying for billboards or bus ads. That’s why they do it. FREE PUBLICITY that will bring them hundreds of clients in the future. Name recognition. They made millions from other clients after this. And charged them.
@@pommiebearsThat’s how America works. You’re innocent until proven guilty. Because if you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time you would want the benefit of the doubt
You cant take everything he said in the car ride as gospel. He also said he has absolutely nothing to do with the murders do you believe him on that too?
barry scheck is an extremely smart man--but the fact that he went to the oj side make me sick--he knows damn well that oj did it. he has to live with it.
What's interesting about this video of these 3 guys is. You have two Jewish lawyers making the point about Fuhrman being a racist who already had a reputation before the Simpson case. Including, Fuhrman being known for his antisemitic actions. But. Charlie Rose, like some of the other Jewish people, were so racially obsessed with Simpson. They were willing to give Fuhrman an antisemitic pass. In order to justify their racism towards a Black man, whom they felt, killed a wyt woman. And sadly. These types. They'll ignore the gray areas, in order make this a black and white argument, over their covert racist Black and White racism. Charlie's racism card wss showing. And the two lawyers perp it and exposed it. Had this been a Jewish man on trial. Rosr would've been willing to listen. One another related note. For all that we know. The murders could've been a racial hate crime. Especially if those racist saw a Jewish man at Nicole's condo. Ron Goldman was Jewish too. And. Nicole stated thst she was receiving a lot if racist letters and thrests, where she'd became so concerned. She'd asked Simpson to come by and monitor the condo. This was shortly before the murders.
He said that OJ was not a suspect and they were just going to his house to warn him as next of kin. However, an ex-husband is not next of kin and he separately admitted that Simpson was a suspect. He walked that back by saying oh, spouses and partners are always suspects. He also was the one that took Simpson's blood to the house.
charlie rose was not only a terrible interviewer who loved to hear himself talk he was exposed as a sexual predator and lost his job - thank God!
And O.J. Simpson is a murderer who like a murderer sociopath wrote wrote "If I did it".
And Barry as Scheck set a sexual predator and murder free
Kk
Charlie Rose interrupts them way too much... Scheck and Neufeld have to work hard to finish their sentences. That's not good hosting etiquette...
have to disrupt and keep the narrative
Barry and Peter two men ahead of their time.
Remember when Barry Scheck called Fung out on his sloppy police work and told him How about THAT Mr. Fung!
Yes, that sticks in my mind. Was a running joke in our house for years.
Berry Scheck is one of the greatest lawyers ever.
He a shark dog. He pounces all over sloppy cases. Sloppy police and cover ups. The gig is up with him. He worth every penny.
During the trial, I couldn’t stand him. However, if I needed a good lawyer, I’d definitely give him a call!
@@bobnichols3233 why ? Because he was aggressively outting stone cold bigots ? This is one time racism did not work in the police favor. The begged to have the case moved, Ito was not about to help the state collude. He was guilty. Fuhrman blew it.
@@CarsonDouglas
No he was not. If he did why Police framed him ? Why they planted evidence in his home ??
Charlie Rose isn’t really listening.
New York's finest. 2 of the best that went out west.
🇮🇱👍🏾
Barry Scheck is the best forensic lawyer out there.
You know it helping innocent people get out prison he handsome too
The best o.j. owns Scheck and Nufeld his life thank God for attorneys like them
Great lier
not in the oj case
smart man but turned against him in the oj trial
Barry Scheck won O J Simpson his freedom he is one hell of a smart lawyer.
It would not have happened without Stephen Singular.
Great lawyer none the less.
Agreed he was the best lawyer in that case
@@shwnbur77 F Lee Bailey? Wtf?
Yeah I felt bad for that forensics guy. The word eviscerated comes to mind.
He was a awesome lawyer 😊
The presence of EDTA has ALWAYS been a unanswerable question by the prosecution
No, they answered it very thoroughly during both the criminal and civil trial. Their own expert testified that the levels did not match police vials.
You don't have a brain. EDTA is found IN EVERYTHING. Your body has EDTA right now. Don't try to make excuses. OJ killed them that night.
The way Nicole was killed......that was personal. We all know who was that angry at her. OJ said "she had it coming"
@@mitchcumstein142 keep believing that
@@mitchcumstein142that's BS🤦♂️
@@robskeys88 No, it’s not. Everything you eat, what you wash your clothes in, what you paint your walls with, has EDTA in it. We all have a certain amount of EDTA in our blood, depending on our diets. Research it. Look it up.
The question became is Furman capable of planting evidence. He said it himself that he had in the past. Now any person would have reasonable doubt after this testimony.
Everything pointed to Furhman planting that glove. Fun fact - Furhman was drugged up with tranquilizers during his testimony.
The moment there was tape of Furman admitting he would pull over black men with white women and 'find something' to pin on them doubt was established. Not to mention gody shots only to reduce bleeding and bruising being hard to find on N words. Oh and the EDTA in the blood! This thing was a wrap long before they got the 12-0 acquittal which was the absolute correct decision EVEN IF he did it.
He is innocent until proven guilty and they did not prove anything except for the desperate lengths they would go to try and convict him.
@@Jim.Jim.32 what? Lol
@@Berkmugga Yeah,this "Jim Jim" guy is in EVERY OJ video defending him without any good arguments. He must be OJs son or daughter or some relative
@@ShinkuGouki oh he’s right Furhman definitely planted that glove and smeared the bloody glove in the bronco. I just didn’t know what head talking about with the tranquilizers and drugs. Wouldn’t surprise me if he was on drugs though Fuhrman is a total low life.
Why is Charlie Rose so aggressive in his questioning of these distinguished lawyers ? OJ may have done it IDK but what I do know is Furhman and the LAPD particularly Furhman planted evidence and the defense proved that. So, the not guilty verdict was correct period!
Your right. Btw nice pic
Well said💯💯💯💯
If you knew that Fuhrman planted the evidence, why didn't you offer your omniscience to the defense team! LOL, you can't even spell Fuhrman's name.
I think OJ was somehow involve or knows more than he ever let on, and I also think the LAPD planted evidence in an effort to strengthen their case!
Kardashian who was friend of oj amd lawyer, fwot oj did it. He was never comfie with overwhelming evidence. The shies oj said he never wore..bruno...pict later showed he did wear them at a bills game.
Awesome video! Its amazing how the media has buried this - and all info that puts doubt on the prosecutions case against OJ.
Barry Scheck knows his stuff and so does Mr. Neufeld! Innocence Project?
If OJ is innocent then Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman are still alive. Maybe they eloped to a deserted island?
Yep he was an expert at being disingenuous.
KeithofRoss
Right On!
Civil jury saw thru all the bull at least.
My ,RESPECT,TO THIS LOWYER, EXCELLENT JOB.
Barry Scheck & Peter Neufeld are both smart lawyers who did a great job. I had no doubt in mind after watching the unedited OJ's trial.
And I have no doubt in mind after watching the unedited trial that OJ did it.
Excellent job guys.
Yeah,excellent job keeping a killer running free
@@ShinkuGoukiNo.. excellent job💯
Scheck loves the word “EXTRAORDINARY” 😂
Hashtag Metoo!!!
I always felt OJ was innocent.
Idiot
Felt? Interesting, I use reason. You know, deductive and inductive reasoning.
Felt? I knew he was innocent from the start.
I agree with you and many people are brainwashed by the media still.
Facts override your feelings
This whole case was nothing but a circus from the start. I have much respect for Barry Scheck who to me was very clear and honest about his professional testimony.
David White
The other lawyer...Neufeld alone with Scheck...are something else...these men along with rest of dream team...did a hell of....job. They represent the best in what attorneys should be and Jewish culture to boot! Thank God for them and thank God OJ had resources and Mr. Simpson showed that he is a brilliant man...such credibility with the way in which he took care of hai family and secured his future after a successful football career......excellent demonstration of excellent upbringing...excellent demonstration of a black man in America...an American not African American ..I might add..and once again look at Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer...two misogynistic rapist..woman haters. who could not possibly believe in his evidence when in fact all those type of men so is project..their male glibness all over the place...20 plus years ..it all came out of the closet! What more do we need to discuss?
He beat her up for years then he murdered her, what a great example.
Fung got. Caught in lies he all crossed up where is it Mr fung
@@dixiedeed4918 haha he was saying Mr Fung to him like a bond villain about to kill someone. They were both excellent.
Neufelds cross of Andrea Mizzola was good stuff.
Rose was so annoying continually interrupting these two legal eagles!!
He was threatened because when you get the science if this case it looked very suspicious
@@garrickgregory6403 If anything the science makes The Juice look even more guilty
@@strnglhld It was tampered with. Science Evidence started contradicts the case EDTA in the blood at 2000 ppm which is not in food and is dangerous, blood splatter shows there was no ankle in the socks as three wet transfers occurred . There was blood evidence that was even lost like Andrea Mazzola’s bindles that dates and initials never made it to lab. There was evidence that pointed away from him. Blood under the nails didn’t match , fingerprints at the scene didn’t match , and unidentified Caucasian male hair was found on the Rockingham Glove yet none of Simpson’s limb hairs were found in any of them .
@I whoever killed them must have been covered in blood. So OJ kills his wife and friend, cleans up, gets ready for his flight, gets there on time...do you know black people? 😂 wtf
Charlie Rose was known for that
With OJs recent death I am again fascinated with this whole case
They accomplished raising reasonably doubt!
Not guilty. Goodnight 😴
Marc Ryan only to idiots. Anyone with a working brain cell could see through their BS.
Not guilty does not represent innocent. Yes not guilty, primarily because a detective used the N word and then denied it. That makes sense.
Not guilty not guilty police stop setting up people
@@pommiebears You are EXTREMELY racist. I say this because blood was planted, the lead detecrive was a racist, OJ did not have life and death wounds on his body that was indicative of a 15 minute struggle, his gloves didn't fit, and there's 4 more decisive factors i could list. Now despite this, and in the face of this your mind can't accept that a Black man didn't kill those 2...
The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.
Reasonable doubt was proven and is why OJ is free today…
This was the most "this are not the droids you are looking for" interview ever, this guys could blame global warming on surfers and get away with it in court
Evidence is a hell of a thing tho isn't it?
Specifically farts from surfers
Great lawyers. These the guys you want on your side.
If you have the money.
I don’t know how they can sleep at night knowing they got a double murderer off
@@brocktonma.1816 They created one of the largest pro bono firms. look up the innocence project.
@@mikey65dean it's Clarke and Darden who can't sleep at night when they think of this trial.
@@mikey65dean Your racism just won't allow you to accept he was innocent....
Clark was told about Furhman by Coleman and a detective Perdy. She told Coleman she was just trying to ruin her case.
The Jury Instruction says:
The defendant is accused in courts one and two of having committed the crime of murder, a violation of Penal Code Section 187. Every person who unlawfully kills a human being with malice aforethought is guilty of the crime of murder, in violation of Section 187 of the California Penal Code. In order to prove such crime, each of the following elements must be proved one, a human being was killed, two, the killing was unlawful, and, three, the killing was done with malice aforethought.
The prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt each element of the crimes charged in the information and that the defendant was the perpetrator of any such charged crimes. The defendant is not required to prove himself innocent or to prove that any other person committed the crimes charged.
Evidence has been received for the purpose of showing that the defendant was not present at the time and place of the commission of the alleged crime for which he is here on trial. If, after a consideration of all the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present at the time the crime was committed, you must find him not guilty.
In the crimes charged in counts one and two, there must exist a union or joint operation of act or conduct and a certain specific intent or mental state in the mind of the perpetrator. Unless such specific intent and/or mental state exists, the crime to which they relate is not committed.
An inference is a deduction of fact that may logically and reasonably be drawn from another fact or group of facts established by the evidence.
Further, each fact which is essential to complete a set of circumstances necessary to establish the defendant's guilt, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, before an inference essential to establish guilt may be found to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, each fact or circumstance upon which such inference necessarily rests, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Elements of the crime of murder that must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt: [Motive is not an element in this case].
1. A human being was killed - Self Evident
2. The killing was unlawful - Self Evident
3. MENS REA: The killing was done with malice aforethought - intentional and premeditated.
4. ACTUS REUS: The defendant killed the two victims and is the perpetrator of the crime. Further, the defendant was present at the time and place of the commission of the alleged crime for which he is here on trial
For Actus Reus the Prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the following:
1. The inference (STORY LINE or THEORY ABOUT HOW THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE CRIME) essential to establish guilt of the Defendant must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
2. However, before an inference (STORY LINE or THEORY ABOUT HOW THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE CRIME) essential to establish guilt of the Defendant may be found to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, EACH FACT or circumstance upon which such inference necessarily rests, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
3. Further, the Defendant was present at the time and place of the commission of the alleged crime for which he is on trial. The Defendant must not have a valid ALIBI.
FACTS or circumstances upon which the inference (STORY LINE or THEORY ABOUT HOW THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE CRIME) necessarily rests which must be proved individually beyond reasonable doubt are the following:
1. The middle finger of OJ’s left hand was cut at the crime scene as the result of a violent struggle with either Nicole or Ron. Blood came out of this injured finger. Many witnesses who were never impeached testified not having seen any cut or bandage and blood dripping from his left hand middle finger.
2. OJ Blood was found at the crime scene: Bundy Walkway and the rear gate. The DNA of the blood samples at the Walkway were consumed by the microorganism which grew exponentially in numbers because the wet swabs were exposed to heat since the truck has no air-conditioning. This renders the blood samples at the Bundy walkway compromised evidence and susceptible to cross-contamination with OJ's blood which actually spilled when Yamauchi opened the collecting tube on the same table where the evidentiary blood samples was located. The blood found at the rear gate has EDTA and is not deteriorated despite having been allegedly unnoticed for 3 week. Also the blood was not in the video recorded the day after the crime was committed suggesting strongly that the blood was planted using the missing 1.5 ml of the reference blood sample of OJ
3. Blood of OJ, Nicole and Ron in the Bronco when OJ’s hands with his two victim’s blood were found on various locations inside his Bronco.The number of blood smears increased in number on the console and the same LAPD personnel who were present at the crime scene also entered the Ford Bronco after the incident transferring the blood from Bundy to the Bronco.
4. Upon reaching his residence OJ passed through the alleyway located at the perimeter and accidentally bumped his head on the air-conditioning unit and consequently he dropped his right hand glove with the blood of the two victims and his own blood. This evidence is very suspicious because:
Fresh blood on the glove which should have been dried,
The undisturbed leaves surronding the glove,
The absence of blood drops on the alleyway,
The gloves did not fit OJ,
OJ's face was unmarked indicating he did not hit the air conditioning unit producing the 3 thumping sounds heard by Kato Kaelin
The bloody right hand glove was planted by M Fuhrman.
5. Blood of OJ on his driveway. OJ claimed the blood drops came out from the hidden cuts on the sides of his fingers left hand) which was probably caused by pinching the golf chips.
6. OJ left the bloody sock in his room with the blood of Nicole which tainted his sock during the time when he was allegedly slashing the throat of Nicole. The blood on the sock had EDTA not normally found in the blood but EDTA is a blood preservative added into the collecting tube. The blood penetrated 3 surfaces which could not have happened when the blood splashed onto the sock while OJ was wearing it. The sock also has no sand particle which must have been aplenty if indeed there was a life and death struggle between Ron and OJ. The sock was also not present prior to each appearance hours later in a video clip suggesting strongly that it was planted evidence.
Therefore, if anyone of the facts mentioned above is not proved beyond reasonable doubt or stating it in another way, if the Prosecution failed to defeat or overcome the reasonable doubt in just one fact mentioned above then the inference or STORY LINE or THEORY of the Prosecution must be rejected and the Defendant must be acquitted.
The Defense was able to present reasonable doubt on each and every facts upon which the inference (STORY LINE or THEORY) necessarily rests but on the other hand the Prosecution was unable to overcome all of them.
Further, the Defense was able to present unimpeachable witnesses which established the TIMELINE showing OJ just did not have enough time to commit the crime. The testimony of Alan, the Limo Driver, was shown to be too inconsistent on the major points. He failed to see the parked vehicle of Kato when it was established that indeed Kato's car was parked along Ashroft Street. It can then be concluded that he failed also to see the parked Bronco of OJ along Rockingham Street. He saw a second vehicle parked behind the Bentley when in fact Arnel's car was parked after OJ left his Rockingham residence. This is a clear case of FATIGUE very common to drivers. This alone is enough to justify OJ's acquittal.
Excellent analysis based on FACTS, you are spot on.
With regard to #5, there where 5-6 driveway drops of OJ blood leading from the bronco to his front door. Since there was NO chronological record as to when these drops where accounted for or discovered, a more reasonable assumption would be that these drops where planted by Vannater (or someone) using OJ's reference vial and a syringe. Vannater had OJs blood in his pocket by 3pm at OJs estate that day. These driveway drops where not tested for EDTA, however there was no splatter pattern and they "dropped from a height of 2 feet". When the blood vial was booked into evidence the next day, we find the 1.5ccs missing.
Low and behold, six months later we have the nurse who drew the OJ blood conveniently changing his testimony saying he did not draw the standard 8ccs (not under oath..but in a home video!).
Oj wasn't at that crime scene and that's all there is to it. Furhman planted that glove, the LAPD went all in. The question is WHY did LAPD frame Simpson? It is my belief that Lang and Vannater knew that Furhman probably planted the glove. They where forced to frame OJ otherwise how the hell would they explain the glove? If it was shown that a black celebrity like OJ Simpson was, in fact, framed by one of their rogue detectives, the city would burn and the LAPD would cease to exist. They LAPD got lucky because if Ojs flight was just 45 minutes earlier there would be no trial of the century.
not according to me it isnt--oj how horrible scrapes with his ex. what about the dna evidence?
@@SUNMAYDEN518 you didn’t read any of the post did you? This is the best explanation of what happened including the comment above yours
@@Jim.Jim.32 show me proof that fuhrman planted the glove,I’ll wait patiently.....
@@garethwilby4033 The defense do not need to prove anything, they just need to show that there is doubt with the prosecution case. I think this is what people miss, they think one side has to prove him guilty and the other side proves him innocent. No, he is innocent until proven guilty beyond any doubt and there was/is plenty of doubt all over the place.
Furhman had a history of booking innocent people and found the glove and was alone when he found it. Did he plant it? Who knows? IS there now a suspicion that he planted it? Sure there is.
that furniture is timeless
Charlie Rose had the best theme music.
8:55 - 9:23 Why was the photo of Fuhrman pointing at the glove at 4 am significant? How does that show that Furhman planted the glove on OJ's property?
HombresGotNoName the glove was pointed at before he went to oj house & found the other glove
Fuhrman was trying to make sure he showed there was only 1 glove at the crime scene because he was planting the other one
@@flunder50cops always point to what specifically in the photograph is important , look it up you will find thousands with the similar pointing hand gesture, this is nothing
this gus doesn't let these two talk unbelievable
Charles got his biased ass handed to him
I watched this when it first aired. He was shitting his pants out of sheer frustration. He was rude and unprofessional.
When the lawyer said a public persona and private persona Charlie Rose is the definition of this
Barry Scheck is counting them ducketts. You know these two got that paper.
Cochran and these 2 lawyers set oj free very smart ,intelligent lawyers 👌
With no conscience whatsoever. Barry Shceck refuses to now answer if OJ is guilty. He says that it doesn’t matter. Lol.
@@pommiebears he did answer your just not listening lol
@@treykennon1795 pay her no mind. She's just a older racist lady. She can't use her mind because the racism she suffers from gets in the way of her being objective.
@@pommiebears which is the correct answer, he cannot prove that oj is guilty
These guys know that OJ did it. I have no respect for this kind of people. Now that for 30 years of attack we see how demoralized Los Angeles is and the police are told not to arrest anyone who is a known criminal anymore. Just let them go. Sad sad sad
People want him to be guilty so bad.. the truth hurts. The jury made the right decision💯
What do you mean “they want him to be guilty”
he is guilty! He cannot possibly be innocent with his blood at the murder scene!
@garethwilby4033 You can't trust ANY of that blood evidence! It was proven that blood was tampered with, planted and found weeks later by corrupt police officers like Mark Furman smh. Blood was also found with EDTA! like I said the Jury made the right decision they saw right though the prosecution's BS case
You can't trust ANY of that blood evidence! It was proven that corrupt police officers like Mark Furman tampered with and planted evidence. Evidence was found weeks later with EDTA, 1.5cc of Oj's missing blood, etc.. don't be naive
1-The presence of the glove(s) at the scene is, in itself, very damning. Of all the millions of gloves in the world, the killer just happened to own the same type of limited edition gloves that OJ owned. What are the chances of that? The police could have questioned ALL of the people who owned these gloves and I am sure that none of them even knew who Nicole was . I believe that the testimony was that there were 200 of these gloves sold
2. The presence of the African American hairs on the skull cap further reduces the pool of suspects. So of that very small group of people who owned these gloves, all of the white/Asian owners would be eliminated as suspects. The black population in the US is 15%, leaving 30-35 possible suspects.
3.Of those remaining suspects, only those with a reason to kill Nicole AND with a fresh cut on their left hand would remain as suspects.
OJ would be the only one in that group.
Sorry my friend, All of that is strictly your opinion.. there was no proof in any of that
36:08 This Charlie was unbelievable…asking stupid questions!! 🤦
How did Charlie stay on so long? He is a terrible interviewer and he constantly interrupts the guest. He over talks as well. Hard to watch this.
Cochran, Scheck, Bailey & Nuefeld were the stars of the Dream Team.
Mr Rose love to ask questions but he didn't answer the question of the woman who that said he fondled them smfh then he resigned
Is that charlie the guy oj talks about
Charlie knows OJ is guilty because he was there.
OJ was a great RB
The greatest fullback nobody talks about. He holds records that cant be broken.
This is hard to follow. Too much interrupting going on.
It's worth watching these guys in court in the OJ Simpson case. Also rI read the 2nd court cases evidence that is interesting for the statements by Nicole's best friend Cora Fischman. Also the Furhman tapes, yikes.
OJ came across there well in his deposition. Honest about his relationship with Nicole.
Why did the investigation searching for a murderer stop the day after the verdict ?
Oj and his team actually put up a 500k reward and set up a tip line. The lapd did not help for obvious reasons
And they won't allow a modern review of the evidence. It's because people want to believe that the police wouldn't plant evidence.
@@Jim.Jim.32 So no one came forward with 500K as an inducement? MMM, I wonder why?
Because they found the real killer,tried him in court and then the racist jury let him go as payback for that lowlife Rodney King
They put up a reward because they knew they’d never have to pay it…..because OJ did it! Lol.
If you think Fuhrman planted the glove Than you must think Fuhrman planted the Bruno Magli shoes on OJ Feet
Use the Abduction Method of Reasoning which is the "Inference to the Best Explanation" to explain the following facts.
1. The right hand glove was still wet with blood almost 6 hours 45 minutes after allegedly having been dropped by OJ. If OJ planted the glove then the blood should have been completely dried by that time. 10:45 PM June 12 to 5:30 AM.
2. There was no blood on the ground around it which should have been consistent with the accidental dropping of the right hand glove drenched with blood of both Nicole and Ron. Thus, it must have been carefully placed there.
3. There were no blood drops along the driveway going to the alleyway and in the alleyway itself despite the Prosecution's allegation that OJ was bleeding with a cut on his left hand middle finger. Conveniently Marcia Clark claimed that the bleeding stopped at that time and resumed when OJ was about to go inside the house.
4. There was a hair of the underbelly of the dog Kato which could have been attached to the glove only when the glove is lying down the ground. Thus, it must have come from the ground at Bundy.
5. The same police officers who reported that they saw only one glove at Bundy also reported that the picture of Fuhrman pointing to the left hand glove was taken 7:00 AM when in fact it was taken 4:30 AM nighttime. What is the significance of this lie by the police officers and Fuhrman?
If they reported the time at 7:00 AM then they can say it would have been impossible for Fuhrman to have taken the right hand glove at Bundy and planted it at OJ's residence since Fuhrman could not have second guessed what glove would be left at Bundy since the impression would be that he went to OJ's residence first. Thus, MF was lying when he said he did not plant the right hand glove at the alleyway.
6. Fuhrman has a coat and plastic bag (a standard issue to detectives) to store the right hand glove without anyone seeing him carrying the glove from Bundy to OJ's residence. The glove inside the plastic bag would have preserved the wetness of the blood since it is not exposed to the atmosphere causing quick drying.
7. Fuhrman saw the right hand glove at the alleyway and reported he went there the morning after the murder. He went to at the alleyway when he was supposed not to be searching for evidence as he has no search warrant yet at that time.
8. On the other hand there was no evidence or testimony to show that OJ was in the alleyway at the night of the murder.
9. OJ had no bruishes on his head putting doubt on Clark's allegation that he bumped his head against the air-conditioner thrice. The noise could have been the compressor. It would have been very unlikely that OJ persisted in moving forward thrice after the first time he allegedly bumped his head on the aircon unit.
10. Fuhrman was exposed as a liar having said the n-word and being heard on the audio tape uttering statements only a genocidal racist could have said and who planted evidence in the past.
There are only two options: Either Mark Fuhrman or OJ planted the bloody right hand glove at the alleyway.
The best explanation that can explain all the above evidence or facts of the case is that MF got the bloody right hand glove at Bundy and planted it at OJ's residence.
Sherlock Holmes once said, "If you eliminate the impossible whatever remains no matter however improbable must be the truth." It's so elementary my dear Watson!
i think LAPD mishandled the DNA, therefore i would not convict a man to death because in this country you are innocent until proven guilty and it wasn't PROVEN he killed her with the DNA because it's tainted, it's garbage. I would not convict OJ to die, just like i would not convict you if it were you Johnny.
Johnny Jack u mean the ones that weren't ojs size?
Did you plant any evidence in this case? Mark Furman took the 5f. Why?
Fuhrman pleaded the 5th for every question they asked him that day, not just that one question. He decided to shut down because he got busted lying about using the n-word. If they would have asked him if he was an LAPD officer, he would have also pleaded the 5th. Look at the video of him doing it; he's looking at his lawyer and his lawyer is just instructing him to plead the 5th to every question. That isn't an indicator that he planted evidence.
*"OJ didn't do it, but it's not our job to find the real killer! Also, we have evidence that OJ is innocent, but due to attorney privilege we cannot tell you about it"*
Lol, all these guys did in this hour long interview is convince me even more than ever that OJ is guilty.
The criminalist that collected the blood evidence at the crime scene testified that she put her initials on the bindles that were supposed to be sent to CellMark to identify the killers DNA.
Low and behold, none of the bindles that arrived at CellMark had any initials on them.
So what happened to the blood evidence that was collected at the crime scene?
had to flush the toilet on this one
@@josephswabe5584I suppose Vannatter, Lang, and Furhman, wore size 12 Bruno Magli shoe, and trampled through the evidence too lol! I suppose they also thought “oh, I’d love to set up a person of color…..I know, let’s set OJ Simpson up, even though it’s going to be heavily scrutinised and he can afford the very best lawyers, yes, we’re going to set up OJ Simpson and see if we get away with it” 😂
@@pommiebearsBut what about the blood under Nicole’s nails not matching OJ’s?
Rose seemed obsessed with Scheck in this interview.
Well hes clearly the smart one...
Scheck is making the most contentious remarks and interrupting Rose, so it's only natural that he would talk to him the most, plus he seems to be the more talkative of the two.
Barry Scheck is one of the greatest defense attorneys of all time
nomibe2911
Rose is inferior. and that is so obvious..and meanwhile. back then. I love watching his show but I did not watch this episode in real time at the time..
Scheck was clearly in his feelings about helping a murderer get off.
S check is admirable when he helps to free innocent people BUT when he uses his skills to free a murderer that is repulsive
Wow, just wow... seeing this after the George Floyd verdict... just Wow. Thank you Mr. Neufeld and Mr. Scheck
When you want Saul Goodman, you call these clowns.
To quote my former boss who worked in forensics for 40 years, "The LAPD framed a guilty man." There isn't a person on this earth with a properly functioning brain that thinks OJ Simpson is innocent and that would include his legal team. Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld have done so much amazing work with wrongful convictions, but it makes me sick that they were largely responsible for getting a vicious murder off.
Peter Neufeld = Will Farrell doppleganger
Blood Oath by Steven Worth
Great attorneys
the glove belonged to Ron Goldman , the ring fingere was torned off and the blood in this glove matched Ron Goldman's blood one in 42 million it could not have been someone elses. this was told at the very beginning before the preliminary trial and they kept this information sealed.
Go back to sleep, eh?
Those gloves were of a limited produced type that were identified by a prosecution witness. There was also a receipt when Nicole purchased them for OJ.
The reason Ron’s blood is all over the gloves is because Ron was stabbed 27 times by the person
( OJ ) wearing the gloves when he was killing Ron.
Barry scheck cross examination of fung for seven days was mind blowing
This interview is very different from the recent interview Barry did with Ezra Edelman. In the Ezra interview, Barry wouldn't answer the questions when he was asked if he thinks the LAPD planted evidence or if all the blood evidence had been cross-contaminated.
I don't think Charlie knew all the specifics but he should of pushed back when they said the glove, the sock, the Bronco blood, and the Bundy blood drops were all of the evidence. There were fresh blood drops identified as OJ's in his driveway and in his foyer as well.
Also, the EDTA thing is being deliberately misrepresented by Scheck/Neufeld and is misunderstood by most people. The test for EDTA on the sock blood and the blood on the back gate came back in the individual parts per million. The reference sample blood had EDTA in the parts per thousand. That's a 3 orders of magnitude difference. Charlie should've brought this up.
The defense never tried to argue that any blood other than the blood on the sock and the back gate came from the reference sample because all of those other blood samples had already been collected/identified by the time OJ's blood was drawn. The only reason they were able to allege the blood on the sock and back gate had been planted was because they were not discovered until several weeks later. The defense argued that every single one of the other OJ blood samples (Bundy pathway, in/on Bronco, in his driveway, in his foyer) had all degraded and been cross contaminated in the LAPD lab. I hope everybody would agree that this is highly unlikely that every single one of the real killers blood samples had degraded and been cross contaminated with OJ's reference sample blood, causing a false positive.
To believe OJ is innocent, you have to believe the following:
1. Fuhrman found a second glove at Bundy and planted it at Rockingham and all of the police officers who were on the scene before Furhman either didn't see it or lied about there being two.
2. All of the killer's blood drops found on the first day had degraded and due to sloppy work by Colin Yamaguchi, every one had been cross-contaminated with OJ's blood.
3. OJ's reference blood was planted on the back gate of Bundy and the sock and for a reason unbeknownst to science, the concentration of EDTA reduced by a factor of 1,000, causing the EDTA levels to be consistent with the levels of Roger Martz's own blood (he tested his own).
4. OJ, by coincidence, owned the exact same type and size of very rare shoes as the killer and could not account for his.
5. Nicole, by coincidence, had bought the exact same type and size of gloves as used by the killer and they could not be accounted for.
6. OJ, by coincidence, had hair that matched that of the killer.
7. OJ, by coincidence, had fibers from the rare type of upholstery in his Bronco, that matched those found on the glove found behind his house.
8. OJ, by coincidence, suffered deep cuts to his middle finger on his left hand the same night as the murders occurred, where the evidence is consistent with the killer bleeding from his left hand.
9. OJ, by coincidence, was seen to be wearing a dark blue sweatsuit, seen by Kato Kaelin, shortly before the murders occurred and dark blue cotton fibers were found at the murder scene. The sweatsuit could not be accounted for.
10. Somebody/something other than OJ made a noise behind Kato's room at the same time Alan Park was ringing the intercom and right before a person matching the description of OJ was seen entering the house by Alan Park.
What is more likely, #1-10 are all true or OJ killed two people?
The strongest argument is always the simplest, and easiest to understand. Your EDTA argument, intentional or not, comes off as quibbling. Most people won't understand it. OTOH they will understand that EDTA isn't found in human blood, and that if it is found at the crime scene, there's a good chance the blood was planted there.
I agree. Science is complicated. It's easier for people to believe a conspiracy theory than it is to follow and correctly interpret the actual evidence. Not to mention when the people peddling the conspiracy theory are extremely persuasive. The more I learn about the case, the more clear to me it is that OJ was guilty; however it also has become more clear to me why he was acquitted and it's precisely for the kind of reason you identified.
Thanks for the comment.
Science is complicated, but it can be simple too. For example, has EDTA ever been found naturally in human blood before? And has it ever honestly been present in blood found at the crime scene? If so, then I think that would be a very strong argument for the "OJ did it" crowd.
The answer to your question is yes and no. EDTA is not natural, so it does not occur naturally but it is present in trace amounts in blood because it is found in laundry detergent and other products and enters the body from these unnatural sources. If you recall, during the trial there was a lot of debate as to what the expected concentration of EDTA should be in human blood. They came to no consensus during the trail (the only literature on the subject was from the 1950s) and there remains no consensus to this day, to the best of my knowledge. That being said, detecting EDTA in and of itself is not super significant and only part of the equation. The concentration is the other big thing. As I stated previously, there was a 1000x difference in concentration between the blood tested and the blood of the reference sample. FBI agent Martz testified that he tested his own blood for EDTA and also got a positive result in a very low concentration. Another argument made was that the test was likely giving a false positive for EDTA at these very low concentrations. Below is the link to an article that describes the testimony better than I can:
www.nytimes.com/1995/07/26/us/fbi-disputes-simpson-defense-on-tainted-blood.html
Martz did more harm than good because he testified for the defense that EDTA was present shared his testimony at the court recess with the prosecution and flipped on the defense stating EDTA wasn't present. But we also find out he erased the raw data from the computer. Rieders had much more experience than him reading the results as EDTA because when Marcia Clark told him the values Rieders said " He would bleed to death with 2000 parts per million." Martz own lab whistle blew on him that he committed perjury on the stand. Martz wasn't credible
Oj may bee many things but murderer he's not...
a single incident of domestic violence...who's he kidding
this is true, and actually backed up by Nicole herself in a the 1993 911 call. By the way the 911 call was a verbal argument. Nicole was seen doing coke with Heidi Fliess in the home and also having oral sex with a known drug dealer in the home with OJs kids awake upstairs. Suffice it to say, he was upset.
If you listen to the video closely, you'll clearly hear ok complaining about her sleeping with this dude while his kids are there.
Your speaking from experience.i believe you.
The only reason that OJ looks guilty is because of the slow speed Bronco chase. Throw that out and OJ looks a lot more innocent
The only reason? C'mon now.
What about the suicide letter and the equivocating about the cut finger!
@@infonomics Ya that doesn’t look too good
So…they planted evidence BEFORE they knew if OJ had an alibi or not? Lol. That would just be stupid.
Not to mention 4 cops were at the scene before Mark Fuhrman and only saw one glove.
OJ totally innocent!
Charlie Rose is playing Johnny Carson to Scheck and Neufeld's Jim Garrison. Amazing how similar this is to the 1968 Tonight Show episode with New Orleans DA Jim Garrison pursuing the assassins of President Kennedy
This is Charlie Rose’s style this is why he was popular he didn’t bullshit anybody he calls them out , he’s asking questions that were on peoples minds like he said
@@johnscanlon2598 Scheck and Nuefeld do a great job showing Charlie why Simpson was innocent, while Charlie shows his viewers what a brainwashed boob looks and acts like. Know anyone like Charlie?
If that case wasn't televised, it probably would have taken half as long and probably would have come back a hung jury or guilty. Television made it a joke.
yes! to this interview though. hyper-crushes on both these freedom fighters
Epic interview...CR not totally professional here. He was glib.
Barry was the one who dismantled the prosecution case, although Fung and some other tech were so bad that it was much easier for Barry. He should have been given much more credit for the outcome of the trial.
Clearly you know Charlie sides with the prosecution lol
These are the two you go see when you’ve got a problem
28:18 Charlie was emotionally invested and was a victim of filtered news from pundits and commentators 😂 He is so wound up because he was exposed as being superficial.
Charlie rose discusses me
Of all the many defence attourneys, these are the most credible. Their problem is they only address evidence allowed into the trial for the jury. But thats all required of lawyers in their position. They cast many aspersions on various evidence, but nothing convincing. Ironically Scheck was cited by polled jurors as the most effective defence attourney. I think the magnificent Innocence Project movements they initiated are bigger than this one case. If the cost of that significant justice was a rich black man going free - well who cares? Guilty white men and women buy their freedoms everyday, despite the iniquitous nature of the capitalistic justice system. If the price of all the IP exonerations is OJ making law enforcement look dumb - that's a good deal, bring it all on. The nationwide network of law schools and innocence projects has grown enormously, and they all do such good work. If losing the OJ trial was the price, consider it paid back. If OJ was white no one would have been paying attention, and the national movement for justice would not exist. America's biggest problem with OJ was that a black potential murderer got set free, what's annoying is what a shitty black man he was. The OJ aquittal pales in comparison with recent bizarre Grand Jury decisions to NOT charge guilty white cops. Since Zimmerman was aquitted, America appears to have had the popular judicial stuff passed over to a Klan-esque conspiracy. Since then every angry white male with dumb legally-owned guns had got pseudo-license to fire at and/or kill people of colour. What shocks me most is hoŵ few folks are challenging this lunacy! Is this the legacy our children deserve???
I care that anyone, let alone Project Innocent lawyers, would knowingly defend a man guilty of slaughtering two innocent people. It's abhorrent. They get plenty of funding elsewhere. They probably didn't even get what O.J. owed them. No, most white people are appalled that a murderer got away, whatever color, when their was a mountain of evidence against him. Smart, fair Oprah Winfrey could tell it from the start. People paid attention cause it O.J. was a big celebrity, and they were equally appalled that Robert Blake got aquitted and appalled that Phil Spector murdered that poor actress. Most white people are concerned, as well, that there is racial profiling, and quotas on arrests and poorly trained police that are allowed to chase after suspects who have minor infractions, such as expired license plates, selling lose cigarettes, etc. Witness the many whites who are in BLM; heck, a white man even started it.
It doesn't matter if they know or not. The fact is, L.A police have a history of police corruption against blacks. I don't know if Mark Fuhrman planted evidence or not but what I do know is, he's a racist. That alone should make the case that he INVESTIGATED! irrelevant against O.J.
Guys, some of that evidence was planted...that's just the truth. Some of the evidence and proof of OJs guilt is sound. But the planted evidence provided reasonable doubt. You can't expect the jury to sift through the evidence to determine what's forensics is good and what's planted. OJ got off because is the LAPD. Don't blame OJs lawyers because the LAPD planted evidence.
10:10 - 10:25
It's not about seeing that the verdict is correct,...it's about winning. Both sides want to win. The verdict is not always the correct one. Plenty of innocent people get convicted, some of the guilty get off. Sadly, it's as simple as that. Asking 12 people who have little understanding of what is being presented to them, to decide guilt or innocence is so wrong, hence, people get off...
yes blame the jury
16:00 - 16:15
Try reading Hank Goldberg's book
Agree or disagree with Scheck and Neufeld, these are 2 brilliant minds. Why did I get the dumb end of the stick?! lol. RIP Juice. Whether you believe he was the killer or not (I think he was), he was someone’s father, grandfather, brother, friend
24:45 Barry couldn't handle it when Charlie asked a legit question about Fuhrman and Vannader working together framing OJ.
Furhman was charged with perjury and did 3 years probation.
And??? Therefore, OJ is innocent?
9:00 It just so happens that Furman had a set of gloves on him with OKs blood , set one at one scene , the other one at his estate ,which , was a matching set . The wool over the eyes of the jury was by the Defense , paid well to elivate their career . Remember this evidence was being collected all within 4 hours of the arrival to the crime scene . OJ s blood from him was not collected by a nurse til much later as he arrived from Chicago , these were being secured to crime scene specialist could tag and bag the evidence. Officers do not touch any evidence , it’s done by experts . The timeline is documented .
Leaving aside whether OJ is guilty or not (let's be real, he is) I'll never understand why criminal defense attorneys get blamed and told "you're going to hell" or "how can you sleep at night?" as if they committed the crimes. They did what they were paid to do, it's your client and you're supposed to defend even the guiltiest of people. That's their job and how they make the system work, whether you like it or not... it's a vital part of the American judicial system (defending the indefensible) & I just don't get the comments telling them they're going to hell as if they did it themselves, and yes when it comes to high profile cases and they have to give interviews they still have to be on the side of their clients, even if they're client was a murderer. I mean after all; defense lawyers risk their reputations and perhaps their careers when they go all-out for obviously guilty clients
O.J. didn't do it. At 4:00 pm June 13 1994 a video was taken with in O.J.'s bedroom and there were no socks there. about an hour later the bloody socks were in his bedroom. Not to mention all the blood evidence at Bundy had no EDTA in it until 3-4 months after the murders. This mean the evidence was contaminated and planted. The blood in the Bronco that was under the center console was in a place where O.J.s left hand couldn't have been which means it was planted. The blood at Simpson's home was LOCATED side by side which means a person would have to be bleeding from to sides of there body and everyone knows O.J. was bleeding from his left finger. Not to mention Ron & Nicole were fighting like hell for their life's if O.J> really did it he would have way more bruises and cuts then just a small cut on his finger.
quincy 7143 the time clock on the video was an hour behibd
@@garethwilby4033 witnesses claim the socks were there, then moved before the video was taken, then put back there afterwards, yet more reasons why that evidence should be thrown out.
They paid big bucks to help OJ I wonder how the feel today
Johnny Jack
Victorius!
I love their white saviour complex. lol.
21:30 No other evidence. These guys have a lot of nerve.
1-The presence of the glove(s) at the scene is, in itself, very damning. Of all the millions of gloves in the world, the killer just happened to own the same type of limited edition gloves that OJ owned. What are the chances of that? The police could have questioned ALL of the people who owned these gloves and I am sure that none of them even knew who Nicole was . I believe that the testimony was that there were 200 of these gloves sold
2. The presence of the African American hairs on the skull cap further reduces the pool of suspects. So of that very small group of people who owned these gloves, all of the white/Asian owners would be eliminated as suspects. The black population in the US is 15%, leaving 30-35 possible suspects.
3.Of those remaining suspects, only those with a reason to kill Nicole AND with a fresh cut on their left hand would remain as suspects.
OJ would be the only one in that group.
Untrue
1. It was an Aris Istotoner - a common glove.
2. The hairs could not be DNA tested. The cap appeared to have been outside for a long period of time.
3. Oj cut his hand in his hotel room in Chicago. This was backed up by a half dozen witnesses and it cannot be rebutted.
Nicole was seen by her neighbor arguing with 3 men in front of her condo abut an hour before the murders. Its my belief they had something to do with it.
@@Jim.Jim.32 ! Incorrect. There was significant testimony from Aris employees who testified that there were only 200 pairs of these gloves.
2. It was not DNA tested but it was undisputed that the hat contained hairs from a black man. I have no idea why you say the cap appeared to be outside for a long period of time. It was found right next to Ronald Goldman.
3. Incorrect again. OJ was questioned by Lange and Vanatter the day after the murder. They had discovered blood at OJ's house WHILE HE WAS IN CHICAGO. OJ admitted that he cut his hand at his house while he was running around before his trip to Chicago i.e. at the exact time of the murders.
ruclips.net/video/r01cjxLc9rM/видео.html
OJ confessed already many times. Of course he did it.
1. has anyone you know ever borrowed a t-shirt, coat, gloves, scarf? The concept that only the things own ed by one person are used by one person is not based on reality in most social groups.
2. African American hair that did not match with OJ so just who was wearing that hat and why did they decide to leave it at the crime scene? Seems a bit silly no, to be leaving caps and gloves of blood laying round, why not put them in your pocket when fleeing? IF you do not see that as suspect then what can we do.
3. Airline pilot and autograph hunters at airport and on plane said he had not cut on his knuckle, was not bleeding and had no bruises on his face. Ron Goldman's knuckles were swollen and blue and his arms had lots of defensive wounds. Being a black belt karate and 21 years his junior in his phyisical prime in a knife fight to the death why is Simpson unmarked?
Seems to me like you are rushing to judgement just like the LAPD did when it is clearly more nuanced that it seems.
@@TheInterestedObserver This is the type of hair splitting you get from OJ truthers.
1. No, it is not my experience that adult males share expensive gloves with each other. I have never done so and I have never had anyone let me wear their very expensive gloves.
2.The hair in the knit cap was not genetically matched to OJ, but it contained African American hairs, demonstrating that the person who killed Ron and Nicole was black.
3. The fact that there were airline passengers who did not detect a cut on OJ's hand is certainly not dispositive evidence that he did not have a cut on his hand. The police had already found blood at Rockingham WHILE OJ WAS IN CHICAGO. When confronted with the evidence, OJ admitted that he cut his hand the previous evening AT OR AROUND THE SAME TIME THAT RON AND NICOLE WERE KILLED. When asked how he cut his hand, he replied that he did not know. Did you listen to the interrogation?
4. Of course at the civil trial we found out that OJ did, in fact, own the very rare Bruno Magli shoes that the murderer wore, only 200 some were sold in the US(I suppose that you are going to tell me that OJ let a friend of his wear the shoes too)
So you are saying that there is another black male who owns both these very rare Isotoner gloves AND these very Bruno Magli shoes who had a cut on his left hand and even knew , let alone had a reason to kill, Nicole.?
This is of course just a small fraction of the evidence which directly points to OJ as the killer.
19:15. Listening him belittle Charlie shows you what kind of person he is.
Fuhrman shouldn't have denied saying the n-word. Back then it wasn't the worst word in the world that only black Americans could use. It's so silly to behave that way about a word. I have never used it outside of reading or repeating it but he would've been believed if he hadn't lied about it. But after Rodney King no one in Los Angeles could touch that, especially in the LAPD.
It's so silly. Words are words. That's free speech. Just being polite is what used to control our speech and not some bizarre thing like "hate speech". The wrong people get accused of such a thing.
Him and Cochran should of got clay award He deserved it.
Scheck is a badass
The best
Yeah so cool how he got a man who brutally murdered people off
Lawyers represent clients free for the marketing. It’s FREE MARKETING. Better than paying for billboards or bus ads. That’s why they do it. FREE PUBLICITY that will bring them hundreds of clients in the future. Name recognition. They made millions from other clients after this. And charged them.
I want these two FRAUDS to represent me in court
💀
Absolutely! They great lawyers, because even if you’re guilty, they don’t care. They will give their best to get you off.
@@pommiebearsThat’s how America works. You’re innocent until proven guilty. Because if you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time you would want the benefit of the doubt
Huh? So it doesn't bother you that the cops planted evidence?
I would of asked the question, why did OJ say “I deserve to die, all I did was love her “ on the phone to the police whilst on the chase.
You cant take everything he said in the car ride as gospel. He also said he has absolutely nothing to do with the murders do you believe him on that too?
He also said he was the "only one who deserved to get hurt".
Once police are incompetent and dirty, I'd never agree with them. Likely more then one person did it....
Bringing doubt in court doesn't make a person smart.but very evil
barry scheck is an extremely smart man--but the fact that he went to the oj side make me sick--he knows damn well that oj did it. he has to live with it.
My thoughts exactly. He knows better. Both of them. Barry schleck just wanted a rhinoplasty. I used to have so much respect for them.
@@brendalevings2427
Racism Statement.
What's interesting about this video of these 3 guys is. You have two Jewish lawyers making the point about Fuhrman being a racist who already had a reputation before the Simpson case. Including, Fuhrman being known for his antisemitic actions. But. Charlie Rose, like some of the other Jewish people, were so racially obsessed with Simpson. They were willing to give Fuhrman an antisemitic pass. In order to justify their racism towards a Black man, whom they felt, killed a wyt woman. And sadly. These types. They'll ignore the gray areas, in order make this a black and white argument, over their covert racist Black and White racism. Charlie's racism card wss showing. And the two lawyers perp it and exposed it. Had this been a Jewish man on trial. Rosr would've been willing to listen. One another related note. For all that we know. The murders could've been a racial hate crime. Especially if those racist saw a Jewish man at Nicole's condo. Ron Goldman was Jewish too. And. Nicole stated thst she was receiving a lot if racist letters and thrests, where she'd became so concerned. She'd asked Simpson to come by and monitor the condo. This was shortly before the murders.
What did detective vannater lie about?
He said that OJ was not a suspect and they were just going to his house to warn him as next of kin. However, an ex-husband is not next of kin and he separately admitted that Simpson was a suspect. He walked that back by saying oh, spouses and partners are always suspects.
He also was the one that took Simpson's blood to the house.
No. He said it changed once they saw the blood droplets
Nothing. now the poor ole man is dead. The criminalist was at the crime scene and that's who he had to give it to. These two are fill of shit.
M
A grandstander, those dummies wouldn't have voted guilty with a videotape
Theae 2 must pay for their moral errors too. Like the LAPD. And Charlie shut up.
justice american style