It is the 10th anniversary for the big O.J. Simpson incident. Remember the White Bronco slow speed chase? " if the glove doesn't fit acquit"? Marsha Clarke, Johnny Cochrane. Did he do it or didn't he or are you old enough to remember? Hope this doesn't offend anyone, just curious on your thoughts.

He probably did it; but there wasn't enough evidence to convict him. He should've walked IMO.

People have been convicted on a lot less, Much Less, evidence. Really now... they found victim's blood on his car, in the car. Blood on his socks in his bedroom. All the DNA matched. He wasnt home, then he was. Footprints in blood at scene match his size and shoe model (rare Italian shoe make if I remember correctly). To say the police planted that blood was absurd. They didnt have the time. And why was he on the run with thousands of dollars in his car? And the note he wrote that was essentially a confession. I think that case proved to the whole world what many of us know in the USA. If you got money and power, then the law does not apply. Think about it, laws in this country are largely the manifestation of the rich and powerful lawmakers and corporations. Coincidence? Who are they protecting and whos interest are they looking out for? It was a joke, a media circus, a ratings bananza, and it gave a lot of people something to talk about for a year. But the sad truth is, two people got brutally murdered and the man (or men) got away scott free. When its all said and done, the result was not much different than the muslim extremist who cut the head off of the civialian contractor. Only OJ didnt tape it!

he did it, he was found guilty of it in civil court even, i couldn't believe they let him go.

To convict someone guilty you are supposed to be 100% sure in your mind that he/she is guilty.innocent people have been put to death because of misleading evidence.If you have any doubts you vote not guilty, that is the way it is written.Now, can anyone here say that you would bet everything you own, your family, your friends, and everything else that matters that OJ was guilty.If you can't say yes then you need to vote not guilty because if you vote guilty and are wrong you just stripped a man of his-belongings-family-friends-and everything else that he hasOur justice system is here for a reason.

To convict someone guilty you are supposed to be 100% sure in your mind that he/she is guilty. ... If you have any doubts you vote not guilty, that is the way it is written.

Punisher,I have to disagree with that... at least as the US judicial system states it... You are to convict if you believe that the evidence supports the conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. I feel that often times we look at any doubt as being reasonable, which is not the case.

 

innocent people have been put to death because of misleading evidence.

Yes innocents have been wrongly convicted, but that is not necessarily the fault of either the investigators or the jury. Humans are fallible... the very hard dilemma we face is: the good of the one vs. the good of the many.

Our justice system is here for a reason, but it is not here to only convict those who tape their own crimes.

 

B-Cell.

I understand where you are coming from but...Take the OJ case, for example.I might be way off but i remember hearing something about planted evidence or manipulated evidence.That sends up a red flag to me. If i'm not sure an investigation is fair there is no way I could convict someone guilty of murder, let alone a lesser crime.

the "planted" evidence was already disproven earlier in this post, try reading.

listen, I've seen several shows saying that the reason OJ went free was because of police foul upsaka bad conduct or whatever the **** you wanna call itPERIOD

i can believe that