Did Simpson hide assets from his creditors? 🪒 Get 100 free blades with your purchase of a Henson Shaving razor with code LEGALEAGLE: legaleagle.link/Henson ⚖⚖⚖Get a great lawyer, fast! legaleagle.link/eagleteam
Dear Legal Eagle, Do not save that Soapbox for another day. Take hold of the change that matters to you. The public should have had access to criminal trial proceedings yesterday. *Reference to ending comments on Nebula version.
a medical rubber gloves is less thin 1% of 1% of 1 % of an inch. a 3 child's old's wrest is at least an inch. a medical rubber glove Would not make difference on a grown professional football players wrest
the low speed chase was going on during my aunt's wedding. my parents, both journalists, and others kept taking turns sneaking out of the reception to listen to their car radios and hurry back to keep everybody updated. i was three and had walking pneumonia, making a terribly cranky flower girl. there's a picture of my dad holding me and giving me a gently stern talking to about throwing my flower girl basket at people. i don't recall throwing the basket. but if i did it, here's how it would have gone:
It should teach you to do your own research because the media left out lots of evidence that was discussed during the trial that raised reasonable doubt
The craziest part. There's multiple videos of OJ wearing those gloves. Not only that, the gloves were frozen and thawed out which shrinks the leather. Him getting off was all levels of crazy
And on advice of council, he went of his arthritis meds, so his knuckles swelled up. Of course LAPD behaved like the Keystone Cops and made it too easy for his lawyers to poke holes into the State's case.
If you notice, he also appeared to be wearing latex gloves under the evidence gloves (presumably to avoid contaminating the evidence), which would further make them a tighter fit.
@lordofuzkulak8308 he was.i do remember someone pointing that out before. Even still, all the other evidence like the DNA, the shoe print, the bloody socks, really it all should've just been enough to end him. I'm surprised the parents of the deceased didn't just track him down and end him themselves.
He also had another pair of rubber or silicone gloves on as he was trying them on. Yeah no shit they're gonna be snug. The level of stupidity in that trial was off the chart.
My favorite Norm MacDonald impression was this one: OJ Simpson has passed away from cancer at the age of 76. He died doing what he loved most: getting away with murder.
I thought that's what real life was... I never understood why there needed to be a sepparation between the word "buy" and the word "pay" when both serve the same function.
@@notbutz9737 You buy products. You pay for products with money. You buy services from people. You pay money for those services. See the difference between the two words?
@@freddied8479 Not the same with Vince, he stopped paying because he thought Grant broke the NDA, which she hadn't. That is, until Vince broke the NDA by not paying her (and all the other women).
As a little kid in ‘94 I couldn’t understand why orange juice was so popular all of a sudden, I was like yeah its good stuff but why put it on trial for murder
My mom was upset with us a few years back when we named my youngest Oliver James. I think there is a bit too much emphasis on the OJ part and not enough on the rich assholes getting away with murder part.
That white bronco chase was such a big deal because 1. They shut down an entire freeway so the city of LA was at a standstill 2. It was so slow. He wasn't even going the speed limit from what I remember. Him and his buddy were just casually driving down an empty freeway for around 2 hours. Every channel switched to it and my dad called me from work to watch it since he knew I was an MTV junkie. It was crazy because everyone thought he was the worlds nicest guy and here he was driving at like 30 mph down the center of the freeway with a gun to his head and roughly 30 cop cars after him.
I have a vivid memory of watching it on tv and my parents came in from grocery shopping - they stopped, put their bags on the floor and just stared at the tv in the living room. It was a completely surreal moment.
I actually can't imagine having an alibi that stupid. Like... you killed someone. People are onto you. Everyone is talking about it. You get a public appearance where you can give whatever story you want. Do you spend time making the best narrative you possibly can so that you have a solid defence? Nope, just make something up about being attacked by a karate man and then say "erm I dunno what happened after that I forgot"
Even funnier is that he said he had the knife in his hand and doesn't remember what happened after. Didn't say the knife was taken from him. 😂 So, he blacked out the using the knife part 😂
Seems like you just said that to create a false statement. If you guys are gonna criticize the matter use factual information so the people following have a stage to stand on.
I really felt sorry for the kids. They had to see their dad after that probably knowing that he killed their mom. There’s no way they weren’t exposed to his temper too.
This man was allowed to dodge consequences his entire life. Wasn't forced to do his community service, let off on murder, prevented from having his property claimed to pay his victims until the day he died. I can't imagine it would be as satisfying taking the property from his family instead.
Apparently, when the police rang OJ to let him know Nicole was dead his response was "do they know who killed her?" Not "oh my god she's dead?" Or something like that. He just "assumed" she had been murdered.
@@ethanstyant9704 Oh and then they found evidence of 2 different knives, 2 different foot prints, and decided not to reveal her tongue was pulled through her neck “incision”. Let’s just focus on the wife beater.
Okay tbf, this is the first question i'd ask because i immediately assume the worst possible reason. My great grandmother was dying for months and when i found out she died i still instantly assumed she got killed by somebody else.
Wow... You do know that this is a legal channel right? We don't just presume someone's guilty, because they didn't ask a question the way you think they should. Also, that was his ex-wife... There's at least some love lost there.
Amen to that sheeple are so blinded by the narrative oj did it himself lol and the dna could of been his sons thats why it was cloae to his it wasnt a 100 match @@baalbezub6848
The first time I heard about OJ Simpson's murder case was in a statistics course, and how stats can manipulate points of view. OJ's lawyer argued, yes there was domestic abuse, but the number of domestic abusers that eventually killed their significant other, was like 1 in a 1000 (I can't remember). But obviously, he omitted the fact that of course most people don't kill their wives or husbands even if there is domestic abuse. Murders are rare to begin with. BUT if there WAS a murder, the likelihood of the abusive husband being the murderer is more than half the time. It's absolutely mind boggling how he got away with murder.
Correction, most men who murder their wives have no prior history of abusing them, Scott Petersons are far more common. The defense intended to call a psychologist to testify towards why OJ was not typical of a man who would kill his wife [ie divorced for many years, moved on with girlfriend, refused ex-wife's advances to get back together, vacationed with ex-wife and attended events with her like Trump's wedding to Marla maples, single incident of "abuse" which was several pushes after she attacked him with a bat, etc.]
It is incredibly easy to manipulate data. That’s why “correlation doesn’t prove causation” is a saying. We can manipulate data any way we want to. But that doesn’t mean it is accurate or helpful for that case.
As someone who had had gloves shrink after being wet, the "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit" rings hollow. Those gloves were found outside and were not exactly in pristine condition. If they had been too big despite their condition, that would be a different case entirely (although if you put the wet gloves on something to stretch them, they will do so. But it takes work to stretch them. Water makes the leather more able to both shrink and stretch, but shrinking doesn't take work.)
I can fit new XS latex gloves on my big hand. My size is usually L. I can do that because the gloves is powdered. Meanwhile, i would struggle to put L size gloves if my hands are wet
If I recall correctly, a photo of Simpson wearing the Bruno Magli shoes didn't surface until after the not guilty verdict in the criminal case, despite strenuous efforts by the prosecution to find one. When it did, it came from a photographer who'd been engaged to photograph Simpson at some publicity event. Since it had been a paying gig, he had kept his dated invoice, proving that Simpson unquestionably had owned a pair of the shoes at the time of the murders.
Lol, false, prosecutor could never tie the shoes to OJ, and the photos were proven to be clones via the negatives. None of the sales people of the shoes ever recalled selling to OJ and FBI could not find any connection to OJ and such shoes.
Fun fact, the ghost writer of OJ Simpson's book actually testified against OJ during the trial. He happened to live a few doors down from where the murders occurred and testified that he had heard Nicole Brown Simpson's dog barking in distress that evening.
My mom was a hairstylist in the 90s. When the trial was happening *NO ONE WAS OUTSIDE* , half the shops were closed and the ones that stayed open all had TV's inside to watch the trial
I remember in school the teachers had it on in the pod which was like a little sem room between four classrooms and kept it on all day and when the verdict was red I was out at PE and one of the teachers came running out saying "not guilty not guilty!" I remember watching The Chase too
It wasn't quite the same for me (too young during the OJ Simpson trial) but I remember something similar happening during the trial of Michael Jackson. In 5th grade one of the teachers had a TV on showing some of the news coverage of the trial (which given the subject *might* have been considered inappropriate, but honestly I personally like that the teacher tried to show us reality at a young age.)
i went over the oj case in my forensics class and an example about how miss handling of evidence and a poorly handled case could make things fall apart and breed doubt when there shouldn't be any. it's so weird to see it be brought up all over again after he passed
I wish I could remember the legal scholar's name, but the best and most accurate and succinct summary of the OJ Simpson trial was: "In the trial of OJ Simpson, the police framed a guilty man." There was a TON that the police did wrong and did illegally. And if they HADN'T done all of that, I'm pretty sure OJ would have been found guilty.
I had Nicole's sister as a counselor for a while. She was an absolutely amazing human being, and I'm so happy that she's finally got justice. She told me that she'd finally be able to rest once he died.
Something I don't recall noticing at the time (I was too young) that my dad pointed out when they showed the footage recently is that when OJ was trying to put on the gloves he is already wearing some gloves. That would, of course, make gloves a much tighter fit than if they just went over your hands as they are designed to do.
Everyone knows murder is only possible if you're wearing gloves that fit perfectly. I'm positive there's never been a single death by the hands of someone wearing ill-fitted gloves
Uhhhh, did you not see the popular video of OJ attempting to put on the glove during the trial? It wasn’t just ill-fitted, they were way too small. Not defending him but I think you have the wrong idea.
@@TitaniumTurbine Leather gloves shrink around 15% when they get wet and aren't immediately dried off, which is what happened. Leather gloves are also meant to be a fairly tight fit to begin with and he was kind of able to get one of the gloves on, so it's not much of a stretch to say that, if they were a little larger, they would fit him "like a glove". There should have been a cross examination in which the same brand gloves of the same size are brought in brand new and he tried those on as well. It could very much squash a lot of these conspiracies either way about the glove not fitting.
@@justicefool3942Regarding the gloves (one fitting and one not) weren't the gloves found in seperate locations?... one at the scene, and one at his residence. That would explain one fitting better than the other. Also the gloves in question were Isotoners (if I recall correctly), very tight fitting gloves.
@@Bahlzeron The more likely reason one would fit better than the other is uneven blood distribution. That is, the one that fit better had less blood on it and so would shrink less. Either way, they both shrank, which is why a good cross exam should have had a control group of gloves that are the same brand of the same size that were not previously worn or tampered with to get a much better grasp on how the gloves would have likely fit prior to being soaked in blood.
I was a criminal justice major in college during the OJ case. We actually had someone from that DAs office come speak my senior year. Let’s just say he a) admitted his office didn’t handle the case particularly well and b) he personally believed in OJs guilt.
@@mistym0rning Yeah except that evidence of blood wasn't collected properly and mishandled that it looked unnatural and therefor was argued that it was planted by the cops. It had traces of EDTA so they argued it was from a lab. The accusation of the blood being planted plus the blood being contaminated with what looks like what's used in labs was enough to throw doubt on the blood evidence. Tech today would have been able to tell the difference between natural EDTA and lab version but back then it wasn't. Now I do believe OJ is guilty but you stating it so clear cut makes it obvious you don't know much about the case. The police messed up. All this "strong" evidence wasn't because of how the police handled it. Fuhrman the guy that lied under oath and was really racist was even asked if he falsified reports or planted evidence and he pleaded the 5th.
@@Alexander-the-MediocreYes! I remember this. I was 14 at the time. The trial is what got me interested into pursuing forensics as a career. A lot changed in the field after the OJ trial.
@@wintercame 😂🤣😂yeah right. She also bought him the Bronco and the house he lived in and gave him a career. Nicole was a great monogamous lady... Legend has it that she once raised the dead.
Strange factoid..... The Ghost Writer for the book testified against OJ at the trial. He lived across from Nicole and was one of the people who heard the dog howling.
Why didn't anyone find out what was wrong? Too paranoid or self obsessed to go find out? I always go out to see what's wrong in my neighborhood. I'm the one who reported the water main broke at midnight.
@@5amiann I'm the same way. Dogs were barking a lot more than normal last week. I checked behind houses, and the street in front, but didn't see anything. In the OJ case someone walking down the sidewalk heard and saw the agitated dog, and saw the body.
@@5amiann dogs howl over a lot of things, and it doesn't sound like a particularly quiet household to live near in the first place. there are reasons other than "paranoid" or "egomaniac" to not investigate a dog howling. also given that it was in fact a murder scene i dont think its automatically "paranoid" to be concerned about the potential danger of investigating. if that was someones reasoning [which we have no evidence it was], it wouldnt be wrong to be worried.
I've gone outside to investigate what I thought was a forest fire at midnight in the middle of a blizzard, called 911 and walked over to try and get a better look, turns out there was a factory just past the woods and it was just some routine burning, but I apparently locked my apartment and forgot my keys, I was stuck outside in a t shirt and shorts in a blizzard at midnight miles from the nearest possible 24 store, I had to dig through the snow for a rock to bust the window to unlock my door because I had a second floor apartment and the door window was the only one I could reach. After that I decided to just stay inside and call in the future and if I'm wrong oh well at least I had good intentions. Fk going to investigate.
I remember Chris Rock had a bit in his act at the time about this case. He was suspicious of the Black community’s joy over OJ’s acquittal. He said something like “Where’s my OJ prize?” (meaning, what did we “win” by OJ getting off?)
That's the USA for you - the country where poor people cheer for the rich person they most closely identify with, because they're the easiest person they can imagine being.
A lot of people viewed it as "haha our rich guy gets away with crimes that your rich guys get away with" which out of context sounds horrible, but when classes and color exist it is a huge win. Your rich get away with anything, our rich get away with anything regardless of how political it is. We are exactly the same.
The Innocence Project was founded by the DNA expert from OJ's legal team using the money he made from the trial. The police contaminating the scene and making a lot of the DNA evidence unusable in addition to the public's poor understanding of DNA evidence led to the rise of better evidence handling procedures and DNA evidence appeared in crime dramas more often to get average people comfortable with the concept
Feels like it needs to be said, in a civil court you only need to be found '51% guilty' but in criminal court you need to be found '99% guilty'. This essentially means that there can be without a doubt that you're guilty in criminal court, while civil court has more leeway.
Hiding "if" inside the "I" of "I did it" and adding "confessions of the killer" is still one of the most brilliant moves in forever destroying the reputation of OJ. He might have gotten more work and had a rehabilitated reputation (like somebody such as George W Bush) if nothing extra was done, however the civil case and change to the book absolutely solidified his guilt in the minds of many, I'd say.
He didn't write that book. He just let them put his name on it for money because the families of the 'victims' effectively kept going after him for every dime he earned.
@@Not_Alwaysthe murder victims are still victims? You might want to rephrase that. Victim doesn't mean victim of OJ specifically. Murder is the action that they were victims of.
He helped write the book. And the families of the victims had every right to go after him for every dime he earned. He owes them still to this day. @@Not_Always
I never understood that defense. Leather shrinks, hands swell, and "fits like a glove" is a saying we use because gloves are tight to the skin. Yet, somehow we ignored all the other evidence and put a (confessed) murder on the streets based on one tight glove
Unfortunately LAPD were less competent than the Keystone Cops and with mishandling of the evidence and destroying evidence by rolling Nichole onto her back to put her in the body bag to transport her to the morgue even a new lawyer could have gotten an aquital.
Mark Fuhrman was far more damaging to the case because his recording primed the jury to think of all evidence in the context of him admitting to planting evidence in previous cases. The problem is that even if Fuhrman wanted to plant evidence he would have had to have known he was going to frame OJ before he even knew where he was going or what happened. The timeline of events for him to have planted evidence don't make any sense. However, this reasoning would have been completely prejudiced by the recordings of Fuhrman using racial slurs, claiming to brutalize suspects, and claiming to plant evidence.
I think the jury was more afraid of the possible repercussions of convicting him (such as the riots after the not guilty verdicts in the Rodney King case) and of being labeled as racists than they were concerned that Simpson might murder someone else. I was in my late 30s at the time and there was a lot if side eye glances. They had to know that they were acquitting a probably guilty man. That's our system though, it's run by humans and humans are infamously flawed, we shouldn't be surprised when cases like this occur occasionally.
More context for Gen Z viewers: Robert Kardashian is Kim Kardashian's dad, and Alan Dershowitz is the same Alan Dershowitz who defended Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein.
I'm not saying this in his defense, but Dershowitz has many times stated that he takes the cases that pay him. He's also said that if the Goldman family had come to him first, he would've represented them.
On the note of Rodney King - my parents were newlyweds at the time, living in West LA during the riots. My mom was nine months pregnant with my older sister. The curfew was lifted before my sister was born, but they still remember seeing the smoke from the balcony of their apartment.
I have a friend from school whose dad was shot in Ktown during the riots. He immediately moved the family to Denver which is where I met him. They were all from Seoul and just wanted a better life because S.Korea was pretty impoverished in the 70s and 80s. What they ended up enduring was far worse than the crime in Seoul. They lived Denver and made it their permanent home though.
One of my colleagues was a teacher in Compton at the time. He said that when the verdict came in, the principal called all the staff in and told everyone to get in their cars and get the hell out, because he knew that shit was going to get ugly.
I was origionally sketical because, to a layman, the obvious question is "if hes guilty why was he acquitted?", in the age of dopamine fueled urgency and impatience (thanks tiktok) its awfully suss that no one could give me a straightforward answer. Its also not CRAZY to image the public might wrongfully demonize a celebrity, especially one who isnt white, so from my perspective things didnt seem to add up, the wikipedia summary doesnt explain it very well either. Of course, in truth, its very complicated and not easy to summarize quickly. Eventually I was educated about the whole story, not just the sketchy trial. I think part of what lead to my undecided perspective in the firstplace is that the common popculture joke is to kinda satirically shed doubt on OJ's guilt, and thats kinda how I learned about it all first. Theres also a lot of instances where people paint OJ more endearingly and obviously once you humanzie him you kinda want to believe he didnt do it, coz wouldnt that be great? Hopefully that makes sense. you could probably just summarize that all as "people often dont explain it very well".
@@82Catfishthat's not the reason at all. The reason is because people will say you are racist if you say that he was guilty trying to shut you up on the topic and that is something we do more and more. We hide behind different stereotypes to try and shut down any opposition because we no longer have the ability to even try and think critically and get to the truth.
It's probably just because of how young I was when all this happened, but I had no idea of just how vindictive OJ was towards the families, making them jump through hoop after hoop after hoop for pennies of what he owed them
Self preservation.. anybody would react that way to a civil judgement against them if the civil judgement means everything you have gets taken from you (even if it should in principle, self preservation means you don't care about that)
Shit I laughed pretty hard when that lawyer said " I am surprised I became the exactor to ojs will but I'll make sure the goldmen family gets nothing". I mean man that's a whole new level of hate I didn't expect to see in this day and age to people you don't know.
Right? Like damn, what a piece of shit. And there's literally no way he wouldn't have known people would hate him for it either. He basically just said, "welp, guess it's time to do literally the worst thing I could do in this situation."
Can we have a shoutout to LegalEagle's research team? Look at all the article clipping they show - pieces from NYT, Wash Po, LA Times and others of all the reporting and how it was reported at the time. Must have taken a while putting that altogether. As a journalism nerd, I was pausing to read the exact wording and then googling to read the full pieces, fascinating. Thank you guys for your work and LegalEaglle for your explainer on this important injustice. Prayers to the Nicole and Ron's families and loved ones, I hope OJ's passing gives you some solace that the killer is finally gone from this world.
@@Laissez-faire402 Dude watch the video and count the number of newspaper clippings. He could have just talked over moving images of OJ and some random mashed up news clips from CNN. They chose the exact pieces from major publishers that were reported at the exact time the trial and civil trial happened. They provide the context of what it was like back then, e.g. cvil trial verdict piece talking about it coming out same day as Bill Clinton's state of the union. "Standard work" GTFO. Legal Eagle is an outstanding UA-cam channel and his team puts in the work to make his videos the best as possible, and I appreciate that. Maybe stop watching if you're a hater.
A funny little thing I remember from the trial was the stealth product marketing some people sneaked in the courtroom. early on in the trial, you could see the backside of a computer monitor whenever they would show the courtroom from a certain angle. When the trial started, it was just a nondescript monitor but a few days later someone had replaced it with a monitor with a monitor that had a huge “SONY” embossed on the back side plastic.
I was a kid in 1995 and remember this going on. Even then, I had the unsettling feeling that he was a bad person, just seeing him on TV. But when he was acquitted, I had this idea that "well, I guess he didn't do it" because kids are dumb and I guess I thought there's no way they'd get something that big wrong. Of course, the older I got, the more I learned how fallacious that line of thinking was, and became as convinced as everyone else that he was guilty. Thank you for the coverage of it here. Looking back now, I feel so bad for Nicole. She did what we're all told to do: report it, get out--and she did the best she could with the circumstances to do exactly that... yet it wasn't enough, the police didn't help, and she not only got killed, but he basically got away with it. I wish I could say the world had changed, but looking at both domestic violence stats and the corrupt, broken "justice" system... it's just the same shit, different decade, isn't it?
"I thought there's no way they'd get something that big wrong." The jury didn't get it wrong. The job of the prosecution was to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the jury didn't think the prosecution managed that, then they got it right when they acquitted. As perverse as it may seem, we don't actually send people to prison for the acts they actually committed. We send them to prison because the prosecution convinced a jury that that the person committed those acts. We mostly all accept on the basis of faith in the jury system that these are the same thing, but they're really not.
@benjaminthefox That, their racism, and the fact that the judge, prosecutors, and lawyers all wanted to write books on it and make money. Shame on them all.
I was horrified to see a comment in another post that someone said that his football career was more important than the violent death of two people and this person thought he was guilty. He said doesn’t matter he was the Juice! His football career was amazing, he was such a hero for his football career. Really where are people’s morals?
The one thing that impresses me about your videos, is the ad reads u do, even for your legal team, is ALWAYS done brand new for each video, not just one clip reused from when you originally did it. It’s nice you spin the videos topic into it as well
I'm shocked and appalled that Devin did not mention the Chewbacca Defense. It'll probably be the most enduring legacy of OJ's in the pop culture zeitgeist, _and_ it's related to law...
I think it would be disrespectful to cite that in a video that addresses the Brown and Goldman estates. They still have surviving relatives that still have to endure the trauma of him being free, relevant, and the system failing them.
And now people rally around some AR-15 toting affluent teen who piled on the crocodile tears after he murdered two people and got his 15 minutes of fame from Fox News and their ilk. So there are people who become idols who are even worse than O.J. who was undoubtedly amoral in so many ways.
2:00 My boss and coworker were talking about OJ. He then turns and goes - you're too young to have witnessed any of this. I just mentioned that I was born in 1998 and I had to check when the trials started.
Wow! They actually allowed middle school aged children to watch this in school!? I remember my parents and others being captivated by this trial. I remember when the verdict was read but at 13 (my age at the time) I didn't understand why people celebrated the verdict while others were devastated by it. In my school we didn't watch it. The teachers seemed divided.
Same at my middle school! They brought a radio into the cafeteria while we were at lunch so that we could hear the verdict live. A very bizarre memory that I'll never forget.
Same at my school in 4th grade, the teacher wheeled in the tv and yelled out "aw bull shit!" Even at the time I questioned if this was an appropriate thing for an adult to be doing.
My High School Social Studies teacher asked if we wanted to watch and follow the Michael Jackson trial. Majority of us said yes, so we watched it on a rollout TV stand as it went along through the verdict
Two things that surprise me: Florida somehow having a law that allows criminals to get away from getting their court-ordered payments made (you'd think a exception for debts incurring from either criminal or civil court-ordered settlements would exist but again, it's Florida); The other is LaVergne's statement claiming he'd do everything to make sure the Goldmans didn't got nothing. At least here such a comment would be considered a grave violation of the Ethics and Discipline Code of the OAB (similar to a State bar association, but that covers the entire country) and would get him suspended pending investigation, and maybe even disbarred (and here disbarment is a death sentence to any lawyer's career).
If I had to guess the laws in Florida were meant to protect the elderly from losing everything, should creditors come after them for some reason. After all they do get tricked into things at that age, they start to lose their understanding and agree to things that no one would normally agree to. Just because a few bad eggs use it to their advantage doesn't mean it's a bad law. My grandmother would have totally done something like that had my mother not taken over her finances.
Props for remembering the "If i did it" sketch from "The Chris Rock Show" which was famously predicted such a ridiculous book. Also, OJ's film career dates all the way back to when he was a student at USC. His appearance in "The Towering Inferno" was while he was an active player in the NFL. "Capricorn One" and "The Naked Gun" came right at the end of his playing career. Not to mention the Hertz ads. So he was very much a household name, even if you didn't follow football.
Great ep, but those Did You Know boxes at minute 14:00 and after are so small that they're not readable on a phone. Usually, you guys full screen those things.
One tangential note: He got away with murder, with the exception of the nine years he spent in a Nevada state prison. Yes, completely different crime, but yes, it was a setup, and yes, the severity of the sentence was directly related to the murders. Las Vegas Metro was in communication with two members of the group who went with Simpson to take back his memorabilia. They knew that the crime was going to be committed, and they sat back and let it happen. Their informants/participants were in fact gathering evidence for them. It was all done to make sure that he would finally go to prison after getting away with murder. My source: two outside consultants working at Las Vegas Metro at the time, who were present when explicit conversations about the setup took place, before and afterwards.
the gloves always got me. If you buy fitted gloves that are snug/tight and then try to put those same gloves on with a pair of latex gloves - that are too small anyway because your lawyer is good - then those fitted/snug gloves won't fit anymore. That Jury were some seriously stupid people.
I think the “if the glove doesn’t fit…” defense could’ve worked because of Mark Fuhrman. The whole plead the fifth moment when asked if he planted evidence likely aided the defense in planting the idea that the gloves don’t fit , therefore they don’t belong to OJ. Now we have knowledge that they didn’t have. Unfortunately, his actions tainted the case and helped prevent justice from being delivered.
@@sachathehuman4234Its not racist, in fact the jury was racist. Most of them were black. This happened after the LA riots. They 100% voted not guilty BECAUSE he was black. The fact that detective Furhman used racist remarks a lot.
Man, it would be nice if we didn't have a tiered justice system where rich people basically have to admit (in the correct way no less) to be found guilty of their crimes...
This time it wasn't because of the tiered justice system of wealth. Instead it was because of the tiered justice system of racism. Specifically the LA PD were horribly racist and had been caught trying to frame OJ. And the jury was majority black with only two white members. And worse of all, the prosecution was insanely incompetent. Had the Prosecution been better or the Jury not already untrusting to the police he would have been found guilty.
And the poor can't afford proper legal help so they have to take guilty pleas, innocent or not, while DAs only want to win & cops can get false confessions, it's BS
Honestly, even if they admit it that’s not a guarantee. If you’re rich enough, there’s always a loophole a good Lawyer can find. Johnny Cochran was evidently a better Lawyer than even Billy Flynn.
The fact that he got found responsible and liable in civil court tells me, very much that this wasn't about anyone actually beliving he didn't do it. It was people hating LAPD and having issues with corruption and clear biases within that institution. The tensions and grivences were so high people were willing to let a murder go. I believe one of the jurors said that this was a payback for Rhodney King. Now, this shouldn't have had a bearing on OJ's case, but when tensions are high people are rarely logical and rational.
Not only that, but they had no choice but to vote based on what they were presented with in court: a star witness that was a turner diaries level racist, blood evidence that was mishandled, and a trial that lasted more than a year. They were all exhausted and I think the verdict was as much payback to the prosecution team as it was payback for rodney king...
Agree. The defense exploited that sentiment in stacking the jury, and did their best to paint the prosecution as biased. Fuhrman was a godsend for the defense- some think he was paid by them to discredit the state's case.
Guilty or not - there was a solid establishment of reasonable doubt regarding the way cops handled the evidence. I personally find that BOTH juries came to the appropriate findings under the rule of law. Civil trials are on the balance of probabilities but criminal cases need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Dirty cops = plenty of reasonable doubt. Had the detectives played it clean, the defence couldn't play up that doubt in the jurors' minds.
The amount of times that OJ claimed he loved Nicole to then just sit in every interview and laugh hysterically was enough for me. I knew he was guilty from the moment I saw all the evidence and the court proceedings. Him laughing hysterically when discussing the brutal murders of his ex-wife and Ron Goldman, I cannot have respect for such an individual
@@matthewbarabas3052 No, that would be the evidence that later was found to be insufficient to prove that he was guilty to a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Courts don't "prove" people guilty; they "find" them guilty, which is something a reasonable person can disagree with, and they certainly don't "prove" people not guilty because that is not their job. All the criminal court found was there was some "reasonable doubt". The rule is "If you're only 99% certain, you must acquit." And, of course, the civil court found that the evidence was sufficient to establish that he probably did it.
@@matthewbarabas3052 He was proved guilty. The trial was in reality a political trial, the jury ignored the evidence because they were being threaten by the politicians
OJ showed us one important thing when he was acquitted: Black, white or brown... so long as you have the money and fame you can escape any consequences for your heinous actions
almost ... what it showed was that -- for the first time -- if he had enough money, a Black man could finally escape consequences just like rich white men had always done.
@@Not_Always Answer: The statements of one of his jurors stating that she had decided that he was not guilty after the first day of the trial and nothing afterward could change her mind. That's a tainted juror admitting to it in public.
Wild thing about the glove is that it did in fact fit... I've definitely worn clothes that didn't fit WELL, but I was still wearing them. I'm not gonna go out and buy some new gloves to commit a murder. Any ol' gloves laying around the house should do.
not only that, there multiple videos of him wearing the gloves on TV. Furthermore, the gloves did fit while he was wearing other gloves at the same time he stopped taking medication for his arthritis so his hand would get bigger
Didn’t they also have him put on rubber gloves underneath while trying on the leather gloves? Since they couldn’t disturb the evidence. It’s difficult to put leather gloves over rubber gloves, for sure. The fact that jurors weighed those ill-fitted gloves more heavily than DNA / blood evidence will never cease to infuriate me.
Could say the same thing about Trump or Clinton, both of whom have way more blood on their hands (because they didn't wear gloves) Edit: People are really sensitive about a news headline from 30+ years ago. Really shows how many people can't let go of events that had nothing to do with them.
@@Newton-Reuther The old "yeah, but whatabout......." Arent there enough forums to give your political opinion elsewhere? No one cares there, either, but it's at least appropriate. You gave away your bias
@@Newton-Reuther Hey I'm sorry to break it to you but there's a lot of people responsible for a lot of death in the world. One murderer doesn't excuse the other.
I don't know that the jury got it wrong. OJ clearly murdered those two people, but the police investigation was absolutely clown-shoes. I asked my father-in-law (lawyer and later judge) about the trial soon after it happened. His response was "if the prosecution's lead witness (a police officer) upon cross-examination is asked 'did you plant evidence?' and his answer is 'I plead the fifth' you don't have a case". I myself have been on a jury that deadlocked because me and one other juror thought that the prosecution and particularly the arresting officer (and witness) that pulled the guy over did a completely crap job of handling evidence in a way that would stand up to scrutiny.
I wonder if the LAPD cleaned house after their botch job became sooooooo infamous. I know if I was a local DA, I'd be beyond pissed to have a couple of my prosecutors hung out to dry during a nationally televised trial, by a cop of all people.
that whole "if the glove doesn't fit..." thing is perfect proof of how absolutely useless jury trials are.. i mean if a jury can be swayed by a stupid goddamn nursery rhyme, a jury is bloody useless
The fact the Florida even has a law that allows such practises in order to basically circumvent any form of collecting from a court determined debt is from my point an attack on the right of the courts as the law basically makes any form of debt uninforcable and as such null and void, killing any form of legal protection for the stiffed party.
And notice that it only protects people who are rich enough (or lucky enough) to own their home without debt. If you are renting or have a mortgage, it doesn't protect the money you were planning to pay rent or pay your mortgage with, so tough luck.
A ghostwriter is the term used when the primary source, namely OJ here, provides the information to another person who proceeds to write the actual book. The ghost writer is not given credit for writing the book, that goes to the primary source.
Those razors really are good. I've had one for about a year, used it just a couple of hours ago. It's paid for itself several times over in not having to buy the replacement heads; I've yet to buy more blades, and as old school double side flat razor blades, they'll be really cheap when I have to. One of the few things I bought on an internet ad (Simon Whistler in this case) and while yeah, kinda steep on the front end, worth it.
I was a teen when the OJ criminal trial was being held...Everyone I knew stopped calling orange juice "OJ" after that lol To this day I still don't call it OJ.
If they hadn't done what they did by acquitting the cops who savagely beating Rodney King, the OJ jury likely wouldn't have found him innocent. Before you say it, we all know: that's not how it's supposed to work. But that goes both ways. Juries aren't supposed to channel motives like that, and cops aren't supposed to savagely beat unarmed black people (or any people). A lot happens that isn't supposed to happen, but the system should have held those cops accountable. 💯
Agreed! If LAPD were held liable for their negligence and abuse before, there wouldn't be a revenge verdict on a guilty defendant. I actually believe the Dream Team poking so many holes into how LAPD handled the crime scene, notification of OJ, the evidence, and so on. They also should have fired Mark Furhman before 1994....
@@mangos2888 There still might have been a jury nullification. "Driving while black" and the regular unjustified homicides by police of other young black men was on their mind. Imagine if the police killed or beat a dozen young pretty white girls every year in your town. How would you feel about the police and "justice" then? Good police officers hold *bad* police officers accountable to the law. An officer who covers for a *bad* police officer *is a bad police officer* .
By that logic, we shouldn't ever have black people on a jury. Portions of the population are always going to have grievances, justifiable or not, against the justice system and civil institutions. If we're saying that means they should, or even reasonably will, reach a highly biased verdict then those jurors should be illegible. Sentiments like 'it's okay for x group of people to do a bad thing, because y injustices exist' don't actually lead anywhere. They don't make the system more likely to reform, they just sow intergroup animosity that makes whatever objectionable thing that happened more likely to happen again.
Man, I remember the Bronco chase. I was in the lounge area of the locker room in the athletic club I was a member of, they didn't kick us out at the normal closing time because we were all watching the chase.
I understand the jury wanted to get back at the police, but the way they hurt Nicole, Ron, and their families by letting their murderer walk free is appalling.
Naw it was the police fault. Much of the evidence was put into question because of how badly it was collected. The blood for example was contaminated in a way that looked like it might have come from a lab so you couldn't disprove it wasn't planted. Evidence looked tampered with. It probably wasn't but the police mishandled it so badly there was no way to fully know. So there is no way the jury could convict given the requirement of "beyond a reasonable doubt" given that the police gave so much reason to doubt.
One juror did. But the police mishandling was so bad it looked like evidence was tampered with. Remember it has to be " beyond reasonable doubt" but the police gave many reasons to doubt even of you think OJ is guilty.
@@JayTemplethe jury members later said they would never convict him no matter what because of the police beating Rodney King. At that time the relationships between cops and black people was horrendous. The jury was mostly black and they said they made the decision to not convict him because of Rodney King.
@@JayTempleIt was also the race card being played and the white jurors didn't want to be labelled racists. I just wonder how they feel knowing they helped a murderer get away with it.
Because to quote a legal scholar "They [the police] tried to frame a guilty man." The prosecutorial team fumbled the case so many times and against a top-tier legal defense team the prosecutors were outmatched. The police department messed up the custody of evidence, thus introducing contamination, there was the racist police detective who pled the 5th on if he tampered or placed evidence at the scene before, thus ruining the prosecutor's star witness's credibility, the poor explanation of DNA blood tests and how they work (the expert the prosecutors had testify confused the jury even more), etc.
I am a Brit, so really shouldn't make suggestions to the US but......a thought has occurred to me. Would it be an idea to give Florida back to the King of Spain and then build a wall? 🙂
Did Simpson hide assets from his creditors? 🪒 Get 100 free blades with your purchase of a Henson Shaving razor with code LEGALEAGLE: legaleagle.link/Henson ⚖⚖⚖Get a great lawyer, fast! legaleagle.link/eagleteam
LOVE YOUR CONTENT!!! PLEASE DO A REVIEW OF LINCOLN LAWYER!!! ❤
I'm so glad you mentioned Norm. He would be proud had he won his fight against cancer. Unfortunately all he got was a draw a few years before OJ.
Dear Legal Eagle,
Do not save that Soapbox for another day. Take hold of the change that matters to you. The public should have had access to criminal trial proceedings yesterday.
*Reference to ending comments on Nebula version.
a medical rubber gloves is less thin 1% of 1% of 1 % of an inch. a 3 child's old's wrest is at least an inch. a medical rubber glove Would not make difference on a grown professional football players wrest
So Steal Manning your arguments that he's guilty what would happen the wired placements and timing if he did it
the low speed chase was going on during my aunt's wedding. my parents, both journalists, and others kept taking turns sneaking out of the reception to listen to their car radios and hurry back to keep everybody updated.
i was three and had walking pneumonia, making a terribly cranky flower girl. there's a picture of my dad holding me and giving me a gently stern talking to about throwing my flower girl basket at people.
i don't recall throwing the basket. but if i did it, here's how it would have gone:
If the flower girl has a fit, you must admit
😂
Hypothetically I do remember having the basket in my right hand ...
If the flower flies, we're in for a surprise.
*Slow clap*
Just as the Onion said: "Oj to be allowed to continue living if his casket is too small"
I wonder how many people came up with this exact same joke at the exact same time when they heard the news
😂 Finally an OJ joke I hadn't heard before.
Respect
@@mikeloeven Knowing how The Onion works, they been waiting to say it since at least 2005
@@ShatteredQvartz😊😊😂
If the coffin ain’t up to size that 🥷🏿 must rise
Norm McDonald impression:
"After decades of unsuccessfully searching for his wife's killer on Earth, OJ Simpson has chosen to search Hell!"
Savage, I could see it!
Isn't norm dead?
@@Cinestudi0 the comment says its an impression
Satan Impression:
"OJ didn't choose to search Hell, he has no choice in the matter."
*OJ Simpson will finally be able to rest in peace knowing his wife's killer is dead*
OJ got acquited and spent the rest of his life making the Jury regret that decision.
he was acquitted purely because he was black and jury knew very well what they were doing at the time
I don't think the jury regrets their decision.. i have seen one of them doubling down on their decision
@@monkeman6566 He was acquitted because the evidence did not support his guilt.
Stealing Manning the argument the required timing and placement if he did it. And the only blood stains was on outside of the glove and already old
The black jury let him off because the white jury let the cops who beat Rodney King off
Really thought he was going to say that OJ’s most famous acting role was “man not guilty of murder”
So You just decided he's guilty. Despite him not being covered in Blood
Dr Grande woulda said this 100% 😂
@@osmosisjones4912hello, the same one man in all the replies who doesn’t believe oj wa guilty :)
The director of Naked Gun said: "R.I.P. Nordberg. His acting was a lot like his murdering: He got away with it, but no one believed him.
@@byronic-heroine I think he was a great actor. At least when he tried on that glove during his murder trial.
What this death has taught me is that sometimes, I can be on the side of cancer
1 in billions
It should teach you to do your own research because the media left out lots of evidence that was discussed during the trial that raised reasonable doubt
Cry about it
@@IbrarH-sn3oy cry about what? he's dead, we're laughing
@@IbrarH-sn3oy She's saying she's happy cancer killed him.
The craziest part. There's multiple videos of OJ wearing those gloves. Not only that, the gloves were frozen and thawed out which shrinks the leather. Him getting off was all levels of crazy
And on advice of council, he went of his arthritis meds, so his knuckles swelled up. Of course LAPD behaved like the Keystone Cops and made it too easy for his lawyers to poke holes into the State's case.
I'll never understand why the judge allowed OJ to handle the evidence, that alone is crazy.
If you notice, he also appeared to be wearing latex gloves under the evidence gloves (presumably to avoid contaminating the evidence), which would further make them a tighter fit.
@lordofuzkulak8308 he was.i do remember someone pointing that out before. Even still, all the other evidence like the DNA, the shoe print, the bloody socks, really it all should've just been enough to end him. I'm surprised the parents of the deceased didn't just track him down and end him themselves.
He also had another pair of rubber or silicone gloves on as he was trying them on. Yeah no shit they're gonna be snug. The level of stupidity in that trial was off the chart.
My favorite Norm MacDonald impression was this one:
OJ Simpson has passed away from cancer at the age of 76. He died doing what he loved most: getting away with murder.
Mine was : OJ died at the age of 76 from cancer, in other news cancer has come out with a book called how I did it
@@stevenpineda3786 At the trial, cancer tried on his prostate and it didnt fit.
i came up with a new joke:
i go around chanting: "orange juice, simp son".
Mine was: Hey, that's my lucky stabbing hat!
I didn't even know he was sick.
It’s so weird that rich people can just not pay their bills. Imagine if a regular person could buy an expensive new car and just never pay for it.
Doesn't always work though, ask Vince McMahon 😅
I thought that's what real life was... I never understood why there needed to be a sepparation between the word "buy" and the word "pay" when both serve the same function.
@@notbutz9737 You buy products. You pay for products with money. You buy services from people. You pay money for those services. See the difference between the two words?
Yeah and rich people pay fines poor folks go to jail only reason that jury didn't squeeze the juice outta of OJ was because of Rodney king
@@freddied8479 Not the same with Vince, he stopped paying because he thought Grant broke the NDA, which she hadn't. That is, until Vince broke the NDA by not paying her (and all the other women).
"Will his victims finally recover?"
My first thought was "they're dead, I don't think so."
I thought the same. Recover from what exactly🤦🏿♂️
I'm glad I'm not the only one lol
People are affected by the death of loved ones.
They're victims in this way.
@brandonf.8360 Do you not have family you care for anyone you care about?
As a little kid in ‘94 I couldn’t understand why orange juice was so popular all of a sudden, I was like yeah its good stuff but why put it on trial for murder
Right I spent a number of years thinking why did they name the killer after orange juice? It’s pretty nice I don’t think it’s deadly?
My mom was upset with us a few years back when we named my youngest Oliver James. I think there is a bit too much emphasis on the OJ part and not enough on the rich assholes getting away with murder part.
I was a little kid too and watched the bronco chase live in my aunt's kitchen. I thought it was Bart Simpson fleeing the cops
The worst part about this is Juice never got to wear Orange.
lol you triggered a memory of kids saying “OJ’s not guilty!”, and thinking, “Orange Juice not guilty of what?”. Thanks for the time travel.
That white bronco chase was such a big deal because 1. They shut down an entire freeway so the city of LA was at a standstill 2. It was so slow. He wasn't even going the speed limit from what I remember. Him and his buddy were just casually driving down an empty freeway for around 2 hours. Every channel switched to it and my dad called me from work to watch it since he knew I was an MTV junkie.
It was crazy because everyone thought he was the worlds nicest guy and here he was driving at like 30 mph down the center of the freeway with a gun to his head and roughly 30 cop cars after him.
I remember that day so well. Another moment I realized the absurdity of humans or at least, American humans.
OJ was in the back seat with a gun. Kardashian said he believed OJ was actually going to kill himself in the Bronco.
It was also a big deal because… it was OJ Simpson.
I have a vivid memory of watching it on tv and my parents came in from grocery shopping - they stopped, put their bags on the floor and just stared at the tv in the living room. It was a completely surreal moment.
"Uh, ya what happened was, this karate guy came out and we fought over the knife, then I blacked out." Yep, alibi checks out
Just like those ninjas who tried to kill Jodi Arias after killing her ex and then let her go 🤣
I actually can't imagine having an alibi that stupid. Like... you killed someone. People are onto you. Everyone is talking about it. You get a public appearance where you can give whatever story you want. Do you spend time making the best narrative you possibly can so that you have a solid defence? Nope, just make something up about being attacked by a karate man and then say "erm I dunno what happened after that I forgot"
Even funnier is that he said he had the knife in his hand and doesn't remember what happened after. Didn't say the knife was taken from him. 😂 So, he blacked out the using the knife part 😂
Seems like you just said that to create a false statement. If you guys are gonna criticize the matter use factual information so the people following have a stage to stand on.
@ Phantom Flame I'm paraphrasing but that is what he said in the interview. If it sounds absurd blame O.J not me
I really felt sorry for the kids. They had to see their dad after that probably knowing that he killed their mom. There’s no way they weren’t exposed to his temper too.
Told he killed their mom even his clothes were not covered in Blood
Did you not hear how his shoes and socks were covered in both the victims blood?
@@osmosisjones4912
@@osmosisjones4912The socks in his bedroom were.
@@osmosisjones4912 Roberst Kardashian took away the bloody clothes
@@osmosisjones4912His gloves, shoes and socks were covered in blood. He had plenty of time to get rid of the clothes.
This man was allowed to dodge consequences his entire life. Wasn't forced to do his community service, let off on murder, prevented from having his property claimed to pay his victims until the day he died.
I can't imagine it would be as satisfying taking the property from his family instead.
Hes innocent. The families just want money
@@bennelong8451 Overwhelming evidence when it meets complete and utter ignorance: (you)
He was worth 3 million and got like 11k a month from his football pension so he wasnt hurting for money which was a shame
@@bennelong8451 why the hell did you say that lol
@@bennelong8451 What a spicy take. Still wrong, though.
His role in the naked gun is so much better now because you get to see him get hurt in increasingly horrible ways over and over again.
I don't think so. But the scene is funny anyway!
Although getting paint on his coat was too much!
Apparently, when the police rang OJ to let him know Nicole was dead his response was "do they know who killed her?" Not "oh my god she's dead?" Or something like that.
He just "assumed" she had been murdered.
Oh and then they found 2 direct evidences of his DNA on the crime scene mixed with the victims blood
@@ethanstyant9704 Oh and then they found evidence of 2 different knives, 2 different foot prints, and decided not to reveal her tongue was pulled through her neck “incision”. Let’s just focus on the wife beater.
Okay tbf, this is the first question i'd ask because i immediately assume the worst possible reason.
My great grandmother was dying for months and when i found out she died i still instantly assumed she got killed by somebody else.
Wow... You do know that this is a legal channel right?
We don't just presume someone's guilty, because they didn't ask a question the way you think they should.
Also, that was his ex-wife... There's at least some love lost there.
Amen to that sheeple are so blinded by the narrative oj did it himself lol and the dna could of been his sons thats why it was cloae to his it wasnt a 100 match @@baalbezub6848
The first time I heard about OJ Simpson's murder case was in a statistics course, and how stats can manipulate points of view. OJ's lawyer argued, yes there was domestic abuse, but the number of domestic abusers that eventually killed their significant other, was like 1 in a 1000 (I can't remember). But obviously, he omitted the fact that of course most people don't kill their wives or husbands even if there is domestic abuse. Murders are rare to begin with. BUT if there WAS a murder, the likelihood of the abusive husband being the murderer is more than half the time. It's absolutely mind boggling how he got away with murder.
Correction, most men who murder their wives have no prior history of abusing them, Scott Petersons are far more common. The defense intended to call a psychologist to testify towards why OJ was not typical of a man who would kill his wife [ie divorced for many years, moved on with girlfriend, refused ex-wife's advances to get back together, vacationed with ex-wife and attended events with her like Trump's wedding to Marla maples, single incident of "abuse" which was several pushes after she attacked him with a bat, etc.]
It is incredibly easy to manipulate data. That’s why “correlation doesn’t prove causation” is a saying. We can manipulate data any way we want to. But that doesn’t mean it is accurate or helpful for that case.
How do you know he did it?
@@Shmutzassen-Schnitzel all the evidence.
@@DonLee1980 what evidence?
As someone who had had gloves shrink after being wet, the "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit" rings hollow. Those gloves were found outside and were not exactly in pristine condition. If they had been too big despite their condition, that would be a different case entirely (although if you put the wet gloves on something to stretch them, they will do so. But it takes work to stretch them. Water makes the leather more able to both shrink and stretch, but shrinking doesn't take work.)
so you're saying he would've bought gloves that were too small and hard to put on to murder two people.
He also wrapped rubber bands on his wrists weeks in advance so that his fingers would be too swolllen to fit.
No, that's not what OP said at all.
@@Not_Always
I can fit new XS latex gloves on my big hand. My size is usually L. I can do that because the gloves is powdered. Meanwhile, i would struggle to put L size gloves if my hands are wet
Exactly! And he can also just tighten his fingers, make them all rigid and that's like putting a glove on a mannequin, it's so hard
The graphic designer for “If I did it” was also spot on.
Lowkey would've gone for more police tape...
And when I squint without my glasses, the "I did it" layout makes me see the word "idiot." The graphic designer knew what they were doing 😂
100% If I remember the family of the victims actually sued and got the rights to that book and they made the title look incriminating which is 👌
@@ladylad2763 Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video.
@@andysmith1996 Welp I was in the process of watching but yeah you got me lol
If I recall correctly, a photo of Simpson wearing the Bruno Magli shoes didn't surface until after the not guilty verdict in the criminal case, despite strenuous efforts by the prosecution to find one. When it did, it came from a photographer who'd been engaged to photograph Simpson at some publicity event. Since it had been a paying gig, he had kept his dated invoice, proving that Simpson unquestionably had owned a pair of the shoes at the time of the murders.
Also had a receipt for a knife bought a few days before that went missing but likely matched the wounds found
@@ethanstyant9704 if it went missing how do you know he had a receipt for it
Lol, false, prosecutor could never tie the shoes to OJ, and the photos were proven to be clones via the negatives. None of the sales people of the shoes ever recalled selling to OJ and FBI could not find any connection to OJ and such shoes.
@@Not_Always knife went missing, the reciept was fount
If they never found the knife you can’t really say it matched the wounds.
Fun fact, the ghost writer of OJ Simpson's book actually testified against OJ during the trial. He happened to live a few doors down from where the murders occurred and testified that he had heard Nicole Brown Simpson's dog barking in distress that evening.
My mom was a hairstylist in the 90s. When the trial was happening *NO ONE WAS OUTSIDE* , half the shops were closed and the ones that stayed open all had TV's inside to watch the trial
I remember in school the teachers had it on in the pod which was like a little sem room between four classrooms and kept it on all day and when the verdict was red I was out at PE and one of the teachers came running out saying "not guilty not guilty!" I remember watching The Chase too
No one went outside and half the shops were closed between January and October of 95? Weird, I don't remember that.
It wasn't quite the same for me (too young during the OJ Simpson trial) but I remember something similar happening during the trial of Michael Jackson. In 5th grade one of the teachers had a TV on showing some of the news coverage of the trial (which given the subject *might* have been considered inappropriate, but honestly I personally like that the teacher tried to show us reality at a young age.)
@ericatucker2683 I remember watching the trial in class, the teachers used it as a current events lesson.
I can confirm. We even watched it in school. I watched the whole trial as a 3rd grader.
i went over the oj case in my forensics class and an example about how miss handling of evidence and a poorly handled case could make things fall apart and breed doubt when there shouldn't be any. it's so weird to see it be brought up all over again after he passed
I wish I could remember the legal scholar's name, but the best and most accurate and succinct summary of the OJ Simpson trial was: "In the trial of OJ Simpson, the police framed a guilty man." There was a TON that the police did wrong and did illegally. And if they HADN'T done all of that, I'm pretty sure OJ would have been found guilty.
not likely
The LAPD lied on the stand. When asked if they planted evidence the cops plead the fifth.
Nope. That jury was going to acquit regardless. It was 'payback' for however many convictions of blacks they felt were unjust.
There was a ton of evidence Prosecutors didn't put forward
@@t.dickinson7942 they got shut down due to failed chain-of-custody.
The best thing to come out of that trial was the parody in Shrek 2 when the knights were chasing a "white bronco".
Yeah
w a i t shrek made an oj joke and it flew right over my head until right here and now on this day
“Ghoulish” is the best description of OJ I’ve ever heard.
As a former teenager who had really tight leather pants I can say you can definitely wear things that don't fit.
You're definitely not guilty.
😂
@2bleushadow u r gorgeous
I had Nicole's sister as a counselor for a while. She was an absolutely amazing human being, and I'm so happy that she's finally got justice. She told me that she'd finally be able to rest once he died.
I remember hearing the news and thinking "Nicole's family will be so happy"
I’m sure she was an absolutely average human being and mostly good at her job.
@@cowmath77 WTF do you mean?
@@1432b don’t feed the troll.
@@cowmath77 Leagues better than you'll ever be, at least. Not saying much, but it's true all the same.
Something I don't recall noticing at the time (I was too young) that my dad pointed out when they showed the footage recently is that when OJ was trying to put on the gloves he is already wearing some gloves. That would, of course, make gloves a much tighter fit than if they just went over your hands as they are designed to do.
Everyone knows murder is only possible if you're wearing gloves that fit perfectly. I'm positive there's never been a single death by the hands of someone wearing ill-fitted gloves
Uhhhh, did you not see the popular video of OJ attempting to put on the glove during the trial? It wasn’t just ill-fitted, they were way too small.
Not defending him but I think you have the wrong idea.
@@TitaniumTurbine Leather gloves shrink around 15% when they get wet and aren't immediately dried off, which is what happened. Leather gloves are also meant to be a fairly tight fit to begin with and he was kind of able to get one of the gloves on, so it's not much of a stretch to say that, if they were a little larger, they would fit him "like a glove".
There should have been a cross examination in which the same brand gloves of the same size are brought in brand new and he tried those on as well. It could very much squash a lot of these conspiracies either way about the glove not fitting.
@@justicefool3942Regarding the gloves (one fitting and one not) weren't the gloves found in seperate locations?... one at the scene, and one at his residence. That would explain one fitting better than the other.
Also the gloves in question were Isotoners (if I recall correctly), very tight fitting gloves.
@@Bahlzeron The more likely reason one would fit better than the other is uneven blood distribution. That is, the one that fit better had less blood on it and so would shrink less.
Either way, they both shrank, which is why a good cross exam should have had a control group of gloves that are the same brand of the same size that were not previously worn or tampered with to get a much better grasp on how the gloves would have likely fit prior to being soaked in blood.
@TitaniumTurbine do you know now easily you can make a glove not fit if you want it to? Lol
I was a criminal justice major in college during the OJ case. We actually had someone from that DAs office come speak my senior year. Let’s just say he a) admitted his office didn’t handle the case particularly well and b) he personally believed in OJs guilt.
There was soo much blood evidence that, in today’s world, he absolutely would’ve been convicted. It’s 100% certain that he did it.
@@mistym0rning Yeah except that evidence of blood wasn't collected properly and mishandled that it looked unnatural and therefor was argued that it was planted by the cops. It had traces of EDTA so they argued it was from a lab. The accusation of the blood being planted plus the blood being contaminated with what looks like what's used in labs was enough to throw doubt on the blood evidence. Tech today would have been able to tell the difference between natural EDTA and lab version but back then it wasn't.
Now I do believe OJ is guilty but you stating it so clear cut makes it obvious you don't know much about the case. The police messed up. All this "strong" evidence wasn't because of how the police handled it. Fuhrman the guy that lied under oath and was really racist was even asked if he falsified reports or planted evidence and he pleaded the 5th.
@@Alexander-the-MediocreYes! I remember this. I was 14 at the time. The trial is what got me interested into pursuing forensics as a career. A lot changed in the field after the OJ trial.
too late to apologize for their BS now
That person from the DA was just mad they couldnt get another black man behind bars. Oj was innocent
2:15 OJ is wearing those gloves that "didn't fit" while broadcasting a football game.
Not.
@@prophetuncutYups. They were an expensive brand bought by Nicole as as a gift for OJ.
@@wintercame 😂🤣😂 yeah right! OJ Simpson was innocent, the evidence showed and proved... You guys have to move on and get a life now, it's time.
@@wintercame 😂🤣😂yeah right. She also bought him the Bronco and the house he lived in and gave him a career. Nicole was a great monogamous lady... Legend has it that she once raised the dead.
@@prophetuncutthe receipt for the gloves, showed that Nicole bought them from Bloomingdales.. but go off dude
Strange factoid..... The Ghost Writer for the book testified against OJ at the trial. He lived across from Nicole and was one of the people who heard the dog howling.
Why didn't anyone find out what was wrong? Too paranoid or self obsessed to go find out? I always go out to see what's wrong in my neighborhood. I'm the one who reported the water main broke at midnight.
@@5amiann I'm the same way. Dogs were barking a lot more than normal last week. I checked behind houses, and the street in front, but didn't see anything. In the OJ case someone walking down the sidewalk heard and saw the agitated dog, and saw the body.
@@5amiann dogs howl over a lot of things, and it doesn't sound like a particularly quiet household to live near in the first place. there are reasons other than "paranoid" or "egomaniac" to not investigate a dog howling.
also given that it was in fact a murder scene i dont think its automatically "paranoid" to be concerned about the potential danger of investigating. if that was someones reasoning [which we have no evidence it was], it wouldnt be wrong to be worried.
@@5amianndo you leave your home at night to investigate every noise?
I've gone outside to investigate what I thought was a forest fire at midnight in the middle of a blizzard, called 911 and walked over to try and get a better look, turns out there was a factory just past the woods and it was just some routine burning, but I apparently locked my apartment and forgot my keys, I was stuck outside in a t shirt and shorts in a blizzard at midnight miles from the nearest possible 24 store, I had to dig through the snow for a rock to bust the window to unlock my door because I had a second floor apartment and the door window was the only one I could reach. After that I decided to just stay inside and call in the future and if I'm wrong oh well at least I had good intentions. Fk going to investigate.
I remember Chris Rock had a bit in his act at the time about this case. He was suspicious of the Black community’s joy over OJ’s acquittal. He said something like “Where’s my OJ prize?” (meaning, what did we “win” by OJ getting off?)
That's the USA for you - the country where poor people cheer for the rich person they most closely identify with, because they're the easiest person they can imagine being.
A lot of people viewed it as "haha our rich guy gets away with crimes that your rich guys get away with" which out of context sounds horrible, but when classes and color exist it is a huge win. Your rich get away with anything, our rich get away with anything regardless of how political it is. We are exactly the same.
None of which makes anyone but the rich, rich.
The Innocence Project was founded by the DNA expert from OJ's legal team using the money he made from the trial. The police contaminating the scene and making a lot of the DNA evidence unusable in addition to the public's poor understanding of DNA evidence led to the rise of better evidence handling procedures and DNA evidence appeared in crime dramas more often to get average people comfortable with the concept
@@redjoker365 Thank you, I didn't know that. It's good to know that some good has come from the OJ debacle.
Feels like it needs to be said, in a civil court you only need to be found '51% guilty' but in criminal court you need to be found '99% guilty'. This essentially means that there can be without a doubt that you're guilty in criminal court, while civil court has more leeway.
That reaction of him looking at the shoes is wild
yeah he looked like he saw a ghost
Hiding "if" inside the "I" of "I did it" and adding "confessions of the killer" is still one of the most brilliant moves in forever destroying the reputation of OJ. He might have gotten more work and had a rehabilitated reputation (like somebody such as George W Bush) if nothing extra was done, however the civil case and change to the book absolutely solidified his guilt in the minds of many, I'd say.
He didn't write that book. He just let them put his name on it for money because the families of the 'victims' effectively kept going after him for every dime he earned.
@@Not_Alwaysthe murder victims are still victims? You might want to rephrase that. Victim doesn't mean victim of OJ specifically. Murder is the action that they were victims of.
He helped write the book.
And the families of the victims had every right to go after him for every dime he earned. He owes them still to this day.
@@Not_Always
@@Not_Alwaysif my two options were downsizing my living expenses and signing off on the most tasteless murderbook, I know which one I’d take.
@@Not_Alwayshe didn’t just put his name on it, he actively participated in the writing of it. He knew what it contained and he wanted it out there.
I never understood that defense. Leather shrinks, hands swell, and "fits like a glove" is a saying we use because gloves are tight to the skin. Yet, somehow we ignored all the other evidence and put a (confessed) murder on the streets based on one tight glove
You mean his car park were it park before and Blood on the outside of his glove. He'd been at house before wouldn't that explain blood stains
Unfortunately LAPD were less competent than the Keystone Cops and with mishandling of the evidence and destroying evidence by rolling Nichole onto her back to put her in the body bag to transport her to the morgue even a new lawyer could have gotten an aquital.
Mark Fuhrman was far more damaging to the case because his recording primed the jury to think of all evidence in the context of him admitting to planting evidence in previous cases. The problem is that even if Fuhrman wanted to plant evidence he would have had to have known he was going to frame OJ before he even knew where he was going or what happened. The timeline of events for him to have planted evidence don't make any sense. However, this reasoning would have been completely prejudiced by the recordings of Fuhrman using racial slurs, claiming to brutalize suspects, and claiming to plant evidence.
I think the jury was more afraid of the possible repercussions of convicting him (such as the riots after the not guilty verdicts in the Rodney King case) and of being labeled as racists than they were concerned that Simpson might murder someone else. I was in my late 30s at the time and there was a lot if side eye glances. They had to know that they were acquitting a probably guilty man. That's our system though, it's run by humans and humans are infamously flawed, we shouldn't be surprised when cases like this occur occasionally.
Research the evidence against OJ's son Jason. OJ almost certainly tried to help cover it up, but Jason was the murderer.
More context for Gen Z viewers: Robert Kardashian is Kim Kardashian's dad, and Alan Dershowitz is the same Alan Dershowitz who defended Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein.
Dershowitz also defended Havey Weinstein in 2018. In Trump’s case it was during his first impeachment trial.
Wow Dershowitz is really working hard to earn his horns
I'm not saying this in his defense, but Dershowitz has many times stated that he takes the cases that pay him. He's also said that if the Goldman family had come to him first, he would've represented them.
@@davidchristie6003 Defense attorneys exist for a reason.
Dang.
People often forget that the trial also put the Kardashians on the map, in case you needed one more reason to hate OJ.
OJ has left a bigger stain on the world then he did when he "Blacked out"
That was a crazy ad read transition. "That guy was awesome, but he's dead. Let me represent you instead." 💀
so slick
On the note of Rodney King - my parents were newlyweds at the time, living in West LA during the riots. My mom was nine months pregnant with my older sister. The curfew was lifted before my sister was born, but they still remember seeing the smoke from the balcony of their apartment.
I have a friend from school whose dad was shot in Ktown during the riots. He immediately moved the family to Denver which is where I met him. They were all from Seoul and just wanted a better life because S.Korea was pretty impoverished in the 70s and 80s. What they ended up enduring was far worse than the crime in Seoul. They lived Denver and made it their permanent home though.
I grew up in Orange county and my dad worked in La doing aerospace stuff. I remember my dad not going to work for several days
@@Oblivisci........Yeah, the shit that the Koreans lived through during the riots was pretty horrible.
I was in the Valley when the riots happened. I didn't see any near me but watched on tv. Scary.
One of my colleagues was a teacher in Compton at the time. He said that when the verdict came in, the principal called all the staff in and told everyone to get in their cars and get the hell out, because he knew that shit was going to get ugly.
The craziest thing is that there are still people who unironically believe he didn’t do it.
I was origionally sketical because, to a layman, the obvious question is "if hes guilty why was he acquitted?", in the age of dopamine fueled urgency and impatience (thanks tiktok) its awfully suss that no one could give me a straightforward answer.
Its also not CRAZY to image the public might wrongfully demonize a celebrity, especially one who isnt white, so from my perspective things didnt seem to add up, the wikipedia summary doesnt explain it very well either.
Of course, in truth, its very complicated and not easy to summarize quickly. Eventually I was educated about the whole story, not just the sketchy trial.
I think part of what lead to my undecided perspective in the firstplace is that the common popculture joke is to kinda satirically shed doubt on OJ's guilt, and thats kinda how I learned about it all first. Theres also a lot of instances where people paint OJ more endearingly and obviously once you humanzie him you kinda want to believe he didnt do it, coz wouldnt that be great?
Hopefully that makes sense.
you could probably just summarize that all as "people often dont explain it very well".
@@82Catfishthat's not the reason at all. The reason is because people will say you are racist if you say that he was guilty trying to shut you up on the topic and that is something we do more and more. We hide behind different stereotypes to try and shut down any opposition because we no longer have the ability to even try and think critically and get to the truth.
It's probably just because of how young I was when all this happened, but I had no idea of just how vindictive OJ was towards the families, making them jump through hoop after hoop after hoop for pennies of what he owed them
Self preservation.. anybody would react that way to a civil judgement against them if the civil judgement means everything you have gets taken from you (even if it should in principle, self preservation means you don't care about that)
@@chris2kgreatbut most people don’t commit double homicide
The Juice has expired
The Juice has finally been contained in a box.
The Juice was bad long before the expiration date.
OJ: Best before 1994
If the OJ's blood was on the outside of the glove wouldn't that mean he was attacked with the glove . And why wasnt his shirt and pants covered
@@osmosisjones4912Don't make a dumb conspiracy theory to deny an evildoer's crimes. First Trump, now OJ? Who are you going to excuse next? Putin?
Thank you! You were probably going to make this video anyway, but I requested it in the comments and now I feel proud.
Shit I laughed pretty hard when that lawyer said " I am surprised I became the exactor to ojs will but I'll make sure the goldmen family gets nothing". I mean man that's a whole new level of hate I didn't expect to see in this day and age to people you don't know.
This type of behaviour is why people hate lawyers.
He later retracted that statement. He said OJ’s estate had debts to pay meaning the Goldmans.
@@dgathome4345oh well if he retracted it that’s ok then what a top guy instead
@@dgathome4345 retractions = PR moves
Right? Like damn, what a piece of shit. And there's literally no way he wouldn't have known people would hate him for it either. He basically just said, "welp, guess it's time to do literally the worst thing I could do in this situation."
Can we have a shoutout to LegalEagle's research team? Look at all the article clipping they show - pieces from NYT, Wash Po, LA Times and others of all the reporting and how it was reported at the time. Must have taken a while putting that altogether. As a journalism nerd, I was pausing to read the exact wording and then googling to read the full pieces, fascinating.
Thank you guys for your work and LegalEaglle for your explainer on this important injustice. Prayers to the Nicole and Ron's families and loved ones, I hope OJ's passing gives you some solace that the killer is finally gone from this world.
Shame they keep using the Daily Mail as a source: it's a hate-filled rag.
Seriously? It's a mainstream, monetized UA-cam channel. You're basically gushing about them doing the standard work to create content.
@@Laissez-faire402 Dude watch the video and count the number of newspaper clippings. He could have just talked over moving images of OJ and some random mashed up news clips from CNN. They chose the exact pieces from major publishers that were reported at the exact time the trial and civil trial happened. They provide the context of what it was like back then, e.g. cvil trial verdict piece talking about it coming out same day as Bill Clinton's state of the union.
"Standard work" GTFO. Legal Eagle is an outstanding UA-cam channel and his team puts in the work to make his videos the best as possible, and I appreciate that. Maybe stop watching if you're a hater.
A funny little thing I remember from the trial was the stealth product marketing some people sneaked in the courtroom. early on in the trial, you could see the backside of a computer monitor whenever they would show the courtroom from a certain angle. When the trial started, it was just a nondescript monitor but a few days later someone had replaced it with a monitor with a monitor that had a huge “SONY” embossed on the back side plastic.
That is so strange
I was a kid in 1995 and remember this going on. Even then, I had the unsettling feeling that he was a bad person, just seeing him on TV. But when he was acquitted, I had this idea that "well, I guess he didn't do it" because kids are dumb and I guess I thought there's no way they'd get something that big wrong.
Of course, the older I got, the more I learned how fallacious that line of thinking was, and became as convinced as everyone else that he was guilty. Thank you for the coverage of it here. Looking back now, I feel so bad for Nicole. She did what we're all told to do: report it, get out--and she did the best she could with the circumstances to do exactly that... yet it wasn't enough, the police didn't help, and she not only got killed, but he basically got away with it. I wish I could say the world had changed, but looking at both domestic violence stats and the corrupt, broken "justice" system... it's just the same shit, different decade, isn't it?
"I thought there's no way they'd get something that big wrong." The jury didn't get it wrong. The job of the prosecution was to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the jury didn't think the prosecution managed that, then they got it right when they acquitted. As perverse as it may seem, we don't actually send people to prison for the acts they actually committed. We send them to prison because the prosecution convinced a jury that that the person committed those acts. We mostly all accept on the basis of faith in the jury system that these are the same thing, but they're really not.
I really want to not hate Florida. But they keep doing crap like that!
Seems to he a safe harbor for a lot of high profile criminals these days, and their golf courses...
Hey man there's plenty of blame to go around. It was California police incompetence that let him get away with it at all.
@benjaminthefox That, their racism, and the fact that the judge, prosecutors, and lawyers all wanted to write books on it and make money. Shame on them all.
@@Dan55888 I'm sure you get your daily dose of CNN propaganda about these "criminals" and their golf courses.
@@benjaminthefox There are definitely a lot of characters in this saga that suck HARD.
I was horrified to see a comment in another post that someone said that his football career was more important than the violent death of two people and this person thought he was guilty. He said doesn’t matter he was the Juice! His football career was amazing, he was such a hero for his football career. Really where are people’s morals?
The one thing that impresses me about your videos, is the ad reads u do, even for your legal team, is ALWAYS done brand new for each video, not just one clip reused from when you originally did it. It’s nice you spin the videos topic into it as well
Yes I love this 😄
Cochran’s infamous use of the Chewbacca defense was instrumental in acquitting OJ.
I'm shocked and appalled that Devin did not mention the Chewbacca Defense. It'll probably be the most enduring legacy of OJ's in the pop culture zeitgeist, _and_ it's related to law...
@@LaMirah Well, he does have an entire video dedicated to the Chewbacca defense. Probably felt he didn't need to go over it again.
I think it would be disrespectful to cite that in a video that addresses the Brown and Goldman estates. They still have surviving relatives that still have to endure the trauma of him being free, relevant, and the system failing them.
The amount of people who thought he was innocent because they simply didn't want their hero to be a killer was disturbing.
And now people rally around some AR-15 toting affluent teen who piled on the crocodile tears after he murdered two people and got his 15 minutes of fame from Fox News and their ilk. So there are people who become idols who are even worse than O.J. who was undoubtedly amoral in so many ways.
2:00 My boss and coworker were talking about OJ. He then turns and goes - you're too young to have witnessed any of this. I just mentioned that I was born in 1998 and I had to check when the trials started.
My middle school had all of us watch the verdict being read in 1995. It’s hard to explain how big that trial was.
They interrupted our elementary school classes to tell us the verdict.
Wow! They actually allowed middle school aged children to watch this in school!? I remember my parents and others being captivated by this trial. I remember when the verdict was read but at 13 (my age at the time) I didn't understand why people celebrated the verdict while others were devastated by it. In my school we didn't watch it. The teachers seemed divided.
Same at my middle school! They brought a radio into the cafeteria while we were at lunch so that we could hear the verdict live. A very bizarre memory that I'll never forget.
Same at my school in 4th grade, the teacher wheeled in the tv and yelled out "aw bull shit!" Even at the time I questioned if this was an appropriate thing for an adult to be doing.
My High School Social Studies teacher asked if we wanted to watch and follow the Michael Jackson trial. Majority of us said yes, so we watched it on a rollout TV stand as it went along through the verdict
Ok, everything else aside, OJ seeing the photo of him with the shoes is hilarious.
"If there was an injury or death in your family, whether OJ did it or not"
damn, that's a cold line
"But, Jonny Conkran has passed away"
Can't wait till cancer writes it's own book "I did it"
It be "if I did it" but the "if" will be very small on the image for the sake of deniability.
Cancer writes such a book, millions of times per year in the US alone
@@chris2kgreat Cancer would be the world's top grossing author if it wrote books.
Same here pal!
Your seamless ad transitions will never cease to amaze me
Two things that surprise me: Florida somehow having a law that allows criminals to get away from getting their court-ordered payments made (you'd think a exception for debts incurring from either criminal or civil court-ordered settlements would exist but again, it's Florida);
The other is LaVergne's statement claiming he'd do everything to make sure the Goldmans didn't got nothing. At least here such a comment would be considered a grave violation of the Ethics and Discipline Code of the OAB (similar to a State bar association, but that covers the entire country) and would get him suspended pending investigation, and maybe even disbarred (and here disbarment is a death sentence to any lawyer's career).
If I had to guess the laws in Florida were meant to protect the elderly from losing everything, should creditors come after them for some reason. After all they do get tricked into things at that age, they start to lose their understanding and agree to things that no one would normally agree to. Just because a few bad eggs use it to their advantage doesn't mean it's a bad law. My grandmother would have totally done something like that had my mother not taken over her finances.
@@777SilverPhoenix777I suppose that's a possibility. however, that law still feels way too broad and abuse-friendly.
Do we think there’s anyone else in the world who might be looking to take advantage of that…? 😂
Props for remembering the "If i did it" sketch from "The Chris Rock Show" which was famously predicted such a ridiculous book. Also, OJ's film career dates all the way back to when he was a student at USC. His appearance in "The Towering Inferno" was while he was an active player in the NFL. "Capricorn One" and "The Naked Gun" came right at the end of his playing career. Not to mention the Hertz ads. So he was very much a household name, even if you didn't follow football.
Great ep, but those Did You Know boxes at minute 14:00 and after are so small that they're not readable on a phone. Usually, you guys full screen those things.
One tangential note: He got away with murder, with the exception of the nine years he spent in a Nevada state prison. Yes, completely different crime, but yes, it was a setup, and yes, the severity of the sentence was directly related to the murders.
Las Vegas Metro was in communication with two members of the group who went with Simpson to take back his memorabilia. They knew that the crime was going to be committed, and they sat back and let it happen. Their informants/participants were in fact gathering evidence for them. It was all done to make sure that he would finally go to prison after getting away with murder. My source: two outside consultants working at Las Vegas Metro at the time, who were present when explicit conversations about the setup took place, before and afterwards.
This is huge. Everyone should know this was a setup.
My source: trust me bro
OJ is innocent
source: i know a guy
@@clearlynotchloe source: book laying out of OJ's son was the killer
the gloves always got me. If you buy fitted gloves that are snug/tight and then try to put those same gloves on with a pair of latex gloves - that are too small anyway because your lawyer is good - then those fitted/snug gloves won't fit anymore.
That Jury were some seriously stupid people.
i guess lawyers and law professors are just as stupid because they also agree with the not guilty verdict for the criminal trial
No, just black, supporting their most famous black idol.
I think the “if the glove doesn’t fit…” defense could’ve worked because of Mark Fuhrman. The whole plead the fifth moment when asked if he planted evidence likely aided the defense in planting the idea that the gloves don’t fit , therefore they don’t belong to OJ. Now we have knowledge that they didn’t have. Unfortunately, his actions tainted the case and helped prevent justice from being delivered.
@@NobodyNeedstoknow-bq5pxdont be racist please.
@@sachathehuman4234Its not racist, in fact the jury was racist. Most of them were black. This happened after the LA riots. They 100% voted not guilty BECAUSE he was black.
The fact that detective Furhman used racist remarks a lot.
Subject matter aside, that's such a sick tie dude, love that turquoise
Man, it would be nice if we didn't have a tiered justice system where rich people basically have to admit (in the correct way no less) to be found guilty of their crimes...
If he doesn't admit, you must acquit
This time it wasn't because of the tiered justice system of wealth. Instead it was because of the tiered justice system of racism. Specifically the LA PD were horribly racist and had been caught trying to frame OJ. And the jury was majority black with only two white members. And worse of all, the prosecution was insanely incompetent.
Had the Prosecution been better or the Jury not already untrusting to the police he would have been found guilty.
And the poor can't afford proper legal help so they have to take guilty pleas, innocent or not, while DAs only want to win & cops can get false confessions, it's BS
Honestly, even if they admit it that’s not a guarantee. If you’re rich enough, there’s always a loophole a good Lawyer can find. Johnny Cochran was evidently a better Lawyer than even Billy Flynn.
Trumps crimes are clear as day and the system just spins it's wheels.
The fact that he got found responsible and liable in civil court tells me, very much that this wasn't about anyone actually beliving he didn't do it. It was people hating LAPD and having issues with corruption and clear biases within that institution. The tensions and grivences were so high people were willing to let a murder go. I believe one of the jurors said that this was a payback for Rhodney King. Now, this shouldn't have had a bearing on OJ's case, but when tensions are high people are rarely logical and rational.
Not only that, but they had no choice but to vote based on what they were presented with in court: a star witness that was a turner diaries level racist, blood evidence that was mishandled, and a trial that lasted more than a year. They were all exhausted and I think the verdict was as much payback to the prosecution team as it was payback for rodney king...
that quote is a myth, however that sort of attitude absolutely existed around the trial
Agree. The defense exploited that sentiment in stacking the jury, and did their best to paint the prosecution as biased. Fuhrman was a godsend for the defense- some think he was paid by them to discredit the state's case.
Guilty or not - there was a solid establishment of reasonable doubt regarding the way cops handled the evidence. I personally find that BOTH juries came to the appropriate findings under the rule of law. Civil trials are on the balance of probabilities but criminal cases need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Dirty cops = plenty of reasonable doubt. Had the detectives played it clean, the defence couldn't play up that doubt in the jurors' minds.
The prosecution was also MUCH better at presenting their case in the civil trial.
Simpson's reaction to that picture was so cartoonish, an actor couldn't do it better if they were playing in a spoof of a similar situation.
The amount of times that OJ claimed he loved Nicole to then just sit in every interview and laugh hysterically was enough for me.
I knew he was guilty from the moment I saw all the evidence and the court proceedings. Him laughing hysterically when discussing the brutal murders of his ex-wife and Ron Goldman, I cannot have respect for such an individual
you mean the evidence that later proved him to be not guilty?
@@matthewbarabas3052 No, that would be the evidence that later was found to be insufficient to prove that he was guilty to a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Courts don't "prove" people guilty; they "find" them guilty, which is something a reasonable person can disagree with, and they certainly don't "prove" people not guilty because that is not their job. All the criminal court found was there was some "reasonable doubt". The rule is "If you're only 99% certain, you must acquit."
And, of course, the civil court found that the evidence was sufficient to establish that he probably did it.
@@BrooksMosescourts do have to prove guilt, though... thats literally the job of the prosecutor.
@@matthewbarabas3052 OJ was proven guilty,but the 10 bIack jurors were mad about Rodney King and they thought letting OJ go free would be "Justice"
@@matthewbarabas3052 He was proved guilty. The trial was in reality a political trial, the jury ignored the evidence because they were being threaten by the politicians
OJ showed us one important thing when he was acquitted:
Black, white or brown... so long as you have the money and fame you can escape any consequences for your heinous actions
almost ... what it showed was that -- for the first time -- if he had enough money, a Black man could finally escape consequences just like rich white men had always done.
What piece of evidence was the smoking gun for you that made you think he was guilty, that a jury somehow overlooked?
@@Not_Always Answer: The statements of one of his jurors stating that she had decided that he was not guilty after the first day of the trial and nothing afterward could change her mind. That's a tainted juror admitting to it in public.
@@Not_Always
Watch tgis section of the video: 8:00
I feel like that's pretty damning.
@@Not_AlwaysWho tf did it then?
OJ's talent on the football field was clearly 2nd to his ability to get the best worst lawyers.
Wild thing about the glove is that it did in fact fit... I've definitely worn clothes that didn't fit WELL, but I was still wearing them. I'm not gonna go out and buy some new gloves to commit a murder. Any ol' gloves laying around the house should do.
not only that, there multiple videos of him wearing the gloves on TV. Furthermore, the gloves did fit while he was wearing other gloves at the same time he stopped taking medication for his arthritis so his hand would get bigger
Didn’t they also have him put on rubber gloves underneath while trying on the leather gloves? Since they couldn’t disturb the evidence. It’s difficult to put leather gloves over rubber gloves, for sure. The fact that jurors weighed those ill-fitted gloves more heavily than DNA / blood evidence will never cease to infuriate me.
The amount of people still love and defend OJ is gross
Could say the same thing about Trump or Clinton, both of whom have way more blood on their hands (because they didn't wear gloves)
Edit: People are really sensitive about a news headline from 30+ years ago. Really shows how many people can't let go of events that had nothing to do with them.
@@Newton-Reuther There's a very clear distinction between institutional violence and murdering his estranged wife.
@@Newton-ReutherIs it alright that I think all three are disgusting?
@@Newton-Reuther The old "yeah, but whatabout......."
Arent there enough forums to give your political opinion elsewhere? No one cares there, either, but it's at least appropriate. You gave away your bias
@@Newton-Reuther Hey I'm sorry to break it to you but there's a lot of people responsible for a lot of death in the world. One murderer doesn't excuse the other.
Two good things came out of that trial. Jackie Childs on Seinfeld and the Chewbacca Defense, both of which were covered brilliantly on this channel.
I don't know that the jury got it wrong. OJ clearly murdered those two people, but the police investigation was absolutely clown-shoes.
I asked my father-in-law (lawyer and later judge) about the trial soon after it happened. His response was "if the prosecution's lead witness (a police officer) upon cross-examination is asked 'did you plant evidence?' and his answer is 'I plead the fifth' you don't have a case".
I myself have been on a jury that deadlocked because me and one other juror thought that the prosecution and particularly the arresting officer (and witness) that pulled the guy over did a completely crap job of handling evidence in a way that would stand up to scrutiny.
I wonder if the LAPD cleaned house after their botch job became sooooooo infamous. I know if I was a local DA, I'd be beyond pissed to have a couple of my prosecutors hung out to dry during a nationally televised trial, by a cop of all people.
that whole "if the glove doesn't fit..." thing is perfect proof of how absolutely useless jury trials are.. i mean if a jury can be swayed by a stupid goddamn nursery rhyme, a jury is bloody useless
“Will his victims finally recover?” You can’t recover from death, Eagle Man.
As many other comments have pointed out, the family and friends left behind are victims as well
Of course, because the ones murdered didn't have any sort of family that misses them or was traumatized by the whole ordeal, right?
@@atheistyoda8915 But whose parents are still alive? O.J. died at 76, half of each of the victims' families are probably dead too.
@@castonyoung7514 Uh, I think you forgot that Nicole Brown has children. Ron Goldman's father is also still alive.
Did you watch the video at all? We know the victims are deceased.
That Eagle Team plug was wild. Do not regret following
The fact the Florida even has a law that allows such practises in order to basically circumvent any form of collecting from a court determined debt is from my point an attack on the right of the courts as the law basically makes any form of debt uninforcable and as such null and void, killing any form of legal protection for the stiffed party.
And notice that it only protects people who are rich enough (or lucky enough) to own their home without debt. If you are renting or have a mortgage, it doesn't protect the money you were planning to pay rent or pay your mortgage with, so tough luck.
“The book was written by a ghostwriter” Yeah, he’s a ghost now I guess. 🤔🤣
A ghostwriter is the term used when the primary source, namely OJ here, provides the information to another person who proceeds to write the actual book. The ghost writer is not given credit for writing the book, that goes to the primary source.
This is really helpful to anyone under 30 who is too young to remember this. Thanks for the recap!!
If I'm ever charged with double murder, I know exactly which law firm I'm calling.
OH Which firm? All of OJs lawyers are dead or retired. Plus, if you dont have the race card, they wont be able to work their magic.
not necessarily. the guys who got him off have been retired for decades likely
@@immapotato1 Some of them are even dead.
DEWEY, CHEATHAM and HOWE?
@@PeteOtton Cochran and Kardashian are dead, but I heard Kim took up law studies...
So...the families will get nothing. Ever. Wealthy people really can do whatever they want to whomever they choose.
Balbal, stop crying and admit you are just poor.
Those razors really are good. I've had one for about a year, used it just a couple of hours ago. It's paid for itself several times over in not having to buy the replacement heads; I've yet to buy more blades, and as old school double side flat razor blades, they'll be really cheap when I have to. One of the few things I bought on an internet ad (Simon Whistler in this case) and while yeah, kinda steep on the front end, worth it.
The only time it’s acceptable to root for cancer
“I’m joining the fight against cancer… on the side of cancer.”
King Charles?
@@Z107.X0 What did he do to you?
@@ronald3836 monarch
I was a teen when the OJ criminal trial was being held...Everyone I knew stopped calling orange juice "OJ" after that lol To this day I still don't call it OJ.
You wrote "OJ" 3 times already.
"but if u committed double murder u should hire us" lmfao
Better call the eagle team
"If you had a loss in the family whether Oj did it or not" lmaooo
If they hadn't done what they did by acquitting the cops who savagely beating Rodney King, the OJ jury likely wouldn't have found him innocent. Before you say it, we all know: that's not how it's supposed to work. But that goes both ways. Juries aren't supposed to channel motives like that, and cops aren't supposed to savagely beat unarmed black people (or any people). A lot happens that isn't supposed to happen, but the system should have held those cops accountable. 💯
Agreed! If LAPD were held liable for their negligence and abuse before, there wouldn't be a revenge verdict on a guilty defendant.
I actually believe the Dream Team poking so many holes into how LAPD handled the crime scene, notification of OJ, the evidence, and so on. They also should have fired Mark Furhman before 1994....
Oh please...keep defending them. We know exactly what it was about, just look at the jury.
@@pearlharbor8065you sound racist.
@@mangos2888 There still might have been a jury nullification. "Driving while black" and the regular unjustified homicides by police of other young black men was on their mind. Imagine if the police killed or beat a dozen young pretty white girls every year in your town. How would you feel about the police and "justice" then?
Good police officers hold *bad* police officers accountable to the law. An officer who covers for a *bad* police officer *is a bad police officer* .
By that logic, we shouldn't ever have black people on a jury. Portions of the population are always going to have grievances, justifiable or not, against the justice system and civil institutions. If we're saying that means they should, or even reasonably will, reach a highly biased verdict then those jurors should be illegible.
Sentiments like 'it's okay for x group of people to do a bad thing, because y injustices exist' don't actually lead anywhere. They don't make the system more likely to reform, they just sow intergroup animosity that makes whatever objectionable thing that happened more likely to happen again.
I never expected the Daily Mail as a serious citation here.
Never before have people joined in on a man’s fight against cancer… on the side of cancer.
Man, I remember the Bronco chase. I was in the lounge area of the locker room in the athletic club I was a member of, they didn't kick us out at the normal closing time because we were all watching the chase.
I understand the jury wanted to get back at the police, but the way they hurt Nicole, Ron, and their families by letting their murderer walk free is appalling.
Don't fault the jury if the police had already caused their own lack of credibility.
Naw it was the police fault. Much of the evidence was put into question because of how badly it was collected. The blood for example was contaminated in a way that looked like it might have come from a lab so you couldn't disprove it wasn't planted.
Evidence looked tampered with. It probably wasn't but the police mishandled it so badly there was no way to fully know. So there is no way the jury could convict given the requirement of "beyond a reasonable doubt" given that the police gave so much reason to doubt.
One juror did. But the police mishandling was so bad it looked like evidence was tampered with. Remember it has to be " beyond reasonable doubt" but the police gave many reasons to doubt even of you think OJ is guilty.
I know it was so dispicable. They were supposed to be impartial and took an oath to be impartial.
@@JayTemplethe jury members later said they would never convict him no matter what because of the police beating Rodney King. At that time the relationships between cops and black people was horrendous. The jury was mostly black and they said they made the decision to not convict him because of Rodney King.
This has been a wonderful break down of this case. Thank you so much for this input and clear explanations.
How this guy got away with it is unbeliveable.
A police department that was already infamous for framing black suspects helps.
@@JayTempleIt was also the race card being played and the white jurors didn't want to be labelled racists. I just wonder how they feel knowing they helped a murderer get away with it.
Because to quote a legal scholar "They [the police] tried to frame a guilty man." The prosecutorial team fumbled the case so many times and against a top-tier legal defense team the prosecutors were outmatched. The police department messed up the custody of evidence, thus introducing contamination, there was the racist police detective who pled the 5th on if he tampered or placed evidence at the scene before, thus ruining the prosecutor's star witness's credibility, the poor explanation of DNA blood tests and how they work (the expert the prosecutors had testify confused the jury even more), etc.
I am a Brit, so really shouldn't make suggestions to the US but......a thought has occurred to me. Would it be an idea to give Florida back to the King of Spain and then build a wall? 🙂
I think the rest of the US wants it returned to the sea.
I live in Florida, so I can comment on your thought.
I really don't think the King of Spain would go along with that idea.
The entire UK should be given back to the Indigenous Africans who founded it.
@@steve470what about the alligator king, you think he'd accept being your ruler as an independent monarchy?
@@Ellie-rx3jt Only if he doesn't get a better offer from any of his other six sons. So I doubt it.
The ad transition was WILD