Subject: civil trial a farce
I can't believe that a person in this country can be determined not
guity, then in the next turn be sued because he was married to the
victim. I 've read other peoples thoughts that that say they believe he
did it and that it was so planned out. Well, if it was so planned out
why would he plant incriminating evidence on his own property.
I have a
few thoughts too. I think Nicole was murdered because Ron Goldman was
followed from the restaurant to Nicole's house. I believe that he was
followed because the murderers thought the envelope might contain money
or possibly drugs. I think he was attacked and murdered, then as the
murderers atempted to run away, Nicole heard a ruckus, walked out and
was a witness and had to be silenced also.
Why was he(Ron
Goldman)really there? And.. Why did he feel he had to personally bring
Nicole those glasses? I know it's not that late but Nicole has two kids
who would probably be going to sleep so why disturb them? Why not
return them in the morning?
The thing about similar looking
shoes,gloves, hat, and even car. How many people in that area have
gloves similar to the ones found and in all of that area there could be
only one white bronco or similar looking vehicle. I tell you if I was
accused of a crime in L.A. because my Honda, Toyota, Ford truck looked
similar to one in a crime, I would try to find the hundreds of other
owners in that area with a similar car.
I think maybe that Ron Goldman
was the reason Nicole was murdered, and that her children no longer have
a mother. I think the money is all the Goldmans are really after, after
all money cannot bring life back to their son or to Nicole.
From what I saw on T.V. there were alot of people entering and leaving
both sites. Could one or more of them transferred evidence from their
clothing to any area at both scenes, accidentally of course?
to domestic violence calls placed to 911 (and see if this sounds fair)
any person who gets into a fight of this nature is definitely or very
likely to murder the other person because fighting seems to lead to
this. They might as well arrest the man because women could not
possibly be violent. Doesn't this sound unfair or is it just me?
the 911 call sounded sarcastic, "You know his record". It did not sound
like a person that was frightened. It sounded more like, Hear we go
again, do something.
I don't think the time frame indicated a very well
planned event. Outside where there could possibly be witnesses. Not
very well planned in my estimate. I have no idea if my thoughts are a
possible scenario but I have heard no one address this line of thought.
I have thought these ideas from the beginning, because I find it hard to
believe 1 person committed these horrible crimes. I only feel sad and
disappointed thinking that a person or persons could really do
something so horrible to another human being. I feel for all the family
members of both victims. However, no amount of money will fill their
bodies with life. I sure wish there was a way.
It was submitted by Marsha (email@example.com) :)
Justice at last! I failed, but it's good to see that the savage murderer is getting his due! I hope he rots in hell without a penny to his name.
It was submitted by Arek Grantham (firstname.lastname@example.org)
I have read through the comments submitted to your "Who the Hell is Charles Grodin"
web site, and I found some thought provoking and some pure drivel. The issue was, and
still is, whether Charles Grodin has the right to pronounce OJ guilty night after night
on his television program. Well, here are my thoughts:
OJ was tried and found not guilty in a court of law. He received a fair trial, and, when
the question of his culpability in the murders of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson
was put to the jury, they came back with a verdict stating, in effect, that the prosecution
had not proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that OJ had indeed committed any crime.
These are the facts. While I may feel differently than members of the jury in the criminal case,
I must abide by the decision that they handed down. This is just how it is.
I, for one, do not agree that OJ was aquitted because he was rich, and thus was able to
mount an outstanding, thoughtful defense. It disturbs me when I hear this. Assistant
district attorneys are generally fairly good lawyers. The state has high requirements
which all ADAs must meet before they become ADAs. Many a rich person in this country
has been convicted of a crime - to automatically assume a high priced lawyer equals instant
aquittal is just plain ridiculous. Having said this, in my opinion, Marcia Clark and
Christopher Darden blew it. They took and ironclad case and muffed it. Some may argue
that the race of the jury was really the issue, and to some extent I agree. But, MC and CD made
it too easy on the jurors to vote the way, and why, they did.
Also, what exactly is the definition of a "slick lawyer"? If I were on trial, I would
attempt to find the best lawyer that I possibly could. What exactly is wrong
with this? I guess that the assumption is that a "slick lawyer" is somehow wrong.
I submit that if any of the persons who refered to Cochran or Shapiro as such would
be the first to call such a lawyer if faced the same circumstances as OJ. A defense
attorney's sole job is to defend his client as best as he is able, within the limits
of the law. As far as I can see, OJ's lawyers broke no laws and fulfilled their mandate,
which they are required to do by oath.
Now, on to the question at hand. I believe in the freedom of speech
and of the press guaranteed to us in the Constitution. But, the question
must be: when does exercising the right of freedom of speech cross the line
into outright slander? Well, consider this: Richard Jewel sued several
news organizations for implying that he had been responsible for the
Atlanta Olympic Park bombing, and won. Charles Grodin, and others in the
press who insist on proclaiming OJ guilty even after his acquittal,
is leaving himself open to such a suit. But, it is up to OJ to put an
end to these attacks. I wonder why he has not?
My own opinion is that OJ is as guilty as sin. But, a jury, truly of
his peers, for better or worse, found him not guilty.
I will accept that jury's verdict, although I may disagree. I will accept
it because it was fair and proceduraly correct. I will accept it because
the laws of this great country say I must. The jury system is the underpinning
of our court system. By far, it is the fairest method ever devised to seek justice for
those wronged and those who have done wrong. It may have occassional flaws,
highlighted in the OJ case and others like it, but the alternatives to
it are unacceptable to anyone who loves freedom and fairness.
In closing, I believe that the OJ trial was fair to both sides. I may question
the verdict, but I have faith in the system that produced it. I hope, that as time passes,
we will learn something from the OJ trial. Mainly I hope that we learn that, white or black,
yellow or red, we learn that we all must stand together, for in unity we have strength.
I am proud to call the citizens of America my brothers and sisters. We have come
from all parts of the world to be here. Most of our ancestors were unwanted and
outcasts in their homelands. But it is here that we are now, and it is here that we
have made our homes, our lives. And it is here that we must make our stand, together.
We must heal our wounds, close the gaps that exist between us and fill the breach
that has opened beneath our very feet. I for one will my best to achieve that goal,
and I urge the others who may read this to do the same.
Very Well Written ... Very Well Thought Out ... Very Positive Recommendation
It was submitted by Lisa Stetson (STETSON@TheRamp.net)
I can not believe that a killer is now allowed to raise the children of the woman he has killed! This is dispicable! I gasp in disbelief when OJ won the first trial and I gasped for happiness when he just lost the suit the GOLDMANS and BROWNS.
It was submitted by scott stewart (email@example.com)
Oj will pay for his crimes sometime...whether it is in this lifetime, or the next!!
It was submitted by Scott Nillissen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
LA police commissioner put it best, that there was absolutely no evidence that there was a conspiracy against OJ, and that every single shred of evidence in this case points to one man. Any one who thinks OJ isn't to blame , has either not seriously analyzed the evidence or ....
From: email@example.com (Larry Graham)
THANKS TO YOU AND GERALDO FOR
SPEAKING OUT FOR JUSTICE, WE NEED MORE PEOPLE LIKE YOU TWO.
I AT ONE TIME WAS A FAN OF O.J.'S. NOT ANYMORE.
HE DID KILL THOSE
TWO PEOPLE. HE IS A BETTER ACTOR
OFF SCREEN THAN ON.SOME DAY
GOD WILL BE HIS JUDGE, AND O.J.
CAN NOT LIE TO HIM , FOR HE ALREADY KNOWS THE TRUTH.
From: ismael gonzalez
Subject: OJ - MY OPINION
WHAT EVER HAPPENED ON THAT NIGHT, THE WHOLE
POLICE FORCE SCREWED THIS CASE UP, MURDER IS NOT A MEANS TO JUSTIFY
VIOLATING OUR BASIC BILL OF RIGHTS. IF EVERYONE WOULD ONLY LOOK PAST
HIS STATUS AS A RICH, JOCK, WHO BEAT HIS EX-WIFE YEARS AGO....OR SO
PEOPLE WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE. I MEAN COME ON. HE DID'NT GO BEAT HER UP
BECAUSE HE FELT HE COULD GET AWAY WITH IT. HE REACTED TO HER ACTIONS
WHICH FORCED HIM TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE SOOO MANY OTHER MEN IN THIS
COUNTRY HAVE DONE, BUT WITH IT BEING OJ LET'S BRING OUT EVERY MISTAKE IN
JUDGEMENT HE HAS MADE. I FOR ONE SUPPORT THE THOUGHT " IF HE WAS FOUND
NOT GUILTY BY A CRIMINAL COURT AND JURY, HOW CAN HE BE FOUOND GUILTY IN
A CIVIL TRAIL???THIS WAS A MAKE UP TRAIL FOR THE BROWN'S AND GOLDMAN'S,
THERE FAMILIES SHOULD FEEL SO STUPID AND LOW ASKING FOR MONEY TO MAKE
THINGS BETTER NOW THAT THEIR FAMILY IS ROTTING IN THEIR GRAVES.
I don't know ... do you think this name is for real ??? ( War 'N Peace )
It was submitted by Warren Peace (firstname.lastname@example.org)
It truly knocks me out that we as a society can make a hero out of this guy. I had tears in my eye the
day he ran for his record yards.
I hoped that they (the Bills) would go all the way for O.J. and I truly liked the man over the next few years for
his commericals, movies
and sports broadcasting.
I didn't know much about this guy until the trail. The evidence was pretty
solid and I think Mark Fuhrman was a jerk
but that doesn't alter a thing. I imagine if you took a hard look at the evidence against Manson it could be blurred to appear circumstaintal.
as well. I definitely feel that an IQ test should be administerd to the jury before they participate. America is such a mixed place, you will
always have debators over every little thing - ufo's, government coverups, conspiracey's, god, and well the list goes on. It wouldn't matter
if a camera had taped everytime he had plunged that knife into Nicole and recorded her muffled screams of pain and then Ron look of surprise
and disbelief when he accidently stumbled onto the scene and when the knife made it's first entry into his body, there would still be people
that would truly believe it to be a setup. I don't know if it is a brain abnormality, block or what. It is often a good thing though to question
but to blindly believe against all odds just is unconcievable to me.
Cochran is a cockroach, I figured from day one that he was going the racial
route. It was obivious from so many of his past history cases plus other than temporary insanity it was their only hope. I didn't hear a thing from
the dream team that didn't equate to anything more than "no it isn't or no it's not".
No, I don't think much of Simpson or the dream team or even
our judicial system (Judge Ito should have thrown Cochran racial ploy right out of the court room).
I think and pray that the best thing that could
happen for OJ is for him just to go blow his brains out and maybe his football days of glory could revive his memory. Of course I suppose you know now
OJ did abuse all of his past girlfriends - I did not know that. Why glorify this kind of individual when we fought so hard to put these types away, I
do know this is a smaller crime but he got away with it many times that I really think it was what lead up to him killing Nicole and I have to admit
she was a little on the dumb side. I think she was the type that had to have money and fame and would not be happy with someone who really loved and cared
for her if they were not as rich and famous. There is no doubt that he "did" stalk her and that is not the nature of a man with good intentions either.
I wish all the conspiracey freaks well as this case should provide plenty of meat to chew for both sides. He got off the criminal charges but is
forever finacially ruined and his name is forever mud.
It was submitted by Kat (SAM-I-AM@prodigy.net)
I would not have found OJ guilty had I been on the original jury. I also think that this civil trial
should not be allowed. The man was found not guilty. It feels like double
jeopary to me. I hope the Goldman's find some peace with this decision. I doubt they'll see any
money. Money can't bring Ron back. I wish this trial would disappear for
OJ's sake and ours. However, I think we should wonder about a system tht
allows a man to be tried twice for the same crime.
From: "Peter V. Sellars"
Subject: RE: Guilty or Not!
To those who dislike O.J. Simpson: Guilty or Not! That is not the
question. O.J. Simpson, whether he is guilty or not, has been brought
down to the level of those who could never rise to his once celebrated
What the hell would anyone care if O.J. murdered 2 people? - as
if O.J. has been the only "murderer" in California. Where are all of
you people, you self-proclaimed" justice seekers, when a no-name
non-celebrity stands accused of a brutal crime? You let the innocent go
to jail without ever raising an eyebrow and now you scream as if you had
your favorite toy taken from you.
Yes, ride your band-wagon while you
can, at least until the next attractive wagon comes along. Remember
this: even a guilty man can be persecuted unfairly. But, how could you
people (who condemn O.J.) ever know what I am writing about? You've
never been on this side - never been unjustly crucified. By the way,
Charles Grodin: he's a mediocre actor at best. It's a joke that anyone
would take him or Geraldo seriously. Both are disgusting.
Subject: The Real OJ
Check out my page:
From: (P. Snyder)
Below is the result of your feedback form.
It was submitted by P. Snyder
Could anything have convinced you that OJ was quilty?
If the police said OJ's sweat was in the gloves lining...
If Kato had "demonstrated" the hit against the wall...
If Nicoles parents had not stood by the DA/LAPD...
If the police had stormed OJ's house in a military fashion...
If the police had gotten Nicole to speak/file charges on one of their numerous visits...
If there had been LESS evidence (you were concerned with there being too much)...
If someone said they had heard his voice at the time of the murders (your concern with his inability to
control his volume)...
You clearly don't beleive the DNA evidence found on Nicole's body, Ron's body,
Nicoles property, Bronco, Inside/Outside OJ's Property... the hair
found in the knit cap so what difference would sweat in the glove
have made to you? You have no problem with the all too convenient
constansies between the victims wounds and OJ badly sliced
finger, the purchase of a knife, his being trained to use one, a similar blade
being used on the victims, the bloody footprint & shoe photos, the bloody gloves
& photos, OJ's whereabouts & acitivities...all which OJ has yet to tell a
consistanct story about, and so on.
Yes the police screwed up quite a bit, but should a killer go free because
of police mistakes... or should the killer and the bungling cops be punished
respectively for their crimes. In one breath you claim OJ and the LAPD have
a wonderful relationship and that the LAPD did nothing to help Nicole (thereby
taking OJ's side) then suggest that the same police force organized
this enormous frame up against OJ. Are they freinds or aren't they? Are the
LAPD bungling idiots or are the highly intelligent? You can't have it both ways!
So again I ask, is there anything that could have convinced you that OJ
murdered his abused ex and her guest... if so what?
Sure glad you didn't ask me that question ???
Subject: Re: The Juice
From: LAWRENCE CHOY-KEE
Organization: FAST LOGIC SYSTEMS
What is up with the extra fingerprint found at the crime scene?
And the clothes in the dryer .... ??? And the empty knife box ???
From: YCNM02B@prodigy.com (MRS JESSICA L NICHOLAS)
Subject: Your web page...
Just wanted to let you know...
Marcia Clark's name is spelled with a "c" not with a "sh" as you have
on your home page.
Thanks I think I got it ... there and on a couple of other pages :)
I have my own "O.J." page and may include a link to your page on it