ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags murder cases , O.J. Simpson

Reply
Old 16th October 2017, 01:09 PM   #41
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
It's been said that a fool never changes his mind.
Well at least he sounds reasonable about it.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 01:55 PM   #42
Nova Land
/
Tagger
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Whitleyville, TN, surrounded by cats
Posts: 5,699
Originally Posted by bobtaftfan View Post
I know most media pundits and outlets believe O.J. Simpson is not only guilty, but obviously and undeniably guilty, but a closer look at the supposed "mountain of evidence" against O.J. reveals contradictions, bogus claims, and absurd scenarios.

An Unlikely Scenario: Problems with the Case Against O.J. Simpson
http://miketgriffith.com/files/unlikelyscenario.htm

You're a little late in posting this. William Dear already proved that O.J. Simpson was innocent (and that it was his son Jason who committed the murders) in his book O.J. Is Innocent And I Can Prove It. Calebprime posted a thread about that more than 5 years ago, and the evidence for Simpson's innocence was so overwhelming that no one even tried to refute it.

William Dear is a Dallas-based private detective who has also been involved in helping uncover the truth about extraterrestials and about the Kennedy assassination. Since someone with a reputation like that has already proved O.J. didn't commit the murders, is there really any need to bring some Mormon conspiracy theorist like Michael T. Griffith into things?
Nova Land is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 02:05 PM   #43
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by Nova Land View Post
You're a little late in posting this. William Dear already proved that O.J. Simpson was innocent (and that it was his son Jason who committed the murders) in his book O.J. Is Innocent And I Can Prove It. Calebprime posted a thread about that more than 5 years ago, and the evidence for Simpson's innocence was so overwhelming that no one even tried to refute it.

William Dear is a Dallas-based private detective who has also been involved in helping uncover the truth about extraterrestials and about the Kennedy assassination. Since someone with a reputation like that has already proved O.J. didn't commit the murders, is there really any need to bring some Mormon conspiracy theorist like Michael T. Griffith into things?
D'oh!
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 03:08 PM   #44
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,164
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
Typically, the EDTA is already in the vial when blood is collected, unless they used a different anticoagulant. And as you say, EDTA is ubiquitous.

If you don't find EDTA, look for heparin or oxalate or citrate.

The thing about EDTA is that it's used for haematology, the study of the blood cells, so vials are usually retained and stored as whole blood. Other anticoagulants are used for various biochemistry or coagulation testing and for these tests the blood is usually centrifuged to harvest the plasma and then the cells are thrown away. So whole unclotted blood stored for any length of time is likely to be in EDTA, as was discussed in the Avery case. However, if you're in a position to acquire some blood to use, you could use any anticoagulant and personally I would recommend heparin.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 03:21 PM   #45
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,164
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I don't know about the OJ case, but I would list the following that come to mind to challenge your numerical estimate, in a variety of circumstances.
1. The cartridge case in Arthur Thomas.
2. The glass lens in David Bain.
3. The serrated edge knife in West Memphis 3.
4. The blood and key in the Rav4 in Steven Avery, and the car itself.
5. The dna on the bra clasp with Raffaele Sollecito.
6. The scratch on the mantle piece in Jeremy Bamber
7. The whole field of secret witness testimony, WM3, David Tamihere where I just watched a 4 day trial 22 years after the murders proving John Hughes fed witness C the testimony that convicted. Witness C was correctly convicted of perjury and waits sentencing. The way that trial unfolded made it look very high risk for Hughes, but he is dead by now.
Obviously a new thread would be preferable for planted evidence, but it seems to me there is plenty of this high risk behaviour in these famous cases before getting to ones we don't know about.

There are certainly interesting points in the OP, but I assume he is guilty nevertheless. But noble cause corruption is rife. I think they usually believe they have the man, but not always. Maybe evidence was planted in OJ...

Actually I think a thread about evidence that is claimed to have been planted would be quite a good idea. (Then I can bore you all senseless by telling you about PT/35b....) so why not start one?

I would only include planted physical evidence though. Coached witness testimony is something else, as is deliberate misrepresentation of genuine physical evidence.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 03:26 PM   #46
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
If you don't find EDTA, look for heparin or oxalate or citrate.

The thing about EDTA is that it's used for haematology, the study of the blood cells, so vials are usually retained and stored as whole blood. Other anticoagulants are used for various biochemistry or coagulation testing and for these tests the blood is usually centrifuged to harvest the plasma and then the cells are thrown away. So whole unclotted blood stored for any length of time is likely to be in EDTA, as was discussed in the Avery case. However, if you're in a position to acquire some blood to use, you could use any anticoagulant and personally I would recommend heparin.

Heparin was the other anticoagulant I was trying to think of. I never got any blood samples with oxalate or citrate. Since the mid 1980s, we tested maybe 10,000 samples of feline blood for taurine levels by ion chromatography. I don't recall any problems with either EDTA or heparin in all that time. Our protocol specified either heparin or EDTA, so I have no information about other anti-coagulants.

At any rate, the OJ defense team was making a positive claim of EDTA at anti-coagulant levels in the blood samples collected at his house and at the crime scene (suggesting planted evidence), and I dispute that.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

Last edited by John Jones; 16th October 2017 at 03:31 PM.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 04:19 PM   #47
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,164
Heparin is the other common anticoaguant, used for clinical biochemistry because the chelating action of EDTA (and indeed citrate and oxalate) wrecks many of the routine biochemistry assays. Citrate is used for blood collected for transfusion though, so if blood were to be obtained from a blood bank that's what you'd have to test for (or CPD I think it is, in the form it's used in the blood bags, that always comes out as "continuing professional development" in my lexicon).

Citrate (ACD I think, acid citrate dextrose) is also used in blood vials for coagulation testing, mainly PT and APTT assays. It's used for that and for transfusion because it's the anticoagulant that is reversible.

Oxalate is mainly just used, with fluoride as an erythrocyte metabolic poison, in collection tubes for measuring glucose. Other tubes allow the erythrocytes to go on metabolsing glucose even after the blood has been collected and this is quite handy as it retards haemolysis by keeping the erythrocytes alive for a while, but obviously that causes glucose concentrations to decrease below the level when the sample was collected. Hence the fluoride. For some reason the anticoagulant in fluoride tubes is nearly always oxalate. I have no freaking idea why.

So there are quite a few possibilities to be considered here, EDTA is by no means the only game in town. (It was for the Avery case though, as that was an EDTA vacutainer they were saying the planted blood had been obtained from.)
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 05:06 PM   #48
wasapi
Illuminator
 
wasapi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,192
I'm perplexed that anyone could think OJ did not murder two people. I also believe OJ is doing everything within his power to prevent the Goldman family from receiving the money they were awarded in the civil trial.
__________________
Julia
wasapi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 07:28 PM   #49
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,111
Originally Posted by Nova Land View Post
William Dear is a Dallas-based private detective who has also been involved in helping uncover the truth about extraterrestials and about the Kennedy assassination. Since someone with a reputation like that has already proved O.J. didn't commit the murders, is there really any need to bring some Mormon conspiracy theorist like Michael T. Griffith into things?
The more the merrier, I suppose. Sadly, the village voice surgically eviscerated Dear's ridiculous assertions in 2012.
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 07:38 PM   #50
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,934
The moment that stands out for me is, several months into the trial a breaking news (and this is back when that meant something) segment and I sat and watched for and hour and 45 flippin' minutes while two talking heads argued about 5 second shot in a news clip taken the morning after the murders where a crime scene investigator walks from one side a house's foreyard to another carrying a clipboard with a manila folder on it and the fact that the manila folder wasn't flapping in the breeze the way one of the talking heads thought it should proved that there was a vial of OJ's blood in that manila folder that they were using to contaminate the crime scene to frame him.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2017, 09:59 PM   #51
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 12,643
I seriously doubt that evidence in a high profile case like the OJ Simpson trial was faked. Like claims that "the moon landings were faked", if the claims were true then there would be too many people who would have to be kept quiet for too long a time.

I happens in lower profile cases of course. When police have a case against somebody but are worried that the case is not strong enough to guarantee a guilty verdict, they may add some fake evidence to the case to strengthen it. Australian police call it "adding blue metal to the mix". Note that police seldom fabricate a case against somebody they believe is innocent unless the person has pissed the police off right royally.

I believe the biggest factor in the not guilty verdict was the race of the jurors.

What the OJ Simpson trial proved was that guilt or innocence and double jeopardy are meaningless in the US legal system. No matter what the final verdict is, you can still have the pants sued off you.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

Last edited by psionl0; 16th October 2017 at 10:01 PM.
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2017, 12:32 PM   #52
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,726
He is not guilty.

He killed two people, though.

Such is our system. Call it racial justice, jury nullification or just piss poor prosecution. The fact is that he killed two people and was found not guilty.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2017, 02:48 PM   #53
Carnivore
Salad Dodger
 
Carnivore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 1,880
The police framed him. They found the bodies outside one of the victim's house then inside they found a picture of OJ and quickly established he was the ex husband of one of the victims. Instantly they decided to pin the crime on him, in spite of the kid glove treatment that was unofficial department policy for celebrities.

Sure, the LAPD had a cosy relationship with OJ, who let cops come over to his house to use his pool and tennis court and provided handshakes and autographs. Sure the LAPD had previously "lost" the paperwork when he beat his wife so badly she insisted he was going to kill her. That doesn't matter. Fuhrman was racist! That means that the bloody gloves at the murder scene and at OJ's home were planted. It was just a lucky coincidence that they were an uncommon brand only sold in one store on the other side of the country, with a only a few hundred pairs made in OJ's size, which a receipt proves OJ's wife bought and which OJ was subsequently photographed wearing. That just goes to show how tricksy and cunning the LAPD is. Why, they only had a few minutes to place this compelling fake evidence in the middle of the night!

Likewise they had to pose the victims bodies in such a way that the FBI Behavioural Science unit would conclude the crime was a personal cause homicide with massive amounts of aggression and overkill directed particularly at Nicole. They presumably also had to plant valuable personal items on the victim's bodies to try to fool the world into thinking it the crime wasn't a robbery. Whats really impressive is that they achieved this without the watching TV cameras noticing anything odd. They even managed to stage the crime scene to make it appear the perpetrator was someone who matched OJ's end of the bell curve physical characteristics.

Sure, Monza pointed out the super high risk of detectives who didn't know each other instantly agreeing to an insanely risky criminal conspiracy to frame a wealthy and popular public figure, betting their careers, pension, freedom and lives on OJ not being out of town or at a public event or with the large number of friends and family who routinely hung out at his home or that proof of someone elses involvement wouldnt be found or that the real killer hadn't turned himself in and was confessing at that very moment. It was worth the risk. As it happens the detectives got lucky, they much later found out OJ was actually at home alone that night. Not only that, but a witness saw him speeding in his car between the murder site and his home right after the murder! Not only that but the same car was found weirdly parked outside the property, around the corner from the main gate. (This made it easy for Fuhrman to plant blood on it). Not only that but the limo driver who had been waiting to take OJ to the airport but was unable to get OJ to answer the gate buzzer saw a figure that looked a lot like OJ come out from the shrubbery behind the guest house just where the property boundary matched OJ's car position on the street and go into the house. Not only that but OJ's house guest Kato Kaelin heard bumps and banging from the same location at the same time! How lucky were the LAPD?

It didn't stop there. OJ's behaviour after the crime was a gift to the conspirators. When a detective finally got hold of him by phone at his hotel in Chicago a few hours later, he broke the news of Nicole's death to him. OJ expressed shock and sorrow and said he would come home immediately. The detective couldn't help noticing that OJ never asked how his wife had died. The detective deliberately hadn't told him. This the LAPD could later spin as suspicious! Days later when the DA's office had faked enough evidence to indict OJ he played right into their hands. They cunningly offered to let OJ vountarily surrender, arranging with his lawyer that he would present himself at the police station at a particular time. As their expert knowledge of OJ's psychological state predicted he of course did not turn himself in. Knowing that his wealth, influence, popularity and factual innocence would count for nothing in any trial, he had no choice but to flee his home leaving an apparent suicide note behind. This of course just made him look guilty - like the LAPD planned all along! After his car was spotted and was returning to his home in the infamous low speed chase a SWAT team cleared away witnesses from OJ's front yard and driveway - even the news helicopters were orderd clear. All was in readiness for the final phase. OJ himself expressed concern the LAPD would kill him as he exited the car. It would be the tidiest possible end to the farcial situation the LAPD had orchestrated.

And so it came to pass, The car parked outside OJ's house, out of view of cameras and onlookers. OJ's friend who had been driving was lured out and taken away. Finally OJ exited the car holding what SWAT initially thought (or claimed they thought) was a weapon. The final piece was in place. LAPD SWAT executed OJ in front of his home so that the travesty of the supposed case against him would never be revealed at trial.

Well, OK, they didn't kill him, they took him inside and let him sit on his couch and brought him a drink and let his friends speak to him. But that's just how cunning they are - they thought they convince people that they weren't intrinsically evil. That they weren't deliberately letting a murderer go free so they could frame one of the most popular celebrities in America - certainly the one of the black celebrities most popular with white people. Including LAPD cops.

Even with all the fake blood, forensic and behavioural evidence against OJ the police were still really, really lucky at all the circumstantial evidence that later turned up against him. Some of the domestic violence the one of responding detectives knew about but they lucked out again when OJs stalking and peeping tom behaviour torward Nicole in new house became known. Likewise OJs threats of violence toward her for dating other men just played into the DA's hands.

Heck, the lying LAPD didn't even need to fake any evidence against OJ. Even discounting absolutely all of the physical evidence the circumstantial case against OJ is pretty darn solid.

Fortunately the jury was to smart to fall for it.
__________________
"It's backwards thinking like this that made me leave Manchester. You Guinness swilling, Marmite blaspheming animal." - Malfie Henpox
Carnivore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2017, 03:58 PM   #54
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 67,361
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
He is [was found] not guilty [in a court of law].

He killed two people, though.

Such is our system. Call it racial justice, jury nullification or just piss poor prosecution. The fact is that he killed two people and was found not guilty.
FTFY. Surely as a lawyer you don't think "he is not guilty" is properly worded?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2017, 04:22 PM   #55
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
 
Dumb All Over's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name)
Posts: 5,441
Originally Posted by Carnivore View Post
The police framed him. [snip]
Nice post.
__________________
The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty forum word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead."
"Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." -Steve Martin
Dumb All Over is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2017, 04:25 PM   #56
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,111
That all you got, Sherlock?
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2017, 05:43 PM   #57
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,164
Originally Posted by Dumb All Over View Post
Nice post.

He really had me going for about a paragraph and a half!
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2017, 08:03 PM   #58
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
 
Dumb All Over's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name)
Posts: 5,441
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
He really had me going for about a paragraph and a half!
I do believe it deserves a nomination.
__________________
The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty forum word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead."
"Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." -Steve Martin
Dumb All Over is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 02:08 AM   #59
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,164
Good idea!
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 09:58 AM   #60
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,726
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
FTFY. Surely as a lawyer you don't think "he is not guilty" is properly worded?
On the contrary, as a lawyer it is the only use of the word that has any meaning. Under the law he was not simply found not guilty, he is not guilty. Despite the fact that the evidence shows he killed two people.

Ask a shrink, a priest, or philosopher if you want to talk about some other form of guilt.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 10:04 AM   #61
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 67,361
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
On the contrary, as a lawyer it is the only use of the word that has any meaning. Under the law he was not simply found not guilty, he is not guilty. Despite the fact that the evidence shows he killed two people.

Ask a shrink, a priest, or philosopher if you want to talk about some other form of guilt.
It's still 'not guilty' only as it applies to the law. You weren't writing a legal brief were you? Did I miss something else in your post?

I understand what you are saying, I don't agree that you don't need the caveat for the post to make sense in this forum format.

Oh well.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 10:06 AM   #62
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 67,361
I think it's interesting the two possibilities seem to be that he was framed or he was guilty. There's no scenario where there simply wasn't enough evidence.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 10:33 AM   #63
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,220
Originally Posted by bobtaftfan View Post
The "mountain of evidence" dissolves when you examine it logically and critically.

As for the police planting evidence in the case, this should come as no surprise. The LAPD was caught planting evidence multiple times back then, such as the Rampart case, where LAPD officers were caught planting drugs. As a result of the Rampart revelations, a bunch of convictions were overturned and the city of Los Angeles paid millions in damages to settle the resulting lawsuits. We also have LAPD Detective Mark Fuhrman's confessions on tape that he had planted evidence in previous cases to frame minorities and that he hated the very sight of mixed-race couples. Fuhrman "found" much of the key evidence in the O.J. case.

The only problem I have with planted evidence in this case is that they would have had to start planting it before the blood from the scene was analyzed.

Remember it came out that in such a vicious struggle, the assailant often also gets injured, and there should be some of his blood there, too. That early on, they had no way of knowing there wouldn't be pools of OJ's blood there.

So to plant evidence on OJ without knowing if his blood was all over the place (as it most likely would have been) would have been foolish and unnecessary. If his blood was all over the place, it would be unneeded. If his blood was not there, almost certainly the "real" murderer's would be, and then there'd be this odd conflict. The least likely scenario, that he did it but left no blood, was not something a rotten police officer could rely on to be true.
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 10:48 AM   #64
whoanellie
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 316
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I think it's interesting the two possibilities seem to be that he was framed or he was guilty. There's no scenario where there simply wasn't enough evidence.
Perhaps this doesn't need to be said, bur it's entirely possible that evidence was planted and oj committed the murders. The 2 possibilities are not mutually exclusive.
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 11:35 AM   #65
Prometheus
Acolyte of Víđarr
 
Prometheus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 48,621
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I think it's interesting the two possibilities seem to be that he was framed or he was guilty. There's no scenario where there simply wasn't enough evidence.
Personally, I think Amanda Knox masterminded the whole thing.
__________________
As Einstein once said, "If you can't think of something relevant to say, just make something up and attribute it to some really smart dead guy."
"I find your lack of pith disturbing," - Darth Rotor
..........
Don't be offended. I'm not calling you a serial killer. -- Ron Tomkins.
Prometheus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 12:18 PM   #66
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 12,643
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Under the law he was not simply found not guilty, he is not guilty.
That sounds like legalese to me.

He was found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury. Therefore, he can not be tried for the same crime again (except in a civil court). Had the standard been balance of probabilities then he most likely would have been found guilty.

Whether he was actually guilty is a different question altogether.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 12:31 PM   #67
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,934
It's all semantics. Whether or not one is currently using "Guilty" to mean "Found guilty n a court of law" in legalese or as a layman's shorthand for "It is my opinion that he did it."
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 01:06 PM   #68
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,726
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
That sounds like legalese to me.
Yes, terms of art should be used as terms of art in their respective art. We are discussing the legal charges brought against a man who killed two people. He is not guilty of those charges, he is not guilty of that act and he is simply not guilty under the law, at law, in the law. Guilty has a meaning, OJ has avoided that tag. Not **** that can be done about it now.

ETA: Hillary is not President. It doesn't matter that she got more votes, she still isn't president. It doesn't matter if Vlad hacked the voting machines and if Trump is kicked out. Hillary is not President.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

Last edited by Dr. Keith; 18th October 2017 at 01:08 PM.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2017, 01:22 PM   #69
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Yes, terms of art should be used as terms of art in their respective art. [...].
You legal maggots make me want to puke. OJ obviously massacred two people. He was found not guilty by a racist nullifying jury with no brains.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 05:48 AM   #70
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,688
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
You legal maggots make me want to puke. OJ obviously massacred two people. He was found not guilty by a racist nullifying jury with no brains.
Do you not see a problem here?
Jonathan Raban wrote a fantastic book describing the air people in New York. There are ground people who can never get in a lift in New York on that thesis. How might the ground people protest?
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 05:56 AM   #71
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
OJ obviously massacred two people. He was found not guilty by a racist nullifying jury with no brains.
The whole trial was a major **** up, it's no wonder things didn't go as smoothly as they should have. But it's dangerous to call your conclusion "obvious" and cast evil intent on the jury for disagreeing with you.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 09:17 AM   #72
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,111
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
The whole trial was a major **** up, it's no wonder things didn't go as smoothly as they should have. But it's dangerous to call your conclusion "obvious" and cast evil intent on the jury for disagreeing with you.
The verdict was political. From an evidentiary pov, it was an open and shut case, and there were statements from some of the jurors I thought qualified as idiotic.
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 09:20 AM   #73
Monza
Alta Viro
 
Monza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,046
Originally Posted by Carnivore View Post
The police framed him. [snip]

Great summary. The LAPD were also very lucky that OJ was so polite and understanding in response to being framed. After being interviewed by two LAPD detectives (the ones that framed him) he never once was angry when they told him about some of the evidence they had. Even after the slow speed chase OJ never felt compelled to announce to the world that he was being framed, that the evidence known at that time was impossible. Instead, once the chase was over, he actually apologized to the LAPD and said he was sorry for causing them trouble. What a guy!
Monza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 09:57 AM   #74
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
The verdict was political.
Could you explain that?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 10:15 AM   #75
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,265
Those who responded to me, fair points. My post was more grump than substance.
Lithrael is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 10:41 AM   #76
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,164
I see the creator of this thread hasn't posted after his first two expository posts. Light the blue touch-paper and retreat to a safe distance?
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 04:48 AM   #77
bobtaftfan
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
A few points in reply:

One, EDTA is never found in human blood in an amount even close the amount of EDTA that was found in the sock blood and in the back-gate blood. This is a myth that the prosecution floated out of desperation. When a real, expert toxicologist was asked about it, he called the idea "absurd" (Frederic Rieders at the criminal trial). The Discovery Channel documentary The Case of O.J. Simpson confirmed this fact by an on-camera experiment.

The Discovery Channel documentary includes a segment where a test person eats a burger that has a large amount of EDTA in it, and his blood is then tested. The result? Only tiny, trace amounts of EDTA show up in his blood. One of the lab chemists explains that the body simply does not allow more than a trace element of EDTA to get into your blood. Dr. Rieders made the same point at the criminal trial.

Two, Nicole never said that if she got killed, O.J. would be the one to do it. It's interesting that the OJ-Did-It crowd rely on the hearsay claims of short-time friends like Faye Resnick, who only knew Nicole for a few months, but ignore the testimony of Nicole's best friend in the whole friend: Cora Fischman. Cora Fischman testified that Nicole *never* said anything to her about O.J. abusing her during the months leading up to the murders.

And I again repeat the fact that O.J. was out of town for much of the six months between January and June 1994, a fact that Kato Kaelin and Arnelle Simpson confirmed, and that the defense confirmed with numerous travel itineraries.

The famous diary entry where Nicole allegedly says that O.J. is abusing and stalking her has been shown to have been forged: https://ojsimpson.co/nicole-brown-si...-entry-forged/. This article is by Brian Heiss, one of the most careful and thorough researchers on the case.

Another entry in her diary--the one about the IRS issue--has also been found to have been forged. Whoever forged the entry was trying to make O.J. look cheap and vindictive, but the forger did not realize that the date they put for the entry was well before O.J.'s lawyer had even sent the IRS-related letter to Nicole. So, pray tell, how did she react to a letter that had not been sent yet?

The therapist who claimed Nicole told her O.J. was stalking and abusing got shredded on cross-examination in the civil trial. For example, O.J. was out of town when one of the alleged abuse incidents supposedly reported to her occurred.

The battered women's hotline counselor who claimed that Nicole called her "for some reason" failed to record any of the essential information in her call log, even though other calls were properly documented. Gee, what a coincidence. It later turned out that a different Nicole had made the call.

Some sources for further reading:

Brian Heiss, "Additional Entry from Nicole Simpson's Diary Determined to Have Been Fabricated"
https://ojsimpson.co/nicole-simpson-diary-fabricated/

Robert Blasier's closing argument in the civil trial: http://miketgriffith.com/files/blasierclosing.htm

Barry Scheck's closing argument in the criminal trial: http://miketgriffith.com/files/scheckclosing.htm

Brian Heiss, "O.J. Simpson and Domestic Violence, Part 3";
"O.J. Simpson and Domestic Violence, Part 4"
https://ojsimpson.co/oj-domestic-violence-part-3/
https://ojsimpson.co/oj-domestic-violence-part-4/

Brian Heiss, "Timeline June 12, 1994: The Murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman"
https://ojsimpson.co/timeline-june-12th-1994/
__________________
Mike Griffith. Real Issues Home Page.

Last edited by bobtaftfan; 22nd October 2017 at 05:04 AM.
bobtaftfan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 05:16 AM   #78
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,164
I am hearing some troubling things about the test to detect EDTA, in the context of the Avery case.

In the Avery case there were only smears of blood and the source of Avery's blood that the alleged fabricators had access to was an EDTA vacutainer, so the theory that detecting EDTA would determine whether the blood found was planted is at least sound. The reports I hear about the testing are troubling though.

What I don't know about the Simpson case is how much blood is alleged to have been planted, how the alleged fabricators were supposed to have been able to get hold of it, and whether EDTA would even have been involved. You're only going to get about 7 ml in the average vacutainer. Fuller and better particulars required.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 02:06 PM   #79
bobtaftfan
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Let's be clear: There is no way that one person's DNA can degrade into another person's DNA. And yet that's what the defense would have you believe.
Wrong. It is amazing that 20-plus years later some folks still don't understand what the defense presented and proved.

The defense's point, which they proved, was simply this: If you mishandle a blood drop during and after collection, you can destroy the DNA in the drop, and if you contaminate that drop with fresh DNA, the only DNA you're going to have in the drop is the fresh DNA. The Bundy blood drops were collected improperly and were then left to cook for several hours in the back of an evidence van, which could have degraded the DNA in the blood to the point that it would not show up in a test--and we know from Yamauchi's testimony that O.J.'s blood vial was handled in the lab at the same time the Bundy swatches were out and being handled. The Discovery Channel documentary proves--demonstrates--how easily the swatches could have been cross-contaminated with DNA from O.J.'s reference vial.

How else do you explain that every single evidence bindle for the Bundy blood drops had no initials on them?

How did the wet transfers get on the Bundy swatches if they were collected and processed the way the police claimed they were? As Dr. Lee noted, wet transfers were a physical impossibility if the police were telling the truth about how they handled the swatches.

Quote:
Oh, and OJ wrote a book detailing how he killed his wife.
No, he did not. The book was ghost-written by a guy who believed O.J. was guilty, and the Goldmans soon won the rights to the book and gained editorial control over it. That's why they changed the title to make it seem like it read I Did It--and they changed the subtitle to read Confessions of the Killer.

If O.J. did it, why didn't he have any cuts or bruises on his face, neck, shoulders, and arms when the police interviewed him the day after the murders?

Why did none of the many witnesses who saw O.J. on the flight to Chicago and at the Chicago airport see any cuts on O.J.'s hands? Why did none of them see any bruises or scratches on his face, neck, or arms?

How do you explain the fact that the blood under Nicole's fingernails did *not* match O.J.'s blood?

What about the fact that most of the wounds to Goldman were made by a left-handed person? (O.J. is right handed.)

Why did the best photo of the back gate prove that there was no blood where the police belatedly claimed they found blood?

Why does the police liability video show no socks on O.J.'s bedroom floor?

Why did the first evidence report on the socks state that there was no blood seen on them? (Did everyone really "miss" the huge, half-dollar-sized stain that the police belatedly claimed they found on one of the socks?)

When exactly did O.J. have time to stalk and abuse Nicole when he was out of town most of the time in the six months leading up to the murders?

Why did Nicole's closest friend, Cora Fischman, say that Nicole never said a word to her about O.J. abusing her in the months leading up to the murders?
__________________
Mike Griffith. Real Issues Home Page.
bobtaftfan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 02:06 PM   #80
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,786
Originally Posted by bobtaftfan View Post
A few points in reply:

One, EDTA is never found in human blood in an amount even close the amount of EDTA that was found in the sock blood and in the back-gate blood. This is a myth that the prosecution floated out of desperation. When a real, expert toxicologist was asked about it, he called the idea "absurd" (Frederic Rieders at the criminal trial). The Discovery Channel documentary The Case of O.J. Simpson confirmed this fact by an on-camera experiment.
So...how much EDTA was found in the sock blood? Or the back gate blood?

According to John Jones here, the amount was so small that it ought to have been considered a negative test, i.e. containing no EDTA at all. JJ sounds like he knows his stuff. Got any refutation?

I've heard a lot of credible sources say there is evidence the socks were planted, and, to me, just the image of the socks at the foot of the bed looks wrong. You can see socks on my bedroom floor, but they are next to the pants. And next to the boots, and near the M&M's wrapper. It's just really weird that the one and only thing on an otherwise clean floor would be a pair of socks, especially when those socks had your ex wife's blood on them. Possible? Yes, certainly, but just kind of weird. So, I'm amenable to some story about planting or at least manipulating evidence when it comes to the socks, but that doesn't mean I'm just going to take some author's word for it.

As for the back gate blood, this is something I see a lot in conspiracy theory posts. I see people going to a lot of effort to refute evidence that just doesn't matter very much. Having refuted it, or at least believing they have refuted it, they then declare that the case falls apart.

It seems like you are doing a bit of that here. As best I can tell, the back gate blood is pretty insignificant to the case. It proves that OJ was bleeding on his own property. Well, so what? He was home. He cut his hand. There's blood. It has virtually no evidentiary value. It certainly doesn't prove he killed Ron and Nicole, it doesn't even really add anything of significance to the case. Ok. If it was planted, it would cast doubt on all the other evidence as well, but, as with the socks, I'm not going to just take some author's word for it. How much EDTA was found in it, or is there some other reason to belive it was planted?

ETA: Forgot to mention the important point that makes me skeptical of things like planting back gate blood. In order for it to be planted, you would have to have cops go out of their way to plant something that wasn't incriminating. Every time you plant evidence, you're taking a big chance that you could be caught. That could result in your case being thrown out, and you going to jail, possibly for a long time. Why plant something that won't even solidify your case? If there's evidence that it was planted, then I guess we have to follow the evidence, but just out front I have to wonder about it,, just because lots of people say things that are not consistent with the "planted" theory and, just as importantly to me, it isn't worth planting.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 22nd October 2017 at 02:10 PM.
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.