Again, so what - even if the cops were jerks, racists, tried to plant evidence, etc. etc. - why did O.J. flee the scene? How did his blood get all over the place? How should the cops have planted that? It's nonsense. If you want to let murderers go just because there is a bad cop somewhere in the force, might as well never convict anyone at all, because there will always be some bad apples among the cops.
SJC, Actually, I don't think the prosecution ever brough up the Bronco chase in the trial. And if I remember correctly, they were largely criticized for not doing so.
Not that it relates to the question of O.J.'s guilt at all, but do I remember it correctly that Darden and Marcia Clark actually had an affair during the trial?
I don;t think that's necessary, but I;d rather do that than convict innocent people based on bad cops manipulations. It's not just that there was a bad cop wandering about somewhere; there was a cop with a beef against Simpson, and an avowed prejudice against his race to the extent he'd said they all ought to be locked up, if I recall ( might be thinking of something else) who handled important evidence integral to the prosecution, and who was one of the primary investigators on scene. I donlt have an answer to 'how' he could have done it. I donlt even know that he did. I just know that if you were on trial for murder, and the lead cop who;d handled much of the evidence against you thought all Germans were Nazis who ought to be killed, and there were questions about some of the evidence against you he'd handled, I'd err on the side of innocence, given our system. If we keep overlooking bad cops because we want to convict, what's the incentive to fix anything? I'm very unsure that O.J was innocent, but there are how many cases a day where bad cops manipulate evidence to convict who they want to, or more likely think is guilty. Letting each one pass because the evidence seems against the accused misses the point that the evidence itself is fruit of a poisoned tree. WHo knows where/how they manipulated it? The onus isn;t on the defense to show how they did, it;s on the prosecution to show they didn;t, and in this case, I don't feel they did that.
Arrrgh. I don't care if the lead cop thinks all Germans are Nazis and should be killed if they find my blood all over the place at a murder scene (and it was not just one cop who found it), and that happens before they could even have my blood at all! Simple logic already shows that it does not matter whether the cop was a racist or whatever (note: it does not matter for the question of O.J.'s guilt, certainly a racist cop should be removed from the police). I remember that AB even said something in the old thread that he thinks O.J. did it, but he is STILL happy he was found not guilty. Where I would agree is that the prosecution did a very poor job, because they allowed the defense to steer the whole trial away from the real issues.
Another Brother: with all due respect what does this have to do with race!! and with all due respect those who actually believe it was a race issue fell right into the defense plans.. pretty ignorant people who see through racial glasses are the ones who fall for that lame excuse people play the race card and there are times where it is applicable but how ?? here ?? please connect the dots for me -- ohh yeah i remember he is black and she was white but.. please ( i cant believe such a weak argument actually worked -- sad-- disgusting)
