Strangely, some people still believe OJ did it.

http://blogging.la/archives/images/2006/08/875BUNDY-thumb.jpgLA County Prosecutor “Patterico” is blogging a series of “Ruminations” on why he believes OJ Simpson got away with murder (h/t Independent Sources). Its pretty straightforward stuff, which compliments his core belief:

I call it the Microscope Effect. If you put anything under a microscope, you can come out with the wildest theories.

The series, now on part seven, acknowledges that the Prosecution made some mistakes, but the evidence was damning as is. The majority of fault, says Patterico, belongs on the jury that looked past the facts.

I think that the composition of the jury was the critical factor in the trial. In my opinion, there is no evidence in the world that would have convinced that particular jury — no pictures of “ugly ass” Bruno Magli shoes, no statements or testimony from O.J. — nothing.(from Part Two)

Patterico spends less time nitpicking the case then bringing up specific, notable manipulations of the jury, including a field trip they were taken on from the Bundy crime scene to OJ’s Rockingham estate. Under normal driving conditions at the time, it would have taken around five minutes to drive between the two locations…

According to the defense, O.J. simply didn’t have the time to get back to his house from Nicole’s condo, get cleaned up, and be ready for the limo driver to pick him up.

Nonsense…

I can’t for the life of me imagine that the jury traveled from Nicole’s to O.J.’s house in anything like five minutes. It wouldn’t surprise me if it took 30 minutes or more.

If the jury thought it took a considerable period of time to travel from Nicole’s to O.J.’s, it’s no wonder they found themselves convinced by the timeline argument. (from part three)

And as for why the civil case found OJ responsible for the murders, while the criminal case didn’t, Patterico provides a full transcript of the prosecution’s closing arguments, along with this solid reason:

O.J. himself. See, in the civil trial, the plaintiffs were allowed to call O.J. You can’t do that in a criminal trial.

The posts are brief enough for even those casually interested in the case, but with enough juicy, interesting tidbits to educate the crime buffs, and the comments alone are enough for those who love drama by conspiracy goofs. Regardless, reading these posts made me wonder how different, for better or worse, the OJ media circus, trial, and verdict would have been if blogs had been around in 1995…

(as of the time of this posting the following have been made available: Part One: Introduction, Part Two: The Jury, Part Three: The Timeline, Part Five: Patterico Visits the O.J. Civil Trial, Part Six: Why Petrocelli Won the Civil Trial, While Clark and Darden Lost the Criminal Trial, and Part Seven: The Microscope Effect. Image from the Famous Trials Douglas O. Linder by )

2 Replies to “Strangely, some people still believe OJ did it.”

  1. You gotta figure that OJ is one of the luckiest people on earth. If the lead detective on the case hadn’t been openly racist (ok, so OJ was playing pretty good odds on this one), he never would have gotten off on the charges.

  2. a friend of a friend, formerly of the LAPD, seems to think that it was actually OJ’s son who got away with murder. i don’t remember how the story stacks up, but it was quite a compelling theory.

Comments are closed.