Issues In The Criminal Trial

[William Anthony]

It is pretty funny. I'm sure it was meant as a joke.;)

There is a joke on the board, Joseph Bell. It's just not comical-distasteful would be more appropriate.

[William Anthony]

Undoubtedly announced and presented by the sole voter in the matter. :rolleyes:

Perhaps, the most informed voter.

[William Anthony]

in order to further your argument you really should stick to the known facts:

Simpson said he cut himself

Fuhrman did not collect blood samples

Simpson said he was bleeding from his hand the night he murdered Ron and Nicole

There was no EDTA in either the socks or the gate stain

There was no reasonable doubt

Fact-not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Simpson did not testify in the criminal trial. Are you calling Martz a liar? I think we may have reached a point of agreement.

[William Anthony]

Originally Posted by fbgweezer View Post
*Snipped*

the pictures were shown to the jury by Darden.

I recall that they were shown to the public and I am not sure about the jury. It is my understanding and the pictures I am speaking of are those found in the safe-deposit box. Please, provide a date and who laid the foundation for the pictures?

[weezer]

Originally Posted by fbgweezer View Post
*Snipped*

the pictures were shown to the jury by Darden.

I recall that they were shown to the public and I am not sure about the jury. It is my understanding and the pictures I am speaking of are those found in the safe-deposit box. Please, provide a date and who laid the foundation for the pictures?

you said the abuse pictures weren't shown to the jury. I said they were shown to the jury by Darden. now, if you have a question about 'which' pictures were shown, I suggest you do some :read:

[William Anthony]

you said the abuse pictures weren't shown to the jury. I said they were shown to the jury by Darden. now, if you have a question about 'which' pictures were shown, I suggest you do some :read:

The rules require that when you post something as a fact you are required to support that claim. I no that you selectively, imho, decide, which rules you will follow, as with the request for a link to the pigeon-toed shoe prints. I do read more than these posts and, in fact are now reading the transcript of the administrative hearing I won, because the other side had appealed. I sometimes have to prioritize what I am reading. With that said it is really a rather minute point judging by the verdict. So, I will continue intermittently reading the transcript and these posts.

[weezer]

The rules require that when you post something as a fact you are required to support that claim. I no that you selectively, imho, decide, which rules you will follow, as with the request for a link to the pigeon-toed shoe prints. I do read more than these posts and, in fact are now reading the transcript of the administrative hearing I won, because the other side had appealed. I sometimes have to prioritize what I am reading. With that said it is really a rather minute point judging by the verdict. So, I will continue intermittently reading the transcript and these posts.

the rules require posting links when a statement is proclaimed as fact and is not something commonly known. for anyone watching the trial (or even reading the transcripts), it is common knowledge that Darden presented the pictures that depicted a bruised and battered Nicole.

[William Anthony]

the rules require posting links when a statement is proclaimed as fact and is not something commonly known. for anyone watching the trial (or even reading the transcripts), it is common knowledge that Darden presented the pictures that depicted a bruised and battered Nicole.

I do believe that Darden presented pictures of a bruised and battered Nicole and I believe that is common knowledge. However, you stated he published them to the jury. I asked you for a link to that and to who established a foundation for the publication of the pictures. I do not think my question encompassed facts that are commonly known.

[Kayleighjo]

Perhaps, the most informed voter.

That's the funniest thing I've heard all week, thanks:)

When I think of words to describe martin, alot come to mind ... informed is definitely not one of them. In fact, none of them could I probably say on this board.

[William Anthony]

That's the funniest thing I've heard all week, thanks:)

When I think of words to describe martin, alot come to mind ... informed is definitely not one of them. In fact, none of them could I probably say on this board.

I will defer to Martin to answer that. :)

[weezer]

I do believe that Darden presented pictures of a bruised and battered Nicole and I believe that is common knowledge. However, you stated he published them to the jury. I asked you for a link to that and to who established a foundation for the publication of the pictures. I do not think my question encompassed facts that are commonly known.

william, I'm not up to doing research for you. If you are interested in which photos, foundation, etc., I suggest you do some research.

[William Anthony]

william, I'm not up to doing research for you. If you are interested in which photos, foundation, etc., I suggest you do some research.

As I said, you selectively choose, which rules you will follow.

[William Anthony]

Wonder whay Darden did not say the only R word that should have had meaning in this trial is Ronald?

[William Anthony]

Correction to this post and its twin on the other thread.

Wonder whay Darden did not say the only R word that should have had meaning in this trial is Ronald?

Wonder why Darden did not say the only R word that should have had meaning in this trial is Ronald?

I did not want any bells to start chiming.

[tv]

Correction to this post and its twin on the other thread.

Wonder whay Darden did not say the only R word that should have had meaning in this trial is Ronald?

Wonder why Darden did not say the only R word that should have had meaning in this trial is Ronald?

I did not want any bells to start chiming.What is the other R word that you're referring to?

[Kayleighjo]

I will defer to Martin to answer that. :)

Trust me, he anwers that everytime he opens his mouth:rolleyes:

[William Anthony]

What is the other R word that you're referring to?

Racist, Rubin, Rush to judgment or Robin Cotton, as examples,-take your pick.

[tv]

Racist, Rubin, Rush to judgment or Robin Cotton, as examples,-take your pick.You mentioned it so the choice is yours but I'd like to add Rage, Randa, Robert (Heidstra), Rockingham, Rush to Verdict and Race Card.

[martin II]

I will defer to Martin to answer that. :)

I was away for about two days to attend my grandchildren's
"Graduation" But i am reading to catch up and still using my ingore button on some post.
martin II

[martin II]

Why do you believe Dennis Fung about this when you don't give him credibilty on anything else? Could it be because it's good for the defense?

martin, to the best of your knowledge, did Phillip Vannatter stop off at a Dunkin Donuts before taking the blood to Dennis Fung?

tv hi
I am not sure where he stopped. It could have been Dunkin Donuts or Twin Donuts. I believe he knew the location of both. But the issue is, D. Fung said that was the first time anyone had brought blood evidence to him at a crime scene. So i am wondering why Vanhatter did that. I am Sure he knew that was not the normal/regular way that blood evidence was handeled.imo
martinII

[weezer]

tv hi
I am not sure where he stopped. It could have been Dunkin Donuts or Twin Donuts. I believe he knew the location of both. But the issue is, D. Fung said that was the first time anyone had brought blood evidence to him at a crime scene. So i am wondering why Vanhatter did that. I am Sure he knew that was not the normal/regular way that blood evidence was handeled.imo
martinII

yeah, it was a first time for Ron and Nicole too.

[martin II]

I will defer to Martin to answer that. :)

A empty can still makes the most noise which is why i still ignore post that i believe containe nothing but noise, noise and more noise.hahaha
imo
martin II:cool:

[William Anthony]

You mentioned it so the choice is yours but I'd like to add Rage, Randa, Robert (Heidstra), Rockingham, Rush to Verdict and Race Card.

Since you are allowing me the choice, I choose Ridiculous prosecution case. Aside from Darden's obvious display of gender discrimination, I wonder if there was some other reason, he chose to say that the only N word that should have been involved in the case was Nicole. As you correctly point out, he had several R words to choose from, with the exception of Rush to Verdict, because the verdict had not been rendered when he made his closing argument, or lack thereof, if you will. Maybe, he did not think Ronald was as important as Nicole for some odd reason.

[martin II]

Since you are allowing me the choice, I choose Ridiculous prosecution case. Aside from Darden's obvious display of gender discrimination, I wonder if there was some other reason, he chose to say that the only N word that should have been involved in the case was Nicole. As you correctly point out, he had several R words to choose from, with the exception of Rush to Verdict, because the verdict had not been rendered when he made his closing argument, or lack thereof, if you will. Maybe, he did not think Ronald was as important as Nicole for some odd reason.


If you will accept it i will add REDO of the way the prosecution has tried other cases using untrue testimony of people obviously standing against the blue wall.imo

[William Anthony]

If you will accept it i will add REDO of the way the prosecution has tried other cases using untrue testimony of people obviously standing against the blue wall.imo

I have no objections.

[William Anthony]

Since a poster has posted Darden's remark about the only N word that should have been involved in the case and did not say that the only R word that should have been involved in the case was Ronald, despite the numerous amount of R words posters have posted on that were involved in the case, I am wondering, if there was an issue that we have not considered or discussed, if you will, that may have caused the prosecution to fail. We have heard that he and Clark went away together after the trial. It has been rumored that the magnificent JC caused Darden to do the glove demonstration. I wonder, based on the poster's post, if Darden may have been motivated by some other reason to promulgate a display of his machismo.

[tv]

Since a poster has posted Darden's remark about the only N word that should have been involved in the case and did not say that the only R word that should have been involved in the case was Ronald, despite the numerous amount of R words posters have posted on that were involved in the case, I am wondering, if there was an issue that we have not considered or discussed, if you will, that may have caused the prosecution to fail. We have heard that he and Clark went away together after the trial. It has been rumored that the magnificent JC caused Darden to do the glove demonstration. I wonder, based on the poster's post, if Darden may have been motivated by some other reason to promulgate a display of his machismo. I'll make this point even though it should be obvious -- the reason the R word wasn't mentioned in the trial is because Mark Fuhrman wasn't asked if he'd used the R word in the last ten years.

Are you suggesting that Chris Darden was showing off for Marcia Clarke?

[William Anthony]

I'll make this point even though it should be obvious -- the reason the R word wasn't mentioned in the trial is because Mark Fuhrman wasn't asked if he'd used the R word in the last ten years.

Are you suggesting that Chris Darden was showing off for Marcia Clarke?

I was responding to what the poster's remark of Darden's statement was. The poster statement did not say that Darden qualified his statement, claiming it had to do with MF's use of the N word, and I am sure there are more N words that were used during the trial. I thought it was a passionate statement and wondered why he did not use that identical statement, substituting R for N word.

I am not suggesting that at all. The magnificent one claimed that Clark did some flirting with him, during the trial, and admitted to being distracted or that he found it difficult to stay focused at some point. I was wondering if Darden might not have felt a twinge of jealousy and went for the gusto. In light of his statement about the N word and his seeming disregard for the R words, I am simply wondering in my mind, if the prosecution was not in some manner distracted and intimidated and, therefore, failed to put forth their best case.

[tv]

I was responding to what the poster's remark of Darden's statement was. The poster statement did not say that Darden qualified his statement, claiming it had to do with MF's use of the N word, and I am sure there are more N words that were used during the trial. I thought it was a passionate statement and wondered why he did not use that identical statement, substituting R for N word.

I am not suggesting that at all. The magnificent one claimed that Clark did some flirting with him, during the trial, and admitted to being distracted at some point. I was wondering if Darden might not have felt a twinge of jealousy and went for the gusto. In light of his statement about the N word and his seeming disregard for the R words, I am simply wondering in my mind, if the prosecution was not in some manner distracted and intimidated and, therefore, failed to put forth their best case.So you're saying that Chris Darden was distracted by Marcia Clarke and felt jealous of Johnny Cochran which led him to throw caution to the wind and do the glove demonstration. What about reports that Marcia Clarke okayed the glove demonstration?

[William Anthony]

So you're saying that Chris Darden was distracted by Marcia Clarke and felt jealous of Johnny Cochran which led him to throw caution to the wind and do the glove demonstration. What about reports that Marcia Clarke okayed the glove demonstration?

I am saying that he may have been motivated and his distraction and his intimidation may have been caused by the antics of the magnificent one and Clark.I am saying that Clark may have been distracted or scorned that the magnificent one was able to stay focused and, consequently, allowed Darden to engage in the, imho, failed demonstration. I am just wondering if there were things going on behind the scenes that we have not possibly considered or discussed, due to the poster's recent post of Darden's apparent sympathy for the female victim and apparent lack of equal sympathy for the male victim.

[tv]

I am saying that he may have been motivated and his distraction and his intimidation may have been caused by the antics of the magnificent one and Clark.I am saying that Clark may have been distracted or scorned that the magnificent one was able to stay focused and, consequently, allowed Darden to engage in the, imho, failed demonstration. I am just wondering if there were things going on behind the scenes that we have not possibly considered or discussed, due to the poster's recent post of Darden's apparent sympathy for the female victim and apparent lack of equal sympathy for the male victim.

William, I was actually beginning to understand your reasoning (not necessarily agree with it) until you said that Chris Darden showed more sympathy for Ron than Nicole. It's an unbelievable reach to say that Chris Darden's use of N word and not mentioning R word shows he was more sympathetic to Nicole.

As a side note: Do we have anyone's word other than Johnny Cochran that Marcia Clarke flirted with him?

[tv]

William, I was actually beginning to understand your reasoning (not necessarily agree with it) until you said that Chris Darden showed more sympathy for Ron than Nicole. It's an unbelievable reach to say that Chris Darden's use of N word and not mentioning R word shows he was more sympathetic to Nicole.

As a side note: Do we have anyone's word other than Johnny Cochran that Marcia Clarke flirted with him?Correction: more sympathy for Nicole than Ron.

[William Anthony]

William, I was actually beginning to understand your reasoning (not necessarily agree with it) until you said that Chris Darden showed more sympathy for Ron than Nicole. It's an unbelievable reach to say that Chris Darden's use of N word and not mentioning R word shows he was more sympathetic to Nicole.

As a side note: Do we have anyone's word other than Johnny Cochran that Marcia Clarke flirted with him?

No, I said Darden apparently showed more sympathy for Nicole. I do not think the reach is that far, since he did not mention the R words nor that the only R word that should have been involved in the case was Ronald. There were two people brutally murdered not simply Nicole. I do not know but when I watched the trial, which reminds me that I need to get my tapes of the trial, I saw what appeared at times to be touching and flirting between the two. I considered the possibility that the magnificent one was flirting with her in an effort to distract her. Unbeknown to me, was the fact that Darden may have been jealous. I think that is the relevant issue, based on Darden's statement.
I think you know the obvious connotation to be placed on his actions and words.

[William Anthony]

Correction: more sympathy for Nicole than Ron.

I caught it and assumed that was what you meant.

[William Anthony]

I think Darden should have said that the only M word involved in this trial should have been murders. I do believe that would have made him seem less gender discriminatory.

[weezer]

I think Darden should have said that the only M word involved in this trial should have been murders. I do believe that would have made him seem less gender discriminatory.

you could go through the whole alphabet william but the fact remains that the up-roar was over Fuhrman's use of the 'n' word on the tapes. flee didn't ask about any other words -- starting with any other letter. Darden was right -- the only 'n' word in the trial should have been 'Nicole'. to stretch that into anything more or to use it to launch yet again another fantasy supposition is silly. imo

[tv]

I think Darden should have said that the only M word involved in this trial should have been murders. I do believe that would have made him seem less gender discriminatory.William, do you actually believe that Chris Darden had a gender bias? Your imagination is in overdrive today. Darden has been accused of many things -- being torn between being black and being a prosecutor, the ill-advised glove demonstration, being an unhappy, pouting person but this is the first time I've seen it mentioned that he felt more sympathy toward Nicole than Ron.

[martin II]

I'll make this point even though it should be obvious -- the reason the R word wasn't mentioned in the trial is because Mark Fuhrman wasn't asked if he'd used the R word in the last ten years.

Are you suggesting that Chris Darden was showing off for Marcia Clarke?

There was media gossip that those two were playing around upstairs in the office after work during the trial.imo

[William Anthony]

you could go through the whole alphabet william but the fact remains that the up-roar was over Fuhrman's use of the 'n' word on the tapes. flee didn't ask about any other words -- starting with any other letter. Darden was right -- the only 'n' word in the trial should have been 'Nicole'. to stretch that into anything more or to use it to launch yet again another fantasy supposition is silly. imo

IIRC, Mr. Goldman made a statement that the prosecution seemed to be forgetting about the murder of his son. I think we must view events, information or evidence, if you will, in its entirety to be able to draw reasonable inferences and be willing to accept a view that we had not considered. We know that Clark and Darden went away together and that the majority of the legal professionals agree that the prosecution bungled the case. I think it is reasonable to consider what may have caused them to do this and to look at events, statements and actions of the participants to see if issues unbeknown to us might have caused the prosecution's failure. I have heard that they spent a lot of time together during the trial after court was out. Of course, this time could have all been spent in trial preparation. However, all of it may not and may have caused a distraction and might have caused Darden to, imho, act irrationally by putting on the glove demonstration.

[martin II]

William, I was actually beginning to understand your reasoning (not necessarily agree with it) until you said that Chris Darden showed more sympathy for Ron than Nicole. It's an unbelievable reach to say that Chris Darden's use of N word and not mentioning R word shows he was more sympathetic to Nicole.

As a side note: Do we have anyone's word other than Johnny Cochran that Marcia Clarke flirted with him?

yea
the trial video

[tv]

yea
the trial videomartin, as a mature man with grandchildren I'm sure you understand that there is meaningless flirting which nearly everyone engages in and there is flirting with more serious intentions. What does the tape show?

[weezer]

IIRC, Mr. Goldman made a statement that the prosecution seemed to be forgetting about the murder of his son. I think we must view events, information or evidence, if you will, in its entirety to be able to draw reasonable inferences and be willing to accept a view that we had not considered. We know that Clark and Darden went away together and that the majority of the legal professionals agree that the prosecution bungled the case. I think it is reasonable to consider what may have caused them to do this and to look at events, statements and actions of the participants to see if issues unbeknown to us might have caused the prosecution's failure. I have heard that they spent a lot of time together during the trial after court was out. Of course, this time could have all been spent in trial preparation. However, all of it may not and may have caused a distraction and might have caused Darden to, imho, act irrationally by putting on the glove demonstration.

well as long as we're using your logic, I also read/heard that orenthal's reaction to Nicole letting a gay guy kiss one of the children could have been based on his own insecurities. :eek:

[weezer]

yea
the trial video

LOL -- I might buy into all of this IF there was anything at all attractive about cochran. but, geez, come on guys -- the guy was odd looking. although it seems that some posters on this board were attracted to him like they were orenthal. I mean, the descriptions are almost the same. :D

[tv]

IIRC, Mr. Goldman made a statement that the prosecution seemed to be forgetting about the murder of his son. I think we must view events, information or evidence, if you will, in its entirety to be able to draw reasonable inferences and be willing to accept a view that we had not considered. We know that Clark and Darden went away together and that the majority of the legal professionals agree that the prosecution bungled the case. I think it is reasonable to consider what may have caused them to do this and to look at events, statements and actions of the participants to see if issues unbeknown to us might have caused the prosecution's failure. I have heard that they spent a lot of time together during the trial after court was out. Of course, this time could have all been spent in trial preparation. However, all of it may not and may have caused a distraction and might have caused Darden to, imho, act irrationally by putting on the glove demonstration.
I take this statement to mean that you think with a more effective prosecution the case against OJ Simpson for the murder of Ron and Nicole was winnable. :beer:

[tv]

There was media gossip that those two were playing around upstairs in the office after work during the trial.imomartin, you previously stated "Considering that GOSSIP is not evidence even at a kitchen table discussion..." I think we can agree there is no evidence that Darden and Clarke were playing around upstairs in the office. Besides, it has no bearing on the case.

[William Anthony]

you could go through the whole alphabet william but the fact remains that the up-roar was over Fuhrman's use of the 'n' word on the tapes. flee didn't ask about any other words -- starting with any other letter. Darden was right -- the only 'n' word in the trial should have been 'Nicole'. to stretch that into anything more or to use it to launch yet again another fantasy supposition is silly. imo

I must disagree. I do not think it is silly to consider what could have caused the prosecution, whom you allege had a mountain of credible evidence, to loose.

[William Anthony]

well as long as we're using your logic, I also read/heard that orenthal's reaction to Nicole letting a gay guy kiss one of the children could have been based on his own insecurities. :eek:

That may well be true. Can I take this to mean that you feel that Darden's insecurities contributed to the bungling of the case?

[William Anthony]

William, do you actually believe that Chris Darden had a gender bias? Your imagination is in overdrive today. Darden has been accused of many things -- being torn between being black and being a prosecutor, the ill-advised glove demonstration, being an unhappy, pouting person but this is the first time I've seen it mentioned that he felt more sympathy toward Nicole than Ron.

I am glad that you understand the originality of my thought processes. Yes, I do not rely on the opinion of others before I form my opinions and then I consider the opinions of those that are pro and con to see, if there is something that can persuade me that my opinion is wrong. As I said, I seem to recall Mr. Goldman making a similar statement, as if his son had been forgotten during the trial.

[weezer]

That may well be true. Can I take this to mean that you feel that Darden's insecurities contributed to the bungling of the case?

naa -- you were the one posting the media gossip regarding clarke and darden -- I posted regarding orenthal's proclivities. besides, I don't agree with the detractors that said the case was winnable. or, at least, not with this jury.

[William Anthony]

I take this statement to mean that you think with a more effective prosecution the case against OJ Simpson for the murder of Ron and Nicole was winnable. :beer:

I think that most cases are winnable or able to be lost based on the evidence admitted and the ability of the party to persuade the trier of fact to adopt their view of the evidence. This is where, imho, preparation and dedication to the adversarial contest comes into play, without allowing yourself to become overly distracted or intimidated by events.

[William Anthony]

naa -- you were the one posting the media gossip regarding clarke and darden -- I posted regarding orenthal's proclivities. besides, I don't agree with the detractors that said the case was winnable. or, at least, not with this jury.

That is your right to disagree but, in this instance, I side with the professionals. There was not only media gossip. IIRC, Clark admitted that she and Darden went to the same resort at the same time. I see no fault with whatever may or may not have transpired between two consenting adults. I do see a fault, if one of the adult professionals had a proclivity to favor one victim over the other, whether or not it was to impress his counterpart female professional and if the professional allowed himself to be distracted and intimidated, because of the female counterpart's interactions with another male.

[weezer]

I am glad that you understand the originality of my thought processes. Yes, I do not rely on the opinion of others before I form my opinions and then I consider the opinions of those that are pro and con to see, if there is something that can persuade me that my opinion is wrong. As I said, I seem to recall Mr. Goldman making a similar statement, as if his son had been forgotten during the trial.

I believe Mr. Goldman and many felt the same way. of course, in order to understand what drove orenthal to the point of murder, we had to understand their history. the saddest part of all of this is that Ron is dead simply because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. imo

[William Anthony]

LOL -- I might buy into all of this IF there was anything at all attractive about cochran. but, geez, come on guys -- the guy was odd looking. although it seems that some posters on this board were attracted to him like they were orenthal. I mean, the descriptions are almost the same. :D

Some people are attracted by money and power or either. I mean look at Bill and Hilary, Cindy and John, Laura and George and Clark and Darden.

[tv]

I am glad that you understand the originality of my thought processes. Yes, I do not rely on the opinion of others before I form my opinions and then I consider the opinions of those that are pro and con to see, if there is something that can persuade me that my opinion is wrong. As I said, I seem to recall Mr. Goldman making a similar statement, as if his son had been forgotten during the trial.I'm surprised that you would validate Mr. Goldman's feelings on this. IIRC, this comment was made in reference to the Simpson trial becoming the Mark Fuhrman trial not in response to him feeling Nicole's murder was getting more attention.

[weezer]

That is your right to disagree but, in this instance, I side with the professionals. There was not only media gossip. IIRC, Clark admitted that she and Darden went to the same resort at the same time. I see no fault with whatever may or may not have transpired between two consenting adults. I do see a fault, if one of the adult professionals had a proclivity to favor one victim over the other, whether or not it was to impress his counterpart female professional and if the professional allowed himself to be distracted and intimidated, because of the female counterpart's interactions with another male.

you crack me up. you take something you've made up and run with it as though it's a known fact. :no:

[William Anthony]

I believe Mr. Goldman and many felt the same way. of course, in order to understand what drove orenthal to the point of murder, we had to understand their history. the saddest part of all of this is that Ron is dead simply because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. imo

The saddest parts of this are that two people were brutally murdered and the family member of one felt that his dead son was not adequately represented by the prosecution, imho. I would hate to think, but there is some evidence, that the prosecution was distracted and intimidated because of some other agenda.

[tv]

you crack me up. you take something you've made up and run with it as though it's a known fact. :no:I agree. This is the true MF -- More Fantasy.

[weezer]

Some people are attracted by money and power or either. I mean look at Bill and Hilary, Cindy and John, Laura and George and Clark and Darden.

don't forget michele and barry :tongue:

[William Anthony]

you crack me up. you take something you've made up and run with it as though it's a known fact. :no:

Obviously, you ignored the qualifiers in my statements, ifs and mights. There are enough posters in this community on these threads claiming to know the facts, relevancy and what is credible. I simply look at the evidence and consider the reasonable inferences to be drawn.

[William Anthony]

don't forget michele and barry :tongue:

You think? I find them to be a beautiful couple. :)

[William Anthony]

I agree. This is the true MF -- More Fantasy.

Check the qualifiers before you accuse.:)

[tv]

10/18/96 - 07:40 PM ET -
Fred Goldman's statement after the verdict
Transcript of statement by Fred Goldman, father of victim Ronald Goldman, after verdicts in O.J. Simpson's murder trial:

"I only have a few things to say.

Last June 13th, '94, was the worst nightmare of my life. This is the second.

I want to thank, on behalf of my family, all decent and law-abiding citizens in this country and nation; Marcia Clark, Chris Darden, Bill Hodgman, Gil Garcetti, every single person in this DA's office.

Until the other day, I had honest to God, no clue how many people in this office had worked day and night for a year toward one goal - and that's justice.

To each and every single one of them, our profound thank you and blessings.

Not to forget Mark, our victims' advocate backbone.

This prosecution team didn't lose today. I deeply believe that this country lost today. Justice was not served.

I and my family will do everything in our power to bring about the kind of change that won't allow what happened today to ever happen to another family again.

In closing I only have one other thing to say.

To my wife, Patti, my daughter Kim, to Michael and Lauren and Brian, my other kids, to all of our deep, close friends who've been there for us, for this year and four months or five or whatever it's been, who've helped us daily, get through each day, we'll never be able to thank you enough.

I will forever be proud of my son and my family. Thank you."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/nns072.htm

[weezer]

The saddest parts of this are that two people were brutally murdered and the family member of one felt that his dead son was not adequately represented by the prosecution, imho. I would hate to think, but there is some evidence, that the prosecution was distracted and intimidated because of some other agenda.

IIRC, Mr. Goldman's statement had nothing to do with the prosecution of the murders but rather the defense's little stunt.

[tv]

You think? I find them to be a beautiful couple. :)And they're really proud of their country -- for the first time in their adult lives, that is. ;)

[weezer]

Obviously, you ignored the qualifiers in my statements, ifs and mights. There are enough posters in this community on these threads claiming to know the facts, relevancy and what is credible. I simply look at the evidence and consider the reasonable inferences to be drawn.

as do I

[William Anthony]

10/18/96 - 07:40 PM ET -
Fred Goldman's statement after the verdict
Transcript of statement by Fred Goldman, father of victim Ronald Goldman, after verdicts in O.J. Simpson's murder trial:

"I only have a few things to say.

Last June 13th, '94, was the worst nightmare of my life. This is the second.

I want to thank, on behalf of my family, all decent and law-abiding citizens in this country and nation; Marcia Clark, Chris Darden, Bill Hodgman, Gil Garcetti, every single person in this DA's office.

Until the other day, I had honest to God, no clue how many people in this office had worked day and night for a year toward one goal - and that's justice.

To each and every single one of them, our profound thank you and blessings.

Not to forget Mark, our victims' advocate backbone.

This prosecution team didn't lose today. I deeply believe that this country lost today. Justice was not served.

I and my family will do everything in our power to bring about the kind of change that won't allow what happened today to ever happen to another family again.

In closing I only have one other thing to say.

To my wife, Patti, my daughter Kim, to Michael and Lauren and Brian, my other kids, to all of our deep, close friends who've been there for us, for this year and four months or five or whatever it's been, who've helped us daily, get through each day, we'll never be able to thank you enough.

I will forever be proud of my son and my family. Thank you."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/nns072.htm

As you know I was speaking of his statements during the trial. It was during the trial that Darden made his remark. I have placed in bold what I believe to be the relevant part of Mr. Goldman's statement as it relates to the discussion we are now having. I did not realize that you had place some of his statement in bold. So, here is the statement I consider relevant to this discussion.

"Until the other day, I had honest to God, no clue how many people in this office had worked day and night for a year toward one goal - and that's justice."

[martin II]

I am glad that you understand the originality of my thought processes. Yes, I do not rely on the opinion of others before I form my opinions and then I consider the opinions of those that are pro and con to see, if there is something that can persuade me that my opinion is wrong. As I said, I seem to recall Mr. Goldman making a similar statement, as if his son had been forgotten during the trial.

True DAT

Many people even now mention Nicole before or without Ron. This is one of the things that caused some friction between the families in addition to the dissagrement on the cash.imo

[William Anthony]

IIRC, Mr. Goldman's statement had nothing to do with the prosecution of the murders but rather the defense's little stunt.

I think you are referencing two different statements. I will look to see if I can find the one I am speaking of. It was something to the effect that Nicole wasn't the only one murdered.

[weezer]

And they're really proud of their country -- for the first time in their adult lives, that is. ;)

they may be more attractive under the church lighting. :rolleyes:

[William Anthony]

they may be more attractive under the church lighting. :rolleyes:

I think that the lights of the White House will accentuate their beauty beyond the level that has heretofore been recognized.

[William Anthony]

I fear that we may have venture off topic.

[martin II]

I believe Mr. Goldman and many felt the same way. of course, in order to understand what drove orenthal to the point of murder, we had to understand their history. the saddest part of all of this is that Ron is dead simply because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. imo

I think it was more his relationship with Nicole that caused him to be at bundy
that night.

[tv]

As you know I was speaking of his statements during the trial. It was during the trial that Darden made his remark. I have placed in bold what I believe to be the relevant part of Mr. Goldman's statement as it relates to the discussion we are now having. I did not realize that you had place some of his statement in bold. So, here is the statement I consider relevant to this discussion.

"Until the other day, I had honest to God, no clue how many people in this office had worked day and night for a year toward one goal - and that's justice."He is referring the the number of people not that worked on the case not the quality of the work. His statement about forgetting his son's murder was in reference to the Mark Fuhrman circus perpetuated by the defense and sanctioned by Judge Ito.

[tv]

I think that the lights of the White House will accentuate their beauty beyond the level that has heretofore been recognized.Your near worship of these two is a little disturbing.

[William Anthony]

He is referring the the number of people not that worked on the case not the quality of the work. His statement about forgetting his son's murder was in reference to the Mark Fuhrman circus perpetuated by the defense and sanctioned by Judge Ito.

IIRC, he made a statement that the focus of the trial seemed to be on Nicole and his son seemed to have been forgotten. As I said I will look for it. I am not denying that he made the other statement.

[tv]

I think it was more his relationship with Nicole that caused him to be at bundy
that night.He was doing a favor for a friend. Anything else you may read into that is only gossip.

[William Anthony]

Your near worship of these two is a little disturbing.

I do not worship or come close to worshiping any human. I do admire and fell pride as it relates to some. Personally, and even the media has agreed, (which is not the highest endorsement) that they are an attractive couple. I think we are off topic.

[tv]

IIRC, he made a statement that the focus of the trial seemed to be on Nicole and his son seemed to have been forgotten. As I said I will look for it. I am not denying that he made the other statement.And I'm not denying he made the one that you refer to. Fred Goldman has been a grieving father since June 13, 1994 and his statements reflect that.

[weezer]

I do not worship or come close to worshiping any human. I do admire and fell pride as it relates to some. Personally, and even the media has agreed, (which is not the highest endorsement) that they are an attractive couple. I think we are off topic.

LOL -- but yet you had to have the last word!

[martin II]

don't forget michele and barry :tongue:


you lost me.Who is Michele and Barry?

[tv]

I do not worship or come close to worshiping any human. I do admire and fell pride as it relates to some. Personally, and even the media has agreed, (which is not the highest endorsement) that they are an attractive couple. I think we are off topic.Sorry, Wiliam, but your statement sounded awestruck to me. I suppose everyone sees beauty differently. I don't think Michelle Obama could be called beautiful -- but that's just me.

[William Anthony]

LOL -- but yet you had to have the last word!

Wrong.

[William Anthony]

you lost me.Who is Michele and Barry?

Isn't Sheck's wife named Michele?

[martin II]

Isn't Sheck's wife named Michele?

OK
THANKS

[martin II]

Sorry, Wiliam, but your statement sounded awestruck to me. I suppose everyone sees beauty differently. I don't think Michelle Obama could be called beautiful -- but that's just me.

Some that use only the European model to determine beauty may have the same opinion that you have expressed.

[tv]

OK
THANKSUnless he's recently changed wives, Barry Scheck's wife's name is Ileana.

[tv]

Some that use only the European model to determine beauty may have the same opinion that you have expressed.martin, give me more credit than that. I find many people, black and white, beautiful -- Michelle Obama isn't one of them. I'm not going to pretend that I find her beautiful to keep you from airing your prejudicial opinion of me. What a ridiculous thing for you to say to me.

[William Anthony]

martin, give me more credit than that. I find many people, black and white, beautiful -- Michelle Obama isn't one of them. I'm not going to pretend that I find her beautiful to keep you from airing your prejudicial opinion of me. What a ridiculous thing for you to say to me.

I think Martin was wondering what measuring stick you used to come to your conclusions.

[martin II]

martin, as a mature man with grandchildren I'm sure you understand that there is meaningless flirting which nearly everyone engages in and there is flirting with more serious intentions. What does the tape show?

I think Cochrans words were "she just want to stand up here next to me"

[William Anthony]

And I'm not denying he made the one that you refer to. Fred Goldman has been a grieving father since June 13, 1994 and his statements reflect that.

Thanks.

[weezer]

I think Cochrans words were "she just want to stand up here next to me"

and to you that equates to her finding him irresistable! LOL

[tv]

I think Cochrans words were "she just want to stand up here next to me"
That sounds like Cochran flirting with Clarke not the other way around. No matter who initiated it, IMO that is harmless everyday flirting and means nothing.

[William Anthony]

And they're really proud of their country -- for the first time in their adult lives, that is. ;)

I do not know what you mean by "they're". I recall hearing that Michelle made the remark. I do not feel that you always have to be proud of something in order to love it. I think it adds to one's capacity to love, when one loves something even though it has not lived up to their ideals. With that said we are off topic, imho. To bring us back on topic, no I do not love MF nor do I hate him. He disregarded two oaths, imho.

[tv]

and to you that equates to her finding him irresistable! LOLI bet she was really turned when he had on the knit cap! :biggrin:

[martin II]

I think Martin was wondering what measuring stick you used to come to your conclusions.

exactly.

Additionally beauty flows from inside out. Without knowing her one may miss this important aspect of beauty.


Many only consider what Vogue has offered to many Americana/Europeans as THE standard.

I will wait tv's response to your clairifcation.

[William Anthony]

That sounds like Cochran flirting with Clarke not the other way around. No matter who initiated it, IMO that is harmless everyday flirting and means nothing.

I am not so sure it did not mean something to Darden. I can understand a dinner and drinks with all the prosecution members present. However, as one poster said, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

[martin II]

and to you that equates to her finding him irresistable! LOL

ask her

[William Anthony]

I bet she was really turned when he had on the knit cap! :biggrin:

The prosecution did seem to have a fiber fetish. :)

[tv]

I do not know what you mean by "they're". I recall hearing that Michelle made the remark. I do not feel that you always have to be proud of something in order to love it. I think it adds to one's capacity to love, when one loves something even though it has not lived up to their ideals. With that said we are off topic, imho. To bring us back on topic, no I do not love MF nor do I hate him. He disregarded two oaths, imho.I said "they're" because most people agree that they're in lockstep with each other's beliefs and opinions. If he gets elected it'll be another co-presidency like the Clintons, imo.

I didn't ask if you love or hate Mark Fuhrman but since you brought it up -- you may believe he disregarded two oaths but OJ Simpson disregarded the rights of two human beings to live and has never paid the price. Mark Fuhrman has paid the price for perjury and there's no evidence that he violated any other oath.

[weezer]

The prosecution did seem to have a fiber fetish. :)

:confused: :shrug:

[martin II]

I bet she was really turned when he had on the knit cap! :biggrin:

So much so that she went out and got a Jerry Curl or a make over and still got her butt kicked.

[William Anthony]

I said "they're" because most people agree that they're in lockstep with each other's beliefs and opinions. If he gets elected it'll be another co-presidency like the Clintons, imo.

I didn't ask if you love or hate Mark Fuhrman but since you brought it up -- you may believe he disregarded two oaths but OJ Simpson disregarded the rights of two human beings to live and has never paid the price. Mark Fuhrman has paid the price for perjury and there's no evidence that he violated any other oath.

Are you saying that Hilary knew and was in agreement with Bill's promiscuity when he was in office?

MF took an oath to serve and protect-not to abuse and harass certain citizens.

[William Anthony]

:confused: :shrug:

They seem obsessed with the fiber evidence, dark colored cotton fibers, which proved nothing. Maybe, she saw the magnificent one in that knit cap and this is what attracted her to him. Just a thought, :) .

[tv]

exactly.

Additionally beauty flows from inside out. Without knowing her one may miss this important aspect of beauty.


Many only consider what Vogue has offered to many Americana/Europeans as THE standard.

I will wait tv's response to your clairifcation.martin, I don't have to clarify how I judge beauty but the only standard I follow is my own opinion. I've already said that everyone sees beauty differently. Either I find a person to be attractive or I don't. I agree that beauty flows from within but you can't make a determination of inner beauty when you first see someone. From what I've seen of Michelle Obama over time any inner beauty she has is often marred by foot in mouth disease even though it seems to be improving. I don't read Vogue -- I'm a more Good Housekeeping kind of gal.

[tv]

So much so that she went out and got a Jerry Curl or a make over and still got her butt kicked.Was the Jerry Curl before or after the knit cap? If you remember.

[William Anthony]

martin, I don't have to clarify how I judge beauty but the only standard I follow is my own opinion. I've already said that everyone sees beauty differently. Either I find a person to be attractive or I don't. I agree that beauty flows from within but you can't make a determination of inner beauty when you first see someone. From what I've seen of Michelle Obama over time any inner beauty she has is often marred by foot in mouth disease even though it seems to be improving. I don't read Vogue -- I'm a more Good Housekeeping kind of gal.

There is a movement afoot in America for improvement in diversity. I think we should all expand our reading. Don't you?

[William Anthony]

Was the Jerry Curl before or after the knit cap? If you remember.

I think before. Did he wear cotton shirts, if you know?

[tv]

Are you saying that Hilary knew and was in agreement with Bill's promiscuity when he was in office?

MF took an oath to serve and protect-not to abuse and harass certain citizens.William, I have no idea what Hillary knew or didn't know about her husband's promiscuity. I'm sure she knew he'd been unfaithful over the years but whether she specifically knew about Monica Lewinski I can't say. I sense you're trying to irritate me by criticizing the Clintons. I should tell you it won't work -- I don't care for either one of them.

[tv]

I think before. Did he wear cotton shirts, if you know?Jerry or Johnnie?

[William Anthony]

William, I have no idea what Hillary knew or didn't know about her husband's promiscuity. I'm sure she knew he'd been unfaithful over the years but whether she specifically knew about Monica Lewinski I can't say. I sense you're trying to irritate me by criticizing the Clintons. I should tell you it won't work -- I don't care for either one of them.

You sense wrongly. I was trying to make heads or tails of this portion of your post.

"I said "they're" because most people agree that they're in lockstep with each other's beliefs and opinions. If he gets elected it'll be another co-presidency like the Clintons, imo."

[William Anthony]

Jerry or Johnnie?

Was she flirting with Jerry Springer too? :) Did you mean Gerald Uelemen?

[martin II]

Was the Jerry Curl before or after the knit cap? If you remember.

I really don't know but think she got it before as the knit cap demo came close to the end of the trial and i do remember much media reporting on her efforts to improve her media immage as some thought it was a little shabby. But it seems she should have gotten a afro as she did try to identify with the jury as a means of getting them to accept that weak case she presented them. Her efforts to play the jury did not work even with the new look.imo

[martin II]

You sense wrongly. I was trying to make heads or tails of this portion of your post.

"I said "they're" because most people agree that they're in lockstep with each other's beliefs and opinions. If he gets elected it'll be another co-presidency like the Clintons, imo."

tv
There has been many co-presidencies in our history. The last one that you speak of left the country with a 3 TRILLION $ surplus and it took the guy in office now about 6 months to give it away and most Americans are pissed with the condituion of their country today.But change is comming.

[tv]

There is a movement afoot in America for improvement in diversity. I think we should all expand our reading. Don't you?I already have a pile of books I want to read and not enough time to read them. Maybe less time on this board would help...:read:

[William Anthony]

I already have a pile of books I want to read and not enough time to read them. Maybe less time on this board would help...:read:

True. I need to prepare for the LSAT. I have not been able for some reason to so do.

[tv]

tv
There has been many co-presidencies in our history. The last one that you speak of left the country with a 3 TRILLION $ surplus and it took the guy in office now about 6 months to give it away and most Americans are pissed with the condituion of their country today.But change is comming.Eleanor Roosevelt comes to mind. Not a physically beautiful woman but very beautiful on the inside. :)

[martin II]

Jerry or Johnnie?

I think Jonnie wore only fine SILK shirts.

[William Anthony]

Eleanor Roosevelt comes to mind. Not a physically beautiful woman but very beautiful on the inside. :)

I have always praised my women friends for their courage. It takes great courage, imho, to walk outside with someone who is only beautiful on the inside.:)

[William Anthony]

I think Jonnie wore only fine SILK shirts.

Is that where his smoothness came from?

[martin II]

martin, I don't have to clarify how I judge beauty but the only standard I follow is my own opinion. I've already said that everyone sees beauty differently. Either I find a person to be attractive or I don't. I agree that beauty flows from within but you can't make a determination of inner beauty when you first see someone. From what I've seen of Michelle Obama over time any inner beauty she has is often marred by foot in mouth disease even though it seems to be improving. I don't read Vogue -- I'm a more Good Housekeeping kind of gal.

You do watch tv right.

I have never seen Michelle with foot in mouth and doubt she will ever be seen in such a posture.

[tv]

True. I need to prepare for the LSAT. I have not been able for some reason to so do.I find I get a lot done when I turn off the computer...but not today. :)

[martin II]

Is that where his smoothness came from?

That, his maker and his hard earned skills. A cut above the rest. Ask Darden.

[William Anthony]

I find I get a lot done when I turn off the computer...but not today. :)

I understand completely. We have idled the day away in witty, entertaining, pleasant and off topic discussions. :)

[tv]

I really don't know but think she got it before as the knit cap demo came close to the end of the trial and i do remember much media reporting on her efforts to improve her media immage as some thought it was a little shabby. But it seems she should have gotten a afro as she did try to identify with the jury as a means of getting them to accept that weak case she presented them. Her efforts to play the jury did not work even with the new look.imoI recall Marcia Clarke telling the media to 'get a life' when they made such a big deal about her hair. IIRC, OJ Simpson had some kind of fancy wave in his hair himself. Do you think he was trying to impress the white jurors?

[tv]

You do watch tv right.

I have never seen Michelle with foot in mouth and doubt she will ever be seen in such a posture.We have a difference of opinion about this. I thought her remark about Hillary Clinton not being able to run her own marriage or (something to that effect) was completely out of line and downright catty.

[martin II]

Eleanor Roosevelt comes to mind. Not a physically beautiful woman but very beautiful on the inside. :)

Her work overshadowed her physical qualities. Nance Regan ran the White House.

[martin II]

Eleanor Roosevelt comes to mind. Not a physically beautiful woman but very beautiful on the inside. :)

Her work overshadowed her physical qualities. Nance Regan ran the White House.You would love Michelle. I suggest you go meet her when she is in your area.

[tv]

Her work overshadowed her physical qualities. Nance Regan ran the White House.OMG, martin, you don't really believe Nancy Reagan ran the White House? :eek:

[tv]

I understand completely. We have idled the day away in witty, entertaining, pleasant and off topic discussions. :)We don't have to always be tearing each other to shreds. That is, as long as you see everything my way. :biggrin: :chicken:

[William Anthony]

We don't have to always be tearing each other to shreds. That is, as long as you see everything my way. :biggrin: :chicken:

Now, I am sure of it. You are a female. :)

[martin II]

OMG, martin, you don't really believe Nancy Reagan ran the White House? :eek:

Yep
Reports were that people could hardly get to speak to him without her approval.I think that was in his chief of staffs book.Plus he was ill during most of his last period served.imo

[tv]

Her work overshadowed her physical qualities. Nance Regan ran the White House.You would love Michelle. I suggest you go meet her when she is in your area.martin, I have no doubt that in person she's a lovely, warm, intelligent woman. I do not agree with her politics or her pessimistic view of America.

[tv]

Yep
Reports were that people could hardly get to speak to him without her approval.I think that was in his chief of staffs book.Plus he was ill during most of his last period served.imoI thought you were saying she set policy and made presidential decisions. You're just saying she was protective of him, right?

[tv]

Now, I am sure of it. You are a female. :)Yes, I am female. See, we're agreeing again.

[martin II]

I thought you were saying she set policy and made presidential decisions. You're just saying she was protective of him, right?

I think the book is by Michael Deaver his chief of staff.

[martin II]

martin, I have no doubt that in person she's a lovely, warm, intelligent woman. I do not agree with her politics or her pessimistic view of America.

You should meet her and ask her her politics this way you can get it from the horses mouth. Be careful, as she may win you over as she has with many others.

[martin II]

martin, I have no doubt that in person she's a lovely, warm, intelligent woman. I do not agree with her politics or her pessimistic view of America.

There are many people that feel the way Michelle was quoted and that is why
the people are making change come.I mean the country is not in the best of shape right now.Some say too many Bushes have been growing.

[tv]

You should meet her and ask her her politics this way you can get it from the horses mouth. Be careful, as she may win you over as she has with many others.A wonderful idea but I doubt if Michelle Obama would take the time to set down and talk politics with me. I'll listen and watch carefully between now and November and make up my mind about her. I've changed my mind about candidates before and it's always possible I will again. I really liked Barack Obama at first and thought he was a candidate for all people and then who-know-who came out of the woodwork and Michelle Obama made those disparaging comments. Have you met her or seen her in person?

[martin II]

Yes, I am female. See, we're agreeing again.

age?

hahaha

[martin II]

A wonderful idea but I doubt if Michelle Obama would take the time to set down and talk politics with me. I'll listen and watch carefully between now and November and make up my mind about her. I've changed my mind about candidates before and it's always possible I will again. I really liked Barack Obama at first and thought he was a candidate for all people and then who-know-who came out of the woodwork and Michelle Obama made those disparaging comments. Have you met her or seen her in person?

Met her once at a function where I am. A fundraiser. She often times meets with womens groups in small group talks in various cities. It is not that difficult to be included or meet her. One thing she is not and that is distant.
Obama is your man. keep a open ear. Actually we have no other option.imo

[William Anthony]

martin, I have no doubt that in person she's a lovely, warm, intelligent woman. I do not agree with her politics or her pessimistic view of America.

I will not speak about her politics but I will address what you call her pessimistic view of America. I would tend to call it a honest and realistic view, coming from her perspective. I know that those who were not born Black in America may find it hard to understand what Blacks are saying. I understand that those who were not born Black in America may have not faced the same or similar disadvantages, stereotypes, social, political, and financial inequities that Blacks encounter on a daily basis. I understand that those who were not born Black in America may feel that America has changed. I understand that those who were not born Black in America may not understand that there should never have been such inequalities, injustices and disadvantages based on race. I know that those who were not born Black in America may not understand how Blacks feel, who have either sacrificed their lives for this country or had loved ones that did, when they hear of lynchings, murders and the Tuskegee experiment and what it means to be denied a full and equal participation in a country that many are willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice for. I do not see a statement of America's history and continued inequality based on race as a pessimistic view. I think that the statement of pride comes from a hope that America is sincerely ready for a change.

[weezer]

I will not speak about her politics but I will address what you call her pessimistic view of America. I would tend to call it a honest and realistic view, coming from her perspective. I know that those who were not born Black in America may find it hard to understand what Blacks are saying. I understand that those who were not born Black in America may have not faced the same or similar disadvantages, stereotypes, social, political, and financial inequities that Blacks encounter on a daily basis. I understand that those who were not born Black in America may feel that America has changed. I understand that those who were not born Black in America may not understand that there should never have been such inequalities, injustices and disadvantages based on race. I know that those who were not born Black in America may not understand how Blacks feel, who have either sacrificed their lives for this country or had loved ones that did, when they hear of lynchings, murders and the Tuskegee experiment and what it means to be denied a full and equal participation in a country that many are willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice for. I do not see a statement of America's history and continued inequality based on race as a pessimistic view. I think that the statement of pride comes from a hope that America is sincerely ready for a change.

william, it sounds as though the only reason you are pro obama is because he's running as a black man. if you really want change in America, shouldn't you be asking what he's going to do for ALL of America? shouldn't you be questioning his beliefs/principles? shouldn't you be asking how he's going to make America better?

[William Anthony]

william, it sounds as though the only reason you are pro obama is because he's running as a black man. if you really want change in America, shouldn't you be asking what he's going to do for ALL of America? shouldn't you be questioning his beliefs/principles? shouldn't you be asking how he's going to make America better?

With all due respect, this was not about who I am going to vote for or Obama. It was about offering an explanation for what some have said it his wife's pessimistic view of America.

[weezer]

age?

hahaha

martin, you're old enough to know that the two questions you don't ask a woman is her age and/or her weight. :tongue:

[martin II]

martin, you're old enough to know that the two questions you don't ask a woman is her age and/or her weight. :tongue:

i understand what you think. But i do think tv is a very confident and smart woman and sweet when she chooses to be. I was just trying to be noisy. Was trying to see if she and Michelle were about the same age.I think i know your age.

[martin II]

william, it sounds as though the only reason you are pro obama is because he's running as a black man. if you really want change in America, shouldn't you be asking what he's going to do for ALL of America? shouldn't you be questioning his beliefs/principles? shouldn't you be asking how he's going to make America better?


Your questions have been asked and answered many times over.Obana has made his political positions quite clear in major speeches and on his web site. It is clear as to how he wants to improve America. His belief in inclusion is one reason why so many American youth and millions of others are working to get him elected. You should consider joining this effort.

[martin II]

william, it sounds as though the only reason you are pro obama is because he's running as a black man. if you really want change in America, shouldn't you be asking what he's going to do for ALL of America? shouldn't you be questioning his beliefs/principles? shouldn't you be asking how he's going to make America better?

Weezer
Almost anything will be better than what we have now but good change is on the way.

[weezer]

Your questions have been asked and answered many times over.Obana has made his political positions quite clear in major speeches and on his web site. It is clear as to how he wants to improve America. His belief in inclusion is one reason why so many American youth and millions of others are working to get him elected. You should consider joining this effort.

you ready to fall out of your chair? LOL -- I did vote for him in the primary -- before wright and wife. Thank goodness I have a second chance to correct that mistake. :patriot:

[martin II]

you ready to fall out of your chair? LOL -- I did vote for him in the primary -- before wright and wife. Thank goodness I have a second chance to correct that mistake. :patriot:

You may be making a mistake by trying to correct what you think was a mistake. If you don't believe you need change then please correct what you say you did.
Did you agree with jerry Falwells sp comments about the country.

[weezer]

You may be making a mistake by trying to correct what you think was a mistake. If you don't believe you need change then please correct what you say you did.
Did you agree with jerry Falwells sp comments about the country.

nope -- I wouldn't vote for him to be president either.

[martin II]

nope -- I wouldn't vote for him to be president either.

Actually no one can.

[martin II]

nope -- I wouldn't vote for him to be president either.

The next time Michelle is in the Big Star you should go talk to her or drop by one of the offices and ask your questions.

[William Anthony]

i understand what you think. But i do think tv is a very confident and smart woman and sweet when she chooses to be. I was just trying to be noisy. Was trying to see if she and Michelle were about the same age.I think i know your age.

She can be sweet when you agree with her. :)

[weezer]

The next time Michelle is in the Big Star you should go talk to her or drop by one of the offices and ask your questions.

oh I don't have any questions for her -- I think her preacher of 20 years did enough explaining. I know exactly where she's coming from, what she thinks, and how she feels.

[William Anthony]

oh I don't have any questions for her -- I think her preacher of 20 years did enough explaining. I know exactly where she's coming from, what she thinks, and how she feels.

I hope this doesn't mean you're stuck in your ways. If you can give MF the benefit of the doubt after hearing the words directly from his mouth, surely, you can give the benefit of doubt to her, when it seems to be her former preacher's words you do not like.

[weezer]

I hope this doesn't mean you're stuck in your ways. If you can give MF the benefit of the doubt after hearing the words directly from his mouth, surely, you can give the benefit of doubt to her, when it seems to be her former preacher's words you do not like.

I don't personally know her so all I can judge her through is the company she keeps. I do have problems with her basic beliefs (religous and patriotic).

I don't give Fuhrman the benefit of the doubt for what was said -- there simply is no proof that what he said about the tapes wasn't the truth.

[William Anthony]

I don't personally know her so all I can judge her through is the company she keeps. I do have problems with her basic beliefs (religous and patriotic).

I don't give Fuhrman the benefit of the doubt for what was said -- there simply is no proof that what he said about the tapes wasn't the truth.

I think she is Evangelical and I have already stated that feeling not proud is not the same as not loving. I agree that there is simply no prove that what MF said on the tapes was not the truth. One more double negative and I won't be sure what I am saying, smile.

[martin II]

oh I don't have any questions for her -- I think her preacher of 20 years did enough explaining. I know exactly where she's coming from, what she thinks, and how she feels.

Thats pretty good since you have never talked to her. But you can always go with the other guy and feel better about your vote. i guess.

[martin II]

I don't personally know her so all I can judge her through is the company she keeps. I do have problems with her basic beliefs (religous and patriotic).

I don't give Fuhrman the benefit of the doubt for what was said -- there simply is no proof that what he said about the tapes wasn't the truth.

Maby you should check out the history of the other guys wife.

[martin II]

oh I don't have any questions for her -- I think her preacher of 20 years did enough explaining. I know exactly where she's coming from, what she thinks, and how she feels.

i think you may have strong feelings about where you think she is comming from, what she thinks and how she feels. Did the preacher explain all of this to you about her?

[tv]

Joseph Bell, my apologies for going off-topic. It's so seldom we have a day without being less than pleasant to each other that I think I speak for most of us that went off-topic when I say we took a break today and took advantage of everyone's good mood. I promise it doesn't happen very often. :tongue:

[tv]

martin, you're old enough to know that the two questions you don't ask a woman is her age and/or her weight. :tongue:Thanks, weezer. Yep,definitely age and weight are taboo. :)

[tv]

i understand what you think. But i do think tv is a very confident and smart woman and sweet when she chooses to be. I was just trying to be noisy. Was trying to see if she and Michelle were about the same age.I think i know your age.Why, martin, how kind of you. I do choose to be sweet occasionally but this case brings out the :flamemad: in me. It just can't be helped. :shrug:


She can be sweet when you agree with her. :) William, you've finally figured me out. ;)

[martin II]

Hi guys. You went off thread about 3 pages ago. If someone wants to start a thread about the Presidential election then go for it. I'll post my opinions there. However...

Simpson learns his ex-wife and a friend have been murdered. He flies back to LA so far, so good. Then the lunacy begins. A reasonable man would get his attorney and go to the police and answer or not questions about his whereabouts and a cut on his hand and his physical abuse of his ex-wife. A reasonable man would follow the course of the law and put his faith in his lawyers and the legal system.

Instead, we get this farcical low speed drive in the Bronco with onlookers and helicopters..I've always wondered what Simpson would have done when he eventually ran out of gas. Simpson was playing the race card long before he was ever booked. I'd have more belief in that ploy if he had been an ordinary person but he was OJ. He was above that. Already his behaviour was suggesting to me that he was hiding 'something' because a famous athlete will get attention - he won't be shuffled to the back of the line and be ignored. He damaged his believability with that ludicrous Bronco cruise long before the case started. A man who knows he is innocent of a crime doesn't act like that.

And don't bother telling me that he acted like that because he was a 'black' man and he was afraid that the LA cops were just waiting to get him. That would gift him with a lot more prescience and insight than he used in Vegas, wouldn't it. It didn't bother him one iota that he was a 'black' man when he beat the living c### out of Nicole.


OJ'S lawyer WAS with him at Parker center.
Oj said he had nothing to hide so he gave the interview to Vanhatter against his lawyers consent.
The prosecution did not use the Bronco ride as they felt it woulf help oj more than hurt him.
I am not sure how oj being a black man had any thing to do with the bronco ride but then that is your post.

[William Anthony]

Hi guys. You went off thread about 3 pages ago. If someone wants to start a thread about the Presidential election then go for it. I'll post my opinions there. However...

Simpson learns his ex-wife and a friend have been murdered. He flies back to LA so far, so good. Then the lunacy begins. A reasonable man would get his attorney and go to the police and answer or not questions about his whereabouts and a cut on his hand and his physical abuse of his ex-wife. A reasonable man would follow the course of the law and put his faith in his lawyers and the legal system.

Instead, we get this farcical low speed drive in the Bronco with onlookers and helicopters..I've always wondered what Simpson would have done when he eventually ran out of gas. Simpson was playing the race card long before he was ever booked. I'd have more belief in that ploy if he had been an ordinary person but he was OJ. He was above that. Already his behaviour was suggesting to me that he was hiding 'something' because a famous athlete will get attention - he won't be shuffled to the back of the line and be ignored. He damaged his believability with that ludicrous Bronco cruise long before the case started. A man who knows he is innocent of a crime doesn't act like that.

And don't bother telling me that he acted like that because he was a 'black' man and he was afraid that the LA cops were just waiting to get him. That would gift him with a lot more prescience and insight than he used in Vegas, wouldn't it. It didn't bother him one iota that he was a 'black' man when he beat the living c### out of Nicole.

PLEASE, someone start the thread about the Presidential election. :)

[William Anthony]

Read my post. I never said his bizarre behaviour in the Bronco was because he was 'black'. You manage to post and manage not to answer the points I make. H'm.

You made some points. I must have missed them. IIRC, as a black man,he plead no lo contendre to the charge of spousal abuse. He did not, like a white man, get on the stand and lie and subsequently and consequently get convicted of perjury, if I am correctly understanding the point you think you made.

[William Anthony]

Why, martin, how kind of you. I do choose to be sweet occasionally but this case brings out the :flamemad: in me. It just can't be helped. :shrug:


William, you've finally figured me out. ;)

Not completely. A man can see the changing of the wind, the movements of the hands of time, but one thing a man was not born to know is when a woman is going to change her mind.

[William Anthony]

'Like a white man get on the stand and lie'. You really don't believe that do you?

Please, quote me in context.

"as a black man,he plead no lo contendre to the charge of spousal abuse. He did not, like a white man, get on the stand and lie and subsequently and consequently get convicted of perjury, "

Those are the facts, IIRC.

[William Anthony]

As a 'black' man no contest. U'm what difference would it have made if he were 'white'? IYO

I was responding to this portion of your prior post.

"And don't bother telling me that he acted like that because he was a 'black' man and he was afraid that the LA cops were just waiting to get him. That would gift him with a lot more prescience and insight than he used in Vegas, wouldn't it. It didn't bother him one iota that he was a 'black' man when he beat the living c### out of Nicole."

I suspect your are an eternally blissful opinionated person.

[William Anthony]

Joseph Bell, my apologies for going off-topic. It's so seldom we have a day without being less than pleasant to each other that I think I speak for most of us that went off-topic when I say we took a break today and took advantage of everyone's good mood. I promise it doesn't happen very often. :tongue:

I hope and see no reason, with the exception of some or dare I say one,:) why we cannot discuss the topics of the threads in a similar fashion. We were able to discuss race, politics and religion without the posts becoming incendiary.

[martin II]

William

M.O. dress sold out across the country.hhhmmmmm

[William Anthony]

William

M.O. dress sold out across the country.hhhmmmmm

I was told the clothes don't make the man, the man makes the clothes.

[William Anthony]

"MR. GOLDBERG: And at the Grand Jury did you give the following answers to the following questions starting on page 389, line 23: "Question: With respect to the blood on the car shown in photograph a of People's 5, as well as b, and the blood behind the Ford Bronco shown with no. 4 in the photograph, c, and the blood shown in photograph f on this exhibit and in photograph--that same drop of blood shown in photograph d of People's 2, in fact all of the blood recovered as shown on the markers in People's 2 in g and f, as well as 5 in photograph g and h, did you recover all of those from the scene for further analysis?

"Answer: The ones labeled with the numbers? Yes, I did. "Question: How did you recover them? "Answer: I recovered them in the manner described before where I would wet a cloth swatch or several cloth swatches if needed, apply it to the red stain and then let the stain transfer onto the cloth swatch." Do you remember giving those answers to those questions?

MR. FUNG: Yes.

MR. GOLDBERG: And when the question was asked, "And how did you cover them," did you believe the questioner wanted to know how they were recovered and who did it?

MR. FUNG: I believed the questioner wanted to know how it was done.

MR. GOLDBERG: Were you trying to mislead anyone when you talked about in the first person, "I did it"?

MR. FUNG: No.

???:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:

[martin II]

Oh William don't be coy! If you all want to have a chin wag about the weather or whatever go for it. That's great. On the appropriate thread. If i remember correctly you like to point this out occasionally. :tongue:

Bella
i am waiting on the link to see if your claim is true or just something you made up.

[William Anthony]

Oh William don't be coy! If you all want to have a chin wag about the weather or whatever go for it. That's great. On the appropriate thread. If i remember correctly you like to point this out occasionally. :tongue:

I was talking about staying on topic and responding to each other in a civil, polite and respectful way.

[William Anthony]

DF understood the question to ask how were the stains covered and not who covered them and he answered "I did it" but claimed he didn't intend to mislead the jury. ??? I guess this was just another irrelevant lie told by a prosecution witness in the minds of some. I think he had a sugar rush from the Dunkin products.

[limakey]

J. Bell,

Would a reasonable man send his two minor children to his in-laws, not knowing what they saw or heard that night?

Would a resonable man, knowing that he cut himself that night, break a glass and trace the outline of a cut on his hand with a shard of that broken glass? Or would he have punched a wall or something else hard enough to make it next to impossible to determine the origin of any injury?

When Mr. Simpson was cuff at his home, he remained calm. IMO, a guilty man would have been going nuts demanding that they uncuff him.

As for the Bronco chase, there are several reasons why the DA's didn't use the chase as proof of flight. Again, IMO, I believe the public does not know the full extent of the taped conversations Simpson had inside the Bronco. We only heard his conversation with Tom Lange. To be fair, I would have thought that his one statement, "Only I deserve to be hurt", would have been enough for the DA's to use the chase, but they didn't. I feel the same way about his police interview, denying that he had been at Nicole's something like 10 days before the murders, would have been enough to introduce that statement.

However, in his police statement, Simpson had the opportunity to send the police on a wild goose chase with Faye Resnick and he clearly said that while she was having issues, at that time, he didn't believe she or any other of Nicole's friends had anything to do with the murders.

I also daresay that while it easy and perhaps natural that people form opinons of guilt or innocence on what they think they would do under the same circumstances, does not mean that all people would react the same.

As for the race card, IMO, I believe the media had a huge, huge impact on this. I think this was confirmed when the battle of the News Magazine Covers hit the stands. However, I also remember hearing, even before the victims were buried, how Mr. Simpson had forsaken his heritage because he married a white woman and wanted to be "white". Race was always going to be a part of this case, wealth was always going to be a part of this case as was fame. Mr. Simpson, his lawyers nor the DA's had any control over what the media was reporting. However, the LAPD had everything to do with this. IMO, if you want to blame anyone or any one agency for the "race card", I would start with the LAPD and the media. IMO.

[William Anthony]

http://www.koam.com/yir/darden2.html

[tv]

http://www.koam.com/yir/darden2.html
What are we supposed to learn from this other than the unsavory details of Robin Quivers' love life?

[William Anthony]

What are we supposed to learn from this other than the unsavory details of Robin Quivers' love life?

Chris Darden Does Stern Show!

" DardenWith loads of pomp and circumstance, ex-OJ Simpson prosecutor, Christopher Darden stopped by to promote his number one best-selling book, "In Contempt". "I admired your work on the OJ Simpson trial...," Howard said as Darden sat down. During his 40 minutes with Howard and Robin, Darden revealed his feelings on the following topics:
Marcia Clark...
When asked about Marcia's new hair style and make-over, Darden said he had seen her new hairdo before the courtroom premiere and that he liked her old "curly" hair style. "I always thought Marcia was attractive," he admitted. When asked if she had recently had breast implants, Darden said he didn't believe so, adding, "How would I know?" Howard claimed that he saw an advance copy of Marcia's yet-to-be-published book and that she's allegedly going to reveal their torrid romance. "If Marcia doesn't write passionate things about me in her book, it won't be worth squat," Darden said coyly implying there was something between the two."

I hope that Darden was not so arrogant as to believe that he overshadowed the trial and that without Marcia mentioning him in the book it would not be worth squat. I think the implications are that the prosecution could have failed because of distractions unrelated to the trial.

[tv]

Chris Darden Does Stern Show!

" DardenWith loads of pomp and circumstance, ex-OJ Simpson prosecutor, Christopher Darden stopped by to promote his number one best-selling book, "In Contempt". "I admired your work on the OJ Simpson trial...," Howard said as Darden sat down. During his 40 minutes with Howard and Robin, Darden revealed his feelings on the following topics:
Marcia Clark...
When asked about Marcia's new hair style and make-over, Darden said he had seen her new hairdo before the courtroom premiere and that he liked her old "curly" hair style. "I always thought Marcia was attractive," he admitted. When asked if she had recently had breast implants, Darden said he didn't believe so, adding, "How would I know?" Howard claimed that he saw an advance copy of Marcia's yet-to-be-published book and that she's allegedly going to reveal their torrid romance. "If Marcia doesn't write passionate things about me in her book, it won't be worth squat," Darden said coyly implying there was something between the two."

I hope that Darden was not so arrogant as to believe that he overshadowed the trial and that without Marcia mentioning him in the book it would not be worth squat. I think the implications are that the prosecution could have failed because of distractions unrelated to the trial.

There may have been something going on between them but I take with a grain of salt what I hear from Howard Stern's show. The fact that Chris Darden even appeared on there is undignified IMO. I'm not sure any relationship they had would have had a bearing on the way they prosecuted the case.

[William Anthony]

There may have been something going on between them but I take with a grain of salt what I hear from Howard Stern's show. The fact that Chris Darden even appeared on there is undignified IMO. I'm not sure any relationship they had would have had a bearing on the way they prosecuted the case.

Darden talked with them for 40 minutes, whether or not his appearance was undignified. Has Darden denied the statements Stern attributed to him? I think Marcia allegedly described it as torrid. Given Darden's display and, imho, the dismal prosecution presentation, I think it is reasonable to consider what have caused them to fail, in light of what some have claimed as a mountain of evidence. I think it is undignified for a couple of professionals to allow their relationship, be it torrid or tepid, to possibly effect their duties and not to adequately represent the murder victims.

I think that Darden is acting much like he acted when they lost the trial by saying that her book would not be squat without mentioning him in it. He appears to be complaining much like when the glove demonstration failed as with a failed relationship. Perhaps, Clark realized that their relationship was only torrid during the trial and its immediate aftermath. Perhaps, the only thing the two had in common was a feeling of self-pity.

[limakey]

I think it is a mistake to even believe that Marcia was the true "first chair" and Chris was the true "second chair". IMO, it is obvious to me that neither were calling the shots because if they were, I believe the result would have been the same but the controversary surrounding the verdict would not have reached the level that it did.

[William Anthony]

I think it is a mistake to even believe that Marcia was the true "first chair" and Chris was the true "second chair". IMO, it is obvious to me that neither were calling the shots because if they were, I believe the result would have been the same but the controversary surrounding the verdict would not have reached the level that it did.

I do not know who was calling the shots. I suspect Hodgeman. As I watched the trial, it was obvious to me that Clark was leading and Darden was imitating a dog, wagging his tail and following behind her.

[limakey]

William,

I think it was Garcetti. Garcetti had the most to lose on this case and he knew it. I don't think Darden did himself any favors by going on the Rivera show and slaming the police during the first few days of the trial. However, what is ironic, Fuhrman said basically the same thing about the police in his book.

[weezer]

*Snipped* ". . . I think Marcia allegedly described it as torrid. Given Darden's display and, imho, the dismal prosecution presentation, I think it is reasonable to consider what have caused them to fail, in light of what some have claimed as a mountain of evidence. I think it is undignified for a couple of professionals to allow their relationship, be it torrid or tepid, to possibly effect their duties and not to adequately represent the murder victims. . ."

you care to offer up anything other than your very vivid and fertile imagination on this?

"I think Marica allegedly. . ."

". . .to allow their relationship. . ."

[William Anthony]

William,

I think it was Garcetti. Garcetti had the most to lose on this case and he knew it. I don't think Darden did himself any favors by going on the Rivera show and slaming the police during the first few days of the trial. However, what is ironic, Fuhrman said basically the same thing about the police in his book.

It may very well have been Garcetti. I think there was enough blame to be spread around evenly as it pertains to the evidence and the trial.

[William Anthony]

*Snipped*

you care to offer up anything other than your very vivid and fertile imagination on this?

"I think Marica allegedly. . ."

". . .to allow their relationship. . ."

I already did. Did you read the link? I see you like the phrase I employed. :)

[tv]

Darden talked with them for 40 minutes, whether or not his appearance was undignified. Has Darden denied the statements Stern attributed to him? I think Marcia allegedly described it as torrid. Given Darden's display and, imho, the dismal prosecution presentation, I think it is reasonable to consider what have caused them to fail, in light of what some have claimed as a mountain of evidence. I think it is undignified for a couple of professionals to allow their relationship, be it torrid or tepid, to possibly effect their duties and not to adequately represent the murder victims.

I think that Darden is acting much like he acted when they lost the trial by saying that her book would not be squat without mentioning him in it. He appears to be complaining much like when the glove demonstration failed as with a failed relationship. Perhaps, Clark realized that their relationship was only torrid during the trial and its immediate aftermath. Perhaps, the only thing the two had in common was a feeling of self-pity.People tend to be a little outrageous on Howard Stern's show and attempt to present themselves as cool. I have no idea if they had a relationship or not. I haven't read Marcia Clarke's book. If they did then they did. I don't see what it has to do with the trial since you think that Hodgeman was calling the shots. Do you think that MC was having an affair with him too?

[limakey]

William,

IMO, there was a lot of evidence in this case. However, the problems the DA had was how to explain it. IMO, the DA's knew from day 2 of this case is that the only way they were going to win was going to be in the court of public opinion and they won that case hands down. I also believe that the DA's expertly lined up their scapegoats one by one and picked them off in the same order. Unfortunately, Chris Darden happened to be on their list--which I think the glove demonstration is perfect proof of this. IMO.

[William Anthony]

People tend to be a little outrageous on Howard Stern's show and attempt to present themselves as cool. I have no idea if they had a relationship or not. I haven't read Marcia Clarke's book. If they did then they did. I don't see what it has to do with the trial since you think that Hodgeman was calling the shots. Do you think that MC was having an affair with him too?

Telling how, selecting the evidence and what evidence and the order it is presented, as well as motions to be presented is a lot different from arguing motions and presenting the evidence, imho, which all required undisturbed preparation, imho. I do not know, who all she was having affairs with, since you suggested Jerry, :). I am interested in any, imho, unprofessional relationship(s) she may have had that could have been an auxiliary to the prosecution's bungling of the case.

[limakey]

TV Dinner,

It is very strange how many people have attributed the conduct of the DA's as a factor on how they lost the case. Dominick Dunne is convinced that on the main reasons that Clark lost the jury was because her skirts were too short. Go figure!

I think the reason many people look at Clark and Darden's relationship as a factor because here was a black DA going after a black man who had a "fetish for blond white women", while it was clear too many people that he was very attracted to a white woman himself.

Apparently, Rocke Harmon took a note pad that was filled with racy comments between Chris and Marcia. So racy that he was convinced that even Howard Stern wouldn't be able read the contents on his show. While I thought that was classless on his part to disclose this, I did realize that he was trying to make a point. Which, to this day, is still totally lost on me.

[William Anthony]

William,

IMO, there was a lot of evidence in this case. However, the problems the DA had was how to explain it. IMO, the DA's knew from day 2 of this case is that the only way they were going to win was going to be in the court of public opinion and they won that case hands down. I also believe that the DA's expertly lined up their scapegoats one by one and picked them off in the same order. Unfortunately, Chris Darden happened to be on their list--which I think the glove demonstration is perfect proof of this. IMO.

There was a lot of evidence but what was its value. I think the defense showed the what it was worth.

[William Anthony]

TV Dinner,

It is very strange how many people have attributed the conduct of the DA's as a factor on how they lost the case. Dominick Dunne is convinced that on the main reasons that Clark lost the jury was because her skirts were too short. Go figure!

I think the reason many people look at Clark and Darden's relationship as a factor because here was a black DA going after a black man who had a "fetish for blond white women", while it was clear too many people that he was very attracted to a white woman himself.

Apparently, Rocke Harmon took a note pad that was filled with racy comments between Chris and Marcia. So racy that he was convinced that even Howard Stern wouldn't be able read the contents on his show. While I thought that was classless on his part to disclose this, I did realize that he was trying to make a point. Which, to this day, is still totally lost on me.

I think the point is that Darden and Harmon were more interested in the length of her skirts than they were in the length of time and the effect it had on the jury and the lack of length of time in undisturbed preparation that it took to present the insufficient evidence.

[limakey]

William,

I totally agree with you about the value of the evidence. However, the DA's were brilliant when they used the value of the evidence to present themselves as the "victims" of it. I think Marcia's close arguement bears this out.

[William Anthony]

William,

I totally agree with you about the value of the evidence. However, the DA's were brilliant when they used the value of the evidence to present themselves as the "victims" of it. I think Marcia's close arguement bears this out.

I think her closing can be interpreted to mean that I am scorned by the magnificent one-someone need to feel sorry for me-enter Darden. :)

[limakey]

William,

I have always believed the DA's dragged out their case as long as possible because they still believed that the knife, shoes and clothes would eventually be found.

Again, IMO, they knew Simpson's whereabouts, they knew his movements of that night and were convinced that he did not have enough time to get rid of the evidence where it would never be found.

I think it is also clear that the DA's knew that no matter how much preparation work they did, some of their witnesses were still going to be horrible witnesses.

[William Anthony]

William,

I have always believed the DA's dragged out their case as long as possible because they still believed that the knife, shoes and clothes would eventually be found.

Again, IMO, they knew Simpson's whereabouts, they knew his movements of that night and were convinced that he did not have enough time to get rid of the evidence where it would never be found.

I think it is also clear that the DA's knew that no matter how much preparation work they did, some of their witnesses were still going to be horrible witnesses.

That does not excuse wasting time in unprofessional relationships, if any. I don't think they expected how horrible MF would be.

[tv]

TV Dinner,

It is very strange how many people have attributed the conduct of the DA's as a factor on how they lost the case. Dominick Dunne is convinced that on the main reasons that Clark lost the jury was because her skirts were too short. Go figure!

I think the reason many people look at Clark and Darden's relationship as a factor because here was a black DA going after a black man who had a "fetish for blond white women", while it was clear too many people that he was very attracted to a white woman himself.

Apparently, Rocke Harmon took a note pad that was filled with racy comments between Chris and Marcia. So racy that he was convinced that even Howard Stern wouldn't be able read the contents on his show. While I thought that was classless on his part to disclose this, I did realize that he was trying to make a point. Which, to this day, is still totally lost on me.

I've never thought OJ Simpson had a 'fetish' for blonde white women only a preference for blondes which he stated himself. I don't think his preference in women had anything to do with this case. I also don't think any relationship between the prosecutors had anything to do with the verdict in this case. I do believe that the females on the jury may not have liked Marcia Clarke -- whether because of short skirts I really couldn't say but it's seems unlikely. I don't think their possible dislike was the reason for the not guilty verdict. Before anyone gets up in arms, this is just my opinion.

If Rockne Harmon's notepad contents were too racy for Howard Stern then that's kind of surprising...I've heard things on the Howard Stern show that curled my hair and I'm not easily shocked. I've also read some comments by Alan Dershowitz that Marcia Clarke made some inappropriate remarks to the defense team about her not wearing underwear. Who really knows?

[limakey]

William,

I totally disagree. They knew exactly what type of witness MF was going to be, in fact, I think they banked on it. He was their number 1 scape goat. However, even if MF was the beacon of honestly and the perfect example of racial harmony, what would change about the case?

In other words, how were the DA's going to explain the glove? However they going to explain the socks? How were they going to explain why so much crucial evidence was not found until, days, weeks, months later?

How were they going to explain the nurse's testimony? Again, IMO, even if you take MF out of the case, nothing changes.

[tv]

I think her closing can be interpreted to mean that I am scorned by the magnificent one-someone need to feel sorry for me-enter Darden. :)William, are you saying that Marcia Clarke's closing argument can be interpreted to mean that she had been rejected by Johnnie Cochran? Oh no, MF -- More Fantasy. :eek:

[limakey]

TV Dinner,

I totally agree with you, I don't think any personal relationships between the lawyers had any bearing on the case. I just find it interesting how many people perhaps feel that it did play a role in the case, hence the verdict.

FYI, historically, female DA's have a much tougher time then their male counterparts. Same old story, an aggressive case put on by a male, that means he is no nonsense, straight to the point, a leader---if a female does it, she is called something completely different and it is not a positive title. Hopefully, this is changing!

[tv]

TV Dinner,

I totally agree with you, I don't think any personal relationships between the lawyers had any bearing on the case. I just find it interesting how many people perhaps feel that it did play a role in the case, hence the verdict.

FYI, historically, female DA's have a much tougher time then their male counterparts. Same old story, an aggressive case put on by a male, that means he is no nonsense, straight to the point, a leader---if a female does it, she is called something completely different and it is not a positive title. Hopefully, this is changing!And I totally agree with you. Strong, assertive women aren't usually looked upon in a favorable light. I'll use Judge Judy as an example -- most men that I've heard comment on her really don't like her. If a man had her attitude it would be compared to the second coming, imo.

[William Anthony]

I've never thought OJ Simpson had a 'fetish' for blonde white women only a preference for blondes which he stated himself. I don't think his preference in women had anything to do with this case. I also don't think any relationship between the prosecutors had anything to do with the verdict in this case. I do believe that the females on the jury may not have liked Marcia Clarke -- whether because of short skirts I really couldn't say but it's seems unlikely. I don't think their possible dislike was the reason for the not guilty verdict. Before anyone gets up in arms, this is just my opinion.

If Rockne Harmon's notepad contents were too racy for Howard Stern then that's kind of surprising...I've heard things on the Howard Stern show that curled my hair and I'm not easily shocked. I've also read some comments by Alan Dershowitz that Marcia Clarke made some inappropriate remarks to the defense team about her not wearing underwear. Who really knows?

If it walks and quacks like a duck...

[William Anthony]

William,

I totally disagree. They knew exactly what type of witness MF was going to be, in fact, I think they banked on it. He was their number 1 scape goat. However, even if MF was the beacon of honestly and the perfect example of racial harmony, what would change about the case?

In other words, how were the DA's going to explain the glove? However they going to explain the socks? How were they going to explain why so much crucial evidence was not found until, days, weeks, months later?

How were they going to explain the nurse's testimony? Again, IMO, even if you take MF out of the case, nothing changes.

I agree that, if you took MF out of the case, the evidence would still be insufficient to convict. I do not think that the prosecution expected his perjury would be exposed or his admissions, albeit by tapes, to plant evidence would come to light.

[William Anthony]

William, are you saying that Marcia Clarke's closing argument can be interpreted to mean that she had been rejected by Johnnie Cochran? Oh no, MF -- More Fantasy. :eek:

I am saying that her closing can be interpreted as her failure to prepare, feeling that she would win the case by causing the magnificent one to become distracted. When that did not happen and she was unprepared, due to her other possible distractions, her closing, if what the poster says is true, suggests that the evidence and she were victimized. Who did the victimization-the defense team, specifically the magnificent one, who did not succumb to her advances. Enter Darden who was willing to find some way to soothe his and her self-pity. Of course this is all my honest opinion.

[William Anthony]

TV Dinner,

I totally agree with you, I don't think any personal relationships between the lawyers had any bearing on the case. I just find it interesting how many people perhaps feel that it did play a role in the case, hence the verdict.

FYI, historically, female DA's have a much tougher time then their male counterparts. Same old story, an aggressive case put on by a male, that means he is no nonsense, straight to the point, a leader---if a female does it, she is called something completely different and it is not a positive title. Hopefully, this is changing!

The only thing a personal relationship could have on the case, was, if the professionals acted unprofessionally by not adequately preparing the case, which, judging from how the case was persented, imho, happened in this instance.

I an not criticizing Clark for her competitiveness. I am considering other causes that may have effected the way she and Darden failed to present the case, in light of the claim that there was a mountain of evidence that should have lead to a conviction.

[William Anthony]

And I totally agree with you. Strong, assertive women aren't usually looked upon in a favorable light. I'll use Judge Judy as an example -- most men that I've heard comment on her really don't like her. If a man had her attitude it would be compared to the second coming, imo.

I believe both Judy and Clark pander(ed) to the camera.

[William Anthony]

I believe that all pandered for the camera, with the exception of the magnificent one. He came across as natural and accustomed to being in control of a courtroom, imho.

[William Anthony]

This from Darden's closing, IIRC.

"You know what they say. Nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors. And the fact that you--we may see you and you may see us doesn't really mean that you know us or that you know me or you know Miss Clark or Mr. Cochran. You see us here in public. But what are we? What are we really? What are we really inside? What are we really at home?"

He specifically mentioned himself, Ms. Clark and the magnificent one but no other members of the prosecution or dream team. Things that make you go...

[martin II]

William,

I think it was Garcetti. Garcetti had the most to lose on this case and he knew it. I don't think Darden did himself any favors by going on the Rivera show and slaming the police during the first few days of the trial. However, what is ironic, Fuhrman said basically the same thing about the police in his book.

I think it was Garcetti also as it was reported that he did attend the daily after trial proseucution strategy meetings.

[martin II]

William,

I totally agree with you about the value of the evidence. However, the DA's were brilliant when they used the value of the evidence to present themselves as the "victims" of it. I think Marcia's close arguement bears this out.

My point, for this paper, however, is that in all of the events involving black men, cultural common senses transformed the men into racialised and sexualised beings who were also criminalised, a transformation that was both reflected, and perhaps created, by the media reports of the events'

For example, the media presented O.J. Simpson as a "black man out of control" (Fiske, 1996, p. 256). While whiteness, culturally, is usually unmarked, in the instance of the trial of O.J. Simpson for murder, the whiteness of the victims was very apparent through the social representations deployed by the media. What happened was that the media had the whiteness of the victims at the forefront of the reporting of the case -- not through direct comments but through reference to their pictures, their families, - while underplaying the racism of another key white person - the racist detective Mark Fuhrman. At the same time, the media reports described the murders as "rage killings", that Simpson was a "burning fuse" and that "justice (for which read brutally killed white victims) was crying out".(NYT 28th September" Excerpts From Closing Charges Against O.J. Simpson).

The prosecutors also participated in reproducing this image of Simpson. For example, the prosecution team, led by a white woman, drew upon prevailing cultural common senses about black men as emotional and uncontrolled people, while simultaneously dismissing the incontrovertible fact of police misconduct by arguing that "Everybody knows he killed - everybody knows. The evidence is there" (Darden 1995, NYT30th September "Excerpts From Final Rebuttal Arguments by Prosecution").

My examination of the Closing Statements of this trial from which the quote in the title of this talk comes - it was said by Johnnie Cochrane, the lead defence lawyer - led me also to see that the issues highlighted by the prosecution and the defence in these statements seemed to differ in both content and style. . .

The prosecution stressed Nicole brown's domestic abuse at the hand of Mr. Simpson, the DNA evidence in a rather protracted and tedious manner, the brutality of the killings, and closed by stating that if he had beaten her, he was also capable of murdering her. While the prosecution did mention police misconduct and the racism of Mark Fuhrman, they did so only to argue that these issues were peripheral to the main DNA evidence, which they claimed proved that O.J. Simpson was the murderer. In reading those Closing Statements, one is rather struck by how much emotion the prosecution used to assert that he was the murderer. While the style of presentation was, at times, rather dry, tedious and ponderous, the content of their Closing Statements amounted to a demand for the jury to act in good faith towards the prosecution - namely, that they would never have taken this case on if they had not known he was the murderer, and inconsistencies in much of the evidence were not relevant to this central fact.

In contrast, and despite press reports to the contrary, the Defence Closing Statements focused on the evidence, and the inconsistencies within it. They explained the idea of "reasonable doubt", and linked this to the credibility of Mark Fuhrman - the racist detective who had been involved at the time of O.J. Simpson's arrest. This legal team also emphasised inconsistencies in key pieces of evidence such as the time line of the events around the murder, the glove not fitting Simpson despite it being a key element in the prosecution's case, and they also spent time in commiserating with the jury about their prolonged sequestration. In sum, although the style of speaking was rather flamboyant at times - "If the glove does not fit, you must acquit" - the Defence Closing Statements worked through all the evidentiary material, and claimed it showed there was more than a reasonable doubt that Simpson was the murderer. In other words, it was the Defence team who took the jury through step by step over the evidence, and showed the flaws in the prosecution's case.

In the LA Times and the New York Times, journalists argued the trial was about domestic abuse, police misconduct, judicial reform by bringing up the role of wealth in obtaining justice (not something that was done in the instance of WKS) and the need for non-unanimous jury verdicts, and victim's rights - that is discourses that were similar to those of the prosecution - and made almost no mention of racism.

http://www.criticalmethods.org/bodone.htm

[weezer]

I am saying that her closing can be interpreted as her failure to prepare, feeling that she would win the case by causing the magnificent one to become distracted. When that did not happen and she was unprepared, due to her other possible distractions, her closing, if what the poster says is true, suggests that the evidence and she were victimized. Who did the victimization-the defense team, specifically the magnificent one, who did not succumb to her advances. Enter Darden who was willing to find some way to soothe his and her self-pity. Of course this is all my honest opinion.

LOL -- now we've gone from all LAPD, FBI, independent labs, witnesses, and media conspired to plant evidence and/or frame orenthal to -- LOL -- marcia was not successful in distracting cochran -- LOL -- so she lost the case. LOL

look -- I don't want to be mean but geez guys -- cochran was strange looking --

[weezer]

My point, for this paper, however, is that in all of the events involving black men, cultural common senses transformed the men into racialised and sexualised beings who were also criminalised, a transformation that was both reflected, and perhaps created, by the media reports of the events'

For example, the media presented O.J. Simpson as a "black man out of control" (Fiske, 1996, p. 256). While whiteness, culturally, is usually unmarked, in the instance of the trial of O.J. Simpson for murder, the whiteness of the victims was very apparent through the social representations deployed by the media. What happened was that the media had the whiteness of the victims at the forefront of the reporting of the case -- not through direct comments but through reference to their pictures, their families, - while underplaying the racism of another key white person - the racist detective Mark Fuhrman. At the same time, the media reports described the murders as "rage killings", that Simpson was a "burning fuse" and that "justice (for which read brutally killed white victims) was crying out".(NYT 28th September" Excerpts From Closing Charges Against O.J. Simpson).

The prosecutors also participated in reproducing this image of Simpson. For example, the prosecution team, led by a white woman, drew upon prevailing cultural common senses about black men as emotional and uncontrolled people, while simultaneously dismissing the incontrovertible fact of police misconduct by arguing that "Everybody knows he killed - everybody knows. The evidence is there" (Darden 1995, NYT30th September "Excerpts From Final Rebuttal Arguments by Prosecution").

My examination of the Closing Statements of this trial from which the quote in the title of this talk comes - it was said by Johnnie Cochrane, the lead defence lawyer - led me also to see that the issues highlighted by the prosecution and the defence in these statements seemed to differ in both content and style. . .

The prosecution stressed Nicole brown's domestic abuse at the hand of Mr. Simpson, the DNA evidence in a rather protracted and tedious manner, the brutality of the killings, and closed by stating that if he had beaten her, he was also capable of murdering her. While the prosecution did mention police misconduct and the racism of Mark Fuhrman, they did so only to argue that these issues were peripheral to the main DNA evidence, which they claimed proved that O.J. Simpson was the murderer. In reading those Closing Statements, one is rather struck by how much emotion the prosecution used to assert that he was the murderer. While the style of presentation was, at times, rather dry, tedious and ponderous, the content of their Closing Statements amounted to a demand for the jury to act in good faith towards the prosecution - namely, that they would never have taken this case on if they had not known he was the murderer, and inconsistencies in much of the evidence were not relevant to this central fact.

In contrast, and despite press reports to the contrary, the Defence Closing Statements focused on the evidence, and the inconsistencies within it. They explained the idea of "reasonable doubt", and linked this to the credibility of Mark Fuhrman - the racist detective who had been involved at the time of O.J. Simpson's arrest. This legal team also emphasised inconsistencies in key pieces of evidence such as the time line of the events around the murder, the glove not fitting Simpson despite it being a key element in the prosecution's case, and they also spent time in commiserating with the jury about their prolonged sequestration. In sum, although the style of speaking was rather flamboyant at times - "If the glove does not fit, you must acquit" - the Defence Closing Statements worked through all the evidentiary material, and claimed it showed there was more than a reasonable doubt that Simpson was the murderer. In other words, it was the Defence team who took the jury through step by step over the evidence, and showed the flaws in the prosecution's case.

In the LA Times and the New York Times, journalists argued the trial was about domestic abuse, police misconduct, judicial reform by bringing up the role of wealth in obtaining justice (not something that was done in the instance of WKS) and the need for non-unanimous jury verdicts, and victim's rights - that is discourses that were similar to those of the prosecution - and made almost no mention of racism.

http://www.criticalmethods.org/bodone.htm

oh geez!

[martin II]

LOL -- now we've gone from all LAPD, FBI, independent labs, witnesses, and media conspired to plant evidence and/or frame orenthal to -- LOL -- marcia was not successful in distracting cochran -- LOL -- so she lost the case. LOL

look -- I don't want to be mean but geez guys -- cochran was strange looking --

If they spent next day strategy time up stairs in the office making google eyes at each other they were prepating for something other than next day trial fight.imo

[SlowHandSam]

I believe that all pandered for the camera, with the exception of the magnificent one. He came across as natural and accustomed to being in control of a courtroom, imho.

Surely, you aren't serious?

[William Anthony]

LOL -- now we've gone from all LAPD, FBI, independent labs, witnesses, and media conspired to plant evidence and/or frame orenthal to -- LOL -- marcia was not successful in distracting cochran -- LOL -- so she lost the case. LOL

look -- I don't want to be mean but geez guys -- cochran was strange looking --

And Darden wasn't? Yes, all of the above could have been contributing factors to the failure.

[William Anthony]

Surely, you aren't serious?

As a heartbeat.

[martin II]

This from Darden's closing, IIRC.

"You know what they say. Nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors. And the fact that you--we may see you and you may see us doesn't really mean that you know us or that you know me or you know Miss Clark or Mr. Cochran. You see us here in public. But what are we? What are we really? What are we really inside? What are we really at home?"

He specifically mentioned himself, Ms. Clark and the magnificent one but no other members of the prosecution or dream team. Things that make you go...

You think Darden could have been dropping acid?

[William Anthony]

LOL -- now we've gone from all LAPD, FBI, independent labs, witnesses, and media conspired to plant evidence and/or frame orenthal to -- LOL -- marcia was not successful in distracting cochran -- LOL -- so she lost the case. LOL

look -- I don't want to be mean but geez guys -- cochran was strange looking --

Maybe, the magnificent one thought Clark was strange looking.

[William Anthony]

You think Darden could have been dropping acid?

Hints for sure. You don't know what Clark, the magnificent one and I do behind close doors.

[martin II]

And I totally agree with you. Strong, assertive women aren't usually looked upon in a favorable light. I'll use Judge Judy as an example -- most men that I've heard comment on her really don't like her. If a man had her attitude it would be compared to the second coming, imo.

I agree that the culture labels strong women as b****** but Judge Judy does pander for the recording cameras. My daughter, in her work appeared before judge Judy regularly in court and she has said Judy is the same on tv as she was in regular court.

[martin II]

William,

I have always believed the DA's dragged out their case as long as possible because they still believed that the knife, shoes and clothes would eventually be found.

Again, IMO, they knew Simpson's whereabouts, they knew his movements of that night and were convinced that he did not have enough time to get rid of the evidence where it would never be found.

I think it is also clear that the DA's knew that no matter how much preparation work they did, some of their witnesses were still going to be horrible witnesses.

Limakey.
I agree that they dragged the case out hoping they would find evidence. Maby dragging that lake Mario sent them to.But they cam up empty. I believe
M Clarke in her closing said something like you should believe he is guilty because i said he is.imo

[weezer]

before we all get carried away here, let's step back and remember what/who lost this case: an uneducated and biased jury.

[martin II]

before we all get carried away here, let's step back and remember what/who lost this case: an uneducated and biased jury.

I suggest you step forward and face the truth. The prosecution made claims that they failed to prove to that jury and many others.
martin II

[martin II]

William,

IMO, there was a lot of evidence in this case. However, the problems the DA had was how to explain it. IMO, the DA's knew from day 2 of this case is that the only way they were going to win was going to be in the court of public opinion and they won that case hands down. I also believe that the DA's expertly lined up their scapegoats one by one and picked them off in the same order. Unfortunately, Chris Darden happened to be on their list--which I think the glove demonstration is perfect proof of this. IMO.

The prosecution failed to tell the jury a cohesive believable story. It was cut & past until some witesses started to conflict with previous ones.

[William Anthony]

before we all get carried away here, let's step back and remember what/who lost this case: an uneducated and biased jury.

I know that you are mored educated than your post reflects, imho. Thus, I am at a loss to attempt to understand your motivation for making it. You know the jury was not a party to the law suit, i.e. they did not bring or defend the charges. Therefore, they could neither win nor lose the case. We know which party lost the case and we are simply considering why. Surely, you are not saying that only educated people could draw reasonable inferences. If you are, that statement is biased, imho.

[William Anthony]

The prosecution failed to tell the jury a cohesive believable story. It was cut & past until some witesses started to conflict with previous ones.

Let's look at the cross of the prosecution's first witness who believed that a female, Nicole, allegedly was being struck on New Year's Day, 1989. I think the cross showed that this witness added nothing to the case, imho.

"Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOUR BEST RECOLLECTION IS THAT THIS CONVERSATION LASTED BETWEEN 3:58 AND ABOUT FOUR O'CLOCK OR 4:01?

A: THE OPEN LINE.

Q: OPEN LINE?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT YOU WERE ABLE TO HEAR, IN OTHER WORDS?

A: RIGHT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IN ORDER FOR YOU TO TRANSMIT AND TO GENERATE THE FORM THAT IS NOW UP ON THE SCREEN, YOU HAD TO TYPE SOMETHING, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: AND AS WE LISTENED TO THAT TAPE, COULD WE HEAR YOU TYPING?

A: YES, YOU COULD.

Q: AND ARE YOU A PRETTY FAST TYPIST?

A: I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE.

Q: WELL, YOU HEARD YOUR -- THE TYPING IN THERE, DIDN'T YOU?

A: YES, RIGHT.

Q: AND SO THERE IS NO MISTAKING ABOUT IT, YOUR TYPING WAS NOT ANYBODY BEING STRUCK, WAS IT?

A: NO.

Q: AND SINCE YOU DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY, YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS BLOWS BEING PASSED BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE OR WHAT THE SITUATION WAS, DO YOU?

A: WHEN I TOOK THE CALL, WHEN IT CAME -- WHEN IT DROPPED IN AT THE VERY BEGINNING?

Q: YES, MA'AM.

A: AND THE WOMAN IS SCREAMING?

Q: YES, MA'AM.

A: THEN I HEARD THE HITS AT THE SAME TIME.

Q: BUT WHAT I'M ASKING YOU, YOU HADN'T TALKED TO ANYBODY SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE AT THAT LOCATION, DO YOU?

A: NO, I DO NOT.

Q: YOU HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT, DO YOU?

[martin II]

Let's look at the cross of the prosecution's first witness who believed that a female, Nicole, allegedly was being struck on New Year's Day, 1989. I think the cross showed that this witness added nothing to the case, imho.

"Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOUR BEST RECOLLECTION IS THAT THIS CONVERSATION LASTED BETWEEN 3:58 AND ABOUT FOUR O'CLOCK OR 4:01?

A: THE OPEN LINE.

Q: OPEN LINE?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT YOU WERE ABLE TO HEAR, IN OTHER WORDS?

A: RIGHT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IN ORDER FOR YOU TO TRANSMIT AND TO GENERATE THE FORM THAT IS NOW UP ON THE SCREEN, YOU HAD TO TYPE SOMETHING, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: AND AS WE LISTENED TO THAT TAPE, COULD WE HEAR YOU TYPING?

A: YES, YOU COULD.

Q: AND ARE YOU A PRETTY FAST TYPIST?

A: I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE.

Q: WELL, YOU HEARD YOUR -- THE TYPING IN THERE, DIDN'T YOU?

A: YES, RIGHT.

Q: AND SO THERE IS NO MISTAKING ABOUT IT, YOUR TYPING WAS NOT ANYBODY BEING STRUCK, WAS IT?

A: NO.

Q: AND SINCE YOU DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY, YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS BLOWS BEING PASSED BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE OR WHAT THE SITUATION WAS, DO YOU?

A: WHEN I TOOK THE CALL, WHEN IT CAME -- WHEN IT DROPPED IN AT THE VERY BEGINNING?

Q: YES, MA'AM.

A: AND THE WOMAN IS SCREAMING?

Q: YES, MA'AM.

A: THEN I HEARD THE HITS AT THE SAME TIME.

Q: BUT WHAT I'M ASKING YOU, YOU HADN'T TALKED TO ANYBODY SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE AT THAT LOCATION, DO YOU?

A: NO, I DO NOT.

Q: YOU HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT, DO YOU?


Not very much.

[William Anthony]

Not very much.

Let's look at the cross of the second witness, the police officer, who placed Simpson under arrest, allowed him to get dressed and flee the scene.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AS AN EXPERIENCED OFFICER AT THAT TIME, YOU HAD ALMOST TWENTY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, YOU CAME UPON THIS SCENE AND YOU SAW MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AND YOU DIDN'T IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION SPEAK TO ANY OTHER WITNESS OTHER THAN HER; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT IS INCORRECT. I TALKED TO MR. O.J. SIMPSON.

Q: WELL, LET'S TAKE IT ONE AT A TIME. YOU DIDN'T TALK TO MICHELLE ABUDRAHM, RIGHT?

A: OTHER THAN TO TELL HER TO GET AWAY FROM THE CAR.

Q: I'M TALKING ABOUT WITH REGARD TO THE INVESTIGATION. YOU DIDN'T TALK TO HER ABOUT THIS CASE, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU DIDN'T GO IN AND TALK TO THE NANNY, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU NEVER EVEN WENT INSIDE THE HOUSE, DID YOU?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: YOU DIDN'T GO LOOK TO SEE WHERE THIS MIGHT HAVE TAKEN PLACE, DID YOU?

A: NO.

Q: YOU TALKED TO MR. O.J. SIMPSON AND HE TOLD YOU, ACCORDING TO YOUR STATEMENT, THAT HE HAD PUSHED HER OUT OF HIS BED; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: BUT HE HADN'T BEAT HER, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND THEN BASED UPON THAT, YOU THEN DECIDED YOU WERE GOING TO PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST, RIGHT?

A: NO.

Q: WELL, YOU THEN MADE A DECISION, WHILE YOU WERE OUTSIDE THIS GATE, TO PLACE MR. O.J. SIMPSON UNDER ARREST; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE AROUND THERE THAT YOU TALKED TO?

A: I TALKED TO NICOLE SIMPSON AND I SAW HER.

Q: YOU SAW NICOLE SIMPSON. YOU KNOW, DO YOU NOT, SIR, THAT IF SOMEBODY GETS INTO A FIGHT, ON OCCASION THERE MAY BE BRUISES ON BOTH SIDES? YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, DON'T YOU, AS AN EXPERIENCED POLICE OFFICER?

A: OH, YES, YES.

Q: SO YOU TALKED TO NICOLE SIMPSON, YOU TALKED TO O.J. SIMPSON, BUT YOU HAD MADE YOUR DECISION, HAD YOU NOT, BEFORE YOU TALKED TO O.J. SIMPSON; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU MADE YOUR DECISION AFTER ONLY TALKING WITH NICOLE SIMPSON; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND YOU DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY ELSE IN CONNECTION WITH THAT DECISION?

A: I DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY ELSE.

Q: AT THAT TIME HOW LONG HAD YOU BEEN A POLICE OFFICER?

A: ABOUT 19 AND A HALF YEARS.

Sounds like a rush to judgment and I can see why he remained a patrol officer for so many years. By the way, Darden used the pictures of Nicole as an exhibit and I believe they might have been entered into evidence. The magnificent one published them to the jury.

[William Anthony]

In regard to my last post, I am not saying that a rush to judgment automatically means that the wrong person is arrested, I am only saying that there must be evidence not only to sustain the arrest but also sufficient evidence to convict. I believe that a rush to judgment is not good LE tactics and may lead ultimately to an acquittal.

[limakey]

William and Martin,

IMO, in Clark's opening of her closing, she basically came right out and said that MF never should have been a cop in the first place, the lead detectives on this case weren't the ripest tomatos on the vine and the CSI team were like lonely little petuntias in the onion patch. No amount of preparation was ever going to change the facts of the this case.

I do believe both Darden and Clark read the media perfectly and knew that even with the inevitable not guilty verdict, they were still going to be okay. In fact, it seemed to me that every time the DA's had a bad day in court, both Clark and Darden's "hero meters" went through the roof.

However, I do believe that both Clark and Darden lost sight of who the real victims were and for that, they deserve the critiques.

[limakey]

William,

I think the problem that I have with your belief that the DA's were unprepared is my belief that the DA's knew from day one what the defense was going to be. They knew very, very early on what their weak links were, in fact, I think they had a hard time finding enough strong links to make their case.

Perfect example, they had to know the nurse's testimony was going to be a key in both of their cases. I find it impossible to believe that it was the nurse himself, who after hearing Cochran's opening statements only then realized he made a mistake and he was the one who brought it to the DA's attention. If this was true, IMO, they would have called him as their own witness and have him correct his testimony. Again, IMO.

[martin II]

Let's look at the cross of the second witness, the police officer, who placed Simpson under arrest, allowed him to get dressed and flee the scene.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AS AN EXPERIENCED OFFICER AT THAT TIME, YOU HAD ALMOST TWENTY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, YOU CAME UPON THIS SCENE AND YOU SAW MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AND YOU DIDN'T IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION SPEAK TO ANY OTHER WITNESS OTHER THAN HER; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT IS INCORRECT. I TALKED TO MR. O.J. SIMPSON.

Q: WELL, LET'S TAKE IT ONE AT A TIME. YOU DIDN'T TALK TO MICHELLE ABUDRAHM, RIGHT?

A: OTHER THAN TO TELL HER TO GET AWAY FROM THE CAR.

Q: I'M TALKING ABOUT WITH REGARD TO THE INVESTIGATION. YOU DIDN'T TALK TO HER ABOUT THIS CASE, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU DIDN'T GO IN AND TALK TO THE NANNY, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU NEVER EVEN WENT INSIDE THE HOUSE, DID YOU?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: YOU DIDN'T GO LOOK TO SEE WHERE THIS MIGHT HAVE TAKEN PLACE, DID YOU?

A: NO.

Q: YOU TALKED TO MR. O.J. SIMPSON AND HE TOLD YOU, ACCORDING TO YOUR STATEMENT, THAT HE HAD PUSHED HER OUT OF HIS BED; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: BUT HE HADN'T BEAT HER, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND THEN BASED UPON THAT, YOU THEN DECIDED YOU WERE GOING TO PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST, RIGHT?

A: NO.

Q: WELL, YOU THEN MADE A DECISION, WHILE YOU WERE OUTSIDE THIS GATE, TO PLACE MR. O.J. SIMPSON UNDER ARREST; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE AROUND THERE THAT YOU TALKED TO?

A: I TALKED TO NICOLE SIMPSON AND I SAW HER.

Q: YOU SAW NICOLE SIMPSON. YOU KNOW, DO YOU NOT, SIR, THAT IF SOMEBODY GETS INTO A FIGHT, ON OCCASION THERE MAY BE BRUISES ON BOTH SIDES? YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, DON'T YOU, AS AN EXPERIENCED POLICE OFFICER?

A: OH, YES, YES.

Q: SO YOU TALKED TO NICOLE SIMPSON, YOU TALKED TO O.J. SIMPSON, BUT YOU HAD MADE YOUR DECISION, HAD YOU NOT, BEFORE YOU TALKED TO O.J. SIMPSON; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU MADE YOUR DECISION AFTER ONLY TALKING WITH NICOLE SIMPSON; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND YOU DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY ELSE IN CONNECTION WITH THAT DECISION?

A: I DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY ELSE.

Q: AT THAT TIME HOW LONG HAD YOU BEEN A POLICE OFFICER?

A: ABOUT 19 AND A HALF YEARS.

Sounds like a rush to judgment and I can see why he remained a patrol officer for so many years. By the way, Darden used the pictures of Nicole as an exhibit and I believe they might have been entered into evidence. The magnificent one published them to the jury.

From the first two witnesses it seemed the prosecution was putting abuse at the top of their case. Maby this was done for pr with the media. The first too
were failures on cross.Not strong at all. It seems they were stumbling out of the gate.

[martin II]

William,

I think the problem that I have with your belief that the DA's were unprepared is my belief that the DA's knew from day one what the defense was going to be. They knew very, very early on what their weak links were, in fact, I think they had a hard time finding enough strong links to make their case.

Perfect example, they had to know the nurse's testimony was going to be a key in both of their cases. I find it impossible to believe that it was the nurse himself, who after hearing Cochran's opening statements only then realized he made a mistake and he was the one who brought it to the DA's attention. If this was true, IMO, they would have called him as their own witness and have him correct his testimony. Again, IMO.

Limakey
On last years oprah show Darden made the statement that he first actually learned about mf when he took the stand. He said that they had heard rumors abou him but that furhman 'Had the opportunity to come forward and tell them about his history(prior to trial) etc and he didn't"He also said" "In my opinion Furhman is worse than OJ"

I took his comments to mean that he did not know of furhmans past.
What was shocking was clarks comments that furhman should have never been a cop yet he was smack dab in the middle of the evidence in the case.

What did her statement tell the jury listening to her.Furhman is a dirty cop?
Furhman cannot be trusted? He should never have been a cop but believe us when we tell you he found certain evidence and did certain things in the case. imo

[martin II]

Yeah William you're finally seeing the light. 'A mountain of evidence that should have lead to a conviction'! You go William. 'The way she and Darden failed to present the case'! Yeah again. Now take step 3 and move on to Judge Ito (dancing or not).;)

"Mountain of evidence" was a sound bite the prosecution put to the public
for those that were not concerned with the details of the case. For those willing to ignore the defense destruction of the claims to satisfy their uninformed opinions or pro-prosecution position before the trial started. I believe you fit this catagory quite well as to date your post here amounts to several low level negative comments at certain posters and absent of any knowledge of the case.

I am sure you failed to notice that the 'MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE' at the end of the case looked more like a pile of sand and a prosecution in utter confusion when the jury inform all that the "mountain of evidence" did not amount to a hill of beans.
imo
martin II

[martin II]

William and Martin,

IMO, in Clark's opening of her closing, she basically came right out and said that MF never should have been a cop in the first place, the lead detectives on this case weren't the ripest tomatos on the vine and the CSI team were like lonely little petuntias in the onion patch. No amount of preparation was ever going to change the facts of the this case.

I do believe both Darden and Clark read the media perfectly and knew that even with the inevitable not guilty verdict, they were still going to be okay. In fact, it seemed to me that every time the DA's had a bad day in court, both Clark and Darden's "hero meters" went through the roof.

However, I do believe that both Clark and Darden lost sight of who the real victims were and for that, they deserve the critiques.


On the morning of 6/13 these unripe tomatos and the CSI team just went about their assignment as they had done in so many cases.Sloppy work void of most writtem protocols doing what ever they decided to do. Trying to pin a suspect asap so as to get their work done asap.

When Shapero sp showed up as ojs lawyer the media told the public that oj would cop a plea and just do some time as that was what Shapero was known for in legal circles. Selling his clients out with agreement with the prosecution. So this i assume may have been good news for the prosecution.

Oj put a stop to this idea.Shaperio was demoted and Cochran and others were hired.

LE and CSI had no idea that the prosecution would have to use their work to build a case that eventually would be attacked by a group of skilled lawyers such as the dream team.

[martin II]

William,

I think the problem that I have with your belief that the DA's were unprepared is my belief that the DA's knew from day one what the defense was going to be. They knew very, very early on what their weak links were, in fact, I think they had a hard time finding enough strong links to make their case.

Perfect example, they had to know the nurse's testimony was going to be a key in both of their cases. I find it impossible to believe that it was the nurse himself, who after hearing Cochran's opening statements only then realized he made a mistake and he was the one who brought it to the DA's attention. If this was true, IMO, they would have called him as their own witness and have him correct his testimony. Again, IMO.


It may be that the prosecution tossed in a little abuse for sympathy as a means to cover some of the weak points in the case. Like the Nurse, mazzola, fung, martz furhman, Park etc.

[martin II]

William,

I think the problem that I have with your belief that the DA's were unprepared is my belief that the DA's knew from day one what the defense was going to be. They knew very, very early on what their weak links were, in fact, I think they had a hard time finding enough strong links to make their case.

Perfect example, they had to know the nurse's testimony was going to be a key in both of their cases. I find it impossible to believe that it was the nurse himself, who after hearing Cochran's opening statements only then realized he made a mistake and he was the one who brought it to the DA's attention. If this was true, IMO, they would have called him as their own witness and have him correct his testimony. Again, IMO.


Limakey
I agree with your past comment. Peratis was home suffering from cancer illness.I doubt he cared a hoot about Cochran's opening. It was the prosecution that took a video camer to his home at night, i think it was, and fed him the "correction" in his original statement.They were motivated to do this because of Cochrans opening statement which seemed to have sent them into some kind of panic.

[martin II]

In regard to my last post, I am not saying that a rush to judgment automatically means that the wrong person is arrested, I am only saying that there must be evidence not only to sustain the arrest but also sufficient evidence to convict. I believe that a rush to judgment is not good LE tactics and may lead ultimately to an acquittal.

It also leads to convictions that are later overturned.

[martin II]

Wow Martin. The way you sweep away the 'mountain' of facts that have been presented ( a tiny fraction of which I have posted myself thank you although as you like to point out I'm several thousand posts behind you ). Since my 'limited in your opinion' time of posting I have read the transcripts and theories which are posted by you and William. You have not changed my opinion one iota to make me believe IRREFUTABLY that Simpson was not guilty. Worthless prosecution, worthless judge and I'd like to acknowledge Weezy's post -worthless jury. Otherwise Martin I'd open my piano lid and accompany you. :)

Belle

It was the defense lawyers that swept away the foundation of the prosecutions claims not me and they did it on world wide tv for all to see.

It has not been and will not be my intent to influence any of what you think.
I can understand how you can believe the prosecution claimes as they were fed to all but only believed by those willing to ignore false testimony and lies by some witnesses. The case was in shambles even before the defense attacked it and showed the jury it could not be believed.Most understand that fact.imo

[William Anthony]

William and Martin,

IMO, in Clark's opening of her closing, she basically came right out and said that MF never should have been a cop in the first place, the lead detectives on this case weren't the ripest tomatos on the vine and the CSI team were like lonely little petuntias in the onion patch. No amount of preparation was ever going to change the facts of the this case.

I do believe both Darden and Clark read the media perfectly and knew that even with the inevitable not guilty verdict, they were still going to be okay. In fact, it seemed to me that every time the DA's had a bad day in court, both Clark and Darden's "hero meters" went through the roof.

However, I do believe that both Clark and Darden lost sight of who the real victims were and for that, they deserve the critiques.

I believe that preparation always allows a party to put forth their best side, whether or not they win. The prosecution failed miserably, imho, due both to a lack of preparation and to the quality of the evidence presented.

[William Anthony]

William,

I think the problem that I have with your belief that the DA's were unprepared is my belief that the DA's knew from day one what the defense was going to be. They knew very, very early on what their weak links were, in fact, I think they had a hard time finding enough strong links to make their case.

Perfect example, they had to know the nurse's testimony was going to be a key in both of their cases. I find it impossible to believe that it was the nurse himself, who after hearing Cochran's opening statements only then realized he made a mistake and he was the one who brought it to the DA's attention. If this was true, IMO, they would have called him as their own witness and have him correct his testimony. Again, IMO.

Let's use Peratis as an example. The prosecution could have handled his testimony in a far better manner, while he was on direct or on rebuttal if they were prepared for the defense. Instead, they put on that badly staged video in a desperate attempt to persuade the jury. I think they thought, like many here, that the prosecution had an invincible mountain of evidence, which allowed them to falsely relax and led to unprofessional relationships. They were unaware that the defense would show that they did not have a good rock. I think they resorted to unprofessional ploys, which, like the unprofessional relationship, also failed.

[William Anthony]

Yeah William you're finally seeing the light. 'A mountain of evidence that should have lead to a conviction'! You go William. 'The way she and Darden failed to present the case'! Yeah again. Now take step 3 and move on to Judge Ito (dancing or not).;)

Please quote me in context, Bella

I am considering other causes that may have effected the way she and Darden failed to present the case, in light of the claim that there was a mountain of evidence that should have lead to a conviction."

[William Anthony]

Hi William You're not replying to me? I'm crushed.

Don't be,

I got around to you. Remember, I posted I like witty and intelligent discussions. So, why would you think I would leave you out?

[William Anthony]

Willy, you can call me Joe. You still haven't replied to my post.:)

You really should try resting more.

[William Anthony]

Wow Martin. The way you sweep away the 'mountain' of facts that have been presented ( a tiny fraction of which I have posted myself thank you although as you like to point out I'm several thousand posts behind you ). Since my 'limited in your opinion' time of posting I have read the transcripts and theories which are posted by you and William. You have not changed my opinion one iota to make me believe IRREFUTABLY that Simpson was not guilty. Worthless prosecution, worthless judge and I'd like to acknowledge Weezy's post -worthless jury. Otherwise Martin I'd open my piano lid and accompany you. :)

I am not trying to make you believe IRREFUTABLY, just as the dream team was not trying, nor had the obligation to do, with the jury. I do not know about Martin but please keep your piano lid closed when I am singing, because you play off key, imho. As it applies to the case and the trial, you seem determined to transform the required standard of proof from an apple to a rock. Don't be made at the jury for understanding the concept of reasonable doubt.

[limakey]

Martin,

I do not buy for one minute that Chris Darden did not know about MF. However, if it is true, that he only heard rumours, then wasn't he obligated to investigate these rumours?

I don't know if you read MF's book, but in it, he clearly states that he knew all about Chris Darden and that he was still angry at him because Darden got a good friend of his tossed off the force because of racial comments he made to an undercover cop.

IMO, if Chris and Marcia and the other DA's are going to stand and say they knew nothing about Fuhrman, then they must assume the responsibility that if they did not know, it was because they did not want to know.

Didn't a good friend of Clark's go to her very early on and warn her about Fuhrman? Wasn't Clark's response to dismiss her and say that she was sick of people trying to be apart of her case?

I do understand that Darden was in a difficult position, however, that does not excuse his choices of remaining ignorant to the very real and documented flaws of the state's witnesses.

[William Anthony]

You still haven't replied to my post and this supposed to mean what?

I don't understand what it is you are not comprehending, I replied to your post addressed to me. That is why I think you may need some more rest. I also replied to the post addressed to Martin, because of some of the things you said in the post. I was not obligated to respond to any post you made. However, I chose to respond, because I was so inclined at that time. It is one thing to read transcripts and another to be able to read through them, imho. Take your time, rest, relax, while reading. Perhaps, then you will understand more. While some may miss your posts, I think they will allow you time to catch up.

[Kayleighjo]

Please quote me in context, Bella

I am considering other causes that may have effected the way she and Darden failed to present the case, in light of the claim that there was a mountain of evidence that should have lead to a conviction."

Is there a point you're trying to make by posting to "Bella"? If you have issues on the gender of Joseph Bell, why don't you send a PM or keep it yourself instead of the stupid innuendos you're so fond of.

Or I suppose I could just refer to you as Doc Holliday, Alpha Chi, Truly Speaking, Isontknow, or Pistol Pete. :rolleyes: