So terribly true. Jason's reaction when the verdict was read always struck me as odd. I mean he held his head down practically the whole time as if he were awaiting his OWN verdict.

MuthaFunka said:

I've not read the book either, but I just perused some stuff from it online. Check this out...

* Jason didn't exhibit "just violent behavior," he dealt with a clinically diagnosed Intermittent Explosive Disorder, for which he was medicated. He was known to snap and go completely apesh*t on folk since he was a kid. Just two months before the murder, he'd checked himself into Cedar-Sinai Hospital because he thought he was going to "rage" soon, but after released he is said to have refused his mood stabilizing medication.

* He tried to commit suicide once by stabbing himself with scissors; another time by slashing his wrists with broken glass; and another time by ODing on his meds. He once almost broke a girlfriend's neck by throwing her into a bathtub. He once beat up another girlfriend at his own birthday party... and tried to strangle her later the same night. He once attacked yet another girlfriend with a big-ass knife and cut off her hair. And he once attacked a former employer with a big-ass knife, an offense for which he was, in fact, on probation when the murders were committed.

* Jason and Nicole were known to go on casual dinner and dancing dates, and some people in their circle reported suspicions Jason had developed (presumably unrequited) romantic feelings for her. Apparently the night of the murders, Nicole and family was supposed to go visit the restaurant that Jason worked at. They, of course, cancelled and ended up at another restaurant. When they cancelled, Jason supposedly left work pissed a bit early that night... a good 45 mins. prior to the murders. If, say, he went to confront Nicole and ran into her with Ron, maybe the !@#$ hit the fan?

* Jason and O.J. were often at odds. Jason once snapped and attacked a statue of his father with a baseball bat. If this is true, Jason's feelings for Nicole probably exacerbated the strife between the two and, if Jason committed the crimes, not only might he have done it with the initial intent of implicating O.J., but he would have had access to virtually anything in O.J.'s possession -- like clothes, shoes, gloves... even his Bronco, all of which he was known to use at will.

* Ron and Nicole were likely killed with a big-ass chef's knife. Well, chef Jason was known to own a set of his own big-ass chef's knives that he usually kept with him. (More on that later.)

* When asked his whereabouts at the time of the murders, Jason first said he worked late that night (but co-workers eventually conceded that he had left early), then he said he was with his girlfriend (but she has said he wasn't), then he said he went home after work to watch TV.

* Several international crime scene experts were consulted, and while they generally support the notion that while O.J. was at the crime scene sometime that night, they say forensic evidence suggests a younger, stronger, more able-bodied man committed the murders.

* Jason was never questioned by police, and while O.J.'s fingerprints were not found at the scene, Jason's prints were never tested against the unknown prints there. And Jason's DNA would possibly have matched some of the blood evidence that was acquired.

* A day after the murders, O.J. is said to have retained a high-powered criminal attorney for Jason (purpose unknown); and Jason's psychiatrist was discovered to have shredded Jason's records.

Put this all together, and it's no slam dunk, but it does make you wonder.

Oh... and about Jason's knives: A while after the murders, the book's author was able to purchase a box of Jason's belongings that Jason had put in storage but (stupidly) failed to pay fees for. Inside the box were, among other things, pictures of Jason in a skull cap similar to the one cops say the assailant may have been wearing, a diary with entries around the time of the murder referring to him as a "Jeckyl and Hyde," who was "living in the year of the knife," and... yep, one of those big-ass knives, which experts say could have been the murder weapon.
[Edited 5/22/09 16:02pm]

Lammastide said:

Eh, it sounds like the guy is TRYING to link him with things he CAN'T really verify. In other words, he's reaching with a lof of his "conclusions" and really just making them sound like "good reasons".

savoirfaire said:

so everyone in that trial was just in it for themselves> he was under oath. i think you'd remember if OJ came into your store and bought a knife.

grade 7? another calgarian making me feel old

JustErin said:

I had real leather gloves and I wore them in rain and snow

emm said:

Haha, I think that the knife store owner was probably seeking attention....

Anyway, I remember that there was a point in time when the OJ simpson trial actually had its own cable channel in our area. It was called OJTV. I also remember, I think I was in grade 7 at the time....

our teacher stopped classes when they were ready to announce the verdict and we listened to it on the radio....

I mean, really, how crazy is that that a bunch of 12 year olds in Canada stopped classes mid-day so we could listen to the outcome of a celebrity murder trial?

Things were so ridiculous.

I know it seems obvious that he might have had a "motive" in the hand of the murders due to the relationship he had with Nicole... but from what I heard, he was on a plane minutes after the incident took place. And something else about his belongings being clean?

Anyone who remembers the 90s please help me clarify?

I always thought they wanted to pin it on OJ for his past spousal abuse.

MuthaFunka said:

It's all circumstantial, sure. But no moreso than the case built around O.J. (And, in fact, a LOT more incriminating.) The only hard evidence they had against O.J was a wee bit of blood on the gate... and assuming that wasn't planted (and I think we have little evidence to say it was), the extent to which it matched O.J. it could also have matched Jason. Unfortunately, we'll never know because the LAPD is too proud to even consider it.

Heck, give me the blood and unknown prints, a subpoena, 48 hours, and a nerd in a lab and I'll check just to shut people up. What's the big deal?
[Edited 5/22/09 17:07pm]

Cinnie said:

Actually from what I am reading, they said the reason he had cuts on the back of his left hand middle finger was BECAUSE he was not wearing the protective glove they found on the scene.

That's evidence?

Cinnie said:

Well, in that case the glove should be out of the question, shouldn't it? Not unless the police planted it there. Also, if the left glove was used in the crime scene, and he has cuts on the back of his hand, shouldn't there be cuts on the glove as well? Where is that glove? If he brought the glove with intent to committ a crime, and had those expensive shoes on, cut the victims without the glove on, then dropped it at her residence, then he should make the list as one of America's Dumbest Criminals. Also, I remembered that someone testified that they've seen two perpetrators dressed in black that night, but couldn't identify any of them as OJ.

angel345 said:

Not really. The glove could've come off during the struggle, thus making his now-bare hand susceptible to injury (i.e. cuts).

Cinnie said:

Did you try Wikipedia?

Would someone PLEASE explain to me what the big deal with the Bruno Magli shoes was? I ask this because as a former employee of Lord and Taylor, I owned several pairs of BM shoes, and the one's OJ had weren't that distinctive.....

Granted, my personal opinion is that if he didn't do it, he had his hands in it....

MuthaFunka said:

In that case, why was he acquitted in the criminal trial, and not the civil trial? To me, I thought it was strange.

MuthaFunka said:

Actually I don't know if the police were ONLY seeking him as a suspect, or if he knew that, I was just trying to see the situation from OJ's little point in hell. I think if someone was about to commit suicide because they were in crisis, they wouldn't want people to remember that saddening crisis. That's how I interpreted that.



Like how rare? Really expensive or just custom made or what? Was this discussed in the trial or people in the 90s were like "ooooh... Bruno Maglis" I actually never heard of them. I need the suspect to be carrying a rare vinyl record for it to have meaning to me. "What are the chances that OJ was photographed carrying a copy of Hung Up by Salt, and the same record turns up at the scene?"

MuthaFunka said:

Then why did they let him try it on?


A mystery I tell ya!

Cinnie said:

Bruno Magli shoes aren't rare at all. At least they weren't back then. They don't sell a bulk of styles in the US anymore, but you could buy them readily in upscale men's stores and Bruno Magli franchise stores in the 80s into the early 90's. They're a Bolognese based in Italy, but in the 80's their franchises were worldwide, and they could also be purchased in department stores like Saks 5th Avenue, Barney's New York, Neiman's, Bloomies, Nordstrom.... My dad used to buy those shoes, for somewhere around 150-175 bucks a pair. He always swore by his Bruno Maglis, and his Stacey Adams
[Edited 5/22/09 22:34pm]

About the shoes the thing no one is pointing out is not only were they a relatively rare make (Magli) and expensive for their time ($500+) but the shoe prints were Simpson's size (12)!!!

Throw that in the mix and it's kind of a game changer...

here is a great analysis = http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/1man.htm

.
[Edited 5/22/09 22:42pm]

Would someone PLEASE explain to me what the big deal with the Bruno Magli shoes was? I ask this because as a former employee of Lord and Taylor, I owned several pairs of BM shoes, and the one's OJ had weren't that distinctive.....

Granted, my personal opinion is that if he didn't do it, he had his hands in it....

I know it seems obvious that he might have had a "motive" in the hand of the murders due to the relationship he had with Nicole... but from what I heard, he was on a plane minutes after the incident took place. And something else about his belongings being clean?

Anyone who remembers the 90s please help me clarify?

MuthaFunka said:

I've not read the book either, but I just perused some stuff from it online. Check this out...

* Jason didn't exhibit "just violent behavior," he dealt with a clinically diagnosed Intermittent Explosive Disorder, for which he was medicated. He was known to snap and go completely apesh*t on folk since he was a kid. Just two months before the murder, he'd checked himself into Cedar-Sinai Hospital because he thought he was going to "rage" soon, but after released he is said to have refused his mood stabilizing medication.

* He tried to commit suicide once by stabbing himself with scissors; another time by slashing his wrists with broken glass; and another time by ODing on his meds. He once almost broke a girlfriend's neck by throwing her into a bathtub. He once beat up another girlfriend at his own birthday party... and tried to strangle her later the same night. He once attacked yet another girlfriend with a big-ass knife and cut off her hair. And he once attacked a former employer with a big-ass knife, an offense for which he was, in fact, on probation when the murders were committed.

* Jason and Nicole were known to go on casual dinner and dancing dates, and some people in their circle reported suspicions Jason had developed (presumably unrequited) romantic feelings for her. Apparently the night of the murders, Nicole and family was supposed to go visit the restaurant that Jason worked at. They, of course, cancelled and ended up at another restaurant. When they cancelled, Jason supposedly left work pissed a bit early that night... a good 45 mins. prior to the murders. If, say, he went to confront Nicole and ran into her with Ron, maybe the !@#$ hit the fan?

* Jason and O.J. were often at odds. Jason once snapped and attacked a statue of his father with a baseball bat. If this is true, Jason's feelings for Nicole probably exacerbated the strife between the two and, if Jason committed the crimes, not only might he have done it with the initial intent of implicating O.J., but he would have had access to virtually anything in O.J.'s possession -- like clothes, shoes, gloves... even his Bronco, all of which he was known to use at will.

* Ron and Nicole were likely killed with a big-ass chef's knife. Well, chef Jason was known to own a set of his own big-ass chef's knives that he usually kept with him. (More on that later.)

* When asked his whereabouts at the time of the murders, Jason first said he worked late that night (but co-workers eventually conceded that he had left early), then he said he was with his girlfriend (but she has said he wasn't), then he said he went home after work to watch TV.

* Several international crime scene experts were consulted, and while they generally support the notion that while O.J. was at the crime scene sometime that night, they say forensic evidence suggests a younger, stronger, more able-bodied man committed the murders.

* Jason was never questioned by police, and while O.J.'s fingerprints were not found at the scene, Jason's prints were never tested against the unknown prints there. And Jason's DNA would possibly have matched some of the blood evidence that was acquired.

* A day after the murders, O.J. is said to have retained a high-powered criminal attorney for Jason (purpose unknown); and Jason's psychiatrist was discovered to have shredded Jason's records.

Put this all together, and it's no slam dunk, but it does make you wonder.

Oh... and about Jason's knives: A while after the murders, the book's author was able to purchase a box of Jason's belongings that Jason had put in storage but (stupidly) failed to pay fees for. Inside the box were, among other things, pictures of Jason in a skull cap similar to the one cops say the assailant may have been wearing, a diary with entries around the time of the murder referring to him as a "Jeckyl and Hyde," who was "living in the year of the knife," and... yep, one of those big-ass knives, which experts say could have been the murder weapon.
[Edited 5/22/09 16:02pm]

Lammastide said:

Oh come on. They found OJ's blood at the scene. They didn't find Jason's. They found OJ's shoeprints at the scene. They didn't find Jason's. It was OJ's ex. Not Jason's. OJ fled. Not Jason. OJ wrote the suicide note. Not Jason. So you can't possibly tell me that OJ ONLY had circumstantial evidence against him. You think a judge is gonna give the go-ahead to try and convict on JUST circumstantial evidence? Not even.

I read some of the book and checked the author out. He's a master detective with impeccable credentials who did a six year investigation. He ain't no slouch.

At the very least his very plausible conclusions should have been looked at if the interests of justice are to be served. At this point the only interests being served has been CYA on the part of those involved.

Personally, I feel OJ was at the scene at some point but I do think that's only half the story.

angel345 said:

Because in a civil trial it doesn't as much proof to convict as does a criminal case takes.