kdogg36 said: "FLarnhill said: "Did they remove the Johnny Cochran reference? It seems the only people who were upset by that verdict were white people."
Funny thing is that I was bothered by the verdictat the time, but it didn't take me long to come to agree with it. The defense demonstrated that the officer on scene - the one who had authority over all of the physical evidence - was not only a bigot, but had lied under oathduring the trial about his bigotry. If that's not reasonable doubt in a trial where the defendent is Black, then I don't know what is."
Meanwhile, the civil trial had new evidence like pictures of OJ wearing "Bruno Magli" shoes which he denied owning in his testimony. Pair of those shoes left footprints at the crime scene. OJ was lucky as hell to have incompetent prosecuting lawyers and racist cop in the criminal trial. In civil case, the lawyers focused on the motive of domestic violence due to OJ's history of violence against his wife with police being called to the house. OJ lost civil case. Granted, burden of proof in civil case is lots lower. It was also believed that several of OJ's legal team in criminal trial (Cochran, Shapiro & Kardashian) thought he was guilty.
Updated On: 3/25/26 at 12:26 AM
