Originally posted by Jim Marrs
Deals were made and the prosecution (which even I could have better conducted) lobbed softballs -- critical points were not pursued, the evidence came
into question and the entire trial was turned into a circus.
Considering the half-baked prosecution case, I think most any fair minded individual would have agreed with the "not guilty" verdict -- reasonable
doubt and all that.
The scenario that you are talking about could very well have played out just as you said. It would fit the well established fact (in CT circles) that
the inverted ethical and moral values of American officialdom just never bottom out.
In spite of accepting that, there are solid reasons to question the popular perception, as William C. Dear does in the second linked video. Here are
two of them:
1. The forensic lab people were not able to match the blood at the crime scene to O.J. Simpson with 100% certainly. That is a staggering blow to the
prosecution, especially when another Simpson family member enters the picture as a suspect. The sort of match they were able to make is more along the
lines that one would expect from a blood relative of O.J.s.
It would be very interesting if they were to try to match his
blood with the crime scene blood.
2. Ronald Coleman was stabbed 19 times. It took ex-NFL star running back, O.J. Simpson, 19 cuts to take care of a young, in good shape, pretty boy. I
know O.J. was not Mean Joe Green, but anyone as used to body contact rough housing as an NFL football player, is going to be more efficient and quick
at subduing and dispatching Joe Public.
William Dear and several other experts have other serious doubts about the Simpson case. I think they are onto something.
It occurred to me that there might be a conspiracy in place in regard to not pursuing
this case. It is still an open case. In light of the
blood evidence quandary, and Jason Simpson's "issues" it would seem logical for the authorities to attempt to obtain a DNA sample from him for
comparison purposes. As far as I know it is not happening. Why could that be?
Here's a suggestion. Suppose the LAPD pursued a case against "the overlooked suspect" and got enough evidence to convict him. Suppose he were put
on trial and convicted. Imagine the field day O.J.s attornies would have suing various Hollywood luminaries who have committed themselves on film
calling him a murderer. And not only suing them but also the broadcasters who spread the now demonstrable libels.
Suddenly we are back in conspiracy territory that most CTers recognize. Big media getting away with media murder. Something to ponder.
[edit on 6-2-2008 by ipsedixit]