It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


O.J. is Innocent

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by calcoastseeker

oh thanx, this post is about the videos, the evidence being with held or suppressed from the public, and possibly even from the families. Thanks, the general public hasn't really been given all the evidence, so most of the time, I really can't get mad at people for saying they think he is guilty. I don't care if you post here and you think he did it, but It's almost predictable at this point. People are already out of hand here, not you. With that Oh I can't post here stuff, the holier than thou, so If I think he did then I can't post stuff, and for our own good, this is a discussion forum you can't tell me I can't post here stuff. Thanks for asking, and I hope you read the thread as well. You can hide here anytime.
I just meant they should go start an I think O.J. did it thread, or a I wanna blame Jason thread, or an I want O.J.'s money, and I don't wanna marry him thread.
It's just that we all know already that you all so many think he's guilty, and we don't care. The people who think he's innocent never get to say or even discuss it at all without having to hear all the other stuff.
If this is a discussion thread, then why can't people who think he's innocent discuss it without being attacked. Why do so many people feel the need to even come to this thread at all then. I come to this site a lot, and I don't comment on every thread. If I wanted to hear babies crying, I'd have a kid. This isn't the breaking news forum either. So many people on this site just want to fight. What do they expect, posting in at an O.J. is innocent thread? Why can't they fight their negative urges? I think they should give up, and turn themselves in, because they aren't heros. I'm guessing the next reply will be/////So I guess we can't be friends anymore then just because I think he's guilty.

posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 12:16 AM
reply to post by calcoastseeker

For sure. This is old stuff. OJ was found innocent in a court of law. No criminal activity on his part at that time and place. A later civil suit found him responsible and he is paying a price for that. I do have a feeling though, that if OJ had been found guilty at the criminal trial, there could have been some devastating consequences, such as riotuous behavior. Perhaps that's where the real conspiracy lies? Just saying, just wondering.

Let's move on to other conspiracies, like Michelle Obama is a transvestite.
or if you transpose images of Shelly Obama's torso upon the face of of Arsenio Hall and reverse either one of them by 180 degrees, they form a perfect trianagle with no overlaps. Oh! Sheesh! They are triangle aliens of some sort of reptilian ancestory! Yikes!

Or GWB is reptile or Obama is a cross between a Kenyan and an elephant.
Hmmmm. wait, does anybody recall how in 2007 that Barack Obama's nose looked similar to a Proboscis Monkey's nose and now it's much shorter? Or how about the prophetic vision of the creator of Mad Magazine who saw into the future and saw the "What, me worry?" vision of GWB as Alfred E. Neuman?

I have a very dear friend who is black, Just saying. While we can't seem to meet on some occasions politically, or philosophically, we agree on some things. We are glad we are out of "the bushes", we agree that Jesse Jackson is a sham artist, we agree Rodney King got a bad rap, we agree Thomas Jefferson was an asshole, but he had a good idea with having sex with his slave, after all, if you go black, you never want to come back,

and, OJ killed them folks, but it was a sort of victory for the American Black community that he got off, however, OJ should not be able to afford to go around killing people. We also agree that his mixed children are very good looking. We both agree that we both should look as good as most mixed kids, of whatver racial heritage.

Meanwhile, OJ killed them there folks. Or not. It matters not to us. It's OJ's problem and he will eventually need to address this situation to "the whatever". It's all on him. It's over,folks. Long been over. Get over it. Let's address more pertinent problems that effect all of us.

posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 01:15 AM
I used to think that OJ was guilty as sin, but now I also think the son did it.

posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by buds84

Oh, the Old Testament. Yeah,let's quote from something that was derived from the loins of Satan.That's a great idea!!

posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:52 PM
First, I would like to say I am not one to say anyone is guilty or innocent even after seeing the evidence in many Murder cases and trials. I never think the evidence is enough to convict many Murderers, but the Jurors do the best with the evidence they have, and some of the reasoning behind some convictions is similiar to what we are seeing with most people. They THINK the murderer did it. Most people think OJ committed the murders. Now, to say the Police conspired to set OJ up for the murders is no more ridiculous than to say the Jurors conspired to set him free. One thing is for sure. It is more likely that some of the Police Department did plant evidence than ALL of the jurors conspired to set him free. The evidence. OJ was a control freak. He was obsessed. That was never going to work. I think the Defense team had little if any problem establishing, to the Jury, that OJ Simpson was a sensible and intelligent man and not a emotional, controlling school boy. The rest of the evidence was very simple. It was not the evidence itself. IT WAS THE LACK OF EVIDENCE AND THE WAY THE EVIDENCE WAS MISHANDLED. There was not enough blood where there should have been and too much blood where there should not have been. Lack of evidence: investigators did not seek to determine the time of Goldman's death by reviewing the contents of his stomach. Lack Of Evidence: investigators did not seek to determine the time of death by reviewing the contents of of the Frozen Ice Cream Cup. Were Nicole Brown's fingerprints on this Ice Cream Cup. Was it still frozen? I can go on and on but this type of eveidence is usually evident in most Murder trials. The Defense Team had little if any problem distracting the Jurors from the blood evidence and getting them to think more about the
conspiracy to convict OJ Simpson. Whether everyone wants to believe it or not, that is exactly what happened and they have most of this country still believing that OJ did commit the murders. Even after his acquittal. It was a conspiracy whether he did it or not.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 05:01 PM
So, maybe the real conspiracy was to set him up to APPEAR guilty in the eyes of the public. Since most people who watched the trial worked and couldn't see all testimony just watched what was broadcast by the MSM, the public perception was altered to guilty.

Here you have the LAPD and the MSM setting him up and trying to convict him, but the jury unable to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt due to lack of evidence and prejudice w/i the law enforcement system. So he's found Not Guilty and turned loose back into a society which now sees him as a guilty man set free and ruined for life.

I find this argument compelling, especially since this is what was done to Michael Jackson and the accusations of molestation against him. Considering Roman Polanski (a white Hollywood producer) ADMITTED to raping a 13 yr old girl (drugging, raping and sodomizing), then fleeing the country to avoid prison, there is a HUGE double-standard in the U.S.A. And the three situations make California law enforment & justice system appear very racist.

What is damning to O.J., is the fact he wrote a book titled "IF I Did It: Confessions of a Killer". Although the Goldman's now own the rights to the book, this is O.J. Simpson's original manuscript, approved by him, with up to 14,000 words of additional key commentary.

Therefore, IF he did not do it, then he KNOWS who did and is covering up for that person. Who would a man cover for? His own flesh and blood, of course.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 07:02 PM
To you, it may concern, you.

Do me a favor, watch the videos on my original post. This has nothing to with his children. Jason was not Ron and Nicole's coc aine dealer! We are not talking about the movie that blames Jason. There is evidence which concludes that glen rogers committed these murders. He was painting the house on the block. There are clear connections, which people deny. In our minds, people who blame Jason, are vengeful, it all it does is discredit what they still say to this day.
Question, why is everyone is miami saying jason did these crimes? Question, when O.J. found out where his families belongings were located and who had them, why, when he called the police did they do nothing? Why didn't they even do their job then, an get them back?
Assumption, ........ Maybe corrupt police officers broke into his house and stole them. The only thing it proves is that the police in florida are as corrupt as the police in california, or in texas even.
I know I posted a video entitled Goldman's get heckled at O.J. verdict, that's not the video I asked you to watch, but maybe you should go back and listen to the video of cnn coverage of the Goldman preach after the most recent verdict. Ron's dad clearly states, News is.....I didn't know O.J. called the Browns' after he got back the things that were stolen. All that shows is he doesn't even know what's going on.
What kind of example does this make to rookie police who want to do right. If you want to make sarcastic remarks about police stupidity, then go start a thread about Phil Gorrido. That guy kept kids in a tent in his backyard, and he's even photographed on google earth in his truck at a stop sign. I know what you mean though, where are these lines of reasoning coming from anyway. Who's on top? Who's really pulling the strings?
Is there some nationwide secret police commissioner or something? Who ever it is, they are pretty good AT MAKING compitent people look like they don't know what they're doing. Meanwhile, the people you'd think would know just donkey don't! Who is it that is being protected? Not jason. Why won't they just release the phone records that prove O.J. was in air on a plane on his way to Chicago, when Nicole Brown called her parents at 10:55. He was already on a plane.
Just do yourself a favor, if you believe in the truth and justice,.... then get a clue. I don't even blame Mark Ferman, or the police. Of coarse, the investigation was flawed at times, but the evidence they are talking about in the videos I posted weren't even found until after the investigation was concluded. It's catistrophic to watch evidence suppressed that actually finger the murderer, not jason. It's even more damaging to people's reputation to watch them defend a man on death row they don't even know. That family has been through enough. Blaming O.J.'s kid is just another tactic the opposition abuse. This situTION IS BORDERLINE FANATICAL, FANISANTICAL, AND INSANE. Like I said if you want to go bash the police then go start a thread about Phil.
What did you vote for Mike Bloomberg or something? Hey, I'll tell you what, you're out of order.....

You're like FRED flinstone driving around with bald feet, you.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 08:16 PM
why do people still care? this happened in the mid nineties. 15 years ago!

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 08:28 PM
Always thought this was drug related. It was known that the boyfriend dealt coke and sometimes people get in deep. Maybe he needed some cash and Nicole said no. Maybe she didn't know but wrong place wrong time.

Then the people who he owes don't care if there is someone else there they just need to send a message. From a logistical standpoint it would not make sense for OJ to do it like that.

I mean, if OJ is dumb enough to try to rob someone he sets up a meeting with do we think he could have pulled that off as clean as it was? No way.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 09:04 PM
I watched the vids in the OP and they don't do much to prove his innocence. However, I do feel he is innocent (he isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer) and feel the evidence pointing to Jason is overwhelming.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 09:23 PM
Look, Jason doesn't sell coc aine. He doesn't sell coc aine to niciole brown. He doesn't sell coc aine to ron goldman either. He doesn't paint houses for money. He doesn't move around alot to find work. He doesn't keep his diary in a storage unit. He didn't steal belonging from his father. Are you implying jason had O.J. running all over the place to get the families belongings back or something? Like I said, people who say it was jason are implying he stole all that stuff from the house. If he did it, and he's a man, then he would have told his dad.

Like I've said over and over, all the evidence is suppressed, so I don't get mad at the lack of interest or understanding. But if that's his dad, then he's got money, and he wouldn't have to steal that stuff, or sell it to his dad.

What you're saying is he stole things from his dad, that he would have gotten when his dad O.J. died anyway? What does he gain? Those things were sentimental to the entire family.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 10:12 PM
I recently had a conversation with a man who claims to be close friends with a former FBI agent/or politician (I can't remember, I had a lot to drink that night). Apparently this guy has the murder weapon stored at his huge ranch here in Texas and is either in the process of or is actually getting DNA tests done on the weapon.

It's my understanding that OJ's son commited the murder, which is why the glove didn't fit.

Of course, I have no idea if this guy was legit, he was a friend of a friend. So, it's a typical he said-she said.

The guy told me that the man with the weapon is also in the process of making a documentary to disclose his findings. We'll see.....


posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 10:13 PM
reply to post by 517.101

It helps to know whose post you are specifically replying to so the 'we' don't have to try and figure it out.

You want people who blame the police to start their own thread, well just WHO do you blame for people believing O.J. is guilty? The police? The D.A.? The relatives of the victims? The MSM? All of the above? None of the above? In 5 sentences or less, who is at fault for O.J. being put on trial and the real killer getting off? And why didn't the Akita bark if this was a stranger who did it? Did the dog become that familiar with the house painter in that time to trust and not bark, much less attack, the murderer? Cuz my Akita attacked someone she knew who entered my home w/o me present.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 10:26 PM
reply to post by 517.101

The documentary pointing the finger at Jason Simpson is very compelling, has more evidence, etc. I suggest you watch it.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 10:59 PM
reply to post by Nivcharah

Well, to touch on your dog theory, which is good, but everyone knows that dogs sense fear, and they bark. A man with a weapon doesn't fear a dog.I don't fear a dog, I'd break it's jaw, I'm an unarmed man.
I don't blame anyone for the trial.
He was charged in the very first days after, and as time went on more evidence concluded it wasn't him. It's nobody's fault. That's the problem. We want the murderer convicted of these crimes, that's it. No fault, no harm, no annimosity.

For a while people thought it was the cook at the restaraunt.

The reply to the other poster about the knife, and the dna test, Watch the link, a knife has been recovered, with a dairy in a storage unit, that's what we're discussing in this thread. They were Glen rogers' items. The murder weapon has been found, along with diary entries.

The only thing we can blame the media for is for not following up on these findings. It's suspect how the media could place so much time on the trial, everyday, and yet somehow not report about the new evidence.

The glove don't fit jason either. Go back, look at his size, he wasn't a young kid. Someone broke into the house, took things, left behind the glove. Again?

You cannot blame the family, but the spotlight goes away as soon as the murderers' last name isn't simpson. This all goes away, including the spotlight, if they convict death row inmate glen rogers.

It's pretty bad when people can't even watch 3-8 minute utube videos on this thread. I will not spend any time watching a movie which implicates anyone other than Glen rogers. The evidence is suppressed in the media. Like I said, this all goes away, then. All the jokes, all the racism, all the propiganda.

I think O.J. knows Glen Rogers committed the murders. I think people who should know that either don't, or just won't accept it.

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 11:08 PM
I watched the clips you posted, they simply don't sway me to believe Jason didn't do the crime. Moreover, and this is very important, you're simply speaking from bias, and actively refusing to consider other alternatives i.e. not watching other videos, is very alarming.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by EMPIRE]

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 11:47 PM
reply to post by EMPIRE

Empire..... read my original post, this thread is a response to those videos, and that other thread.... simpson murders Revisited? Read it, don't just watch the videos. It's in my first post, you're just trolling, and you just got caught. It's you're bias, not mine. O.J. is innocent.

As memory serves me, that's what you're complaining about in your thread you called Atten ats members, stop or something. I'm still waiting for your reply. You're rude. You have plenty of time to come to my post, watch the videos, not read it, and then get caught trolling on something I said to someone else.
I must have meant you then, why don't you prove you haven't read my original post instead, not who I was replying to.

Stop being a hypicrite.

reply to my post in your thread.

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 01:39 AM

Originally posted by 517.101
reply to post by EMPIRE

Empire..... read my original post, this thread is a response to those videos, and that other thread....

I see where you mentioned the other thread, I don't see in your OP where you said it was a response to documentary showing evidence Jason commited the murders. I may have missed it, but would you be kind enough to post it, because I've read your OP twice now and don't see it, thanks.

simpson murders Revisited? Read it, don't just watch the videos. It's in my first post, you're just trolling, and you just got caught. It's you're bias, not mine. O.J. is innocent.

Dude you're on the deep end now. I read your post, I read the thread a member made here about OJ (I think I even replied in it), and I watched the documentary "OJ IS GUILTY BUT NOT OF MURDER." How am I trolling and how did I get "caught"? How am I showing bias when I already said I agree OJ is innocent?

As memory serves me, that's what you're complaining about in your thread you called Atten ats members, stop or something.

You're off topic now, so in order to keep you on topic in your own thread I won't address your statement.

I'm still waiting for your reply. You're rude.

See above and my apologies if I missed your post. My thread is seven or eight pages long, and you'll see I do my best to reply to everyone.

You have plenty of time to come to my post, watch the videos, not read it, and then get caught trolling on something I said to someone else.

I read your post, watched your vids and don't see anything convincing.

I must have meant you then, why don't you prove you haven't read my original post instead, not who I was replying to.

I read your OP, I simply don't see anything compelling about the OP or your claims that someone aside from Jason Simpson commited the murders.

Stop being a hypicrite.

I can't stop being something I'm obviously not.

reply to my post in your thread.


In closing, I would like for you to know thats ome of the people in the vids you posted are in the documentary I mentioned. If you want to close the door on other perspectives that's your right, but you're limiting yourself when you do it.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by EMPIRE]

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 01:36 PM
reply to post by EMPIRE

This is a conspiracy that we have all been made aparty to at this point. The dvd oj is guilty but not of murder, is like watching a world war documentary with d-day left out. I hope it's not the best we get, because the media spent way more time on this, and they as reporters owe us more.

Look, like I said people are dead, and belongings were stolen from the house and sold. IT'S silly to imply jason stole those things, and again to implicate him in the murders. The police can't figure out who bought them, or who they were sold too? Like I said, even when o.j. tracked down the belonging and called the police and the browns', the police wouldn't o anything, and they didn't o anything again. They spent even more police time buiding a case in las vegas, than to find out who took them.

We are owed more than chincy dvd's, and police who don't do anything, and a bias media. The point is, if there ever is an o.j. revisited, and a proper investigation is ever done, if it is proven it wasn't anyone named simpson, there would be riots, and it wouldn't be black people. It is extremely unrealistic to admit murders were committed, and a house was broken into, an not to admit a family is terrorized and still is by unresponsible, and unruly people who claim they want the truth. I'm really glad my quest for truth inspired you to write your post. That's all I want is to people to stop lying to themselves, and to stop settling for things, when they deserve better anyway.

O.j. is guilty is as to there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq. Bias, hearsay, denial of hard evidence, and fantasy. Again, jason didn't steal those things from his dad. Jason doesn't hand out with a housepainter and write in a dairy together about how they are going to kill. Jason doesn't have a storage unit with a knife in it. Jason doesn't sell coc aine. Jason doesn't stalk his own family. Jason isn't mad nicole was hanging around ron, the night after a date? Look, you'd have to admit it, even if that was your stepmother, why would you kill Ron? If she was my step mother I would probably have more of a problem with my mother dating Glen Rogers, the house painter, than Ron.
I hope I've inspired you to write another post. You're probably one of those people who are really mad they got the rights to a book called " If I Did It " . / Joke...I just can't identify with were you are coming from, or with the video, it's not satisfying, an I deserve better. You haven't even addressed the facts about about Glen Rogers in the dvd in any of you're just replied with bias about what you thought about jason, and then you acussed me of being bias. So think before you post, and don't forget, like you have already to tell this thread what you think about the glen rogers' evidence. I mean, he is the only reason a murder weapon was ever retrieved. I'm sure we'll hear from you soon, when you feel up to addressing the the glen rogers evidence.

Hey get back to us about that, we care alot about your bias and your opinion.

posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 10:42 PM
If you have a problem believing that OJ wanted his 2 young children to wake up and find their mother stabbed to death (as the prosecution case implies), then you should at least open your mind to other scenarios. I thought the Jason Simpson theory (OJ Simpson is guilty but not of murder, on Google videos) was plausible, but didn't completely tie everything together. I didn't realize that OJ hired a lawyer for Jason, but not for himself, that day.

I am not familiar with Glen Rogers, or the other theories.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in