CA - O.J. Simpson & the murders of Nicole Brown, Ron Goldman, 1994 *not guilty*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

I think the Jason theory makes a lot of sense. I live in LA and lived in Brentwood area when Nicole was killed. It was ALWAYS a rumor and viable theory because of people who know and worked with him. He was nuts---had a violent temper, carried sharp knives and knew how to use them, and he HATED Nicole because of the pain she caused his mother. The night of the murders, he had been humiliated by Nicole and that was the last straw. It makes more sense that he would go off on her than the theory that OJ would have. JMO

http://blacksportsonline.com/home/2...kely-ojs-son-jason-killed-nicole-ron-goldman/
1- Ron Goldman fought for his life, OJ physically was breaking down and didn’t have any bruising on him.

Besides a small cut on his knuckle, OJ who was stripped naked by the LAPD had zero bruising on his body.

2- Jason Simpson had experience assaulting people with deadly weapons.

Jason had almost killed an ex-girlfriend with a knife, assaulted another girlfriend and came after his boss with a kitchen knife. He was trained in hand-to-hand combat as well as field knife training while attending the Army and Navy Academy. OJ also was squeamish around blood and there was a lot of blood at the scene.

3- Jason was off his antipsychotic meds at the time.

4- The physical evidence matches Jason more than OJ, but the LAPD never followed up.

DNA was found under Nicole’s fingernails that didn’t match OJ’s, but they never tested it against Jason’s DNA.

etc etc etc...
 
katydid23 said:
DNA was found under Nicole’s fingernails that didn’t match OJ’s, but they never tested it against Jason’s DNA.

etc etc etc...
Click to expand...

There is no doubt OJ did it. The DNA under her fingernails was hers.
 
It was definitely a WTH moment when I saw it!!!! The son could have been involved possible fighting off Ron Goldman while oj attacked Nicole that could explain why oj didn't have any marks on his body and how Goldman had the defensive wounds inflicting them on the son maybe this could shed new light on the case I still firmly believe oj Simpson is guilty and is where he belongs!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Where the Jason theory breaks down, for me, is that OJ was only about OJ-24/7/365. No way in hell he's going to sit in jail and risk his life and lifestyle for his unstable son from his first marriage.
Also Arnelle and Jason were reportedly very fond of Nicole.
JMO but OJ did this alone then raced back to be driven to the airport so he could use the trip as his alibi.
 
TexMex said:
Where the Jason theory breaks down, for me, is that OJ was only about OJ-24/7/365. No way in hell he's going to sit in jail and risk his life and lifestyle for his unstable son from his first marriage.
Also Arnelle and Jason were reportedly very fond of Nicole.
JMO but OJ did this alone then raced back to be driven to the airport so he could use the trip as his alibi.
Click to expand...

You may be right about all of the above---but one thing I am not in agreement with. It is not true that Jason was 100% fond of Nicole.

He was very torn because of his mother's painful situation. His Mom did not stand up for herself legally and financially when OJ divorced her. And she ended up in bad financial straits, and bad health---while Nicole was living very well. Jason felt guilt and pain surrounding that situation. He tried to stay friendly with Nicole because he wanted to stay on good side with his dad. But he had simmering anger/resentment. Some say he was also very attracted to Nicole and that messed his head up as well.

But he felt humiliated and insulted when Nicole did what she did that night. He had told everyone at his restaurant, where he was a chef, that his father was coming to a family party that night, at the restaurant. And he was severely embarrassed when Niciole changed to another restaurant, with little explanation. He was livid.

Jason had a history of threatening and attacking people with knives. OJ did not.
 
katydid23 said:
You may be right about all of the above---but one thing I am not in agreement with. It is not true that Jason was 100% fond of Nicole.

He was very torn because of his mother's painful situation. His Mom did not stand up for herself legally and financially when OJ divorced her. And she ended up in bad financial straits, and bad health---while Nicole was living very well. Jason felt guilt and pain surrounding that situation. He tried to stay friendly with Nicole because he wanted to stay on good side with his dad. But he had simmering anger/resentment. Some say he was also very attracted to Nicole and that messed his head up as well.

But he felt humiliated and insulted when Nicole did what she did that night. He had told everyone at his restaurant, where he was a chef, that his father was coming to a family party that night, at the restaurant. And he was severely embarrassed when Niciole changed to another restaurant, with little explanation. He was livid.

Jason had a history of threatening and attacking people with knives. OJ did not.
Click to expand...

Not buying the speculation of anger at (it was OJ who cheated on his mother and was responsible for divorce financial arrangements, not Nicole) or killing her because Dear theorizes he was humiliated because dinner plans changed last minute.
OJ had a history of abusing people...mostly the murder victim, his wife Nicole.

Article about Dear (kinda a stalker imo)

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/bill-dear-is-full-of-it-and-i-can-prove-it-6684433
 
TexMex said:
Not buying the speculation of anger at (it was OJ who cheated on his mother and was responsible for divorce financial arrangements, not Nicole) or killing her because Dear theorizes he was humiliated because dinner plans changed last minute.
OJ had a history of abusing people...mostly the murder victim, his wife Nicole.

Article about Dear (kinda a stalker imo)

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/bill-dear-is-full-of-it-and-i-can-prove-it-6684433
Click to expand...

OJ cheated on his wife WITH Nicole. And his wife was feeling shamed and mortified that her husband left her for a young, pretty white woman. That had to hurt Jason very much in terms of his mother's pain. And he felt guilty for caring for and hanging out with Nicole and OJ. It is hard for the kids being in the middle of all that. Jason mom was depressed and living in a rundown apartment in the bay area. Nicole was living in an upscale townhouse in Brentwood.

And it was MORE than just dinner plans. Jason had made a big deal of the dinner party at his work that day. He cooked an ambitious meal, planned for it all day. Talked it up to this coworkers. His famous father and his family were all going to eat the meal he had prepared for them. Then NO ONE CALLED HIM to cancel. That would be very insulting and embarrassing in front of your bosses and coworkers.

Oj did have a history of abuse. But never with knives or guns. Mostly, he shoved people around, slapped them, scared them, insulted them, mocked them.

Jason attacked people with KNIVES previously. Very different than OJ's previous history.
 
I watched the show, but I am not buying the "Jason" did it theory! Like Detective Lang said, the only blood at the scene belonged to OJ, Nicole, and Ron Goldman. The crime scene was brutal and bloody. So, I am puzzled as to why there was not more blood in the Ford Bronco belonging to OJ. Not saying that Jason couldn't have been involved somehow. I read that Dear has been pitching this story for a long time. Are the networks running out of "new" stories, or do they want to focus on "high profile cases" so more people will tune in for higher ratings?
 
katydid23 said:
OJ cheated on his wife WITH Nicole. And his wife was feeling shamed and mortified that her husband left her for a young, pretty white woman. That had to hurt Jason very much in terms of his mother's pain. And he felt guilty for caring for and hanging out with Nicole and OJ. It is hard for the kids being in the middle of all that. Jason mom was depressed and living in a rundown apartment in the bay area. Nicole was living in an upscale townhouse in Brentwood.

And it was MORE than just dinner plans. Jason had made a big deal of the dinner party at his work that day. He cooked an ambitious meal, planned for it all day. Talked it up to this coworkers. His famous father and his family were all going to eat the meal he had prepared for them. Then NO ONE CALLED HIM to cancel. That would be very insulting and embarrassing in front of your bosses and coworkers.

Oj did have a history of abuse. But never with knives or guns. Mostly, he shoved people around, slapped them, scared them, insulted them, mocked them.

Jason attacked people with KNIVES previously. Very different than OJ's previous history.
Click to expand...

Jason's mom had moved on and didn't seem to be suffering from the divorce from OJ so many years past. She married again in 1986 and divorced in 1991. She married a third time in 1992, two years prior to Nicole's murder.
Iirc the dinner was canceled on June 11by Nicole telling Jason she was sorry but decided to eat at a less expensive restaurant which was closer to the recital.
OJ was a convicted wife abuser who owned knives. His blood was at the crime scene along with his Bruno Mali shoe prints.
 
TexMex said:
Iirc the dinner was canceled on June 11by Nicole telling Jason she was sorry but decided to eat at a less expensive restaurant which was closer to the recital.
OJ was a convicted wife abuser who owned knives. His blood was at the crime scene along with his Bruno Mali shoe prints.
Click to expand...

Right, she may have cancelled, but he was still upset at the situation. But it was just the final straw.

I agree Oj's blood was at the scene, and he was there in his Bruno Malis. But I think Jason was there too.
 
katydid23 said:
You may be right about all of the above---but one thing I am not in agreement with. It is not true that Jason was 100% fond of Nicole.

He was very torn because of his mother's painful situation. His Mom did not stand up for herself legally and financially when OJ divorced her. And she ended up in bad financial straits, and bad health---while Nicole was living very well. Jason felt guilt and pain surrounding that situation. He tried to stay friendly with Nicole because he wanted to stay on good side with his dad. But he had simmering anger/resentment. Some say he was also very attracted to Nicole and that messed his head up as well.

But he felt humiliated and insulted when Nicole did what she did that night. He had told everyone at his restaurant, where he was a chef, that his father was coming to a family party that night, at the restaurant. And he was severely embarrassed when Niciole changed to another restaurant, with little explanation. He was livid.

Jason had a history of threatening and attacking people with knives. OJ did not.
Click to expand...

Hello Katydid. I am so glad someone is talking about the show last night.

I watched the two episodes last night and it was the first I even knew about another son.

I had no idea he had an older boy. It was an interesting show and I am anxious to watch the rest of the series.

IMO its early yet for me to conclude much but right now at this point I have to say that I think its possible a 2nd person was there during the murders but so far I didnt think they showed any real evidence of that. If anything I thought the evidence they tried to show was pointing the other way.

The shoe prints didnt really convince me too much when the detective said the pattern matched Rons clothes. I did find it strange why they didnt show the clothes then. If it matched the clothes pattern then we should have seen what the clothes looked like. So that was inconclusive to me because I am not sure what the sideways lines in the blood could be from. It could be other shoe prints or it could be clothes. I did think I saw an outline of another shoe when they had it circled. Have to rule it inconclusive right now.

Lee is definiltey paid during trials so I take what he says with a grain of salt whenever I hear him. LOL But he made a great point that they should have done the extra testing. Not sure why LE would not let the original investigation go through with that.

Finding the presence of the extra chemical in the blood was a big deal to me. It should not have been there. I didnt like the way that LE seemed to get upset about the blood allegations and yet he didnt provide any real reason why the blood should be missing.

When he said loudly and meanly something like "Do you really think investigators are going around sprinkling a little blood out at a crime scene to further prove the case?"
I was like "Yeah its possible and I would not put it past them". LOL

I was waiting for him to tell me why it couldnt have happened and he had no answer for the extra chemical, the missing blood, and why the investigator brought the blood back to the crime scene. It should have been held in the lab.

Then the knife. This is where if anything the knife showed it wasnt the knife used at the crime scene. Hardly any other blood on the knife and what little they found was in the threads. Easily could have been from hunting years ago whoever owned it before he ever bought it.
Plus the biggie about the single edge wounds pointed to a single edged knife and they had a two edged knife. So unless there is more about the knife I have to outrule the knife at this point.

The hat. This was the most compelling for what they were alleging. Not solid proof but I will give them circumstantial evidence. The pictures sure looked like a similar hat and unless OJ was ever seen with a hat on like that it was pretty interesting.

So in conclusion for right now I have to wait on more episodes but I am leaning towards they did not show much to convince me of anything. I am not yet convinced there even was a 2nd person there.

I am anxious to watch more shows on this. It was interesting and glad there is discussion on the show.

Thanks for pointing out about the dinner date. I hope they bring up that in another show. Sounds very interesting.
 
Oh and I was so happy to see Derrick from Big Brother fame. I am a huge Big Brother fan and I watched his season. He is a real nice guy. I like his partner on this show too. They both seem honest and trying to do their investigation of this the right way.
 
The EDTA, for example, was pure defense spin and debunked at trial

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/26/us/fbi-disputes-simpson-defense-on-tainted-blood.html

"Everyone is saying that I found EDTA, but I am not saying that," said Mr. Martz, chief of the F.B.I.'s chemistry toxicology unit, with a hint of frustration. "I was asked to determine whether those blood stains came from preserved blood. Those blood stains did not come from preserved blood."

Mr. Simpson's lawyers had to call Mr. Martz because he conducted the experiments about which Dr. Frederic Rieders, an expert for the defense, testified on Monday. Although Mr. Martz technically was one of their own, from the outset Mr. Simpson's lawyers attacked him.

Mr. Martz conceded to Robert Blasier, a lawyer for Mr. Simpson, that blood found on the sock and the gate shared some of the physical properties and molecular characteristics of EDTA. In highly technical language that left even the lawyers tripping over their tongues, he said the blood samples "responded like EDTA responded" and "was consistent with the presence of EDTA."

Analyzing Mr. Martz's data on Monday, Dr. Rieders said the two blood samples did contain EDTA. But Mr. Martz said Dr. Rieders had jumped to conclusions in what he called a "very dangerous" fashion. While one test revealed some of the same ions as EDTA, he said, two others precluded its presence.

"It is not appropriate to identify EDTA based on the data I have provided for the sock and the gate," he testified.
 
TexMex said:
The EDTA, for example, was pure defense spin and debunked at trial

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/26/us/fbi-disputes-simpson-defense-on-tainted-blood.html

"Everyone is saying that I found EDTA, but I am not saying that," said Mr. Martz, chief of the F.B.I.'s chemistry toxicology unit, with a hint of frustration. "I was asked to determine whether those blood stains came from preserved blood. Those blood stains did not come from preserved blood."

Mr. Simpson's lawyers had to call Mr. Martz because he conducted the experiments about which Dr. Frederic Rieders, an expert for the defense, testified on Monday. Although Mr. Martz technically was one of their own, from the outset Mr. Simpson's lawyers attacked him.

Mr. Martz conceded to Robert Blasier, a lawyer for Mr. Simpson, that blood found on the sock and the gate shared some of the physical properties and molecular characteristics of EDTA. In highly technical language that left even the lawyers tripping over their tongues, he said the blood samples "responded like EDTA responded" and "was consistent with the presence of EDTA."

Analyzing Mr. Martz's data on Monday, Dr. Rieders said the two blood samples did contain EDTA. But Mr. Martz said Dr. Rieders had jumped to conclusions in what he called a "very dangerous" fashion. While one test revealed some of the same ions as EDTA, he said, two others precluded its presence.

"It is not appropriate to identify EDTA based on the data I have provided for the sock and the gate," he testified.
Click to expand...

Thanks Tex. That helps.

When I listen to shows like they had on I try to be careful to really listen to what is being said and its hard sometimes because we don't always get a lot of background on how they got to their statements.

Things can be innocently twisted or misconstrued by accident or sometimes because we have a predisposed bias opinion that we want to see validated.

One example where I thought that happened was when Derricks partner Kris seemed shocked that nobody interviewed the son of OJ. But at least 2 or 3 times I heard the other people on the show say they did try to interview him but he lawyered up and would not cooperate.
So its not like LE failed back then in trying to interview him and Kris made it seem that way.

We have to be very careful when we listen and also if we have background information ourselves that we can find like you found it can really help us form our own conclusions.
 
Hatfield said:
Thanks Tex. That helps.

When I listen to shows like they had on I try to be careful to really listen to what is being said and its hard sometimes because we don't always get a lot of background on how they got to their statements.

Things can be innocently twisted or misconstrued by accident or sometimes because we have a predisposed bias opinion that we want to see validated.

One example where I thought that happened was when Derricks partner Kris seemed shocked that nobody interviewed the son of OJ. But at least 2 or 3 times I heard the other people on the show say they did try to interview him but he lawyered up and would not cooperate.
So its not like LE failed back then in trying to interview him and Kris made it seem that way.

We have to be very careful when we listen and also if we have background information ourselves that we can find like you found it can really help us form our own conclusions.
Click to expand...

Agree. These new "investigators" keep moving the time of death to 9:59pm. They keep referencing that exact time because Nicole's watch was photographed at 9:59.
They keep doing this despite Det. Lange telling them that the watch picture was taken at the coroner office at 9:59AM the day after the murder.
Det. Lange even showed them his notes from the crime scene where he noted Nicole's watch was operating....NOT broken.
This "investigation" is imo just sensationalism trying to capitalize on the successful recent TV series and specials about this crime. It's told in similar fashion to the recent JBR special which named a new suspect.
JMO but they could soon face a lawsuit like the one Burke Ramsey filed for 750M against the program which named him as the killer of his sister.
 
I believe they will do a complete turnabout at the end and say Jason is not guilty. THat way they avoid the lawsuit but got the ratings.
 
TexMex said:
Agree. These new "investigators" keep moving the time of death to 9:59pm. They keep referencing that exact time because Nicole's watch was photographed at 9:59.
They keep doing this despite Det. Lange telling them that the watch picture was taken at the coroner office at 9:59AM the day after the murder.
Det. Lange even showed them his notes from the crime scene where he noted Nicole's watch was operating....NOT broken.
This "investigation" is imo just sensationalism trying to capitalize on the successful recent TV series and specials about this crime. It's told in similar fashion to the recent JBR special which named a new suspect.
JMO but they could soon face a lawsuit like the one Burke Ramsey filed for 750M against the program which named him as the killer of his sister.
Click to expand...

The show is a scam. Kind of sad some people are hearing details about this case for the first time and will come away with totally false info. Henry Lee is desperately trying to justify his bought and paid for testimony about nonsense. What OJ proved is that with enough money you can manipulate the system. Nevada proved it does not always work.
 
So far all this show has done is remind me of how guilty O.J. is.

The sleuthing is kind of sad, too. They spent a bunch of time on the time card, had a witness say that the cooks only stayed until 9:30 on Sundays not 10:30 as was written in. But if you look at the card, the last time entry was the following Sunday and Jason was there until 10:20. Sheesh folks, really?

The broken watch, as mentioned by others above, was clearly not an issues though the whole Jason did it theory seems to rely on it. Even the the detective explains that the time was the following morning and he has even written "operable" in his notes from 20+ years ago.

Frankly this show is pretty much garbage. "let's ignore all of the evidence, come up with a theory that has no supporting evidence, then drag the son's name through the muck for 6 hours." If I was Jason, I'd be talking to a lawyer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 228 (members: 67, guests: 161)

Online statistics

Members online
67
Guests online
161
Total visitors
228
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,901
Messages
18,247,468
Members
234,496
Latest member
Alex03
Back
Top