CA Ronald Lyle Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson found dead June 12 1994

  • #41
  • #42
what in the cuckoopants is going on in this thread?

thirsty lol... (not you @sds71)
 
  • #43
OJ Simpson is likely to avoid paying the families due to a tax lien against his estate

American Manhunt: O.J Simpson features exclusive new interviews with key figures involved in the trial, including former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman, defence attorney Carl Douglas, prosecutor Christopher Darden, and Ron Goldman’s sister, Kim.The series comes to Netflix on January 29.

 
  • #44
OJ Simpson is likely to avoid paying the families due to a tax lien against his estate

American Manhunt: O.J Simpson features exclusive new interviews with key figures involved in the trial, including former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman, defence attorney Carl Douglas, prosecutor Christopher Darden, and Ron Goldman’s sister, Kim.The series comes to Netflix on January 29.

I'm watching this right now.
 
  • #45
  • #46
Photo of Robert Kardashian, O.J. Simpson

Insiders claim Robert Kardashian Sr. helped O.J. Simpson hide crucial evidence in his wife and Ron Goldman's murder case.

Following the one-year death anniversary of O.J. Simpson, the disgraced NFL star's close friend and attorney Robert Kardashian Sr., has been accused of helping him get away with the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.

Insiders claimed while Simpson acted vile, Kardashian betrayed his oath to the justice system by allegedly destroying key pieces of evidence in the double murder case.
 
  • #47
I can’t believe that the netflix documentary actually made me cry on OJ:s behalf. Such pathetic narcissism.

He loved her, but his personality disorder(s) got the best of him. Not sure he was a sociopath because he seems to have some actual feelings here and there. And he wasn’t a great actor.
 
  • #48
Ms. Shively and Mr. Heidstra each had witnessed between 10:40 P.M. to 10:50 P.M.; an irate person(s); a vehicle being driven similar to someone in a rush. The vehicle Ms. Shively saw was driving North on Bundy as opposed to the vehicle Mr. Heidstra saw that was driving South on Bundy. Both vehicles were traveling away from Ms. Simpson's neighborhood.

Mr. Heidstra testified he left 10:15 P.M. from his residence to walk his dogs. Mr. Heidstra went East on Dorothy and then turned to his left and went North on Westgate. Then Mr. Heidstra turned to his left and went West on Gorham. At Gorham and Bundy, Mr. Heidstra heard Ms. Simpson's dog barking hysterically at 10:30 P.M. to 10:35 P.M. Mr. Heidstra decided to avoid Bundy Street and turn back and go to a nearby alley that runs parallel to the East of Bundy. As Mr. Heidstra proceeded South in the alley, he heard two male voices which appeared to be arguing and then a gate being "slammed"(closed in a loud and forceful manner) at 10:40 P.M.

Also, Mr. Heidstra testified as he reached the end of the alley, he turned to his left and went East a few houses and turned and looked backed toward Bundy at 10:45 P.M. Mr. Heidstra saw a vehicle coming out of a dark area on Dorothy and turning to their right or South onto Bundy. The driver appeared to be in a hurry which was stated by Mr. Heidstra. Mr. Heidstra thought he saw a wagon car or a jeep. And then he further added that it might have been a Chevrolet Blazer or Jeep Cherokee(See Image Heidstra).

Mr. Heidstra's description of the vehicle is quite general. I saw only three consistencies in his observation of the vehicle: 1) The color of the vehicle was a light color, possibly white
2) The vehicle was wagon-like, meaning the roof extended over the trunk of the car
3) The vehicle went South onto Bundy Street and the quick acceleration of the vehicle
Hey OP I think your like of inquiry has merit as it is similar to how I am approaching this case where I argue ojs present at or near the crime scene doesn’t automatically mean guilt of commuting the murders. Many people assume the forensic evidence means oj is guilty of commiting the murders and while that is probably true I want to challenge that assumption. The forensic evidence proves oj was there at the crime scene but doesn’t prove what he did there. He might have been present at the crime scene that night but we don’t know if oj was the killer an accessory a conspirator or a witness. While I think oj probably did it since that’s the most logical conclusion. I think we also shouldn’t dismiss alternate theories out of hand. Especially since the main theory has some issues with it as well like no murder weapon being found or the lack of bruises on oj for example.
 
  • #49
Not guilty verdict 30 yrs. ago today.
 
  • #50
Wild there are people in this thread who think he’s innocent. Y’all exist???
 
  • #51

O.J. Simpson's estate agreed to pay nearly $58 million to Ron Goldman’s father, decades after the former NFL star was acquitted of murdering him and Simpson's ex-wife.

Fred Goldman filed a creditor claim in July 2024, originally seeking just over $117 million, after a civil jury found Simpson liable for the June 1994 deaths of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson, and ordered him to pay millions of dollars in damages.
....
LaVergne told NBC News that the value of Simpson’s estate is between $500,000 and $1 million. He said the estate will pay Goldman what they can after administrative expenses and the IRS is paid. At the time of Simpson's death, he owed money to the IRS.
 
  • #52
Wild there are people in this thread who think he’s innocent. Y’all exist???
He was found not guilty. So yeah they do exist. He may have been guilty but it wasn’t proven in criminal court. Personally I’m not sure if he was guilty or innocent. I could see why someone would think he is guilty or innocent. I think there were real problems with the prosecutions case and the defense did a good job raising reasonable doubt.
 
Last edited:
  • #53
Wild there are people in this thread who think he’s innocent. Y’all exist???
I’ve met a few in real life too. Very few.

The ESPN 30 For 30 documentary series on OJ goes a good job in explaining how the not guilty verdict was possible despite substantial evidence.
 
  • #54
The lead detective pled the 5th which meant he couldn't be cross-examined. I'm not seeing how this doesn't open the window to reasonable doubt. I BTW think a different jury could have come to a different decision. I'm not seeing how THIS jury was wrong though.
 
  • #55
I totally get why the trail happened the way that it did, it’s wild to me that in hindsight, with everything we know now, that people still find him innocent
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
1,675
Total visitors
1,774

Forum statistics

Threads
635,369
Messages
18,674,571
Members
243,182
Latest member
lbowen808
Back
Top