Discussion:
Very doubtful OJ can get a fair trial. And what does the judge mean, to forget OJ's past?
(too old to reply)
i***@yahoo.com
2008-09-12 17:06:15 UTC
Permalink
He was found innocent in the Nicole trial. Also, and I know many of
you here know it, but OJ spent a lot of his own money to try to bring
those responsible to justice.
b***@home.com
2008-09-13 17:51:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@yahoo.com
He was found innocent in the Nicole trial. Also, and I know many of
you here know it, but OJ spent a lot of his own money to try to bring
those responsible to justice.
He spent lots of time & money protecting his son, Jason, from the media.
Jason is the murderer. O.J. is protecting his first born. Yeap, he spent
lots of money protecting his son.

O.J. has pulled the wool over the eyes of billions of people for 14 years.
That vail of deception is coming off soon. The real truth will be exposed.

Watch this space.
Ragnar
2008-09-16 13:01:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@home.com
Post by i***@yahoo.com
He was found innocent in the Nicole trial. Also, and I know many of
you here know it, but OJ spent a lot of his own money to try to bring
those responsible to justice.
He spent lots of time & money protecting his son, Jason, from the media.
Jason is the murderer. O.J. is protecting his first born. Yeap, he spent
lots of money protecting his son.
O.J. has pulled the wool over the eyes of billions of people for 14 years.
That vail of deception is coming off soon. The real truth will be exposed.
Watch this space.
Nice try.

So how did Jason manage to bleed OJ's blood at Bundy? Why was there a
mixture of only OJ's, Ron's and Nicole's blood in the Bronco and on
the Rockingham glove?

Only one person bled on June 12, 1994 at both crime scenes: OJ
Simpson. Other than Ron and Nicole, only one person's blood was found
at Bundy, at Rockingham, on the Bronco, on the gloves, and on OJ's
clothing.

The Jason killed Nicole 'theory' is just as absurd as all of the
alternative theories to the actual truth: that OJ killed Ron and
Nicole. All of the evidence points to OJ: none of it points anywhere
else.
b***@home.com
2008-09-16 19:47:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ragnar
Post by b***@home.com
Post by i***@yahoo.com
He was found innocent in the Nicole trial. Also, and I know many of
you here know it, but OJ spent a lot of his own money to try to bring
those responsible to justice.
He spent lots of time & money protecting his son, Jason, from the media.
Jason is the murderer. O.J. is protecting his first born. Yeap, he spent
lots of money protecting his son.
O.J. has pulled the wool over the eyes of billions of people for 14 years.
That vail of deception is coming off soon. The real truth will be exposed.
Watch this space.
Nice try.
So how did Jason manage to bleed OJ's blood at Bundy? Why was there a
mixture of only OJ's, Ron's and Nicole's blood in the Bronco and on
the Rockingham glove?
Only one person bled on June 12, 1994 at both crime scenes: OJ
Simpson. Other than Ron and Nicole, only one person's blood was found
at Bundy, at Rockingham, on the Bronco, on the gloves, and on OJ's
clothing.
The Jason killed Nicole 'theory' is just as absurd as all of the
alternative theories to the actual truth: that OJ killed Ron and
Nicole. All of the evidence points to OJ: none of it points anywhere
else.
You better get your bib ready, you too will be 'eatin crow real soon now.

The blood in the driveway on Rochingham & the blood at Bundy is said to be
one in a million match to O.J. Simpson. That puts it in the 'near relative'
catagory. Either the blood was planted by LAPD or Jason came to Rockingham
after the murders.

Nicole had blood on her back that did not match O.J., Ron or herself. I'd
bet it would match Jason's.

Nicole clawed at her attacker. She had blood & skin under her fingernails.
That DNA did not match O.J. I'd bet it would match Jason's.

There was human hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene. That
human hair did not match O.J. I'd bet it would match Jason's.

There was animal hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene. I
would bet the animal hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene
belongs to Jason's dog. Wouldn't it be great to have DNA from Jason's dog?
Both sets of hair would tie Jason to the crime scene.

All this points to Jason committing the murders & calling O.J. to the crime
scene after the fight, after the murders had taken place.

Note to O.J. The train wreck in Chatworth will be nothing compaired to the
train wreck coming your way when this all flushes out. The light at the end
of the tunnel will be inditments against you and your family.

Watch this space for future details.
Ragnar
2008-09-17 02:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@home.com
Post by Ragnar
Post by b***@home.com
He was found innocent in the Nicole trial.  Also, and I know many of
you here know it, but OJ spent a lot of his own money to try to bring
those responsible to justice.
He spent lots of time & money protecting his son, Jason, from the media.
Jason is the murderer.  O.J. is protecting his first born.  Yeap, he spent
lots of money protecting his son.
O.J. has pulled the wool over the eyes of billions of people for 14 years.
That vail of deception is coming off soon.  The real truth will be exposed.
Watch this space.
Nice try.
So how did Jason manage to bleed OJ's blood at Bundy? Why was there a
mixture of only OJ's, Ron's and Nicole's blood in the Bronco and on
the Rockingham glove?
Only one person bled on June 12, 1994 at both crime scenes: OJ
Simpson. Other than Ron and Nicole, only one person's blood was found
at Bundy, at Rockingham, on the Bronco, on the gloves, and on OJ's
clothing.
The Jason killed Nicole 'theory' is just as absurd as all of the
alternative theories to the actual truth: that OJ killed Ron and
Nicole. All of the evidence points to OJ: none of it points anywhere
else.
You better get your bib ready, you too will be 'eatin crow real soon now.
The blood in the driveway on Rochingham & the blood at Bundy is said to be
one in a million match to O.J. Simpson.  That puts it in the 'near relative'
catagory.  Either the blood was planted by LAPD or Jason came to Rockingham
after the murders.
Wrong. Blood from a near relative does not match. Related people share
certain alleles, but it is more than just these that are used for DNA
testing. Jason's blood would not match OJ's in a forensic DNA test.
Post by b***@home.com
Nicole had blood on her back that did not match O.J., Ron or herself.  I'd
bet it would match Jason's.
Wrong again. First of all, the blood on Nicole's back was not
collected. Undoubtedly it was OJ's.

There was blood found on Nicole's thigh and under her fingernails that
tested as type B, which does not match Ron, Nicole or OJ. However, it
was consistent with degraded type BA blood, which is Nicole's type.
This was a half-truth cited by Johnnie Cochran in his opening
statement that was discredited.
Post by b***@home.com
Nicole clawed at her attacker.  She had blood & skin under her fingernails.
That DNA did not match O.J.  I'd bet it would match Jason's.
Show me any testimony from either the criminal or civil trials that
any tissue was found under Nicole's fingernails and was DNA typed. You
can't, because it simply didn't happen. The blood was too degraded to
be DNA typed; however as demonstrated above, it was almost certainly
Nicole's blood that had degraded..
Post by b***@home.com
There was human hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene.  That
human hair did not match O.J.  I'd bet it would match Jason's.
Wrong again. There were 12 human hairs found in the knit cap that
resembled OJ's in all physical characteristics. No follicles were
attached, so there was no DNA to test. Your information is incorrect.
Post by b***@home.com
There was animal hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene.  I
would bet the animal hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene
belongs to Jason's dog.  Wouldn't it be great to have DNA from Jason's dog?
Both sets of hair would tie Jason to the crime scene.
The animal hair was consistent with Nicole's Akita. Wrong again.
Post by b***@home.com
All this points to Jason committing the murders & calling O.J. to the crime
scene after the fight, after the murders had taken place.
All of this is speculation that is simply either made up or is an
incorrect recitation of the real evidence that was introduced at the
two trials.
Post by b***@home.com
Note to O.J. The train wreck in Chatworth will be nothing compaired to the
train wreck coming your way when this all flushes out.  The light at the end
of the tunnel will be inditments against you and your family.
Watch this space for future details.
OJ has his hands full right now. He stands a good chance of going to
prison for the rest of his life, which is where he should have been
since 1995.
c***@nym.hush.com
2008-09-18 19:17:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ragnar
Post by b***@home.com
Post by Ragnar
Post by b***@home.com
He was found innocent in the Nicole trial.  Also, and I know many of
you here know it, but OJ spent a lot of his own money to try to bring
those responsible to justice.
He spent lots of time & money protecting his son, Jason, from the media.
Jason is the murderer.  O.J. is protecting his first born.  Yeap, he spent
lots of money protecting his son.
O.J. has pulled the wool over the eyes of billions of people for 14 years.
That vail of deception is coming off soon.  The real truth will be exposed.
Watch this space.
Nice try.
So how did Jason manage to bleed OJ's blood at Bundy? Why was there a
mixture of only OJ's, Ron's and Nicole's blood in the Bronco and on
the Rockingham glove?
Only one person bled on June 12, 1994 at both crime scenes: OJ
Simpson. Other than Ron and Nicole, only one person's blood was found
at Bundy, at Rockingham, on the Bronco, on the gloves, and on OJ's
clothing.
The Jason killed Nicole 'theory' is just as absurd as all of the
alternative theories to the actual truth: that OJ killed Ron and
Nicole. All of the evidence points to OJ: none of it points anywhere
else.
You better get your bib ready, you too will be 'eatin crow real soon now.
The blood in the driveway on Rochingham & the blood at Bundy is said to be
one in a million match to O.J. Simpson.  That puts it in the 'near relative'
catagory.  Either the blood was planted by LAPD or Jason came to Rockingham
after the murders.
Wrong. Blood from a near relative does not match. Related people share
certain alleles, but it is more than just these that are used for DNA
testing. Jason's blood would not match OJ's in a forensic DNA test.
Post by b***@home.com
Nicole had blood on her back that did not match O.J., Ron or herself.  I'd
bet it would match Jason's.
Wrong again. First of all, the blood on Nicole's back was not
collected. Undoubtedly it was OJ's.
There was blood found on Nicole's thigh and under her fingernails that
tested as type B, which does not match Ron, Nicole or OJ. However, it
was consistent with degraded type BA blood, which is Nicole's type.
This was a half-truth cited by Johnnie Cochran in his opening
statement that was discredited.
Post by b***@home.com
Nicole clawed at her attacker.  She had blood & skin under her fingernails.
That DNA did not match O.J.  I'd bet it would match Jason's.
Show me any testimony from either the criminal or civil trials that
any tissue was found under Nicole's fingernails and was DNA typed. You
can't, because it simply didn't happen. The blood was too degraded to
be DNA typed; however as demonstrated above, it was almost certainly
Nicole's blood that had degraded..
Post by b***@home.com
There was human hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene.  That
human hair did not match O.J.  I'd bet it would match Jason's.
Wrong again. There were 12 human hairs found in the knit cap that
resembled OJ's in all physical characteristics. No follicles were
attached, so there was no DNA to test. Your information is incorrect.
Post by b***@home.com
There was animal hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene.  I
would bet the animal hair in the black knit cap found at the crime scene
belongs to Jason's dog.  Wouldn't it be great to have DNA from Jason's dog?
Both sets of hair would tie Jason to the crime scene.
The animal hair was consistent with Nicole's Akita. Wrong again.
Post by b***@home.com
All this points to Jason committing the murders & calling O.J. to the crime
scene after the fight, after the murders had taken place.
All of this is speculation that is simply either made up or is an
incorrect recitation of the real evidence that was introduced at the
two trials.
Post by b***@home.com
Note to O.J. The train wreck in Chatworth will be nothing compaired to the
train wreck coming your way when this all flushes out.  The light at the end
of the tunnel will be inditments against you and your family.
Watch this space for future details.
OJ has his hands full right now. He stands a good chance of going to
prison for the rest of his life, which is where he should have been
since 1995.
I guess we will just have to wait and see who is right and who has been
mis-lead all these years..

I have a good feeling about this. I still think you should look for
breaking news about this real soon. By real soon I mean within a fortnight
or two.
o***@yahoo.com
2008-10-07 14:40:07 UTC
Permalink
He was found innocent in the Nicole trial.  
You're right, his first trial wasn't fair. Due to a stupid, biased
jury who refused to convict a brutha' despite absurdly obvious
evidence that he was lying, that he did the crime.

Not fair at all.
Also, and I know many of
you here know it, but OJ spent a lot of his own money to try to bring
those responsible to justice.
Yes, he searched golf courses all over America looking for the killer.

All he needed to find the killer was a mirror.

Loading...