Jump to content

American Crime Story


xBrownstonex

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, -W.A.R- said:

explosive episode last night

Yeah, undoubtedly one of the best hours of television in the last year or so. I figured this trial gained as much interest as it did because of the murder aspect, but I was unaware of the further implications. Even knowing the outcome, this continues to be a riveting series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those of you who never saw the original trial back in 1995, you're in luck!

Esquire is condensing a year's worth of testimony, sidebars, and evidentiary hearings into a much more digestible twelve hours of trial highlights. 

The Real O.J. Simpson Trial will air this Monday, April 3rd in one twelve-hour marathon. 

 

This will be nostalgia at its best for me. I was but a tween when all this went down and back in the nineties, some of us remember, most households had one TV, at max two. So when I got home from school, I had to acquiesce the television to my parents, who sat enraptured for a whole year and by proxy, I watched the trial too. I'll never forget my mother telling me "No! You cannot have the remote! The limo driver is testifying today!" and my dad "Why don't you go play with yourself in your room, if you've got nothing to do, son?" I ended up watching most of the trial and remember bits of it better than others. 

My one qualm with ACS is the fact that so little of the show focused on lawyers taking testimony, which really, for me is what the trial was all about. I know its hard to make testimony look sexy and the back and forth editing of it all gets cumbersome, but there was some great stuff that got left out of this show. (Barry Scheck's, "Scheck Attack!" was but ten seconds worth of television on this show and left out one of the trial's most memorable moments "How about THAT, Mr. Fung!?") So I'll be glad to see the real thing presented again, this time with the fat cut out. 

Set your DVR's for Monday!

http://deadline.com/2016/03/o-j-simpson-trial-esquire-network-marathon-1201726132/

Edited by appetite4illusions
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The episode was pretty good, it was pretty intense, I think that Ross believes that OJ did it, like he knew OJ since a very long time and knew what OJ is capable of. 

1 hour ago, wasted said:

I feel like OJ was framed. Furman just seems so guilty. And the single squirt of blood reminds me of Avery's blood mark in the car. The police corrupt yo. With all due respect. 

I don't think so he was framed, not getting personal here but you are not the right person to say this cause you are having unprotected sex while having HIV and then you are telling the girl that its non of her business. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, appetite4illusions said:

For those of you who never saw the original trial back in 1995, you're in luck!

Esquire is condensing a year's worth of testimony, sidebars, and evidentiary hearings into a much more digestible twelve hours of trial highlights. 

The Real O.J. Simpson Trial will air this Monday, April 3rd in one twelve-hour marathon. 

 

I have been watching bits and pieces from the actual trial after each episode.

 

Edited by Bumblefeet
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/31/2016 at 11:38 AM, wasted said:

I feel like OJ was framed. Furman just seems so guilty.

Fuhrman is a racist but i don't think he planted that glove...for one 14 police officers attest that there was only 1 glove at the murder scene...you can't tell me they would all lie....second Fuhrman had no clue before he went to OJ's place if OJ had an air tight alibi that would exonerate him...you're telling me he just carried a bloody glove from a crime scene in his pocket to plant in hopes that OJ wouldn't have a alibi that checked out? lol not likely 

theres definitely some stuff doesn't jive for me though and thats: Where's all the Blood? these murders were savage...i would think the killer would be drenched in blood...i suppose OJ could have stripped all his clothing off and put them in a bag...another issue is Goldman had bruised fist meaning he fought his attacker...so where is the bruising on OJ? im for certain he was involved though....the bruno magli shoe print, the cut finger and his blood at the crime scene are enough proof he was there that night...well that or one unbelievable coincidence 

On 3/31/2016 at 1:40 PM, Bumblefeet said:

I have been watching bits and pieces from the actual trial after each episode.

lol im almost an expert on this case now...ive watched so much i go to sleep debating about this shit

Edited by -W.A.R-
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But isnt that what you do to frame someone? Take a bloody glove and drop it at his house.

Furman could have found it first and taken it to OJ's.

But OJ probably still did it but Furman wanted to make sure they get him. 

DNA evidence alone should be guilty?

In a way it seems more that they didn't want another riot. And Furman's tapes made that likely. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, wasted said:

But isnt that what you do to frame someone? Take a bloody glove and drop it at his house.

yes but i explained why that didn't seem plausible...even if you say that all these officers were in some big conspiracy to frame OJ simply because he was black and was dating a white woman that still doesn't explain how they knew he wouldn't have an alibi at the time of the murders 

 

Edited by -W.A.R-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm saying they assumed he did it and framed him a little ...and still lost. 

If they were going to frame him they would probably check out his habits and movements. 

But I don't see who else would want to kill Nicole. 

Sid he really just get off because the gloves didn't fit and one jury couldn't be sure? Because I can't find much other than a vast racist conspiracy to get him off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, wasted said:

But isnt that what you do to frame someone? Take a bloody glove and drop it at his house.

Furman could have found it first and taken it to OJ's.

But OJ probably still did it but Furman wanted to make sure they get him. 

DNA evidence alone should be guilty?

In a way it seems more that they didn't want another riot. And Furman's tapes made that likely. 

 

I wish I could put up that bar scene from episode 7 where Marcia Clark explains what it would take for the Furman conspiracy to be true. Safe to say it isn't very realistic that he would have thought as many steps ahead as he needed to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wasted said:

I guess I'm saying they assumed he did it and framed him a little ...and still lost. 

If they were going to frame him they would probably check out his habits and movements. 

But I don't see who else would want to kill Nicole. 

Sid he really just get off because the gloves didn't fit and one jury couldn't be sure? Because I can't find much other than a vast racist conspiracy to get him off. 

He did it, like see his past track record. This thing got over blown just cause he was a celeb. Something similar to yours, you are not the only one who is suffering from HIV, there are others too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bumblefeet said:

I wish I could put up that bar scene from episode 7 where Marcia Clark explains what it would take for the Furman conspiracy to be true. Safe to say it isn't very realistic that he would have thought as many steps ahead as he needed to.

A conspiracy worked out before hand probably not. But one cop who finds a glove a drops it off at OJ's to make sure this time. After you listen to the tapes you wouldn't put anything past him. One cop took some evidence home for the first time in his career? 

I think basically having a jury is a bad idea. In some cases it has to be unanimous? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Slash787 said:

He did it, like see his past track record. This thing got over blown just cause he was a celeb. Something similar to yours, you are not the only one who is suffering from HIV, there are others too. 

Celebrity culture is just a reflection of real life that's why people identify or follow it. The old narcissists/inverted narcissist game played for dollar bills. 

As much as Charlie has done some questionable things alledgedly, he has also shed light on the state of hiv and been a ray of hope for other infected people. 

But it goes both ways, Charlie has enough medical advice to believe he can have unprotected sex with hiv but also he will get sued for it. It a different world. 

It is like OJ though the money can distort what is acceptable in real life. But you also have to ask yourself whether the world you are looking at in hollywood is as clean and nice as middle america wants it to be. Brat pack members, hard rock bands and NFL players are some of the worst behaved people out there. Even ones we like can be living pretty sordid lives at some point. But audiences keep tuning in and having opinions, clicks a keep clickin', dollars keep cha-chining, Charlie's up for auction, ain't no use in prayin', that's the way it stayin'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, wasted said:

Celebrity culture is just a reflection of real life that's why people identify or follow it. The old narcissists/inverted narcissist game played for dollar bills. 

As much as Charlie has done some questionable things alledgedly, he has also shed light on the state of hiv and been a ray of hope for other infected people. 

But it goes both ways, Charlie has enough medical advice to believe he can have unprotected sex with hiv but also he will get sued for it. It a different world. 

It is like OJ though the money can distort what is acceptable in real life. But you also have to ask yourself whether the world you are looking at in hollywood is as clean and nice as middle america wants it to be. Brat pack members, hard rock bands and NFL players are some of the worst behaved people out there. Even ones we like can be living pretty sordid lives at some point. But audiences keep tuning in and having opinions, clicks a keep clickin', dollars keep cha-chining, Charlie's up for auction, ain't no use in prayin', that's the way it stayin'

I stayed glued to the TV throughout this trial. I must admit I believe they planted the glove on his property yet I also believe him to be guilty. The prosecution made so very many errors. Foremost they overthought the DNA evidence. They bored the jury to death with it. It went on forever. Then once the defense team ripped it apart who knew what was actually legit. Race did play a major part of this as well.

I think the jury probably came in each day and looked Marcia Clark and Chris Darden up and down and decidedly hated them more every time. Marcia had such contempt for everyone and she certainly didn't hide it. Chris was too methodical and rigid. OJ's 'Dream Team' were just that. They had style and were true actors. They were entertaining. You can't tell me that 12 jurors plus a handful of alternates are locked away for eight months and they don't discuss this case before they begin deliberations? Oh, I'm sure they discussed more than the case. It was probably like a series of Survivor. Many formed alliances and discussed what Marcia wore and how they couldn't stand the sound of her voice. Everyone hated her hair! So with that said, it was a popularity contest for the lawyers, and sadly the prosecutors lost. That, in my opinion was a great part of this. 

Slash787 - you don't really think wasted is Charlie Sheen do you? You're joking right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're trying to frame me for impersonating Charlie Sheen on the Internet because I like CD and Dj Ashba solos. They've planted gloves all over the forum. But now Johnny Slash and Duff Travolta have endorsed CD by playing Chi dem and Better live at the GNR reunion show maybe they will see I was right. Or just buy more ill fitting gloves and fake hiv blood. OJ Sheen is innocent!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wasted said:

They're trying to frame me for impersonating Charlie Sheen on the Internet because I like CD and Dj Ashba solos. They've planted gloves all over the forum. But now Johnny Slash and Duff Travolta have endorsed CD by playing Chi dem and Better live at the GNR reunion show maybe they will see I was right. Or just buy more ill fitting gloves and fake hiv blood. OJ Sheen is innocent!

hahahaha! I've always loved you wasted! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FFS, the set up conspiracy is nonsensical. Furhman couldn't have pulled it off alone and while definitely a shady racist prick, was not stupid to the degree one would have to be to try and frame an incredibly wealthy famous man who may well have had an alibi. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, AdriftatSea said:

I must admit I believe they planted the glove on his property

lets say it was planted: 14 officers attest that there was only 1 glove at the murder scene...now theres 2 options here

A: all these officers were told by Fuhrman & co to cover up for them and say they only saw one glove, so they can go frame a possibly innocent man 

B: all those officers somehow overlooked the 2nd glove and the detective that made up in his mind that either, OJ committed this crime or simply wanted to frame him because he was black and was married to a white woman, just happened to stumble upon it and somehow discreetly concealed it

i have a hard time believing either of those scenarios

whatever option you believe, lets move on to the planting part...ok these detectives are heading to OJ's with this glove in their possession to plant without any clue as to what OJ's alibi would be at the time of the murders OR if they would even be able to get on his property without a search warrant

but miraculously his Bronco was sitting outside the estate with blood on it (from when he "cut himself while getting his cellphone" earlier that night) which gave them probable cause to enter the property.....what are the odds they would be so lucky that all this went right for them so they could plant a glove? literally at every turn they caught a break

even more luck for them was Kato giving the perfect location to plant the glove in a place that was consistent with somebody trying to avoid being seen by a waiting limo driver out front....i mean come on its no way it worked out that damn well for them

i think what happened is OJ dropped the glove by accident and maybe he knew he had because Kato said he heard 3 bumps on the wall in succession and i'll tell you if i knew i had dropped some incriminating evidence and couldn't find it in the dark (im assuming it was dark back there) i'd be so pissed i'd hit whatever was closest to me :lol:

Edited by -W.A.R-
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 31, 2016 at 11:38 AM, wasted said:

I feel like OJ was framed. Furman just seems so guilty. And the single squirt of blood reminds me of Avery's blood mark in the car. The police corrupt yo. With all due respect. 

You can explain how and where the cops got a small sample of Avery's blood to plant in the car (tampered blood sample from previous case). 

How do you explain OJ's blood at the crime scene?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, -W.A.R- said:

lets say it was planted: 14 officers attest that there was only 1 glove at the murder scene...now theres 2 options here

A: all these officers were told by Fuhrman & co to cover up for them and say they only saw one glove, so they can go frame a possibly innocent man 

B: all those officers somehow overlooked the 2nd glove and the detective that made up in his mind that either, OJ committed this crime or simply wanted to frame him because he was black and was married to a white woman, just happened to stumble upon it and somehow discreetly concealed it

i have a hard time believing either of those scenarios

whatever option you believe, lets move on to the planting part...ok these detectives are heading to OJ's with this glove in their possession to plant without any clue as to what OJ's alibi would be at the time of the murders OR if they would even be able to get on his property without a search warrant

but miraculously his Bronco was sitting outside the estate with blood on it (from when he "cut himself while getting his cellphone" earlier that night) which gave them probable cause to enter the property.....what are the odds they would be so lucky that all this went right for them so they could plant a glove? literally at every turn they caught a break

even more luck for them was Kato giving the perfect location to plant the glove in a place that was consistent with somebody trying to avoid being seen by a waiting limo driver out front....i mean come on its no way it worked out that damn well for them

i think what happened is OJ dropped the glove by accident and maybe he knew he had because Kato said he heard 3 bumps on the wall in succession and i'll tell you if i knew i had dropped some incriminating evidence and couldn't find it in the dark (im assuming it was dark back there) i'd be so pissed i'd hit whatever was closest to me :lol:

Fuhrman was the Chief Detective. Those cops would have all lied to protect their boss. Lord of The Flies Mentality. Check out this link as well.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=720944

I'm not asking you to agree with me. I'm stating my opinion. I think he's guilty. But what happened to the knife?  And Fuhrman was a known racist. The murders were so brutal that it had to be someone that knew them. The murders were very personal. The glove issue. Big, fat racist Fuhrman wanting to score! And his henchman wanting to score along with 'The Boss'... do you remember those days. The Rodney King days. Remember the truck driver ripped out of his truck and stomped until he was almost brain dead? Those cops had a vendetta. A vendetta against any black man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Angelica said:

FFS, the set up conspiracy is nonsensical. Furhman couldn't have pulled it off alone and while definitely a shady racist prick, was not stupid to the degree one would have to be to try and frame an incredibly wealthy famous man who may well have had an alibi. 

What is the FFS you are coming at me with? Do you protest yourself to be a feminist as I've seen some of your other posts? You've never addressed any of the men on this board this way. The women on this board are a minority. So you don't agree with me, that's fine. I would never speak to you so disrespectfully. I'm stating my opinion. I'm not asking you to agree with me. If you want to debate, then learn the fuck how!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...