Jul 5, 2025
Оfftopic Community
Оfftopic Community
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Featured content
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
OffTopic Community
Random Interesting Topics
I have a question about the OJ Simpson trial and evidence.?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave87gn" data-source="post: 1692030" data-attributes="member: 172822"><p>There was a mountain of evidence, but the defense easily proved that some of the articles were planted or at least tampered with.. Armed with that thought, the jury could not believe with any degree of certainty that more or all of the evidence was tampered with</p><p>Evidence</p><p>1. The bloody socks. did not show up on the video of the crime scene but turned up later mysteriously.</p><p>the socks were examined by both sides in June and neither side found any blood. In Aug. a reporter who was subpeoned before the judge reported that the socks now have a blood mixture of Ron, and Nicole's blood. She didnt reveal her source, but low and behold the socks were sent to be tested after her report and it came back just as she reported- ODD huh?</p><p>2. The tow truck driver who hauled away the bronco stole a sovenier from the passenger side glove box. He testified that he did not see any blood in the bronco, yet when the Bronco was photographed 2 months later, it was full of blood</p><p>3. The missing blood. Vanatter traveled around with OJs blood sample all afternoon, to both crime scenes..some was missing- the police have no idea why</p><p></p><p>There is plenty more</p><p></p><p>I know every detail of this case and know that OJ if guilty was also framed, but he could not have done this alone</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave87gn, post: 1692030, member: 172822"] There was a mountain of evidence, but the defense easily proved that some of the articles were planted or at least tampered with.. Armed with that thought, the jury could not believe with any degree of certainty that more or all of the evidence was tampered with Evidence 1. The bloody socks. did not show up on the video of the crime scene but turned up later mysteriously. the socks were examined by both sides in June and neither side found any blood. In Aug. a reporter who was subpeoned before the judge reported that the socks now have a blood mixture of Ron, and Nicole's blood. She didnt reveal her source, but low and behold the socks were sent to be tested after her report and it came back just as she reported- ODD huh? 2. The tow truck driver who hauled away the bronco stole a sovenier from the passenger side glove box. He testified that he did not see any blood in the bronco, yet when the Bronco was photographed 2 months later, it was full of blood 3. The missing blood. Vanatter traveled around with OJs blood sample all afternoon, to both crime scenes..some was missing- the police have no idea why There is plenty more I know every detail of this case and know that OJ if guilty was also framed, but he could not have done this alone [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Name
Verification
Please enable JavaScript to continue.
Loading…
Post reply
Top