Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
conspiracybeliever

'OJ is innocent': Private investigator claims

66 posts in this topic

is it true he wasn't allowed in st.louis,missouri ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

innocent men dont run from the cops.

I think that's a very valid point. It's not like he was some poor dude no-one knew of or cared about.

This was an American football hero. The whole slow speed cop chase was so bizarre. Of course, the media were in over drive and should have been stopped.

If it had been some dude from Compton, the cops would have spiked his tires and put an end to it.

I think that the way that whole chase went down fed Simpson's already over inflated sense of ego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone interested in this case, I highly recommend the book Outrage by Vincent Bugliosi.

One thing I found very revealing (and I'm commenting on it because I've never seen it mentioned elsewhere) was in the suicide note- or I should say was blatantly absent from the note- and that's that Simpson failed to acknowledge Ron Goldman- that Goldman was also murdered. Simpson didn't deny killing Goldman, nor did he outright deny killing Nicole.

Simpson began by writing "First, everyone understand I had nothing to do with Nicole's murder." (From Outrage, Pg. 307)

An outright denial would be "I did not kill Nicole". An honest statement would be "I did not kill Nicole, or Ron Goldman.

I think Simpson was subconsciously acknowledging what we all knew and that's that Nicole was indeed the only intended victim.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep ,Ronald Goldman was totally just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Poor guy.

I have read Outrage, and I agree with you - great book!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

innocent men dont run from the cops.

Not unless they have someone to protect, which is the basis behind the book.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Simpson's attempt to disappear, there's not a more obvious display of guilt.

It was entirely self-serving, the same as the "farewell letter".

No one but Simpson could have possibly benefited from either.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep ,Ronald Goldman was totally just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Poor guy.

I have read Outrage, and I agree with you - great book!!

If you haven't read And The Sea Will Tell, also by Bugliosi, I highly recommend it, too. (As awful as that crime is, I found the story mesmerizing.)

Bugliosi was the defender in that case, and in the trial and book he spoke of a "consciousness of innocence" shown by his client.

Whereas Simpson's behavior demonstrated a consciousness of guilt, the defendant in this other case demonstrated innocence by her actions and statements before the trial and (I think) more importantly, before the crime was discovered; that her actions and statements simply didn't make sense if she'd have actually been of a certain knowledge.

It's fascinating.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep ,Ronald Goldman was totally just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Poor guy.

I have read Outrage, and I agree with you - great book!!

I feel very sorry for both victims but probably more for Ron Goldman. As you say, poor bas**** was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Unless Simpson was tipped off that there was a man at Nicole's or a man was going to be there.

That's one point about this case I've always wondered about. Goldman and Simpson both there at the same time - some deadly karma or a setup?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one point about this case I've always wondered about. Goldman and Simpson both there at the same time - some deadly karma or a setup?

Antilles, I'm curious to know how you think a set-up was possible, and why that would make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Antilles, I'm curious to know how you think a set-up was possible, and why that would make sense.

Let's just say that I rarely believe things at face value. Simpson had been there before and seen Nicole with other men.

But why that night did he decide to kill her? That night when Goldman goes there to return sunglasses she had left at Mezzaluna?

It could just have been really bad cosmic karma on Goldman's part...coincidences do happen and the police never raised the issue. But I do still wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just say that I rarely believe things at face value. Simpson had been there before and seen Nicole with other men.

But why that night did he decide to kill her? That night when Goldman goes there to return sunglasses she had left at Mezzaluna?

It could just have been really bad cosmic karma on Goldman's part...coincidences do happen and the police never raised the issue. But I do still wonder.

Well, some things only the killer will ever know.

Re: the police, I think their only concern was with the who, not the why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That night when Goldman goes there to return sunglasses she had left at Mezzaluna?

It was Nicole's mother's glasses that Goldman had agreed to deliver to Nicole. Nicole's mother had spoken to Nicole about having left them at the restaurant, and Nicole called the restaurant, and they located them outside in the gutter.

Goldman was said to have had other plans that night. A friend (I believe he was also a co-worker) said that as the two of them were left the restaurant, among the last words between he and Goldman were about them meeting up later at a specific place. I don't remember if the friend said whether there was talk of Goldman also returning the glasses before they were to meet back up, but I don't think it matters. The point is that it appears that Goldman was at Nicole's only to return the glasses, which surely wasn't a planned event.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was the son .It's why OJ endured the trial the way he did .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever heard of Glen Rogers?

Probably not because Glen Rogers is one of America’s least-known serial killers (70, possibly 80 people). But wait. He is also most likely the real murderer of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman.

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/nicole_killer_s3FVzjS6gjHP9SbvpFRXQO

Hmmm,that is quite interesting ,and makes sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, 7 minutes to change your mind completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever heard of Glen Rogers?

Probably not because Glen Rogers is one of America’s least-known serial killers (70, possibly 80 people). But wait. He is also most likely the real murderer of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman.

http://www.nypost.co...6gjHP9SbvpFRXQO

Next they'll be pushing this thug as the assassin who killed JFK. :no:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought it was his son.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may well be onto something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel very sorry for both victims but probably more for Ron Goldman. As you say, poor bas**** was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Unless Simpson was tipped off that there was a man at Nicole's or a man was going to be there.

That's one point about this case I've always wondered about. Goldman and Simpson both there at the same time - some deadly karma or a setup?

Deadly karma, I would say. Why would OJ Simpson (or anyone) want to kill Goldman? The guy went there to return the sunglasses Nicole Brown left at the restaurant. Maybe he was hoping for the opportunity to connect with her, who knows? The way he was stabbed shows he most likely tried to come to Brown's aid. How courageous and valiant. His wounds show he put up a tremendous fight against his killer. Poor man. Such a senseless death, and talk about bad luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watch the new documentary on I.D. " OJ Trial of the Century"

It was alright. Good time killer. You should give it a look.

Hard to believe it's been 20 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say knowing what I know that I think he did it out of egoistic pride, but if I had been on the jury I would have not have voted to convict. The police were incompetent boobs and the prosecutors did the best they could with a weak case that relied entirely too much on technology that had too many opportunities for mistake and worse.

The defense was disgusting and I don't think he would have been convicted no matter how "good" they supposedly were. The American system requires reasonable doubt, and there was lots of doubt.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next they'll be pushing this thug as the assassin who killed JFK. :no:

Word has it that he kidnapped the Lindbergh baby too. Was he anywhere near Ford's Theatre in 1865?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deadly [KARMA], I would say. Why would OJ Simpson (or anyone) want to kill Goldman? The guy went there to return the sunglasses Nicole Brown left at the restaurant. Maybe he was hoping for the opportunity to connect with her, who knows? The way he was stabbed shows he most likely tried to come to Brown's aid. How courageous and valiant. His wounds show he put up a tremendous fight against his killer. Poor man. Such a senseless death, and talk about bad luck!

What is the sound of one hand clapping? The answer is "the roar of a thousand face palms".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say knowing what I know that I think he did it out of egoistic pride, but if I had been on the jury I would have not have voted to convict. The police were incompetent boobs and the prosecutors did the best they could with a weak case that relied entirely too much on technology that had too many opportunities for mistake and worse.

The American system requires reasonable doubt, and there was lots of doubt.

I think there are a lot of reasons for the jury's verdict but in a case where the nature of the crime is what it was and the evidence of guilt is (to me) absolutely overwhelming, to say that the verdict is appalling is a gross understatement.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.