@@movieman175agreed. Johnny took advantage of racial tensions. Anyone could of done that. Sad how jury ate it up. Ignored the evidence. Hopefully everyone got their OJ WON PRIZE in the mail as Chris rock has said.
@@slickrick2420Johnny wasn’t even a good lawyer. Used race card. Ironic. Anyone could of done that. Unintelligent jurors fell for it and ignored evidence. Still waiting for your OJ won prize? Shows you how bad the prosecutors were. Sad how the jurors behaved. Sad day for American Justice. But that’s your opinion. That’s fine.
@@slickrick2420 He played the race card from the bottom of the deck. He saw everything through the lens of racism even if it was nonexistent. He walked around with the Nation of Islam as his bodyguards. Cochran's shtick was always the same racism card, predictable same old MO. Bugliosi was far superior as a trial lawyer to Cochran. Cochran just got lucky with a biased jury wanting pay back for Rodney King.
and kris jenner admitted that robert had his own feelings..leaning toward guilt and was disgusted by o.j. he even ignored his call as he laid on his dead bed! he couldn't look away from the overwhelming evidence
Actually the defense said that Oj told them all to look like that intentionally . They all agreed to not cheer and celebrate till after because they knew the media would crucify them for that and criticize them for being insensitive to Ron and Nicole’s family if a happy reaction was caught on camera . I think OJ is innocent but he knows who did it. Drug dealers killed her because Oj stopped paying her and Faye resnicks debts
A look of shocked, surprised, & confusion. Rob knew his best friend was guilty. You gotta see his Barbara Walter's interview 1996. Rob admitted he believed OJ was guilty & why.
I just now noticed the reaction of OJ's attorneys. Except for Cochran, the rest looked absolutely dismayed, and rightly so. They knew that scumbag was as guilty as sin.
Yes especially Robert Kardashian's expression said everything, when his horribly unjust wrong not guilty verdict was read, he looked totally shocked and disgusted.
I know this guy has passed. But...he could have answered his own question about how OJ got off. Just ask the all WHITE jurors....corrupt judges....corrupt prosecutors....corrupt police....corrupt defense teams from the 50's 60's 70's who convicted INNOCENT black people back then. Then he wouldn't have even had to write his book about OJ. Hpw long does one play with a snake before it bites you? Btw...WTH is an average jury? One that looks like a sixties jury?
Yes, Ito seemed just about paralyzed by all the issues involved with every decision he took: OJ’s notoriety, the media pressure, the racial issue. He was like a doe in the headlights.
Lance Ito with his nasal feminine voice and 2 inches in his pants probably felt threatened and emasculated his whole life by television images of white confidence, deep voiced masculinity and therefore constantly ruled against whiteness. Even having a white wife (who somehow tolerated him all these years) was not enough to reassure his constantly faltering ego. Pathetic. Testosterone level < 50 Ito.
Vincent Bugliosi seems a genuine, honest, and sincere man. The way he speaks not only oozes with compassion, but also an appropriate toughness with a humorous edge.
I'll tell you what outraged me. Hearing a juror who was treated to trips to New York with all the ensuing treats, shows, fancy dinners etc. saying to a reporter The best thing that ever happened to me was the OJ case. I was shocked and saddened, two dead people brutally knifed to death and a woman with no compassion or empathy serving on the jury.
And that was back in the '90's. Today that kind of person is celebrated. Those who worship money and fame over anyone or anything are sick people indeed.
@@clockworkNateIt is America. How gross of a circus was this case, whether Simpson was guilty or innocent? People lined up on bridges, holding "Go Juice" signs, or people cheering and jumping up and down when the not guilty verdict was read, like it was a football game. Even Johnnie Cochran was pumping his fist and saying yes, when the verdict was read, which ANY decent attorney, or HUMAN BEING for that matter, knows is insensitive and a no no. This case exposed some serious illness about a lot of people in this country. You dont cheer. Two people lost their lives, and two kids were motherless for the rest of their lives. There should be some acknowledgement of that in terms of peoples behavior. Really gross.
Vincent Bugliosi said he would never had agreed on this jury and would have had the case transferred to were it took place. Yes. This jury was bias, terrible, and simply put, God Awful.
It would have been a much better prosecution had Mr. Bugliosi and Daniel Petrocelli been in charge. With a more diverse and better educated jury they had a very good shot at a conviction. The wildcard being the sleazy tactics of Johnny Cockroach who successfully managed to deflect from his client and put the LAPD on trial. But in the end I think they could have neutralized Cockroach.
He didn't even have the balls to read the letter himself, he made Jason do it. That weak coward who only knew how to beat and kill women. And he's supposed to be a hero for black America 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️ I think his acquittal was a bigger accomplishment for black Americans than Obama becoming president.
@@TDKiller415 The only coward was that bigot Fuhrman. He wasn't even man enough to admit he used a racial insult to describe African Americans. And then pled the 5th when he was cornered. Now who's really a coward?
@@TDKiller415 OJ didn't kill anyone. They already proved that during the trial. There was only one documented domestic violence incident, where him and Nicole were wrestling on the bed... that's it.
@@rashun506 Fuhrman was wrong to do that, yes, but that was not perjury, because it was nothing to do with the actual case. Whats next? Ask the detective about their sexual orientation, medical history etc and if he lies about ONE of them then he's not to be trusted? If that were allowed then there would be no real trials. Get a grip, clown, what Fuhrman said or did was nothing to do with the trial. The only reason it seemed that way was because that idiot Ito mishandled the trial. If he lied about where or when he found the glove, THEN it would cast doubt, not racial slurs. What? If OJ were white and Nicole, Ron and Fuhrman were black, would Fuhrman lying about using the term "white motherfucker" be so important to you? And don't forget, OJ ran from the police, ran from reading the note to find the killer, and eventually ran away from California to Florida, partially because of the civil suit, and partly because most of California believed he was a killer, whites and young blacks wanted nothing to do with him, but in Florida he was rather fresh. Now who's a coward?
According to a more recent interview with one of the jury members, 90 percent of those on the jury felt that acquitting OJ, was "payback" for Rodney King. When asked whether she (the juror) believed that was right or wrong, she held up her hands. As if to say, who knows ? Perhaps, she meant, "who cares?" I tend to think the jury were going to acquit OJ from day 1.
This is the pertinent section of the interview with juror Carrie Best --- Interviewer: Do you think there are members of the jury that voted to acquit OJ because of Rodney King? Bess: Yes. Interviewer: You do? Bess: Yes. Interviewer: How many of you do you think felt that way? Bess: Oh, probably 90 percent of them. Interviewer: 90 percent. Did you feel that way? Bess: Yes. Interviewer: That was payback. Bess: Uh-huh [in agreement] Interviewer: Do you think that's right ? In response to this question, the juror "holds up her hands". --- Source: www.thewrap.com/oj-simpson-juror-not-guilty-verdict-was-payback-for-rodney-king/
she even went as far as blaming Nicole for staying with OJ for so long, obviously she doesnt know how having kids together complicates such a big decision. and of course the fact that battered women all stick around too long. considering Nicole had finally ended it for good weeks before the murders, this lady was wrong on many levels.
I agree with you. It's actually quite shocking how this case was tried. If they were really out to convict OJ, they fucked up on nearly every turn. Especially when choosing to move the case to LA, or for allowing him to try on those gloves with latex gloves underneath and without some kind of control over it. Absolutely dumb on their part. On the bright side everyone involved boosted their careers and pretty much all of them came out with a book as well.
@@Tmillea Who are you that we should trust you. That might be true but Juice must have been hired to off him when he just happened to be at Nicole's so he could off her too.
@@Tmillea Why do you think you’ll never see any photos of Ron with his father. Fred disowned him because he was disappointed how much of a ****upRon has become.
@@January. While I had to agree with you, and looking closer at it with more objectivity, ( if the evidence could be trusted) you may be correct; But it certainly does appear that it still looks like Mark a furhmam. definitely may have planted the glove! That guy was creepy and probably an abject hardcore Bigot...Remember, the fact that he Lied about the * N" wod means he can not be trusted..
eric Mays not sure what that’s supposed to prove whether he watched or not. I didn’t watch one game with Wilt Chamberlain but know he’s one of the best ever because of his record and what his peers say. Vincent won a crazy amount of cases for an ADA. It’s like 103 out of 104 actual jury trials. He also successfully prosecuted a mock trial against Lee Harvey Oswald against Gerry Spence (which I did watch) and won. Spence was a well known and nationally respected defense lawyer - as big if not bigger than any on the dream team OJ had. Gerry said he’s the most thorough and dogged prosecutor he went up against. Even if it was a mock trial. Vince wrote several books on other cases and how we would’ve prosecuted. He is, by far, the most prominent prosecutor of the last 50+ years. Simply asking what cases someone personally watched is disengenuous. What games of Babe Ruth or Ty Cobb did you watch and is that the only way to determine whether they were legends in their particular area?
Clark was used to dealing with underfunded and overburdened public defenders,,,,,,, she was flustered when dealing with Dream-team. On the other hand, Barry Sheck came off as a spoiled brat who needed a good spanking---too bad Ito wasn't up to the task of giving it to him. In fact, the whole Dream Team was pretty creepy.
Don't make excuses for her, that's the job she accepted and this is the equivalent of the Super Bowl for her profession, to use a dumb analogy. This was her chance to show that race, celebrity status, etc., didn't matter, and that the people of her constituency deserved justice no matter who the perpetrator was. She tanked it. Let's be honest, the case was thrown by the prosecution because of the racial tension in California in regard to the Rodney King case and the L.A.P.D. Did you watch this video? From the venue being changed, to the surreal amount of evidence purposefully left out, to even going as far as to set themselves up to look foolish. For example, the prosecution gave the defense the tape of O.J. in a jovial mood at the recital BEFORE questioning Denise Brown about him being angry and brooding. They KNEW the defense had that and would show it to destroy their witness's testimony. The prosecution also knew Fuhrman had used the "N" word in the previous decade and yet chose him as one of the officers they called as a witness, instead of up to 14 other non-racist officers they could have chose. They set themselves up to fail. There's no way two lawyers who work for the D.A. for the State of California are dumb enough to leave out everything that they chose to leave out.
I am proud Sheck has used his OJ notoriety and his DNA knowledge for the "Innocence Project". I agree Sheck acted like a short mouthy Jew lawyer and the rest of them looked ridiculous publicly backing those silly planted evidence theories. They were smarter than Clark and Garcetti, the downtown LA decision lost this case out of the gate. OJ won and the taxpayers lost ( and all safety conscious- non murderer liking people everywhere)
@@pommiebears I think the evidence they presented was more than enough, but they definitely should've gone all out shredding the defence's contradicting theories to pieces, and also having OJ try on the gloves and then villifying Fuhrman didn't help.
@@TDKiller415 The prosecutors didn't vilify Fuhrman. They defended his reputation. Unfortunately, Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape made people think again. And I think he added little extra to the scene to solidify it was OJ, but that created an opening for the defence
@@hus390 Really? So Marcia Clark referring to Fuhrman as a racist, the worst the LAPD has to offer and better off never born was defending his reputation? Chris Darden saying that Fuhrman didn't deserve the title of detective because he didn't warrant that kind of respect, that was a way of defending his reputation? Maybe in Wonderland, it is. The same world where the abusive father tells his victim son that he is his only real friend. Defending Fuhrman's reputation would be pointing out that Fuhrman had successfully exonerated African Americans in the past such as Arrick Harris and also pointing out that his use of the n-word for the fictional screenplay was the same as a black police officer using anti-white slurs for a fictional screenplay, and that Fuhrman had no motive to try and frame OJ, since if OJ had a valid alibi and Fuhrman was found out, he would be facing life in prison. THAT would be defending Fuhrman's reputation. Clark and Darden did more damage to him than Cochran. All Cochran and Bailey did was ask him if he used the n-word and then produce the tapes. Clark and Darden were the ones who went all out making him look even worse than OJ.
Because they appointed a judge who didn't take control of the courtroom and let his ego become inflated due to a few media and "dancing Ito" sound bites!!!
This case was a failure of a lot things mostly societal problems we have with race and guilt trips. 1992 Rodney king beating made the da Gil garceti the liberal tool to feeel the ness the bring the case downtown because wanted to prove the black jurors will not be biased and try at he is transparent with the black community. He gave the non guilty verdict on the silver platter he is liberal idiot like his mayor son.
Bugliosi would have destroyed the planted glove theory and of course wouldn’t have been stupid enough to turn over a demonstration to the murderer himself.
The defence would have asked OJ to try the gloves. Come on!! Bugliosi wouldn't have fared better than Darden. ⚠️It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
exactly... also i found it telling that o.j. was VERY EAGER to try on those gloves...no nervousness, no hesitation, and the fact the killer wore them to unalive the mama of his kids.. he goes into over acting mode... his lawyer made fun of it in the LMN docu
This historical criminal case might have had the worst cast of participants ever: Judge Ito, DAs Clark and Darden, Defen$e Team, jurors and the murderer. So much time, money, emotions and resources were wasted. 🤦🏼
Thank you so much for speaking up and standing up for the truth‼️‼️‼️❗️I have no faith in our judicial and justice system, especially after the last election‼️‼️‼️❗️Corruption has its jaws deep and wide in this country‼️‼️‼️❗️I was in court eight years fighting my ex and received no justice because he had the money and the tital‼️‼️‼️❗️
I initially thought the prosecution did a fine job. With incredibly clear reasoning and argument, Bugliosi demolished my perception. He is an amazing lawyer.
They did better than Vince is giving them credit for. I mean, some of the evidence was unquestionably obvious and the jury chose to ignore those facts. Any other trial and they get a conviction with half of what they had against OJ.
It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
And Cochran was an expert in black comedy (no pun intended), because he turned a murder trial into a race comedy circus. I thought only Martin Scorsese had that talent.
It is OBVIOUS that this CLOWN is a racist! (👎). When he mouthed off telling the public that 9 of the jurors were BLACKS (out of 12 persons), i went "oh, oh, i know what's being insinuated"; n then he led onto How of lowly mind/intelligence the jurors were, i had expected that to come out. Then he attacked Johnny Cochran as a low grade lawyer; n then..... AS I EXPECTED!!! - the esteemed judge Ito ALSO!!! came criticised as incompetent! So, this channel has given Vincent Bugliosi his chance to show his RACISM!! (👎). Let's be FAIR!! - let this channel gv Marcia Clark n her fellow prosecution lawyers/team members a chance to explain/clarify How UNFAIR Vincent's criticisms were.
The judge was a moron & prejudice & so were the jury. The prosecution team was way out of their league! Simpson was & still is guilty & got away with murder. The defense “dream team” should be ashamed of themselves for defending a man they KNEW was guilty! Karma has a way of showing itself!
No, it's essential that EVERYONE get a robust defense that tries its best. But they should do so ethically. The OJ defense played the race card and manipulated the jury instead of relying on evidence.
This is the most comprehensive, no BS , honest assessment of this case that I’ve ever seen and I have watched many. Perry Mason ain’t got nothing on Vincent B!!!
Before the interview began and throughout the interview, OJ said multiple times that the book is fictional and he's telling the interviewer what's in the book. He's trying to remember what's in the book. He isn't the author of the book. The book that you're speaking of has already been proven by a number of people to be factually inaccurate (Brian Heiss 2018).
Was you angry when that lady admitted on her death bed that Emmit Till didn't do what she said he did?. Were you angry when those guys bombed the church in the 60's that killed those 4 black children? And we're given lite sentences? Were you angry when corrupt judges.... corrupt prosecutors...corrupt defense teams...and all Caucasian jurors convicted innocent black people during that time? As a black man who was about 21 during the OJ case I felt deep down he did it. I still feel that now. But I also can understand why this jury voted the way it did. These systems have been against black people for a long time. And then you have Furhman admitting on tape they would plant evidence and quote un quote beat N1$$4RS to a pulp. The jury did what they felt they had to do. Get some type of satisfaction.
For some weird reason, I find a lot of comfort in listening to the amazing Vincent Bugliosi give his common sense assessment of the case. Would’ve been epic had he been the key prosecutor in this circus of a trial.
My God, so do I!! Me Bugliosi could have earned a conviction for the People against this murderous narcissist by himself, alone, with one arm tied behind his back!! What a brilliant man! In contrast, look at the lives of the "Dream Team". Most of them died prematurely, or had tragedy in their private or professional lives. Ponder on THAT for a brief minute!
@@sha11235 he's not making any credible points. Everything he's saying here was already refuted very well during the trial by the defense team. This tape is trash. OJ is still innocent.
@@23_Knows_ALL You mean the same OJ who said to Judith Regan in 2006: "I remember I grabbed the knife, then I'm seeing these two bodies. I'd never seen so much blood in my life. Obviously I must've dropped the glove there because thats where the police found it." Yeah, yeah, VERY innocent. Kind of reminds me of the Emmett Till case. You must love double jeopardy.
Too bad Vince is gone. Great job on the JFK case with his monumental book and trial, and in this case. We don’t need a retrial of the OJ case….we just got it on these two videos
Can you imagine it? Vincent Bugliosi as lead prosecutor. Having the case tried in Santa Monica, with a more educated and wealthy jury (OJ’s real peers) and not using Fuhrman?
He still would've used Fuhrman, he had to because he was the one Kato directed to the second glove, but he would've instructed Fuhrman to tell the truth about using the n-word and apologise for it so that the defence would have no reason to prove that he was a liar or perjurer by getting those irrelevant tapes. Clark and Darden didn't prepare him properly, but Fuhrman shouldn't have been stupid enough to lie.
Someone told Marcia before the trial that this was a case she couldn’t win. You have to think who it was in the defense, who was defending him, and where and when it was. Circumstances were against the prosecution only.
@@aftonelaineburton1596 Bugliosi was an uppity a-hole. It's not very layer-like to go on TV and say "the jury was dumb". Granted I'm absolutely sure the average John Q Juror has an IQ lower than his shoe-size but a former prosecutor shouldn't say it on TV. Imagine if Bugliosi had still been the DA: "Thank you, members of the jury. What we expect you to do, now, is to go to that room, deliberate, and then come back with a guilty verdict"..... 4 hours later..... "Fuck you, you stupid fucking morons! You should've never been put on that panel to begin with! And I'm sure you found him not guilty because most of you are black!". Seriously that's what it sounds like.
I love how Bugliosi claims he doesn't "have a racist bone" in his body and - yet - he doesn't shy away from the word (I have to use it to make a point) "nigger". He could've said "The N word" and we would've all known what he was talking about. But - NO - the used the word 15 times, during the Fuhrman-related section of the interview. Also I think he sounds like a 1st class moron when he called the jurors dumb cause they didn't go to college. Since when have education and intelligence been the same thing? According to this logic (let's wind the clock back 60-70 years) if his father, who was an Italian-American grocery store owner, or his grandfather who came to America on a boat and later on became a US citizen, people who probably never cracked a book in their lives, had been jurors on a murder trial where another Italian American was the accused, and IF they had found the defendant not guilty, they would've been accused of being biased ("Hey they're WOPs. What do you expect?") and they would've been accused of being dumb Italians who didn't go to college.
@@phillophotographer7366 How much of this did you watch the first 30 seconds? He stated the opposite he said that is what the excuse prosecutors office was telling people the Jury had a low IQ and the verdict was based on race. Bugliosi said if the Prosecutors office prosecuted it correctly this jury would have found OJ guilty. He says the first vote they got 2 to 10 vote guilty on a F performance from the prosecutors office if prosecutors had an A performance would have gotten a 10
One thing to remember: When one party sticks to one story and remembers it right down to the last detail, its pretty obvious they're telling the truth. When the other party has to come up with all sorts of theories which are full of baseless allegations and outright contradictions, its pretty obvious its a pack of lies. You don't have to be racist or biased to know who's telling the truth. You just have to be outright stupid to fall for obvious lies.
You're absolutely right. Nonetheless, as we both know, that's what we're going to be accused of - racism, bias, or being "apologists" for racism (OJ25, anyone?) lol. You can silence anyone by calling them racists these days, no matter how far away from being a racist you are. It's almost as bad as cancel culture.
@@Juliet_Tobin It actually IS cancel culture. It was the same with the Depp/Heard trial. The mainstream media were going all out referring to Depp as a sexist silencer and his supporters as biased sexists and misogynists, while ignoring all of the physical evidence that proved Heard was the abuser and the testimonies where she contradicted herself and indicated quite clearly that she was the liar. The Simpson trial was actually one of the earliest examples of woke agendas and cancel culture. Not one media outlet dared to refer to OJ as a murderer, just like with Amber Heard. No one will dare call her an abuser like the Sun called Depp a wife beater with no proof. Bugliosi was the first prominent figure to speak out, but because by then Cochran and Bailey had run their mouths about conspiracy theories and the mainstream media had ignored all of the evidence that proved OJ guilty and instead made villains out of Clark, Darden and Fuhrman, the majority were brainwashed into thinking OJ was framed, so thats why most people these days refer to figures like Bugliosi, Daniel Petrocelli, Hiroshi Fujisaki, Jeffrey Toobin, Jackie Glass and Ezra Edelman as either racist, one-sided or sell-outs.
@@TDKiller415 I agree with you. This is a slight segue way but the consequences of Heard's actions are going to be devastating for authentic DV victims. I've already noticed more than one of the "OJ is innocent" cult now compare Nicole to Amber. Poor Nicole! It's awful.
@@Juliet_Tobin I still remember Camille Vasquez asking the jury to imagine it was Depp verbally abusing Amber on the tapes. She played the media's own game against them, in a way indirectly accusing them of being biased and misandrist by hearing the evidence and still supporting Amber and denouncing Depp. Here, Clark and Darden should have played the race game too, since Ito had allowed the defence to. In their closing arguments, one of them should've asked the jury to imagine all of the same evidence and circumstances, but that OJ and Cochran were white and Nicole, Ron and Fuhrman were black, and Cochran was making these conspiracy allegations to claim a black police detective wanted to frame a white man based on reverse-racism, and then ask them if they would believe it or if they would know it was another white on black crime and add Nicole and Ron's names to the long list including Rodney King and Latasha Harlins. But it doesn't matter anyway, both OJ and Amber confessed to their crimes. OJ confessed on television to Judith Regan in 2006 about dropping the glove at Bundy, and Amber admitted during her trial that she did write the op-ed and it was indeed about "Johnny's power".
Thanks for uploading this! In college I watched the whole thing on several VHS tapes...over several days. If any person watches this, in its entirety, and still believes OJ did not commit this crime, they are either too stupid to understand evidence of a crime or they simply enjoy lying to themselves.
Or deep down they're happy that a black man got away with butchering two whites, but they're trying so hard to hide it via conspiracy theories that they don't realise they're making their anti-white racism all the more obvious. If blacks truly wanted to make a difference via tit for tat, they'd band together, get some guns and storm the HQ of heavily-armed white supremacist groups, people who would actually shoot back at them with zero hesitation. Instead, they choose to burn down the city, attack innocent whites, and piss on the graves of slaughtered innocent whites and spit at their grieving families. Thats not fighting for racial equality, thats just adding fuel to the fire, giving white supremacists more reason for racial hate crimes and turning more educated and unbiased white people away. I'm glad at least that these days, people of all races seem more united, like BLM marches. I participated in a few myself and all I saw were people, skin colour meant absolutely nothing to me.
What do you make of the 5-6 witnesses who testified in court that they didn't see any cuts, wounds or bandages on O.J.'s hands at LAX, on his flight to Chicago or once he landed ? If they are telling the truth, where did his blood come from ?
@@whataboutrob442 It's was very unfortunate that Nicole and Ron got their throats slit from ear to ear. And bled out like two goats at a voodoo ceremony. But looking at all the manufactured evidence and bigot investigators mishandling evidence. The jury rendered the correct verdict.
I just cannot get over Darden's sheepishness. It's almost as if he was trying to cover for Simpson and he made it sound like he does not believe in the prosecution's case at all. Was Darden afraid that he would be lynched by black sympathizers of Simpson if he did not practically apologize for working for the prosecution?
@@monarene44 It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence. ---- Remember, Fuhrman was the lead detective in the case, the first in the scene and knew the place. What could have Darden have done to wash him away from the jury's mind??
@@hus390Fuhrman created trouble but that does not answer my question. The thing about him pleading the 5th is likely badly misunderstood. It does not mean that the tampered with the evidence at all. It just means he is not going to give the defense any leeway to probe further and spin the borderline retarded jury into believing something in their legal illiteracy but Fuhrman was between a rock and a hard place so pleading the 5th also looked bad but at least protected him from further assault.
If only Bugliosi has been the prosecutor, he alone could have taken on all of O.J’s slimy, scheming lawyers and won that case for Ron and Nicole and sent O.J. straight to the slammer! I would’ve watched the whole thing. If only....... 😕
Thank you for this video. It is very informative. Even though the evidence is there, the jurors cannot or will not believe that OJ did this. This case is very sad in the fact that two people lost their lives and as you say, OJ just keeps on smiling. Although the lawyers defended their client well (which they will say, is their purpose) this trial became a three ring circus and I don't know how they look at themselves in the mirror. What ever happened to justice! Thank you for providing the public with a more accurate version of the situation.
Yes, there is definitely a lot of smiling going on by OJ, even when discussing the murder of the person who he says was one of the closest to him in his life. OJ has an intense need to be liked, to retain that hero status he once had, and has gone on a multitude of interviews in a desperate attempt to smile and convince people that he is still that great person everyone thought he was. He thrives on that admiration. Losing that is clearly more important to him then losing Nicole.
@@brian4019 When OJ smiles while discussing how he "would have" killed Nicole and Ron, he's not only laughing at how he did it, got away with it and is now freely confessing while being protected by double jeopardy, but he's laughing at every fool who keeps defending him and saying he's innocent, particularly Cochran, Bailey and Scheck, and all those racists who cheered for him. To this day, I'm sure all he's doing is laughing at their stupidity.
Justice was thrown away by people like u who believe whatever u see or hear on the news. It was thrown away when people like u support americas military. It was thrown away when people like u are racist. It was thrown away when people like u stole this land and country from native americans. It was thrown away when people like u went against your own country Britain. Should i continue and go on???? Or are u getting the picture!
Darden was a Buffon. He made it seem as if black people weren’t intelligent enough to hear the n word being uttered and to not have an emotional response.
@@GregoryKeller Well he was right about a percentage. Remember before the trial it said over 90% of blacks said they believed race was not an issue, but then over 70% believed it was after race became part of the trial. Cochran and Bailey knew who they were dealing with, and Darden knew Cochran inside out, Cochran was once like a mentor to him.
@@TDKiller415 No. It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
@@simonepeterson3301 It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
Bugliosi is an extremely capable attorney. Had he been the lead prosecutor in The People v. O.J. Simpson the result would have been different. But damn, his ego has ego!
Bugliosi is one of my heroes. I’ve read some of his books, listened to him in interviews, and the way he logically makes his argument and destroys opposing views is inspiring. He uses hard evidence, logic, and common sense, and woe to anyone with an opposing view. If I were president, I’d have put Vince on the Supreme Court, given his integrity and his knowledge of the law. Sad he’s gone now; I would’ve liked to meet him.
He says in the second part of this video, "If I had wings maybe I could fly." Well, he now has them-angel wings. Too bad he didn't prosecute this case, Simpson would've joined Manson behind bars.
The Most Brilliant Criminal Mind Of All Time Luv This Guy He Actually Keeps In Touch With His Clients And When He Went To The Other Side And Worked As A Defense Attorney,He Wouldn't Take Any Client That Was Guilty morals and values died with this man so sad
I was once impressed by Dr. Lee. But after reading several of his books I changed my opinion. His case studies were filled with inconsistencies and contradictions. 🧐
@@pommiebears Both were forced to admit that they were paid to give false testimony in the murder trial. In the civil trial, Fujisaki only allowed Baden to talk about contamination in this case, and he admitted there was none. Henry Lee later published a study that disproved all the blood planting and contamination claims. All those experts were approached by the prosecution but they sided with OJ because of money. One was domestic abuse expert Lenore Walker, and she later admitted that testifying for OJ for a paycheck ruined her career because her peers turned her away for betraying her own cause.
I was cleaning my kitchen overhead extractor hood the other day. It’s stainless and it needs polishing to keep it clean. I ran my finger along the top and sliced into the top of my finger. Not a huge cut, but it bled fairly well. You couldn’t have gotten a cut as deep as the cut on OJ’s knuckle and not know or remember how you did it....no way. If a small cut is enough to make you aware, and have to tend to it, that whopping slit on his finger would definitely need cleaning and a plaster.
This has nothing to do with the trial. You're not an expert on humans. According to the evidence, OJ didn't cut his hand until he was in Chicago ( th-cam.com/video/lsFj2Xb4q9g/w-d-xo.html ).
@@c.reaves2670 are you serious? He is badass. As far as Prosecutors go he is probably up there with the best to ever live. His record is 150 to 1. He successfully convicted a man for capital murder who wasn't even at the crime scene, that alone is an incredible feat. He inspired me to pursue a career in law. He and Jane Goodall are my heroes.
JusticeForTheSilenced I guess you’re right. A badass prosecutor doesnt mean that you (meaning him) was a good human. I'm referring to him stalking a milk man ( crazy story🤔)and attacking his mistress (another crazy bizzare story).
Crazy looking back on how huge that case was. I was in Jr High when they paused class an rolled tvs into the classrooms to watch the verdict live. I remember my teacher was outraged.
With this much evidence, anyone should have been able to get a conviction. It would have been epic to watch Bugliosi. Instead, the DA chose to appear PC so we got dimwitted, mumbling, plodding, apologetic Darden and the thoroughly-unlikable scatterbrained Marcia.
What evidence? The prosecution couldn't even explain how the preservative got in the blood samples. The gloves didn't fit. The timeline made it impossible for OJ to have killed anyone. Hahaha!
@@TDKiller415 In that same interview, OJ clearly said it's not a confession and that's it's just a hypothetical. He literally said it was a hypothetical multiple times throughout the interview. That's a fact. Here's my source for you (th-cam.com/video/EjSE8qn0Jk0/w-d-xo.html). This is important because the book contract says OJ has to do a promotional tour for a fictional book, which is the interview that you are referring to. That's the only reason why the interview was even taking place, because he was promoting a book where the contract for the book says he must do a promotional tour for a fictional account of what happened. This is very obvious. Please keep up. You know he's innocent, but you don't want to accept it.
Seeing and hearing the pain in Fred Goldmans face and voice brings tears to my eyes. So unfair that he and his family not only lost Ron in such a horrible way, they couldn’t even see justice done. Glad they were able to turn things around in the civil case..they absolutely deserved some form of closure.
Saying OJ Simpson is guilty is one thing, but proving your case beyond a reasonable doubt is another thing. That is something most people do not understand about the legal system. Your emotions have no bearing on the law. The glove did not fit; Mark Furman planted evidence and pled the 5th; there was missing blood: the Bronco was vandalized while in police custody; contaminated crime scene with blood not belong to any of the victims; blood appearing inside the Bronco after it was impounded by the police; travel time irregularity were enough to make the jurors doubtful of the charges.
@@TDKiller415 Agreed. I would have had Bugliosi as the lead, then Kelberg, Hodgman and Harmon as supporting members of the team and I think we could have at least had a hung jury.
@@Romulan2469 If he led the team there would be no hung jury, because he would've had the trial held in Santa Monica with a white jury that would've sent that murderer to jail for life, not like that bastard Garcetti who just wanted more black people to vote for him
Julian Sciberras one juror said if they’d had video of him doing it, she still wouldn’t have voted guilty.......because she thinks the prosecution didn’t PROVE IT. She must have been blind and stupid to not have seen all the proof.
@@pommiebears That juror was obviously a racist who was incapable of making a fair decision. Simply because a videotape of OJ committing those murders, IF presented in court, would have been enough "proof" for any juror of average intelligence to vote for conviction.
I would say Deion Sanders. He was a Pro Football Hall of Famer and played in the Super Bowl. He played in the World Series as a baseball player. Was a rapper. Also a announcer and a College Football Coach.
@@mikeallen5865 deion is no where close to the popularity of the two mentioned in OP. Ask pretty much anyone if they know Shaq male or female and majority will say yes. Now imagine even asking a woman if they know who deion sanders is. Would be weird even bringing his name up because more than likely they will say no.
Tiger Woods in his prime as far as likeability. OJ was so famous even people like me knew him despite his career ending when i was 3. he was Nordberg and the sideline reporter at NBC college and pro football games to people my age.
Marcia Clark was incompetent and grossly insensitive. She was just thinking of her book deal. Thank god she retired after this case. Who wouldn’t after she lost this obvious guilty case.
I've certainly never liked how, after the ACS season came out, that Clark was turned into a "feminist hero" and someone who was unfairly maligned. I get that attacking her for her appearance was a cheap and low blow that the press should never have done, but her actual performance speaks volumes. If anything, she might be projecting who she is NOW onto who she was THEN.
This is really really good. He also did a great mock trial with Gerry Spence and won a conviction against Oswald. Love the way the trial and video clips are weaved in with commentary from many of the players. 🙏 rip vince....a true "crime dog."
Wish Vincent got his wish and prosecuted all the people he thinks deserves it. The Prosecutor telling OJ to try on the gloves, served no purpose. And then getting the Isotoner CEO to testify. That their gloves shrink after getting wet?? Reminds me of the Deal Of The century wet drone scene. 😃
...all your points are spot ON, but you forget, the jury would NOT find him guilty even IF they were shown a video of him actually committing the murder....period.
Correct. Bugliosi’s presentation is accurate but also what we lawyers call “immaterial,” i.e. it wouldn’t have made any difference even if everything had been done perfectly. He doesn’t seem to realize that Simpson was a hero to blacks for making it in the world of white business, the first black guy to do so, really, so his being exposed as a murderer would have killed their collective self-esteem. Lincoln anticipated all this when he suggested that they be repatriated to Africa after emancipation.
Having watched both parts of this video several times, I have come to the conclusion that the prosecution, Clark and Darden, did not introduce in to evidence Simpson’s damning and insaley guilty police interrogation tape and Bronco chase because they WANTED to lose the case. Why they wanted to lose the case, I can only speculate. When Darden looked at the jury and said “I’m glad I’m not the one making that decision”, I almost took it as a threat. Why the hell would a prosecutor tell a juror “I’m glad I’m not in your shoes”. He should be saying “I wish I was in your shoes, finding Simpson guilty would be the easiest thing ever!!” They threw this case on purpose but needed to look like they were taking it serious. This is beyond incompetence. The fact that Simpson lost the civil case immediately right after speaks to the fact that there was enough evidence to make a solid case. I know civil case requires less proof, but we should’ve got a hung jury instead of an innocence result. This stupid trial went on for ten useless months. Everyone reading this would’ve slam dunked this case immediately if they went up to the jury day 1 and said “Simpson’s DNA was found in every crime scene, Nicole’s blood was found in his car, his hair was found in the skull cap, he has no alibi for the time of the murder, and he tried to run on national TV.” Darden and Clarke’s silly selves go up in front of everyone and start off with “eVeRyoNe LoVeS oJ, nO oNe wAnTs tO HuRt hIm”. 🤦🏽♂️
One of the greatest lawyers in American History. This should be studied by anyone wanting to be a lawyer.
This is the kind of a lawyer people should be studying not Johnny Cochran.
Greatest? Nahhh that goes to Johnnie
@@movieman175agreed. Johnny took advantage of racial tensions. Anyone could of done that. Sad how jury ate it up. Ignored the evidence. Hopefully everyone got their OJ WON PRIZE in the mail as Chris rock has said.
@@slickrick2420Johnny wasn’t even a good lawyer. Used race card. Ironic. Anyone could of done that. Unintelligent jurors fell for it and ignored evidence. Still waiting for your OJ won prize? Shows you how bad the prosecutors were. Sad how the jurors behaved. Sad day for American Justice. But that’s your opinion. That’s fine.
@@slickrick2420 He played the race card from the bottom of the deck. He saw everything through the lens of racism even if it was nonexistent. He walked around with the Nation of Islam as his bodyguards. Cochran's shtick was always the same racism card, predictable same old MO. Bugliosi was far superior as a trial lawyer to Cochran. Cochran just got lucky with a biased jury wanting pay back for Rodney King.
OJ Simpson can finally rest knowing that his wife's killer is dead.
Who’s here after OJ died no one?!?!
I'm here because of Simpson's death. Going over this trial again.
R.I.P OJ we know you were innocent.❤
We all are. Even you!!
@@padussia Troll alert.
@@padussia🤣
The look on Robert Kardashian’s face when the verdict was announced says it all..
and kris jenner admitted that robert had his own feelings..leaning toward guilt and was disgusted by o.j. he even ignored his call as he laid on his dead bed! he couldn't look away from the overwhelming evidence
Shock- I really think he expected a guilty verdict.
Actually the defense said that Oj told them all to look like that intentionally . They all agreed to not cheer and celebrate till after because they knew the media would crucify them for that and criticize them for being insensitive to Ron and Nicole’s family if a happy reaction was caught on camera .
I think OJ is innocent but he knows who did it. Drug dealers killed her because Oj stopped paying her and Faye resnicks debts
A look of shocked, surprised, & confusion. Rob knew his best friend was guilty. You gotta see his Barbara Walter's interview 1996. Rob admitted he believed OJ was guilty & why.
Don't forget he was part of the 'dream team' so he couldn't be a witness. Nicole was his friend too.
Terrible jury, terrible judge, terrible prosecutors…The case was doomed from the beginning
Well said
The jury was terrible.The prosecution did an OK job
I just now noticed the reaction of OJ's attorneys. Except for Cochran, the rest looked absolutely dismayed, and rightly so. They knew that scumbag was as guilty as sin.
Yes especially Robert Kardashian's expression said everything, when his horribly unjust wrong not guilty verdict was read, he looked totally shocked and disgusted.
Bullshit.
The job of a defense lawyer is to WIN.
And they were happy, their careers are on the line, otherwise they wouldn't be there lmao
I know this guy has passed. But...he could have answered his own question about how OJ got off. Just ask the all WHITE jurors....corrupt judges....corrupt prosecutors....corrupt police....corrupt defense teams from the 50's 60's 70's who convicted INNOCENT black people back then. Then he wouldn't have even had to write his book about OJ.
Hpw long does one play with a snake before it bites you?
Btw...WTH is an average jury? One that looks like a sixties jury?
Robert Kardashian looks like he's thinking "Oh crap, what have I done? I never thought they'd actually find this guy not guilty, since he is indeed."
Yeah no attorney would want to lose the biggest case of the century. In front of the whole world.
Had the worse judge in history for this case!!!!
Yes, Ito seemed just about paralyzed by all the issues involved with every decision he took: OJ’s notoriety, the media pressure, the racial issue. He was like a doe in the headlights.
Where's judge Judy when you need her most?
@@myriamickx7969 He loved every second of it! Ito has an ego the size of a Mack truck!
Lance Ito with his nasal feminine voice and 2 inches in his pants probably felt threatened and emasculated his whole life by television images of white confidence, deep voiced masculinity and therefore constantly ruled against whiteness. Even having a white wife (who somehow tolerated him all these years) was not enough to reassure his constantly faltering ego. Pathetic. Testosterone level < 50 Ito.
Ito seemed to be working for the defense.
Vincent Bugliosi seems a genuine, honest, and sincere man. The way he speaks not only oozes with compassion, but also an appropriate toughness with a humorous edge.
I'll tell you what outraged me. Hearing a juror who was treated to trips to New York with all the ensuing treats, shows, fancy dinners etc. saying to a reporter The best thing that ever happened to me was the OJ case. I was shocked and saddened, two dead people brutally knifed to death and a woman with no compassion or empathy serving on the jury.
That's America for ya.
Agree, disgusting thing to say
The idea that pleading the 5th should imply guilt is contrary to justice. He did it yes but come on.
And that was back in the '90's. Today that kind of person is celebrated. Those who worship money and fame over anyone or anything are sick people indeed.
@@clockworkNateIt is America. How gross of a circus was this case, whether Simpson was guilty or innocent? People lined up on bridges, holding "Go Juice" signs, or people cheering and jumping up and down when the not guilty verdict was read, like it was a football game.
Even Johnnie Cochran was pumping his fist and saying yes, when the verdict was read, which ANY decent attorney, or HUMAN BEING for that matter, knows is insensitive and a no no.
This case exposed some serious illness about a lot of people in this country. You dont cheer. Two people lost their lives, and two kids were motherless for the rest of their lives. There should be some acknowledgement of that in terms of peoples behavior.
Really gross.
i wish bugliosi had been the prosecutor in this case
So do I!
It wouldn't have mattered who the Prosecutor was it could of been Atticus Fitch, that jury was not going to convict OJ.
Nate Hester I don’t think so...Vincent Bugliosi was brilliant!
Vincent Bugliosi said he would never had agreed on this jury and would have had the case transferred to were it took place. Yes. This jury was bias, terrible, and simply put, God Awful.
It would have been a much better prosecution had Mr. Bugliosi and Daniel Petrocelli been in charge. With a more diverse and better educated jury they had a very good shot at a conviction. The wildcard being the sleazy tactics of Johnny Cockroach who successfully managed to deflect from his client and put the LAPD on trial. But in the end I think they could have neutralized Cockroach.
Thank you SO MUCH for posting this! It’s like Bugliosi Art of War!
Yes, O.J. Simpson searched far and wide on every golf course in America for the killer.
He didn't even have the balls to read the letter himself, he made Jason do it. That weak coward who only knew how to beat and kill women.
And he's supposed to be a hero for black America 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️ I think his acquittal was a bigger accomplishment for black Americans than Obama becoming president.
@@TDKiller415 The only coward was that bigot Fuhrman. He wasn't even man enough to admit he used a racial insult to describe African Americans. And then pled the 5th when he was cornered. Now who's really a coward?
@@TDKiller415 OJ didn't kill anyone. They already proved that during the trial. There was only one documented domestic violence incident, where him and Nicole were wrestling on the bed... that's it.
@@23_Knows_ALL They even PROVED he didn't kill anyone? LMAO.
Meanwhile actual innocent men and women are rotting in prison.
Priorities.
@@rashun506 Fuhrman was wrong to do that, yes, but that was not perjury, because it was nothing to do with the actual case. Whats next? Ask the detective about their sexual orientation, medical history etc and if he lies about ONE of them then he's not to be trusted? If that were allowed then there would be no real trials. Get a grip, clown, what Fuhrman said or did was nothing to do with the trial. The only reason it seemed that way was because that idiot Ito mishandled the trial. If he lied about where or when he found the glove, THEN it would cast doubt, not racial slurs. What? If OJ were white and Nicole, Ron and Fuhrman were black, would Fuhrman lying about using the term "white motherfucker" be so important to you?
And don't forget, OJ ran from the police, ran from reading the note to find the killer, and eventually ran away from California to Florida, partially because of the civil suit, and partly because most of California believed he was a killer, whites and young blacks wanted nothing to do with him, but in Florida he was rather fresh.
Now who's a coward?
According to a more recent interview with one of the jury members, 90 percent of those on the jury felt that acquitting OJ, was "payback" for Rodney King.
When asked whether she (the juror) believed that was right or wrong, she held up her hands. As if to say, who knows ? Perhaps, she meant, "who cares?"
I tend to think the jury were going to acquit OJ from day 1.
This is the pertinent section of the interview with juror Carrie Best
---
Interviewer: Do you think there are members of the jury that voted to acquit OJ because of Rodney King?
Bess: Yes.
Interviewer: You do?
Bess: Yes.
Interviewer: How many of you do you think felt that way?
Bess: Oh, probably 90 percent of them.
Interviewer: 90 percent. Did you feel that way?
Bess: Yes.
Interviewer: That was payback.
Bess: Uh-huh [in agreement]
Interviewer: Do you think that's right ?
In response to this question, the juror "holds up her hands".
---
Source:
www.thewrap.com/oj-simpson-juror-not-guilty-verdict-was-payback-for-rodney-king/
she even went as far as blaming Nicole for staying with OJ for so long, obviously she doesnt know how having kids together complicates such a big decision.
and of course the fact that battered women all stick around too long. considering Nicole had finally ended it for good weeks before the murders, this lady was wrong on many levels.
I agree with you. It's actually quite shocking how this case was tried. If they were really out to convict OJ, they fucked up on nearly every turn. Especially when choosing to move the case to LA, or for allowing him to try on those gloves with latex gloves underneath and without some kind of control over it. Absolutely dumb on their part. On the bright side everyone involved boosted their careers and pretty much all of them came out with a book as well.
Even if they had caught ok in the act jury would have sent him free
but because she's black, she can get away with it 100%, what a privilege
Race should never have been an issue in this case. It was about the brutal murder of two innocent people.
Trust me. Goldman wasn’t the person his dad thought he was. He was a coke dealer. The whole restaurant was.
@@Tmillea Who are you that we should trust you. That might be true but Juice must have been hired to off him when he just happened to be at Nicole's so he could off her too.
@@Tmillea
Why do you think you’ll never see any photos of Ron with his father. Fred disowned him because he was disappointed how much of a ****upRon has become.
@@daffyduckfan4478 I know that.
Well you should have told that racist Furhman not to “find” a glove. Also, that idiot admitted on tape to planting evidence
Vincent Bugliosi was a master of argument. What a great legal mind!
No jury was going to convict OJ in LA after the Rodney King thing
No black jury.
Like Jody Arias stated about herself, mark my words, No jury will ever convict me..." Mark my Words".
@@jumpropestairs6129 the jury was an integrated group, their were black, white, and Hispanic combined making a tough decision.
That jury wouldn't convict NO MATTER WHAT.
@@January. While I had to agree with you, and looking closer at it with more objectivity, ( if the evidence could be trusted) you may be correct; But it certainly does appear that it still looks like Mark a furhmam. definitely may have planted the glove! That guy was creepy and probably an abject hardcore Bigot...Remember, the fact that he Lied about the * N" wod means he can not be trusted..
Vincent Bugliosi was an absolute legend. I wish all lawyers had his fortitude, wisdom, and skill.
He's the "Michael Jordan" of prosecutors. Watching him is like watching Michael. He's really that much better than the rest.
I am a practicing criminal trial lawyer of 11 years. There is no one that equals Bugliosi. He is the greatest criminal lawyer ever.
Go Irish What cases have you watched of vincent¿
eric Mays not sure what that’s supposed to prove whether he watched or not. I didn’t watch one game with Wilt Chamberlain but know he’s one of the best ever because of his record and what his peers say. Vincent won a crazy amount of cases for an ADA. It’s like 103 out of 104 actual jury trials. He also successfully prosecuted a mock trial against Lee Harvey Oswald against Gerry Spence (which I did watch) and won. Spence was a well known and nationally respected defense lawyer - as big if not bigger than any on the dream team OJ had. Gerry said he’s the most thorough and dogged prosecutor he went up against. Even if it was a mock trial. Vince wrote several books on other cases and how we would’ve prosecuted. He is, by far, the most prominent prosecutor of the last 50+ years. Simply asking what cases someone personally watched is disengenuous. What games of Babe Ruth or Ty Cobb did you watch and is that the only way to determine whether they were legends in their particular area?
Totally Agreed! His experience, wisdom and personality was much better than Clark's or Darden's.
Clark was used to dealing with underfunded and overburdened public defenders,,,,,,, she was flustered when dealing with Dream-team. On the other hand, Barry Sheck came off as a spoiled brat who needed a good spanking---too bad Ito wasn't up to the task of giving it to him. In fact, the whole Dream Team was pretty creepy.
She was boning the team lol
Don't make excuses for her, that's the job she accepted and this is the equivalent of the Super Bowl for her profession, to use a dumb analogy. This was her chance to show that race, celebrity status, etc., didn't matter, and that the people of her constituency deserved justice no matter who the perpetrator was. She tanked it. Let's be honest, the case was thrown by the prosecution because of the racial tension in California in regard to the Rodney King case and the L.A.P.D. Did you watch this video? From the venue being changed, to the surreal amount of evidence purposefully left out, to even going as far as to set themselves up to look foolish. For example, the prosecution gave the defense the tape of O.J. in a jovial mood at the recital BEFORE questioning Denise Brown about him being angry and brooding. They KNEW the defense had that and would show it to destroy their witness's testimony. The prosecution also knew Fuhrman had used the "N" word in the previous decade and yet chose him as one of the officers they called as a witness, instead of up to 14 other non-racist officers they could have chose. They set themselves up to fail. There's no way two lawyers who work for the D.A. for the State of California are dumb enough to leave out everything that they chose to leave out.
I am proud Sheck has used his OJ notoriety and his DNA knowledge for the "Innocence Project". I agree Sheck acted like a short mouthy Jew lawyer and the rest of them looked ridiculous publicly backing those silly planted evidence theories. They were smarter than Clark and Garcetti, the downtown LA decision lost this case out of the gate. OJ won and the taxpayers lost ( and all safety conscious- non murderer liking people everywhere)
The closing arguments by Clark and Darden were a total embarrassment for them,
Absolutely awful, weren’t they?
@@pommiebears Yes.....They had issues beyond their control but none the less ....
@@pommiebears I think the evidence they presented was more than enough, but they definitely should've gone all out shredding the defence's contradicting theories to pieces, and also having OJ try on the gloves and then villifying Fuhrman didn't help.
@@TDKiller415 The prosecutors didn't vilify Fuhrman. They defended his reputation. Unfortunately, Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape made people think again. And I think he added little extra to the scene to solidify it was OJ, but that created an opening for the defence
@@hus390 Really? So Marcia Clark referring to Fuhrman as a racist, the worst the LAPD has to offer and better off never born was defending his reputation? Chris Darden saying that Fuhrman didn't deserve the title of detective because he didn't warrant that kind of respect, that was a way of defending his reputation?
Maybe in Wonderland, it is. The same world where the abusive father tells his victim son that he is his only real friend.
Defending Fuhrman's reputation would be pointing out that Fuhrman had successfully exonerated African Americans in the past such as Arrick Harris and also pointing out that his use of the n-word for the fictional screenplay was the same as a black police officer using anti-white slurs for a fictional screenplay, and that Fuhrman had no motive to try and frame OJ, since if OJ had a valid alibi and Fuhrman was found out, he would be facing life in prison. THAT would be defending Fuhrman's reputation. Clark and Darden did more damage to him than Cochran. All Cochran and Bailey did was ask him if he used the n-word and then produce the tapes. Clark and Darden were the ones who went all out making him look even worse than OJ.
over 6 hours of Vincent? perfect
This case went from "the people of the state of California vs.Orenthall James Simpson" to the case of "the O.J. Simpson defense team vs. the LAPD.
Because they appointed a judge who didn't take control of the courtroom and let his ego become inflated due to a few media and "dancing Ito" sound bites!!!
This case was a failure of a lot things mostly societal problems we have with race and guilt trips. 1992 Rodney king beating made the da Gil garceti the liberal tool to feeel the ness the bring the case downtown because wanted to prove the black jurors will not be biased and try at he is transparent with the black community. He gave the non guilty verdict on the silver platter he is liberal idiot like his mayor son.
Bugliosi would have destroyed the planted glove theory and of course wouldn’t have been stupid enough to turn over a demonstration to the murderer himself.
The defence would have asked OJ to try the gloves. Come on!! Bugliosi wouldn't have fared better than Darden. ⚠️It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
exactly... also i found it telling that o.j. was VERY EAGER to try on those gloves...no nervousness, no hesitation, and the fact the killer wore them to unalive the mama of his kids.. he goes into over acting mode... his lawyer made fun of it in the LMN docu
True but Clark didn't want to.rehabilate the police.
This was excellent. Thank you
This historical criminal case might have had the worst cast of participants ever: Judge Ito, DAs Clark and Darden, Defen$e Team, jurors and the murderer. So much time, money, emotions and resources were wasted. 🤦🏼
Thank you so much for speaking up and standing up for the truth‼️‼️‼️❗️I have no faith in our judicial and justice system, especially after the last election‼️‼️‼️❗️Corruption has its jaws deep and wide in this country‼️‼️‼️❗️I was in court eight years fighting my ex and received no justice because he had the money and the tital‼️‼️‼️❗️
I initially thought the prosecution did a fine job. With incredibly clear reasoning and argument, Bugliosi demolished my perception. He is an amazing lawyer.
They did better than Vince is giving them credit for. I mean, some of the evidence was unquestionably obvious and the jury chose to ignore those facts. Any other trial and they get a conviction with half of what they had against OJ.
Tells it like it is. Much as some may not want to hear it. He's simply stating them with rigorous candour. Helps the voice is relaxing to hear.
It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
IF O.J. IS INNOCENT NICOLE BROWN & RON GOLDMAN ARE STILL ALIVE HE IS 100.% GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU MR Bugliosi
Thank you for the upload. We appreciate it.
Bugliosi is brilliant
Bugliosi is a deadpan comedy genius. Hahaha
And Cochran was an expert in black comedy (no pun intended), because he turned a murder trial into a race comedy circus. I thought only Martin Scorsese had that talent.
He’d have given Cochran a hell of a run for his money. A lot better than Marcia Clark did by telling Cochran she was wearing no underwear
It is OBVIOUS that this CLOWN is a racist! (👎). When he mouthed off telling the public that 9 of the jurors were BLACKS (out of 12 persons), i went "oh, oh, i know what's being insinuated"; n then he led onto How of lowly mind/intelligence the jurors were, i had expected that to come out. Then he attacked Johnny Cochran as a low grade lawyer; n then..... AS I EXPECTED!!! - the esteemed judge Ito ALSO!!! came criticised as incompetent! So, this channel has given Vincent Bugliosi his chance to show his RACISM!! (👎).
Let's be FAIR!! - let this channel gv Marcia Clark n her fellow prosecution lawyers/team members a chance to explain/clarify How UNFAIR Vincent's criticisms were.
This is the best stuff I've ever seen in my life 😊😊😊😊
The judge was a moron & prejudice & so were the jury. The prosecution team was way out of their league! Simpson was & still is guilty & got away with murder. The defense “dream team” should be ashamed of themselves for defending a man they KNEW was guilty! Karma has a way of showing itself!
Lawyers should NOT be ashamed at defending a person they knew was guilty. The accused have EVERY right to a lawyer of their choosing.
Weird rationalization for helping a killer evade justice.
No, it's essential that EVERYONE get a robust defense that tries its best. But they should do so ethically. The OJ defense played the race card and manipulated the jury instead of relying on evidence.
This is the most comprehensive, no BS , honest assessment of this case that I’ve ever seen and I have watched many. Perry Mason ain’t got nothing on Vincent B!!!
7:58 is by far the best description of just how crazy this entire fiasco was.
Before the interview began and throughout the interview, OJ said multiple times that the book is fictional and he's telling the interviewer what's in the book. He's trying to remember what's in the book. He isn't the author of the book. The book that you're speaking of has already been proven by a number of people to be factually inaccurate (Brian Heiss 2018).
Glen Rogers.
I was so angry and furious. Seeing vincent ripping those incompetent ones apart is so satisfying.
Was you angry when that lady admitted on her death bed that Emmit Till didn't do what she said he did?.
Were you angry when those guys bombed the church in the 60's that killed those 4 black children? And we're given lite sentences?
Were you angry when corrupt judges.... corrupt prosecutors...corrupt defense teams...and all Caucasian jurors convicted innocent black people during that time?
As a black man who was about 21 during the OJ case I felt deep down he did it. I still feel that now. But I also can understand why this jury voted the way it did. These systems have been against black people for a long time. And then you have Furhman admitting on tape they would plant evidence and quote un quote beat N1$$4RS to a pulp.
The jury did what they felt they had to do. Get some type of satisfaction.
“Mental midgets” 😆
For some weird reason, I find a lot of comfort in listening to the amazing Vincent Bugliosi give his common sense assessment of the case. Would’ve been epic had he been the key prosecutor in this circus of a trial.
Me too! It's a shame he wasn't the lead prosecutor in this sham of a trial!
My God, so do I!! Me Bugliosi could have earned a conviction for the People against this murderous narcissist by himself, alone, with one arm tied behind his back!! What a brilliant man! In contrast, look at the lives of the "Dream Team". Most of them died prematurely, or had tragedy in their private or professional lives. Ponder on THAT for a brief minute!
If you read Outrage, you would've seen some of these same comments he says here. But it is still great to watch this legend. RIP Vince.
@@sha11235 he's not making any credible points. Everything he's saying here was already refuted very well during the trial by the defense team. This tape is trash. OJ is still innocent.
@@23_Knows_ALL You mean the same OJ who said to Judith Regan in 2006:
"I remember I grabbed the knife, then I'm seeing these two bodies. I'd never seen so much blood in my life. Obviously I must've dropped the glove there because thats where the police found it."
Yeah, yeah, VERY innocent. Kind of reminds me of the Emmett Till case. You must love double jeopardy.
One of my absolutely favorite writers !!! So hlad I found this
Too bad Vince is gone. Great job on the JFK case with his monumental book and trial, and in this case. We don’t need a retrial of the OJ case….we just got it on these two videos
Vince had to go eventually. But he lived a long life and left a great legacy. I wish more attorneys acted like him.
Too bad Vince could not live to see this day.
Can you imagine it? Vincent Bugliosi as lead prosecutor. Having the case tried in Santa Monica, with a more educated and wealthy jury (OJ’s real peers) and not using Fuhrman?
OJ would be still rotting in jail.
He still would've used Fuhrman, he had to because he was the one Kato directed to the second glove, but he would've instructed Fuhrman to tell the truth about using the n-word and apologise for it so that the defence would have no reason to prove that he was a liar or perjurer by getting those irrelevant tapes. Clark and Darden didn't prepare him properly, but Fuhrman shouldn't have been stupid enough to lie.
And here i am again after O.J.'s death so I can get riled up all over again.
You're not the only one...😅
Same!
Yeah we're sick and dumb for getting sucked into this negativity huh?!🤣🤦♂
Thanks for the video 🇨🇴😎👍
The jury wasn’t very bright. How do we know they’re not very bright? The not guilty verdict tells us these people were not very bright. 😂😂😂😂
Clark and Darden were way out of their league.
@haileyh500: Waaaaaaaay out. They were overwhelmed.
Factz
Someone told Marcia before the trial that this was a case she couldn’t win. You have to think who it was in the defense, who was defending him, and where and when it was. Circumstances were against the prosecution only.
John Michael that’s what happens when you put 2 inexperienced idiots at the helm of a trial you want them to lose
Marcia Clark was anything but inexperienced. You could have had Moses prosecuting this case and they would have found him not guilty.
Vincent was right to speak out about Simpson's guilt before the trial. He sets the record straight.
Too bad he was a HYPOCRITE!
@@aftonelaineburton1596 Bugliosi was an uppity a-hole. It's not very layer-like to go on TV and say "the jury was dumb". Granted I'm absolutely sure the average John Q Juror has an IQ lower than his shoe-size but a former prosecutor shouldn't say it on TV.
Imagine if Bugliosi had still been the DA: "Thank you, members of the jury. What we expect you to do, now, is to go to that room, deliberate, and then come back with a guilty verdict"..... 4 hours later..... "Fuck you, you stupid fucking morons! You should've never been put on that panel to begin with! And I'm sure you found him not guilty because most of you are black!".
Seriously that's what it sounds like.
I love how Bugliosi claims he doesn't "have a racist bone" in his body and - yet - he doesn't shy away from the word (I have to use it to make a point) "nigger".
He could've said "The N word" and we would've all known what he was talking about.
But - NO - the used the word 15 times, during the Fuhrman-related section of the interview.
Also I think he sounds like a 1st class moron when he called the jurors dumb cause they didn't go to college.
Since when have education and intelligence been the same thing?
According to this logic (let's wind the clock back 60-70 years) if his father, who was an Italian-American grocery store owner, or his grandfather who came to America on a boat and later on became a US citizen, people who probably never cracked a book in their lives, had been jurors on a murder trial where another Italian American was the accused, and IF they had found the defendant not guilty, they would've been accused of being biased ("Hey they're WOPs. What do you expect?") and they would've been accused of being dumb Italians who didn't go to college.
Should have been tryed in Santa Monica ..west LA had jurisdiction and the results would have been much different
@@phillophotographer7366 How much of this did you watch the first 30 seconds? He stated the opposite he said that is what the excuse prosecutors office was telling people the Jury had a low IQ and the verdict was based on race. Bugliosi said if the Prosecutors office prosecuted it correctly this jury would have found OJ guilty. He says the first vote they got 2 to 10 vote guilty on a F performance from the prosecutors office if prosecutors had an A performance would have gotten a 10
thanks for this!
I like that he says what everyone is thinking. The jury is not very bright 😂
One thing to remember:
When one party sticks to one story and remembers it right down to the last detail, its pretty obvious they're telling the truth.
When the other party has to come up with all sorts of theories which are full of baseless allegations and outright contradictions, its pretty obvious its a pack of lies.
You don't have to be racist or biased to know who's telling the truth. You just have to be outright stupid to fall for obvious lies.
You're absolutely right. Nonetheless, as we both know, that's what we're going to be accused of - racism, bias, or being "apologists" for racism (OJ25, anyone?) lol. You can silence anyone by calling them racists these days, no matter how far away from being a racist you are. It's almost as bad as cancel culture.
@@Juliet_Tobin It actually IS cancel culture. It was the same with the Depp/Heard trial. The mainstream media were going all out referring to Depp as a sexist silencer and his supporters as biased sexists and misogynists, while ignoring all of the physical evidence that proved Heard was the abuser and the testimonies where she contradicted herself and indicated quite clearly that she was the liar.
The Simpson trial was actually one of the earliest examples of woke agendas and cancel culture. Not one media outlet dared to refer to OJ as a murderer, just like with Amber Heard. No one will dare call her an abuser like the Sun called Depp a wife beater with no proof. Bugliosi was the first prominent figure to speak out, but because by then Cochran and Bailey had run their mouths about conspiracy theories and the mainstream media had ignored all of the evidence that proved OJ guilty and instead made villains out of Clark, Darden and Fuhrman, the majority were brainwashed into thinking OJ was framed, so thats why most people these days refer to figures like Bugliosi, Daniel Petrocelli, Hiroshi Fujisaki, Jeffrey Toobin, Jackie Glass and Ezra Edelman as either racist, one-sided or sell-outs.
@@TDKiller415 I agree with you. This is a slight segue way but the consequences of Heard's actions are going to be devastating for authentic DV victims. I've already noticed more than one of the "OJ is innocent" cult now compare Nicole to Amber. Poor Nicole! It's awful.
@@Juliet_Tobin I still remember Camille Vasquez asking the jury to imagine it was Depp verbally abusing Amber on the tapes. She played the media's own game against them, in a way indirectly accusing them of being biased and misandrist by hearing the evidence and still supporting Amber and denouncing Depp.
Here, Clark and Darden should have played the race game too, since Ito had allowed the defence to. In their closing arguments, one of them should've asked the jury to imagine all of the same evidence and circumstances, but that OJ and Cochran were white and Nicole, Ron and Fuhrman were black, and Cochran was making these conspiracy allegations to claim a black police detective wanted to frame a white man based on reverse-racism, and then ask them if they would believe it or if they would know it was another white on black crime and add Nicole and Ron's names to the long list including Rodney King and Latasha Harlins.
But it doesn't matter anyway, both OJ and Amber confessed to their crimes. OJ confessed on television to Judith Regan in 2006 about dropping the glove at Bundy, and Amber admitted during her trial that she did write the op-ed and it was indeed about "Johnny's power".
@@TDKiller415 I like your style. You use rational thought and common sense...both too often missing in today's conversations.
Thanks for uploading this! In college I watched the whole thing on several VHS tapes...over several days.
If any person watches this, in its entirety, and still believes OJ did not commit this crime, they are either too stupid to understand evidence of a crime or they simply enjoy lying to themselves.
Ur 100% correct
Or deep down they're happy that a black man got away with butchering two whites, but they're trying so hard to hide it via conspiracy theories that they don't realise they're making their anti-white racism all the more obvious.
If blacks truly wanted to make a difference via tit for tat, they'd band together, get some guns and storm the HQ of heavily-armed white supremacist groups, people who would actually shoot back at them with zero hesitation. Instead, they choose to burn down the city, attack innocent whites, and piss on the graves of slaughtered innocent whites and spit at their grieving families. Thats not fighting for racial equality, thats just adding fuel to the fire, giving white supremacists more reason for racial hate crimes and turning more educated and unbiased white people away.
I'm glad at least that these days, people of all races seem more united, like BLM marches. I participated in a few myself and all I saw were people, skin colour meant absolutely nothing to me.
Unfortunately there are still many stupid people. :)
What do you make of the 5-6 witnesses who testified in court that they didn't see any cuts, wounds or bandages on O.J.'s hands at LAX, on his flight to Chicago or once he landed ?
If they are telling the truth, where did his blood come from ?
I agree 1000%
Yet,I constantly encounter people in the comments saying OJ is innocent 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Excellent video. Thank you.
Love this program!
RIP Bugliosi!!!! I wish he was in the prosecution’s side!!
And he would have gotten his Ass handed to him just like Darden, Clark and the rest of the prosecution and he knew it.
@@JB-435 He only lost one case his entire career. Stupid comment
@@whataboutrob442 And the O.J case would have been the second.
@@JB-435 No, oj was guilty. Even the jurors admitted that this was payback for Rodney King.
@@whataboutrob442 It's was very unfortunate that Nicole and Ron got their throats slit from ear to ear. And bled out like two goats at a voodoo ceremony. But looking at all the manufactured evidence and bigot investigators mishandling evidence. The jury rendered the correct verdict.
I just cannot get over Darden's sheepishness. It's almost as if he was trying to cover for Simpson and he made it sound like he does not believe in the prosecution's case at all. Was Darden afraid that he would be lynched by black sympathizers of Simpson if he did not practically apologize for working for the prosecution?
He was a total embarrassment in that courtroom. His book was good though.
@@monarene44 It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence. ---- Remember, Fuhrman was the lead detective in the case, the first in the scene and knew the place. What could have Darden have done to wash him away from the jury's mind??
@@hus390Fuhrman created trouble but that does not answer my question. The thing about him pleading the 5th is likely badly misunderstood. It does not mean that the tampered with the evidence at all. It just means he is not going to give the defense any leeway to probe further and spin the borderline retarded jury into believing something in their legal illiteracy but Fuhrman was between a rock and a hard place so pleading the 5th also looked bad but at least protected him from further assault.
If only Bugliosi has been the prosecutor, he alone could have taken on all of O.J’s slimy, scheming lawyers and won that case for Ron and Nicole and sent O.J. straight to the slammer! I would’ve watched the whole thing. If only....... 😕
Thank you for this video. It is very informative. Even though the evidence is there, the jurors cannot or will not believe that OJ did this. This case is very sad in the fact that two people lost their lives and as you say, OJ just keeps on smiling. Although the lawyers defended their client well (which they will say, is their purpose) this trial became a three ring circus and I don't know how they look at themselves in the mirror. What ever happened to justice! Thank you for providing the public with a more accurate version of the situation.
Yes, there is definitely a lot of smiling going on by OJ, even when discussing the murder of the person who he says was one of the closest to him in his life.
OJ has an intense need to be liked, to retain that hero status he once had, and has gone on a multitude of interviews in a desperate attempt to smile and convince people that he is still that great person everyone thought he was. He thrives on that admiration. Losing that is clearly more important to him then losing Nicole.
@@brian4019 When OJ smiles while discussing how he "would have" killed Nicole and Ron, he's not only laughing at how he did it, got away with it and is now freely confessing while being protected by double jeopardy, but he's laughing at every fool who keeps defending him and saying he's innocent, particularly Cochran, Bailey and Scheck, and all those racists who cheered for him. To this day, I'm sure all he's doing is laughing at their stupidity.
Justice was thrown away by people like u who believe whatever u see or hear on the news. It was thrown away when people like u support americas military. It was thrown away when people like u are racist. It was thrown away when people like u stole this land and country from native americans. It was thrown away when people like u went against your own country Britain. Should i continue and go on???? Or are u getting the picture!
fantastic. bravo. after 25 years finally i know what this was all about. in germany you saw only short clips about the trial. great job.
Stan Spacek the entire trial is available on TH-cam. If you want to watch it gavel to gavel.
You didn't have CNN in Germany at that time? Unlikely.
Omg. Darden’s closing statement is crazy. He made the jury think that O.J. deserved a pass and that their evidence against him was not strong enough.
One of the weakest lawyer I have ever seen
Darden was a Buffon. He made it seem as if black people weren’t intelligent enough to hear the n word being uttered and to not have an emotional response.
@@GregoryKeller Well he was right about a percentage. Remember before the trial it said over 90% of blacks said they believed race was not an issue, but then over 70% believed it was after race became part of the trial. Cochran and Bailey knew who they were dealing with, and Darden knew Cochran inside out, Cochran was once like a mentor to him.
@@TDKiller415 No. It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
@@simonepeterson3301 It was Fuhrman that created the troubles. The prosecutors did fine with what they had, I don't think any other prosecutors would have changed anything. Fuhrman was godsend to OJ. What he said on the tape about blacks and specially interracial relationships between black men and white women, and knowing and being in the property a few years ago made the defence's case plausible. When he was asked if he planted evidence in this case or before, he pleaded the 5th.🤯 I think he saw the crime scene and added little to solidify the case against OJ, that ended up creating opening for the defence.
Bugliosi is an extremely capable attorney. Had he been the lead prosecutor in The People v. O.J. Simpson the result would have been different. But damn, his ego has ego!
Travesty that Vincent Bugliosi never tried this case. If only he had come out of retirement to work this case.
Julieann Why he wasn’t asked to is even worse !!
Does his argument in this video seem compelling to you? This has to be the most biased argumentation method.
@@mr_knowitall Yes
They wouldn't let him. They felt he had done Manson and several other high profile cases and that it was someone else's turn. He was out of favor.
@@jstarr7506 The families of Ron and Nicole paid dearly for that.
Clark referred to horrific crime scene photos as "like furniture" to her family?!
Bugliosi is one of my heroes. I’ve read some of his books, listened to him in interviews, and the way he logically makes his argument and destroys opposing views is inspiring. He uses hard evidence, logic, and common sense, and woe to anyone with an opposing view. If I were president, I’d have put Vince on the Supreme Court, given his integrity and his knowledge of the law. Sad he’s gone now; I would’ve liked to meet him.
He says in the second part of this video, "If I had wings maybe I could fly." Well, he now has them-angel wings. Too bad he didn't prosecute this case, Simpson would've joined Manson behind bars.
@@sha11235 I’m amazed that out of prosecuting over 100 felony cases, Bugliosi only lost one case. He was truly something special.
Complete common sense. I love this guys attention to detail.
Love that he quotes his Playboy Magazine article lol
Credible source LOL!!!
But I do actually just read it for the articles!
I sure wish Vince would have been the prosecutor
I agree with you 100 %
If he was there ok would have been behind bars
@@danielupsdell2697 He still would've lost. He's not saying anything substantial here.
It’s quite obvious to me that the first decision of doom was to televise this circus in the first place. Complete ego fest.
All these years later, it still baffles me how a case of this import went to two apparently novice prosecutors.
Marcia Clark was 19-1 in death penaly cases. I would hardly called that "novice."
with that jury it wouldnt matter who was prosecuting the case. not even Vince couldve won.
@@markmac2206 This is racist.
@@23_Knows_ALL what is?
@@markmac2206 You're saying that the mostly black jury is too stupid to look past race and make the right decision. That is racist.
The Most Brilliant Criminal Mind Of All Time Luv This Guy He Actually Keeps In Touch With His Clients And When He Went To The Other Side And Worked As A Defense Attorney,He Wouldn't Take Any Client That Was Guilty morals and values died with this man so sad
After Ruby Wax interviewed Simpson in 98, he rang her April 1st and said: 'I did It. April Fool!'
Marsha Clark was an embarassment!!
I was once impressed by Dr. Lee. But after reading several of his books I changed my opinion. His case studies were filled with inconsistencies and contradictions. 🧐
Exactly the same with forensic pathologist Dr Michael Baden. That man will lie his ass off for money.
@@pommiebears yep, he too is a sellout.
@@pommiebears Both were forced to admit that they were paid to give false testimony in the murder trial. In the civil trial, Fujisaki only allowed Baden to talk about contamination in this case, and he admitted there was none. Henry Lee later published a study that disproved all the blood planting and contamination claims.
All those experts were approached by the prosecution but they sided with OJ because of money. One was domestic abuse expert Lenore Walker, and she later admitted that testifying for OJ for a paycheck ruined her career because her peers turned her away for betraying her own cause.
@@pommiebears Baden will provide any opinion if the price is right!
I was cleaning my kitchen overhead extractor hood the other day. It’s stainless and it needs polishing to keep it clean. I ran my finger along the top and sliced into the top of my finger. Not a huge cut, but it bled fairly well. You couldn’t have gotten a cut as deep as the cut on OJ’s knuckle and not know or remember how you did it....no way. If a small cut is enough to make you aware, and have to tend to it, that whopping slit on his finger would definitely need cleaning and a plaster.
Great point
This has nothing to do with the trial. You're not an expert on humans. According to the evidence, OJ didn't cut his hand until he was in Chicago ( th-cam.com/video/lsFj2Xb4q9g/w-d-xo.html ).
That poor clerk has to hear herself screw up OJs name every time they play it!! Lmfao!
Ito was so pro defense it was actionable.
Fantastic!
He is 100% guilty.
VideoFanatic02 ..no shit Sherlock
A fuckin million percent.
There was enough evidence to convict him 10 times over !
This man is a badass.
Do some research on this guy and I think you will feel differently.
@@c.reaves2670 are you serious? He is badass. As far as Prosecutors go he is probably up there with the best to ever live. His record is 150 to 1. He successfully convicted a man for capital murder who wasn't even at the crime scene, that alone is an incredible feat. He inspired me to pursue a career in law. He and Jane Goodall are my heroes.
JusticeForTheSilenced
I guess you’re right. A badass prosecutor doesnt mean that you (meaning him) was a good human. I'm referring to him stalking a milk man ( crazy story🤔)and attacking his mistress (another crazy bizzare story).
@@JusticeFortheSilenced Manson?
@@rhondabitler2461 Yes ma'am
Crazy looking back on how huge that case was. I was in Jr High when they paused class an rolled tvs into the classrooms to watch the verdict live.
I remember my teacher was outraged.
I very much liked 'Outrage'. It had the ring of truth to me, from the first pages.
I disagree, Vincet Boogeyman is deeply misinformed. Read Legacy of Deception by Stephen Singular.
@@Jim.Jim.32 "Vincet Boogeyman". Really? You're not selling it well.
@@SpeccyHorace Jim Jim is nothing but an obsessed O.J. fan who spams every O.J. video with bullshit claims that he is innocent of the murders.
@@SpeccyHorace Bugliosi the HYPOCRITE's got a nice ring to it.
I read "Outrage" several times, actually.
With this much evidence, anyone should have been able to get a conviction. It would have been epic to watch Bugliosi. Instead, the DA chose to appear PC so we got dimwitted, mumbling, plodding, apologetic Darden and the thoroughly-unlikable scatterbrained Marcia.
What evidence? The prosecution couldn't even explain how the preservative got in the blood samples. The gloves didn't fit. The timeline made it impossible for OJ to have killed anyone. Hahaha!
@@23_Knows_ALL OJ confessed in a 2006 interview, dummy 😅😅 Just like Emmett Till's killers.
@@TDKiller415 In that same interview, OJ clearly said it's not a confession and that's it's just a hypothetical. He literally said it was a hypothetical multiple times throughout the interview. That's a fact. Here's my source for you (th-cam.com/video/EjSE8qn0Jk0/w-d-xo.html). This is important because the book contract says OJ has to do a promotional tour for a fictional book, which is the interview that you are referring to. That's the only reason why the interview was even taking place, because he was promoting a book where the contract for the book says he must do a promotional tour for a fictional account of what happened. This is very obvious. Please keep up. You know he's innocent, but you don't want to accept it.
@@23_Knows_ALL easy from his food and clothes which contain the preservative.
@@23_Knows_ALL did you watch the video
How did clark and Darden get this case? They made a horrible mess of it
@Glow Bright no it was ok who did it and I’m black it was not another person or more than one who did it . He did it
@Glow Bright dont be naive we all know he did it
Darden had to take over for Hodgman after he had that heart attack after the first day.
The mirror line is still just so hilariously brutal
Robert Kardashian looked like he was about to throw up when the verdict was read.
Seeing and hearing the pain in Fred Goldmans face and voice brings tears to my eyes. So unfair that he and his family not only lost Ron in such a horrible way, they couldn’t even see justice done. Glad they were able to turn things around in the civil case..they absolutely deserved some form of closure.
I agree 💯 but sadly they got nearly no money from the civil verdict....what was it? Some hundred grand out of 30 Mil...?
It was a hollow victory for them because they will probably never see all the money they got from the judgment.
@@chriscoop7666 About that much, and remember the interest that builds up with the judgment.
Saying OJ Simpson is guilty is one thing, but proving your case beyond a reasonable doubt is another thing. That is something most people do not understand about the legal system. Your emotions have no bearing on the law. The glove did not fit; Mark Furman planted evidence and pled the 5th; there was missing blood: the Bronco was vandalized while in police custody; contaminated crime scene with blood not belong to any of the victims; blood appearing inside the Bronco after it was impounded by the police; travel time irregularity were enough to make the jurors doubtful of the charges.
I’m sure just hearing a judge say the murderer was definitely responsible for the killings was a victory in and of itself.
This guy should´ve been on the prosecution team
No, he should've LED the team.
@@TDKiller415 Agreed. I would have had Bugliosi as the lead, then Kelberg, Hodgman and Harmon as supporting members of the team and I think we could have at least had a hung jury.
@@Romulan2469 If he led the team there would be no hung jury, because he would've had the trial held in Santa Monica with a white jury that would've sent that murderer to jail for life, not like that bastard Garcetti who just wanted more black people to vote for him
If Simpson would have took a selfie over the bobies at the time of the murders he still would have got off with it!!
Julian Sciberras one juror said if they’d had video of him doing it, she still wouldn’t have voted guilty.......because she thinks the prosecution didn’t PROVE IT. She must have been blind and stupid to not have seen all the proof.
@@pommiebears That juror was obviously a racist who was incapable of making a fair decision. Simply because a videotape of OJ committing those murders, IF presented in court, would have been enough "proof" for any juror of average intelligence to vote for conviction.
Word.
Cochran would've said it was a lookalike or the photo was forged. The jury would've bought it. They were dyslexics who thought LAPD was CIA.
@@pommiebears Stop lying, they never said that. Cite your sources.
The moment when OJ Simpson was acquitted was the moment in which modern America was born.
I tell the kids that it's like if today The Rock or Shaq killed his wife and her boyfriend. That's how famous OJ was..
J Starr5 Great comparisons.
I thought they said Ron was just a friend
I would say Deion Sanders. He was a Pro Football Hall of Famer and played in the Super Bowl. He played in the World Series as a baseball player. Was a rapper. Also a announcer and a College Football Coach.
@@mikeallen5865 deion is no where close to the popularity of the two mentioned in OP. Ask pretty much anyone if they know Shaq male or female and majority will say yes. Now imagine even asking a woman if they know who deion sanders is. Would be weird even bringing his name up because more than likely they will say no.
Tiger Woods in his prime as far as likeability. OJ was so famous even people like me knew him despite his career ending when i was 3. he was Nordberg and the sideline reporter at NBC college and pro football games to people my age.
OJ is too disgusting.
How? He was innocent.
You were a brilliant mind. RIP Vincenzo
3:16:43
"It was pure, simple, unadulterated incompetence, of an extreme nature."
Damn.
Marcia Clark was incompetent and grossly insensitive. She was just thinking of her book deal. Thank god she retired after this case. Who wouldn’t after she lost this obvious guilty case.
I've certainly never liked how, after the ACS season came out, that Clark was turned into a "feminist hero" and someone who was unfairly maligned. I get that attacking her for her appearance was a cheap and low blow that the press should never have done, but her actual performance speaks volumes. If anything, she might be projecting who she is NOW onto who she was THEN.
Love this guy rip
Hard to imagine this is the resolution we used to watch stuff in.
This was cutting edge!!
This is really really good. He also did a great mock trial with Gerry Spence and won a conviction against Oswald. Love the way the trial and video clips are weaved in with commentary from many of the players. 🙏 rip vince....a true "crime dog."
Interesting, Garry Spence was frequently mentioned, at the start of this whole affair, as the first choice for Simpson's defense attorney.
@@stevensica89 Yes, I read about that.
Wish Vincent got his wish and prosecuted all the people he thinks deserves it.
The Prosecutor telling OJ to try on the gloves, served no purpose.
And then getting the Isotoner CEO to testify. That their gloves shrink after getting wet??
Reminds me of the Deal Of The century wet drone scene. 😃
...all your points are spot ON, but you forget, the jury would NOT find him guilty even IF they were shown a video of him actually committing the murder....period.
Correct. Bugliosi’s presentation is accurate but also what we lawyers call “immaterial,” i.e. it wouldn’t have made any difference even if everything had been done perfectly. He doesn’t seem to realize that Simpson was a hero to blacks for making it in the world of white business, the first black guy to do so, really, so his being exposed as a murderer would have killed their collective self-esteem. Lincoln anticipated all this when he suggested that they be repatriated to Africa after emancipation.
@@sidstorch9405The first? C'mon, Mr Lawyer. Ever hear of Sidney Poitier or Sammy Davis Jr? You are disbarred as a TH-cam lawyer
My respect to him . is over now what we learned something for the best no.mistakes in the future thanks.
Having watched both parts of this video several times, I have come to the conclusion that the prosecution, Clark and Darden, did not introduce in to evidence Simpson’s damning and insaley guilty police interrogation tape and Bronco chase because they WANTED to lose the case. Why they wanted to lose the case, I can only speculate. When Darden looked at the jury and said “I’m glad I’m not the one making that decision”, I almost took it as a threat. Why the hell would a prosecutor tell a juror “I’m glad I’m not in your shoes”. He should be saying “I wish I was in your shoes, finding Simpson guilty would be the easiest thing ever!!”
They threw this case on purpose but needed to look like they were taking it serious. This is beyond incompetence. The fact that Simpson lost the civil case immediately right after speaks to the fact that there was enough evidence to make a solid case. I know civil case requires less proof, but we should’ve got a hung jury instead of an innocence result.
This stupid trial went on for ten useless months. Everyone reading this would’ve slam dunked this case immediately if they went up to the jury day 1 and said “Simpson’s DNA was found in every crime scene, Nicole’s blood was found in his car, his hair was found in the skull cap, he has no alibi for the time of the murder, and he tried to run on national TV.”
Darden and Clarke’s silly selves go up in front of everyone and start off with “eVeRyoNe LoVeS oJ, nO oNe wAnTs tO HuRt hIm”. 🤦🏽♂️