"O.J. Simpson, in his own words, tells for the first time how he would have committed the murders if he were the one responsible for the crimes," the network said in a statement. "In the two-part event, Simpson describes how he would have carried out the murders he has vehemently denied committing for over a decade." From CNN.com
What the hell?
I remember both the murders (with the subsequent Bronco chase) and the verdict being announced. I remember being shocked and outraged (I was a Niners and a Naked Gun fan!). I never quite understood how this was such a racially devisive court case. Why would anyone want to sign on to O.J.'s cause? He was an abusive husband. He was known for his temper. His blood was at the scene of the crime. Now, I know that DNA evidence was a new courtroom technology in 1996, but damn people. It seems like quite a leap or six to say that someone cute the Juice's hand and left his blood at the scene.
With all the evidence, the only person to get "convicted" was Mark Fuhrman - because he lied. Not quite justice, but an interesting commentary on the case and how it affected the U.S.
Ok, I totally went off on an ill-planned tangent - and so didn't mean to. But the bottom line is that O.J. is nuts and as responsible for the deaths of two people as he was in June of 1994.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
DUDE! Ok, I'd heard about this a couple of weeks ago, but it was so stupid that I thought it had to be a joke. O.J. Simpson's *wink-wink* theory of how someone would kill, and get away with killing, his wife and Ron Goldman. Why would any sane person do this?