To: Gondring
FWIW, I have heard a very convincing argument from a forensic expert that OJ wasn’t the killer, but his son, Jason, was & the old man was just trying to take the heat for the kid.
16 posted on
01/11/2011 7:03:14 PM PST by
KosmicKitty
(WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
To: KosmicKitty
FWIW, I have heard a very convincing argument from a forensic expert that OJ wasnt the killer, but his son, Jason, was & the old man was just trying to take the heat for the kid.I had a co-worker mention the same thing years back. Something about the DNA evidence and how it was tested.
25 posted on
01/11/2011 7:57:05 PM PST by
IYAS9YAS
(Liberalism can be summed up thusly: someone craps their pants and we all have to wear diapers)
To: KosmicKitty
I remember hearing the same and thinking it could be true.
26 posted on
01/11/2011 8:03:31 PM PST by
antceecee
(Bless us Father.. have mercy on us and protect us from evil.)
To: KosmicKitty
All of the evidence points to OJ. Perhaps his son helped, but not having an alibi is not the most convincing evidence when there are so many pieces of evidence that point to OJ.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/nns25.htm lists the evidence and both views of it.
31 posted on
01/11/2011 8:31:51 PM PST by
skr
(May God confound the enemy)
To: KosmicKitty
FWIW, I have heard a very convincing argument from a forensic expert that OJ wasnt the killer, but his son, Jason, was & the old man was just trying to take the heat for the kid. That's what I've thought all along!
34 posted on
01/11/2011 8:38:19 PM PST by
Netizen
To: KosmicKitty
FWIW, I have heard a very convincing argument from a forensic expert that OJ wasnt the killer, but his son, Jason, was & the old man was just trying to take the heat for the kid.
Yes, it's from the book/documentary
OJ Is Guilty, But Not Of Murder by William Dear. I find it fairly compelling. Among the points:
Jason was emotionally disturbed and prone to violent outbursts - and had gone off his meds
Jason was upset at Ron and Nicole, one reason was because they failed to deliver on a promise to eat at the restaurant where he was cooking that night
Jason was known to carry a knife
His DNA would have also pointed to OJ, unless very specific tests were done to separate the two
...and a number of other interesting points that provide an equally valid interpretation of the evidence presented against OJ.
To: KosmicKitty
Remember the slow speed chase? When Simpson pulled into his driveway, the son came running up to the vehicle and Simpson pushed him away. From that moment on, I felt like the son was the real murder. No proof, just a thought.
To: KosmicKitty
FWIW, I have heard a very convincing argument from a forensic expert that OJ wasnt the killer, but his son, Jason, was Then, why was OJ's blood and size 12 Bruno Magli shoe prints (of which OJ owned a pair) found at the scene?
50 posted on
01/11/2011 11:38:33 PM PST by
Ol' Sparky
(Liberal Republicans are the greater of two evils)
To: KosmicKitty
I find that hard to believe since to this day OJ claims “someone else” did it - if he had been trying to protect his son, he wouldn’t have been trying to get the police to look for someone other than himself.
60 posted on
01/12/2011 9:04:38 AM PST by
WhyisaTexasgirlinPA
("The View" is the new Maury Povich inspired "Fight Club in Heels")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson