republicanchick
New member
I watched this show last night on CNN (no access to Fox), didn't learn much of anything b/c I have already read
Marcia Clark's book
Chris Darden's book
and others I can't recall, pertaining to the OJ case..
but it was interesting in 1 place where this idiot juror said he though OJ was innocent. HUH??! :noway:
The thing is (if I heard correctly) he didn't really think so 20 yrs ago. as a juror.. but now...
whatever. Moron alert.
I thought CNN could have interviewed a wider array of witnesses, experts, jurors... etc...
another astounding thing was Goldman's sister saying she couldn't emotionally understand the decision, but "logically..."
HUH?????
what logic?
where? :noway:
there was logic somewhere?
oh yeh... maybe the logic of human idiocy... or, uh... something--meaning that most people (and this case proves it better than most ) just are not smart enough to look beyond the emotional appeals (of amoral [redundancy alert?] attorneys like Barry Scheck.. Cocharan).
If you put all emotion and appeals-to-race aside, which SHOULD be a GIVEN in a "court of law" (ha ha... what a freaking joke)
you have this:
(surprise, surprise) EVIDENCE
and it was OVERWHELMING... the evidence against him...
his blood was at the crime scene... and
BEFORE LAPD had OBTAINED any of OJs blood to allegedly taint the crime scene with!
Nichole's blood was at HIS place, on socks, etc...
but I will say this about CNN: at least they didn't come across like THEY themselves accepted the verdict.
guess that's hard to do even for libs... considering all the...
again... that pesky thing called
EVIDENCE
+++
Marcia Clark's book
Chris Darden's book
and others I can't recall, pertaining to the OJ case..
but it was interesting in 1 place where this idiot juror said he though OJ was innocent. HUH??! :noway:
The thing is (if I heard correctly) he didn't really think so 20 yrs ago. as a juror.. but now...
whatever. Moron alert.
I thought CNN could have interviewed a wider array of witnesses, experts, jurors... etc...
another astounding thing was Goldman's sister saying she couldn't emotionally understand the decision, but "logically..."
HUH?????
what logic?
where? :noway:
there was logic somewhere?
oh yeh... maybe the logic of human idiocy... or, uh... something--meaning that most people (and this case proves it better than most ) just are not smart enough to look beyond the emotional appeals (of amoral [redundancy alert?] attorneys like Barry Scheck.. Cocharan).
If you put all emotion and appeals-to-race aside, which SHOULD be a GIVEN in a "court of law" (ha ha... what a freaking joke)
you have this:
(surprise, surprise) EVIDENCE
and it was OVERWHELMING... the evidence against him...
his blood was at the crime scene... and
BEFORE LAPD had OBTAINED any of OJs blood to allegedly taint the crime scene with!
Nichole's blood was at HIS place, on socks, etc...
but I will say this about CNN: at least they didn't come across like THEY themselves accepted the verdict.
guess that's hard to do even for libs... considering all the...
again... that pesky thing called
EVIDENCE
+++