OJ Simpson Talks Buffalo Bills and Twitter on Tim Graham Show

[nucci]

8 hours ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I really like the Bills WRs but his point about Allen’s short throw accuracy is not completely off. I’m expecting Josh to take steps forward (in that department) but Beasley is only going to help if that happens.

That's the talking point about Allen. It's what we're going to hear about all camp and preseason. Allen made some great throws and will improve. 

1 hour ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

You are I generally agree but I'm not sure about your opinion that this was textbook jury nullification.  That term usually means that the jury didn't convict because they don't like the consequences of the conviction.  To me the textbook example would be a dad who is accused of killing his daughter's rapist.  Should he be convicted of murder?  By law, if he is indeed the killer, yes.  But the jury doesn't want to see the guy punished for doing a very understandable thing.  So they find not guilty.  

 

I think OJ's case was all about reasonable doubt.  I think Cochran very adeptly played the race card and made the jury believe that white cops like Fuhrman may have manufactured some of the evidence against OJ.  And I think Scheck was masterful in casting doubt on the forensic evidence.   And there might have been some hanky-panky in the the glove fiasco.  

 

All in all, OJ's "Dream Team" did what they needed to do against an over-matched duo of prosecutors.  And a guilty man walked free.

If one of my children were butchered by a scumbag like OJ, I wouldn't want to see his name on the Wall of Fame or listen to him pleasantly chit-chatting with TG.

he wouldn't be alive today. 

[vincec]

51 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

There is no doubt that his legal team did their job, while the prosecution got caught up in playing to the cameras, and the judge allowed the courtroom to turn into a circus.  You are probably right in terms of the textbook example of jury nullification; however, I'm not so sure most of the jurors bought into reasonable doubt - but, I could be wrong on that. I don't believe the defense convinced most of the jurors that Simpson didn't do it, as much as they did a good job of portraying the LAPD as racist, corrupt, etc... - thereby, creating a choice for the jurors: convict Simpson and let the LAPD go unpunished, or acquit Simpson and punish the LAPD for a long history of egregious behavior.

 

 

This is exactly true. I remember the joyous reactions of many black people after the verdict and didn't for a second get the impression that they were happy because an innocent man was justly acquitted. They were celebrating the fact that a corrupt system, and the LAPD in particular, took one right between the eyes. This was a masterful performance by Cochran.

Edited July 4, 2019 by vincec

[hondo in seattle]

58 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

There is no doubt that his legal team did their job, while the prosecution got caught up in playing to the cameras, and the judge allowed the courtroom to turn into a circus.  You are probably right in terms of the textbook example of jury nullification; however, I'm not so sure most of the jurors bought into reasonable doubt - but, I could be wrong on that. I don't believe the defense convinced most of the jurors that Simpson didn't do it, as much as they did a good job of portraying the LAPD as racist, corrupt, etc... - thereby, creating a choice for the jurors: convict Simpson and let the LAPD go unpunished, or acquit Simpson and punish the LAPD for a long history of egregious behavior.

 

 

 

This is a good point.  While the LAPD deserved consequences for some of their poor behavior, letting a killer go free was not the best way to do it IMHO.  Blacks shouldn't get prosecuted for being black.  But neither should blacks like OJ go unpunished for being black.  While the former happens far, far, far more than the latter (and I can't emphasize that enough), both are wrong.  

 

Sadly, I won't live long enough to see a color-blind society here in America where people are universally judged by the 'content of their character, not by the color of their skin.'   But hopefully I do live long enough to see OJ's name taken off the wall and the Bills win a Super Bowl.  

[Rocket94]

17 minutes ago, vincec said:

This is exactly true. I remember the joyous reactions of many black people after the verdict and didn't for a second get the impression that they were happy because an innocent man was justly acquitted. They were celebrating the fact that a corrupt system, and the LAPD in particular, took one right between the eyes. This was a masterful performance by Cochran.

A good book on the subject was written by former Manson prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. In his work "Outrage", Bugliosi hammers home quite a dissection of the case.

[JaBu]

17 hours ago, HuSeYiN_NYC said:

I’m only 41 years old (today actually)

 

 

HAPPY Birthday!

[BuffaloBob]

4 hours ago, StHustle said:

With that type of violent and bloody killing of two people by a knife...you dont find the lack of blood evidence a cause for concern?

 

Im just going off my memory of the case. I was very young then, like around 10 years old so I may be forgetting key things but if I remember correctly they couldnt connect him to blood of either victim besides evidence proven to have been planted.

To the contrary, there absolutely was blood/DNA evidence and the defense managed to muddy the waters with made up fanatsies about the blood evidence being planted and/or that the blood samples were tainted while in custody.  The prosecution was in over its head and the OJ bought himself an acquittal.

[bbb]

I thought it was funny that OJ was complaining about trolls 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

1 hour ago, vincec said:

...This was a masterful performance by Cochran.

Few realize that he financed his law degree by writing the bumper sticker ‘If This Van’s Rockin’, Don’t Bother Knockin!’

*

?

[Freddie's Dead]

Any respect I had for Timmah Graham just evaporated.  No self-respecting journalist would give that POS an interview.

[4merper4mer]

8 hours ago, Rico said:

No place is more dangerous than the space between Fred Goldman and a TV camera.

Having your son butchered and watching your government bumble through the prosecution might make anyone feel voiceless.

[K-9]

6 hours ago, vincec said:

This is exactly true. I remember the joyous reactions of many black people after the verdict and didn't for a second get the impression that they were happy because an innocent man was justly acquitted. They were celebrating the fact that a corrupt system, and the LAPD in particular, took one right between the eyes. This was a masterful performance by Cochran.

I thought the same thing immediately after the verdict and that opinion was really driven home after watching ‘OJ: Made in America.” One of the best documentaries, regardless of subject matter, that I’ve seen. 

[Rocket94]

10 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

I have investigated / analyzed more homicides over the last 35 years than I care to even remember. Having grown up idolizing O. J. Simpson, and from a professional curiosity perspective, I watched most of that trial and paid very close attention to the facts of the case. So, the answer to your question is, (1) Acquittal does not equal innocent, (2) there was NOT a lack of evidence of guilt, (3) there were no "equally plausible" suspects and (4) yes, I have concluded, based on everything I know about that case, that O. J. Simpson killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. It was a text book example of jury nullification. That trial started as a murder trial and ended as a referendum on racism within the LAPD.

 

That is just my opinion; however, one, that I believe, is reasonably arrived at. You are welcome to have a different opinion.

Jim Brown had his own take on the OJ Simpson situation...interesting.

[row_33]

Nothing positive or useful can come from rehashing this.  Treat those in your life with respect.

 

 

[bbb]

12 hours ago, Rocket94 said:

Jim Brown had his own take on the OJ Simpson situation...interesting.

 

What was it?

[Sig1Hunter]

On 7/4/2019 at 10:49 AM, yungmack said:

So in spite of a jury decision of "Not Guilty," a lack of evidence of guilt, and several equally plausible potential perps, you have concluded he did it. 

 

Yes. 

[Gugny]

12 hours ago, row_33 said:

Nothing positive or useful can come from rehashing this.  Treat those in your life with respect.

 

 

 

It's Tim Graham.  Your expectations need to be more realistic.

[Rocket94]

5 minutes ago, bbb said:

 

What was it?

Well...I should not have even mentioned it. Let's just say that he is not a fan of Simpson.

[bbb]

24 minutes ago, Rocket94 said:

Well...I should not have even mentioned it. Let's just say that he is not a fan of Simpson.

 

Yeah, I knew that.  I just wanted to know what his theory was. 

[Rocket94]

6 minutes ago, bbb said:

 

Yeah, I knew that.  I just wanted to know what his theory was. 

Well...it was no theory. Jim Brown voiced his opinion back then. 

[row_33]

46 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

It's Tim Graham.  Your expectations need to be more realistic.

 

I respect your views

 

Nae room in my heart or life for Tom Graham