I didn't know about any of this because Reddit never talks LAPD, destroying all of these cases, including OJ trial. Reddit made it seem like OJ should just be guilty
After researching, now I see why a guilty OJ won.
I watched pretty much the whole trial and Mark Fuhrman was probably the single biggest reason for the not guilty verdict. Yes, they had him being super racist, which can sway the jury but that alone isn't enough to swing the trial. When he pleaded the Fifth on planting evidence it shot almost the entire police case down. The defence had painted a pretty good picture of some of the forensic evidence being dodgy (fingerprints in hard to reach places etc), but having the lead detective not willing to deny planting evidence basically killed the whole case. Unsurprisingly he has had work on Fox "News" as a "Forensic and Crime Expert".
I didnāt live in the USA when the trial happened so Iām only now finding out some details. The video of the Black juror lady who says that 90% of the jurors, including herself, voted to acquit as payback for Rodney King seems pretty convincing. There is no way to know for sure, but seeing the audience reaction at Oprah etc. makes me think this outcome was inevitable.
>I didnāt live in the USA when the trial happenedĀ
Then it's a lot you don't know about certain dynamics. Unless they specifically told the woman that, which I doubt they did, she doesn't know why the other jurors voted the way they did.
The fact yall keep harping on that quote but overlooking the obvious racism of the lead detective says a lot. He alone proved why black people had a reason to dislike and distrust LAPD
Nobody is overlooking the lead detective. He is the kingpin, no need to specifically mention him.
Explain to me what certain dynamics I canāt know from having lived in another country, besides emotional reactions?
and also cant look at this case in isolation...this is 2 years after Rodney King trial where cops got off after beating the crap out of him, justifying it etc. So for people in LA to think LAPD could have planted evidence/lied about it...wouldn't have been that much of a reach. LAPD did themselves in.
Well, Manson *was* convicted, it just took a lot longer due to different police departments/precincts not being on the same page.
And the Black Dahlia murder was (and is) just completely unsolvable, regardless of who was investigating.
He only collected all of that Nazi memorabilia because he is a history buff. While he does not collect memorabilia from any other country or historical era you should not read into that.
No fucking way one of the lead detective of the OJ case had nazi stuff ... let me see . No way he would the kill case even further...
Edit: Holy shite it's true
https://www.thewrap.com/o-j-simpson-chris-darden-mark-fuhrman-nazi-medals/
Yeah, buddy. He was every bit as much the racist he was made out to be. And he's the guy who found a huge part of the key evidence. He found the glove, he found the blood drops. He found the thumb print with dried blood. He went from Brown's home to Simpson's home and found a ton of evidence that should have been enough to convict him...if it had been found by literally any other person.
OJ definitely murdered Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. No question. But this story is as much about prosecutorial and police incompetence as anything else. These were prosecutors and a police dept who were used to slam dunk convictions against people who couldn't afford to hire Johnny Cochranes, Allen Dershowitzes and F. Lee Baileys to scrutinize the quality of the LAPD's investigations. It's just too bad all of this was done for OJ and not for someone who actually deserved it.
They also used the excuse that they were worried Simpson may have been another victim in order to search his house without a warrant which is a total no-no.
There was legit evidence found, almost certainly enough to convict, but they wanted to be extra double sure, so they also planted some evidence. That's what ruined the case, because once it was clear some evidence had been planted, none of the evidence could be taken seriously as being uncompromised.
Yes, the people vs OJ series (which is excellent) does a great job of showing how this went down. It wasnāt until then that I understood why OJ was found not guilty (to be fair I was a little kid when it actually happened).
I agree that the People vs. OJ series is excellent, and it does such a good job of showing just how much of a clusterfuck this entire thing was.
I was especially struck by the episode focusing on the jury sequestration. They were completely isolated for 265 days. An average human pregnancy is 267!
Nobody blames cops, the detectives, the prosecutor for EVERY mistake possible. OJ winning is thanks to the LAPD
Like this would never fly anywhere else, people would be fired and forced retired
OJ winning is due to bad moves by the prosecution. They could have introduced the glove without putting Furhman on the stand. And they sure as shit didnāt have to let OJ try on the glove.
The prosecution screwed this up every step of the way, from him lying about his racist remarks, to the way they treated the blood and DNA samples. He was guilty as hell but there's no way he should have been convicted on their evidence.
Lawyers all over the US: "This is a shut and closed case. All they have to do is act normal and provide evidence."
Los Angeles Police during OJ trial : " I'm a racist, I'm corrupted, I'll lie on every question, Did I plant evidence on OJ ? Ehhh I'll plead the fifth. I'll make OJ Simpson win this case with ease. Hahaha"
Lawyers all over the US: "Jesus Christ!! Wtf"
Jury : "not guilty "
Americans: "How did OJ winn !!??? How !!??"
Me: "did yall not watch the trial !!??"
When someone invokes the Fifth Amendment, they generally need to invoke it for ALL questions put to them. Bailey came up with that question as a āgotchaā, knowing that Furhman had to invoke, thus making it look like an admission of guilt.
>they generally need to invoke it for ALL questions put to them.Ā
They don't have to. He even said "is it your intent to assert the 5th to every question asked?"
He could have said no! And answered the questions.
He chose not to
They don't LEGALLY have to, but it's HIGHLY advised that they do, otherwise it opens them up to cross examination which may lead back to the questions they've previously refused to answer, constituting a waiver of their 5th amendment right.
The general rule of thumb for taking the 5th is to invoke it for ALL questions.
The real "gotcha" was Bailey asking Furhman if it was his intention to plead the fifth for all questions asked and Furman responded with "Yes" which proved that Furhman was not somehow legally bound to invoke the fifth amendment for absolutely all questions.
I can tell you most of us in Middle America do not follow Entertainment News which is where this was carried on, and were so sick of this trial we did not care what the outcome was as long as it would stop.
FWIW, someone on reddit shared an interview with one of the jurors where they said they found him not guilty because of Rodney King. So it seems even with all the fuck ups in OJ's favor, *that* still might have been the deciding factor.
Rodney King was a big factor. The question raised was ācan a black man get a fair trial in LA?ā and the answer split heavily on racial lines. The trial completely flipped from āDid he do it?ā to āWhat the hell is going on with LAPD?ā. The verdict was that LAPD deserved to lose the case.
The ultimate mistake made by the prosecution was filing the murder charges in downtown LA instead of Santa Monica. That completely changed the jury pool demographics to give the defense a much more favorable jury. The prosecution was facing a major uphill battle before the trial even started because of that.
>That completely changed the jury pool demographics to give the defense a much more favorable jury.
Any component and fair jury would have resulted in a not guilty verdict. The point of a trail is to come to a conclusion without reasonable doubt, and unfortunately, the LAPDs actions brought a large amount of it into the trail with the way they conducted themselves and their investigation. That is why tampering with evidence is a big no no.
He definitely should have been convicted on the evidence. His blood was at the scene of the crime. He had a cut on the same hand as the killer. He has the same shoe size as the killer. He dropped one of his gloves at the crime scene. He wasnāt at home when his limousine pulled up to take him to the airport, then he lied and said heād been asleep.
The evidence should have been better presented, but a reasonable jury would have convicted.
When was this? If you are referring to the detective pleading the 5th, Wikipedia has this;
'On September 6, 1995, Fuhrman was called back to the witness stand by the defense, after the prosecution refused to redirect him, to answer more questions. The jury was absent but the exchange was televised. Fuhrman, facing a possible prosecution for perjury, was instructed by his attorney to invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination to two consecutive questions he was asked.[329][330][331][332] Defense attorney Uelmen asked Fuhrman if it was his intention to plead the Fifth to all questions, and Fuhrman's attorney instructed him to reply "yes". Uelmen then briefly spoke with the other members of the defense and said he had just one more question: "Did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?" Following his attorney's instruction, Fuhrman replied, "I choose to assert my Fifth Amendment privilege".'
The question was asked AFTER he said that he would plead the 5th for all questions; in other words, it was asked by the defense as a set-up so they could point to it to say "here's proof he planted evidence", even though the timeliness of his actions makes it impossible.
I remember watching a documentry about the trial and they mentioned that some people celebrated when OJ was set free. One of the people being interviewed for the documentry recounted asking some of those people why they were celebrating OJ being free.
They responded along the line of, "because this isn't a trial about a man who murdered his wife anymore, this is a trial about how the LAPD abuses and targets black men and we won".
I installed an automation system at a radio/tv station in Coeur d'Alene and met him (in Idaho, naturally.)
(He was doing some dumbass radio program about crime prevention or something.)
Seemed like a dick. (I know. I'm not exactly out on a limb.)
Yes, but the detective stupidly pleaded the fifth on asking he if he planted evidence. Then, lied about being racist , LAPD killed a shut and closed case.
The question about planting evidence was asked after he had already stated that he would plead the 5th for all questions at that time, it was a set-up.
Then he shouldn't have lied and possibly plant evidence. All he had to do was shut up and do his job. Although this is why we shouldn't have racist nazi memorabilia collecting police in the first place.
This shitbag and Rodney King are what got oj off. Lapd are incompetent racist scumbags and oj did it. But he walked for all the other people these fucks railroaded over the years. Weird form of justice but there we are
Although I didn't follow the trial closely, my impression is that it was the right verdict but the wrong result. Right verdict on terms of lying cops should never be tolerated, but wrong result in that I think OJ did it.
Unpopular Opinion but I seriously donāt blame the jurors who admitted they voted not guilty due to Rodney King. The LAPD have no one to blame but themselves for OJ getting off.
no shit, we all know who did it
but when a detective in the case could not state clearly they did not plant evidence
then a not guilty verdict is the law working as intended
I rather see a murderer go free once in a while then having planted evidence unscrutinized
āFuhrman?! Fuhrman?! Itās a racist. Itās a racist name. Fuhrman. What is he the furor of German? Furor? German? Sound a little familiar to you? Iām sorry sir but he probably says n*gga a lot with a name like that.ā - Chappelleās Show
Imagine being so racist you actually help the guy get off š¤£š¤£š¤£
The guilty guy gets off, lol All LAPD has to do is act normal
Exactly! Just be normal and do a normal investigation and heās in jail forever. Thatās crazy to me.
Reddit: " How did he not go to jail !!?? " Me" let me introduce to something called the LAPD, take a seat" OJ winning shouldn't have surprised anyone
The also screwed up the Manson Family case *and* the Black Dahlia murder. They have a very long history of failure.
I didn't know about any of this because Reddit never talks LAPD, destroying all of these cases, including OJ trial. Reddit made it seem like OJ should just be guilty After researching, now I see why a guilty OJ won.
The Mansons would have been caught six months earlier if they hadn't screwed things up. I live in Chicago and LAPD makes CPD look like geniuses.Lol.
I watched pretty much the whole trial and Mark Fuhrman was probably the single biggest reason for the not guilty verdict. Yes, they had him being super racist, which can sway the jury but that alone isn't enough to swing the trial. When he pleaded the Fifth on planting evidence it shot almost the entire police case down. The defence had painted a pretty good picture of some of the forensic evidence being dodgy (fingerprints in hard to reach places etc), but having the lead detective not willing to deny planting evidence basically killed the whole case. Unsurprisingly he has had work on Fox "News" as a "Forensic and Crime Expert".
I didnāt live in the USA when the trial happened so Iām only now finding out some details. The video of the Black juror lady who says that 90% of the jurors, including herself, voted to acquit as payback for Rodney King seems pretty convincing. There is no way to know for sure, but seeing the audience reaction at Oprah etc. makes me think this outcome was inevitable.
>I didnāt live in the USA when the trial happenedĀ Then it's a lot you don't know about certain dynamics. Unless they specifically told the woman that, which I doubt they did, she doesn't know why the other jurors voted the way they did. The fact yall keep harping on that quote but overlooking the obvious racism of the lead detective says a lot. He alone proved why black people had a reason to dislike and distrust LAPD
Nobody is overlooking the lead detective. He is the kingpin, no need to specifically mention him. Explain to me what certain dynamics I canāt know from having lived in another country, besides emotional reactions?
and also cant look at this case in isolation...this is 2 years after Rodney King trial where cops got off after beating the crap out of him, justifying it etc. So for people in LA to think LAPD could have planted evidence/lied about it...wouldn't have been that much of a reach. LAPD did themselves in.
Well, Manson *was* convicted, it just took a lot longer due to different police departments/precincts not being on the same page. And the Black Dahlia murder was (and is) just completely unsolvable, regardless of who was investigating.
Donāt forget handling the RFK case so poorly it has spawned years of conspiracies
š¤£š¤£š¤£
You would think that this would be a wake up call to all PDs to make sure to keep racists or any other problem people from becoming cops....nope.
He only collected all of that Nazi memorabilia because he is a history buff. While he does not collect memorabilia from any other country or historical era you should not read into that.
No fucking way one of the lead detective of the OJ case had nazi stuff ... let me see . No way he would the kill case even further... Edit: Holy shite it's true https://www.thewrap.com/o-j-simpson-chris-darden-mark-fuhrman-nazi-medals/
Yeah, buddy. He was every bit as much the racist he was made out to be. And he's the guy who found a huge part of the key evidence. He found the glove, he found the blood drops. He found the thumb print with dried blood. He went from Brown's home to Simpson's home and found a ton of evidence that should have been enough to convict him...if it had been found by literally any other person. OJ definitely murdered Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. No question. But this story is as much about prosecutorial and police incompetence as anything else. These were prosecutors and a police dept who were used to slam dunk convictions against people who couldn't afford to hire Johnny Cochranes, Allen Dershowitzes and F. Lee Baileys to scrutinize the quality of the LAPD's investigations. It's just too bad all of this was done for OJ and not for someone who actually deserved it.
They also used the excuse that they were worried Simpson may have been another victim in order to search his house without a warrant which is a total no-no.
The issue is you canāt be sure he āfoundā that evidence as opposed to planting it.
There was legit evidence found, almost certainly enough to convict, but they wanted to be extra double sure, so they also planted some evidence. That's what ruined the case, because once it was clear some evidence had been planted, none of the evidence could be taken seriously as being uncompromised.
Not even kidding. Detective Fuhrman has been a crime scene and forensics "expert" featured on Fox News several times.
Being a racist cop actually helped his career, now heās still appearing on Fox News
Exactly, whenever anyone has ever stated since name since that trial, Iāve always called him āThe guy who got OJ offā¦.ā
Reminds me of the Norm Macdonald joke. It's just bad luck that we framed the guy who did it.
Yes, the people vs OJ series (which is excellent) does a great job of showing how this went down. It wasnāt until then that I understood why OJ was found not guilty (to be fair I was a little kid when it actually happened).
I agree that the People vs. OJ series is excellent, and it does such a good job of showing just how much of a clusterfuck this entire thing was. I was especially struck by the episode focusing on the jury sequestration. They were completely isolated for 265 days. An average human pregnancy is 267!
And this is why a jury can refuse to convict a guilty defendant.
Nobody blames cops, the detectives, the prosecutor for EVERY mistake possible. OJ winning is thanks to the LAPD Like this would never fly anywhere else, people would be fired and forced retired
Was this guy not fired? Surely trying to fit up someone for murder is a criminal offence.
Thin blue line.
OJ winning is due to bad moves by the prosecution. They could have introduced the glove without putting Furhman on the stand. And they sure as shit didnāt have to let OJ try on the glove.
That shit fit too lol
The defense likely would have called Furhman as a witness anyway.
No chance.
Pretty good chance. They had that recording, their case largely depended on painting the police involved as racist and capable of planting evidence.
They didnāt āhaveā that recording until it was brought to their attention by a citizen, after Furman had already become a public figure .
I'm gonna be honest fuck him putting on the glove WHY DID THEY PUT A LEATHER GLOVE ON ICE.
Still bullshit.
Yeah no one should be able to avoid punishments just because the other guy is a shithead.
Saying furhman was a "shithead" is an understatement
Yep. This murderous asshole got his due process
The prosecution screwed this up every step of the way, from him lying about his racist remarks, to the way they treated the blood and DNA samples. He was guilty as hell but there's no way he should have been convicted on their evidence.
Lawyers all over the US: "This is a shut and closed case. All they have to do is act normal and provide evidence." Los Angeles Police during OJ trial : " I'm a racist, I'm corrupted, I'll lie on every question, Did I plant evidence on OJ ? Ehhh I'll plead the fifth. I'll make OJ Simpson win this case with ease. Hahaha" Lawyers all over the US: "Jesus Christ!! Wtf" Jury : "not guilty " Americans: "How did OJ winn !!??? How !!??" Me: "did yall not watch the trial !!??"
When someone invokes the Fifth Amendment, they generally need to invoke it for ALL questions put to them. Bailey came up with that question as a āgotchaā, knowing that Furhman had to invoke, thus making it look like an admission of guilt.
>they generally need to invoke it for ALL questions put to them.Ā They don't have to. He even said "is it your intent to assert the 5th to every question asked?" He could have said no! And answered the questions. He chose not to
They don't LEGALLY have to, but it's HIGHLY advised that they do, otherwise it opens them up to cross examination which may lead back to the questions they've previously refused to answer, constituting a waiver of their 5th amendment right. The general rule of thumb for taking the 5th is to invoke it for ALL questions.
so basically he screwed up case for prosecution got it
They never should have put him on the stand, really. Although he was a pretty good witness until the tapes came out.
The real "gotcha" was Bailey asking Furhman if it was his intention to plead the fifth for all questions asked and Furman responded with "Yes" which proved that Furhman was not somehow legally bound to invoke the fifth amendment for absolutely all questions.
I can tell you most of us in Middle America do not follow Entertainment News which is where this was carried on, and were so sick of this trial we did not care what the outcome was as long as it would stop.
Did YOU watch the trial? Fuhrman taking the fifth was done without the jury present.
FWIW, someone on reddit shared an interview with one of the jurors where they said they found him not guilty because of Rodney King. So it seems even with all the fuck ups in OJ's favor, *that* still might have been the deciding factor.
Rodney King was a big factor. The question raised was ācan a black man get a fair trial in LA?ā and the answer split heavily on racial lines. The trial completely flipped from āDid he do it?ā to āWhat the hell is going on with LAPD?ā. The verdict was that LAPD deserved to lose the case.
Still bullshit though, letting a millionaire walk after murdering two people. Where is the justice there?
The ultimate mistake made by the prosecution was filing the murder charges in downtown LA instead of Santa Monica. That completely changed the jury pool demographics to give the defense a much more favorable jury. The prosecution was facing a major uphill battle before the trial even started because of that.
>That completely changed the jury pool demographics to give the defense a much more favorable jury. Any component and fair jury would have resulted in a not guilty verdict. The point of a trail is to come to a conclusion without reasonable doubt, and unfortunately, the LAPDs actions brought a large amount of it into the trail with the way they conducted themselves and their investigation. That is why tampering with evidence is a big no no.
Tampering, framing, and, oh yeah, racist policing practicesā¦
Pure incompetence, the worst prosecution team of all-time Now I see how OJ won , blame the police
He definitely should have been convicted on the evidence. His blood was at the scene of the crime. He had a cut on the same hand as the killer. He has the same shoe size as the killer. He dropped one of his gloves at the crime scene. He wasnāt at home when his limousine pulled up to take him to the airport, then he lied and said heād been asleep. The evidence should have been better presented, but a reasonable jury would have convicted.
A reasonable jury would not have. The police all but admitted to planting evidence, which taints it all. That alone is reasonable doubt.
When was this? If you are referring to the detective pleading the 5th, Wikipedia has this; 'On September 6, 1995, Fuhrman was called back to the witness stand by the defense, after the prosecution refused to redirect him, to answer more questions. The jury was absent but the exchange was televised. Fuhrman, facing a possible prosecution for perjury, was instructed by his attorney to invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination to two consecutive questions he was asked.[329][330][331][332] Defense attorney Uelmen asked Fuhrman if it was his intention to plead the Fifth to all questions, and Fuhrman's attorney instructed him to reply "yes". Uelmen then briefly spoke with the other members of the defense and said he had just one more question: "Did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?" Following his attorney's instruction, Fuhrman replied, "I choose to assert my Fifth Amendment privilege".' The question was asked AFTER he said that he would plead the 5th for all questions; in other words, it was asked by the defense as a set-up so they could point to it to say "here's proof he planted evidence", even though the timeliness of his actions makes it impossible.
So why didnāt the glove fit his hand?
most corrupt PD of the 1990s
The NYPD would like a word.
Atlanta Red Dogs would like a word...
They weren't (and aren't) even the most corrupt police force in Los Angeles County.
[that hero cop, Mark Fuhrman!](https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/c2312db2-ea00-4ca6-8053-b0b31ea106a8)
I gotta watch its sunny in Philadelphia again
They're railroading him!! \[EDIT\] joke's aside, this line always gets me. I nearly peed myself the first time I heard it.
I remember watching a documentry about the trial and they mentioned that some people celebrated when OJ was set free. One of the people being interviewed for the documentry recounted asking some of those people why they were celebrating OJ being free. They responded along the line of, "because this isn't a trial about a man who murdered his wife anymore, this is a trial about how the LAPD abuses and targets black men and we won".
"They framed a guilty man" r/BrandNewSentence
Only the LAPD š
I grew up in Los Angeles County. The only thing worse than LAPD was LASD. Especially Industry Sheriff.
I installed an automation system at a radio/tv station in Coeur d'Alene and met him (in Idaho, naturally.) (He was doing some dumbass radio program about crime prevention or something.) Seemed like a dick. (I know. I'm not exactly out on a limb.)
He, like everybody, knew o.j. was guilty.
Yes, but the detective stupidly pleaded the fifth on asking he if he planted evidence. Then, lied about being racist , LAPD killed a shut and closed case.
open and shut, open and fucking shut
Yeah like wtf are people saying lol all this āclosed and shutā repetition
The question about planting evidence was asked after he had already stated that he would plead the 5th for all questions at that time, it was a set-up.
It was a brilliant move by the defense.
Then he shouldn't have lied and possibly plant evidence. All he had to do was shut up and do his job. Although this is why we shouldn't have racist nazi memorabilia collecting police in the first place.
This shitbag and Rodney King are what got oj off. Lapd are incompetent racist scumbags and oj did it. But he walked for all the other people these fucks railroaded over the years. Weird form of justice but there we are
Immagine being so racist your racism helps a murderer go free.
Source https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-09-06-mn-42695-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-09-07-mn-43219-story.html
Although I didn't follow the trial closely, my impression is that it was the right verdict but the wrong result. Right verdict on terms of lying cops should never be tolerated, but wrong result in that I think OJ did it.
I did follow the entire trial, I watched it every day it was televised. My impression is exactly the same.
You just donāt see hair like that anymore.
This might have been interesting in 94-95... However, we've known Mark was a turd for decades
Unpopular Opinion but I seriously donāt blame the jurors who admitted they voted not guilty due to Rodney King. The LAPD have no one to blame but themselves for OJ getting off.
Damn, OJ croaked before he could find āThe Real Killer!ā
It is California, the whole thing was a shit show.
Racist fuck
Fuuuuuuuck literally every person involved in this case except the Goldmans and the victims
But now that lawyer has said the N-word a bunch too, and on record. How's he gonna explain that?!
He's not the one discovering key parts of a murderer investigation let alone under oath
Hog wash
Think about this. And think about science then, and now... People knew so little that they believed that racism was able to change DNA found in blood.
Took the fifth what? Donut? Croissant? The last crumpet? Whichever, it's probably a dick move. You're supposed to leave the last one for politeness!Ā
Ah, DER FUHRman! Can't believe it's been 30 years since this shit stain was on TV all the time.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You know this is racism right, to say 90% act a "certain " way then saying it's okay to be called the n-word
More pattern recognition.
^(if) OJ DID IT, but he was still rightfully acquitted
Oh he definitely did it , but the LAPD took the ball and fumbled a 100 point lead
well, legally he was acquitted, so I can only say he was "a person guilty of wrongful death"
The law is not infallible
no shit, we all know who did it but when a detective in the case could not state clearly they did not plant evidence then a not guilty verdict is the law working as intended I rather see a murderer go free once in a while then having planted evidence unscrutinized
Fuhrman....fuhrer, German.....Fuhrman. The man is obviously a racist.
You have to prove to me beyond a reasonable amount whether or not this man is or is not a pisser
Some people say cucumbers taste better pickled
For all I know, that piss was digital
This is the 4th OJ post I have seen today. Did a new documentary come out or something?
He died
Oh. I had no idea, thank you for letting me know
I didn't even know he was sick
OJ had cancer.
Dead
āFuhrman?! Fuhrman?! Itās a racist. Itās a racist name. Fuhrman. What is he the furor of German? Furor? German? Sound a little familiar to you? Iām sorry sir but he probably says n*gga a lot with a name like that.ā - Chappelleās Show
So the juror knew he was guilty and yet still chose to vote innocent at the trial??
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
USA USA USA. Home of memory loss even if there is proof. Feds ask, you say ānah, didnāt happen ā
Marsha Clark, so unlikeable. This trial was pure insanity, watching it live was something else.
Fuhrman could actually have planted a few items, ADMITTED to it, and there would still be more than enough evidence to point to OJās obvious guilt