hammerva Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 Watching part 3 and 4 is so frustrating because you know that all of the defenses arguments are complete bullshit but the prosecution and their wittiness are so incompetent that you can't help thinking that it is possible. The bloody glove part is incredible in the manipulation of it and the stupidity of Darden that everyone can see 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatling Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 All 5 parts of this are on Comcast/Xfinity On Demand as well it appears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 So yeah, you can give Carl Douglas that MVP trophy now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 3 hours ago, odessasteps said: I wonder if people will now try and connect OJ with CTE. A couple months ago, the doctor Concussion was based on said he'd bet anything OJ had CTE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spritenaut 32 Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 10 hours ago, Elsalvajeloco said: So yeah, you can give Carl Douglas that MVP trophy now. He's being interviewed on Mike and Mike in about 25 min, if anyone is interested (approx. 9:30 AM EST). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 I feel like I've heard him on ESPN platforms 2-3 times a day for the last two weeks. Roger Cossack and Lester Munson better not answer their phones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerva Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 So apparently Roy Firestone is getting some serious heat for his interview calling him an enabler to OJ's domestic violence history. While I agree that it was a complete puff piece mostly designed as PR, that was what most interview shows in the late 80's/early 90's was. Hell I am even sure if shows like Outside the Lines was around at the time. If you are going to blame the enablers for OJ, Firestone is probably not even in the top 50. I wish the same people who showed hate toward Firestone would show the same fire to the police who let him getting away with it 8 fucking times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supremebve Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 1 hour ago, hammerva said: So apparently Roy Firestone is getting some serious heat for his interview calling him an enabler to OJ's domestic violence history. While I agree that it was a complete puff piece mostly designed as PR, that was what most interview shows in the late 80's/early 90's was. Hell I am even sure if shows like Outside the Lines was around at the time. If you are going to blame the enablers for OJ, Firestone is probably not even in the top 50. I wish the same people who showed hate toward Firestone would show the same fire to the police who let him getting away with it 8 fucking times The LAPD are pretty much the enablers of everything that happened so far in the movie. The reason O.J. didn't get charged with domestic violence, the reason the black jurors didn't trust any of the evidence, and the reason he ultimately got acquitted are all based on the LAPD's brutality, corruption, and/or incompetence. Seriously, they didn't murder Nicole and Ron, but they did everything else. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie M. Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 One of the best things about this series is that it simultaneously walks you through why O.J. got off while also leaving no doubt that he was guilty and how easy it should have been to convict him. Seeing the photos was rough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spritenaut 32 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 7:04 PM, hammerva said: So apparently Roy Firestone is getting some serious heat for his interview calling him an enabler to OJ's domestic violence history. While I agree that it was a complete puff piece mostly designed as PR, that was what most interview shows in the late 80's/early 90's was. Hell I am even sure if shows like Outside the Lines was around at the time. If you are going to blame the enablers for OJ, Firestone is probably not even in the top 50. I wish the same people who showed hate toward Firestone would show the same fire to the police who let him getting away with it 8 fucking times The Firestone entry is bad in retrospect, but, yeah, pretty typical for the time. OJ was a celebrity ex-pro athlete. No one thought his legacy would end up being "unconvicted murderer". At the time, a lot of people probably thought things were being blown out of proportion due to his celebrity status, I would think that, on some level, ESPN saw some benefit to making nice with OJ and letting Firestone go easy on him. Staying in the "OJ business", as they say. It's not at all the same thing, but, as a cycling enthusiast, I can say that there are an awful lot of fawning Lance Armstrong interviews from the early 90's that follow the same format. Lance goes on, spouts a load of drivel, and attacks his critics. Host laughs along with Lance, tells Arrmstrong how great he is, and acts like the idea that he was on any sort of PED is silly and his critics must be nuts. I know people who worked on staff at two different triathlon magazines and Lance made the cover because he sold the magazine. Period. Part of that was making a de facto deal with Lance's people to give them editorial approval. If you wanted Lance on the cover so you could sell more magazines, the article inside was going to be favorable to him. It's just the way the game was played. Firestone conducted a lot of soft interviews. This one has just come back to haunt him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supremebve Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 8 hours ago, Charlie M. said: One of the best things about this series is that it simultaneously walks you through why O.J. got off while also leaving no doubt that he was guilty and how easy it should have been to convict him. Seeing the photos was rough. Yeah, OJ definitely killed those people, but there is no way at all he should have been convicted. The prosecution's star witness perjured himself, and didn't have an answer when the defense asked him whether or not he planted evidence at the scene. That doesn't even include the fact that essentially all of the evidence was handled incorrectly. I was on Twitter last night and so many people were talking about how terrible it was for Johnnie Cochran to use the race card. He couldn't use the race card until the LAPD dealt the race card. Mark Fuhrman sued the LAPD for early retirement on the basis that he was too racist to do his job. That shit actually happened, and every cop they interviewed is still trying to say he isn't a racist. Why the hell would anyone trust anything those people had to say? The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and there was a reason to mistrust all of the evidence that the prosecution presented. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisM Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 If I was on that jury, I would have voted Not Guilty, as well. Did he do it? Most likely. But was there enough evidence to cast reasonable doubt? Absolutely. The most telling quote is this one from Marcia Clark, in regards to Mark Fuhrman - "You have been a liar and racist throughout, and the only reason i know you didn't plant evidence, is because you couldn't have. Otherwise, I'm with them." 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxB Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 On 18/06/2016 at 1:54 PM, supremebve said: Mark Fuhrman sued the LAPD for early retirement on the basis that he was too racist to do his job. That shit actually happened, and every cop they interviewed is still trying to say he isn't a racist. LAPD cops of that era (and maybe today, I have no frame of reference) probably have a really high bar for how much you have to hate black people before it crosses the line into being actual racism. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supremebve Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 15 hours ago, AxB said: LAPD cops of that era (and maybe today, I have no frame of reference) probably have a really high bar for how much you have to hate black people before it crosses the line into being actual racism. One of my biggest pet peeves is when people do things that are overwhelmingly racist, and somehow people come to the conclusion that he or she is not a racist. If the there are no racists, why is there so much racism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now