OJ Simpson Faces Good Chance at Parole From Nevada Prison: He was not guilty at his original murder trial

There are two court systems in the United States: federal and state courts. Each covers different types of cases. In the federal system, whether the trial is criminal or civil, the jury must reach a unanimous verdict.


In the federal system, whether the trial is criminal or civil, the jury must reach a unanimous verdict.

I personally watched every minute of the televised trial of O.J. Simpson and as a reasonable person, knowledgeable of criminal law and procedure, would have voted him not guilty simply on the basis of reasonable doubt.


Why were there no blood spatter marks on the back gate of his Rockingham home when films were originally taken that evening, but found early in the morning?

Why did LAPD Detective Phil Vanatter carry the vial of Simpon’s blood in his pocket for many hours before turning them into the medical examiners office? (Source)

Prosecution: one of the most important parts of the case, claiming it placed Simpson at the crime scene; said Simpson dripped blood after wounding his finger with a knife during the murders; said scientific controls and testing by different labs thwarted any possibility of contamination or tampering.

Defense: mounted vigorous counterattack, alleging samples were sloppily collected and poorly handled, rendering DNA results unreliable; raised possibility that blood was planted by someone who took it from a police crime lab vial that contained Simpson’s blood and a blood preservative,


The most compelling evidence was blood stains on paper wrapping that was supposed to be holding dry blood samples; wound on Simpson’s left hand was only a minor one he suffered in his house, not enough to drip as much blood as prosecutors found, and that Simpson re-injured the finger when he cut it on a glass in a Chicago hotel room the morning after killings, before police interviewed him. (Source)

The bloody shoe prints matched a size 12 Bruno Magli shoe, a relatively rare Italian-made model. Simpson wears size 12 shoes.

Prosecution: tried to place Simpson at the murder scene by showing that Bloomingdale’s in New York, where Simpson sometimes shopped, carried such shoes. Odd Reach!

Defense: Thousands of people bought such shoes; noted that no murder shoes were ever recovered and that the prosecution had no evidence that Simpson ever purchased such shoes; raised the possibility that unexplained “imprints” that didn’t match the Bruno Magli sole also were at the crime scene.


If Simpson were truly guilty, why would he have placed one of his gloves and his alleged watch cap under a plant at the front of the residence then throw the other over the fence on the side of the home, all the way back as far as the guest house? (Mark this completely unbelievable.)

Perhaps most importantly, Singular’s information about the blood checked out.

Several pieces of the most important Simpson blood evidence was found to contain EDTA, strongly indicate that that blood was planted from an evidence vial, and did not come out of a human being during the execution of the crime.

This blood evidence is still hotly disputed, and the prosecution spent a great deal of time at the trial trying to show the EDTA found in the crime scene blood was due to mistakes in the testing.

But if that was truly the case, how could Stephen Singular’s source possibly have known EDTA would be mistakenly found in the blood months in advance?


Mark Furman lied about using the word “Nigger,” what else were he and the police lying about during the evidence presentation at O.J.’s trial? (Source)

Fuhrman and another detective then made an undocumented trip to OJ Simpson’s house at Rockingham in the early hours of the next morning and dropped the glove behind a fence to the side of the property.

It was Fuhrman himself who then subsequently found this apparent piece of damning evidence against Simpson. (Source)

Wayne Stanfield, American Airlines pilot for O.J.’s trip to Chicago on the night of the killings, said he talked with O.J., who appeared relaxed and alert. 

Noted blood on O.J.’s finger(Source)

Did O.J. Simpson have a violent past?

Through 911 calls to police and testimony, prosecutors allege a history of Simpson hitting, degrading and stalking Ms. Simpson.

Prosecution: pointed to motive, showing Simpson was prone to jealous rages and capable of hurting his ex-wife; suggested Goldman died because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and Simpson may have seen him as a potential suitor.

Defense: irrelevant, isolated events that were poorly supported by what little evidence the prosecution presented.

Some of my recollections above may not be completely precise, time has that effect.

I know what I saw, and heard and had I been a juror on that trial, O.J.Simpson would have been found “NOT GUILTY.”

The defense rests!

The media is telling us that due to Mr. Simpson’s fame they will telecast his parole hearing.

In reality, they are doing so to pump up their woeful ratings.

P.S., Marsha Clark and Chris Darden put on a woeful prosecution.

The Washington Times

By Ken Ritter
July 17, 2017

LAS VEGAS (AP) — O.J. Simpson, the former football star, TV pitchman and now Nevada prison inmate No. 1027820, will have a lot going for him when he asks state parole board members this week to release him after serving more than eight years for an ill-fated bid to retrieve sports memorabilia.


Now 70, Simpson will have history in his favor and a clean record behind bars as he approaches the nine-year minimum of his 33-year sentence for armed robbery and assault with a weapon. Plus, the parole board sided with him once before.

No one at his Thursday hearing is expected to oppose releasing him in October — not his victim, not even the former prosecutor who persuaded a jury in Las Vegas to convict Simpson in 2008.

“Assuming that he’s behaved himself in prison, I don’t think it will be out of line for him to get parole,” said David Roger, the retired Clark County district attorney.

See the entire article below.



Four other men who went with Simpson to a hotel room to retrieve from two memorabilia dealers sports collectibles and personal items that the former football star said belonged to him took plea deals in the heist and received probation.

Two of those men testified that they carried guns.

Another who stood trial with Simpson was convicted and served 27 months before the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that Simpson’s fame tainted the jury. Simpson’s conviction was upheld.

Prison life was a stunning fall for a charismatic celebrity whose storybook career as an electrifying running back dubbed “The Juice” won him the Heisman Trophy as the best college player in 1968 and a place in the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1985.

He became a sports commentator, Hollywood movie actor, car rental company spokesman and one of the world’s most famous people even before his Los Angeles “trial of the century,” when he was acquitted in the killings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman.

Simpson, appeared grayer and heavier than most remembered him when he was last seen, four years ago.

He will appear Thursday by videoconference from the Lovelock Correctional Center, to be quizzed by four state parole commissioners in Carson City, a two-hour drive away.

Two other members of the board will monitor the hearing, said David Smith, a parole hearing examiner.

The commissioners will have a parole hearing report that has not been made public, plus guidelines and worksheets that would appear to favor Simpson. It plans to make its written risk assessment public after a decision.

They will consider his age, whether his conviction was for a violent crime (it was), his prior criminal history (he had none) and his plans after release, Smith said.

Nevada has about 13,500 prison inmates, and the governor-appointed Board of Parole Commissioners has averaged about 8,300 annual hearings for the past four years.
The rate of inmates who are granted parole in discretionary hearings held as they approach their minimum sentence, like Simpson’s, averages about 82 percent.

The same four board members also have experience with Simpson, having granted him parole in July 2013 on some charges — kidnapping, robbery and burglary — stemming from the 2007 armed confrontation. The board’s decision left Simpson with four years to serve before reaching his minimum time behind bars.

Board members Connie Bisbee, Tony Corda, Adam Endel and Susan Jackson noted at the time that Simpson had a “positive institutional record,” with no disciplinary actions behind bars.

Simpson’s lawyer, friends and prison officials say that hasn’t changed.

“He’s really been a positive force in there. He’s done a lot of good for a lot of people,” said Tom Scotto, a friend from Florida whose wedding Simpson was in Las Vegas to attend the weekend of the robbery.

Scotto said he visits or talks with Simpson every few months.

Simpson leads a Baptist prayer group, mentors inmates, works in the gym, coaches sports teams and serves as commissioner of the prison yard softball league, Scotto said.

Scotto will be among the 15 people with Simpson in a small conference room at the prison, along with Simpson’s lawyer, Malcolm LaVergne, daughter Arnelle Simpson and sister Shirley Baker.

A parole case worker, two prison guards and a small pool of media also were expected, along with Andy Caldwell, a retired Las Vegas police detective who investigated the Simpson case, and Bruce Fromong, one of the memorabilia dealers who was robbed.

“I don’t want to offer an opinion,” said Caldwell, now a Christian minister in Lyons, Oregon.

“I’m just curious to see how everything unfolds.”

Fromong said he will attend as a victim of the crime but will be “trying to be good for O.J.” He said he suffered four heart attacks and severe financial losses as a result of the robbery but later forgave Simpson.

The other collectibles broker, Alfred Beardsley, died in 2015.

same-day ruling.

A decision usually takes several days.

Laurie Levenson, a Loyola Law School professor, and longtime Simpson case analyst, predicted a “tsunami” of public attention if Simpson wins release.

“If this is the ordinary case, he will be paroled,” Levenson said. “But O.J. is never the ordinary case.”

Al Lasso, a Las Vegas defense attorney who has followed the case but does not represent Simpson, said any other defendant in a similar case probably would have gotten probation, not prison.

“I think he spent more than enough time in prison for a robbery in which he didn’t even have a gun himself,” Lasso said.

But Michael Shapiro, a New York defense lawyer who provided commentary during Simpson’s conviction in Las Vegas in 2008 and his acquittal in Los Angeles in 1995, said freedom was no certainty.

“The judge believed he got away with murder,” Shapiro said. “That’s the elephant in the room. If the parole authorities feel the same way, he could be in trouble.”


About JCscuba

I am firmly devoted to bringing you the truth and the stories that the mainstream media ignores. Together we can restore our constitutional republic to what the founding fathers envisioned and fight back against the progressive movement. Obama nearly destroyed our country economically, militarily coupled with his racism he set us further on the march to becoming a Socialist State. Now it's up to President Trump to restore America to prominence. Republicans who refuse to go along with most of his agenda RINOs must be forced to walk the plank, they are RINOs and little else.
This entry was posted in OJ Simpson Faces Good Chance at Parole From Nevada Prison: He was not guilty at his original murder trial and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to OJ Simpson Faces Good Chance at Parole From Nevada Prison: He was not guilty at his original murder trial

  1. drartaud says:

    Great article. Didn’t know or consider much of it at the time, but it does point the way to his innocence, at least of this crime. And had this crime not occurred, the one he was convicted of would not have occurred either.

    Many years ago, a used car lot near another one where I worked, had the owner arrange to buy stolen TVs delivered by truck at night. As he waited with cash in hand, the truck roll open door was lifted. No TVs, but a guy with a shotgun. The owner ran, got shot, was taken to the hospital where they failed to consider the extent of his injuries, put him aside while treating other situations, he turned critical and passed away. Years later, seeking parole, the killer claimed had the hospital treated him properly, he wouldn’t be in jail for murder, maybe attempted murder, but not murder. And you know what, I agree. This is the tragedy of OJ, though he seems like a criminal through and through, until his wife’s murder, that wasn’t the case. In the absence of the civil suit against him, the crime he was jailed for probably wouldn’t have happened.

    I remember a Florida DA saying anyone can convict a guilty person, it takes someone with talent to convict an innocent one. There are some sick people out there, including on the police force and in government.

    Thanks for the interesting article and perspective.


    • JCscuba says:

      Thanks D. I’ve been catching all kinds of shit from this article. Hey it’s my opinion, I watched the trial, I researched the evidence. I guess people hang on to their beliefs and just dig in and can’t let their little minds accept alternative possibilities.

      Do I think O.J. did it? Does it make any difference? I do believe he probably arranged to have it done, the evidence shows reasonable doubt, ergo a good jury would be required to consider reasonable doubt. If they did, he was therefore not guilty as charged.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. malenurseken says:

    Very interesting. Isnt the system supposed to convict based on evidence, beyond reasonable doubt! Seems there were plenty of reasons to cause doubt of positive guilt here. They should not have convicted him when there WAS doubt about what really happened. Shouldnt the courts and justice system supposed to operate that way??? This all sounds fishy


  3. JCscuba says:

    Thanks my friend, indeed there was room for reasonable doubt.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Pat Riot says:

    What was LAPD’s motivation to frame OJ?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s