Are you qualified to be a juror on a felony murder trial: Revisiting the first murder trial of Nicole Brown Simpson

By Jim Campbell

July 19, 2017

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.

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 vile that contained Simpson’s blood and a blood preservative, EDTA




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 afterkillings, 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.

I second knife purchased by O.J. Simpson was found during the demolition of his Rockingham estate that demonstrated that Mr. Simpson’s blood was not on it after it was tested forensically. 

Oddly it was tested by the LAPD labs with not independent testing.

The blood was not found to be O.J.’s leading to the specualtion that O.J. possible went through the murder trial to prevent his son from being tried for the murders. (Source)

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 by the prosecution!

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? (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. Why?

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? Yes, when it came to Nicole.

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.

Would you have found Mr. Simpson guilty with the huge amount of evidence providing reasonable doubt?




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 Are you qualified to be a juror on a felony murder trial: Revisiting the first murder trial of Nicole Brown Simpson and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Are you qualified to be a juror on a felony murder trial: Revisiting the first murder trial of Nicole Brown Simpson

  1. Sam says:

    Too much here left open for discusion


  2. Dave the Differentiator says:

    The origin murder case and trial was decided by a jury and the verdict is final. O.J. Simpson found not guilty.

    The case was presented by a team of seasoned prosecutors who did their best AND lost.

    The evidence against OJ was tainted and questionable as to any key points. there was no proof beyond a reasonable doubt so OJ went free.

    The PRESS or what we call the Main Stream Media condemned OJ and were successful in their biased presentation of their set of facts. WTF?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Simply Linda says:

    Metaphorically, I think lying dogs just need to be kept that way…I agree JC…and with Dave the Differentiator. I also remember watching the whole thing, and the serious doubts about the prosecution and police. One will never know what truly happened, I also think he got a raw deal the term he is presently serving for a crime that they got him on because they didn’t find him guilty the first time (lets just keep it real and quit lying about it)…again, police and prosecution issues, as the other fellows who actually brandshied the gun, did less time.{{{stepping off the soap box}}}


  4. GG says:

    I don’t give a rat’s patootie about OJ Simpson or
    any of the “celebrity, high profile cases.”
    Part of “National Enquirer,” type,
    reality tv series, and another ID tv case…
    Just gets special treatment in the spotlight b/c
    OJ has celebrity status..


    • JCscuba says:

      What’s that got with you having the ability to make a judgement based on the evidenced presidented? A second knife found at the scene found no O.J. blood on it.


    • JCscuba says:

      Here’s why it does matter and it matters big time Wanda. The police on many police forces plant evidence, i.e. they are crooked and want to take an easy way to solve a case. That’s what happened here. The entire topic was about reasonable doubt, apparently you missed that, you are forgiven, drop and give me 5o then go back to your corner.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.