The People v OJ Simpson - American Crime Story [** Spoilers **]

transylman

OJ did it.

philstar

can we change the title of this thread to...The People vs OJ Simpson cause thats the name of the series

Frank Grimes

philstar wrote: »

can we change the title of this thread to...The People vs OJ Simpson cause thats the name of the series

It's a true crime anthology series called American Crime Story, the first season is about OJ Simpson so the thread title is accurate.

philstar

^^^^^^^^

in fairness no one knows it as...American Crime Story

Frank Grimes

philstar wrote: »

in fairness no one knows it as...American Crime Story

I do and I doubt I'm the only one given that it's the name of the series.

Have to agree. Anyone I talk to about the series don't say American crime story they say the people vs OJ Simpson.

I think the thread would get more notice with OJ in the title.

fin12

Deleted User wrote: »

Have to agree. Anyone I talk to about the series don't say American crime story they say the people vs OJ Simpson.

I think the thread would get more notice with OJ in the title.

Ya your probably right but if someone really wants to find the thread they'll find it..

amdublin

philstar wrote: »

can we change the title of this thread to...The People vs OJ Simpson cause thats the name of the series

Your wish is my command

Frank Grimes wrote: »

It's a true crime anthology series called American Crime Story, the first season is about OJ Simpson so the thread title is accurate.

True

philstar wrote: »

^^^^^^^^

in fairness no one knows it as...American Crime Story

That's true also

mod:
Thread title edited

Tipsy McSwagger

Ok in terms of quality this show is really poor. The writing is terrible, the acting terrible and the whole feel of the show feels like a poorly written soap opera. Travolta is shockingly bad with his sucking on a lemon acting, Schwimmer is lost and Cuba Gooding Jr completely miscast and putting in a horrendous performance. I would have loved to have seen Idris Elba cast as OJ with the show been a lot more darker, more serious and someone like David Fincher directing a couple of episodes.

amdublin

Oh I'd have to disagree tipsy.

David schwimmer is playing someone "lost". Robert kardashian was not a famous person, just an ordinary business / family man thrust into the spotlight when his best friend did something bad. I think he is portraying what Robert went through very well. Plus I think he's captured Roberts stature and mannerisms very well - he looks like a small man.

Re John Travolta - have you seen footage of shaping back then? He looks like he's suckling in a lemon too!

There is argument for it to be done darker alright. But I think it's done well all the same...

Tipsy McSwagger

I didn't say he's playing Kardashian as being lost what I meant is he is lost as in he doesn't know what way to act in this show except say 'juice' all the time, I like Schwimmer and thought he was fantastic in Band of Brothers, so some of Travolta's awful acting must have infected him. The show is enjoyable but really reached a low point with that posh dinner basil exposition nonsense.

amdublin

I am a little behind! I record it on Monday night and then watch it at the weekend. I will watch out for that basil dinner :pac:

Ice Maiden

amdublin wrote: »

I think david s is excellent in it. Also John Travolta.

Actually it's funny all the famous people playing people you saw on tv during the 90s trial. They are all very believable.

Was thinking that too. Very 90s cast!

ronnie3585

This weeks' episode is brilliant. Poor Marsha:(

fin12

ronnie3585 wrote: »

This weeks' episode is brilliant. Poor Marsha:(

what number episode is that? is Marsha the woman lawyer on the prosecution team..

furiousox

Episode 6.

fryup

its very borderline libellous, implying that OJ did it...whether we like it or not..he was found innocent after all

bradolf pittler

fryup wrote: »

its very borderline libellous, implying that OJ did it...whether we like or not..he was found innocent after all

But he was later found guilty or "responsible" for the murders in a Civil trial so i guess their well covered legally.
Personally i think the show is great,There's some real "i remember that" moments from the media frenzy over Marsha Clarke's Hair to the gloves to the bronco chase and even though we all know the outcome of the verdict its still gripping stuff.

La_Gordy

Really enjoyed the Marcia, Marcia, Marcia episode. I thought the show was a bit trashy in the beginning, but each week it has been getting stronger.

squonk

I'm enjoying it a lot. It's really crept up my view rankings. I thought the first few episodes were a bit ropey or not particularly well executed but ager two or 3 episodes it really got into it's stride and is great now. I don't remember too much about the trial and I missed all the kerfuffle about Marcia Clark at the time but small pieces are really bringing me back. I'm surprised actually how unlikeable Simpson sems to be.

transylman

fryup wrote: »

its very borderline libellous, implying that OJ did it...whether we like it or not..he was found innocent after all

Seriously?

Copy-paste list of evidence below from elsewhere. If you can go through that and come to any conclusion other than the obvious one you are even more special than the people that were on his jury.

Key: Simpson = OJ Simpson; NBS = Nicole Brown Simpson

Forensic evidence

Simpson's blood was found at the Bundy crime scene, in his Ford Bronco and at his home
Simpson's bloody shoe prints were found at the crime scene
Hairs found in a woollen cap at the crime scene were a forensic match for Simpson
A bloody glove was found on a footpath at the rear of Simpson's home. The blood was a DNA match for Simpson and that of both victims. Hairs of both victims were also found on the glove, and microscopic fibres matched the carpet of Simpson's Bronco. The glove was a match for the other one found at the Bundy crime scene
A pair of blood-spattered socks were found on Simpson's bedroom floor. The blood was a match for Simpson and NBS. This evidence proved to be controversial, as traces of EDTA (a blood preservative used when collecting samples) was detected in the blood, indicating possible contamination
Blood of both victims was found in the Bronco

Circumstantial evidence

On the night of the murders, Simpson sustained a very deep wound to a finger on his left hand. In fact not only the same night, but the precise hour that the crimes were committed. In his first police interview the day after, Simpson said that he could not recall how he had been cut. However, in subsequent testimony he claimed that he cut it while retrieving his cell phone from his car while rushing to catch his flight to Chicago
Two independent witnesses swore that they saw Simpson's white Bronco, or a vehicle very similar to it, speed away from Nicole's street at the precise time that the murders are believed to have occurred
The bloody footprints found at the crime scene were matched to a size 12 Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoe. These Italian designer shoes were so rare that only 299 pairs were sold in the USA up to that point. Photographic evidence of Simpson wearing these exact shoes were shown in the civil trial, despite Simpson previously denying that he ever owned them
The five blood drops found on a footpath at the crime scene that were matched to Simpson were all to the left of the shoe prints, the same side that Simpson cut his hand that night
The bloody gloves were identical to a pair that NBS bought for her husband in 1990. Like the shoes these were very rare models, with only 200 pairs sold in that year
Simpson had a long history of spousal abuse against his ex-wife. In their 17 year relationship, NBS had called the police 9 times to complain of domestic violence. Simpson was convicted in 1989 of spousal abuse and was sentenced to community service
NBS had confided in friends shortly before her murder that she feared Simpson would kill her one day. She also suspected that he was stalking her
Two days after the murders, Simpson's defence team had him undergo a polygraph test. Knowing that whatever the outcome the test would be inadmissible as evidence, they hoped for a positive result that might be used to sway public opinion in favour of Simpson. In the polygraph, a score of -6 or less indicates deception while +6 indicates that the subject is telling the truth. Simpson failed the test miserably, scoring -22. In a report submitted to defence attorney Robert Shapiro, the test administrator Dennis Nellany interpreted the polygraph as an indication of Simpson's guilt in the murders. Unsurprisingly, the defence chose not to publicise the results. The test eventually came to light during the 1996 civil trial
When Simpson was notified via his lawyers that he was to be charged with the murders and to surrender at the police station, he instead absconded with his friend AC Cowlings, leaving what seemed to be a suicide note. When he was finally apprehended after the notorious Bronco chase, he was found with his passport, a gun, a fake beard, clean underwear and $8750 cash, which Cowlings said OJ had asked him to hold. A receipt found with the beard showed that it had been purchased two weeks prior to the murders
A guard at the jail where Simpson was being held on remand, who sat outside the door of the room where Simpson talked to minister Rosey Grier, swore that he overheard Simpson shout "I didn't mean to do it. I'm sorry."
Simpson had no alibi for the time of the murders. In varying accounts he claimed to either be asleep or chipping golf balls on his lawn alone in the dark

fryup

transylman wrote: »

Seriously?

Copy-paste list of evidence below from elsewhere. If you can go through that and come to any conclusion other than the obvious one you are even more special than the people that were on his jury.

i don't think he's innocent for a second but the fact of the matter is he was found not guilty in that criminal trial and i doubt the programme makers would make this series if he wasn't in prison at the moment

Cianmcliam

Vincent Bugliosi made a mini-series years ago: "Absolutely 100% Guilty" and called his book on the case "Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O. J. Simpson Got Away with Murder". I don't think libel ever crossed the minds of the show's producers!
The Bugliosi documentary on the case is excellent, well worth watching. He doesn't hold back describing the spectacular incompetence of the prosecution and the idiocy of some of the jurors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9F90DHsOdg

fryup

here's the actual footage of F Lee Bailey cross examination of Detective Mark Fuhrman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3d4xgvAdC8

fryup

did Bob Shapiro really have access to those gloves during jury recess ??

ridiculous that it was allowed to happen, farce of a trial

La_Gordy

This week's episode is also a great one - the background to "If the glove doesn't fit - you MUST acquit." I thought Marcia's reenactment of the conspiracy wi shot glasses was pretty good for demonstrating how illogical it is that the police were out to frame OJ.

whatawaster81

fryup wrote: »

did Bob Shapiro really have access to those gloves during jury recess ??

ridiculous that it was allowed to happen, farce of a trial

Apparently they had access for an hour during lunch. Chris Darden after Cochran was dead went on to claim that johnnie cut the lining of the gloves.
Another claim was that OJ stopped taking his meds for arthritis which caused his hands to swell up though it's unclear if this is accurate as the meds take weeks to act. Another claim is that they simply shrunk when washed.

Either way that's the moment the prosecution gave the trial away according to most commentators.

PeterTheEighth

La_Gordy wrote: »

This week's episode is also a great one - the background to "If the glove doesn't fit - you MUST acquit.

I watched all around this story about two years back, even going through the stuff with Marcia Clarke's book, Mark Fuhrman's Oprah appearance and Chris Darden's interviews. There were two points about this:

1. Marcia Clarke pretty much throws Darden under the bus, that it was HIS decision to try to get OJ to try on the glove.

2. Darden said he had no choice to ask OJ to put on the glove, because he knew that the defence were gonna go through the whole charade whether he asked or not.

fryup

but the thing is they did fit his hands albeit a tight fit, and lets not forget he was wearing latex gloves underneath which would have made it even tighter...can't believe the trial swung on this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__reD_phfbg

PeterTheEighth

fryup wrote: »

but the thing is they did fit his hands albeit a tight fit, and lets not forget he was wearing latex gloves underneath which would have made it even tighter...can't believe the trial swung on this

And they argued that the condition that the glove was left in, that it would have shrunk anyway. I think because it was damp.

Anyway, I've started watching the damned thing. I hope ye are all happy. Up to Ep 3 now.

Every time I see Travolta I think of yer man out of The Mask.