Community Chat

[hyacinth003]

I haven't followed this like I followed the OJ Simpson trial. I did watch that one live. I thought it was presented almost beyond ANY doubt, much less reasonable doubt. They had so much physical evidence, as well as circumstatial.

Lest there are some "youngsters" here.....They had OJ's blood where it didn't belong, the vitctims' blood where it didn't belong, the "bloody glove" outside OJ's property, the limo driver who testified OJ wasn't home when he got there, then saw him arrive. I think the prosecution in that case called it a "mountain of evidence." No one else had any motive to kill these people. Unfortunately, Ron Goldman, was a terrible victim of circumstance.

The defense used the defense of "police are racists," the DNA was contaminated, the police sprinkled OJ's blood from the blood draw all over, and other goofy ideas. But, they won the case.

In any fairness to that jury, DNA was not well known and understood at that time. People have been convicted of one piece of their DNA since. I also think there was social pressure to acquit him.

There's no one else that could have killed Caylee Anthony except her mother. But, after the OJ trial, I won't be sure of anything until it happens.

Hyacinth