News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I remember OJ Simpson getting off a double-murder because there was a remote possibility that someone (actually several hundred people) orchestrated a conspiracy to plant evidence.
He stabbed two people to death and there was DNA evidence tying him to the crime scene.
Years later Jurors came out and said they acquitted OJ in response to the Rodney King incident.
Not remote, they did. Police corruption let him off. If they let the evidence do its job there was enough to convict.
They went with their instincts and tried to frame a guy who just happened to actually be guilty, and it backfired on them.
LAPD is notoriously corrupt, just like the nypd.
You seem to be confusing Martin Luther King with Rodney King. No need for you to do legwork.
Martin Luther King Jr doesn't have any famous trial losses to his name, are you thinking of Rodney King, who was also in LA and whose trial was contemporary?
Rodney King had direct bearing on the OJ trial. Jurors admitted they acquitted OJ as "payback" for King
yeah which was a key in that this was who this poster meant
They're thinking of Rodney Dangerfield who, quite famously, suffered from a lack of respect.
And he was always suspiciously stepping on ducks whenever he was around...
There are users in here who are utterly confused, look at the other replies. I know the 90's were now over 3 decades ago but it's all completely searchable. There are multiple documentaries. I don't know how people confuse Rodney King, Martin Luther King and the OJ Simpson case all in one thread. Astonishing.
Add another one: my brain completely deleted the "King" part and I thought he was talking about the Protestant reformist before reading the replies about OJ and Rodney King.
I should sleep.
it has an uncomfortable "i can't tell the difference between Black people" vibe. i don't mind people not remembering the 90s. i do mind people not double checking the broad details real quick
It's mind blowing particularly to an Oldy McOldface like myself who was there and lived through the events.
same here. i was just little when the police brutalized Rodney King. but i still remember my white neighbors being incensed about how while that was wrong, the LA riots were completely unjustified. meanwhile my Black neighbors all tried to explain that a riot is not the result of a single event and that the LA riots were the response to decades and even centuries of mistreatment
seems only one person got confused, the one that got banned. judging by his username, he was definitely looking for trouble.
He got off because the jury was subjected to an absolute media circus and was tampered with repeatedly and the lawyers for OJ did everything they could to confuse them about the relatively new technology of DNA analysis, and judge Ito had almost no control over the courtroom, leading to one of the first "memes" of "I'll allow it."
You don't have to do legwork, I remember much of it.
Edit: it took me a moment to realize you said Martin Luther King... I don't even... man, bruh, just.... bruh.
The jurors did actually admit later that they acquitted OJ as "payback" for Rodney King https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/o-j-simpson-juror-admits-believed-simpson-guilty-him-off-payback
You’re thinking of Rodney King. Completely different. Mark Fuhrman committed perjury and tampered with evidence.
Rodney King was the case of a driver who got assaulted by police and brutally beat, it led to rioting across LA because it was captured on video, and King's iconic "Can't we all get along" speech on TV. It was the same general time and place, but not directly connected to the OJ case.
Mark Fuhrman may or may not have been some racist tampering with evidence but it still would have taken enormous resources and a risky gamble to frame OJ for... reasons. OJ was not framed, he got off because they turned the trial into a media circus and the jury didn't understand DNA evidence which was very new and few people had heard of it as an investigation tool. They have tried to leverage Rodney King's beating but that was only one part of the massive fuck-up by prosecution and the legal system.
My memory of events is still pretty fresh but you're welcome to look it all up.
Rodney King was connected; Jurors admitted later that they acquitted OJ as "payback" for Rodney King, even though they thought he was guilty
Any movies or other media you’d recommend for getting an accurate and detailed account of the OJ case?
I would have to look it up, I didn't watch documentaries, I watched it all on live TV at the time. I'm sure there's boatloads of stories and documentaries on youtube, just beware anything that tries to paint the case as anything other than a massive clusterfuck and failure of the system to safeguard judicial system from money, fame, influence and media hype. What went wrong, was it was the first huge celebrity trial covered on live TV, and all the same nonsense and political bullshit you would expect to happen today, happened then.
The DNA evidence was biggest the key which would have clinched any similar case today, but it was still a very new thing, and people were as dumb about science then as they are now, so that ignorance was leveraged by a rich man's legal team and whatever political funding they were getting.
Time is a flat circle.
There was more than DNA evidence, there was a fat ton of circumstantial evidence, testimonies from associated people, and of course things like Nicole Brown Simpson having previously called 911 as OJ was beating her up and threatening her life, the whole massive performance piece of the slow-speed bronco chase, it was just a fuckup from the start and everyone involved just wanted to get famous from it.
You mean hero cop Mark Fuhrman?