The Truth About The Original OJ Case

[David Sklansky]

To the three of you I say this:

It is obvious that OJ didn't drive to Nicole's house to kill her. Seeing Goldman put him into a state of rage. And murdering someone in that state is not generally accepted by the public as deserving of conviction of a crime that carries the sentence of life without parole. Regardless of the technical names for this. And I believe his attorneys had the same opinion.

I also am pretty sure that the prosecutors would have accepted a much lessor sentence, ten years or so, if he had plea bargained. And they were trying to punish him for declining. And if true, that was also a reason for the attorneys to feel no qualms in defending him. (See my new thread on plea bargains.)

Finally I think it is quite possible that the poster who speculated that the defense attorneys were outraged because evidence was planted might be right. In fact Lestat could easily be wrong about Johnny Cochrane. He might not always want to hear the truth but in this case I wouldn't be surprised if he KNEW the glove was planted because OJ told him that he dropped both gloves at the scene. Most defense attorneys I know consider that planting of evidence all the excuse they needed to ethically allow them to acquit Ted Bundy.