The People v OJ Simpson - FX (1 Viewer)

[apalmer]

Well, kentric, I certainly hope you express such bias to a judge during jury selection if you're ever called to serve.

I'm sure most judges already take such expert witness presentations with a grain of salt so I doubt it would be necessary for me to speak up.

eta:

Actually, he meant when you're asked the voir dire question about whether you're more likely to believe testimony from a police officer than from someone else. Saying you are is a basis for dismissal from the panel so the attorneys don't have to deal with your misconceptions.

And, fwiw, I've never met a judge who takes an expert witness "with a grain of salt".

I'm sure that's something they'd normally volunteer.

I know what he meant. What I'm saying is that unless it is asked directly, I'm not going to volunteer my views on the expert. I have expressed myself on views of testimony of the police relative to non-police, but only because it was specifically inquired.

For the sake of defendants everywhere looking for their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial, let's hope you never get called to serve on a jury.

Hey, nobody cares about a fair trial anyhow.....until they're the defendant, of course.

 

[kentric]

Well, kentric, I certainly hope you express such bias to a judge during jury selection if you're ever called to serve.

I'm sure most judges already take such expert witness presentations with a grain of salt so I doubt it would be necessary for me to speak up.

eta:

Actually, he meant when you're asked the voir dire question about whether you're more likely to believe testimony from a police officer than from someone else. Saying you are is a basis for dismissal from the panel so the attorneys don't have to deal with your misconceptions.

And, fwiw, I've never met a judge who takes an expert witness "with a grain of salt".

I'm sure that's something they'd normally volunteer.

I know what he meant. What I'm saying is that unless it is asked directly, I'm not going to volunteer my views on the expert. I have expressed myself on views of testimony of the police relative to non-police, but only because it was specifically inquired.

For the sake of defendants everywhere looking for their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial, let's hope you never get called to serve on a jury.

Hey. If you can be a lawyer, I can't be any worse as a jurist.

 

[apalmer]

Well, kentric, I certainly hope you express such bias to a judge during jury selection if you're ever called to serve.

I'm sure most judges already take such expert witness presentations with a grain of salt so I doubt it would be necessary for me to speak up.

eta:

Actually, he meant when you're asked the voir dire question about whether you're more likely to believe testimony from a police officer than from someone else. Saying you are is a basis for dismissal from the panel so the attorneys don't have to deal with your misconceptions.

And, fwiw, I've never met a judge who takes an expert witness "with a grain of salt".

I'm sure that's something they'd normally volunteer.

I know what he meant. What I'm saying is that unless it is asked directly, I'm not going to volunteer my views on the expert. I have expressed myself on views of testimony of the police relative to non-police, but only because it was specifically inquired.

For the sake of defendants everywhere looking for their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial, let's hope you never get called to serve on a jury.

Hey. If you can be a lawyer, I can't be any worse as a jurist.

Hard to be something when you don't know what it is. You may someday be a juror (heaven help the parties if you are), but I can guarantee you won't be a jurist.

 

[kentric]

Well, kentric, I certainly hope you express such bias to a judge during jury selection if you're ever called to serve.

I'm sure most judges already take such expert witness presentations with a grain of salt so I doubt it would be necessary for me to speak up.

eta:

Actually, he meant when you're asked the voir dire question about whether you're more likely to believe testimony from a police officer than from someone else. Saying you are is a basis for dismissal from the panel so the attorneys don't have to deal with your misconceptions.

And, fwiw, I've never met a judge who takes an expert witness "with a grain of salt".

I'm sure that's something they'd normally volunteer.

I know what he meant. What I'm saying is that unless it is asked directly, I'm not going to volunteer my views on the expert. I have expressed myself on views of testimony of the police relative to non-police, but only because it was specifically inquired.

For the sake of defendants everywhere looking for their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial, let's hope you never get called to serve on a jury.

Hey. If you can be a lawyer, I can't be any worse as a jurist.

Hard to be something when you don't know what it is. You may someday be a juror (heaven help the parties if you are), but I can guarnatee you won't be a jurist.

Yup mistake on my part. I can guarantee that I have no desire to become a jurist or lawyer.

eta. my last words on this as I find myself getting a bit to aggressive here.

Take care.

 

[apalmer]

Well, kentric, I certainly hope you express such bias to a judge during jury selection if you're ever called to serve.

I'm sure most judges already take such expert witness presentations with a grain of salt so I doubt it would be necessary for me to speak up.

eta:

Actually, he meant when you're asked the voir dire question about whether you're more likely to believe testimony from a police officer than from someone else. Saying you are is a basis for dismissal from the panel so the attorneys don't have to deal with your misconceptions.

And, fwiw, I've never met a judge who takes an expert witness "with a grain of salt".

I'm sure that's something they'd normally volunteer.

I know what he meant. What I'm saying is that unless it is asked directly, I'm not going to volunteer my views on the expert. I have expressed myself on views of testimony of the police relative to non-police, but only because it was specifically inquired.

For the sake of defendants everywhere looking for their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial, let's hope you never get called to serve on a jury.

Hey. If you can be a lawyer, I can't be any worse as a jurist.

Hard to be something when you don't know what it is. You may someday be a juror (heaven help the parties if you are), but I can guarnatee you won't be a jurist.

Yup mistake on my part. I can guarantee that I have no desire to become a jurist or lawyer.

eta. my last words on this as I find myself getting a bit to aggressive here.

Take care.

Luckily, I just watched "Bridge of Spies", so I can still respect my profession despite your withering disdain. Of course, your reaction to to the movie would be quite different from mine.

 

[Zow]

This conversation has me recalling the best jury panel I've had by far.

Felony criminal trial in Phoenix, around the time that some farmers were killed in southern AZ by undocumented immigrants. My Mexican-looking client needed a Spanish interpreter and, against advice, dressed like a Mexican cartel member to the first day of trial. We get through the judge's portion of voir dire which was pretty uneventful -- in that we don't really learn anything about anybody. My co-counsel does our portion of the voir dire. Raises the issue that our client was using the interpreter (my client's legal status in the country is irrelevant to the trial and not something the jury would ever find out) and whether that bothered anybody. Some guy in the back who hadn't yet raised his hand for anything raises his hand and unleashes a xenophobic tirade which would have made Donald Trump proud. Co-counsel asks the panel if anybody else agrees and sure enough hands jump up and down like popcorn and more fuel is added to the fire. More than half the panel was chiming agree with the initial hand-raiser. After about twenty minutes of anti-immigration garbage the prosecutor (a Mexican immigrant) comes over to me and asks us to approach the judge (an Italian immigrant) about just striking the entire panel. We of course don't object and the judge strikes the entire panel -- effectively wasting the day and about 2k in court costs.

Why was this collection of xenophobic bigots the best jury panel I've ever seen? Because they were honest with their biases and the defendant was avoided the horrific injustice of being unknowingly run over by a jury who had pre-judged him. Being a biased person is absolutely one's right. But being a biased juror without disclosing such bias to the court is engaging in truly disgusting behavior.

 

[Short Corner]

Well, kentric, I certainly hope you express such bias to a judge during jury selection if you're ever called to serve.

I'm sure most judges already take such expert witness presentations with a grain of salt so I doubt it would be necessary for me to speak up.

eta:

Actually, he meant when you're asked the voir dire question about whether you're more likely to believe testimony from a police officer than from someone else. Saying you are is a basis for dismissal from the panel so the attorneys don't have to deal with your misconceptions.

And, fwiw, I've never met a judge who takes an expert witness "with a grain of salt".

I'm sure that's something they'd normally volunteer.

I know what he meant. What I'm saying is that unless it is asked directly, I'm not going to volunteer my views on the expert. I have expressed myself on views of testimony of the police relative to non-police, but only because it was specifically inquired.

For the sake of defendants everywhere looking for their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial, let's hope you never get called to serve on a jury.

Hey. If you can be a lawyer, I can't be any worse as a jurist.

Hard to be something when you don't know what it is. You may someday be a juror (heaven help the parties if you are), but I can guarnatee you won't be a jurist.

Yup mistake on my part. I can guarantee that I have no desire to become a jurist or lawyer.

eta. my last words on this as I find myself getting a bit to aggressive here.

Take care.

Good call given the ### pounding you are taking.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Can you buttholes take your crap to the lawyer thread?

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

27 minutes into this and so unimpressed. Looks like a Lifetime movie so far.

 

[Zow]

Can you buttholes take your crap to the lawyer thread?

Up yours, Dr. Brown.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Can you buttholes take your crap to the lawyer thread?

Up yours, Dr. Brown.

Whatever you say, Ruth Bader-Jizzberg

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Jesus, this is bad.

so glad they make sure they use dramatic music every GD time there is something dramatic happening. I'm sure I would be lost without it.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Marcia Clark smokes.

Film at 11

 

[DA RAIDERS]

And you lawyers really need to drop the Latin. Voir dire? So unnecessary.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

And you lawyers really need to drop the Latin. Voir dire? So unnecessary.

It's French; but it's basically English at this point, like soupe du jour, laissez-faire, or hors d'oeuvre.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Verum dicere in Latin. Got it

 

[Willie Neslon]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

 

[Smack Tripper]

Took a big step back Episode 2... no tension in that car ride

Agree with the redheaded stranger on Rocky Dennis Clark

 

[MattFancy]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

Yeah the Kardashian scene was so dumb. What was the point of that? Back to back episodes that involved the Kardashian kids when there was zero need to do so.

 

[pantherclub]

To me its absolutely bizarre and surreal to watch that chase scene and I can immediately recall exactly where I was, exactly who I was with, exactly how the room was set up, how they cut the NBA game. All that stuff is incredibly vivid in my mind but yet I would have to stop and think really hard what I did say this last Saturday morning. Funny how things get burnt into your brain.

 

[Willie Neslon]

And why did Robert Kardashian tell the family OJ killed himself? "We have reason to believe"...what was the reason? Wasn't explained.

 

[MattFancy]

And why did Robert Kardashian tell the family OJ killed himself? "We have reason to believe"...what was the reason? Wasn't explained.

I figured the reason was the suicide note he found

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

These things are good:

ice cream and cake, a ride on a Harley, seeing monkeys in the trees, the rain on my tongue, and the sun shining on my face.

These things are a drag:

dust in my hair, holes in my shoes, no money in my pocket, and the sun shining on my face.

 

[Willie Neslon]

And why did Robert Kardashian tell the family OJ killed himself? "We have reason to believe"...what was the reason? Wasn't explained.

I figured the reason was the suicide note he found

But he had already given them the note. He paused as if there was additional info. You're probably right but it was unclear. He pulls up to the house, goes crazy in the car, comes in to tell them about the note and then says after a dramatic pause they have reason to believe he killed himself. They knew he took off in the bronco with AC, they just had a press conference where they ask him to turn himself in. So what else happened? I assume something was edited out. Sloppy though.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

 

[The General]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

People can't get enough of those big assed chicks.

 

[Willie Neslon]

g

 

[Cjw_55106]

I've only watched episode 1 so far. No complaints about Cuba playing the part from me.

 

[Bob Magaw]

A couple other issues I had with O.J.s story/multiple stories, which he seemed to have trouble keeping track of.

I've never cut my hand as bad as it sounds like he did in my life. Despite playing in a violent sport, likely he hadn't either - except within 24 hours of the butchering of his wife and a second person, in which the murderer may well have suffered defensive wounds (especially with gloves missing, for whatever reason). The worst I ever cut my thumb was from the lid of a can I had just opened, it was deep but short, maybe could have used a few stitches, but it healed by itself and left a small scar. I still remember it no problem something like 40 years later. But OJ couldn't remember how he got his nasty cut when interrogated by the detectives something like a day or two later (he supposedly cut it on a glass he smashed after being informed about his wife's murder on the phone in Chicago, than it was something else - to explain blood evidence in the Bronco?*). I realize this isn't in and of itself conclusive, definitive proof, but for me it was part of the mosaic that seemed to overwhelmingly point in OJs direction.

Also his trouble remembering why he was late for the limo driver before leaving for the airport to Chicago. He slept in, he was playing golf, I think there was a third version. Just seemed that he was making it up as he went along.

Enjoying the teasers of a looming legal/strategic/leadership divide between Shapiro and Cochran.

Also looking forward to see who was cast for key "dream team" roles F. Lee Bailey and the DNA twins.

* Didn't he inexplicably claim he cut it in the Bronco, though I doubt there were many sharp edged objects sufficient to account for the wound. Instead of the infamous "misfit" glove fiasco (he was on anti-inflammation meds for arthritis, and it was speculated he could have terminated there use leading up to the misadventure/spectacle), it would have been great to lock OJ in the Bronco for a few minutes and TRY to cut himself. If he proved unable to replicate the bizarre wound mechanism explanation alibi, instead of focusing on the Byzantine DNA evidence which would cause anybody without a doctorate in molecular biology (pretty sure that describes most of the seated jury) to have their eyes turn into cartoon Xs, there could have been a PROSECUTION nursery rhyme:

"IF IT DOESN'T SPURT, RED ALERT!"

 

[Bigboy10182000]

.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

Higher ratings?

OJ is barely a footnote to a lot of people under 30 years old. The Kardashians, however, are household names.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

Higher ratings?

OJ is barely a footnote to a lot of people under 30 years old. The Kardashians, however, are household names.

Unacceptable pandering IMO. It's important that we hold this television miniseries starring Cuba Gooding Jr, John Travolta and Ross from Friends to the strictest of journalistic standards.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

Higher ratings?

OJ is barely a footnote to a lot of people under 30 years old. The Kardashians, however, are household names.

More people are going to tune in because those scenes are included?

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

Higher ratings?

OJ is barely a footnote to a lot of people under 30 years old. The Kardashians, however, are household names.

More people are going to tune in because those scenes are included?

Either way this thing is filled with crappy writing. It's about 1/2 step up from a Lifetime Movie.

 

[Zow]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

Higher ratings?

OJ is barely a footnote to a lot of people under 30 years old. The Kardashians, however, are household names.

More people are going to tune in because those scenes are included?

Either way this thing is filled with crappy writing. It's about 1/2 step up from a Lifetime Movie.

But god forbid we take time away from discussing this compelling drama to discuss actual legal issues.

 

[matttyl]

Hold on, her dog was also named Kato - like the dude living in the back? Never realized that.

 

[Capella]

Can you all that want to talk about a 20-year-old case that has been ripped apart a hundred times over take it to another thread please? Some of us would like to discuss wtf happened to John Travolta's face in here and it's hard with you amateur Kojak's trying to crack the case.

 

[Willie Neslon]

299 (size 12)http://www.people.com/article/oj-simpson-reaction-photo-bruno-magli-shoes-deposition-tapes

but the cops planted evidence

Why would you need to plant evidence on a 'slam dunk' case? Still nobody attempting to explain the other evidence at the scene that indicates someone else being there.

I think that there will be trace findings of other people almost anywhere. That would be my explanation. May not serve to answer what you're looking for in the context of a murder investigation, but I truly believe that's the correct answer - certainly not that there was another person necessarily there.

Fresh blood? The blood spray on Nichole's back was an unidentified 3rd person.

Total BS.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

Higher ratings?

OJ is barely a footnote to a lot of people under 30 years old. The Kardashians, however, are household names.

More people are going to tune in because those scenes are included?

Either way this thing is filled with crappy writing. It's about 1/2 step up from a Lifetime Movie.

But god forbid we take time away from discussing this compelling drama to discuss actual legal issues.

Your face should be treated as a hostile witness.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Also looking forward to see who was cast for key "dream team" roles F. Lee Bailey

Nathan Lane

 

[Good Posting Judge]

Can't believe some of you wangos are getting bent out of shape about Cuba Gooding Jr. not being big enough.

 

[Smack Tripper]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

We all know why.

Seriously, i don't. Does FX have a piece of them?

Higher ratings?

OJ is barely a footnote to a lot of people under 30 years old. The Kardashians, however, are household names.

Unacceptable pandering IMO. It's important that we hold this television miniseries starring Cuba Gooding Jr, John Travolta and Ross from Friends to the strictest of journalistic standards.

If they're gonna pander we shouid have gotten Robert Higgins phone call

 

[koby925]

Can't believe some of you wangos are getting bent out of shape about Cuba Gooding Jr. not being big enough.

Why is that hard to believe? A lot of the mystique with OJ was how he was remembered as one of the best power speed athletes ever. Even when this happened he was what mid to late 40s? And still a pretty big in shape dude. Seeing 5 foot nothing a hundred and nothing Cuba trying to play him - and all the other actors playing cops, his lawyers etc are much bigger - is tough to swallow. It's bad casting.

Agree with this being like a Lifetime movie.

 

[Bob Magaw]

If not for prematurely passing, I would have liked to have seen the late Gary Coleman cast as OJ. Or maybe Emmanuel Lewis?

 

[Rocky Dennis]

Cuba is great in this. Why they have to keep showing the Kardashian kids every episode? They had nothing to do with any of it. It's almost silly, trying to show their association because they're famous now? Weird.

Marsha Clark has a Rocky Dennis thing going in this.

 

[strykerpks]

Can't believe some of you wangos are getting bent out of shape about Cuba Gooding Jr. not being big enough.

Why is that hard to believe? A lot of the mystique with OJ was how he was remembered as one of the best power speed athletes ever. Even when this happened he was what mid to late 40s? And still a pretty big in shape dude. Seeing 5 foot nothing a hundred and nothing Cuba trying to play him - and all the other actors playing cops, his lawyers etc are much bigger - is tough to swallow. It's bad casting.

Agree with this being like a Lifetime movie.

Cuba is only 3" shorter

 

[Major]

I was hopeful this show would be entertaining given the cast and story but that second episode was awful. Travolta gives me a good laugh as Shapiro though.

 

[lakerstan]

I didn't know there were actually 2 white Broncos, so gotta give them credit for getting some things right.

 

[shadyridr]

Did you guys solve the case yet?