Simpson “has no history of resorting to raging violence to solve his emotional problems.”
And "high-tension escort"...? Sounds like someone Eliot Spitzer would know.
The article explains exactly what this star witness would have said, but it's the ABA Journal, so I'm excerpting regardless.
Simpson “has no history of resorting to raging violence to solve his emotional problems.”
Hmm I guess Drunk Lee Bailey should again look at those photos of Nicole’s face, maybe that outta reminder him what OJ does when he’s pissed
hahahahahahahaha, I was wondering the other day what a lawyer who had his license revoked, did for a living.. now I know.... they write fiction!
How the mighty have fallen. This guy hasn’t yet realized that the entire country thinks he’s a flaming idiot.
He was going to be acquitted no matter what.
Am I the only one who remembers the juror throwing a black power sign?
The news here? F. Lee Bailey is STILL ALIVE.
His career, however, has been dead for over a decade.
Someone should tell him.
So how does Flea Bailey resolve OJ crying in the background of the infamous 911 call, “My god, how can I live with myself?!?!” I don’t think he was talking about forgetting the Monday special at Denny’s.
FWIW, I have heard a very convincing argument from a forensic expert that OJ wasn’t the killer, but his son, Jason, was & the old man was just trying to take the heat for the kid.
I feel that both juries reached the right conclusion, even if they may have done it for the wrong reasons. Simpson was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt because the defense offered evidence of blood sample tampering (which, it was later revealed, was not an unusual thing for LAPD to do when it really needed a conviction) that the prosecution did not successfully refute. I also felt there were holes in the timeline about when/where Simpson was while he was back at Rockingham after the crime was committed.
The civil journey had the lower bar of “preponderance of the evidence” (better than 50-50 he did it) and also had the additional evidence of the Bruno Magli shoe prints at the crime scene, which was not introduced in the first trial.
I think Bailey’s “new evidence” is a red herring anyway. Just because another person might have been in the area, doesn’t exonerate Simpson at all unless you can prove Simpson was *not* in the area.
I guess he forgot about the violent incidents OJ had in FL including smacking around his current girlfriend at the time and when he got into an altercation on an off-ramp, road rage. And lest we forget why he’s in prison now. I’m not a lawyer but du’oh?
Psst... Bailey.... He admitted it.
DNA? Everybody got DNA, so wut?
The Boston Strangler was innocent too.
Hey man - the glove didn’t fit!!
It is a crazy world we live in.
So all he is guilty of is being a violent, wife beating, adultering sociopath who ditched the mother of his first two children to be with a blonde party girl, which he beat until she couldnt take it anymore and filed for divorce. He is going to hell forever either way, so it is fine with me.
No he’s right, it was OJ’s son. He wanted to borrow the bronco and OJ told him to go axe his mother.
Pure B.S. F. Lee! Don't you remember O.J destroying Nichol's car with a baseball bat? I guess that wouldn't be rage would it F. Lee?
Then, why did Nicole have to call police because he was threatening her life? Why did she predict he would kill her?
OJ’s blood was all over the place. If there is contamination of blood it doesn't turn into OJ blood.
The Jury nullification was ridiculous.
Good old F. U. Bailey