General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: O J Simpson dead at 76: [View all]Xolodno
(6,613 posts)However....
1. DNA evidence was still a bit "new" and most people didn't understand it.
2. The police had a bit of a "reputation" and not in a good way.
3. The police investigation seemed to be haphazard.
4. The prosecution wasn't on the same page at times and focused on the wrong things.
5. The gloves, talk about a blunder. Cochran was probably doing a jig afterwards.
6. Furman, another major blunder. But to be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if the defense called him in as a hostile witness. His involvement and previous encounters put a stain on everything.
7. Sequestering the Jury for that long, at that point, whatever the majority was, everyone would have just changed their votes to it.
8. Strong possibility of an accomplice. An arthritic person overpowering two people with only a single cut on his hand, no bruises or any other wounds, etc.
9. Not securing key witnesses ahead of time and then seeing them pop up on a talk show, rendering them unusable.
10. Many other blunders by the prosecution.
I honestly don't see how they could have gotten a conviction.