So, as someone who A) isn’t a US native and was very young at the time, I only very vaguely remember the verdict, but has recently watched the Netflix series on it, I have a question for those old enought to remember the actual thing going on: Is the series accurate? I mean it looks like an absolute clusterfuck on the side of the LAPD and the prosecution. But the whole story is like something out of a particularly bad soap opera, was it really like that?

I haven't seen it. But some of my Criminal Justice courses in College touched on how the Prosecution did a terrible job. The general consensus seems to be had the Prosecutor kept a better wrap on things, OJ would likely have been convicted.

 

Now there is a little more to the story as the blame doesn't solely lie with the Prosecutor, but also the LAPD because of their extreme carelessness. Both the LAPD and Prosecution felt it was impossible for OJ to win, so they didn't strive for high professionalism. As we know now, that strategy came back to bite them.

As Death said above, I haven't watched it and was too young for it as well, but took some forensics courses. The biggest issue I remember from going over the O.J case was the way the evidence was handled was sloppy. No signatures from everyone who touched it (this is a huge NO NO as you have to remove the evidence now. No matter how damning it is.) Detectives and LAPD did possibly the worst job handling forensics evidence I've ever heard of in that case and ultimately, as Death said, O.J would've been convicted had the evidence been allowed.

Again, haven't watched the show but from a forensic standpoint, I've never heard of a case more botched behind the scenes than O.J v The People.

I made it through 2 episodes before I couldn't stand to watch more. This was 3 years ago when it was first aired on FX. Cuba Gooding as OJ Simpson? I won't even comment more about how it was cast.

 

OJ murdered his wife and a waiter from a posh Studio City restaurant back in 1994. He murdered them with a hunting knife, and made a huge mess. They should have forced him to commit suicide during that entirely too long Bronco ride around Los Angeles, that or just gunned him down on the freeway... but they didn't do that.

 

He was guilty as Ted Bundy, but too many people saw too many episodes of CSI, and allowed the defense attorneys to put the LAPD, and the very new DNA evidence, on trial instead. He got away with murder, but we had him here in a Nevada prison for 9 years after he staged an armed robbery of his own property at the Palace Station Casino. He was recently released, but we had fun putting that asshole away for a little while. He actually showed up at my wife's restaurant shortly after his release. He's still a jerk.

That judge was too into his 15 minutes of fame and let that trial get out of control.  The prosecution botched a lot of things as well, but a better judge managing the trial might have mitigated that a bit.

That judge was too into his 15 minutes of fame and let that trial get out of control.  The prosecution botched a lot of things as well, but a better judge managing the trial might have mitigated that a bit.

I fully agree.

 

So, as someone who A) isn’t a US native and was very young at the time, I only very vaguely remember the verdict, but has recently watched the Netflix series on it, I have a question for those old enought to remember the actual thing going on: Is the series accurate? I mean it looks like an absolute clusterfuck on the side of the LAPD and the prosecution. But the whole story is like something out of a particularly bad soap opera, was it really like that?

The trial, Itself, was like a real life soap opera. My mother watched it every day, and felt a real loss when it ended.

 

It was a cluster fuck circus, Judge Ito cried in the courtroom because his wife was hurt by racist hate mail. Marcia Clark was a good prosecutor, but Johnny Cochran was like a PT Barnum in terms of showmanship and charisma. People were fascinated by every lurid aspect. Tapes of Nicole Simpson’s 911 calls were a stark contrast to the carefully crafted image O.J had built for himself. Nicole’s sister, who could have been her twin except for being brunette, dyed her hair blonde to freak out O.J. The drama was delicious and gobbled up by the public. All this was largely because Ito did not ban cameras from the courtroom. Oh! I remember he had an apple laptop on his desk and covered up the logo due to complaints by Microsoft.

 

 

It was a cluster fuck circus, Judge Ito cried in the courtroom because his wife was hurt by racist hate mail. Marcia Clark was a good prosecutor, but Johnny Cochran was like a PT Barnum in terms of showmanship and charisma. People were fascinated by every lurid aspect. Tapes of Nicole Simpson’s 911 calls were a stark contrast to the carefully crafted image O.J had built for himself. Nicole’s sister, who could have been her twin except for being brunette, dyed her hair blonde to freak out O.J. The drama was delicious and gobbled up by the public. All this was largely because Ito did not ban cameras from the courtroom. Oh! I remember he had an apple laptop on his desk and covered up the logo due to complaints by Microsoft.

Perfect description of events. The entire concept of blind justice was turned into a media circus. Shameful.

Wow. Thanks for the perspective!