Mark M. wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 1996, Dale Thorn wrote:
Re: Below text. One of the most fascinating aspects of the Simpson case (to me, anyway) is how persons who know about conspiracies, mafia hits, etc., are still willing to believe OJ is guilty (fer sure), looking only at the "evidence" presented by the same folks who (send for list).
Information about the evidence, crime and trial are not classified for the reason of "national security" in this case.
True, but what's reported is a joke, just like other media scams.
There's a motive and there is nothing outlandishly unbelievable about the possibility that Simpson did do it.
I didn't say no possibility, just very little probability. And what motive did this wealthy man have to savagely (inhumanly, yet) murder those two people? There are people who have plausible motives, though.
OJ never was in the military and there is nothing that even remotely suggests that he had anything to do with the CIA.
CIA, remotely? I guess Colby, Jr. living next to Nicole is outside the boundary of remote? I guess A.C.'s boss Ippolito, *close* friend of George Aronow, *close* friend of George Bush, etc. is also out of bounds? Ever hear of international coke rings? OJ was up to his neck in Mob, and looks like Denise Brown likewise. Too remote for you?
The Simpson case and the JFK assassination are not even remotely comparable.
Lessee, an apple and a banana are "not even remotely comparable", due to so many differences, etc. But, I can eat both of them, and get nutrition from both, so, they *do* have quite a bit in common. The Warren Commission, and all "official" treatments of the JFK assassination were not based on the real evidence, nor was the OJ trial. If you're one of those people who saw Ruby do it, and you said "gee, musta been just another wacko", then you could look at the OJ trial the same way and say "gee, just another crazy black man", etc.