Google and Bing Finally Agree
RSS
Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
Searching on “American Murderers” finds Google and Bing agreeing that the great majority of famous American murderers were white:
After all, who ever heard of O.J. Simpson?
You’re right Steve, there is indeed an equivalency to be drawn between Ted Bundy and OJ Simpson.
Weird, I expected some theories on the overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing. I emphasise American whites because some of the stories I’ve heard about Idi Amin certainly make the case for his inclusion, though his killings were more tinged with megalomania, as opposed to the cold, calculated mass murders of white folk.
jennifer_lawrence_ok.gif
Continuing mass murder & genocide in practically the entirety of central Africa is just "the feelz" getting a bit out of control. Ditto for South Africa. I mean, who doesn't enjoy being slowly murdered in the backlands by gangbangers?
The only thing is that Hollywood has trained people to associate violence with whitey and friendly warmth and underdoggedness with blackey.
Sometimes though....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBpBeJJmMDc
Upon consideration, how many serial killers/mass murderers exist in the Rwandan population?
Watching films, cops n' robbers on TV one would be forgiven for thinking that black people committed almost no crime at all.
The gift that keeps giving. Steve, why don’t you ask the audience to suggest topics for the new year?
If bias in searches were the only problem with Google…
https://qz.com/1494111/googles-caste-system-is-bad-for-workers-and-bad-for-google-too/
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/12/who-would-have-thought-it.html
I was brought on as a contractor and not a regular employee, and I was never offered to become a regular employee. I didn't get to go to meetings and functions reserved for
employees, I didn't get the pay and stock options and benefis teserved for employees, yet I did similar work."
The last claim must be taken with a shaker of salt: This Hindoo is a document review attorney. For those who don't know, that's shit-work that often pays about $40,000.00 annially and involves clicking a mouse all day as you skim – sorry, carefully read – stultifying quantities of files as part of discovery. Lawyers do it in part because a lawyer has to do it, same way a pharmacist has to reviews your pantaprozole with you the first time he fills the order: it ain't because handing out pantoprazole is terribly ticklish and complex work, friends.
Everg single big outfit in silly valley follows this model (many elsewhere do): Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, Friendface, Twitter, Uber, Lyft, Yahoo!, Juniper, Polycom, Adobe – f**k whatcha heard: All of em!
If you are good at your job and make the cut, you can get converter to full-time employment within a year. It ain't hard, but you cannot be a slacker or a dingus: one reason for the arrangement is to keep you out if you are!
I expect a major problem for the author is that, as a policy matter (and probably a sound one) if you are doing doc review, you're kind of already branded as ... well ... I ain't hiring you next time i need a lawyer.
No, I'm afraid this piece is just more of the Hindoo entrée into grievance-mongering at which that people are proving such superstars (Vanita Gupta, Kamala Harris, etc.). Again I emphaise the lack of substance. He isn't documenting mistreatment or even discourtesy, except to make generalisations with no specific examples or details to support them. His beef is: I took a temporary job, knowing it was temporary, and I disn't get to go to the Christm—sorry, "Holiday" party or watch Imagine Dragons perform and tell me it is okay to be gay at the company picnic. Also, I'm a Hindoo so it was Because Racism.
I hate hate hate silly valley, but this loser is part of the problem, not a victim of it.
I typed in “American Murderers” in Google and got a photo array of dames.
As far as I can tell, your Google search coughed up an array of serial killers. I think in this country fewer than 400 serial killers have been identified by law enforcement in the last 60 years. The number of homicide victims recorded in this country in that time approaches 1 million, of which the subset who fell victim to serial killers would be < 0.5%. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that the social profile of serial killers is verrrry different from the general population of killers.
Spree killers skew even further that direction, looking almost like a random sample.
I suspect its because these subsets of murder have more to do with something going really wrong inside the brain, with the killer being just plain nuts, than any of the social, cultural, racial, or whatever else factors that drive most murder.
I guess men aren’t killing people?
Why does Google assume that Earl van Best was the Zodiac Killer? Very sloppy.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-evidence-for-and-against-the-theory-that-Earl-Van-Best-Jr-was-the-Zodiac-killer
Google “Google Employees.”
Cos White murderers are stylish, inventive and evil, whereas black murderers are evil and boring?
Steve, OJ was acquitted. And he’s still looking for the real killer!
I wonder if they could have OJ come up without being sued. Both have deep pockets.
If he ever makes any money they will take it.
Tons of people call OJ a murderer.
This one is less surprising to me. As you noted in a post on early Law & Order and Sherlock Holmes, society isn’t that interested in the most typical kinds of murders. Ed Gein being such a weirdo, even for a murderer, makes him more interesting.
The words “White” and “murderer” are synonyms. The SJW/Thought Reform State Apparatus has decreed. Algorithms are written and uploaded.
That is all.
Actually, the WaPo published an article claiming that the most prolific serial killer in the U.S. is a black man:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/20/he-claims-hes-americas-deadliest-serial-killer-with-victims-police-believe-him/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8d791bd8c446
…and a Mexican drug cartel hit man facing capital murder charges claims to have killed 35 people:
https://www.ocala.com/news/20180920/alleged-drug-cartel-hitman-set-for-june-trial-in-ocala
…but according the Google, the Five Year Plan is always a success.
American Clowns are 100% white. Although Bing thinks that America’s #2 clown is John Wayne Gacy.
Would anyone watch the cop shows if the typical murder was featured? Two disagreeable drunks arguing until one kills the other would get boring pretty quickly.
Also, crimes tend to happen on TV where the show is located. The crime rate in Honolulu really isn’t nearly as bad as one would presume from TV, nor are Navy personnel in New Orleans nearly as likely to be killed as one night think.
http://www.murderdata.org/2015/01/how-many-unsolved-murders-are-there-its_24.html
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oBwAXVjttCQ/VMQMtlHNUOI/AAAAAAAAAII/WBXMpwwtyz8/s1600/MurderCurve.jpg
As far as I can tell, your Google search coughed up an array of serial killers. I think in this country fewer than 400 serial killers have been identified by law enforcement in the last 60 years. The number of homicide victims recorded in this country in that time approaches 1 million, of which the subset who fell victim to serial killers would be < 0.5%. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that the social profile of serial killers is verrrry different from the general population of killers.
The demographics of serial killers are different from the typical killer. They look more like the population at large.
Spree killers skew even further that direction, looking almost like a random sample.
I suspect its because these subsets of murder have more to do with something going really wrong inside the brain, with the killer being just plain nuts, than any of the social, cultural, racial, or whatever else factors that drive most murder.
Manson is the king mate.
OJ was acquitted.
I find it amazing some of you are still invested in the functioning society LARP America has become.
Where’s Samuel Little, 78, an African American whom the FBI believes may be among the most prolific serial killers in US criminal history? Why does his achievement go unrecognized?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46384197
In the case of OJ, Google is still searching for the real murderer…
No John Allen Muhammad.
It wouldn’t surprise me to find his photo if I googled “American heroes” though…
For some reason on my phone nothing is showing up after the colons in the three previous posts including this one. The results you are highlighting are blank
This result is not surprising. When people search for murderers, they probably don’t want a random sample; they want the top names. Serial killers are predominantly white, so that’s what the results return. Was the result really unexpected?
This one is less surprising to me. As you noted in a post on early Law & Order and Sherlock Holmes, society isn’t that interested in the most typical kinds of murders.
Suggest that the sort of people who are attracted to and prosper in the trade of scriptwriting have a hard time getting inside the heads of lumpenproletarians. We’re talking about impulsive people responsive to street drugs, to emotional spikes, and to an honor culture foreign to 90% of the population. It’s hard to make that interesting except in a look-at-this-trainwreck sort of way.
There is a niche market for more realistic crime stories. See the Investigation Discovery Channel or HLN. These, like more conventional crime drama, have the detectives as their protagonist. A program like Dateline or 24 Hours will manufacture a human interest story around the victim and (drawing matters out) the dyad formed by the victim and the perpetrator. Tough to do with the sort of characters you find in slums.
Well, to be fair, OJ was found not guilty.
Was it Ed Opperman who said Goldman was a coke dealer and half the LAPD knew it was another coke dealer who was an LAPD business partner who did the hit? Probably complete crap but that fellow tells some amazing stories.
As far as I can tell, your Google search coughed up an array of serial killers. I think in this country fewer than 400 serial killers have been identified by law enforcement in the last 60 years. The number of homicide victims recorded in this country in that time approaches 1 million, of which the subset who fell victim to serial killers would be < 0.5%. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that the social profile of serial killers is verrrry different from the general population of killers.
I got the same thing. Lots of ladies, mostly white and some black.
I guess men aren’t killing people?
“In the case of OJ, Google is still searching for the real murderer…”
95% of African Americans and Muslims believe Trump’s toupee was found at the scene and said this fact would influence their vote in 2020.
What’s interesting me is how scrupulously that multiple homicide ‘n rape in Kansas of a week ago is being ignored.
Compare, say, to Dylann Roof.
I did see that the Kansas Supreme Court had removed the death penalty. If the races were reversed, would courts and media have played it the same? We both know the answer.
Link? Names of victims? A quick search gives little data.
IIRC, O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder in the criminal case…
I guess men aren’t killing people?
Maybe someone at google was annoyed at all of the “diversity” among these lists, and thought it would be amusing to make the list of famous murderers all women (even though we know that’s a context in which we don’t want to highlight “diversity”). But since women are “diverse” and female murderers “challenge the stereotype”, it’s hard to object to within diversity logic.
The OJ case truly showed me how divided the country was, and how different people were living in their own realities, divorced from real life.
Two things— in those days I was part of the NYC gambling scene. Not a big name, but I knew some pretty big names. At one point the National Enquirer revealed Marcia Clark’s first husband had been an Israeli gangster who had been a big part of the Los Angeles gambling scene. I talked to friends of mine who not only confirmed what the Enquirer said, but it turns out the truth was much worse and much stranger than the Enquirer article.
My mother was an avid feminist, and I found out the hard way that one simply did not ever criticize feminist icons. That was the nastiest I can ever remember my mother getting to me.
At the time of the verdict, I had just finished teaching a class at a community college in NYC. I went to a teachers’ lounge where there was a TV. No students allowed. I thought it was safe, until the place was suddenly overrun with students, all of them black. I started to get concerned for my safety. When OJ was acquitted, the students were all happy and cheering. Their team had won the big game.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
Commenters suggested he was acquitted because the black jurors were too thick to understand DNA was a legitimate forensic tool (white mans' voodoo). As it happens the jurors were a pretty credible and articulate group. There was a high school vice principal, several teachers, nurses, some government workers, one lady was a buyer in a department store (a pretty responsible and well paid occupation at the time). There were just a few lower income/poorly educated folks. These were after all people who consistently register to vote.
Some of the cops were questionable. Although DNA is powerful evidence, and a precise science, it becomes questionable when the chain of evidence protocols for sample collections are violated (and it happened). The prosecutors and cops were incompetent and potentially corrupt.
Rubbish.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.'s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.'s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings-- the driver from the infamous "slow-speed chase" of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife's home by someone else, why was O.J.'s blood on the driver's-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife's home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson's former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.'s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.'s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) -- The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. - One of Nicole Brown Simpson's sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole's mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. - Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson's home, and Simpson go to McDonald's for dinner.
9:45 p.m. - Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. - Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. - While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. - Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson's home.
10:40 p.m. - Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. - Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. - Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. - Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. - Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. - 11:15 p.m. - Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. - Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. - Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. - Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. - The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. - Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson's house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. - The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson's Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. - Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson's daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father's longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. - Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
[ http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson's guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.'s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman's even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson-- including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime-- was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
Bugliosi's book explains all the ways they screwed up.
That said, could there have been more people involved than JUST OJ? Sure.
I've always suspected a drugs angle as well as the obvious dynamic of Nicole having severely provoked an unstable Negro male.
I remember the look on William Pierce's face when the OJ incident was being discused. He felt OJ was in a sense a "good guy" because many white women would avoid marrying or having sex with black men after this example. He felt her life was worth that. Extreme maybe.
Gender seems to be an issue here too. Marybeth Tinning smothered 3 of her kids and is suspected of smothering 5 others. Why isn’t she in there? Andrea Yates as well.
Are Google’s more-upworthy propaganda results possibly a product of overweighting on Wikipedia links?
You could test this by comparing how frequently vs. expected occurrence G spits out results about transgender “famous” people or about adherents of Ayn Rand or plots of video game soap-opera series.
Anti Trump forces ran Egg McMuffin and some other dude to siphon off votes from Trump in 2016. I think we should return the favor and push OJ HARD to run for the Democratic Nomination in 2020.
Upsides for OJ:
1. He loves the press.
2. Can interact with Kim Kardashian a lot as a candidate.
3. Can have Kanye West imprisoned if he wins.
He can run against Kamala Harris as “the REAL Black candidate” since he’s been to prison, accused of murder, and engaged in a chase by the police.
It would be hilarious to see the other candidates engage OJ on debate stages.
And Kanye West would campaign hard for Trump. Almost as if his life depended on it.
Yes, that’s one reason black murderers aren’t as famous as white ones. Most killings by blacks are just depressing and stupid.
Weird, I expected some theories on the overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing. I emphasise American whites because some of the stories I've heard about Idi Amin certainly make the case for his inclusion, though his killings were more tinged with megalomania, as opposed to the cold, calculated mass murders of white folk.
The equivalency is in the notoriety; the search was not for serial killers. But you’re right, NN, the number of American murders today bears no relationship to race.
Interestingly, the cop shows make it look like certain types of interesting crimes are much more common than they really are, but the less interesting crimes are less common.
Also, crimes tend to happen on TV where the show is located. The crime rate in Honolulu really isn’t nearly as bad as one would presume from TV, nor are Navy personnel in New Orleans nearly as likely to be killed as one night think.
Two things— in those days I was part of the NYC gambling scene. Not a big name, but I knew some pretty big names. At one point the National Enquirer revealed Marcia Clark’s first husband had been an Israeli gangster who had been a big part of the Los Angeles gambling scene. I talked to friends of mine who not only confirmed what the Enquirer said, but it turns out the truth was much worse and much stranger than the Enquirer article.
My mother was an avid feminist, and I found out the hard way that one simply did not ever criticize feminist icons. That was the nastiest I can ever remember my mother getting to me.
At the time of the verdict, I had just finished teaching a class at a community college in NYC. I went to a teachers’ lounge where there was a TV. No students allowed. I thought it was safe, until the place was suddenly overrun with students, all of them black. I started to get concerned for my safety. When OJ was acquitted, the students were all happy and cheering. Their team had won the big game.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
Many years after the OJ acquittal I saw a documentary where most of the jurors appeared. They all thought OJ did the crime but that the prosecution did not produce evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
Commenters suggested he was acquitted because the black jurors were too thick to understand DNA was a legitimate forensic tool (white mans’ voodoo). As it happens the jurors were a pretty credible and articulate group. There was a high school vice principal, several teachers, nurses, some government workers, one lady was a buyer in a department store (a pretty responsible and well paid occupation at the time). There were just a few lower income/poorly educated folks. These were after all people who consistently register to vote.
Some of the cops were questionable. Although DNA is powerful evidence, and a precise science, it becomes questionable when the chain of evidence protocols for sample collections are violated (and it happened). The prosecutors and cops were incompetent and potentially corrupt.
This is part of what I meant by the prosecution bungling the case, along with the gloves, etc.
I can’t remember where I read that many law enforcement officials believe Simpson had an accomplice. Simpson said he did. The prosecution and the Goldman family believed he acted alone. None of us were there, and the victims aren’t talking. Simpson is a notorious liar. The only ones who know for sure are Simpson — who claims he can’t remember killing them, saying he got so upset he lost control of his senses — and any possible accomplice.
In any case, the book “If I Did It” is a fascinating account of the events leading up to the murder and the murder. All the profits go to the Goldman family. You can interpret it as a confession, or a fictional attempt to try to excuse what he did.
Google must be controlled by Hollywood casting directors. It’s like every judge in Hollywood movie was a black person. Blacks are so wise & authoritative and deserving to sit judgement on us.
Hollywood movies often feature blacks as science geniuses while most violent criminals are white. And racial violence is usually white on black than vice versa.
Weird, I expected some theories on the overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing. I emphasise American whites because some of the stories I've heard about Idi Amin certainly make the case for his inclusion, though his killings were more tinged with megalomania, as opposed to the cold, calculated mass murders of white folk.
The idea that there is a dearth of black serial killers is a media-generated myth:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1030.2870&rep=rep1&type=pdf
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/wicked-deeds/201412/serial-killer-myth-6-they-are-all-white
The guy who raped and murdered the Harvard girl in 1969 was linked by DNA to two other rape and murders. He likely would have killed more had he not been in prison for much of his life.
https://www.boston25news.com/news/who-killed-jane-britton-50-year-murder-investigation-finally-closed/875994868
Maybe more blacks want to be serial killers, but that doesn't mean they can pull it off. For long, anyway.
Do they have a racial breakdown of victims-per-perpetrator?
Compare, say, to Dylann Roof.
Scrupulously ignored, indeed! I remember briefly hearing about the murders, but not the murderers. A shocking crime, brutal, clearly a hate crime. I found one link to a Washington Times story on it as I wanted to find out what had happened, but it has been taken down.
I did see that the Kansas Supreme Court had removed the death penalty. If the races were reversed, would courts and media have played it the same? We both know the answer.
Kansas deserves divine judgment more than San Francisco, I think. Because SF at least admits it's pagan and Satanic (LaVey was from there and the local literati like Herb Caen adored him.) Kansas claims to be morally upright and Christian but is totally cucked to the max.
Compare, say, to Dylann Roof.
“What’s interesting me is how scrupulously that multiple homicide ‘n rape in Kansas of a week ago is being ignored.”
Link? Names of victims? A quick search gives little data.
The short quote I posted from the link is to an enemedia news blurb that left out a few things like the rapes, the fact that one woman survived to tell about it, so the 5th murder was from yet another crime.
Lol. That would be the case.
If you really can't find it, get back to me. Then I'll exert myself to find you a link.
The First 48 was pretty popular. It was interesting to watch at first, then became pretty predictable.. grab the surveillance video, pickup the dimwit suspect, get his DNA and lean on him till he confesses. Watching the show they make it so routine I thought that homicide clearance rates would be increasing, but according to the Murder Accountability Project they’re actually trending down:
http://www.murderdata.org/2015/01/how-many-unsolved-murders-are-there-its_24.html
Higher share of killings in low clearence places like Chicago and Baltimore?
Decline of "throwing one of the usual suspects in prison"?
Manson didn’t actually kill anyone in the murder spree associated with him, he ordered others to do it. He indicated in an interview that he had killed someone previously.
Bing vs Google
Beautiful Women (images): I thought there would be more non Europeans especially Asians including South Asians. Many of the images for African women were prompts for where to click to find more images like that.
Hot Women (images): More Asians and fewer dark skinned.
Handsome men (images): Mostly White men, few Asians, some Africans trigger warning: gay
Sexy men (images): Same as handsome men but very gay oriented with Google looking to me to be very gay. trigger warning: very gay
Capitalizing the S in sexy did not seem to change anything. sexy men vs men sexy did and +sexy men produced different results.
BTW: On Google, american +inventors produced a different list. First African American was #9 Elijah McCoy who actually invented something important. I got bored and did not try to add quotes and whatnot.
Weird, I expected some theories on the overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing. I emphasise American whites because some of the stories I've heard about Idi Amin certainly make the case for his inclusion, though his killings were more tinged with megalomania, as opposed to the cold, calculated mass murders of white folk.
Which makes it ok.
jennifer_lawrence_ok.gif
Continuing mass murder & genocide in practically the entirety of central Africa is just “the feelz” getting a bit out of control. Ditto for South Africa. I mean, who doesn’t enjoy being slowly murdered in the backlands by gangbangers?
The only thing is that Hollywood has trained people to associate violence with whitey and friendly warmth and underdoggedness with blackey.
Sometimes though….
Spree killers skew even further that direction, looking almost like a random sample.
I suspect its because these subsets of murder have more to do with something going really wrong inside the brain, with the killer being just plain nuts, than any of the social, cultural, racial, or whatever else factors that drive most murder.
Yep. A large percentage of serial killers have head trauma as a child, or explainable conscious blackouts. Scott Erskine, one of the pictured serial killers is a perfect example.
The most notorious cereal killer is Count Chokula
You learn something new everyday. Thanks.
I’m a true crime nerd. This one makes sense considering the demographics of my tribe. True crime nerds tend to be white and awkward. It’s a way to meet like minded people and, if we’re honest, it’s a nice excuse to bond with other whites.
We know there’s a world of non white killers and their victims but it’s nice to focus on our own for a little while.
That said, the SJWs are butting in, whining about the focus on pretty white low risk female victims, and with a weird obsession with prostitutes – sorry, that’s “sex workers”. They’ve gone from no one deserving to be murdered (fair enough) to screeching at the mere mention of the existence of high risk lifestyles.
It’s at the stage where they howl at the idea that the johns aren’t all wonderful gentlemen, or that hookers don’t do it for the love of sex with strangers. (The new feminism, with its hatred of “SWERFs”, is going to be interesting.)
They’re struggling, of course, because wallowing this much in the seedy underbelly seems more of a white thing. Plus, with the greater white interest on crime and genealogy, there are simply going to be more white guys getting caught. A one and done street murder simply isn’t as interesting as planning out a few dozen murders.
Basically both seem to interpret that as “serial killers”.
Neither fronts the mass killers like the Las Vegas old white punk or the Virgina Tech Korean punk, etc. Nor do they put up your Lee Harvey Oswald or John Wilkers Booth, who have arguably committed the most famous murders in US history (from today’s perspective). (Lincoln’s assasination will probably still be in the HS history books in 100 years–if there is a USA. Kennedy’s will be a footnote like McKinley’s.)
So this is really famous serial killers. Blacks indeed do serial killings–as with much else–at several times the white rate. But routine man jealous\annoyed\cheated kills wife\ex-wife murder isn’t going to make the cut.
So naive! You mean the Rothschilds and the Mossad.
http://66.media.tumblr.com/fa755f4baab92901fced60fa1f0c51fb/tumblr_oe7qzwiIHi1rf9hn3o1_1280.jpg
Steve, you might usefully start the New Year by revisiting the basics of HBD through FBD: Finch Bio-Diversity.
Here’s Harvard’s take on the issue
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2006/07/how-darwins-finches-got-their-beaks/
And my favorite line:
“Eventually, the immigrants evolved into 14 separate species, each with its own song, food preferences, and beak shapes.”
Can’t see them saying that about, say, Europeans.
Environment>Evolution>Genetics>Culture>Institutions>Politics.
OJ lost the wrongful death civil suit to his victims’ families and has not paid the judgement yet.
If he ever makes any money they will take it.
Tons of people call OJ a murderer.
Try entering “Germans” into the Google search field.
I am happy to report that Bing and Google seem to agree on one of my pet subjects, the inventors of television. They also agree with me on who deserves the number one spot.
Bing tops its page with images of 1) Philo Farnsworth, and 2) Charles Francis Jenkins.
Google shows 1) Farnsworth, 2) Jenkins, and 3) John Logie Baird.
Jenkins, BTW, kinda sorta looks like he might have had some black ancestry. In the sepia-toned picture Bing selects, he is damn near Thurgood Marshall.
Neither fronts the mass killers like the Las Vegas old white punk or the Virgina Tech Korean punk, etc. Nor do they put up your Lee Harvey Oswald or John Wilkers Booth, who have arguably committed the most famous murders in US history (from today's perspective). (Lincoln's assasination will probably still be in the HS history books in 100 years--if there is a USA. Kennedy's will be a footnote like McKinley's.)
So this is really famous serial killers. Blacks indeed do serial killings--as with much else--at several times the white rate. But routine man jealous\annoyed\cheated kills wife\ex-wife murder isn't going to make the cut.
“Lee Harvey Oswald or John Wilkers Booth, who have arguably”
So naive! You mean the Rothschilds and the Mossad.
Feelings trump evidence.
http://www.murderdata.org/2015/01/how-many-unsolved-murders-are-there-its_24.html
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oBwAXVjttCQ/VMQMtlHNUOI/AAAAAAAAAII/WBXMpwwtyz8/s1600/MurderCurve.jpg
Fewer bar fight killings, which are the easiest to solve?
Higher share of killings in low clearence places like Chicago and Baltimore?
Decline of “throwing one of the usual suspects in prison”?
I am gay. I came of age after the insanity of the 70s. I find bathhouses horrifying and associate them with irresponsibility, disease and mass death.
I think Steve is largely correct. Industrial scale promiscuity took off in the 70s. AIDS was able to to take hold in that environment. The gay political leadership was catastrophically wrong in thinking and promoting promiscuity to be healthy and a “right”
I wish gay lib back then was only about non discrimination and equal marriage rights and responsibility. Oppression against gay people was real. Gay kids who came out were often abandoned by family. Gays WERE treated terribly. Fear of being fired from jobs. Actual policies to fire known gays existed. No gay person was able to ever marry the person they wished to spend their life with. Happily I lived to see tremendous progress in my lifetime so today it is safe and comfortable to be gay without fear of job loss or ostracism. I was finally able to marry my partner of 20 years back in 2015.
So I don’t know why most commenters here just don’t recognize a happy medium or balance. People just want to be treated fairly and not ostracized. Treat gay people as individuals. Non discrimination. Some gays are responsible and unfortunately a segment was and is self destructive, just like much of the far Left. No need to repress gay people simply to live their lives responsibly like I do.
But any venue that spreads disease regardless of sexual orientation like bath houses and sex clubs should be shut. Public sex should be prosecuted.
I believe the far left is destructive as previously discussed. But some elements of the Right can be cavalier in their cruel attitudes and lump everyone in groups with crappy leadership as if they all are like that, when we are not.
Part of that was general down-percolation and part was the continuing, Gramscian march through the institutions of hardcore cultural Marxists.
Seems like none of the famous serial killers when it was a popular TV topic in the 90s were black. But more than half of the cold case “we finally found the guy who killed 20 prostitutes decades ago” are black.
The guy who raped and murdered the Harvard girl in 1969 was linked by DNA to two other rape and murders. He likely would have killed more had he not been in prison for much of his life.
https://www.boston25news.com/news/who-killed-jane-britton-50-year-murder-investigation-finally-closed/875994868
Two things— in those days I was part of the NYC gambling scene. Not a big name, but I knew some pretty big names. At one point the National Enquirer revealed Marcia Clark’s first husband had been an Israeli gangster who had been a big part of the Los Angeles gambling scene. I talked to friends of mine who not only confirmed what the Enquirer said, but it turns out the truth was much worse and much stranger than the Enquirer article.
My mother was an avid feminist, and I found out the hard way that one simply did not ever criticize feminist icons. That was the nastiest I can ever remember my mother getting to me.
At the time of the verdict, I had just finished teaching a class at a community college in NYC. I went to a teachers’ lounge where there was a TV. No students allowed. I thought it was safe, until the place was suddenly overrun with students, all of them black. I started to get concerned for my safety. When OJ was acquitted, the students were all happy and cheering. Their team had won the big game.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit.
Rubbish.
I personally don’t see the “American Murderers” search result as the manifestation of a glaring PC bias that the “American Inventors” google search is. I know that Steve isn’t making that claim, but there’s an implied parallel there. The problem is, even as a self-described white advocate (as well as a person who’s lost white acquaintances to black murderers) I see many of the worst white serial killers in a class of infamy all their own.
I sort of doubt that Ed Gein and Charles Starkweather of the 1950’s got all the news coverage and artistic interpretation (books or movies) back then because the media wanted to play up white murderers over non-white murderers. Even as late as the 1980’s or early ’90’s, the Bundy and Dahmer cases had little to do with that, though elements of the media at the time did try to overplay the black victims of Dahmer.
While it’s true that the percentage of black murderers in our society is exceptionally high (sometimes over half) given the relatively low percentage of blacks (about 13%) – and that the media today blatantly tries to gloss over that fact – there were elements of deviousness, cunning and calculated sadism that the worst white serial killers used to terrify the public. White murderers were also able to evoke a sort of “they walk among us” paranoia from the (largely white) population at large. That’s a big part of why they’re more famous today.
Yes, we live in a more left-biased media environment today than we we ever have before, and that’s disturbing, but the most disturbing thing to me is that if Charles Starkweather were to go on his killing spree today, it’d probably be forgotten by the public in 18 months. Or less.
Rubbish.
Does this mean you believe OJ was innocent?
stealdate or marry black men as the enemy) to be seated on the jury, on the theory that black women would be sympathetic, on the basis of their common gender, to a white woman murdered by a black man. This theory doesn't withstand the laugh test, i.e. if you can't say something out loud without laughing, there's something not quite right about it. Once jury selection was complete, the die was cast.http://famous-trials.com/simpson/1989-jurypageWomen killed in this country outside of slums are so (IIRC, about 3/4 of the time, demonstrably) by members of their household, by proximate relatives, or by paramours current and former. Quite a bloc of the remaining quarter is accounted for by unsolved killings and killings by others in the social circle of the victim. Some of these occur in the course of robberies, burglaries, and sexual assaults. Please not also that maybe 20% of the homicides in this country are affected using up-close-and-personal means like knives or bare hands. Even in an area as populous as greater Los Angeles, the annual number of homicides committed against (1) women (2) outside the slums and points adjacent (3) by someone other than a demonstrable intimate (4) not conjoined to any other felony and (5) making use of highly personal means, can be expressed in single digits.
Flannery O'Connor once said that literature trades in the possible, not the probable. Yes, it's possible that in a handsome section of Los Angeles an unknown individual stabbed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman to death just for the thrill of it. That sort of thing is a staple of horror fiction with few examples in mundane life. That such a thing would happen and that a compost heap of evidence would be left behind implicating an innocent third party really is the stuff of fiction.
Note the word “famous.”
Two things— in those days I was part of the NYC gambling scene. Not a big name, but I knew some pretty big names. At one point the National Enquirer revealed Marcia Clark’s first husband had been an Israeli gangster who had been a big part of the Los Angeles gambling scene. I talked to friends of mine who not only confirmed what the Enquirer said, but it turns out the truth was much worse and much stranger than the Enquirer article.
My mother was an avid feminist, and I found out the hard way that one simply did not ever criticize feminist icons. That was the nastiest I can ever remember my mother getting to me.
At the time of the verdict, I had just finished teaching a class at a community college in NYC. I went to a teachers’ lounge where there was a TV. No students allowed. I thought it was safe, until the place was suddenly overrun with students, all of them black. I started to get concerned for my safety. When OJ was acquitted, the students were all happy and cheering. Their team had won the big game.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.’s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.’s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings– the driver from the infamous “slow-speed chase” of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife’s home by someone else, why was O.J.’s blood on the driver’s-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife’s home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson’s former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.’s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.’s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) — The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. – Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. – Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. – One of Nicole Brown Simpson’s sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole’s mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. – Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson’s home, and Simpson go to McDonald’s for dinner.
9:45 p.m. – Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. – 9:50 p.m. – Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. – While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. – Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson’s home.
10:40 p.m. – Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. – Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. – Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. – Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. – Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. – 11:15 p.m. – Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. – Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. – Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. – Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. – The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. – Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson’s house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. – The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson’s Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. – Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson’s daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father’s longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. – Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
(http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson’s guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.’s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman’s even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson– including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime– was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
http://www.murderdata.org/2015/01/how-many-unsolved-murders-are-there-its_24.html
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oBwAXVjttCQ/VMQMtlHNUOI/AAAAAAAAAII/WBXMpwwtyz8/s1600/MurderCurve.jpg
The homicide clearance rate in Japan is close to 100%, I think. But then again, they have different kinds of people, environment, and a very different philosophy toward policing, suspect interrogation and treatment, and public safety in general.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.'s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.'s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings-- the driver from the infamous "slow-speed chase" of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife's home by someone else, why was O.J.'s blood on the driver's-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife's home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson's former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.'s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.'s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) -- The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. - One of Nicole Brown Simpson's sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole's mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. - Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson's home, and Simpson go to McDonald's for dinner.
9:45 p.m. - Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. - Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. - While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. - Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson's home.
10:40 p.m. - Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. - Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. - Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. - Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. - Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. - 11:15 p.m. - Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. - Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. - Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. - Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. - The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. - Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson's house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. - The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson's Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. - Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson's daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father's longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. - Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
[ http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson's guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.'s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman's even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson-- including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime-- was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
I meant “Rockingham,” of course, rather than “Roxbury.” Mea culpa!
Sorry, just skimmed the headline without bothering to read first. Was thinking of the OTHER famous Bing. Bing Crosby, that is, who seldom agreed with many people in general, much less an entity that didn’t exist in his lifetime as Google.
So was Kate Steinle’s murderer.
I find it amazing some of you are still invested in the functioning society LARP America has become.
So naive! You mean the Rothschilds and the Mossad.
http://66.media.tumblr.com/fa755f4baab92901fced60fa1f0c51fb/tumblr_oe7qzwiIHi1rf9hn3o1_1280.jpg
Yep screw the actual physical evidence! Public sentiment massaged by greedy, bloviating “authors” provide all the proof you need.
Feelings trump evidence.
Who’s behind Psychology Today? Why are they so often allowed to debunk politically correct received wisdom with actual facts?
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.'s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.'s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings-- the driver from the infamous "slow-speed chase" of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife's home by someone else, why was O.J.'s blood on the driver's-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife's home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson's former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.'s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.'s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) -- The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. - One of Nicole Brown Simpson's sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole's mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. - Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson's home, and Simpson go to McDonald's for dinner.
9:45 p.m. - Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. - Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. - While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. - Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson's home.
10:40 p.m. - Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. - Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. - Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. - Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. - Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. - 11:15 p.m. - Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. - Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. - Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. - Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. - The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. - Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson's house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. - The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson's Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. - Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson's daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father's longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. - Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
[ http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson's guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.'s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman's even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson-- including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime-- was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
I also should have said “Bundy,” rather than “Gretna Green!” The latter was the home from which Nicole Simpson earlier had called 9-1-1 on O.J., when he was menacing her, whereas the former was the home that she subsequently moved to, and the one where she and Ron Goldman were murdered. Mea maxima culpa!!
Google:
American Mathematicians
First six image hits are black
or:
American Cowboys
First two are black
Also, does anybody have the dish on what transpired with those limousine murders a while back? I mean in NY where the driver sped the hunk of junk into other cars and such and killed everyone in the limo.
Also interesting, if one googles American Mathematicians, the first six pictures are of black people. Well, you may say, it is probably due to the high correlation of that search string with queries using the string African American Mathematicians. However, the first eight websites returned have nothing to do with African American Mathematicians, and clearly only reference the string American Mathematicians. So the pictures presented do indeed seem to be the result of some special fiddling.
Image searches are fun.
Do a Google search for pictures of “greatest Americans,” and in the #1 position you get this man’s picture and quote:
“The greatest Americans have not been born yet. They are waiting for the past to die.” –Saul Williams
Now go to Bing and look up images for the same thing, “greatest Americans,” and you get this guy:
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.'s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.'s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings-- the driver from the infamous "slow-speed chase" of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife's home by someone else, why was O.J.'s blood on the driver's-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife's home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson's former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.'s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.'s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) -- The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. - One of Nicole Brown Simpson's sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole's mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. - Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson's home, and Simpson go to McDonald's for dinner.
9:45 p.m. - Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. - Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. - While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. - Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson's home.
10:40 p.m. - Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. - Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. - Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. - Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. - Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. - 11:15 p.m. - Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. - Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. - Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. - Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. - The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. - Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson's house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. - The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson's Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. - Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson's daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father's longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. - Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
[ http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson's guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.'s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman's even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson-- including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime-- was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
I remember my frustration and anger at the jury when it acquitted OJ in the face of overwhelming circumstantial evidence as you laid it out.
But over time I’ve come to agree with the black female jurors: White bitch got what she deserved.
Burn the coal, pay the toll, and don’t be stealing good black men, you white she-devil!
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.'s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.'s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings-- the driver from the infamous "slow-speed chase" of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife's home by someone else, why was O.J.'s blood on the driver's-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife's home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson's former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.'s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.'s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) -- The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. - One of Nicole Brown Simpson's sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole's mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. - Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson's home, and Simpson go to McDonald's for dinner.
9:45 p.m. - Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. - Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. - While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. - Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson's home.
10:40 p.m. - Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. - Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. - Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. - Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. - Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. - 11:15 p.m. - Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. - Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. - Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. - Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. - The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. - Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson's house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. - The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson's Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. - Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson's daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father's longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. - Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
[ http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson's guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.'s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman's even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson-- including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime-- was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
Paleo Liberal is correct that the prosecution bungled its case.
And you are correct that the jury gave its verdict for purely racial reasons.
The real question is whether or not the majority black jury would have found Simpson guilty if the prosecution had not bungled its case and thus not left them with any viable claims of doubt. We will never know.
IMO the black jury would have nullified even if God had come down and proven guilt — unless He appeared as a black man like Johnny Cochran — and Nichole Brown Simpson hadn’t been a pretty blonde.
O.J.'s motive for murder was clear. His violent temper, directed at his ex-wife, was clear. The fact that he had a fresh cut on his hand was clear. The fact that he exhibited evidence of a guilty conscience-- by his fleeing his arranged arrest; by his writing an apparent suicide note; by his possessing his passport, a large sum of cash, and a disguise, when he fled Chez Kardashian; by his telling a friend, who was a former L.A.P.D. officer, that he did not wish to take a polygraph examination about the murders because he supposedly had dreamed of killing his ex-wife, and he feared that his recollection of that dream would register as deception when he stated to a polygrapher that he had not killed his ex-wife!-- was clear. The fact that he had no witness to his supposedly being at home, in between his return from dinner with Kato Kaelin and the latter's hearing banging on his guesthouse's outside wall, is clear. The fact that there were blood-flecked clothes left in his electric dryer, when he left for Chicago, was clear. The fact that no one was brought forward as the black man whom the limousine driver saw enter the house-- when O.J., just after that, had claimed to have been in the shower-- is clear. For there to be a reasonable doubt, justifying an acquittal, there have to be factual or logical reasons to reject such evidence, not merely some alternative theory of the crime (e.g., a drug-related hit intended for one of Nicole Simpson's girlfriends) that avoids addressing the evidence put before the jury.
It takes brains, foresight, and low time preference to be a successful serial killer. So this needs clarification.
Maybe more blacks want to be serial killers, but that doesn’t mean they can pull it off. For long, anyway.
Do they have a racial breakdown of victims-per-perpetrator?
The bloods and the crips are still around because blacks want to be gangsters.
But they've been eclipsed by MS13 among others. Why?
Because MS13 has good leadership, while the black gangs do not.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.'s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.'s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings-- the driver from the infamous "slow-speed chase" of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife's home by someone else, why was O.J.'s blood on the driver's-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife's home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson's former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.'s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.'s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) -- The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. - One of Nicole Brown Simpson's sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole's mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. - Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson's home, and Simpson go to McDonald's for dinner.
9:45 p.m. - Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. - Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. - While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. - Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson's home.
10:40 p.m. - Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. - Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. - Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. - Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. - Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. - 11:15 p.m. - Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. - Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. - Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. - Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. - The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. - Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson's house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. - The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson's Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. - Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson's daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father's longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. - Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
[ http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson's guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.'s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman's even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson-- including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime-- was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
Welcome back. Nice summary, but still missing a key point. As Bugliosi pointed out, “contamination” of DNA can put an additional person at the scene, but it does nothing to lessen the probability of guilt for anyone found in the mix. It was THAT point that the prosecution was inexplicably silent about, both on cross and in summation. Can’t really go straight to nullification absent competence on that huge point.
Maybe more blacks want to be serial killers, but that doesn't mean they can pull it off. For long, anyway.
Do they have a racial breakdown of victims-per-perpetrator?
In other words, are more Black serial killers caught after killing their first victim?Which would mean that they wouldn’t technically meet the criteria for being a serial killer? Sounds plausible to me.Plus, even with that caveat, Blacks are overrepresented:
It takes brains, foresight, and low time preference to be a successful serial killer.
More than any of those, though, it takes killing people that no one cares much about–prostitutes, vagrants, etc.; people to whom you have no known connection.
“It’s easy to get away with murder, except the one you want to commit.” –Aaron Haspel
Weird, I expected some theories on the overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing. I emphasise American whites because some of the stories I've heard about Idi Amin certainly make the case for his inclusion, though his killings were more tinged with megalomania, as opposed to the cold, calculated mass murders of white folk.
You aren’t up to date on the numbers NN.
Upon consideration, how many serial killers/mass murderers exist in the Rwandan population?
Exactly.
Serial Killers are white in the same way American Scientists are white. Not. Blacks are over represented in the ranks of serial killers. Not so in the ranks of scientists. Or engineers. Or infantrymen. Or pilots. Or Nobel prize winners. Or physicists. Or mathematicians. Or Doctors.
A friend went to the site of the horrible limo crash and said it was pretty obvious that the limo came down a long downhill straightaway and the brakes failed before the T intersection and it just careened on into a parking lot and then into a creek.
The owner / agent provocateur fled back to Pakistan, which he had claimed asylum from.
In the case of the USA, it means anyone in the world can come here and go underground by disappearing into the illegal population. Or if they have $2500 a year for a lawyer, drag out their claim for 5-10 years, no matter how weak, a get a work permit and free health care. And then when they lose... disappear.
Sometimes the cases take even longer than 10 years. Just read another case about a Pakistani who arrived in the early 90s, was arrested for a minor crime and then claimed asylum to avoid deportation in 1997. He lost every single step of the way, but is still here 21 years later. And you are aware of the mortgage fraudster "activist" in NYC, a similar case.
In Germany last I read of Merkel's 1.3 million invaders, 50,000 have been processed for asylum so far, and of those ordered deported, less than half have actually left. The deportation rate is no doubt far lower than the invitation of 16-year-old burka'd cousin-wives from the home country.
The prosecution certainly was suboptimal– beginning with the arguably fatal decision by L.A. D.A. Gil Garcetti to have O.J. tried in Downtown L.A., rather than in Santa Monica, primarily to accommodate the outsized media interest in the proceedings. I could point out any number of stupid things that the prosecution did– such as allowing O.J. to try on the blood-drenched, then dried, then frozen, and then thawed gloves, by himself, in front of the sympathetic jury, after O.J. also deliberately had not been taking his prescribed arthritis medication, so that his hands would swell and his joints would stiffen! My point, however, is that the unassailable evidence, vis-a-vis the prosecution’s theory of the case, made it an open-and-shut case, beyond a reasonable doubt, even if one totally discounted that DNA evidence and the fact that one of the murder gloves was allegedly found at O.J.’s estate.
O.J.’s motive for murder was clear. His violent temper, directed at his ex-wife, was clear. The fact that he had a fresh cut on his hand was clear. The fact that he exhibited evidence of a guilty conscience– by his fleeing his arranged arrest; by his writing an apparent suicide note; by his possessing his passport, a large sum of cash, and a disguise, when he fled Chez Kardashian; by his telling a friend, who was a former L.A.P.D. officer, that he did not wish to take a polygraph examination about the murders because he supposedly had dreamed of killing his ex-wife, and he feared that his recollection of that dream would register as deception when he stated to a polygrapher that he had not killed his ex-wife!– was clear. The fact that he had no witness to his supposedly being at home, in between his return from dinner with Kato Kaelin and the latter’s hearing banging on his guesthouse’s outside wall, is clear. The fact that there were blood-flecked clothes left in his electric dryer, when he left for Chicago, was clear. The fact that no one was brought forward as the black man whom the limousine driver saw enter the house– when O.J., just after that, had claimed to have been in the shower– is clear. For there to be a reasonable doubt, justifying an acquittal, there have to be factual or logical reasons to reject such evidence, not merely some alternative theory of the crime (e.g., a drug-related hit intended for one of Nicole Simpson’s girlfriends) that avoids addressing the evidence put before the jury.
Most murder suspects in a place like Los Angeles, are thoroughly unsympathetic figures. O.J. Simpson couldn't have been more different.
Furthermore, Nicole Brown wasn't a particularly sympathetic victim. Dominick Dunne wrote in one of his Vanity Fair articles, "Nicole is everything black women hate." White people I talked to at the time, didn't like her either, but wanted O.J. convicted.
Regarding black on white murders, black jurors usually vote guilty. Why? The Usual Suspect in a black on white murder is dead bang guilty, the crime was especially brutal, and (as above) not sympathetic.
Weird, I expected some theories on the overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing. I emphasise American whites because some of the stories I've heard about Idi Amin certainly make the case for his inclusion, though his killings were more tinged with megalomania, as opposed to the cold, calculated mass murders of white folk.
The overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing appears to be a product of media representation – the megaphone – rather than anything as tedious as criminal statistics.
Watching films, cops n’ robbers on TV one would be forgiven for thinking that black people committed almost no crime at all.
The defense theory was that O.J. had been framed by using his own comparison blood sample to plant traces of his blood wherever it was supposedly found to be incriminating. As I recall (albeit after all of these years), all of the blood samples entered into evidence belonged either to O.J., the lone defendant in the case, or to one or both of the two decedents, with or without an admixture that included O.J.’s blood!?! Regardless, I consider the case to have been open-and-shut, as I explained above, even if the blood identifications were discounted altogether!
Asylum is the gaping hole in the West’s defense against mass migration.
In the case of the USA, it means anyone in the world can come here and go underground by disappearing into the illegal population. Or if they have $2500 a year for a lawyer, drag out their claim for 5-10 years, no matter how weak, a get a work permit and free health care. And then when they lose… disappear.
Sometimes the cases take even longer than 10 years. Just read another case about a Pakistani who arrived in the early 90s, was arrested for a minor crime and then claimed asylum to avoid deportation in 1997. He lost every single step of the way, but is still here 21 years later. And you are aware of the mortgage fraudster “activist” in NYC, a similar case.
In Germany last I read of Merkel’s 1.3 million invaders, 50,000 have been processed for asylum so far, and of those ordered deported, less than half have actually left. The deportation rate is no doubt far lower than the invitation of 16-year-old burka’d cousin-wives from the home country.
Maybe more blacks want to be serial killers, but that doesn't mean they can pull it off. For long, anyway.
Do they have a racial breakdown of victims-per-perpetrator?
Ironically, this is an explanation of the gang situation in the United States.
The bloods and the crips are still around because blacks want to be gangsters.
But they’ve been eclipsed by MS13 among others. Why?
Because MS13 has good leadership, while the black gangs do not.
O.J.'s motive for murder was clear. His violent temper, directed at his ex-wife, was clear. The fact that he had a fresh cut on his hand was clear. The fact that he exhibited evidence of a guilty conscience-- by his fleeing his arranged arrest; by his writing an apparent suicide note; by his possessing his passport, a large sum of cash, and a disguise, when he fled Chez Kardashian; by his telling a friend, who was a former L.A.P.D. officer, that he did not wish to take a polygraph examination about the murders because he supposedly had dreamed of killing his ex-wife, and he feared that his recollection of that dream would register as deception when he stated to a polygrapher that he had not killed his ex-wife!-- was clear. The fact that he had no witness to his supposedly being at home, in between his return from dinner with Kato Kaelin and the latter's hearing banging on his guesthouse's outside wall, is clear. The fact that there were blood-flecked clothes left in his electric dryer, when he left for Chicago, was clear. The fact that no one was brought forward as the black man whom the limousine driver saw enter the house-- when O.J., just after that, had claimed to have been in the shower-- is clear. For there to be a reasonable doubt, justifying an acquittal, there have to be factual or logical reasons to reject such evidence, not merely some alternative theory of the crime (e.g., a drug-related hit intended for one of Nicole Simpson's girlfriends) that avoids addressing the evidence put before the jury.
Does Santa Monica have its own jury pool? It is a separate city, but courts and major crimes are handled by counties. Less black than LA proper, but probably just as hostile to the police.
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-12/local/me-55971_1_prosecution-gil-garcetti-peremptory-challenges
Gil Garcetti blames the Northridge earthquake for his choice of Downtown L.A., rather than Santa Monica, for the O.J. Simpson murder trial:
https://nypost.com/2016/04/10/former-da-gil-garcetti-i-never-wanted-marcia-clark-on-oj-trial/
Link? Names of victims? A quick search gives little data.
A quick search gives little data. So true. The judge tried to gag the media because the crime was so outrageous that public facts could bias the jury. And, of course, the media has no desire to come clean on just what kind of monster they’ve been stoking.
http://www.newnation.org/Archives/Wichita-010616.html
The short quote I posted from the link is to an enemedia news blurb that left out a few things like the rapes, the fact that one woman survived to tell about it, so the 5th murder was from yet another crime.
The internet is global. Which is why a handful of people are making unprecdented amounts of money, peddling anything and everything to billions of eyeballs around the globe. But the internet is not confining itself to commercial fare; it is regarded as an authoritative information source.
We are told that, due to AI, different countries and different people see different things when searching on the internet, which, if true, poses a bunch of problems as far as truth in information is concerned.
It is Sales 101 to cater to the sensitivities of your largest customer base.
Most internet viewers are non-white; whites comprise nothing but tiny flecks on the global mosaic.
So, are they showing Black users, searching the internet, what they want to see about violent crime stats, while putting the niche market of white users beneath them since whites represent far fewer global eyeballs on ads, or are they tailoring the information that users get on serious subjects based on race?
Guess not since Steve is white. And I see no evidence that internet search molds to the sensitivities of whites in general or of individual white searchers, quite the opposite and to an extreme in some cases.
Whites are just paying service providers between $60 to $100 per month to get, in effect, a 24/7 lecture about historical crimes, like slavery, which current generations of whites had no part in, while Blacks are never told that Blacks in the USA commit 7 times more murders.
The internet is a volume sales industry. It is all about the number of eyeballs on ads. It has to be either the economics of the sheer numbers of non-white users or the racial bias of the industry’s majority non-white employees. It is ironic, given who birthed the computing world.
The US is still majority white. It was even more white a few years back, when most of the original research undergirding the current tech industry was done—research that was funded mostly by the US government, with US companies bringing most of the internet-access devices to fruition.
Yet, the current non-offshored / non-outsourced part of the American tech industry—from most of the higher-paying CS jobs, to most of the higher-paying IT jobs, to most of the lower-paying warehouse jobs, to most of the lower-paying back-office jobs and most of the lower-paying call center jobs held by welfare-eligible moms—is mostly non-white. There are a lot of young-only whites in one place: the extremely low-paying, high-turnover, tech-related retail jobs.
White Americans still have a lot of consuming power, although our elected leaders are working hard to dismantle what is left of the white middle class. And, no, they are not creating a big minority middle class as a replacement. They are creating a bigly underclass of womb-productive welfare consumers, including lots of non-white noncitizens, with a partial replacement of the white upper middle class via mass immigration.
White legislators want to save a few slots in the upper middle class for their own progeny who will take two of the few good jobs per household, doubling up on high-wage jobs with benefits, and further decreasing the size of the American middle class.
When our non-Wall-funding congresspeople are not indulging in family-friendly vacation time—when they are not enjoying their 218 days off per year—they are undermining many of the citizens who bother to turn out on voting day by making sure that they are undercut by welfare-eligible immigrants in the low end of their own counry’s labor market, while also displaced in the scarce middle-class jobs.
Be sure to vote for these guys and gals, helping them to undermine your prospects of keeping a roof over your head, much less a mobile device in your hand, if you are a non-womb-productive, non-welfare-eligible citizen, living on earned-only income in the USA.
Vote for legislators who continue to let in 1.7 million new legal immigrants per year, including hundreds of thousands of womb-productive, welfare-eligible immigrants, collecting layers of monthly welfare for US-born kids (free rent, free food, free electricity, free monthly cash) and up to $6,431 in refundable child tax credit money. You can buy a lot of mobile tech products with $6,431 in tax-time cash, especially when your major monthly bills are eliminated by government to reward you for womb-productive sex and part-time / gig work.
These immigrants can afford to undercut citizens in the labor market, working cheaply while the US government takes care of their major household bills. That frees up plenty of money for every member of the household, including every “poor” child, to have the equivalent of a pocket-sized TV in the form of a smartphone, with the service providers charging them less than non-welfare-eligible, individual users via discounted family plans.
Did you, fellow middle-class white-privileged people, including those who grew up being called upper-middle-class, have a TV in your room, much less in your pocket as a kid?
Most of the children and the teenagers in the USA are non-white, and since marketers have always catered to the young, it is not surprising that the internet spits out information that appeals to this group of potential customers.
Meanwhile, although every “poor” kid (including every “poor” legal / illegal immigrant) owns a smartphone, a growing number of white (and other), non-womb-productive, non-welfare-eligible adult citizens of the USA cannot afford rent on low pay and inadequate hours, driven lower by welfare-buttressed immigrants who need to stay under the income limits for welfare, with rent costs driven higher by more unit chasers.
Our legislators keep trucking in the foreign part-time / temp workers, not just the ones working part-time and temp jobs with low wages to stay under the income limits for womb-productivity-based welfare in single-breadwinner households.
Congress is trucking in educated foreign nationals in to take many of the few middle-class jobs, with the Trump Administration making sure that the womb-productive, higher-paid, immigrant temp workers got an increased non-refundable child tax credit of several thousand to reward sex, reproduction and anti-white search engine construction.
Remember, as you struggle to cover the rent on a crappy, one-room apartment and your non-discounted mobile plan, white non-womb-productive citizens, that you need to do the responsible thing. As more and more of you are pushed out of the labor force in your own vastly underemployed country, make sure to do the civic chore of voting for people getting $174k salaries, lifetime benefits and global contacts to milk for $500k speech opportunites after they leave office.
The “Congress Critters” deserve those rewards for helping to destroy your standard of living and your way of life.
Search Bing and Google for Bought Off Politicians.
Do a Google search for pictures of "greatest Americans," and in the #1 position you get this man's picture and quote:
"The greatest Americans have not been born yet. They are waiting for the past to die." --Saul Williams
https://www.picsofcelebrities.com/celebrity/saul-williams/pictures/large/saul-williams-quotes.jpg
Now go to Bing and look up images for the same thing, "greatest Americans," and you get this guy:
http://celebrityinsider.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/The-Greatest-American-Hero.jpg
Duck duck go is no better. St. MLK is first followed by white–P.T. Barnum. The rest are blacks and Amerindians, with Lincoln tucked in.
I long have joked, when talking about O.J.’s infamous murders, that if a video eventually turned up that appeared to show him fleeing the scene of the crime in his white Ford Bronco, many of his die-hard supporters would reject it reflexively– and some of them even would claim that it was a video of Detective Mark Fuhrman, in blackface, who had not merely framed O.J., after the fact, because the opportunity to do so had fortuitously presented itself to him, but who had planned and executed the murders for the very purpose of thereby framing O.J.!
Commenters suggested he was acquitted because the black jurors were too thick to understand DNA was a legitimate forensic tool (white mans' voodoo). As it happens the jurors were a pretty credible and articulate group. There was a high school vice principal, several teachers, nurses, some government workers, one lady was a buyer in a department store (a pretty responsible and well paid occupation at the time). There were just a few lower income/poorly educated folks. These were after all people who consistently register to vote.
Some of the cops were questionable. Although DNA is powerful evidence, and a precise science, it becomes questionable when the chain of evidence protocols for sample collections are violated (and it happened). The prosecutors and cops were incompetent and potentially corrupt.
One of the best quotes I saw was they tried to frame a guilty man.
This is part of what I meant by the prosecution bungling the case, along with the gloves, etc.
I can’t remember where I read that many law enforcement officials believe Simpson had an accomplice. Simpson said he did. The prosecution and the Goldman family believed he acted alone. None of us were there, and the victims aren’t talking. Simpson is a notorious liar. The only ones who know for sure are Simpson — who claims he can’t remember killing them, saying he got so upset he lost control of his senses — and any possible accomplice.
In any case, the book “If I Did It” is a fascinating account of the events leading up to the murder and the murder. All the profits go to the Goldman family. You can interpret it as a confession, or a fictional attempt to try to excuse what he did.
Two things— in those days I was part of the NYC gambling scene. Not a big name, but I knew some pretty big names. At one point the National Enquirer revealed Marcia Clark’s first husband had been an Israeli gangster who had been a big part of the Los Angeles gambling scene. I talked to friends of mine who not only confirmed what the Enquirer said, but it turns out the truth was much worse and much stranger than the Enquirer article.
My mother was an avid feminist, and I found out the hard way that one simply did not ever criticize feminist icons. That was the nastiest I can ever remember my mother getting to me.
At the time of the verdict, I had just finished teaching a class at a community college in NYC. I went to a teachers’ lounge where there was a TV. No students allowed. I thought it was safe, until the place was suddenly overrun with students, all of them black. I started to get concerned for my safety. When OJ was acquitted, the students were all happy and cheering. Their team had won the big game.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
Makes sense. Keep in mind the city was not that enthusiastic about bringing OJ to justice because rightly or otherwise they feared another riot.
Bugliosi’s book explains all the ways they screwed up.
That said, could there have been more people involved than JUST OJ? Sure.
I’ve always suspected a drugs angle as well as the obvious dynamic of Nicole having severely provoked an unstable Negro male.
I remember the look on William Pierce’s face when the OJ incident was being discused. He felt OJ was in a sense a “good guy” because many white women would avoid marrying or having sex with black men after this example. He felt her life was worth that. Extreme maybe.
Yes, L.A. County has multiple judicial districts, each of which draws its juries from a discrete pool:
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-12/local/me-55971_1_prosecution-gil-garcetti-peremptory-challenges
Gil Garcetti blames the Northridge earthquake for his choice of Downtown L.A., rather than Santa Monica, for the O.J. Simpson murder trial:
https://nypost.com/2016/04/10/former-da-gil-garcetti-i-never-wanted-marcia-clark-on-oj-trial/
The short quote I posted from the link is to an enemedia news blurb that left out a few things like the rapes, the fact that one woman survived to tell about it, so the 5th murder was from yet another crime.
The Carr case was totally unmentioned in newspapers outside Wichita, and shows what cucks the pols and electorate of the Stupid State of Kansas are.
I think Steve is largely correct. Industrial scale promiscuity took off in the 70s. AIDS was able to to take hold in that environment. The gay political leadership was catastrophically wrong in thinking and promoting promiscuity to be healthy and a “right”
I wish gay lib back then was only about non discrimination and equal marriage rights and responsibility. Oppression against gay people was real. Gay kids who came out were often abandoned by family. Gays WERE treated terribly. Fear of being fired from jobs. Actual policies to fire known gays existed. No gay person was able to ever marry the person they wished to spend their life with. Happily I lived to see tremendous progress in my lifetime so today it is safe and comfortable to be gay without fear of job loss or ostracism. I was finally able to marry my partner of 20 years back in 2015.
So I don’t know why most commenters here just don’t recognize a happy medium or balance. People just want to be treated fairly and not ostracized. Treat gay people as individuals. Non discrimination. Some gays are responsible and unfortunately a segment was and is self destructive, just like much of the far Left. No need to repress gay people simply to live their lives responsibly like I do.
But any venue that spreads disease regardless of sexual orientation like bath houses and sex clubs should be shut. Public sex should be prosecuted.
I believe the far left is destructive as previously discussed. But some elements of the Right can be cavalier in their cruel attitudes and lump everyone in groups with crappy leadership as if they all are like that, when we are not.
The Seventies was the Sixties for people who weren’t on the leading edge of the demimonde of hippies and whacksters or show biz or very wealthy or very poor people. ‘Illicit’ sex, using recreational drugs, free divorce, abortion, et al, were verboten throughout the sixties to respectable middle class people. In the seventies, anything went.
Part of that was general down-percolation and part was the continuing, Gramscian march through the institutions of hardcore cultural Marxists.
Commenter Chrisnonymous says, “you’re welcome…”
https://www.unz.com/isteve/more-great-moments-in-google-gaslight/#comment-2724843
In the case of the USA, it means anyone in the world can come here and go underground by disappearing into the illegal population. Or if they have $2500 a year for a lawyer, drag out their claim for 5-10 years, no matter how weak, a get a work permit and free health care. And then when they lose... disappear.
Sometimes the cases take even longer than 10 years. Just read another case about a Pakistani who arrived in the early 90s, was arrested for a minor crime and then claimed asylum to avoid deportation in 1997. He lost every single step of the way, but is still here 21 years later. And you are aware of the mortgage fraudster "activist" in NYC, a similar case.
In Germany last I read of Merkel's 1.3 million invaders, 50,000 have been processed for asylum so far, and of those ordered deported, less than half have actually left. The deportation rate is no doubt far lower than the invitation of 16-year-old burka'd cousin-wives from the home country.
The UK, more specifically England, is ground zero as far as the Paki scam of importing in rotten ol fugly inbred homeland cousins to marry. The Paki family in Pakistan is paying large tributes annually to the UK family head to be able to (in essence) marry into the UK and into future marriage/immigration scams where one day they will get their own imported brides/grooms cashing outs from.
Denmark saw this scam and made some laws to stop it. I am nor sure how this turned out. Just call it the imported inbred cousin marriage with big money payoff racket.
What do I personally believe?
I believe OJ was guilty but the prosecution screwed the case up so badly the jury had to acquit. OJ himself described exactly what happened in the book “If I Did It”. OJ went there with a friend who later drove OJ home. All the oddities of the prosecution time line disappear when you realize there was someone else there to park and clean up the car while OJ got ready for his flight.
***
What subject did you teach at that community college, Professor? I trust that it was neither Law nor Criminology.
Who was the friend that went with O.J.? How do you know? Whose vehicle did they take, and which one (if it was O.J.'s, since he had more than one, at the time)? How is it that O.J.'s blood, mixed with that of his two victims, was found inside of his white Ford Bronco (not to be confused with the matching white Ford Bronco then owned by his friend and former teammate, Al Cowlings-- the driver from the infamous "slow-speed chase" of June 17, 1994)? If O.J. was driven home from his late ex-wife's home by someone else, why was O.J.'s blood on the driver's-side front door of his own white Ford Bronco, near the door handle? Why did the witness who claimed to have seen O.J. returning home from the murder scene, on the evening of June 12, 1994, place him alone and behind the wheel of a white Ford Bronco, driving recklessly and angrily through an intersection located between his late ex-wife's home and his own gated estate?
(While living in L.A., the following summer, I and two old friends made the drive from the alley behind the late Nicole Simpson's former home, on Gretna Green, and O.J.'s then home, on Roxbury, at about the same time as the murder took place, on a Sunday night. It was a straightforward drive, with light traffic, and we arrived at O.J.'s estate in short order, without breaking any traffic laws. Under similar conditions, a year earlier, O.J. should have arrived home in plenty of time to be heard by Kato Kaelin, as O.J. climbed over the rear fence, next to the guest houses, and to be seen by the limousine driver, who had arrived to take him to the airport, for his scheduled flight to Chicago, as O.J. crossed the yard, in full view of the waiting driver, and entered the front door of his own house.)
Here is a Court TV timeline, reposted at the CNN Web site, for the event in question:
***
(Court TV) -- The following is the sequence of events on the night of June 12, 1994 and early morning hours of June 13, based on the testimony of witnesses. O.J. Simpson has said he was at his Brentwood home waiting for a limousine at the time the victims were fatally stabbed. All times are Pacific Time.
6:30 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson, her children and several others go to dinner at the Mezzaluna restaurant.
8 p.m. - Nicole Brown Simpson and her children leave Mezzaluna, and stop for ice cream on the way home.
9:15 p.m. - One of Nicole Brown Simpson's sisters calls Mezzaluna to say that Nicole's mother had left her glasses at the restaurant. Ronald Goldman volunteers to return the glasses.
9 p.m.-9:30 p.m. - Brian Kaelin, a friend staying in a guest house at O.J. Simpson's home, and Simpson go to McDonald's for dinner.
9:45 p.m. - Kaelin and Simpson return home.
9:48 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. - Goldman leaves the restaurant with a white envelope containing the glasses.
10:15 p.m. - While watching television, Pablo Fenjves, a neighbor of Nicole Brown Simpson, hears the cries and constant barking of a dog.
10:25 p.m. - Limousine driver Allan Park arrives at Simpson's home.
10:40 p.m. - Kaelin hears three loud thumps on an outside wall of his room.
10:40-10:50 p.m. - Park buzzes intercom several times but does not get any response.
10:55 p.m. - Park calls his boss and tells him Simpson is not home. He is told to wait until 11:15 since Simpson is always late.
Shortly before 11 p.m. - Park sees a black person, six-feet, 200 pounds, walking across the driveway towards the house.
About 11 p.m. - Kaelin goes to the front of the house to check on the noise. He sees the limousine driver at the gate. Several seconds later, Park again buzzes the intercom and Simpson answers. He says he had overslept and just gotten out of the shower.
11 p.m. - 11:15 p.m. - Simpson puts his bags in the limousine.
11:15 p.m. - Limousine leaves for Los Angeles Airport.
11:35 p.m. - Limousine arrives at airport.
11:45 p.m. - Simpson leaves on an American Airlines flight to Chicago.
12:10 a.m. - The bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are discovered outside her townhouse.
About 5 a.m. - Detectives Mark Fuhrman and Philip Vannatter arrive at Simpson's house.
5:15-5:30 a.m. - The detectives examine an apparent bloodstain on Simpson's Ford Bronco.
5:40 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. - Detective Fuhrman decided to jump the wall in order for police to get inside the estate. Once on the grounds, the detectives awaken Simpson's daughter, Arnelle, who is staying in a guest house. She takes the police to the house and telephones Cathy Randa, her father's longtime assistant.
7 am-7:30 a.m. - Detective Vannatter declared the area a crime scene and goes to get a warrant to search the house. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
[ http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/court.archive.simpson14/index.html ]
***
Even if one is foolish enough to believe that the mishandling of the DNA evidence somehow could have produced the damning lab results, seemingly proving O.J. Simpson's guilt, and even if one is stupid and credulous enough to believe that Detective Mark Fuhrman transported and planted one of the matching bloody gloves worn by the killer from the crime scene to O.J.'s own estate, unnoticed by anyone present at either location, without Detective Fuhrman's even knowing whether O.J. was then at home, away from home, or even out of the country altogether, on that particular Sunday evening, the other evidence arrayed against O.J. Simpson-- including his having the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have committed the crime-- was overwhelming, to the point of open-and-shut. The jury engaged in jury nullification, based on race, plainly and simply.
The prosecution wanted women on the jury because one of the victims was a woman and the estranged wife of who they charged as the murderer.
The defense wanted blacks on the jury because the accused was black.
The two sides compromised and ended up with black women. OK, they didn’t agree, but jury selection is a kind of negotiation, and this is the jury composition that resulted.
The prosecution was concerned about the accused’s favorable public image and getting any juror to vote for conviction. Marcia Clark worked the angle of the accused as a known spouse-abuser, attempting to create a narrative of his yelling on the 9-1-1 call being on the slippery slope to spousal murder.
This had the black women jurors, metaphorically speaking, leaning back into the backrests of their chairs, arms folded and heads tilted, rolling their eyes. For a variety of cultural and historical reasons, it appears that black women have a much more realistic view of domestic strife then the white feminist equation of woman always good, man bad.
Black women were possibly the worst choice for jurors for giving consideration to the prosecution’s version of what happened, especially the way they presented the case. But along the lines of the famous iSteve post “Lesbians are not gay”, black women have an entirely different view than white women, and a white woman prosecutor was too self-absorbed to Notice Things (TM), like such distinctions.
Link? Names of victims? A quick search gives little data.
‘Link? Names of victims? A quick search gives little data.’
Lol. That would be the case.
If you really can’t find it, get back to me. Then I’ll exert myself to find you a link.
There is a reason why assertions are supported with evidence. The rule of thumb is that assertions without supporting links of some kind are simply false. If somebody asks you for your sources, some sort of responsive reply is expected _by the audience_, people outside your conversation.
Or, you could be happy and satisfied with being marked as a troll.
Counterinsurgency
The prosecution was given pro bono jury-consulting services (whereas O.J. had to pay the going rate). The prosecution’s jury consultant told Marsha Clark, the Jewish feminist, not to pick black women– because they would see the late blonde trophy wife, Nicole Simpson, as a white woman who got what was coming to her, after “stealing” a successful black man from his first, black wife, and then doing that black man dirt, thereby bringing him low. Marsha Clark, the Jewish feminist, thought that she, as a successful female trial attorney, knew better than any professional trial consultant what to look for in a juror, and that her persuasive skills as a successful female trial attorney would win over any female juror– black, white or otherwise. Marsha Clark, the Jewish feminist and (previously) successful trial attorney, was mistaken.
JesusiSteve.Interesting. He fled back to the country he said was so dangerous for him that he needed asylum from it. Whatever the outcome of whatever legal problems he may have due to the limo crash, he should be prosecuted for a fraudulent asylum claim and be deported and barred from ever returning.
jennifer_lawrence_ok.gif
Continuing mass murder & genocide in practically the entirety of central Africa is just "the feelz" getting a bit out of control. Ditto for South Africa. I mean, who doesn't enjoy being slowly murdered in the backlands by gangbangers?
The only thing is that Hollywood has trained people to associate violence with whitey and friendly warmth and underdoggedness with blackey.
Sometimes though....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBpBeJJmMDc
How is it possible that a few images on a screen of people acting seen maybe a couple times a year can “train” people, when so much of the remainder of their time is real life? Doesn’t seem plausible.
The essential racial dynamic– a black defendant and two white victims– was the same in both the 1994-1995 O.J. Simpson criminal trial and the 1996-1997 O.J. Simpson civil trial; and yet:
***
A predominantly white jury with two members who consider O. J. Simpson ”probably guilty” of murder was selected today to hear a wrongful death suit filed against him by the victims’ families.
The clerk swore in the jury of 12, eight of whom are white, two black, one Hispanic and one a man who is half Asian and half black. Seven are women and five men.
The panel’s racial makeup starkly differs from that of the jury that acquitted Mr. Simpson, who is black, a year ago of double murder charges. That jury ended up with nine black, one Hispanic and two white members.
Race has emerged as an issue in the case, inside and outside the court. Surveys have found that whites overwhelmingly disagreed with Mr. Simpson’s acquittal and blacks supported it.
Two of the jurors in the civil trial said they believed Mr. Simpson was ”probably guilty.” Both are white. The remaining jurors said they were not sure of Mr. Simpson’s guilt or had no opinion.
***
https://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/18/us/jury-that-is-mostly-white-is-picked-for-o-j-simpson-civil-trial.html
In media-speak, of course, then as now, “mostly white” or “predominantly white” is meant to signal the media’s opinion that the civil jury was thereby inherently “RACIST!” To question the overwhelmingly Black jury in the criminal trial, on the other hand, was, and is, taken by the same media as a sure sign of racial resentment, if not one of outright “RACISM!” The fact that the media-maligned civil jury came about as close as possible as a twelve-member jury could, back then, to reflecting the actual racial and ethnic diversity of 1990s America– two-thirds non-Hispanic White, 5/24ths Black, 1/12th Hispanic, and 1/24th Asian– while the criminal jury was three-fourths Black, and only one-sixth White– when the exact opposite would have reflected America fairly closely– was, and is, utterly lost on the media.
Also, crimes tend to happen on TV where the show is located. The crime rate in Honolulu really isn’t nearly as bad as one would presume from TV, nor are Navy personnel in New Orleans nearly as likely to be killed as one night think.
Bah, next thing you’ll be telling me that rural English gentry aren’t constantly offing each other in inventive ways..
I did see that the Kansas Supreme Court had removed the death penalty. If the races were reversed, would courts and media have played it the same? We both know the answer.
The cuck voters of Kansas failed, as always, to remove the responsible judges.
Kansas deserves divine judgment more than San Francisco, I think. Because SF at least admits it’s pagan and Satanic (LaVey was from there and the local literati like Herb Caen adored him.) Kansas claims to be morally upright and Christian but is totally cucked to the max.
Doesn’t the average American watch several hours of television per day?
Why should we put any faith in “professional trial consultants”? How do they know what they claim know?
I think Steve has mentioned that lots of wealthy Iranians who entered America as asylum seekers regularly return to the land of their birth to visit relatives and attend family events. In other words, they don’t seem to have much fear of persecution.
Even though blacks may be more violent on average than whites, most whites have no personal experience of black violence so the impressions they get from movies and television may influence their opinions more than the facts.
Yes, and what Americans tell pollsters about what percentages of the American population they think are, say, Black or homosexual comports much more closely to what they see, day in and day out, on their televisions– and in the corporate mass media, more broadly– than with what the Census Bureau and other (more-or-less) serious tabulators of American demographics report as their social-scientific estimates of the American population at large, at any give point in time.
I think it’s interesting that now, looking at that situation, it is obvious to me even before reading your comments, that black women would be terrible jurors for the prosecution in that trial. However, I don’t know I would have thought the same in the 1990s. What’s changed? I started listening to RadioDerb, got redpilled, and found
JesusiSteve.I sat next to O.J. at a bar once. This was ten years ago, shortly before he went to prison.
JesusiSteve.In Marcia Clark’s defense, the OJ Trial turned out to open a lot of eyes.
“a few images…” Have you seen television lately? I can believe it when a survey had some foreigners guesstimating the US population at 75% black. There is no doubt in my mind that television is systematically trying to normalize mixed race marriage and whites as a minority.
https://qz.com/1494111/googles-caste-system-is-bad-for-workers-and-bad-for-google-too/
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/12/who-would-have-thought-it.html
The author is whining withiut cause. The system of which he writes is ubiquitous and imperfect, but no grand injustice. Read carefully and you note he claims no significant, specific examples of poor treatment; his gripes amount to:
I was brought on as a contractor and not a regular employee, and I was never offered to become a regular employee. I didn’t get to go to meetings and functions reserved for
employees, I didn’t get the pay and stock options and benefis teserved for employees, yet I did similar work.”
The last claim must be taken with a shaker of salt: This Hindoo is a document review attorney. For those who don’t know, that’s shit-work that often pays about $40,000.00 annially and involves clicking a mouse all day as you skim – sorry, carefully read – stultifying quantities of files as part of discovery. Lawyers do it in part because a lawyer has to do it, same way a pharmacist has to reviews your pantaprozole with you the first time he fills the order: it ain’t because handing out pantoprazole is terribly ticklish and complex work, friends.
Everg single big outfit in silly valley follows this model (many elsewhere do): Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, Friendface, Twitter, Uber, Lyft, Yahoo!, Juniper, Polycom, Adobe – f**k whatcha heard: All of em!
If you are good at your job and make the cut, you can get converter to full-time employment within a year. It ain’t hard, but you cannot be a slacker or a dingus: one reason for the arrangement is to keep you out if you are!
I expect a major problem for the author is that, as a policy matter (and probably a sound one) if you are doing doc review, you’re kind of already branded as … well … I ain’t hiring you next time i need a lawyer.
No, I’m afraid this piece is just more of the Hindoo entrée into grievance-mongering at which that people are proving such superstars (Vanita Gupta, Kamala Harris, etc.). Again I emphaise the lack of substance. He isn’t documenting mistreatment or even discourtesy, except to make generalisations with no specific examples or details to support them. His beef is: I took a temporary job, knowing it was temporary, and I disn’t get to go to the Christm—sorry, “Holiday” party or watch Imagine Dragons perform and tell me it is okay to be gay at the company picnic. Also, I’m a Hindoo so it was Because Racism.
I hate hate hate silly valley, but this loser is part of the problem, not a victim of it.
HEH!
That’s another great comment from you, E.N. You oughta have a blog.
Because they listen to my old friend from Purdue, Saul Kassin, who has earned however many big-screen televisions he has hanging on his walls, these days, in Williamstown and New York City. More objectively measured, however, what successful attorneys, and ultimately their clients, are willing to pay such trial consultants, usually in corporate civil cases, on top of those attorneys’ own hourly fees, and any miscellaneous legal costs, suggests that people who are notably good at earning money and accumulating wealth see those trial consultants’ own hourly fees, and additional costs, worth the added expense. Of course, like many other things in life, “you pays your money, and you takes your chances!”
Der Bingle was an all around butthead, to be honest. But he furthered the development of tape recording greatly, probably more than Les Paul, by financing Ampex.
With updated electronics, vintage Ampex 300, 350 and 440 tape decks are still the finest open reel tape machines ever built.
Back then TV networks didn't save the videotapes of old broadcasts, so Crosby arranged for someone to film the broadcast.
This is also why you don't see the actual broadcasts of old Super Bowls. What you are watching is film shot by NFL Films, the league's propaganda arm.
Desi Arnaz also insisted on shooting I Love Lucy on film, which is why it is the oldest sitcom that is shown ubiquitously.
If I recall correctly, Art Deco pointed out that the prosecution made a good enough case. The problem was it allowed a majority of black women (who see good-looking white women who
stealdate or marry black men as the enemy) to be seated on the jury, on the theory that black women would be sympathetic, on the basis of their common gender, to a white woman murdered by a black man. This theory doesn’t withstand the laugh test, i.e. if you can’t say something out loud without laughing, there’s something not quite right about it. Once jury selection was complete, the die was cast.http://famous-trials.com/simpson/1989-jurypage
Neither fronts the mass killers like the Las Vegas old white punk or the Virgina Tech Korean punk, etc. Nor do they put up your Lee Harvey Oswald or John Wilkers Booth, who have arguably committed the most famous murders in US history (from today's perspective). (Lincoln's assasination will probably still be in the HS history books in 100 years--if there is a USA. Kennedy's will be a footnote like McKinley's.)
So this is really famous serial killers. Blacks indeed do serial killings--as with much else--at several times the white rate. But routine man jealous\annoyed\cheated kills wife\ex-wife murder isn't going to make the cut.
Interesting assertion. From my vantage I’d guess that JFK’s assassination attended a much greater upheaval in the society at large than did Lincoln’s. Which is particularly odd (if accurate) because no one would deny Lincoln’s vastly greater importance in American history.
stealdate or marry black men as the enemy) to be seated on the jury, on the theory that black women would be sympathetic, on the basis of their common gender, to a white woman murdered by a black man. This theory doesn't withstand the laugh test, i.e. if you can't say something out loud without laughing, there's something not quite right about it. Once jury selection was complete, the die was cast.http://famous-trials.com/simpson/1989-jurypageThe forewoman on the jury was pretty explicit about an ‘agreement’ among the jurors (which she enforced–sometimes angrily–including in interviews) essentially to let OJ go free no matter what the evidence showed, and this was clearly about racial animus. Does no one remember the juror booted off early on who declared “Da Juice got nothin’ ta worry about!”
https://www.thewrap.com/oj-simpson-juror-not-guilty-verdict-was-payback-for-rodney-king/
Was Nicole Brown Simpson the original Becky? She called the cops–repeatedly–and look what it got her.
Gacy was hit in the head with a swing as a child.
Indeed. I’m pretty much a news hound and I only learned what (little) I know about the case here on UNZ.
Frankly it’s mildly scary that anyone can be so willfully naïve about the influence and ubiquity of mass media propaganda. I say “mildly” only because the delusion is so widespread. I’ve noticed that often the same people who claim immunity to its effects are actually well under its sway.
But then it reminds me of the old bromide that the Devil’s greatest achievement is convincing people that he doesn’t exist.
And: “Normalizing” mixed-race marriages was achieved a generation or two ago in the MSM. In the Current Year, the message is clear that every decent white woman will choose a POC mate, and only a POC mate, or else be branded a racist. Which, as you know, is the absolute worst thing on earth any person can be.
Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised if O.J. has concussion related brain issues.
No, of course not.
It was pointed out by Harold Rothwax at the time that the chain-of-custody complaint implied a conspiracy to frame Simpson cooked up on the spot between quite a mass of public employees, not all of whom were well-acquainted with each other. It’s the sort of paranoia you might expect of people who have a common cultural frame of reference. Since Mark Fuhrman was working with a partner, you’d have to assume that said partner was willing to work with Fuhrman to frame Simpson. Whatever lurid fantasies blacks maintain about what whites say behind closed doors, you and I both know that people who yammer on like Fuhrman are exceedingly unusual outside of odd little subcultures. If his partner (one Brad Roberts) has ever been such a person, no one has yet presented proofs.
Women killed in this country outside of slums are so (IIRC, about 3/4 of the time, demonstrably) by members of their household, by proximate relatives, or by paramours current and former. Quite a bloc of the remaining quarter is accounted for by unsolved killings and killings by others in the social circle of the victim. Some of these occur in the course of robberies, burglaries, and sexual assaults. Please not also that maybe 20% of the homicides in this country are affected using up-close-and-personal means like knives or bare hands. Even in an area as populous as greater Los Angeles, the annual number of homicides committed against (1) women (2) outside the slums and points adjacent (3) by someone other than a demonstrable intimate (4) not conjoined to any other felony and (5) making use of highly personal means, can be expressed in single digits.
Flannery O’Connor once said that literature trades in the possible, not the probable. Yes, it’s possible that in a handsome section of Los Angeles an unknown individual stabbed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman to death just for the thrill of it. That sort of thing is a staple of horror fiction with few examples in mundane life. That such a thing would happen and that a compost heap of evidence would be left behind implicating an innocent third party really is the stuff of fiction.
Women killed in this country outside of slums are so (IIRC, about 3/4 of the time, demonstrably) by members of their household, by proximate relatives, or by paramours current and former. Quite a bloc of the remaining quarter is accounted for by unsolved killings and killings by others in the social circle of the victim. Some of these occur in the course of robberies, burglaries, and sexual assaults. Please not also that maybe 20% of the homicides in this country are affected using up-close-and-personal means like knives or bare hands. Even in an area as populous as greater Los Angeles, the annual number of homicides committed against (1) women (2) outside the slums and points adjacent (3) by someone other than a demonstrable intimate (4) not conjoined to any other felony and (5) making use of highly personal means, can be expressed in single digits.
Flannery O'Connor once said that literature trades in the possible, not the probable. Yes, it's possible that in a handsome section of Los Angeles an unknown individual stabbed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman to death just for the thrill of it. That sort of thing is a staple of horror fiction with few examples in mundane life. That such a thing would happen and that a compost heap of evidence would be left behind implicating an innocent third party really is the stuff of fiction.
They could have tried a Serial-Killer-Did-It defense, but I don’t think serial killers attack a woman with a young man standing nearby. I guess the drug dealer thing was the best they could do.
O.J.'s motive for murder was clear. His violent temper, directed at his ex-wife, was clear. The fact that he had a fresh cut on his hand was clear. The fact that he exhibited evidence of a guilty conscience-- by his fleeing his arranged arrest; by his writing an apparent suicide note; by his possessing his passport, a large sum of cash, and a disguise, when he fled Chez Kardashian; by his telling a friend, who was a former L.A.P.D. officer, that he did not wish to take a polygraph examination about the murders because he supposedly had dreamed of killing his ex-wife, and he feared that his recollection of that dream would register as deception when he stated to a polygrapher that he had not killed his ex-wife!-- was clear. The fact that he had no witness to his supposedly being at home, in between his return from dinner with Kato Kaelin and the latter's hearing banging on his guesthouse's outside wall, is clear. The fact that there were blood-flecked clothes left in his electric dryer, when he left for Chicago, was clear. The fact that no one was brought forward as the black man whom the limousine driver saw enter the house-- when O.J., just after that, had claimed to have been in the shower-- is clear. For there to be a reasonable doubt, justifying an acquittal, there have to be factual or logical reasons to reject such evidence, not merely some alternative theory of the crime (e.g., a drug-related hit intended for one of Nicole Simpson's girlfriends) that avoids addressing the evidence put before the jury.
First, I am a true crime junkie going back to Manson and have studied famous crimes.
Most murder suspects in a place like Los Angeles, are thoroughly unsympathetic figures. O.J. Simpson couldn’t have been more different.
Furthermore, Nicole Brown wasn’t a particularly sympathetic victim. Dominick Dunne wrote in one of his Vanity Fair articles, “Nicole is everything black women hate.” White people I talked to at the time, didn’t like her either, but wanted O.J. convicted.
Regarding black on white murders, black jurors usually vote guilty. Why? The Usual Suspect in a black on white murder is dead bang guilty, the crime was especially brutal, and (as above) not sympathetic.
Weird, I expected some theories on the overwhelming association between American whites and serial killing. I emphasise American whites because some of the stories I've heard about Idi Amin certainly make the case for his inclusion, though his killings were more tinged with megalomania, as opposed to the cold, calculated mass murders of white folk.
You’ve probably already been informed, but blacks are over-represented (23%-24%, I believe) among serial killers. To the extent that number isn’t higher I attribute to lower average IQ.
http://www.murderdata.org/2015/01/how-many-unsolved-murders-are-there-its_24.html
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oBwAXVjttCQ/VMQMtlHNUOI/AAAAAAAAAII/WBXMpwwtyz8/s1600/MurderCurve.jpg
It would be interesting to plot both a number of murders investigated line and a number of murders committed line on the same chart.
I find it amazing some of you are still invested in the functioning society LARP America has become.
What’s your standard for calling someone a murderer on a major media platform?
I wonder how many people convicted in Japan did not actually commit the crime. I’d bet it’s at least a little higher than in the US.
Crosby and his involvement with Ampex is literally the only reason we have a recording of Game 7 of the 1960 World Series, perhaps the most famous World Series game ever.
Back then TV networks didn’t save the videotapes of old broadcasts, so Crosby arranged for someone to film the broadcast.
This is also why you don’t see the actual broadcasts of old Super Bowls. What you are watching is film shot by NFL Films, the league’s propaganda arm.
Desi Arnaz also insisted on shooting I Love Lucy on film, which is why it is the oldest sitcom that is shown ubiquitously.
Some were dumped in the ocean, like all the Ernie Kovacs shows.
Film had the advantage of being a one shot medium, and Kodachrome has little recoverable silver once processed, so it survived.
Film is still better than videotape, just as film is better than almost all still digital imagery in practice, but economics favor digital hugely.
Two hundred years from now, they may well have most of the pictures taken of Marilyn Monroe on the original film but images of Beyonce, Britney Spears or the like may be rare and only from magazines found in landfill excavations. Just as old vinyl from the Andrea Doria is still playable but the 1980s CDs are sometimes already turned to unplayable gunk.
There is no commercially available truly archival digital storage medium.
And no one cares very much.
Lol. That would be the case.
If you really can't find it, get back to me. Then I'll exert myself to find you a link.
Colin
There is a reason why assertions are supported with evidence. The rule of thumb is that assertions without supporting links of some kind are simply false. If somebody asks you for your sources, some sort of responsive reply is expected _by the audience_, people outside your conversation.
Or, you could be happy and satisfied with being marked as a troll.
Counterinsurgency
O.J.'s motive for murder was clear. His violent temper, directed at his ex-wife, was clear. The fact that he had a fresh cut on his hand was clear. The fact that he exhibited evidence of a guilty conscience-- by his fleeing his arranged arrest; by his writing an apparent suicide note; by his possessing his passport, a large sum of cash, and a disguise, when he fled Chez Kardashian; by his telling a friend, who was a former L.A.P.D. officer, that he did not wish to take a polygraph examination about the murders because he supposedly had dreamed of killing his ex-wife, and he feared that his recollection of that dream would register as deception when he stated to a polygrapher that he had not killed his ex-wife!-- was clear. The fact that he had no witness to his supposedly being at home, in between his return from dinner with Kato Kaelin and the latter's hearing banging on his guesthouse's outside wall, is clear. The fact that there were blood-flecked clothes left in his electric dryer, when he left for Chicago, was clear. The fact that no one was brought forward as the black man whom the limousine driver saw enter the house-- when O.J., just after that, had claimed to have been in the shower-- is clear. For there to be a reasonable doubt, justifying an acquittal, there have to be factual or logical reasons to reject such evidence, not merely some alternative theory of the crime (e.g., a drug-related hit intended for one of Nicole Simpson's girlfriends) that avoids addressing the evidence put before the jury.
I remember the day the decision was made by the jurors. To me it was obvious, and frankly it still is, who did it. But on that day prior to the announcement, ABC/NBC/CBS had a panel of lawyers on, and they polled them as to the outcome, and they came in something like 10-2 or some such. At the time it was confirmation bias for me that lawyers are scumbags, but now that that I’m older, I really do think OJ’s team really did just out lawyer the prosecution.
Google:
Compare, DuckDuckGo:
Strangely, Kermit Gosnell is completely ignored.
Lol. That would be the case.
If you really can't find it, get back to me. Then I'll exert myself to find you a link.
You posted
“that multiple homicide ‘n rape in Kansas of a week ago”
So that’s what I looked for. If you’re referring to the Reginald and Jonathan Carr case, what looks like a racist rape and murder spree, those killings and rape were IIRC a year ago?
(thanks densa for the Carr link)
Lincoln was wildly unpopular in America when he was shot, unlike Kennedy.
Back then TV networks didn't save the videotapes of old broadcasts, so Crosby arranged for someone to film the broadcast.
This is also why you don't see the actual broadcasts of old Super Bowls. What you are watching is film shot by NFL Films, the league's propaganda arm.
Desi Arnaz also insisted on shooting I Love Lucy on film, which is why it is the oldest sitcom that is shown ubiquitously.
Right, the old quad video tapes were re-recorded over because the tapes were reusable, but expensive.
Some were dumped in the ocean, like all the Ernie Kovacs shows.
Film had the advantage of being a one shot medium, and Kodachrome has little recoverable silver once processed, so it survived.
Film is still better than videotape, just as film is better than almost all still digital imagery in practice, but economics favor digital hugely.
Two hundred years from now, they may well have most of the pictures taken of Marilyn Monroe on the original film but images of Beyonce, Britney Spears or the like may be rare and only from magazines found in landfill excavations. Just as old vinyl from the Andrea Doria is still playable but the 1980s CDs are sometimes already turned to unplayable gunk.
There is no commercially available truly archival digital storage medium.
And no one cares very much.