Shortly after, we became ashamed of ourselves at how evident it was that he was guilty. Then we'd just start laughing at how long we felt he was innocent. There was no way he actually was, right? Not so fast...
A new show premiered last night, "Is O.J. Innocent? The Missing Evidence" on the Investigation Discovery channel. Admittedly, the sole initial reason I tuned in was because I'm a huge fan of Derrick Levasseur, a cop who is investigating the new evidence on the case. I've been a fan since he was on (and won) season 16 of "Big Brother" and wanted him to win because he's a cop.
I went into watching the show completely believing O.J. is guilty. I didn't think I'd be convinced until the last episode, if at all, that he didn't kill Nicole and Ron. I was actually convinced on the very first episode that there may be more to the story. While I do believe there's a chance he did it, there's also the theory now that OJ may have taken the fall for Jason but it can easily be leaving Jason out to dry and an easy free target. Derrick, Bill and Kris concluded that there were 2 people but they can't conclude that the other was involved in the murder in any way, or that the other person even knew about what OJ was going to do.
If you ask me, it was Jason Simpson, OJ's son, with him that night. Too many people concluded that there was another person, someone wearing a hat Jason was known to own and wear, but stopped wearing after the murders. While I do think OJ committed the crime, too many people saw another person with him and someone even identified that person as Jason. I don't know how anyone can despute his involvement in some capacity. Especially after watching every episode of "Is O.J. Innocent: The Missing Evidence."
No comments:
Post a Comment