I had never heard this theory prior to his death, but now I see it popping up here and there. Is there any evidence to support this? I still think he probably did it, but I’m curious as to why people are saying this now.
his son was a chef and had military knife training and had attacked an ex gf with similar knife. also had a history of drugs. OJ comes off as more a gun/muscle kind of problem solver.
The watch cap found at the scene was the kind the son wore. dog hair on the scene, son owned a dog and oj did not. sons alibi was very weak. sons vehicle was bloodied not the bronco. the glove fit the son.
Well, what kind of sources did you find for the claims that you are actively stating as facts? I think it’s important to provide sources for claims as strong as these, regardless of whether you are a reporter or a veterinarian.
User Num10ck actually said they don’t believe that OJ’s son did it, and they’re just articulating another prevalent theory. If this were a debate I’d agree with you, but this is just casual speculation about an event from 30 years ago.
Its just bad internet manners to not provide the links to the claim you want people to understand/ engage with.
Like, if we’re going to discuss something, and you have a point your are looking to make, drop a link. Its not my job to put out effort to find support or research a claim I’m not making.
It really is. Now you have all these suggestions you’re not going to qualify. Arguing is performative and it’s clear you would rather do that than take five seconds to clarify lmao
Thanks for posting this! I also googled it (It took like 10 seconds, not sure why we’re expecting so much of you below) and saw they’re are a lot of people talking about it. I don’t know how much stock I put in it personally, but it’s an interesting theory that I knew nothing about prior.
I had never heard this theory prior to his death, but now I see it popping up here and there. Is there any evidence to support this? I still think he probably did it, but I’m curious as to why people are saying this now.
his son was a chef and had military knife training and had attacked an ex gf with similar knife. also had a history of drugs. OJ comes off as more a gun/muscle kind of problem solver.
The watch cap found at the scene was the kind the son wore. dog hair on the scene, son owned a dog and oj did not. sons alibi was very weak. sons vehicle was bloodied not the bronco. the glove fit the son.
Any sources for these claims?
i just googled ‘OJ simpson son’ i’m not a reporter.
Well, what kind of sources did you find for the claims that you are actively stating as facts? I think it’s important to provide sources for claims as strong as these, regardless of whether you are a reporter or a veterinarian.
If your response is ‘just google it’, its not a response.
Onus is on you to support your claims.
User Num10ck actually said they don’t believe that OJ’s son did it, and they’re just articulating another prevalent theory. If this were a debate I’d agree with you, but this is just casual speculation about an event from 30 years ago.
Its just bad internet manners to not provide the links to the claim you want people to understand/ engage with.
Like, if we’re going to discuss something, and you have a point your are looking to make, drop a link. Its not my job to put out effort to find support or research a claim I’m not making.
It really is. Now you have all these suggestions you’re not going to qualify. Arguing is performative and it’s clear you would rather do that than take five seconds to clarify lmao
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
aka
everything i put is on the first page of google results for the search term i provided.
you have everything you need to easily get to where i got.
If you make a claim, you’ve got to go out and gather, qualify, and frame the evidence.
Not our job, yours.
hah either a lazy troll or you fundamentally misunderstand the nature of our relationship, or what lemmy is.
Nah just been on the Internet a long time and sharing it’s norms with you.
You make a claim, any claim, and it’s your job to provide some level of support, no one else’s.
But motive?
great question. maybe he was loyal to his dad and didn’t like the waiter banging his mom and driving dad’s ferrari? but why kill his own mom then?
who would have enough of a motive outside of this inner circle?
Thanks for posting this! I also googled it (It took like 10 seconds, not sure why we’re expecting so much of you below) and saw they’re are a lot of people talking about it. I don’t know how much stock I put in it personally, but it’s an interesting theory that I knew nothing about prior.
It was floating around during the trial too. No one took it seriously back then either.