- Jurisdiction
- California
I've become interested in the OJ murder case again because of his parole hearing over the Vegas robbery.
I've watched some documentaries on YouTube and read some stuff over the past couple of days to refresh my memory.
Whenever I study true crime stories like this, I can't help but think how I would've gone about trying not to get caught (although it should go without saying that I would never even consider really doing something so awful; this is just a thought exercise for fun).
It seems like the murders weren't very well planned. But what if they had been? Assuming OJ did it (I know -- big stretch), here's an imaginary scenario for the attorneys out there, with a couple of questions at the end.
OJ commits the murders about one hour earlier than he did, giving himself more time to clean everything up methodically.
He uses a knife he got somehow without being recognized when he obtained it, but that can't be traced to him. (They never found the murder weapon and this knife purchase was never revealed at trial, but it was at the grand jury inquisition and helped hold him over for trial. I discuss it more later.)
He kills Nicole's dog first (which he didn't do at all; its incessant barking led to a likely time for the murders from testimony from the neighbors, and it got loose and led a neighbor to the bodies within a couple of hours of the murders).
He's wearing cheap clothes he bought specifically for the murders.
He secured his gloves with duct tape or rubber bands or something so they don't come off. (Whether such a method would've likely worked is irrelevant; we're assuming here that it did and he left no gloves behind, even if he just got lucky.)
Underneath he's wearing restaurant "cutting gloves" (these are thin, lightweight gloves with metal mesh under the fabric, used in restaurants when cutting food. It's nearly impossible to cut through them with a knife, which is why they're worn), so he never cuts his hand.
He's also wearing a bald cap under his knit cap to cover his hair, and both are secured so they don't come off during the murders.
He also wears cheap tennis shoes he bought for the murders; they're two sizes too big with newspapers or something stuffed into the toes.
Maybe he also plans the murders for a night with heavy rain forecast, which helps rinse away evidence (as well as making additional noise and likely reducing the number of neighbors walking their dogs, etc. during that time).
After committing the murders, he drives at a leisurely pace to a spot in the country he has scoped out ahead of time. He turns off his lights and is careful not to pull off of the pavement, onto dirt where he could leave tire tracks.
He pulls off all of his clothes and leather gloves and throws them in a ditch. He throws the shoes in there too, careful to pull out the newspapers first.
Then he pulls his regular clothes and shoes out of a duffel bag in the back of the Bronco and puts them on. He's still wearing his cutting gloves and probably two or three pairs of rubber gloves underneath so as not to leave fingerprints on anything he's leaving behind, as well as the bald cap so as hopefully to not drop hairs on anything.
(Throwing the stuff in a commercial dumpster behind a store or something would make it less likely that any of it would ever be found, but the risk of being caught on a security camera isn't worth it.)
He drives back at a leisurely pace.
The duffel bag was a cheap one bought for this purpose; he throws it out the window a few miles down the road, but still in the country.
He pulls off all of the other gloves a few more miles down the road and throws them out the window.
He goes to a carwash and thoroughly washes the Bronco inside and out -- including spraying down the carpet and upholstery. He has a bunch of old towels in the back; he dries out the inside as well as he can, then throws the towels and the bald cap in the trash at the car wash.
He also throws out the newspapers from his shoes here or throws them out the window earlier, like he did with the gloves.
(It doesn't make much difference if he's caught on camera or recognized here; everyone washes their car, and I spray out the inside of mine like this too [although not as thoroughly as he would need to here] maybe two or three times a year just for regular cleaning, so people do that sometimes too. People also throw away worn-out towels, and this kind of job is a good final use for them.
(And yes, doing this on a rainy night looks strange, but it's not illegal. Besides, he's about to go on a trip, and he's also cleaning the inside; maybe he wants his car clean when he comes back, and this is his last chance to do it before he leaves.)
Now he drives back to his house at a leisurely pace. Once inside, he takes a very long, thorough shower, then throws everything he was wearing in the washing machine.
Here are the implications:
1. There's no barking dog to establish a likely time for the murders.
2. Presumably the bodies aren't found until after dawn, after OJ has already been in Chicago for hours. (I realize they can make estimates based on forensics, like rate of decay for the temperature, insect activity, etc. But it's still an estimate, and a probably 10+ hour window of time is inherently less convincing than the two-hour or so window they got because of the dumb luck of Nicole's dog quickly leading a neighbor to the bodies.)
3. There are no cap and glove found at the crime scene.
4. The bloody shoe prints are from a type of shoe OJ has never previously owned, and from a size that doesn't fit him; the whole Bruno Magli thing never happens.
5. OJ didn't cut his hand.
6. So presumably there's also none of OJ's blood found outside of his house. (Apparently there really was none found at the crime scene.)
7. There also is presumably none of his hair found at the crime scene.
8. The other bloody glove isn't found in his yard.
9. There are no bloody socks found in his bedroom.
10. There's probably no blood found on or in his Bronco (I realize they almost certainly could find literally microscopic amounts, especially inside, but the obvious blood on the outside was what caused them to look at the Bronco in the first place).
11. There's no testimony to the grand jury from the lady who claimed OJ flew threw a red light at an intersection and almost hit her. (This wasn't used in the trial because she sold the story beforehand to a tabloid, but it helped bind him over for trial and definitely contributes to this day to the public's opinion that he's guilty.)
12. There's no testimony to the grand jury from a knife salesman who said he sold OJ a knife similar to the murder weapon about three weeks before the murders.
13. There's no testimony from the limo driver that he saw a silhouette of a man matching OJ's size entering the house or that the Bronco wasn't there when he first arrived, because OJ was already back in the house long before the driver arrived.
14. There are no suspicious statements (based on the fact OJ appeared to have just entered the house) from OJ to the driver over the intercom to the front gate about oversleeping, just getting out of the shower, etc.
15. Kato doesn't hear the thumps outside, presumably of OJ returning home.
16. There's no story from the driver or Kato about OJ being overly protective of a particular bag as the limo is being loaded.
17. Once OJ is notified of the murders the next day and returns to LA, he refuses to say ANYTHING to the police, as is his right. Not ONE word.
So my questions are:
In this scenario, how likely is it that they're even able to charge OJ with the murders?
And how likely is the civil suit to be successful?
I've watched some documentaries on YouTube and read some stuff over the past couple of days to refresh my memory.
Whenever I study true crime stories like this, I can't help but think how I would've gone about trying not to get caught (although it should go without saying that I would never even consider really doing something so awful; this is just a thought exercise for fun).
It seems like the murders weren't very well planned. But what if they had been? Assuming OJ did it (I know -- big stretch), here's an imaginary scenario for the attorneys out there, with a couple of questions at the end.
OJ commits the murders about one hour earlier than he did, giving himself more time to clean everything up methodically.
He uses a knife he got somehow without being recognized when he obtained it, but that can't be traced to him. (They never found the murder weapon and this knife purchase was never revealed at trial, but it was at the grand jury inquisition and helped hold him over for trial. I discuss it more later.)
He kills Nicole's dog first (which he didn't do at all; its incessant barking led to a likely time for the murders from testimony from the neighbors, and it got loose and led a neighbor to the bodies within a couple of hours of the murders).
He's wearing cheap clothes he bought specifically for the murders.
He secured his gloves with duct tape or rubber bands or something so they don't come off. (Whether such a method would've likely worked is irrelevant; we're assuming here that it did and he left no gloves behind, even if he just got lucky.)
Underneath he's wearing restaurant "cutting gloves" (these are thin, lightweight gloves with metal mesh under the fabric, used in restaurants when cutting food. It's nearly impossible to cut through them with a knife, which is why they're worn), so he never cuts his hand.
He's also wearing a bald cap under his knit cap to cover his hair, and both are secured so they don't come off during the murders.
He also wears cheap tennis shoes he bought for the murders; they're two sizes too big with newspapers or something stuffed into the toes.
Maybe he also plans the murders for a night with heavy rain forecast, which helps rinse away evidence (as well as making additional noise and likely reducing the number of neighbors walking their dogs, etc. during that time).
After committing the murders, he drives at a leisurely pace to a spot in the country he has scoped out ahead of time. He turns off his lights and is careful not to pull off of the pavement, onto dirt where he could leave tire tracks.
He pulls off all of his clothes and leather gloves and throws them in a ditch. He throws the shoes in there too, careful to pull out the newspapers first.
Then he pulls his regular clothes and shoes out of a duffel bag in the back of the Bronco and puts them on. He's still wearing his cutting gloves and probably two or three pairs of rubber gloves underneath so as not to leave fingerprints on anything he's leaving behind, as well as the bald cap so as hopefully to not drop hairs on anything.
(Throwing the stuff in a commercial dumpster behind a store or something would make it less likely that any of it would ever be found, but the risk of being caught on a security camera isn't worth it.)
He drives back at a leisurely pace.
The duffel bag was a cheap one bought for this purpose; he throws it out the window a few miles down the road, but still in the country.
He pulls off all of the other gloves a few more miles down the road and throws them out the window.
He goes to a carwash and thoroughly washes the Bronco inside and out -- including spraying down the carpet and upholstery. He has a bunch of old towels in the back; he dries out the inside as well as he can, then throws the towels and the bald cap in the trash at the car wash.
He also throws out the newspapers from his shoes here or throws them out the window earlier, like he did with the gloves.
(It doesn't make much difference if he's caught on camera or recognized here; everyone washes their car, and I spray out the inside of mine like this too [although not as thoroughly as he would need to here] maybe two or three times a year just for regular cleaning, so people do that sometimes too. People also throw away worn-out towels, and this kind of job is a good final use for them.
(And yes, doing this on a rainy night looks strange, but it's not illegal. Besides, he's about to go on a trip, and he's also cleaning the inside; maybe he wants his car clean when he comes back, and this is his last chance to do it before he leaves.)
Now he drives back to his house at a leisurely pace. Once inside, he takes a very long, thorough shower, then throws everything he was wearing in the washing machine.
Here are the implications:
1. There's no barking dog to establish a likely time for the murders.
2. Presumably the bodies aren't found until after dawn, after OJ has already been in Chicago for hours. (I realize they can make estimates based on forensics, like rate of decay for the temperature, insect activity, etc. But it's still an estimate, and a probably 10+ hour window of time is inherently less convincing than the two-hour or so window they got because of the dumb luck of Nicole's dog quickly leading a neighbor to the bodies.)
3. There are no cap and glove found at the crime scene.
4. The bloody shoe prints are from a type of shoe OJ has never previously owned, and from a size that doesn't fit him; the whole Bruno Magli thing never happens.
5. OJ didn't cut his hand.
6. So presumably there's also none of OJ's blood found outside of his house. (Apparently there really was none found at the crime scene.)
7. There also is presumably none of his hair found at the crime scene.
8. The other bloody glove isn't found in his yard.
9. There are no bloody socks found in his bedroom.
10. There's probably no blood found on or in his Bronco (I realize they almost certainly could find literally microscopic amounts, especially inside, but the obvious blood on the outside was what caused them to look at the Bronco in the first place).
11. There's no testimony to the grand jury from the lady who claimed OJ flew threw a red light at an intersection and almost hit her. (This wasn't used in the trial because she sold the story beforehand to a tabloid, but it helped bind him over for trial and definitely contributes to this day to the public's opinion that he's guilty.)
12. There's no testimony to the grand jury from a knife salesman who said he sold OJ a knife similar to the murder weapon about three weeks before the murders.
13. There's no testimony from the limo driver that he saw a silhouette of a man matching OJ's size entering the house or that the Bronco wasn't there when he first arrived, because OJ was already back in the house long before the driver arrived.
14. There are no suspicious statements (based on the fact OJ appeared to have just entered the house) from OJ to the driver over the intercom to the front gate about oversleeping, just getting out of the shower, etc.
15. Kato doesn't hear the thumps outside, presumably of OJ returning home.
16. There's no story from the driver or Kato about OJ being overly protective of a particular bag as the limo is being loaded.
17. Once OJ is notified of the murders the next day and returns to LA, he refuses to say ANYTHING to the police, as is his right. Not ONE word.
So my questions are:
In this scenario, how likely is it that they're even able to charge OJ with the murders?
And how likely is the civil suit to be successful?
