Last week, Investigation Discovery aired a documentary film called "My Brother the Serial Killer." It alleges that serial killer Glen Rogers, who is currently on death row in Florida, murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Glen's brother, Clay Rogers, claimed that OJ Simpson hired Glen to retrieve some earrings that OJ bought for Nicole, and that OJ told Glen that he "may have to kill" Nicole.

As expected, the documentary has been getting a lot of criticism. I haven't seen the film, and don't intend to. It's just another pathetic attempt to shift blame away from OJ Simpson.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/20/justice/o-j-simpson-film-claim/index.html

http://gawker.com/5963059/new-film-says-oj-didnt-do-it

There is a lot of evidence to suggest OJ did it. I would say the biggest reasonable doubt in my mind is the lack of a motive. They shared custody of their children. One thing I know is when kids go on visitations with the other parent kids talk about everything the other parent is doing. My ex-fiances son told his dad that his mom was seeing someone (that someone being me). To me the jealous ex-husband motive doesn't make sense to me at all. I'm not saying that OJ didn't do it or didn't have knowledge of it. Some of the evidence clearly suggests he was there at the crime scene. My only question is the motive.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest OJ did it. I would say the biggest reasonable doubt in my mind is the lack of a motive. They shared custody of their children. One thing I know is when kids go on visitations with the other parent kids talk about everything the other parent is doing. My ex-fiances son told his dad that his mom was seeing someone (that someone being me). To me the jealous ex-husband motive doesn't make sense to me at all. I'm not saying that OJ didn't do it or didn't have knowledge of it. Some of the evidence clearly suggests he was there at the crime scene. My only question is the motive.

What do you mean it doesn't make sense? It has been well-documented that OJ was possessive of Nicole, and it's extremely obvious that the divorce was not his idea at all. Regardless, motive or no motive, the evidence against OJ Simpson is overwhelming.

If you read Vincent Bugliosi's book Outrage: The Five Reasons Why OJ Simpson Got Away With Murder, you will have clear understanding of why the case was lost. One of the reasons was because a lot of crucial evidence was never introduced to the jury, including the tape recorded police interrogation in which OJ Simpson couldn't give a consistent answer about the deep cut on his left middle finger. There's also the so-called suicide note, which Bugliosi says "reeks with guilt", challenging anyone to show him an innocent person charged with murder who would write a note like that.

To me the jealous ex-husband motive doesn't make sense to me at all.

Wow, really? :eek:

I have a friend (also in the legal field) who apparently took a legal education course about the O.J. trial.

Apparently, since DNA was still in its "newer" phases, Judge Lance Ito did not understand the significance of it or the fact that DNA from BOTH Ron and Nicole was in the Bronco. According to my source, the judge did not allow the prosecution to talk about the presence of the DNA.

I have no idea if this is true. I'd like to hope that it's not, but I've said I believe the jury got it wrong on that one...