Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FRONTLINE: The O.J. Verdict 10 years later just starting on PBS

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 08:06 PM
Original message
FRONTLINE: The O.J. Verdict 10 years later just starting on PBS
New season. Excellent program.

This was the beginning of the End of Real News (I think).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
KyndCulture Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. that is a very good point, the beginning of the end of real news!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's really sad to see Frontline wasting a program on OJ
Sounds more like an "Entertainment Tonight" special.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. You should really watch this program before you judge, this is about...
...the way the News Media screwed up this case and lost most of their credibility in the process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. If you still feel that way when it's over, I'll watch it
It starts here in 30 minutes.

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. It also was about how little the facts mattered to those interested...
...and how much this was a wake-up call for Liberal-white Americans that, even though we don't speak it or participate in racism, it was (and most likely still is) a problem in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Thanks. I'm taping it now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. The end of real news began when an obviosly impaired
Presidential candidate wandered down the Pacific Coast Highway during a debate... and WON<sic> the debate!

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you SPIN. Starring Peggy Noonan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Huh??? I don't get it, sorry. But let me ask you one thing about you post.
What does "<sic>" mean? I've always wondered about that, and have never been able to find the answer to that question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. It denotes an error in original written material.
It's used to point out a mistake, usually grammatical, without changing the offending word or phrase.

In my post I used it to denote that "Won" was a mistake that was caused? by the aforementioned "spin."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lexingtonian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. Good show.

I was in L.A. most of that time. It was like that in the city at the time, the show got the sensibility remarkably right. But it would have been brutal to fully portray the psychological intensity- both dramatic and horrifyingly dismal at once- it really had then and there.

It's easy to see how the criminal trial jury got past the DNA evidence there was, then as now. But it still seems to me that in rejecting the blood drop trail leading away from the crime scene itself- identified as Simpson's blood- as credible evidence is where they made a leap of faith, or logic, that imho the evidence made logically impossible. And that is painfully sad to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tomee450 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. They rejected the blood evidence
because they thought it was planted. The police failed to handle evidence in the usual manner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lexingtonian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. perhaps so.

But the 3 different blood drop trails (at the two houses and in the car), all OJ's, added up to so much more blood than the 1-3 cc's max that could have been "missing" from OJ's lab sample that Van Natter took to the crime lab, which was the only possible source.

It was sheer mendacity pretend that planting 3 cc's could account for it all. Some of those 20 blood spots that led away from the crime scene were over an inch in diameter. 3 cc's might be enough for two or three of them. My guess was you would have needed about 50 cc's total for all the blood drops. And if they had been planting it all, probably some more for the glove(s).

It would have been very very obvious to the lab and sample collectors if the drops had been made by blood diluted with water or admixed human or animal blood of any kind, or blood taken from the mess that was the murder scene.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. Last week was a similar program, on the Discovery channel
I think and the prosecution was criticized. One point, they wondered, why didn't they bring up the "slow chase?" O.J. had about $10K on him, carried a false beard - everything in that chase pointed to someone trying to flee. Yet, they chose not to bring it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaPera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
13. Watch "The Sixties", instead, on PBS, a bit more real. n/t
Edited on Wed Oct-05-05 12:10 AM by LaPera
:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-05-05 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I saw that show over the weekend, great stuff.
It was on after parts 1 and 2 of the Bob Dylan: No Direction Home and then it went into the 2 hour "Get up, Stand Up" which covered every protest movement of the 20th and 21st Century.

That was an exhausting (8 hour) night of Happiness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC