Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 45

Thread: Who killed Ron and Nicole?

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack White View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Drago View Post
    Donald Freed's Killing Time: The First Full Investigation into the Unsolved Murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman has made the best case to date.

    Freed, of course, wrote Executive Action and Death in Washington: The murder of Orlando Letelier , both of which belong on your "Must Read" lists.
    Sorry, Charles. THIS DOCUMENTARY makes the best case.
    Lots of new evidence. Three Jason diaries in which he "confesses".
    New witnesses...a forged alibi time card...new photos with evidence...
    and the actual murder weapon.

    Watch it.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...59946122795&hl

    Jack
    Some who promised to watch this video have not yet done so.

  2. #22

    Default

    I've watched it Jack. It is quite a convincing case he puts forward there. I was an OJ did it believer before but not now. It is a shame though he has had no interest from the legal system there. Like the Justice Dept with JFK. They've gone through the machinations of an investigation and trial and that's that. End of story for them.
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magda Hassan View Post
    I've watched it Jack. It is quite a convincing case he puts forward there. I was an OJ did it believer before but not now. It is a shame though he has had no interest from the legal system there. Like the Justice Dept with JFK. They've gone through the machinations of an investigation and trial and that's that. End of story for them.
    An important facet is that Jason has not brought any
    legal action against Bill Dear, which he certainly would
    if innocent.

    Thanks for you comment about the importance of Dear's
    documentary. I am disappointed that many are afraid to
    look at it lest it change their prior opinion.

    Jack

  4. #24
    Myra Bronstein Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack White View Post
    ...
    Thanks, Dawn, for watching this compelling video.
    You are interested in justice.

    Others here must not be interested in justice, since
    they refuse to watch Dear's presentation of new
    evidence about the real killer. They give lip service
    to justice, but are victims of their own preconceptions
    and biases. "OJ did it, let him rot in jail".

    I lose respect for any and all who REFUSE to look at
    evidence which dispels mystery and exposes truth.
    ...
    Jack
    Jack you're overreaching in concluding that anyone who opts not to watch that hour plus video is not interested in justice. Maybe people prefer to focus instead on big picture crimes that changed the course of the world, like the JFK, RFK, and MLK assassinations. We all pick our battle and there is no shortage.

  5. #25
    Myra Bronstein Guest

    Default

    Ok well I got so curious that I had to watch the video and it's completely convincing. Furthermore Dear absolutely does give a clear motive--that Nicole and family did not come eat at his restaurant as planned and Jason was hurt and disappointed. Give that he was off the meds he took to control his rage that is enough of a trigger.

    And I must correct myself that this is not a big picture crime. The big picture, while not a deep political one, is that the LAPD does not care about finding real killers and correcting past mistakes. And I'm sure the LAPD is not atypical among police forces.

    Thanks for sharing that video with us Jack. Dear seems utterly credible. I especially appreciate the fact that he said he tried to share the evidence he uncovered with the LAPD and they blew him off. It was only after that that he wrote his book to spread the word about his findings. In fact he's giving away his findings in the video. It's not a tease to promote the book. He lays it all out there. So profit from the book does not seem like his primary goal. Sharing his evidence and conclusions is the goal.

    OJ Simpson innocent. Whooda thunk it?

    And good for the jury who acquitted him. Never thought I'd say that.

  6. #26
    Myra Bronstein Guest

    Default

    Overwhelmingly positive reviews of Dear's book at Amazon:

    http://www.amazon.com/J-Guilty-But-N...owViewpoints=1

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myra Bronstein View Post
    Ok well I got so curious that I had to watch the video and it's completely convincing. Furthermore Dear absolutely does give a clear motive--that Nicole and family did not come eat at his restaurant as planned and Jason was hurt and disappointed. Give that he was off the meds he took to control his rage that is enough of a trigger.

    And I must correct myself that this is not a big picture crime. The big picture, while not a deep political one, is that the LAPD does not care about finding real killers and correcting past mistakes. And I'm sure the LAPD is not atypical among police forces.

    Thanks for sharing that video with us Jack. Dear seems utterly credible. I especially appreciate the fact that he said he tried to share the evidence he uncovered with the LAPD and they blew him off. It was only after that that he wrote his book to spread the word about his findings. In fact he's giving away his findings in the video. It's not a tease to promote the book. He lays it all out there. So profit from the book does not seem like his primary goal. Sharing his evidence and conclusions is the goal.

    OJ Simpson innocent. Whooda thunk it?

    And good for the jury who acquitted him. Never thought I'd say that.
    Thanks, Myra, for sharing your opinion.

    Injustice is everywhere, and all all corruption that allows it
    ought to be exposed. The system that allows this is at fault.
    It really makes little difference whether it is LHO or OJ who
    is falsely accused. That both were made patsies is what
    ultimately matters.

    OJ was guilty of something most parents might do...covering
    up to save his son. That is wrong, and is a crime, but is
    understandable.

    Jack

    PS...Dear spent 12 years investigating the case spending his
    own money to develop evidence. He clearly was interested in
    truth, not profits.
    Last edited by Jack White; 11-08-2010 at 03:17 PM.

  8. Default

    Jim Fetzer watched the OJ documentary last weekend.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...9946122795&hl#

    I hope he will post his opinion here.

    Thanks, Jim.

    Jack
    Last edited by Jack White; 12-07-2010 at 04:40 AM.

  9. #29
    Myra Bronstein Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack White View Post
    Jim Fetzer watched the OJ documentary last weekend.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...9946122795&hl#

    I hope he will post his opinion here.

    Thanks, Jim.

    Jack
    I hope so too. I never thought I'd conclude that OJ is innocent, but Dear made his case.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myra Bronstein View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack White View Post
    Jim Fetzer watched the OJ documentary last weekend.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...9946122795&hl#

    I hope he will post his opinion here.

    Thanks, Jim.

    Jack
    I hope so too. I never thought I'd conclude that OJ is innocent, but Dear made his case.
    Same for me. I was previously convinced that OJ got away with murder because of his money and lawyers. But Dear puts forth a very convincing case that it was his son. :top:
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •