Simpson trial: Witness sees guns in room 1203

I will always believe that Mr. Simpson committed the murders of Nicole & Ron and I watched every minute of that trial. However, this time around I have serious issues with the plea agreements of the other defendents. By doing that, the D.A.'s office has proven that all they really want is OJ and they are willing to let the others go with a simple slap on the hand. If I was on this jury i couldn't in good conscience convict him on all these charges considering Mr. Simpson wasn't even carrying a gun nor did he set this up. I'm stunned with this Alexander character i see him as a thug and a liar and wouldn't believe a word of this. Thanks for all your good coverage.

Cashmore, although I feel bad for him as I think he really got caught up in the whole thing, he I dont think either hurt or helped CJ or OJ. Unless he testifies to something more detrimental today, he is just not effective to me. You could see the anger and fear in him, and we all know what that can make you say and do. I think the judge is fair, so far, a little bit on the prosecution side maybe, but on the whole pretty fair. We will see today.

Of course OJ should get more time. He orchestrated it, wanted the gun, and it was his "stuff".

WIthout OJ, none of the 6 would have even been there.

Hi in my opinion i continue to hear all this talk about racism has anyone else noticed that most of the people testifying against oj are black for that matter most of the whites involved seem to keep saying that they dont want oj to get in trouble was this an armed robbery no doubt in my mind the proof is in the pudding and there is a whole lot of it its obvious with the proof not only did oj know about the guns he told them to bring them and then to top it off he is a smart man he told them to say there were no guns because he knew if they could some how convince people there were no guns they would walk he just couldnt keep the web of lies going they are to many people involved and the gun truth came out i watch the case as much as possible Jamie Floyd was my favorite but I now realize that no matter how much proof comes out she has a blind eye in no way will she admit that he could even possibly be guilty I believe and as a black man its hard to say but I believe what we have here is reverse racism I say this because most all blacks dont want oj to be prosecuted not because of his guilt or innocence but because of the color of his skin all these seperate charges oj has faced through the years have been violent rather he was guilty or not road rage and his other charges are violent and to me the police officers couldnt be just making up all these charges this situation is like a kid who starts stealing he might take a dollar then five dollars and until somebody makes him pay for his actions that kid will work his way to grand theft most people dont learn if they continue getting their way for their whole life thank you for your time

Four men pleaded guilty to various crimes; how can a jury not find O.J. and C.J. not guilty of at the very least the same crimes the other men have pleaded guilty on? They were all in the room; they are all guilty by all being there in the first place. The same as if they all went into a bank with the intent of robbing it or taking back "their" stuff.

Jami- it is either robbery with or without a gun.

O.J. and his band of thugs and pimps(his best friends) will be convicted of at least robbery- he stole a lot more than"his stuff"- Montana, Pete Rose, baseball bats and balls, cell phones, sunglasses, etc.

I believe that he told two of his thug buddies to bring guns. so, as of today I convict him of armed robbery and kidnapping.

Nevada has the right to create tough laws and prosecute law breakers. These are unique Nevada laws, this is not New York

what did Mr. Grosso mean when he said "I would like to reserve a motion"??

Thanks

Debbie

The big question that needs to be answered is, why would Simpson go to the authorities prior to the "robbery"? If he knew of gun use, wouldn't that just be putting the nail in his own coffin. He may think he is above the law but is he really that stupid. You can't rely on the sole testimony of criminals who are trying to get the blame off themselves.

Mr Grasso also said to Cashmore that O.J. stated he didn't see the guns but what Cashmore said was that O.J. was telling people there weren't any guns. When Riccio gets immunity, Cashmore, Ehrlich, and Alexander took a plea deal, this means that something criminal did occur. Thank goodness for cross examination by the prosecution. Let's do make this clear that even by taking the plea deals from the state, these guys have had their lives ruined. So Jamie you say that is because they commited a crime? Well Stewart and O.J. were in that room on the 13th too. THAT MEANS THEY ARE GUILTY!! Why didn't Stewart and O.J. take pleas? Because these two think they are above the law.

Also, I understand that the defense attorney's are just trying to discredit the witnesses by bringing up their criminal histories so wy can't the prosecution bring up the past criminal histories of the only two defendants remaining. I have heard the defense bring up the Goldmans more than once in the questioning. Grasso said it today. It seems that the defense is the one that keeps reminding the jury of the past.

After watching this trial for eight days, I've come to the conclusion it was all Ruccio. He's a con man and double talker. He set the whole thing up for money. If it wasnt for him none of this would have happen. He's laughing all the way to the bank off O.J. He said he got $200.000 already. Throw the whole thing out!!!

Kim:
All the witnessess so far have been PROSECUTION witnesses.
The prosecution does not do cross examination of their own
witnessess. The do a direct and redirect examination.
Perhaps, it was made clear to ALL the other defendents by the
DA that they weren't after them.. That they had bigger fish to
fry and were ONLY after OJ.
I'm sure OJ wasn't offered the sweetheart deal that the ONE OF THE
GUNMEN got of probation .

I am so tired of Jami (and other non-"objective" anchors/guests) using the catch phrase, "if it doesn't fit, you must acquit." Let's face it, in the 1995 trial, O.J. was ALLOWED to try on a leather glove that was drenched in liquified blood at one time, which then dried for over a year, and which O.J. tried to don WITH RUBBER GLOVES APPLIED FIRST!. Try it yourself; you will not be able to wear a shrunken leather glove with rubber gloves applied FIRST. The sad thing is that Judge Ito allowed this circus. Judge Glass is a true credit to her profession by maintaining decorum with could very easily get out of hand, given the players.

In this case, however, the "glove" fits. EVERYONE who testified so far knew there were guns in the room. O.J. stepped in **** and tried to undo other people's memories by trying to convince people there were no guns.

Give me a break!

This judge seems to be another Halverson except, she' s wide awake and looking for a TV deal. If she can help these crooks put OJ away, watch for her making the rounds on talk shows, shopping a book, and looking for the same thing the guys who set OJ up wanted, money,

Alexander's testimony can't even be trusted as to what he even
carried out of the Palace Station Hotel that night. The surveillance
video clearly shows he isn't carrying anything. Not even his
precious BIBLE . LOL

Kim, the defense didnt bring up the Goldman's, the prosecution witness, Cashmore, testified and used the Goldman name in his testimony while he was being crossexamined by the defense. So no, the defense didnt bring up the Goldman name. And I agree with not a playa, Riccio set the whole thing up, is cashing in on everyone, and got off scott free. What I dont understand is, before this whole day started, the day at the hotel room, Riccio called the police and the FBI and they wouldnt do anything about this. Why didnt they before this happened respond to that call and none of this would have happened? They knew this was going to happen and allowed it. I believe they have guilt in the whole situation.

Kathie,
Your'e right, the correct term is redirect of Mr. Cashmore. So with that said, why do you think these guys will only get probation? They could be sentenced anywhere from 1 to 5 years in prison on Felony charges. And by stating that they got a sweetheart deal then that means they are guilty right? And if they are guilty, since Stewart and O.J. were in the room (guns or no guns) then they are guilty also. Stewart and O.J. could get probation from the jury for their participation in this crime.

It's strange when the most cynical, caustic and condescending person in the courtroom is the judge. And you said Judge Ito was in over his head!

Just a thought..Remember when John Gotti was tried in NY? There were plenty of mafia thugs who turned on Gotti and the taxpayers paid for witness protection for these people. So let's make sure that we understand that the State of NY and the Federal Government put known killers on the street .

C'mon–Simpson's actions are those of a vigilante-someone who has put himself outside and above the law. It's consistent behavior with one who has gotten away with murder, now isn't it?

When it comes to murder (or double murder), I have more sympathy with jealous husbands than probably anyone. OJ Simpson is a great guy who did a bad thing (or two). And the torment he has seen, coming from the oppressed minority underclass, to be raised up to the highest heights and all the while living in two worlds, worlds that have always been at war with each other. I sympathize with the Browns and the Goldmans, as well, of course. But, seriously, anyone who thinks they weren't cheating... OJ is really one of the best of all of us and it's sad to see him have to go through all this. (He should have been convicted before, but not for this.)

Even me as a blind man can see that its not about now its about then.listen to all the lies.

One thing I heard Cashmore say was he heard OJ state I don't use guns. I beleive that there were guns there, I believe OJ asked for there to be guns there, I believe OJ asked for the guns to be displayed. After all 8 of 9 people in the room saw the gun/s.
BUT this may not be a bad defense because everybody knows that OJ is a knife man.

Why do prosecutors always over try the case against oj? They didn't need this witness!

If OJ is convicted of just one of these charges, i will have a renewed

faith in our legal system. Judge Glass is certainly a credit to her pro-
fession-she rules, and that is what a judge does!

To start with, I agree, I think the judge is doing a great job in trying to keep the focus on this trial and not on anything else. Gilbert, I think was a complete waste of time and humanity. I didnt like him sitting there looking and shaking his head, smirking sarcastically, and trying to get the address of Rockingham into the testimony. All of us know what he was trying to do, again bring up the other OJ trial. 3 times he said the Rockingham house. He was acquitted of that trial, keep to this one. So far, we have caught I think everyone of the prosecution witnesses in lies, either by their own admission or testimony from the preliminary hearing or tapes. How can you believe any or them? That is not to say that OJ and CJ are innocent but from the testimonies, we have to take what they said, and their lies, as evidence. The prosecution I think has a long way to go to prove to me that these two are the ringleaders and the only ones who should pay for the crime. I know the others are pleading to felonies, but that is a far throw from life in prison if OJ and CJ are found guilty. I would take probation anyday over life in prison too.

Sorry about the last post for time. Finally a prosecution witness we can maybe believe. Maybe cause he has nothing to gain as far as jail time.? And the funny thing is he is a hostile witness in jail already, and not trying to please the prosecution. Wow, plenty of excitement today. Mr Beardsley, although a criminal already, for some reason is more believable in his testimony than all the rest put together. Do I think he was there for any reason other than he was forced, subpeoned, to be? No. I think he has the least to gain, the most to lose, so far. There is no ulterior motive for him in this case. I believe he was another pawn in the game by Mr. Riccio.

I am a bit confused about the evidence that was taken from CJ's house by Sgt. Hunt.. Why was it taken? Why was it entered into evidence and then never really mentioned except to say that they were taken? I am talking about the shirt, notebook, and picture?

im glued to this trial ,what a bunch of misfits ive been watching all week.pay close attention to the objections mr rogers is driving me nutz..gotta love this judge shes fair.yeah lets cut a deal with the prosecucution,looks like most are scared but very arrogant.im leaning to an aquittal but thats my choice.and perhaps ill change my thoughts later i need facts,and doubt is certainly there.by the way back off and quit picking on jami shes the smart cookie

I see so many of you here are trying to fit a square peg into a triangle.

Well accorinding to John McCain ( GOP presidential joker), my friends, you would need a chisel to make that triangular hole bigger to fit the square.

My friends, we have to suspend justice for now until that triangular hole is big enough for the square.

I am bewildered how anyone can possibly believe that OJ is not guilty. Forget ALL the details and the character of ALL the witnesses. If, in the future, someone steals your stuff, you have one of two choices:-

Choice A – Call the police. The police investigate. You prove it's your stuff. The thieves can't explain how they got it. The thieves go to jail. You get back your stuff.

Choice B – You take the law into your own hands. You round up a bunch of thugs, confront and threaten the alleged thieves, take "your" stuff. You go to jail because it's robbery. It is immaterial if the stuff is actually yours.

The reason it's immaterial is that you can't take the law into your own hands. What if stuff got stolen from you and someone told you that Sam did it. So you find, confront and threaten Sam and take back your stuff. You believe that you have every right to do so. Then you find out that your spouse sold the stuff to Sam, who innocently purchased it. Sorry, Sam, my bad. I'll pay to have your underwear dry cleaned.

That's why we have laws, my friend. Most people prefer it to anarchy.

I wish O.J. would take the stand. If he had nothing to hid he should take the stand and tell his side. But I think he knew and saw the gun.He is full of it. O.J. is a good liyer he won the big one in Calf.

I believe O.J killed Nichole Simpson & Ron Goldman.
It was a miscarriage of Justice.
(O.J found Not Guilty)
But I don't think he should be punished severely this time for a Missed Opportunity of the past.
Thank You,
BrainySkeeta

Everyone testifying has a story, but which story dipicts what really transpired before, during, and after the incident in that hotel room. What was said to police during interrogation, and the pretrial hearing has to closely mirror what is now being stated during the trial. Also, what is stated on the stand in this trial has to have a ring of truth. For instance, Mr. McClinton stated he had his gun across his chest during the incident in the hotel room. How many people do you know who have pulled a gun out hold the gun across their chest? When you pull a gun out, you will point it...eventually.

O.J. knows he belongs in prison, so he just can't keep from being in the court systems, Cal., Florida and now LV . He was wife beater, double murderer and robber, just because his picture or name is on something doesn't mean its his. This stuff of his should be sold and money go to the Browns/Goldmans which, he was hiding in the first place. If he looked at McClinton's gun permit, did O.J. touch it and leave fingerprints on it!!? Come on Vegas, he shouldn't get away with this one.

I am curious as to why no one has ask McKlinton how often he carries his weapon. With having a permit I am more than sure he carries it quite often, he would not have gotten a permit if this were not so. Considering this why all the stress of OJ knowing whether there were guns or not. Mcklinton would have had his weapon, no matter so why attempt to nail OJ for something that probably would not have been in his control anyway. Point, it doesn't matter whether OJ knew
about guns or not Mcklinton would have had his. Why have they not ask this question. How often do u carry

how is this bell out going to affect my receiving of my 2009 income tax refund. i normaly get money back every year because i don't make much money i can not afford this bell out.