THE OJ FAN MAIL PAGE

This is the compilation of all the fan mail that I have gotten on OJ. If you have more stuff to add to this, go ahead. I'll even put it in here for your fame and fortune. Vote here to give your statement to the world on what you think of OJ Simpson. Say what you want: we'll make more!

THE RESULTS

As of October 3, 1995, 9:18am EST, here is the way it stands.
441 persons voting


Guilty...............

304 [68.9%]




Not Guilty........

107 [24.3%]




Undecided.........

30 [6.8%]



Up 2.7% from last week, Guilty is the verdict!



Sorry, but due to the extreme amounts of mail, we will NOT be putting your comments below, because it takes too much time. If you would like to write a cgi script that takes the form and sticks it into the html code for you, feel free. But until that time, we will only keep votes tabulated and up to date.

Peter



Date:   Tue, 12 Sep 1995 07:38:45 -0600
From: Dan Shultz <70004.3551@compuserve.com>
Subject: Guilty

any other human being on the face of the 
earth would have been convicted months  
ago, given the same evidence. 

Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 22:27:18 -0600 From: bob whalen <bwhalen@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Guilty I never liked the Buffalo Bills
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 22:05:52 -0600 From: bob culp <cbmsmail!rjcu@att.com> Subject: Guilty If he didn't do it he paid to have it done!!!! I think he was there for the initial face slashing of Nicole, but the murder wasn't to happen til he was chitown bound and the assassin did her in at about 11:20PM when Goldman showed up and tried to stop it!
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 19:55:32 -0600 From: Mark Bailey <markba@bconnex.net> Subject: Not Guilty The prosicution has not proven their case
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 14:32:11 -0600 From: A. D. T. <right> Subject: Guilty Even if furman is corrupt as hell... he obviously doesnt' have the intelligence to pull the con ver up that everyone is making this frame-up to be. OJ is a murderer and only his schizter lawyers have kept him out of jail this long. If it were you or me up there, we would have been on death row by now.
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 14:05:33 -0600 From: pam <pam.r.jenkins@conoco.dupont.com> Subject: Undecided I think the prosecution have not proved their case. All they have is a lot of circumstantial evidence . One day it looks like he may be guilty and the next it seems like he isn't. It's very confusing. I really don't care if he is or isn't. If he did it and only he and God knows, then justice should be served. However, if he's innocent, he may know who did it and is afraid to come forward, then he is a fool, but he should not have to pay for someone else's crime. His wife was a total drug head and sl ut -- as was he. She did not deserve to be killed.
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 19:44:43 -0600 From: Arturo Mocha <unknown> Subject: Not Guilty Missing blood that could have been planted. Socks & golve are in locations that make no sense. F urman had been to OJ's house 10 years prior and a few times after for Ms. Simpson's calls. As a cop w ho did not like interracial couples, having said that he would plant evidence, my experience watching cops beat up kids, commit premeditated murder, steal from property rooms, be in charge of theft rings, take drugs and money from people they did not then arrest, etc. I feel that there is more than enoug h room for doubt that by law I must find him not gilty. I really think he did it, with help and that the cops tried to help out the case by planting more evidence. According to a cop friend of mine that has taken training courses with LA cops this is their method of operation.
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 20:10:37 -0600 From: william <whiskey@telepath.com> Subject: Guilty the evidence, clearly proves his guilt
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 17:05:27 -0600 From: Jim <jimc@netaccess.on.ca> Subject: Not Guilty If he had done it, there would have been blood all over him and the bronco and it couldn't have been m issed by anyone.
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 15:08:20 -0600 From: Jeff <KnJ Sapper@aol.com> Subject: Guilty His blood is all over the place, the DNA results say it's his blood, and he has no alibi.
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 14:02:51 -0600 From: Walter Lide <pla@usa.net> Subject: Not Guilty He probably did it, but with what I know (that the jury doesn't) is that Furman is a jerk and might well have faked and manufactored evidence. I would be unable to convict him because of Mark Furman's attitude about blacks and his past behavior.
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 13:31:29 -0600 From: Marsha <pinetar@interpac.net> Subject: Undecided I agree there was just to much blood for him not get hurt and bloody, and I hate Mark Fuhrman, will someone e-mail me and tell me why they can't put him on the stand? I don't understand that part of the law. C. Darwin is a baby!
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 23:19:53 -0600 From: c. stewart <snogull@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Not Guilty fuhrman set him up
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 22:20:14 -0600 From: Rob Ward <rdward@indiana.edu> Subject: Not Guilty Just Becuase.
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 19:01:34 -0600 From: Susan Moore <buddy@maui.net> Subject: Guilty Because he did it
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 12:39:34 -0600 From: stephens.6@osu.edu <guilty of something> Subject: Not Guilty corrupt police practices will free OJ
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 05:21:18 -0600 From: Joe Kueser <jkueser@ncsc.dni.us> Subject: Undecided We know a lot more than the jury does, but if I were a jury, I'd have to let him off based on reasonab le doubt. The possibility exists that OJ was indeed set up. Maybe by Mark Vermon, maybe by someone else. Maybe by a group of officers. If Fermon has done it before, why couldn't he do it again. It seems unbelievable, but we h ad a case here (in Newport News, Virginia) not too long ago that an officer planted bombs! Live bombs! in a local m all, as well as the courthouse. He did this specifically to set someone up. So...it could happen! (Reasonable doubt!)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 00:12:37 -0600 From: Joe Bob <bmartin@azstarnet.com> Subject: Guilty because of a testosterone-induced rage
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 22:22:38 -0600 From: Donald LaMonda <Dlamon42@maine.maine.edu> Subject: Not Guilty More than one person killed them; one person could not have done that much damage without drawing some sort of attention to themselves. It also seems to me that the way they were killed meant that those individuals knew what they were doing--could be professionals. The story that the LAPD provided also seems to me to be the "quick-fix" type thing because the job done on Nicole and her friend was so well done. Framing O. J. was also a professional setup which could very well have involved the police. T here isn't enough information for me to think that O. J. was capable of committing such a violent act and have to fight his way through it to finish without coming out of it slightly battered. Mr. Goldst ein fought his butt off before he died; O. J. had a scratched finger?!?! Right!!!!!
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 21:19:34 -0600 From: Methos <jmcginty@winternet.com> Subject: Not Guilty Furmon did it.
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 15:33:59 -0600 From: Steven Rush <nlion@gate.net> Subject: Not Guilty I suppose if he wanted Nicole dead he could have said "Hey A.C. go kill Nicole". Something on the spur of the moment would have made him kill them and I think OJ has/had more self control then that. I also know he is not guilty because Jimmy Hoffa killed Nicole and that other guy AND is the father of Kato Kalin. -Steve
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 14:44:53 -0600 From: Clown Overlord <bworley@acpub.duke.edu> Subject: Not Guilty Elvis and Jimmy Hoffa were in a conspiracy to kill Nicole, their favorite prostitute.
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 12:01:45 -0600 From: JENNIFER <TORRES.EDU> Subject: Guilty HIS HAIR & BLOOD ARE EVERYWHERE! THE EVIDENCE IS OVERWHELMING. AND IF HE DIDN'T DO IT HE KNOWS WHO DI D; HE KNOWS SOMETHING!
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 09:29:12 -0600 From: Dwayne <dwayne@dc.ilsi.org> Subject: Guilty the evidence is overwhelming and those that seem to believe he is innocent are BLIND. By the way, OJ isn't that bright to cover his tracks that well.
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 02:44:02 -0600 From: Niel O'Brien <nielo@interpac.net> Subject: Undecided It seems to me the case hinges on Mr. Furman and he's obviously a wonderful guy. It's not out of the realm of possibility that the LAPD "knew" they had their man but didn't have the proof, so they helped the case along with a little evidence they had laying around. I've lived in LA and I've known cops there. I was on a jury once where they obviously had the wrong guy so we aquitted. When the jury asked why the case ever came to trial, the answer was "well, maybe he isn't guilty of this crime, but we know he's a burgler and we thought we might get him on this one." Great attitude.
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 1995 17:54:45 -0600 From: James Buff <nsbuf9889@alpha.nsula.edu> Subject: Not Guilty he pleaded Not Guilty, and only a stupid person would plead "Not Guilty" if they knew the prosecution had enough evidence to put him/her under.
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 1995 14:43:21 -0600 From: Dave Purl <dpurl@slonet.org> Subject: Not Guilty His son did it !!!!
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 1995 13:39:33 -0600 From: Eli D. Taylor <teli@okstate.edu> Subject: Guilty but, I think he should go free. After all, he lost his wife.
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 1995 11:34:13 -0600 From: Steven A. Jessen <jessen@redoak@otp.com> Subject: Guilty There is no doubt in my mind that the murder suspect is OJ, himself. There is too mu ch evidence to not convict him. He did a wrongful act and he should be punished for his crime.
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 1995 09:53:04 -0600 From: Louise <cerrone@scsu.ctstateu.edu> Subject: Guilty It is not about black or white it is about rich vs. poor. If he was poor his a** would have been in jail already. It makes me sick to see him sit there so smug when he knows he'll walk.
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 1995 20:18:42 -0600 From: mark younggren <marky001@spacestar.com> Subject: Guilty cinfpops in l.a aren't smart enough to plant
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 1995 20:02:36 -0600 From: Raymond Myers <rmyers@mail.coin.missouri.edu> Subject: Guilty O.J.'s blood was on the murder seen
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 1995 18:54:18 -0600 From: virginiawolff <berniekoelzer@uniserve.com> Subject: Guilty i think o,j, is not guilty. and i also believe that if the jury were all white that ito buritto would have let the tapes come in. he is the only judge who sucks around M.clark the pit bull.and is pro pros cution. he is predgious.i hate him...
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 1995 14:58:23 -0600 From: Kielan Marie Thomas <kmthomas@chaph.usc.edu> Subject: Not Guilty all you need is reasonable doubt and I have *more* than enough of those what with Fuhrman and the like lihood of his having tampered with evidence. Thanks
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 1995 09:05:51 -0600 From: Michael Jennings <jamaken@aol.com> Subject: Guilty It is just is. He must be if the trial is this long!
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 1995 07:18:53 -0600 From: Michael Acklin <eacklin@animal.blarg.net> Subject: Undecided Impossible to determine validity of evidence due to recent LAPD developments
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 1995 04:31:42 -0600 From: ned fagan <nedfagan@rival.com> Subject: Not Guilty No motive, no time, history of good relations, bad history on the part of police, obvious criminality of detectives.
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 1995 17:02:14 -0600 From: William R. Collins <Wcollins1@aol.com> Subject: Guilty Quite clearly the evidence points to him as the guilty party. I am not following the "Beyond reasona lble doubt" premise, because I'm not a jury member. I think this case helps to demonstrate that our c urrent legal system is not working. Also, we are dealing with real life, not a police drama, or a mov ie. Face it. He is guilty!!!!!!
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 1995 07:23:39 -0600 From: Denise <DeniseMB27.aol> Subject: Guilty Juice or no Juice he is guilty as sin even his defense team thinks he's guilty inside source.
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 1995 17:19:02 -0600 From: eric schmidbauer <?> Subject: Guilty For some reason OJ is the only person DNA analysis dosn't apply to!!!No other indication of any other person who could have committed the crime exists
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 1995 15:24:25 -0600 From: dave raygor <raygord@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Not Guilty he was not only framed, the L.A.P.D. is corrupt and the L.A.D.A.'s office will do anything, say anything to win a case. They don't care to hear about anything that points away from their agenda. By the way, Ito is in bed with the D.A.!
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 1995 13:35:31 -0600 From: JT Fondren <JTFazz@aol.com> Subject: Guilty No other reasonable explanation and a whole lot of scientific evidence mounting against him. Hard to d ispute some of the numbers thrown up by Clark, et al.
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 22:05:58 -0600 From: lee white <whitel@3rddoor.com> Subject: Guilty enough evidence
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 15:24:30 -0600 From: Jill Mariee <jillgery@ici.net> Subject: Not Guilty Because Furhman is a racist, Marcia Clark is a snob and neither one of them wants O.J. to walk. All of their evidence is purely circumstantial. And,because I have a lot of faith in O.J. He didn't have enough time. I think it was a psychopath named Kaboloz who killed Nicole and Goldman.
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 12:27:04 -0600 From: K.S.BREWER <ksbrewer@whale.st.usm.edu> Subject: Guilty 95% of the evidence points towards him. Its too co-incedental that he was rushing to leave town on that very night at that very time. PLUS, there is proof of him beating and harrassing Nicole in the past. On tape and by testimonies of friends.
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 19:45:22 -0600 From: Nitin Walia <dwalia@glen-net.ca> Subject: Not Guilty Because of the evidence! HA! HA! HA:! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! IN YOUR FACE PROSECUTION! A! HA! HA! HA! HA! Judge ITO... EAT MY BURRITO!
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 15:37:47 -0600 From: Tom Whitfield <twhitfield@fullerton.edu> Subject: Guilty who else could have done it!!!
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 10:05:40 -0600 From: Karst <Karstk@dds.nl> Subject: Guilty The DNA-results proved his guilt!!!!
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 01:58:45 -0600 From: StillBogey <StillBogey@aol.com> Subject: Guilty Blood, DNA, fibers, evidence of some planning (dome light removed from interior of Bronco). Defense s trats with nothing but bad witnesses. Now they are triing Fuhrman. Just the way these people were killed. Something that violent is motivated by real passion.
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 21:39:23 -0600 From: Roberta Symbouras <Roberta.Symbouras@Morebbs.com> Subject: Guilty Come on, the guy is guilty as sin...and everyone knows it!!!!!
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 21:10:48 -0600 From: Paul <PK_MULA_INT@msn.com> Subject: Guilty could there possibly be any doubt
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 19:01:16 -0600 From: Steve Polich <chairman@moa.com> Subject: Guilty OJ, formerly master of his universe, thought he could get away with the murders. Unfortunately, he was unaware of how much blood is contained in the human body...Kato might have helped him...
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 13:51:10 -0600 From: Ken Proch <PROCHK2@EPO.GOV.ON.CA> Subject: Undecided IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT DAY IT IS AND WHO IS TALKING - SOMETIMES HE LOOKS GUILTY AS SIN AT OTHERS INNOC ENT AS A NEW BORN BABY
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 13:34:40 -0600 From: Donte Harris <www.siu.edu> Subject: Not Guilty The prosecution has not proven that OJ committed the murders. No weapon! No witness! No motive! Comtaminated evidence! Dishonest Police Officers!
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 13:29:13 -0600 From: bob young <bob17@netvoyage.net> Subject: Guilty its obvious
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 10:58:02 -0600 From: K. A. Stancliff <stancliff.k.a%wec@dialcom.tymnet.com> Subject: Guilty Who had a better motive? What about DNA?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 07:31:26 -0600 From: Timthetoolmantaylor <123 easy street anywhere USA 12345> Subject: Guilty Guilty as charged. Fry the sucka.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 16:20:23 -0600 From: Tahnda Bailey <tahnda@water.ca.gov> Subject: Not Guilty In the words of Dr. Lee, the evidence just doesnt add up. Blood on socks that seeped thru to other side, not possible if they were on a body. Blood on gate weeks later, not reasonable given that they knew OJ was going to put on a major defense. Ron Goldman saw his killer and didn't put up much of a fight, not reasonable, since he was fighting fo r his life. OJs blood everywhere, from that tiny cut? You'd expect the whole finger to be missing. Bruno Magli shoes, He wore his best shoes to kill people, why not a cheap pair of nikes? Is Furhman capable of planting evidence? You betcha!
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:49:14 -0600 From: A.Smoke <ASO16547@UNCVX1.OIT.UNC.EDU> Subject: Not Guilty There is too much reasonable doubt. I am convinced that the LAPD is capable of anything, including the prosecution. They seem to believe that it's okay to destroy someone's life as long as they look good in the process. We've turned into a country of I, I, I, instead of We the People.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:32:01 -0600 From: Scott Burgy <sburgy@csubak.edu> Subject: Not Guilty This crime required more than just one individual to pull off. I feel that O.J. knows who did it and may have had a hand in the actual murders, but he alone did not kill Nicole...
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 13:29:52 -0600 From: kim lundin <klundin@rockford.gannett.com> Subject: Guilty he killed them
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 08:33:58 -0600 From: Richard <Richard.stettner@atlantaga.attgis.com> Subject: Not Guilty The law says "Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". I have seen enough to have reasonable doubt!
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 21:25:02 -0600 From: WILLIAM HYMES <ABORALIS@IX.NETCOM.COM> Subject: Guilty tO MANY LITTLE THINGS POINT TO HIM
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 16:00:08 -0600 From: kquinn <kquinn@www.bozell.com> Subject: Not Guilty couldnt have done it in that short time span.
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 07:23:53 -0600 From: Jack Van Tol <jvantol@dallas.net> Subject: Guilty He DID it! Plain and simple...like his trial...
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 04:00:09 -0600 From: Francisco Vega <FRVega@kbbsnet.com> Subject: Not Guilty I don't think any body is able to kill two persons, leave a pool of blood all over and come out with out a scratch. I think some other people did it, just happen that O.J. is the prime suspect and he is Black, If he wasn't black thinks were handle diferent. I think at the end every body who thinks he was guilty will think about it and say how they were about to put a man in jail for life for something he did not do.
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995 17:40:30 -0600 From: O.J. Simpson <tjlin@primenet.com> Subject: Not Guilty He just didn't do it.
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995 04:10:41 -0600 From: Adrian Madlener <madlener@ucla.edu> Subject: Guilty Because I heard Mr. Higgins on ABC News with peter jennings say that OJ looked sc ared.
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 16:43:32 -0600 From: Palmer <baer@tcd.net> Subject: Guilty No one could look so damn aloof at the trial to determine the guilt of his ex-wif e's murderer in any situation
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 16:04:00 -0600 From: Neil Uspal <ngu101@psu.edu> Subject: Not Guilty AC, Jimmy "The Greek", Marcus Allen, & the LAPD are all in on the conspiracy to nail OJ!
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 07:53:29 -0600 From: Stephen Wiseman <wiseman@net.access.on.ca> Subject: Not Guilty Still reasonable doubt in my mind. Prosecution's case is circumstantial; too man y loose ends; I'm not sure that evidence wasn't tamperred with by LA cops.
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 05:44:43 -0600 From: Tom Crauwels <crau@innet.be> Subject: Guilty Evidence
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 18:14:06 -0600 From: Dave Robertson <dave.robertson@servtech.tor250.org> Subject: Guilty Boy you shure have the options lop sided guilty or inocent... how about weird spin off therirys See ya, Dave dave.robertson@servtech.tor250.org or dave.robertson@ablelink.org
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 15:41:28 -0600 From: Brent Thomson <bthomson@imap2.asu.edu> Subject: Guilty Thinking...
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 10:36:17 -0600 From: Jim Morrison <Jars@mail.utexas.edu> Subject: Not Guilty He's the Juice..
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 00:13:44 -0600 From: J. O'Connell <joconnell@ids2.idsonline.com> Subject: Undecided Wait until all evidence is in--the fair way!
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:14:39 -0600 From: james devine <jdevine@supernet.ab.ca> Subject: Guilty he did it
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:14:12 -0600 From: Beth Collison <ecolliso@uhmtravel.tim.hawaii.edu> Subject: Guilty but will get off.
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 18:47:37 -0600 From: Leigh Koven <compulov@aol.com> Subject: Guilty He ran.
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 18:21:57 -0600 From: Eric Lloyd <hoser@uclink4.berkeley.edu> Subject: Guilty the genetic evidence against him is overwhelming and he is an acknowledged wife b eater.
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 11:39:12 -0600 From: Susan Midtdal <smidtdal@direct.ca> Subject: Guilty Who else did it?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 11:23:59 -0600 From: Jennifer <jbh@med.unc.edu> Subject: Guilty He killed Nicole in a jealous rage. He let his emotions take over before he thoug ht all the way through what was happening. OJ is guilty of killing in a moment of jealously.
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 20:53:23 -0600 From: JA Sellers <ASellers@hsc.usc.edu> Subject: Guilty The cut on his left hand, his lack of an alibi, the carpet fibers, the DNA, EVERYTHING
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 20:12:59 -0600 From: Mary <mspiersw@extro.ucc.so.OZ.AU> Subject: Guilty GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY as all hell
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 12:19:50 -0600 From: courtney <courtney.e.stanton@fmr.com> Subject: Not Guilty I'm from LA and I know just how racist the cops are. Many of my friends have been set up by them. Both Nicole and O.J. were heavy drug users as well (probably goldman too), so I wouldn't be surprised if it was a drug deal gone bad or something similar.
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 11:23:05 -0600 From: Ed Massey <alex1@expert.cc.purdue.edu> Subject: Not Guilty I feel he might know something about who did it or possibly contracted it to be done. Whoever did this would undoubtedly be covered in blood and OJ did not have the kind of time it would take to clean himself up and still catch his flight.
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 07:44:52 -0600 From: Kelly Carnes <khcarnes@gsvms2.cc.gasou.edu> Subject: Not Guilty The prosecution hasn't presented a "beyond a reasonable doubt" case. It's too coincidental that the glove was "found" in the dark in a rarely travelled alley -- It's too coincidental that blood drops lead directly to O.J.'s front door -- It's too coincidental that the blood in and on the Bronco "grew" as time passed -- It's too coincidental that blood appeared after weeks on the socks -- and finally, it's too coincidental that undegraded blood appeared two weeks after the murder on the back gate. Sounds to me like the case was helped along to get a conviction...
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 00:27:57 -0600 From: Franklin Villamor <artfrank@aol.com> Subject: Guilty Just because
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 19:41:48 -0600 From: Tracy Blevins <gsbs1183@utsph.sph.uth.tmc.edu> Subject: Guilty Seriously. The defense claims that the incompetent investigators and police are the same ones who could frame OJ and cover it up? Impossible and illogical.
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 17:32:39 -0600 From: scott <neurotic@winternet.com> Subject: Guilty He scares me.
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 16:28:38 -0600 From: Susan Blanchard <HKSue@nwrain.net> Subject: Guilty It's a bit obvious
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 10:05:41 -0600 From: spencer burke <burke6@wit.edu> Subject: Guilty The fact that there is his boold at the crime scene and when will the defense stop flip-flopping on scientific evidence. Science is what built this country, knowledge is power!! O.J. should get the chair. If fuhrman is a racist's remove him from the force, don't blame him for O.J.'s actions.
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 00:52:35 -0600 From: Gary Blunk <gary.blunk@sandiegoca.attgis.com> Subject: Guilty You have to ask?
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 21:06:22 -0600 From: Scott <sskks@primenet.com> Subject: Guilty He did it!!!!!!!!
Return-Path: <jonas.bergman@moderat.se> Reply-To: jonas.bergman@moderat.se To: beckman@purplecow.com Subject: Guilty Date: 21 Aug 1995 14:30:11 GMT Organization: Moderata Samlingspartiet Of course he is guilty. The evidence is enormously strong against O.J. But I guess thatęs no guarantee, for the jury to find O.J. guilty, since the US juridicial system depends on the emotional feelings the jury has for the victims and the defendant. If the jury is black, the defendant is black and the victims are white, then the defendant is not guilty (and the other way around). Strange!! Jonas Bergman Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 13:12:51 -0600 From: Libby <LibbbyBell@aol.com> Subject: Guilty It's obvious ! The man was my hero before this.... Just goes to show what happen s when you think you are a God because people treat you like a God.
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 11:39:55 -0600 From: Brian Estelle <estellePA@aol.com> Subject: Guilty overwhelming physical evidence (i.e. DNA, blood drops, etc.)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 10:51:39 -0600 From: Dan McCollum <mccollum@wharton.upenn.edu> Subject: Guilty The DNA, Blood spots, and his history of violence.
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 00:41:22 -0600 From: duane mohney <dmohney@bright.net> Subject: Guilty but not of murder, conspiracy to commit murder is more likely
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 18:01:23 -0600 From: Ellen Blackmun <EBlackmun@microsoft.com> Subject: Not Guilty It's obvious..
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 14:50:10 -0600 From: Tuomas Viskari <Tuomas@Viskari.hitech.fi> Subject: Not Guilty I think he is not guilty!!!!
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 12:57:42 -0600 From: Dave Craig <dc@passport.ca> Subject: Not Guilty The prosecution seems too biased. They're not making any attempt to seek the truth. The scary thing is , if Marcia Clark knows of any police misconduct she would not reveal it. She seems to be taking this trial so personally that it's scary. If I got the feeling that the prosecution was simply doing their job in an impartial manner and they were simply doing their job and presenting truthfull evidence for the jury to decide, I might be inclined to vote guilty. If I was the prosecution and the remainder of someone's life was in my hands and there was some evidence that a police officer might have planted ev idence, I would be the first one to launch an investigation into those allegations. I wouldn't get ups et and flustered at the mere thought that this defendant might not have done it. I would seek the trut h and once I am satisfied that this is truthfull evidence then and only then would I try to put him aw ay.
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 04:42:47 -0600 From: Tom Gordon <squaw@ibm.net> Subject: Guilty It's so obvious!
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 01:05:30 -0600 From: Brigette Freeman <fsbaf@aurora.alaska.edu> Subject: Guilty OJ beat his wife, he was already close to killing her.
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 22:38:16 -0600 From: Noah Lamy <noahlamy@dorsai.org> Subject: Guilty Even without Furman or the glove the prosecution has a very good case while the defense floats one uns upportable theory after another along with sideshow items like dragging the judge's wife into it. If there was a scintilla of evidence for an actual frameup/coverup or some other possible killer or if OJ had a decent alibi you know we would have heard about it by now, but we haven't.
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 21:45:12 -0600 From: Bill Halvorsen <billh@cais.com> Subject: Guilty I thought there WAS a rush to judgement... and then watching the trial when I can, it became obvious that the dream team is blowing bulldust into the wind of reason at every opportunity; the prosecution's case is, sadly, circumstantial; but the defense's case has turned out to be insulting to everyone and made of whole cloth.
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 13:04:06 -0600 From: Thomas Grinnell <sertec1@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Guilty blood in car, driveway, home; different stories for alibi (none acceptable); limo driver's testimony seeing someone enter house and THEN OJ answers call; history of beating wife and other violence; too small a space for more than 1 attacker; DNA; shoe prints; gloves seem to be his.
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 12:34:52 -0600 From: f.h. cromer <fcromer@ria-emh2.army.mil> Subject: Guilty o.j.'s body language and facial contortions give him away...
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 11:17:30 -0600 From: steve adler <s.adler@bull.com> Subject: Guilty Evidence is overwhelming despite attempts to difuse the issues with Mark Fuhrman.
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 11:13:53 -0600 From: Adam <akira@nin.com> Subject: Guilty he is to obvious, just sits there .. he just doesn't care about it, he just stares into the void.
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 22:27:40 -0600 From: Alastair Bor <bor@world.std.com> Subject: Not Guilty Innocent until proven guilty
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 16:06:58 -0600 From: Leslie & Laura Miles <don't know> Subject: Not Guilty Glove didn't fit, thumps on Guest House were to get attention, glove found on Simpson grounds had no bloody trail to it, too much blood from crime scene and they only found bloody socks?!
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 16:06:49 -0600 From: Kevin <kbrint@winternet.com> Subject: Guilty the voices, man.
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 15:55:59 -0600 From: Bill Cairns <cairnsd@isueh1.agw.bt.co.uk> Subject: Undecided I'm a mental!
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 09:05:00 -0600 From: Georges Hudon <r22630@er.uqam.ca> Subject: Guilty The theory that detective Furman planted the bloody glove at OJ's house is not very plausible. Before placing the glove, Furman must have known that OJ did not have an alibi. Also, how could he have known that Kato heard sounds coming from the spot where Furman would have placed the glove? If Furman did plant the glove, he should open his own psychic line, he would make a fortune.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 23:41:56 -0600 From: m austin <yukon@sky.net> Subject: Guilty evidence
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 23:00:26 -0600 From: Ross Woody <woooody@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Not Guilty Fuherman is a BIG LIAR!!!
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 22:45:26 -0600 From: nancy brosnan <awcohen@pacbell.com> Subject: Guilty Theres blood everywhere !
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 22:44:46 -0600 From: Jim Berry <jberry@unix.asb.com> Subject: Guilty Overwelming evidence! Motive, opportunity.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 21:43:17 -0600 From: jhornsby@cadvision.com <GUILTY.GUILTY.GUILTY> Subject: Guilty At the risk of sounding warped I hope OJ Simpson is suffering the hell he put his wife through during their marriage. I saw the Goldman family on TV today and my heart goes out to them. Mr Goldman coine d the phrase that his son, Ron and Nicole Brown were butchered and how right he is. Ron's sister had some words to say and I can sympathize with her disgust of the High-priced Defence Team - Cochrane, Sh apiro and Douglas have all made statements outside the Courthouse. Bailey has been on CNN. Don't tel l me they're not getting paid for and enjoying the publicity. That Cochrane is a pompous little nobod y who struts around like he's somebody. The pictures of Nicole being battered told the story and comp ounded with all the other evidence that OJ Simpson should be lead to the gallows and executed in the p ublic square. I don't care how popular he was he had no right to kill those two beautiful people.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 17:51:21 -0600 From: Betsy Wolfe <FFRT53a@Prodigy.com> Subject: Guilty From the trial evidence I have heard so far, being that everyday this here hillbilly is glued to CNN. ...I have no life ya know...:)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 14:14:27 -0600 From: Ibrahim Sei <sei@eng.umd.edu> Subject: Not Guilty He can't kill TWOOOOOOO people,get rid of everything else except the planted gloves.
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 19:07:17 -0600 From: scott <wsbroad@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Guilty all evidence points to oj, defense provides no real defense as to what oj was doing at the time or proof of non-involvement.
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 18:49:08 -0600 From: elizabeth arnesen <elizabeth_arnesen@blyth.com> Subject: Guilty why else would he try to run, write suicide letters etc. And the DNA is his! And he had motive, being a jealous (x)husband. Furthermore he had a violent history against Nicole. He was probably on drugs, and it only took one quick stab to kill her, then go after Ron.
Return-Path: <KASILL@aol.com> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 23:51:58 -0400 Subject: oj GUILTY
Return-Path: <magicman@teleport.com> Date: Sat, 5 Aug 1995 02:05:58 -0700 Subject: o.j. Judge Ito and the prosecurtion are working feverishly to convict o.j. its not fair a trial can be so one sided. o.j. is innocent and deserves to get out of the hell hole he has lived in for over a year. (at least before something horrible happens to his sweet lilttle mom)
Return-Path: <meals@dickinson.edu> Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 14:40:39 -0400 Subject: oj simpson I support whatever decision the jury makes. It is their job to decide this case and I appreciate their sacrifice to achieve their purpose.
Return-Path: <sallyh@primenet.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 95 00:19:36 -0700 Subject: OJ is guilty!!! He is guilty and this taxpayer trial is a real travesty of justice for all of America. If it were you or me, we'd have been tried AND hung by now - but because he is a celebrity, we have to put up with it. Personally, I think it was a crime of passion and I feel very badly for him but murder is murder. Your status should not determine your sentence. This should send out a message to all of the "lovers" in America that it takes years to build a relationship and a few minutes can end it. This "crime of passion" is more relevant than most people think and really needs to be looked at. People call it domestic violence, jealously, etc.....all the same thing. Anyway - he did the crime, he should pay the price. Hopefully some will learn from it.
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 95 10:59:53 -2400 From: Sue D'Angelo <sudangelo@vaxsar.vassar.edu> Subject: http://www.cs.hope.edu/~beckman/oj/ojmail.html OJ is guity. But I feel with his expert lawyers he will get off, or a hung jury. Mayeb he will be found guilty. I think he did it. He was extremely jealous of his ex-wife. He did follow her a lot. I wish she said on one of those 911 calls, that someday this man is going to kill me. The blood was found all over the place, on the glove, on his socks, on his bronco, on his driveway, in his house. He did do it and I feel sorry for his children, they don't have there mother anymore. Why did she move 15 minutes away from him, she should of moved far far away. Sue
Return-Path: <dwlcml@wolfe.net> Date: Sat, 15 Jul 95 15:15:12 -0700 I think he is guilty,that's OJ, because if you take the date nicole died it adds up to 32 which is Oj's number.
Return-Path: <magicman@teleport.com> Date: Sat, 8 Jul 1995 02:34:50 -0700 Subject: o.j.simpson o.j. simpson is not guilty so if the shoes fit wear them and if they fit like a glove then take a stab at it!!!!!!!!
Return-Path: <marlene@ece.cmu.edu> Date: Fri, 07 Jul 95 15:51:34 0000 Organization: Carnegie Mellon University Subject: Best think twice The fact of the matter is that we may nevr know just whether or not OJ did commit this hanous crime, just as, at least for myself, may never know truely whether or not Mike Tyson is a rapist (convicted or not). We all placed our virdict upon this case last summer and I don't think the jurors are any different. I would personally have a very hard time placing OJ in jail for the remainder of his life if I were a juror. I felt that the Los Angeles DA was quick in arresting OJ and in turn has set it self up for another PR desaster like the Manendez trial. The way I see it, there are those of us who do not believe he did it because their is not enough evidence to prove he did, and those who believe OJ is guilty because they feel the evidence is quite encriminating. But there are too many people out there who feel OJ is or is not guilty because of emotion. Who wants to put an American hero in jail, but then again who wants to see another rich or even a rich black man aquitted. I can't look at this from either of those two final perspectives. Unfortunately, this case has become not one of right or wrong, guilty or not guilty; it has rather become a trial of manipulation, backstabbing, racism, and money. Granted this case would have been settled a long time ago where we talking about Orenthal James Simpson rather than "The Juice", Heisman Trophy winner, the first man to rush for 2,000 yards in a single season, and American Star. Hopefully with the Defense about to prove its case these things will change and the correct verdict will be issued, but hope can run thin. ^?Wrong and Right is not Black and White. The best Offense is a strong Defense. OJ acquitted Dave
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 13:49:39 -0600 From: A Person <rdowers@xroads.com> Subject: I think OJ is... so *unbelievably* guilty. The thing that really gets to me is that if this was Joe Schmoe off the street, and he killed his wife and another man, this case would be wrapped up before you could say Justice. Just goes to show how the rich can get away with (literally) murder. Sad, really.
Return-Path: <oms93sjd@ccs.ehche.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 19:27:30 -0700 Organization: Edge Hill College of Higher Education Subject: OJ IS INNOCENT??? Hello, I'm Sarah, I think OJ has been set up because it would have been difficult to tackle 2 peop le. Also, the last drop of blood to be found had huge amounts of DNA.... The glove doesn't fi t....... The detective in chargge may have a grudge against succesful black people. He was i nvolved with the beating of that man, and then he failed in jailing Micheal Jackson.... Who has ever heard of a top dectective taking a blood sample home and keeeping it in his refidgerator over night...????? Very strange I must say. Sarah PS. Your background is good, but it makes it difficult to read your text.

WACKO's eyes aren't hurting: Sorry dear, but I haven't found anything more appropriate.


From: Barbara Fulp <bfulp@pinn.net> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 95 09:41:42 -700 Subject: O J's Gloves Any woman who owned a pair of leather gloves in the 40's or earlier had to wash them at home. We all knew they shrank unless they were put on a glove stretcher while drying. No question in my mind as to why the gloves didn't fit. Barbara Fulp
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 15:15:10 -0600 From: Denise Warren <Washington, D.C.> Subject: I think OJ is...not GUILTY!! I think it is very unfair of the media and the world to have judged him and convicted him in their own mind without even hearing his side. How can you honestly say that this man is guilty and you have only heard one side. Before I decide on his guilt or innocence I want to hear everything and only then will I be able to render a clear and honest verdict. I would like to the this happen in the United States where we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, not guilty and proven innocent! How would you feel if it were your son on trial for a murder he did not commit and the world had judged him without hearing his side? Would you be so eager to say Guilty then as you are now?
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 14:19:10 EST Subject: Re: Simpson case Return-Receipt-To: (DEVGREGO@amber.indstate.edu) My name is Trey Gregory. I think O.J. Simpson is guity! Because there is so much evidence that he did it. But he didn't do it alone there was no way he could have done it by himself.
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 12:43:36 -0600 From: Raf <Raphaelf@harper.stanford.edu> Subject: I think OJ is... innocent. I believe the conspiracy theory. Marsha Clark loves celebrity cases because she gets to be on the news and promote her career. If she is searching for the truth, as she says she is, the real truth is that there isn't enough evidence to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty. It is about time for the prosecution to stop wasting taxpayer money on this circus trial. As for the prosecution's so called "domestic violence" evidence - it is ridiculous to suggest that a wealthy, career-oriented man, a self-made millionaire, would kill his wife and risk his millions, even if he did beat her. And if Nicole Simpson really thought OJ would kill her, would she live 15 minutes away from him? Besides the questionable blood evidence, there is absolutely nothing concrete that can tie Mr. Simpson with the crime. That is, unless you ask the Goldman family, who have filed a wrongful death suit, which is a civil suit in which they demand an undisclosed sum of money (that's right, money) be payed to them because their son died. What about the Brown family, who previously so piously stated their concern for the children of Simpson and Brown, now trying to desparately cash in so that no money whatsoever is left for these children, who have had their family destroyed. I suppose Faye Resnick is a reliable source of information, or Kato Katlin, who have both published books and need to add sensationalist details that a canniballizing public, searching for gory details wants to hear. Is this America, where a man accused is guilty because we let some uneducated, illiterate anchorpeople (who need the ratings) tell us he is so? It is disturbing that becuase of OJ's celebrity status and the public's search for scandal we must brand him guilty, and encourage unfair, damaging remarks and rumors to flow freely, to cripple his hard-earned career and to destroy his reputation before a jury, who is the real authority in judging his guilt or innocence can make a decision.

WACKO Note: Ever realize the people who think he's innocent explain themselves in GREAT detail? And those who think he's guilty just say so? Hmmmmmm... Kinda makes you wonder.


Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 00:56:34 -0600 From: Leslie <sassy@magi.com> Subject: I think OJ is... Absolutely 100% guilty!
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 02:48:39 -0600 From: cyreno <cyreno@primenet.com> Subject: I think OJ is... Innocent, Reasons: He killed 2 people without one sound, gloves don't fit him , dna evidevce is so that anybody black could have done it. gimmie a break how can you think otherwise???
Return-Path: <RobertJ260@aol.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1995 17:42:23 -0400 Subject: GUILTY as HELL Is there really any doubt? Blows me away when people can ignore the mountain of evidence, the blood, the motive, the history of the marriage, the opportunity,, the DNA, and the fact that, nobody else was ever a suspect. Nobody but OJ could have done this. And this is from someone who used to idolize the guy. The 80% of black Americans who say OJ is innocent are all racist idiots with their heads in the ground. Guilty as hell. So obvious you would have had to had your brain removed secretly from your skull while asleep and replaced with a large jicama to think otherwise.
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1995 09:49:06 -0600 From: Ralph Arnold <arnold@epoch.geol.sc.edu> Subject: I think OJ is... guilty as hell, and has a hell of a production crew.
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 13:43:54 -0600 From: BMcD <Monterey, Califorina> Subject: I think OJ is...GUILTY!!!!!!!! Guiltier than shit!!!!! DNA dont lie, and his was everywhere that it should not have been. If a poor hillbilly poacher can be convicted of illeagly taking a deer off of Clint Eastwoods ranch in Northern Calif by matching DNA. Then why should OJ's shyster lawyers be able to claim that DNA is an unreliable indicator of guilt. Fry in hell OJ, you truly deserve it!!!!!!! Just wait til the Boys in the big h ouse get a hold of you. So you better brush up on your broken field running tecnique, and dont forget the KY Jelly!
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 12:30:07 -0600 From: lwhite <.edu busu> Subject: I think OJ is... I think OJ is guilty as the day is long.

WACKO has had a short day: So does this mean he's innocent?


Return-Path: <ubrd040@br8c.okladot.state.ok.us> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 09:41:13 -0500 Subject: guilty as charged!
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 11:43:28 -0600 From: Dena M. Melloncamp <dmmellon@prairie.org> Subject: I think OJ is... ...GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY!! (and I personally have always liked him as a celebrity) But even though I have always liked him let's face it...the evidence, motive, previous actions, etc, are all pretty damning. Those who blindly think he is innocent are either too hung-up on his "celebrity-ness", his public image, or the "race thing". He committed these acts in a fit of blin d rage. He may very well not remember doing it, but it doesn't mean he is innoc ent! Unfortunately, the media & his money & lawyers will probably succeed in making a mockery of the "system". And what a shame, at the loss of two lives.
Return-Path: <102024.2402@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 08:14:21 -0400 Guilty. Very Guilty and in denial!
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 16:05:37 -0600 From: Cancelled Czech <fernald@czecher.ultranet.com > Subject: I think OJ is... definately in big trouble but he will walk. But probably not until the year 2001, that's when that bitch Clark will give up. Next to Judge Ito she is the biggest dipshit on that TV funny farm.
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 17:15:19 -0600 From: Dave Polo <PoloD@Docker.com > Subject: I think OJ is... I think without a doubt that O.J. is guilty. He had a motive and he said on numerous ocations that, "he was going to kill her if he caught her with another man." O.J. is a very controlling person and could not stand when she really did finally break away from him. I think Simpson knew it was the final end of their relationship. He decided that if he couldn't have her, nobody could and killed her.
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 1995 16:33:41 -0600 From: rich kolden <rjk@argonne> Subject: I think OJ is... guiltier than hell (part of my new book - funnier than hell)
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 1995 16:29:21 -0600 From: rich <rjk@argonne> Subject: I think OJ is... he is an animal and should be treated like one.
Return-Path: <kprodger@in50207.cc.nps.navy.mil> Date: Wed, 07 Jun 95 09:06:55 -0700 Sender: kprodger@in50207.cc.nps.navy.mil Subject: Crime Re-creation Does anyone know where to find the computer generated re-creation of the Goldman-Simpson murder(if it's available on the net)?

YES!!! It's here! The OJ MURDER MPEG!

(Ummm, click the words above to get it, ok?)


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 08:35:15 -0600 From: jonna <222 suck butt!!!!> Subject: I think OJ is... has the biggest p-------- I never seen!!!! oh not guilty!!!!!!
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1995 13:05:34 -0600 From: dora <Bldg. 4443> Subject: I think OJ is... innocent until proven guilty but you know marsha clark thinks he is the Big Bad Black Son of a B---- but what she should be doing is getting Bill Hodgmen to come and take he place because she is loosing it.
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 07:49:24 -0600 From: ANONYMOUS in Neuropsychology <UAB> Subject: I think OJ is GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY I think he should quit wasting the tax payers money to try his case and go ahead and enter a plea of guilty by reason of temporary insanity like all the other g uilty criminals do in order to make sure they never have to serve a day in priso n. Just like Nicole Simpson told her friends and family, "OJ is going to kill m e and he will get away with it. He will OJ his way out of it."
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 22:07:41 -0600 From: Michael Farquharson <bassplyr@astral.magic.ca> Subject: I think OJ is... undoubtedly guilty. I read some of these feeble reasons explaining why OJ is innocent, and I have to shake my head in utter disbelief. How anyone can expect someone who commits such a brutal act of violence to react in a calm manner afterwards is utterly ridiculous. This was a crime of unbridled rage, perpetrated by a jealous, controlling, vicious, violent WIFE-BEATER!!!! The evidence is overwhelming. Those of you who believe he is innocent must be out of your minds, and your vain attempts to explain why he could not have committed these murders are a sad attempt to run from the fact that even the "rich and famous" commit heinous crimes. As a Canadian, I must say that this trial is showing what a farce the American/Californian legal system is. Between the media circus and OJ's high profile lawyers, there is still a chance that this vicious murderer will walk the streets again after killing his children's mother, and an innocent young man in the wrong place at the wrong time. In Canada, he would now be behind bars for the rest of his life where he belongs, with no chance for parole. Why don't you Americans do it like we Canadians and British do? When he is arrested, keep all details and evidence from the public, and allow an IMPARTIAL jury to decide the defendant's fate, fairly and honestly based on the evidence heard for the first time during the trial. I must also say in closing that I am sure that OJ's lawyers know he is guilty, and if he is aquitted (god forbid), that they are satisfied that they lined their pockets with blood money earned by "defending" the brutal murderer of two innocent young people.
Date: 02 Aug 1995 08:26:54 -0700 From: Denise Forbes Subject: Reply to M. Farquharson's response Michael Farquharson wrote: <"Why don't you Americans do it like we Canadians and British do? Return-Path: <dj_finn@postoffice.utas.edu.au> Date: Sun, 04 Jun 95 09:49:12 -0700 Organization: Uni of Tas Subject: OJ AND THE CHAMBER AWAITING. I just have to say i think it's getting pretty obviuos that O.J's guilty as sin, but hey, who cares? Let him walk, it's not like he can run anymore.... we've all gotta die someday, even O.J, and just think..if he comes out innocent i just have to see what happens next. this is the perfect end to this century! FREE OJ AND JAIL JUDGE EITO FOR THE TRY-HARD GOATEE! ps. i think if O.J. has to hit the stand, that will be the big indicator. plus, he sure knows how to look cool under pressure 2. Another good reason to let him go, i say. Everyone says his movie career's over if he gets out anyway but i doubt it! OJ CAN DO IT! SO FREE OJ FREE OJ TODAY! AND CMON NAKED WEAPON 4 & 1/4!!! regards, dave.
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 11:44:11 -0600 From: Teenager <Nova Scotia> Subject: I think OJ is...guilty O.J has problems and I think is very messed up. I also think some of his family need to get a life, they are using the whole thing for a joke and for money. He should be executed or put to prison for life with pictures of his wife and Ronal d hanging around him, maybe he would feel guilty.
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 22:57:29 -0600 From: Mister E <pobox 17684> Subject: I think OJ is... The lad went over to the womans house, saw her with another guy and went nuts. He doooodddddit! guilty as charged
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 16:34:31 -0600 From: Bugsy Lombardo <rsl6@pge.com> Subject: I think OJ is... Proof that if you have the $$$$ you can get away with Murder or any othe r thing you want to do.
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 15:49:11 -0600 From: fpeck <arco.com> Subject: I think OJ is... Guilty as sin.
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 14:59:15 -0600 From: Bob Holt <106 37th st nw> Subject: I think OJ is... Dear OJ, I think you are neat. I hope you get out so you can kill more people. I think you should burn your next victim .
Date: Tue, 30 May 1995 03:53:04 -0600 From: Kevin.Weaver <@TCF.COM> Subject: I think OJ is... Not Guilty
Date: Mon, 29 May 1995 19:32:03 -0600 From: cp Subject: I think OJ is... definately NOT guilty. It has to be proven that he is and when he is found not guilty, all those whom responded that he is will be beyond aa shadow of a doubt GUILTY.
Date: Mon, 29 May 1995 18:33:33 -0600 From: bill Subject: I think OJ is... Guilty....by the way...did you know that if you add up the numbers in th e dates they were killed it adds up to 32? They were killed on 6/12/1994. 6+1+2+1+9+9+4 = 32! What a coincidence!

WACKO Note: 32 was OJ's jersey number.


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 23:22:47 -0700 From: mike wacksman NOT GUILTY Someone or people framed OJ. OJ's lawyers will prove to the people that their client, OJ is innocent. He will be a free man soon.. I can't wait until he testifies, so he can tell the whole world that he's 100% not guilty. EVeryone watch !!i t will happen..i guarantee it!!! OJ will be back !! OJ is 100% not guilty. There is no physical evidence, no murder weapon. NOTHING to convict OJ Simpson. He has been guilty by the media,itself. They convicted him when he was arrested. There will be acquittal. OJ will take the stand and testify that he didn't commit the murders. HE was set up. Someone wanted this star to face charges of murder. The lawyers on this case will prove the PEOPLE that their client, OJ didn't commit the murders...
Return-Path: Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 14:40:15 -0700 Subject: AIR Mosaic Feedback Mail Mail sent from AIR Mosaic (16-bit) version 3.07.04.02 He's guilty for all the reasons William Bugliosi articulates so well; he's the f ormer LA proscecutor who put Manson away; I've seen him on CNBC with Geraldo and that other guy...? OJ is guilty because he had the motive, means, opportunity, left blood everwhere, behaved suspiciously, lied to the limo driver, admitted to the cops that he was dripping blood everywhere, had gone into crazed rages befo re, etc., etc. His lawyers have made up aliblis for him that contradict what he told the police in his statement; chipping golf balls my @#*$%!!! If he walks it 'll be a damn shame. To me it will be as disgusting as it was when the first tri al of the cops who wailed on Rodney King were found innocent. But things don't l ook so good for OJ right now, especially with this new book of interviews with K ato. So we'll see...if the jury lasts!!-Jim
Return-Path: Date: Fri, 26 May 95 13:42 EDT Subject: www counter Your page http://www.cs.hope.edu/~beckman/oj/oj.html is getting too many hits to continue using my counter. Please read http://www-mae.engr.ucf.edu/~ssd/counter.html Steve

Hee hee hee COOL!


Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 10:21:31 -0600 >From: Gino Agostinelli Subject: I think OJ is...absolutely, 100% GUILTY He was a cowardly wife-beater who went over the edge. How can anybody with half a brain think he is not guilty. There is a trail of blood that has been specifically identified. Come on, there can not be a shadow of a doubt that he did it. That is not to say he will be found guilty. He has the best legal team ever assembled and I think he will be acquitted Basically because the jury seems to be a bunch of idiots who can't think straight and don't know when they're being lied to. Jeanette Harris said she had doubts about his guilt. How? What did the defense provide that raises doubt? That the entire LAPD, three labs, and a littany of others were all in on the conspiracy. We all know that neither the government nor any public offices (LAPD and one of the crime labs) can plan that effectively. Especially a conspiracy of the scope that the defense purports. Let us not have our collective intelligence insulted any longer. Innocent until proven guilty is correct, but how much proof do we need? I think OJ provided enough proof on June 12, 1994. Realize that his lawyers are paid to do a job and they don't think he's innocent. They are far more intelligent than any of you and they deal in this kind of think everyday. They've seen it many times. It is foolhardy to think that someone who attended law school, and has been practicing law successfully for a number of years would reach a conclusion other than guilt. All of their contentions seem to be immaterial; a smoke screen. However, it is not their fault. It is OJ's fault. He gave them nothing to work with. He should have just scrawled his autograph in Nicole's fresh blood across the Bundy sidewalk. His lawyers are damn good. Johnnie Cochran hypnotizes. Barry Scheck, although completely rude and disrespectful of anybody in the courtroom, seems to be the perfect embodiment of our perceptions of a lawyer. He is agressive and brash as he chips away at each witness. His tone and choice of words often have more effect than the actual substance of the question or answer. Had this been any other African- American man he would be rotting in jail awaiting his death. But with his legal team. He will be rotting in Maui awaiting his Mai-Tai.

WACKO WOW!!!: Man, I never thought we'd get novels here!!!


Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 12:43:36 -0600 From: Marsha dreier <dreirm.civ.lib> Subject: I think OJ is...innocent Realistically, it would be impossible for a cartoon character to murder anyone. Oh wait, that's Bart Simpson Nevermind.
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 16:46:54 -0600 From: Joels <joels@adirondack.net> Subject: I think OJ is...GUILTY Why else would he smirk in court!!
Return-Path: <kearns_brian@scooby.Nswses.Navy.Mil> Date: Tue, 23 May 95 12:38:51 -0700 Subject: o.j. guilty or innocent WITH THE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE BEING PRESENTED IN COURT RIGHT NOW, I I FEEL IT IS OBVIOUS THAT OJ IS GUILY OF THE MURDERS. TOO MANY PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED FOR IT TO BE A POLICE CONSP IRPIRACY, AND OJS LAWYERS SEEM TO BE JUST GRASPING AT STRAWS.
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 13:20:22 -0600 From: Frank Boateng <boat@afb.yale.edu> Subject: I think OJ is...Not guilty I think O.J. might know the person or persons who commited this crime. What I want to know is that after he killed Nichole, what was Ron doing? waiting for his turn? come on! Again, I think that little cut on OJ's finger is just too small to be dripping all over the place especially if he has a glove on. Think about it, all the police officers gave inconsistant statements and everyone knows very well that Furman did something as far the glove and some other evidence in this case are concern. O.J. is innocent so let him go.
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 09:30:54 -0600 From: john doee doe <uiuc.edu> Subject: I think OJ is guitly... Noose the juice
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 12:56:15 -0600 From: Jim Gilliland <James_Gilliland> Subject: I think OJ is... OJ: You are so guilty it makes me want to buy nectarines.

WACKO BLECH!: That's pretty sick there Jim.


From: "F.KASOLO" <F.KASOLO@lshtm.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 22 May 95 13:05:48 -700 Subject: Not guilty I think O.j is not guilty.The ought to have been more than one person to kill both person.
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 14:00:19 -0600 From: vada <Hartland@ganet.net> Subject: I think OJ is... Guilty as a West Virgian par-taking in incest.
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 08:08:40 -0600 From: sherlock IV <crime solver AVE.> Subject: I think OJ is... innocent, Me and a friend of mine sat at work and talked about the OJ case and we concluded that OJ's son did the killings. I vaguely remember in the beginning they mentioned something about his son disliking Nicole. If I am correct i think they had an affair. That would explain why OJ was so distraught on the plane ride. His son had just killed his ex-wife. OJ is more likely to get off than his son would be therefore that's why he's going to trial. If it was known to this day that his son did this we all know that this thing would have been over in 6 to 8 months. The son went and told Kato also what he had done as well as telling him about the glove he had thrown behind the fence. They went and told OJ and the three of them searced for the glove. Kato going to get a flashlight then heard the limo driver ringing the door bell. That is why no one was quick to get the door because they were searching for the glove so that OJ could dispose of it with the rest of the evidence. Kato and OJ know who did this terrible thing but they aren't saying a word. Some people will go way out for their children and that's what OJ is doing.By the way his son was the one who drove the Bronco that night. He did that because he knew that OJ would have an alibi Think about it why would a man that already has been dating someone go and screw his life around and be so careless.
Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 10:05:28 -0600 From: confused <somewhere, TX......> Subject: I think OJ is... innocent.I haven't been able to keep up with the trial on a daily basis but the dissapearance of the blood samples has me a bit thrown off. This has made it very obvious that OJ has been set up. I think that someone in the Police Dept. is a fraud and they were probably scared that OJ would give up there cover. That person knowing how obsessed and on June 12 how upset he was with Nicole took that moment as a priviledge to save their own ass and hang OJ. The truth will never be know. I'm praying for OJ. I hope he knows who his savior his. When God steps in no man can defeat him. MAY BOD BE WITH YOU OJ!!! JUST BELIEVE with all your heart and all your soul and God will deliver you.
Return-Path: <lynx2@linux1.virginia.lib.mn.us> Date: Tue, 16 May 1995 15:52:02 -0500 From: 23.EAST.PARKWAY.STREET.VIRGINIA.MN.55792@linux1.virginia.lib.mn.us Subject: OJ OJ IS INNOCENT. THAT Marcia Clark bitch should go to hell!!!! besides, that slut nicole definetly deserved it!! OJ's defense should be that he wasn't trying to kill Goldman, he was just trying to cut off that bastard's f###ing d!@k!!

Everything Below here is mail up to May 16th. Everything before this is after May 16th. Got it?

Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 13:58:42 -0700 From: F.Lee Baliley (f.lee.bailey@oj.com) Subject: I think OJ is... DAMN GUILTY!

WACKO Note: This is so utterly fake -- check the spelling of 'Bailey'!


Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 13:10:35 -0700 From: Rob Malda (malda@cs.hope.edu) Subject: I think OJ is... Guiltier than the Manson bros. Worse than Hitler. More evil than Rush. MORE BORING THAN FULL HOUSE!

WACKO Note: Got this one off of HotWired.Com...

From: Steven R. Meyers Subject: The new one... Date: Tue, 7 Mar 95 Just got this... What's OJ Simpson's www address?... http://////////////// (Read aloud..." H-T-T-P colon slash slash slash...") - Steve
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 22:22:02 -0600 From: Jane Doe-Doe (Very very private!!!!!)

WACKO Comment: Geez, I wish I knew her address!

Subject: I think OJ is... giving an award winning preformance! BEST ACTOR OF 1995!!!
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 19:09:03 -0600 From: Jerry O'Neil (Pulaski, NY) Subject: I think OJ is... probably guilty; the prosecution, however is nowhere near proving it beyond reas onable doubt. Every expert witness the prosecution calls, the defense leaves in ashes on the courtroom floor.
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 11:05:13 -0600 From: Shannon (@ucs.indiana.edu) Subject: I think OJ is... Well-known
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 14:23:17 -0600 From: Trena (T_Diggs@lac.jci.tju.edu) Subject: I think OJ is... I believe once we get to the DNA evidence it will show that without a doubt, O.J. is guilty!
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 12:27:57 -0600 From: thy bun (tbun@ousd.k12.ca.us) Subject: I think OJ is... How did OJ kill two persons without a word from the victims? I gave him five stars....Best killer in the 95.
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 17:21:12 -0600 From: pam (pammcc@cccd.edu) Subject: I think OJ is... absolutely 100% GUILTY!!!!
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 06:52:50 -0600 From: sherri taylor (http://i3125top.atl.hp.com) Subject: I think OJ is... 50% not guilty...I think OJ played a part in what happened or he knows who is responsible for what happened...but how can a one person with arthritis kill two people..one of whom is a black belt and no one heard any noise or screaming except for a dog barking...come on people let's be realistic.
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 01:19:22 EDT Return-Path: (TJFY67B@mail.prodigy.com) OJ is guilty, but he did not do it alone. It was either with his is son (the older one, duh) or Robert Kardashian.
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 18:00:44 -0600 From: Alysia Maschak (jmaschak@cln.etc.bc.ca) Subject: I think OJ is... really weird. What kind of person would write a book declaring his innocence unless he felt a need to prove that? I mean, yeah, right he's innocent! Hey OJ, try explaining Nicole's 911 call, complaining about YOU!! ;-) Alysia Maschak ;-)

WACKO Question: Does she mean ME? Or OJ?


Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 12:03:31 -0600 From: student (springhill high N.S. Canada) Subject: I think OJ is... 100% guilty but will probably get off because of who he is. He should be hung for taking those poor kids mother away from them!
From: (bruce@nix.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 95 10:22:20 -400 Subject: Simpson Trial Personally, I gave O.J. the benefit of doubt un- til the DNA evidence came back. Persons have been sent to jail and the gas chamber for decades from fingerprint evidence, and DNA fingerprinting is 1000 times more reliable than that.
Return-Path: (tmaddox@kalama.doe.Hawaii.Edu) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 21:55:38 +1000 X-Personal_Name: tlm guilty! Subject: oj's guilty! OJ's guilty as sin!
From: Matt Gitchell (gi6075ma@meteor.uscolo.edu) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 95 09:31:30 -2400 I think that OJ is very guilty and that he is going to walk away a free man in the end.
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 14:35:53 -0600 From: O.J. Simpson (oj@statepen.com) Subject: I think *I* am... am innocent. And I'm sick of this media overexposure. I was framed. I'm not a fool! I would have cleaned the blood up! How can I be evil! I was in a movie with Leslie Neilson...
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 95 13:11:09 -0700 From: John Morris (jmorris@awinc.com) Subject: OJ You asked for Email telling you whether or not one thinks OJ is guilty and why. You can pencil me in as one who does indeed think he is guilty. I won't bother talking about the obvious - all the circumstantial evidence that points straight to him - but my belief is based solely on his being what we might call an "asshole." No kidding. I can remember a conversation my wife and I had when he was arrested for beating Nicole back in 1989. I just had a real bad feeling about the guy - like I do about anybody who smiles all the time - and I told my wife, "this is the real OJ we're seeing now - not that apparently swell guy who is always smiling." There's no way anyone will ever prove OJ killed his wife, because the evidence is all circumstantial - even if there is a perfect DNA match - but I know he did it anyhow. Because he's an asshole.

WACKO Vote of Gratitude: Thanks for the soliloquy. Tell yer wife that I said "Shuzbutt."


Date: Mon, 01 May 95 16:28:54 -0500 From: James Felix Black (spcfelix@otto.spc.uchicago.edu) Subject: The OJ site - Dear Heart - Just a quick note to tell you that the Wacko OJ site is unquestionably the ugliest thing I've ever seen. Keep up the good work and don't ever let anybody tell you that background images aren't a great idea. JFB James Black email:j-black@uchicago.edu
From: OMSI Visitor (OMSI.Visitor@omsi.edu) Date: Tue, 02 May 95 12:40:57 -700 Subject: O.J. trial I think he was set up by someone,

WACKO Thought: Gee, Thanks so much for taking the time.


From: Darlene Waddington (boots@PrimeNet.Com) Date: Wed, 03 May 95 17:37:34 -700 Subject: I think OJ is... guilty of a lot more than he's even on trial for. And even if the evidence doesn't hold up, he should be imprisoned for making all those goofy faces in court. And has anyone noticed how he and Shapiro are starting to look the same? And that Johnny Cochran looks like a grumpy Hostess cupcake?
Date: Wed, 3 May 1995 11:58:17 -0600 From: Kim LaBoda (kllaboda@mailbox.syr.edu) Subject: I think OJ is... Guilty as hell. Why does he keep making those horrendousfacial gestures? He's such a psycho......
Date: Wed, 3 May 1995 12:53:28 -0600 From: dede (phs) Subject: I think OJ is... I think the man is innocent. If anyone can, explain to me how can one man kill to people. Why do are there only blood drops that they are finding. If you kill two people you are not going to have blood drops you are going to have a pool o f blood on you. Where is the murder weapon. If he is this careless enough to l eave this blood drops, so where is the murder weapon.
Date: Thu, 4 May 1995 14:34:28 -0600 From: Kevin Delgadillo (Not) Subject: I think OJ is... Guilty. Unfortunately, this trial has become more about which lawyers have the biggest dicks (sorry for Ms. Clark) and not about whether he indeed killed Nicole. The whole trial is one long, bad, and expensive joke. I predict that it will result in a mistrial and he will walk. How can the jurors arrive at a decision with all the long, drawn out, boring, and confusing testimony? Snoooore. Kevin
Date: Thu, 4 May 1995 16:19:41 -0600 From: J. Bennett (bennettj@intellinet.com) Subject: I think OJ is... Guilty, ignorant, waster of tax payers money. The situation can be resolved in 10 minutes in Tuscaloosa, Alabama.
Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 10:59:21 -0600 From: Rachel Randall (86-51 Midland PKWY Queens N.Y. 11432) Subject: I think OJ is...a f###ing a##hole I think O.J. is obviosly guilty.He had the means and the motive, the place and the time.He acted like all the other bastards that get jeolous of their wfves or in his case ex-wife. He is one of those types that wants all or nothing.

WACKO Censorship: This girl is a definite New Yorker! :-)


Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 11:25:17 -0600 From: TONY LOFDAHL (218 GERALD LAFAYETTE LA 70503)

{=-WRITE HIM!

Subject: I think OJ is...GUILTY A GOOD PLAYER BUT A MANIAC
Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 11:27:29 -0600 From: Joey Mattison (217 Waterford Lafayette LA 70503) Subject: I think OJ is... Guilty If O.J. did do it he did a stupid murder.
Date: Sat, 6 May 1995 15:21:04 -0600 From: alfonse j'boutie (yogie@jellystone.com) Subject: I think OJ is... is guilty of beating his wife but there is not enough evidence to be jailed for murder. Though he has served his time for battering nicole brown-simpson.
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 10:26:51 -0600 From: Chet Schroeder (1421 Gardenia ) Subject: I think OJ is...GUILTY AS SIN I think that O.J. should be considered for capitol punishment, in public if he is found guilty. he has comitted a terrible atrocity and should be put to the stake and burned. He is just a rotten carton of juice.
Return-Path: (kb637791@oak.cats.ohiou.edu) Date: Wed, 10 May 1995 13:35:54 -0400 X-Personal_Name: jen From: kb637791@oak.cats.ohiou.edu Subject:I love OJ I Watch every day. I am 23 and Out of work right now, so that's why I watch. I don't think he did it. I don't believe the Racist detective Furhman planted the glove, but Think about this... the prosecution needs OJ's bronco to be out there on the street at 10:40 or so because Kato supposedly heard Bumps in the night. Supposedly OJ jumping the fence. Well, his bronco wasn't seen by the prosecution's witness at that time. Will someone tell me how Oj was supposedly Jumping over the fence and dropping the glove when his car wasn't even there.And don't tell me he parked down the street, walked thru the neighbor's yard, jumped the fence, dropped the glove, walked back to the car, drove to the front of his house, walked up, and then the limo driver saw a Black figure walking up the yard... at what time? 1045? How totally ridiculous is that. Come on. It's grasping at straws.

WACKO Cry-For-Help: PLEASE!! Someone hire this guy! He's too obscessed with the OJ Case!!! :-)


Date: Wed, 10 May 1995 16:59:09 -0600 From: Eaglin (sreaglin@ucdavis.edu) Subject: I think OJ is... NOT GUILTY! I think this b/c of these questions: Why was the socks moved? Why wasn't his car taped off? Why did they take a blanket from OJ's car and place it over Nicole to cover her? Where did this strength to kill two people ( in th e fashion that they were murdered)? If he loved his childeren so much, why woul d he kill their mother knowing that they are in the house? If he did kill them, Why would he keep the socks? He could have gotten rid of them just like the cl othing and the murder weapon (neither have been found)? Why is an X amount of O J's blood (that he offered to give) missing? Why is there blood on the OUTSIDE of the blood vile, it wasn't there when OJ gave his blood? These are just a few of the many questions that I continue to hold b/c the DA ha s failed to answer them. I watch CourtTV every day and than I watch the differe nt highlights on the news, I believe that I am a well informed viewer. I also believe that the only way OJ will be found innocent is if the real murder ers are found, but I don't think that this will happen b/c they are long gone. I do believe that it was rush to judgement. One last note (for now at least): I don't think nor do I believe that OJ commit ted this crime. But I DO BELIEVE THAT HE KNOWS WHO DID! In the fast life that OJ, Nicole and Goldman lead it is dangerous and if you screw with the wrong peop le you WILL GET HURT. My theory is: it was "these people" (if you will) that d id the killings and OJ is trying to protect his childern and family by allowing his lawyers to prove him NOT-GUILTY.

WACKO Ponderance: Do people really follow the OJ case this much? I run this page and I have NO CLUE what's going on in the case, other than the fact that the jury is pissed and Ito doesn't want a mistrial. That was in Time. :-) [End WACKO soliloquy]


Date: Thu, 11 May 1995 13:24:25 -0600 From: Bartman @ bellevue (3412 169 Ave N.E. BELLEVUE , WA. 98008) Subject: I think OJ is... Innoscent , but this damn trial is blown so out of proportion that people forget what it is all about . Murders, for crying outloud !Because of that I make fun of it on my radio show on mondays . Like spoofs of the JUDGE , in ''AIR ITO'S '' shows it is now a hell of a lot more entertaining than those damn Menendez brot hers !!!!!!!!! Thank - You who ever you are who killed Ronald and Nicole ,now practica lly the nation is tuned in on the O.J. trial !!!!!! In case you did not guess , or are not smart enough to figure out sarcasism when you here it , that was a sa rcastic remark , THANK-YOU very much Barton Goldman Treece III
Date: Sun, 14 May 1995 17:33:25 -0600 From: Derek Wuenschirs - Toronto, Ontario Subject: I think OJ is Kato Kaelin's lover 'Nuff Said. :-)

WACKO Sexual Orientation: Hmmm, is this the view of ALL Canadians?


Date: Tue, 16 May 1995 11:46:22 -0600 From: shirley pitts (houston,texas) Subject: I think OJ is... innocent of the actual killing but I do believe that he had something to do with it as well as kato and al. No matter what the verdict may be he shouldn't be sentenced to death.They will however reap what they sow as well the person that puts him to death if that is the outcome.Also people are joking about this life is not a joke you know.


[PurpleCow HomePage|OJ HomePage]
Peter Beckman + beckman@purplecow.com +Hope College