Quote:
Originally Posted by bamadavefan15
Idk about that. It's such an amazing story to begin with.
|
Let me rephrase: I agree it's a compelling story.
I guess I'm surprised there's enough drama to wring out of it that we didn't get at the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by junior94
okay I'm assuming they didn't simply change this plot detail just for dramatic affect, because it would be a MAJOR change to bother doing... but so why I'm confused is why Furman still answered the "did you plant any evidence for this crime?" question asserting the 5th. As much as, yes, the tapes demonstrated how despicable of a person that he was and he'd perhaps fooled with evidence in past cases, but he DIDN'T do that on the OJ case, right? I mean hell, that's part of why we know that OJ really did it, because none of this framing conspiracy from the cops bullshit that Cochran keeps harping on actually occurred in this specific case.
and btw in response to some of the above posts, yea there's no doubt that Chris Darden got mind fucked multiple times in this case and made some hugely idiotic decisions, but I don't think you can put it ALL on he and Clarke for screwing the pooch. Ito himself deserves some of the blame, he let things get way out of hand and go on far too long.
|
I think this show has been pretty good at showing it was death by 1,000 cuts for the prosecution. The gloves, Fuhrman, the length of the trial's impact on the jury, the racial makeup of the jury not favoring Clark the way she expected, not holding the trial in Santa Monica, et cetera, et cetera. They just lost and lost and lost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebridge15
can't wait to see how they handle the verdict
|
Spoiler alert: He's found guilty.
... Of a different crime years later.