1
Allegedly*
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26529 readers
621 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I had never heard this theory prior to his death, but now I see it popping up here and there. Is there any evidence to support this? I still think he probably did it, but I'm curious as to why people are saying this now.
his son was a chef and had military knife training and had attacked an ex gf with similar knife. also had a history of drugs. OJ comes off as more a gun/muscle kind of problem solver.
The watch cap found at the scene was the kind the son wore. dog hair on the scene, son owned a dog and oj did not. sons alibi was very weak. sons vehicle was bloodied not the bronco. the glove fit the son.
Any sources for these claims?
i just googled 'OJ simpson son' i'm not a reporter.
Well, what kind of sources did you find for the claims that you are actively stating as facts? I think it's important to provide sources for claims as strong as these, regardless of whether you are a reporter or a veterinarian.
If your response is 'just google it', its not a response.
Onus is on you to support your claims.
everything i put is on the first page of google results for the search term i provided.
you have everything you need to easily get to where i got.
If you make a claim, you've got to go out and gather, qualify, and frame the evidence.
Not our job, yours.
hah either a lazy troll or you fundamentally misunderstand the nature of our relationship, or what lemmy is.
Nah just been on the Internet a long time and sharing it's norms with you.
You make a claim, any claim, and it's your job to provide some level of support, no one else's.
i also miss journalism. mahalo.
nauka bradduh.
User Num10ck actually said they don't believe that OJ's son did it, they're just articulating another prevalent theory. If this were a debate I'd agree with you, but this is actually just casual speculation about an event from 20 years ago.
Its just bad internet manners to not provide the links to the claim you want people to understand/ engage with.
Like, if we're going to discuss something, and you have a point your are looking to make, drop a link. Its not my job to put out effort to find support or research a claim I'm not making.
It really is. Now you have all these suggestions you're not going to qualify. Arguing is performative and it's clear you would rather do that than take five seconds to clarify lmao
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
aka
Here's the thing: nobody on the internet ever wants to have a philosophical discussion with you, much less with a username like Tropical Dingdong. Nobody has to prove shit to you. I can make outlandish claims like "Crazy frog arcade racer 2 is the best racing game ever created" and not back it up at all and that's fine. Nobody has to argue with you or give you any benefit of the doubt. I know I sure won't.
You must be new here.
But motive?
great question. maybe he was loyal to his dad and didn't like the waiter banging his mom and driving dad's ferrari? but why kill his own mom then?
who would have enough of a motive outside of this inner circle?
Thanks for posting this! I also googled it (It took like 10 seconds, not sure why we're expecting so much of you below) and saw they're are a lot of people talking about it. I don't know how much stock I put in it personally, but it's an interesting theory that I knew nothing about prior.
It was floating around during the trial too. No one took it seriously back then either.