You should read his book about the case. It wasnt published until COVID times strangely enough. He talks about how he doesn't use notes. He also fully belived OJ was innocent which i think is why his cross is truly so good. It's got to be easier defending someone you believe is innocent than defending someone you know is guilty.
Only mediocre people like you will think F lee Bailey is impressive....That dude was a heartless fraud who absolutley knew OJ was guilty....and those questions he was asking Mark Furhman was equivalent too the questions a toddler would ask if they were practicing law.....he was desperately trying to poke holes in a very strong case against OJ.
@@KateMich12 Only mediocre people like you will think F lee Bailey is impressive....That dude was a heartless fraud who absolutley knew OJ was guilty....and those questions he was asking Mark Furhman was equivalent too the questions a toddler would ask if they were practicing law.....he was desperately trying to poke holes in a very strong case against OJ.
whats impressive is these lawyers who would quit and run home crying after 2 hours being a cop, have the gall to stand up there and lecture a first responder in the field about decisions they made on the fly. whoever is impressed by this can thank themselves for why we have so many unmotivated unqualified cops now.
people will sit back in amazement of a true defense lawyer at his finest grill a corrupt cop , yet still think, "oh OJ still did it though'' lol not realizing the amount of evidence that was planted, the fact that ron and nicole both were using cocaine and ron turns out to be a informant for the lapd, and nicole was bringing these elements around her home, 2 knives were used, and there were at least 2 killers, and it wasn't oj, it was linked directly to the lifstyle and dealings of nicole and ron, and by the way , ron goldman, i doubt was at the wrong place at the wrong time and you had the most corrupt police force in us history dispatched to the scene and they framed the shit out of OJ, the media ran with it and bombarded you the pubic through repetition that OJ did it, he didn't
@philipwilliams1754 Oooo!... Can you just imagine what would've happened to Fuhrman had he been convicted and sent to county?! Which would've been justice... The State should've had a criminal and civil trial for him, too. Even the Aryan brotherhood inmates would've tee'd off on him.
To think that Bailey did not use a single note throughout this entire cross is remarkable. His questions are firing like a machine gun. Just listening to this has me scared. No wonder he's regarded as giving the best cross examinations. This should be played at all law schools.
You have to be completely ignorant about the law to think this was a brilliant cross-examination. None of this should have ever been allowed. And none of it would have been allowed if there was a judge with an ounce of competency or backbone. Forman actually made bailey look stupid if you pay attention to the questions and answers.
I worked in a company in Maine about 10 years ago where Bailey happened to be friends with the CEO, and was on the board of trustees. I used to see him regularly and spoke with him occasionally. A very interesting man and definitely a prima donna.
Yes Bailey was masterful and very deliberate in his dismantling of Furman.. I love how Bailey can always get to the point without really getting to the point..
There’s not much substance to points he makes it’s the manner in which he makes them. If you listen to the detail he repeats and regurgitates a lot making it seem like there’s something “fishy going on”. If the same points were made in a bland manner you wouldn’t bat an eye. It’s all in the delivery not the content. He was by then a seasoned court orator with the rhetoric of Shakespearian actor. To me his delivery is cliched and over dramatic like one of those over the top court dramas on television. x
@@wormsnake1but he still got to the point of exposing the lies that furman told during the preliminary hearing. In this video alone 25:05 - 26:05, you get to hear furman admit that at some point during his time at Bundy, that he was alone near the bodies. That shows that he had opportunity to pick up that 2nd glove, that he would eventually plant at OJs house. Later when asked if he planted or manufactured any evidence in the case, he plead the fifth.
@Stephen Sipek Bailey bragged for weeks about how he was going to bury Fuhrman. After this cross examination Carl Douglas and Johnny Cochran were far from impressed. Sections of media also felt that this cross was rather ordinary. In fact had the Fuhrman tapes not surfaced it would have been wildly recognised that Bailey was living on his past reputation. You will also notice going forward in this case that Bailey's witness load becomes reduced. This is because Simpson and Cochran became annoyed that Bailey did not take notes and made mistakes such as, Colombian necklace as opposed to neck tie. The final straw for Bailey came when he was given William Bodziak, who was the FBI shoe print expert. In this cross examination he proposed that there were two killers and both were wearing size 12 Bruno Magli shoes. That's why Gerald Uelman was given the final task of burying Mark Fuhrmen.
Good points Terry. There is another RU-vid clip of Fuhrman/Bailey testimony with attorneys commenting during the breaks.......and pretty much every legal expert agrees (at the time) that Bailey didn't lay a glove on him (no pun intended). Only people who have decided that OJ is innocent or really buy into this pointless fishing expedition believe this Bailey "destroyed" stuff. Had Fuhrman just come clean about his use of language.....all Bailey's thunder would have been for nothing.
F.Lee Bailey is the best money O.J. Simpson ever spent , without F.Lee Bailey's total destruction of Mark Fuhrman on the wittness stand , O.J. May have got convicted.
44wetwater 44wetwater Unfortunately Bailey didn’t get paid for the job, the Jew Shapiro took $1000,000 from O.J and hired his old friend but didn’t pay him.
The evidence was overwhelming against Simpson, regardless of how well F. Lee Bailey destroyed Fuhrman’s testimony. O.J. was found not guilty because several members of the jury had previous negative interaction(s) with LAPD and believed that the detectives assigned to the case were culpable in the mishandling of evidence, or more to the point, responsible for planting one of the gloves at Simpson’s residence on Rockingham. The LAPD was as much on trial in the O.J. Simpson case as Simpson himself. It wasn’t so much based on the evidence of murder than it was from the ill repute of the LAPD.
why people even now hate the defense team I do not get, they just did their job. and shocking is that Furher Man was the best witness prosecution had the rest were incompetent or stupid. Bailey almost made Fuhrman confess the planting of the evidence
@@deebee9917 Just compare Cochran's cross-examination to Shapiro's. If you're being honest, they're not even close. Link: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-doKNcYGrwBE.html
@@surpriseimblack Cochran and Shapiro, come on now. Any rational person will tell you that OJ would’ve been convicted without Johnnie. Lee said it himself.
Alan Rochin You’re right, OJ was there at the scene, but was not the killer, that’s why he escaped without a scratch. However his son Jason is the killer, and that’s why all the DNA evidence points to OJ. They share the same DNA profile.
There is quite literally not a "case hidden" since Epstein did not get formally convicted or face trial since he died in jail awaiting proceedings. There was no trial to film. The charges he was facing are publicly available its really not that hard to find what he he was being accused of. Also, Oj Simpson was facing State charges in California where it is not uncommon for a court to allow cameras in a trials with public figures. Epstein was facing Federal charges (i know you didnt bother to actually read the indictment, which is also publicly available, but if you had you would see from the title alone that he was accused of Federal crimes) which means there are far stricter rules that the courts enforce in regards to cameras and publicizing of proceedings. But im sure its easier to believe in conspiracy theories since it doesnt require any actual knowledge or research.
This cross examination puts me to sleep with an ASMR effect. F Lee Bailey is brilliant, a master of his craft. He will not give Furman an inch and follows his statements to the end of logic. It’s like Bailey is steering Furman into a corner. Furman is despicable, of course but he also handles himself extremely well in the courtroom so an interesting dynamic at work here.
what is sad is that none of them atoned for their sins. OJ did not atone for his sins as a husband as a wife beater. maybe he was not a killer but he was a failure as father. Fuhrman maybe did not plant any evidence, but he was a racist police officer in actions not only thoughts. he did not atone for his abuse of the police badge after that. at least OJ went to prison for the Las Vegas scandal, Fuhrman did nothing to clean his past.
@@roc7880 OJ is a killer, he’s a murderer and always will be. Fuhrman was a racist jerk but he shouldn’t be conflated with Simpson. My point here is that the cross examination is bizarrely calming. It’s weird, I put this on and it puts me to sleep. Idk why
@@MC-vh7go I am not sure if OJ did the murders the DNA evidence does not add up. I can talk about it for hours. someone is guilty of murder if found as such by a jury. if you think the verdict was not correct blame the cops the forensics and the prosecutors who were beyond incompetence. maybe the testimony is soothing for you because your conscience knows otherwise
@@roc7880 the DNA does not add up? From crimemuseum.org It is reported that the DNA evidence showed that the chance that some of the blood found near the bodies came from anyone but Simpson was 1 in 170 million. The chance that blood found on Simpson’s sock could be from someone other than Nicole Brown was 1 in 21 billion. Blood samples found inside of Simpson’s Bronco, which was discovered outside Simpson’s home the next day, were equally matched to Simpson and both victims. So you have Simpson’s DNA at the crime scene, his blood and Nicole’s DNA match on Simpson’s socks in his home. The DNA certainly added up.we’re talking 1 chance in 170 million here.
@@MC-vh7go dude, the DNA was OJ's. What does not make sense is how 2 mls of blood from the vial was missing, how the blood from OJ had EDTA, the presence of blood spots days after the murder, and many other things.
F Lee Bailey's interrogation of Fuhrman was perfect. Eventually Fuhrman starts to expose himself as being arrogant and very uneducated as concerning of having any higher learning other then his police training. Fuhrman's egotistical attitude is what busted this case wide open and Ms Clark just let it go on. More proof of his; I'm the law attitude. Now Fuhrman has become the suspect in front of the jurors. He's no longer a investigating detective; but a suspect under indictment and the prosecution team just sits there like a spectator in the courtroom. And the public said the defense team was playing the race card. No they just exposed the stupidity of the prosecution's case and the investigators involved.
LOL. You're talking about someone else's education, or lack thereof, while using the word "then" instead of "than"? LOL. Also, it's "AN" investigating detective, not "A" investigating detective. Government run schools strike again. Dude, I wouldn't be calling anyone stupid at this point, and now, years later, it's more than evident that the jury was biased as two have come out publicly and already stated they were. The prosecution lost this case, and the "dream team" didn't do anything more than what a reasonably skilled defense lawyer would do under these same circumstances; let the facts be muddled and create doubt. I don't think I know anyone, or at least not too many people at this point or even back then, DUMB enough, to not see the mountain of evidence, not even counting the DNA part, to think this guy didn't kill them. Then again, there are a LOT of easily fooled people "rooting" for OJ and well, that's that.
@@dyates6380 frist of all a mountain of evidence produced by who? If your talking about evidence planted by Mark Fuhrman and Vannatter and the criminalist Dennis Fung changes the initials on the blood evidence collected. I could see someone like yourself believing the detectives involved in this case. As to the preferred reference to then rather than is referring to the pastence. Its always the same old thing with people like yourself instead of looking at the total picture of the case you only see the jurors 8 blacks and four whites who didn't by into the bull$#!+ that has gotten many a innocent people convicted by falsifying evidence. The prosecution team put on a domestic violence case against OJ Simpson, not a double homicide case. They got caught lying and tampering with the evidence. Your probably one of those people who believe Donald J Trump, "When he said that he won the election, because they cheated him? The question that remains, just like in the Simpson trial, "Is who? But unlike the Simpson case, "We know who he is!
That case showed the power of celebrity, was far more about race that justice, racist jurors that didn't want to accept the mountain of evidence, with others to dumb to understand the evidence, all leading to a brutal psychopath killer walking free, but eventually got years behind bars!
How did OJ covered in blood with a bleeding finger, and holding a bloody knife only manage to leave one little spec of blood on the outside of a white vehicle and then leave smears of blood on the inside of the bronco?
Well if it was planted wouldn't whoever was doing that just smear more blood around, if you are suggesting it was planted! By the way, did you ever heard of a cloth, towls, cleaning agents, tissues, O yes, forgot OJ with his arthritis hands wasn't able to clean!anything 😅, like now did OJ go to the airport later with all that blood from crime scene on him, I been wondering about that for years, O i forgot, he has a shower in his house😅!
All that blood at the crime scene but almost no blood in the Bronco and he somehow showered and washed all the blood away in 5 minutes but no blood went down the drains... Even if the bloody clothes were in the bag Kardashian took out or the bag OJ wouldn't let Kato touch, he does not get from Bundy to Rockingham without leaving considerable blood behind. And to be able to clean it all up in 5-10 minutes? It's preposterous.
From the opening statement on january 25th, he did most of the cross examinations during the first few weeks. Including witnesses Det. Riske (feb 9), Det. Philipps (feb 16) and Det. Lange (feb 21 or 22)
Netflix didnt come close especially when Darden was cited for contempt. They dramatized it to the max to impress the people who never watched the original trial.
🕵🏽♂️Its question after question after question ; one after another. Definitely takes patience in being a cross-examination lawyer..and a bit of forward-thinking mental chess in drawing inferences, mentally steering the jury's thought process (applying right brain logic) all whilst capitalizing on emotional feelings (left brain connotations) of human analytics and sentiments. The cadence quick speed of some questions (usually truth comes faster than a few seconds pause for a lie) is intentional.
@@archangelvvv Impossible for him to have planted it. Fourteen uniform officers arrived at the murder scene prior to Fuhrman and they all stated they only saw one glove. Most of them didn't even know and had never heard of Fuhrman. To believe that Fuhrman planted the glove you would have to believe that more than a dozen officers were either all mistaken on this issue or they all lied. Each one is equally preposterous.
Well he was coached and practiced this with the prosecution, as they knew it was coming. I think they even mention he spoke to psychiatrist about his testimony prior to taking the stand. It’s freaking great later on when he pleads the fifth after being asked about planting evidence or saying the N word.
I agree. I always believed the media about Furman in this case but I recently read the book Furman wrote and he was made the scapegoat in my opinion. He was advised to take the 5th. Idk. Who knows but I find it all very interesting
Marcia was such a horrible prosecutor she was letting Mark take it in the ass on this one she had so many chances to object to F Lee Bailey questioning but never did that's why Mark threw them under the bus and pleaded the fifth he knew it!!!
@@slabbusterrtr7690he would have just lied to her so it wouldn't have changed anything. He had too much baggage in his past, cops like this are nothing but a liability and all of society has to pay for it
yes and the defense tried to get a new judge and they almost did. Incidentally, Mark Furhman cursed out Judge Ito's wife years prior. This trial was a SHIT SHOW
Jim Jim no...the defense DID NOT. That’s a big porky pie Jim. The prosecution wanted a new judge. Johnny Cochran said they’d redact the part of the tapes where capt York is mentioned. Marcia wanted a mistrial. Cochran didn’t. I can guide you to the day the arguments happen in regard to this if you wish. You know better than that, Jim.
Furhman running around in dark crime scene during nothing oh change that he going from Bundy to Rockingham planting stuff moving glove to Rockingham and perhaps planting blood too much time doing nothing perhaps telling kateo he give him signal on wall when he finished no way a person's body thump hitting the air condition Durham just happen find the glove and blood on Broncos too many holes can not give time murders happens how can you see a little speak in dark thought he was concern about other ppl bleeding come on now this does not make sense
Even though most people think OJ did it. One think that I will never understand is how OJ didn’t have any injuries and bruises after the struggle. It appeared that Coleman had been in an ínstense fight and he had trained in martial arts. How does Oj only get one small cut which can be explained away. Did he get help?
Twenty five years later and this trial hasn't lost its intrigue as to who done it. Out of all the police officers at the crime scene,they elected Fuhrman to escort them to OJs house (based on the notion that he was once at the estate of OJ Simpson), if Fuhrman was supposed to show them the way, then why wasn't he the lead patrol car? Fuhrman was the police Departments wild card they all knew about his background and his capabilities to plant evidence. Under cross examination hes got an explanation for everything except for his response to where you investigating or looking for suspects he's crossed up now he can't remember all his lies and now tape recordings of him saying that he would plant evidence. Forget about a white cop calling a Black Man a N______, that's everyday language to a white cop. If anyone believes that Fuhrman pleaded the fifth because he called a Black Person a N_____ is ether stupid or just not willing to except the truth. A cop pleading the fifth amendment because he called a Black person a N_____, you can't believe that now can you? So that would mean from now on every single white cop would have to plead the fifth in every trial concerning a black person. That's crazy,but that's what happened in this trial the only person found guilty in this shameful case was Mark Fuhrman the white knight of the LA police Department guilty of perjury. For lying about never using the word N______. Unbelievable right, but it happened in 1995 in America.
Watching Bailey's questioning I see the Defense's argument a little more clearly about Fuhrman... I always thought o.k, he's a racist, so they're saying he planted the glove. What Bailey is suggesting is that since we have Fuhrman on tape bragging about how he's the key witness because he found the glove, and that he had said he wants the big arrest... that he had a desire to be involved and while sitting there for two hours waiting on Lange he hatched up the idea to plant the glove. That actually makes a lot of sense. only real problem with that is, you have to believe that all the other cops who had seen both gloves lied about it later.... but many of them knew how Fuhrman was and ignored it so it's possible.
Actually it's the other way around. Fourteen uniform officers arrived at the crime scene prior to Fuhrman and all of them stated they only saw one glove. Most of them did not know and had never heard of Fuhrman. There simply wasn't a second glove there for him to find. You would have to believe that more than a dozen officers were either all mistaken on this issue or they all lied. One is just as preposterous as the other.
@@1981lashlarue regardless, just as unlikely OJ lost a bloody glove at a murder scene then realized he still had on a bloody glove and just tossed it on his property. Then, the guy who discovers the bloody glove is a serial, genocidal liar racist, who pleads the Fifth when asked directly if he planted the glove or fabricated any evidence. Reasonable fucking doubt if ever!!!! Just stop!
@@mugm2 Actually, it is likely, or at least plausible, than Simpson lost the glove at the crime scene while brutally murdering two individuals. Remember, he was only expecting Nicole to be there as Ron wasn't planning on being there. I don't think anyone is suggesting that Simpson "tossed" the glove onto his property as he was returning in haste, late for his limo and nearly missing his flight. He was in a bit of a fluster and it likely fell during the course of his quick return. Murderers and criminals leave behind clues and evidence at crime scenes and their homes all the time so I don't know why that is so unbelievable. The jury never saw or was never informed that Fuhrman took the Fifth so that couldn't be a part of their reasonable doubt. Even if you completely remove the bloody glove as evidence and pretend it never existed, there is still far more than enough evidence to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. When your blood is at the crime scene, that's bad enough but when the victims blood are in your home and car, that's lights out, game over time. There's just no coming back from that.
Slopy forensic work too. Dennis Fung should have gotten fired for his incompetence. The LAPD SHOULD have known that this Murder case was going to be High Profile. The LAPD should have assigned their very best people to this case.
I wonder how stupid is for somebody to commit double murder and forget a glove at the crime scene and one at his house. after that let the car with evidence next to his house and go to Chicago. come back and go for an interview at the police without a lawyer and donating blood without a warrant.
He was in a hurry. There was a fight between OJ and Goldman. He was stressed. He had to go to Chicago, if he hadn't caught that plane OJ knew that they would suspect him and everything would have been different in this case.
How dumb is it to go to a hotel room with lots of witnesses and put a gun in their face to get a bunch of junk back? Criminals are not exactly rocket scientists. That's why the jails are quite full.
They had to give furhman training sessions on his tenper prior to him testifying. There's also rumors that he was given some oral meds that will keep him composed under pressure.
Furman had told his friends watch how I out smart Bailey when I get on the stand. He didn't know Bailey was setting up traps and Furman fell right in 😢
Face the facts that the lapd didnt have a case against him and tried to get evidence against him and that his why they did such a sloppy job and coṅtaminated the crime scene
bailey: "do u know the color of a smurf Mr. Fuhrman" "I don't know what you mean sir" "Isn't it part of your training detective Fuhrman" "well it depends if we watch cartoons in the morning at the station" "that is NOT what I asked, Mr. Fuhrman" "whats the question again sir" "what COLOR IS A SMURF???!" "I have not investigated that, sir. I couldn't speculate" "Isn't it true you have made racial slurs about smurfs in the past" "no sir I have never"
@@ralphjames151 naw you just don't understand it...go watch a vince vaugn film like wedding crashers which is what someone like u would consider humour that you understand. leave things like this for the adults who can actually think. go play
Furham did it,he left the bbq early and swung by to get a piece of a$$,got jealous when Ron was there,and took out both cause he could do it being former Marine!
i'm really curious about whether bailey thought of himself as clever, or whether he accepted the fact that his role was simply to annoy and discomfort the hostile witnesses
If you know ahead of time you are going to be able to successfully dismantle someone's credibility it makes your job a lot easier. That's pretty easy to relate to, you don't have to be a lawyer, we've probably all caught people trying to get away with something and we know ahead of time what to look for in their story
At the time referenced, her body had not been officially identified and a good investigator does not assume what they may suspect. Just because Nicole lived at that residence, does not mean the blood soaked female lying dead there is actually her. Body had to be officially identified and was subsequently.
@@amann399 technically you are right. But in real life, he knew who it was. Just like technically his job as an officer was to protect and serve but in reality he wasn’t always there to protect and serve. My fav Eminem line is “LETS GET DOWN TO BUSINESS, I don’t have time to play around, what is this? MUST BE A CIRCUS IN TOWN, we shoving shit down on these clowns!”
Furmem thought he was so smart ! But when F Lee Bailey ask you if you ever said something over and over again you should know he has the evidence that you did!!
Yes Mark Fuhrman had used that word over at least 500 plus times all on record and he lied under oath that he have never used that word, if he'll lie about that he'll lie about everything else too apart of that reasonable doubt that the government couldn't prove beyond any reasonable doubt that O.J. Simpson committed those murders
All he did was lie. Oj wasn't a Suspect but I decided to inspect his Bronco. A speck of blood "caught" my eye. It caught your eye because you were inspecting the inside and outside of the vehicle.
Shapiro appeared to be ignorant and narcissist throughout the case. I think he may have felt Krochran and Bailey out shined him. I don't believe he really believed OJ was innocent....he knew this case had the potential to boast his career.
Gennifer Pace He wanted OJ to take a plea deal early on and also Robert Kardashian as an accessory... Kardashian talks about it in his interview with Barbra Walters
LOL. Even back in 1995, all those years ago, even then we all got a chuckle out of Bailey's self important "bluster". LOL. We were commenting on how he must have watched too many Perry Mason episodes. He sounds like an old fool here. He thought it was going to be the "gotcha" moment throughout this trial. Dude, sit down.
