Is O.J. Innocent? The Missing Evidence (2017) User Reviews

Maybe The Worst "Documentary" I've Ever Seen

[brusty1 · 1/10 · 18 January 2017]

After watching this travesty of journalism and investigation, I felt obligated to write a warning to people wanting to waste 6 hours of their lives watching this documentary series. First, let me say that I am a huge documentary watcher and watch several Investigation Discovery shows (and like some of them quite a bit). Second, I've seen the fantastic documentary "OJ: Made In America" and the great series "American Crime Story: The People VS OJ Simpson". Both were high quality, informative and highly entertaining. This series, however, was a textbook example of cashing in on a big name and popular topic for ratings and money. It's exploitative journalism at its worst.

They have absolutely no physical evidence that anyone except OJ Simpson committed the brutal murders of Ron Goldman & Nicole Brown Simpson. If you look at any case long enough, you can come up with inconsistencies and anomalies that make anyone look like a suspect. All of their "detective" work amounts to sensationalism used to trick people into having doubt in their minds. They spend 6 hours (and lots of commercials in between) talking about things that could have fit into one hour long episode. It probably would have fit into a 30 minute episode. Investigation Discovery should be ashamed of airing this junk. Anyone with any reasonable intelligence will be insulted by the theories they provide. In the end, the only thing that even slightly redeems this series is that the investigators come to the logical conclusion that OJ committed the murders. They should have done that in one episode and not milked it for ratings.

The bottom line: Don't watch "Is OJ Innocent?" unless you want to waste a lot of time and get no new information about the case.

Is O.J. Innocent? No.

[mg75535 · 1/10 · 24 January 2017]

This "docuseries" was clearly a desperate attempt for Bill Dear to get the smear campaign against Jason Simpson of the ground, which he's been attempting to market since 2001. There is no evidence uncovered in this show that wasn't revealed in the Trial or "O.J.: Made in America". Every single piece of evidence that "proves" Jason was involved can be easily explained. The only thing this documentary showed was that O.J. was just as terrible of a father to his children as he was a husband to his wives. It's frankly irresponsible and cruel to be accusing Jason of these atrocious crimes with nothing to back it up except for the word of one attention seeking old hack.

Who gave the Go-Ahead to make this Crap?

[sentientsight · 1/10 · 20 January 2017]

The production quality of this series is very good. Unfortunately nothing else about it is.

6 episodes and they finally work out what took the police back in 1994 seconds to see. Of course if they had worked out that their smoking gun evidence was total BS at the start then they wouldn't have a show.

Watching this show I felt sorry for the family of all involved, including the production crew. This show must have put a few lawyer's kids through university based on the Slander it portrays as evidence. There is the occasional disclaimer but even that is spoken in a token way.

If you want to see 6 hours of what many would describe as "Cyber Bullying" if done online, then watch the whole show, but all the info is presented in the last episode. If your still interested watch that first and judge if the show is worth it for you.

Given enough time and effort anyone could be linked to many different crimes or events. Especially if you only show evidence that supports your theory.

A Compelling Case is Presented: Let the Viewer Decide!

[lavatch · 7/10 · 8 August 2017]

The verdict in the 1995 trial of the People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson was an embarrassment for the City of Los Angeles. With the passing of over two decades, the District Attorney would certainly not be interested in reopening the case to examine the evidence presented in this television series. In so doing, city officials would only be admitting their own incompetency in the "trial of the century."

Neither are the American people interested in exploring the new evidence presented in this series. The lazy public has already made up its mind about O.J. Simpson's guilt. Even a recent Oscar-winning documentary series neglects to look at the evidence, focusing instead on broader themes of race and society.

But for the thoughtful viewer, this series and the book written by William C. Dear ("O.J. Is Innocent") offer the compelling case that O.J.'s son Jason Lamar Simpson should have at least been considered a significant suspect in the case. Instead, he was never interrogated by the LAPD, his background was not thoroughly examined, and his flimsy alibi was not subjected to close scrutiny.

Jason Simpson's upbringing included the tragic death of his younger sister in which Jason had been asked to watch her. He failed in his task, she drowned in the family swimming pool, and he had to carry the trauma of that loss of life. By his teens, he was addicted to alcohol and was experiencing bouts of uncontrollable rage. At the time of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman, Jason Simpson was on probation for assaulting his employer. One of the neighbors of Nicole Simpson appears on camera testifying that Nicole believed that Jason was stalking her. One of the witnesses in this program describes the "sexually charged" environment of the dysfunctional Simpson family.

Jason's alibi on the night of the murders is a tissue of lies and obfuscation. The copy of the time card for his work at Jackson's Restaurant on the night of June 12, 1994, does not even list the dates alongside the hours. One of the times is hand written, as opposed to machine stamped. The time cards for the employees had labels affixed at the top. In this time card, however, Jason Simpson's name is hand written at the top. The restaurant owner who supported Jason's alibi was not even present in the restaurant on June 12, so he could not have known when Jason left work that evening. Jason's girlfriend's account conflicts with Jason's deposition given during the civil trial. The most important eyewitness is Carlos Ramos, a busboy at the restaurant, who testified that the kitchen shut down at 9:00pm on the night of June 12. Jason Simpson could have left work at any time after 9:00pm, which again should have made him a prominent suspect in the Simpson-Goldman murders, which the prosecution alleged occurred around 10:15pm.

A good portion of this series addresses the evidence of the blood that suggests a match of the blood of O.J. Simpson with that found at the crime scene. Yet, the blood of O.J.'s relatives such as his son could produce equally compelling conclusions that Jason was at the crime scene, committed the murders in an act of rage, later phoned his father who visited the crime scene, and undoubtedly stepped in the blood. Within twenty-four hours and prior to his own arrest, O.J. had hired a criminal defense attorney to represent Jason

Over time, high profile murder cases tend to sort themselves out. In the JonBenet Ramsey case, the most recent scenario suggests that the brother of JonBenet killed his sister with a blow to the head in a moment of rage after she swiped a piece of pineapple from his plate. In this reading of the evidence, the parents covered for the little boy, fooling the authorities for decades.

A parent will often stop at nothing in order to protect a child. That may be true as well in the case of O.J. Simpson and his son Jason. Although this six-part series was uneven, especially in the final two episodes, it nonetheless works closely to the evidentiary record to challenge the viewer to come to terms with the major contradictions in the case. Only time will tell whether or not Jason Lamar Simpson has a conscience.

Fallacious reasoning and felonious production value

[industrialwonk · 1/10 · 23 January 2017]

Unfortunately, I happened to "side-eye" this show indirectly as my wife was watching and waiting in suspense for a mind bending revelation that will never come. This show exists only because critical thinking has vanished in America to such an extent that fallacies can now take the place of fact-finding and truth. A fictional General Jack D. Ripper said that " as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to replenish our precious bodily fluids." Pure water is akin to pure information, people cannot process fake and tainted information with impunity from harm. I frankly think that anyone producing an offering forth fallacious programming, such as this, needs to be charged with a Class One Felony and put in jail forever. A better hell for these people would for them to be forced to binge watch their own tripe until they squealed or begged for mercy.

Starts Off Great but Turns Rather Pointless

[Michael_Elliott · 6 February 2018]

Is O.J. Innocent? The Missing Evidence (2017)

You can check out the individual episodes to hear my thoughts on each of the six but this here is just an overview. This six-part television special has Martin Sheen narrating as an investigator presents new evidence that he claims proves that O.J. Simpson was not guilty of the murders and he points the finger at his oldest son. From here a couple detectives join the case and comb through the evidence to see if they can prove that there was someone else who did the murders.

Again, you can read my thoughts on each episode but I must asy that for the most part I enjoyed this special even though it ends with a major dud and in my opinion the sixth episode is the least entertaining. The highlight of the entire series is the fact that we get some new interviews with many of the key players in the trial including Fred Goldman, Tanya Brown, Detective Tom Lange, Henry Lee, Allan Park, Andrea Scott, Ron Shipp and Kato Kaelin.

The episodes present some rather interesting bits of evidence and the series does a very good job at pulling you along just like an old-fashion cliffhanger. They build up your interests, present the story and then they usually leave you with more questions. Throughout the series I was interested in what was going on but it seems every piece of evidence would then lead me to ask several other questions. The Simpson book "If I Did It" is called into play and we're asked to believe the book just in case Simpson told the truth in it.

I'm a Simpson buff and will watch any film or documentary that deals with him. I found the first five episodes to be highlight entertaining and thanks in large part to the new interviews. There's some interesting ideas brought up here but I think most of it gets flushed down the toiled during the final ten-minutes of the last episode. I don't know, I just feel like the producers of this were playing a joke the entire time as it really just doesn't end very well.

Still, if you're enjoy stuff dealing with the case then it's worth watching.

Keystone Cops (not Tom Lange)

[bew-31931 · 1/10 · 26 February 2017]

After Lange says, Blood, Blood and more Blood, you can change channels unless you want to laugh a lot.

Only value was Tom Lange's appearances, and even he was disappointing when he said "there it is" as a fake Bronco was produced with reproduced blood stains.

Stop doing these Mr Goldman....please, don't dignify them with the time. Same thing Tanya Brown who likely had to be heavily edited when "Gamechanger" mentioned Jason or begged to stay for a minute after she likely told him to get out off camera.

Hope Jason and the home owners at Rockingham and Bundy sue Dear, Sheen and this sham. How many times did they go there or the fake time test at night to film private property? (good thing they were not pulled over for speeding)

So after all that the cop on Big Brother "Game-changer" (take a drink every time he said it Levasseur) and the other guy paid $50,000 for a court appearance could not call up the restaurant owner and the partner they interviewed when they were not showing the time clock and ask if the time cards were two-sided A-B? That and Dear threatening grand jury after he produced nothing but some guy who was trying very hard to pass a polygraph who of course learned of this show filming. (and happened to call in)

Priceless, was that the baseball card guy on Better Call Saul?

They sure had time to keep running out to get Kato more face-time before the show wrapped suddenly to see Georgia Hardstark desperately trying to hide her tattoo on television vs internet version.

Hint-Maybe OJ got out of the driver side and opened the passenger door and reached in? The funny thing is the camera quality and overhead shots were right there with O.J Made in America, the slo-mo of the posse walking in the street sums up how fake this was.

The handwriting expert meeting them outdoors for a minute, and rubber stamping a hand-writing sample as identical even Vincent Laguardia Gambini would have destroyed, it was beyond funny to see someone walk outside, look at a writing sample and just know it's Jason Simpson.

This was actually quite a compelling documentary. Hear me out.

[mybeautifulchaos · 10/10 · 20 April 2024]

Before I begin, I must say that I feel many of the people who rated this documentary over the years were completely biased and closed-minded. After all, much of the evidence surrounding this case was overwhelming and all of it pointed to O. J., and this is still true for today. Coupled with the fact that O. J. legitimately sought to publish a book with his own "hypothetical" confession, there is no doubt in my mind that he was the sole perpetrator of this crime and was the one who had ultimately taken Nicole Brown's and Ron Goldman's lives.

This documentary was actually compelling to watch, and presented much of the evidence that we were shown as well as the pieces we never knew about in a completely different light. There were pieces to this puzzle that were never solved many years ago, but after hearing from the two investigators that were invited to look into this case and reading O. J.'s written account of what took place on June 12, 1994, it is very difficult to rule out an accomplice.

However, it does, in fact, appear that O. J. acted alone to carry out the murders, even if someone had accompanied him to the scene to act as his designated driver that night. The blood evidence that was found in the vehicle correlates this hypothesis, but I think it's time that people rule O. J.'s son out and consider that maybe, just maybe, the anonymous person that O. J. met prior to the murders that he wrote about in his book is exactly the person who went with him when he went to confront Nicole and Ron. After all, Jason's time card would absolve him of any involvement of his father's evil deed, no matter how much Bill Dear wants to drag him into this mess.

Before I conclude my review, I have to commend the investigators for remaining firm with Dear, for seeking the truth no matter what that may be, and for reaching unbiased conclusions based on legitimate evidence. I think Bill could learn a thing or two from you. As Detective Lange even stated during this series, sometimes you have to learn to accept that there are some things you will never know.

With that said, this was an excellent documentary and was very well done. Mohandie and Levasseur were the ones who put in real detective work based on their experience with the police force, and I hope Bill eventually learns to accept the only logical outcome they had come to even if he is too prideful to admit that he is wrong. Thank you both for standing up for the truth and not caving into a conspiracy theory that holds no merit in the end.

10/10. I totally recommend.

Who did the makeup job!?

[danioralia · 3/10 · 21 January 2017]

There is no way I believe OJ is innocent but it's interesting to have on for background TV I guess. I just cannot stop staring at how bad the makeup is on these guys. In one scene when they are looking at a duplicate Bronco in a underground parking garage they look green as if an ill person. I dunno it may sound funny but what has my attention so much in watching this is me not getting over how bad the makeup artist is here in the touch ups. It bothered me enough that I actually had to look this up to leave a comment. I have always been interested in watching OJ documentaries this case is one I remember so vividly as a 8 year old when it happened. This documentary has my least amount attention though, it also appears super scripted so my interest was easily getting lost when this is a topic I'm normally glued to.

Overly excited people trying to be detectives!

[bellab1972 · 2/10 · 25 April 2022]

I woke up after a nap with this show on and watched it for a while.. All I saw were a few unintelligent people trying to appear clever unravelling the Oj Simpson situation. Yes, they asked questions but ignored the obvious. Nichole Simpsons watch broke at a certain time supposedly when she got murdered. The question I would ask would be 'was her watch set accurately to the correct time' and 'did it stop working immediately after her murder'.. Not all watches are set to precisely the correct time. Nearly every assumption they made I could tear apart and the people on the show were so excited when they actually thought of something.. Basically, this show was a total waste of time and effort..

Entertainment only!

[erinloshaw · 2/10 · 3 March 2019]

As a piece of entertainment it is well done. However, like the book it is based on, it is so misleading that it dangerous.