No one is saying OJ is not complicit he is simply not the killer.

>*This is key* OJ had a history of conducting violence against
>one of the victims, which was his wife. Jason does not.

Jason has a history of violence against women period and using knives. How is that not key? How is it not key that the blood and skin found under Nicole's nails are not OJ's and he had no marks on his body after a voluntary strip search?

In his past, Jason had nearly killed a girlfriend (with a knife) and almost seriously injured another in fits of rage (whereas O.J. has been accused of domestic abuse, but he has never been arrested for assault and was not prone to use weapons to settle a dispute).


>I heard about the handwritten vs. electronic time card. I
>don't get the implied meaning from it.

Why would you hand write your time card when the machine works just fine? One reason is to write a different time other than what the clock would stamp. If arriving late to work or not all isn't an issue having a machine stamp your card shouldn't matter.

Jason worked at the Restaurant Nicole was to eat at that evening, but they ended up elsewhere.

>That "OJ"= hates the sight of blood" has no relevance.
>Momentary rage can easily overtake a blood phobia. Also, he
>was giving Nicole a bloody face, despite his fear of blood.

No relevance even though he nearly decapitated someone and then as stated meticulously cleaned off all the blood? You do know police can find blood after it's been washed up right? Do you not believe they didn't do such an analysis of anything OJ touched?

>I don't know about the unidentified fingerprints. Were they
>unidentified cause they were partials or unable to be
>identified for other reasons?

Unidentified because they don't know whose they are. Again:
15 separate unidentified fingerprints. Do you really think 15 partial fingerprints is worth writing about?

>To me, the OJ Simpson case is not that complex or unique. It
>fits the pattern of a lot of domestic violence situations that
>ends up in murder.

You should check that link. Far more evidence supports it was Jason and not OJ. It's as non complex as you state.
>
>It is not plausible to me that his son did. OJ owned a rare
>pair of shoes and a bloody footprint from that show was at the
>scene. It's just...yeah OJ brutally killed those two people.

Yes of course he was at the scene to help get his kid out of trouble

Somehow you missed the fact that Jason has a history using knives to threaten people, but if you want to believe it's OJ go for it.