Christopher Darden, crybaby

Christopher Darden should probably keep his mouth shut. What he shouldn't do is now, 17 years later, hurl vague accusations at the defense attorneys who represented OJ Simpson at his murder trial. Ooh, the defense attorneys must have manipulated the glove, futzed with the lining, spirited the evidence out of the courtroom during a break so they could rip it.

Sure, man. Sure that's what happened. You didn't lose that case because the prosecution tried the most epically awful case ever. Taking 9 months to put on evidence is obscene and unnecessary in almost any case. Of course you lost. The jury HATED you for taking up so much of their lives!

But rather than focusing on all the stupid things the prosecution did in that trial, let's just talk about this one stupid thing. If you want to blame anyone for the glove incident, it needs to be you. You're the idiot who let yourself get goaded into having OJ try the glove on in the courtroom. You know how you never ask a question you don't know the answer to? Well, that's kinda what you did there. At least it's the same principle. You let the witness have control over something in front of the jury. That's entirely on you. And, really, trying on a dried out, tight-fitting leather glove over a latex glove? You couldn't possibly have thought that would end well, did you? Every trial advocacy professor in the nation was screaming at the television the day you let that happen.

Now, though, instead of just owning up to what a boneheaded mistake you made, you're making accusations. You are accusing defense attorneys of violating the ethical rules of the profession. I take that very seriously. And as you should well know making unfounded accusations is itself a violation of those ethical rules. So you might want to think about it a bit more. The accusation you are making, though, potentially also rises to the level of a crime. Manipulating physical evidence could most definitely be considered obstruction of justice, no?

It's easy to hurl these accusations 17 years later, knowing that no one will, or even really can, look into them. Memories fade and no one will be able to say whether the bailiff charged with securing the evidence during breaks turned his back for a minute or left the room. And the main target of your accusation, Johnnie Cochran, isn't around to defend himself.

So once again, sir, I would recommend that you just shut up. You lost. You screwed up big time. And to now make baseless accusations that can never be substantiated because so much time has passed makes you look like a sour grapes crybaby loser. And an unethical jerk to boot.