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.

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.

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.

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.