Jury finds O.J. Simpson guilty on all charges !!

[winbig]

If Obama gets elected, than maybe he'll grant O.J. a pardon.

get real.

 

[NoMouthToScream]

If Obama gets elected, than maybe he'll grant O.J. a pardon.

That is the most ridiculous and obscene statement I've heard yet. Obama has many years as a lawyer and knows the legal system very well. There would be no reason for him to release a convicted criminal especially one as heinous as O.J. Simpson.

You are clearly implying something else with that statement and it reveals much about your own character.

 

[tim5ny]

That is the most ridiculous and obscene statement I've heard yet. Obama has many years as a lawyer and knows the legal system very well. There would be no reason for him to release a convicted criminal especially one as heinous as O.J. Simpson.

You are clearly implying something else with that statement and it reveals much about your own character.

Spank you very much!

Maybe I was rather implying something about Obama's character. Ever think of that?

 

[1819]

That is the most ridiculous and obscene statement I've heard yet. Obama has many years as a lawyer and knows the legal system very well. There would be no reason for him to release a convicted criminal especially one as heinous as O.J. Simpson.

You are clearly implying something else with that statement and it reveals much about your own character.

heinous? he was cleared of murder charges despite what the public believes. if we want to stand behind a justice system in this country we have to take the good with the bad and the popular with the unpopular. same with the recent conviction. why would he get life in prison? he has no prior criminal record. if we are supposed to treat everyone equal then why is he different? i happen to believe justice is being served but my belief, along with the rest of the public, is not supposed to matter in a court of law.

 

[j_l]

heinous? he was cleared of murder charges despite what the public believes. if we want to stand behind a justice system in this country we have to take the good with the bad and the popular with the unpopular. same with the recent conviction. why would he get life in prison? he has no prior criminal record. if we are supposed to treat everyone equal then why is he different? i happen to believe justice is being served but my belief, along with the rest of the public, is not supposed to matter in a court of law.

Ok, lets just cut the crap here.

He's guilty.

The whole jury was bought.

End of.

 

[1819]

Ok, lets just cut the crap here.

He's guilty.

The whole jury was bought.

End of.

lol. you were there? you know first hand? we cant have it both ways here in the u.s. good with the bad. if we want the system to stay like it is we have to rely on the 12 in the courtroom not the millions who watch on tv. when john gotti walked, countless times, they cheered in the streets. he murdered dozens. that sits well with the public because the media made him a star and oj a monster. blame the media, blame the lawyers. not oj or john gotti. again i believe he is guilty just like you do but we have absolutely no way of knowing except what we saw on tv.

 

[Rusty]

lol. you were there? you know first hand? we cant have it both ways here in the u.s. good with the bad. if we want the system to stay like it is we have to rely on the 12 in the courtroom not the millions who watch on tv. when john gotti walked, countless times, they cheered in the streets. he murdered dozens. that sits well with the public because the media made him a star and oj a monster. blame the media, blame the lawyers. not oj or john gotti. again i believe he is guilty just like you do but we have absolutely no way of knowing except what we saw on tv.

Hang on, first things first.
OJ was the murderer not the media or the lawyers can we at least blame Him for that?
Just because most lawyers and reporters are about as pure as a fart from Satans arse does not mean we should apportion some of the blame onto them.
This man was blessed with fame and fortune and had it all.
When he became twisted and embittered he took it out on others rather than deal with his issues.
Even then after being given another chance that few would ever get he managed to prove what a low life He is.
The man does not even seek forgiveness because he has no regard for other peoples thoughts or feelings.
He took away Two lives and while they have been rotting in the ground He has been walking around as a free man.
I do not accept that you must take the good with the bad.
That is what reform is for.
We got rid of death penalty over here exactly because we were not prepared to accept taking the good with the bad.
The jury system is fine but legal representation needs to be equal and that is where reforms should be made.
There can not be justice if the scales are unbalanced.

 

[1819]

Hang on, first things first.
OJ was the murderer not the media or the lawyers can we at least blame Him for that?
Just because most lawyers and reporters are about as pure as a fart from Satans arse does not mean we should apportion some of the blame onto them.
This man was blessed with fame and fortune and had it all.
When he became twisted and embittered he took it out on others rather than deal with his issues.
Even then after being given another chance that few would ever get he managed to prove what a low life He is.
The man does not even seek forgiveness because he has no regard for other peoples thoughts or feelings.
He took away Two lives and while they have been rotting in the ground He has been walking around as a free man.
I do not accept that you must take the good with the bad.
That is what reform is for.
We got rid of death penalty over here exactly because we were not prepared to accept taking the good with the bad.
The jury system is fine but legal representation needs to be equal and that is where reforms should be made.
There can not be justice if the scales are unbalanced.

my question is how do you know he is a murderer? you just said the jury system is fine. the jury found him not guilty. so despite what you, me and millions may believe...legally he is not a murderer. that is my whole agruement. you absolutely must take the good with the bad. how can we cry over it? not guilty by a jury of his peers. end of story. as far as the death penalty...we got rid of it because it was too costly. not because of some moral issue. if we can ever figure out how to punish the guilty, with death, swiftly and error free, then it may actually do some good. no more 20 years on death row. no more automatic appeal, then after appeal after appeal. apply it to certain criminal instances. a "smoking gun rule" kind of thing. we have the resources. video evidence is a strong tool today. that along with other evidence can be enough to convict without error. if a suspect walks into a 7-11, and is seen on film, shooting the clerk then he should be put to death immediatley. this will serve as a deterent and solve the problem of overcrowding while taking a danger out of society. i am a firm believer in second chances and hard luck sories and blah, blah, blah. i am also a firm believer in taking responsibility for one's self. i always cut to the chase. i try to filter out all the b.s. that our society is so good at throwing out there and clouding the situation. if you steal a car and get caught, pay the price and hopefully learn a lesson. if you steal a car, run from the cops, and kill a person in the crosswalk well then tough luck. you fry. you dont want to fry you dont steal a car, to bad. i dont want to hear it's the cops fault for chasing. i dont want to hear it's the taverns fault for selling you beer. if you break it down to it's simplist form...dont steal the car.

 

[Rusty]

my question is how do you know he is a murderer? you just said the jury system is fine. the jury found him not guilty. so despite what you, me and millions may believe...legally he is not a murderer. that is my whole agruement. you absolutely must take the good with the bad. how can we cry over it? not guilty by a jury of his peers. end of story. as far as the death penalty...we got rid of it because it was too costly. not because of some moral issue. if we can ever figure out how to punish the guilty, with death, swiftly and error free, then it may actually do some good. no more 20 years on death row. no more automatic appeal, then after appeal after appeal. apply it to certain criminal instances. a "smoking gun rule" kind of thing. we have the resources. video evidence is a strong tool today. that along with other evidence can be enough to convict without error. if a suspect walks into a 7-11, and is seen on film, shooting the clerk then he should be put to death immediatley. this will serve as a deterent and solve the problem of overcrowding while taking a danger out of society. i am a firm believer in second chances and hard luck sories and blah, blah, blah. i am also a firm believer in taking responsibility for one's self. i always cut to the chase. i try to filter out all the b.s. that our society is so good at throwing out there and clouding the situation. if you steal a car and get caught, pay the price and hopefully learn a lesson. if you steal a car, run from the cops, and kill a person in the crosswalk well then tough luck. you fry. you dont want to fry you dont steal a car, to bad. i dont want to hear it's the cops fault for chasing. i dont want to hear it's the taverns fault for selling you beer. if you break it down to it's simplist form...dont steal the car.

The point I am making is the jury found him not guilty because of the defense he had.
They put vast resources into throwing doubt onto the way the evidence was gathered and got into the technicalities that surround it.
If he had been a poor man he would not of been able to afford such a defense and got a 3rd rate council and no doubt of been convicted for murder.

There is a solicitor here that specialises in getting celebrities off from traffic offenses using legal loops holes.
He is a good Solicitor but if you can not afford him then you get found guilty.
With this sort of inequality and hypocrisy in the justice system then it is little wonder many people assume the system is corrupt and contemptuous.
Of course law only came into being to protect the haves from the have nots so it is not that surprising that these kind flaws still exist.
This is what should be reformed.

As for the death penalty being too expensive?
Surely it costs a great deal more to feed,house and police someone for the rest of their life.
We got rid of the death penalty because it is morally abhorrent.
It is very natural for those close to loved ones who were murdered to want revenge but revenge is not justice.
Maybe some of these animals do not deserve life but who among us is pure and wise enough to make that judgment?

If it is wrong for an individual to kill another no matter how justified they feel how can it be right for the state to murder in the name of justice?

 

[jas2587]

LOL no no in Johnnie Cochran Voice
the Glove did not fit
you must acquit


Cindy

 

[suzecat]

The point I am making is the jury found him not guilty because of the defense he had.

Boy howdy

They put vast resources into throwing doubt onto the way the evidence was gathered and got into the technicalities that surround it.
If he had been a poor man he would not of been able to afford such a defense and got a 3rd rate council and no doubt of been convicted for murder.

The good thing that happened was that protocols for gathering evidence were changed (drastically). The poor/incarcerated now have access to attorneys that will verify guilt or innocence through new DNA results of the evidence that was used to convict. Two of OJ's dream team are involved in what is known as "The Innocence Project" as a result of the OJ mess.

As for the death penalty being too expensive?
Surely it costs a great deal more to feed,house and police someone for the rest of their life.

I used to think that must be true, but it costs much more money to take a prisoner through the appeal process towards the death chamber.

If it is wrong for an individual to kill another no matter how justified they feel how can it be right for the state to murder in the name of justice?

Rusty, it's a crazy mixed up world. Who'd think that being put to death would not deter someone from committing capital murder?

 

[1819]

rusty...... i do disagree with you on the death penalty but that is for another time... i agree 100% with you on a flawed justice system. there is no right and wrong. it is simply winning and losing. you also get as much justice as you can afford. a defense attorney is supposed to be in your corner to make sure you are treated fairly even if guilty. they are not supposed to try and win at all costs. unfortunately that is what happens 100% of the time. a defense attorney is better than any priest. you can confess all your sins to him and he will try to save your a*s as long as your check clears. how the hell did that happen?

 

[RobWin]

rusty...... i do disagree with you on the death penalty but that is for another time... i agree 100% with you on a flawed justice system. there is no right and wrong. it is simply winning and losing. you also get as much justice as you can afford. a defense attorney is supposed to be in your corner to make sure you are treated fairly even if guilty. they are not supposed to try and win at all costs. unfortunately that is what happens 100% of the time. a defense attorney is better than any priest. you can confess all your sins to him and he will try to save your a*s as long as your check clears. how the hell did that happen?

You said a mouthful there 1819, and oh so true isn't it !!

 

[Rusty]

Thanks Suzecat I have learned something there as regards the repercussions of the OJ case.
I still can not believe it is more expensive to put someone to death than incarcerate them though, remember people who are doing life sentences have appeals too.
I guess I will have to research it properly.

1819 I understand people have very strong views on the death penalty and I am not saying mine is more valid than yours I am just fighting my corner so to speak.
It is much like the abortion debate with both sides having valid arguments, I guess it just comes down to our sensibilities.
Of course that should not stop us trying to convince each other we are right

I think as Rob astutely pointed out in bold, you have concisely summed up what I was trying to say.

 

[tim5ny]

No more golfing and country clubs for O.J. ! He may be playing 18 holes in prison, but he wont need to bring his clubs or caddy. He's 61 years old now, so if they give him a nice long sentence, than we can be rest assurred that this pile of shit will never be yelling out "Four!" again!