PDA

View Full Version : OJ Simpson Found Guilty



Dom Heffner
10-04-2008, 09:37 AM
Exactly 13 years to the day he was acquitted of killing his ex-wife and Ronald Goldman.

Could spend the rest of his life in jail.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27010657/

RedsBaron
10-04-2008, 09:50 AM
Exactly 13 years to the day he was acquitted of killing his ex-wife and Ronald Goldman.

Could spend the rest of his life in jail.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27010657/

If he spends the rest of his life in jail, how will he ever be able to find the "real killers" of Nicole and Goldman? :rolleyes: There are surely a few golf courses that O.J. has not yet had an opportunity to check out in his never ending quest to find those murderers.

Sea Ray
10-04-2008, 10:19 AM
That's great news. I think OJ was guilty 13 years ago and I also think he's guilty of using a gun and intimidating a couple folks in this instance which is pretty much what he was convicted of. In a sense the two trials were connected because the whole reason OJ had this issue of moving his memorabilia around the "underground" was to avoid paying money to the Goldman family. He lost the civil trial because of how the criminal trial went and now it leads to this. It really did all come back to him.

Of course he'll appeal and he may still walk but he'll be in jail for awhile now and I doubt he has the fight he had as a 48 yr old. He also doesn't have Johnnie Cochran anymore. This process will be much harder on him this time around.

Joseph
10-04-2008, 10:29 AM
I too think he committed the crime a decade and a half ago, however based on our judicial system the 'right' verdict was reached. I'm a huge supporter of the beyond reasonable doubt. I'd rather a few guilty walk than many innocents go to jail.

Anyway, I too hope he is sentenced based only on this crime and not the specter of the previous one.

Bip Roberts
10-04-2008, 12:13 PM
I love how no one cares anymore. It was a huge race war back in 95 but now its just a shoulder shrugger.

Dom Heffner
10-04-2008, 12:36 PM
Of course he'll appeal and he may still walk

Success with this strategy rests in the 1%-3% range.

Because there was a gun involved, he's facing a minimum 15 years.

Not sure where parole comes in or not- haven't caught that in the coverage.

GAC
10-04-2008, 12:49 PM
Exactly 13 years to the day he was acquitted of killing his ex-wife and Ronald Goldman.

Does anyone think it was more then just coincedence that the jury handed their verdict down on that exact day?

Dom Heffner
10-04-2008, 01:11 PM
Does anyone think it was more then just coincedence that the jury handed their verdict down on that exact day?

Honest truth- I came a hair of writing in my original post the following:

Attention, GAC: You were right, I now believe. :)

(I know this is not what you are referring to, but I couldn't resist.)

Sea Ray
10-04-2008, 03:38 PM
I love how no one cares anymore. It was a huge race war back in 95 but now its just a shoulder shrugger.

The people I've talked to do care. They're thrilled. One commented "maybe this will knock the smirk off his face". I think it might depend on your age. I remember seeing OJ play football, compete in the Superstars on Wide World of Sports on Saturday afternoons, do Hertz commercials, Monday Night Football, etc...just be the all everything athlete. What happens to him now does interest me.

redsfanmia
10-04-2008, 03:56 PM
You know its just a shame when an upstanding citizen like Mr Simpson gets railroaded by the legal system and is found guilty of a crime for which he is totally innocent. The man has spent the last 13 years of his life searching for the killers of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman and this is the thanks he gets. This verdict just make me lose faith in the entire legal system.:rolleyes:

SunDeck
10-04-2008, 04:03 PM
He's got a new book under contract. The working title is, "If I did threaten those people with a gun, here is how I would have done it."

Matt700wlw
10-04-2008, 04:17 PM
I guess it's time to retire the Joe Deters "OJ Simpson is playing golf today" cut from the Stooge Report file...

GAC
10-04-2008, 04:51 PM
He's got a new book under contract. The working title is, "If I did threaten those people with a gun, here is how I would have done it."

:lol:

Hap
10-04-2008, 05:19 PM
.

FlightRick
10-04-2008, 05:55 PM
Leaving 13 years ago, well, 13 years ago, I can't believe that I'm actually having a hard time wrapping my head around this and feeling good...

I mean: (1) I am a strong believer in all actual CRIMES having VICTIMS, and in this case? I see none. I see two weasels in possession of OJ's stuff who pretty much deserved to be shaked down and who were profiting from the incident within hours of it happening. Who really cares if these slimeballs got pee-your-pants scared while OJ and his henchmen were on their mission of recovery? Not I. Sue OJ for the cost of dry-cleaning and be done with it. (2) This case meets no common sense definition of "kidnapping" that I've ever contemplated. Maybe it meets a legal one, but since when has the law ever coincided 100% with common sense?

And then there's (3) the revenge factor. Whether the jury was retro-victing OJ for 13 years ago or not, I don't know or really care; but what we do know is that Vegas cops were bragging about being able to "get" OJ when LA couldn't, and the prosecutor's office approached it the same way. Vindictively. Which, hey, maybe that's fair motivation when it comes to OJ.... but in this case, he was tried concurrently with his primary accomplice, who had nothing to do with 13 years ago. It's impossible to feel any sympathy for OJ under any circumstances, but that's kinda sucky for that guy. But my guess is they HAD to be tried together for fear that if they weren't, the cases would diverge with being treated as a relatively tepid "crime" without much in the way of malice, while the other would still reek mightily of the "revenge factor" as it hurtled towards melodrama and maximum sentencing.


Rick

MWM
10-04-2008, 06:06 PM
I don't feel any pity for OJ, I thought he was guilty 13 years ago and got away with murder. It's disgusting. But having said that, I have a real hard time believing OJ Simpson is capable of getting a fair trial with a jury in this country, whther it's assault or whether it's jaywalking. This thread is evidence of just how prejudiced folks are when it comes to him. It's justified prejudice, but I can't believe that it doesn't affect every potential juror. But no one cares because it's OJ and I doubt any judge is going to question that as there's nothing to gain and everything to lose by it. It's an incredibly slippery slope.

guttle11
10-04-2008, 06:21 PM
I don't feel any pity for OJ, I thought he was guilty 13 years ago and got away with murder. It's disgusting. But having said that, I have a real hard time believing OJ Simpson is capable of getting a fair trial with a jury in this country, whther it's assault or whether it's jaywalking. This thread is evidence of just how prejudiced folks are when it comes to him. It's justified prejudice, but I can't believe that it doesn't affect every potential juror. But no one cares because it's OJ and I doubt any judge is going to question that as there's nothing to gain and everything to lose by it. It's an incredibly slippery slope.


Well, this was a pretty open and shut case to begin with. Audio of OJ storming into the room, not allowing them to leave, using weapons illegally to intimidate, and stealing personal property. Textbook kidnapping and robbery at gunpoint. OJ's camp couldn't even come up with a defense that would even remotely put doubt into the biggest OJ supporter in the world.

But I do agree with your premise. If the case was less clear, you would be 100% correct.

Degenerate39
10-04-2008, 08:17 PM
Does the glove fit this time?

Matt700wlw
10-05-2008, 03:11 AM
He gets away with brutally murdering two people and he's stupid enough to put himself into another criminal situation.......he should be locked up for being a moron

Matt700wlw
10-05-2008, 03:20 AM
This is the perfect example of getting what's coming to you.....his celebrity won't get him out of this one... He's been one cocky piece of crap since the day he got a chuckle 13 years ago....he's nothing more than an irrelevant piece of human excrement.

Sea Ray
10-05-2008, 12:16 PM
He gets away with brutally murdering two people and he's stupid enough to put himself into another criminal situation.......he should be locked up for being a moron


This is the perfect response for MWM's concerns. Knowing that he's going to be dealt with harshly by the police and the legal system, he can't afford to go around threatening folks at gunpoint. The legal system gave him a huge break 13 years ago, now it's coming down hard on him. He wouldn't be in this situation if he'd had better sense. He should have no complaints about his luck overall in the American judicial system.

paintmered
10-05-2008, 12:20 PM
If this were a basketball game, O.J. just got the bad end of a make-up call.

MWM
10-05-2008, 12:24 PM
The legal system gave him a huge break 13 years ago, now it's coming down hard on him.

So you think what happened 13 years ago SHOULD factor into the judicial process for this incident?

Chip R
10-05-2008, 01:17 PM
I don't think O.J. has carte blanche to commit a crime and not be convicted of it just because people think he was guilty of the other murders.

Sea Ray
10-05-2008, 10:31 PM
So you think what happened 13 years ago SHOULD factor into the judicial process for this incident?

No, not at all.

I'm saying that OJ can't complain about the judicial system being biased against him. Like anything else in life, you win some, you lose some...

George Foster
10-05-2008, 11:51 PM
I too think he committed the crime a decade and a half ago, however based on our judicial system the 'right' verdict was reached. I'm a huge supporter of the beyond reasonable doubt. I'd rather a few guilty walk than many innocents go to jail.

Anyway, I too hope he is sentenced based only on this crime and not the specter of the previous one.

Your right the law says "reasonable doubt" NOT "beyond the shadow of a doubt." Unless you have a video recording of the murder in HD, there will always be doubt, but is it reasonable?

If you threw out all the blood evidence, there were still footprints of the murderer all over the crime scene. Those shoes were size 13 Bruno magli shoes. The prosecutors office produced a credit card receipt that Simpson purchased a pair of size 13 Bruno Magli shoes, that Simpson said he lost while traveling. What would common sense say happened? What is reasonable? How many people can afford or wear these shoes? Who would want her dead, and who had assaulted her in the past? It just so happened he lost them? Again what is reasonable?

Guilty.....behond a reasonable doubt.

Matt700wlw
10-05-2008, 11:52 PM
So you think what happened 13 years ago SHOULD factor into the judicial process for this incident?

I think the judge should give him life and tell him the reason is he should have already had it.......that, however, wouldn't fly...

Sea Ray
10-06-2008, 09:49 AM
Your right the law says "reasonable doubt" NOT "beyond the shadow of a doubt." Unless you have a video recording of the murder in HD, there will always be doubt, but is it reasonable?

If you threw out all the blood evidence, there were still footprints of the murderer all over the crime scene. Those shoes were size 13 Bruno magli shoes. The prosecutors office produced a credit card receipt that Simpson purchased a pair of size 13 Bruno Magli shoes, that Simpson said he lost while traveling. What would common sense say happened? What is reasonable? How many people can afford or wear these shoes? Who would want her dead, and who had assaulted her in the past? It just so happened he lost them? Again what is reasonable?

Guilty.....behond a reasonable doubt.

There is rarely a trial where there's more evidence.