O.J. Simpson sentenced to at least 15 years

[HAL 9000 96]

Where are all the supporters from OJ's original murder trial? They claimed he was framed by racist cops last time so what's the difference now?

My guess is that this time the media coverage was a lot lower so they could find a jury that didn't know anything about the lastest charge. By contrast, the OJ in 1995 (?) were the most uninformed people they could find in SOCAL.

Why are you always scraping the barrel for scandal?

Scandals that only exist in his brain.

After the obligatory nonsense we get some stabs at answering my question.

He wasn't convicted in 1995 because the prosecution bungled the case

Or that lots of money can buy really good lawyers.

Coming from you, its automatically converted into positive confirmation.

He wasn't convicted in 1995 because the prosecution bungled the case.

Well I guess the case was rightfully thrown out. We shouldn't be interested in whether someone actually did commit murder or not but rather to make sure that the police followed their check sheet. After all murders are cut and dry like taking an exam. So if one document does not have its "t" crossed, throw the dam case out.

PS I thought the glove didn't fit.

Not thrown out... it made it to verdict without a mistrial. FWIW I hope he rots in hell this time around.

Karma is a b!tch.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

He wasn't convicted in 1995 because the prosecution bungled the case.

Well I guess the case was rightfully thrown out. We shouldn't be interested in whether someone actually did commit murder or not but rather to make sure that the police followed their check sheet. After all murders are cut and dry like taking an exam. So if one document does not have its "t" crossed, throw the dam case out.

PS I thought the glove didn't fit.

So presumably you're perfectly fine with cops planting evidence to ensure conviction because they "know" that someone is guilty?

[jundp 191]

That's insane. I hope George Bush can fix this before he leaves office.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

After the obligatory nonsense we get some stabs at answering my question.

Nope. I never supported OJ.

[Heracles 417]

So presumably you're perfectly fine with cops planting evidence to ensure conviction because they "know" that someone is guilty?

Yes because that happens all of the time.

Just the other day I was watching the crime channel and was thinking that in reality out of three weeks worth of murders reported on the local news, usually most murderers are never caught. So just think of how many are roaming the streets freely. Heck one of you guys could be a murderer for all I know. Consider the United States homicide rate, that is extremely likely.

So I agree six, lets make a difficult job even harder to do. It doesn't take a genius to hide a crime. Contrary to CSI, most times the police have nothing to go by.

Edited December 5, 2008 by Aficionado

[Sister Fracas 5]

Ok let's see if I have this straight...

• No one on this thread supports OJ

Everyone thinks he's a murdering mess

No one is sorry to see his butt going to jail

But yet we find a way to argue about it... only on VJ! LOL

[alienlovechild 75]

After the obligatory nonsense we get some stabs at answering my question.

Nope. I never supported OJ.

Never claimed otherwise. Just for somebody to explain the difference between OJ trials. An OJ supporter would presumably be more dedicated in offering a defense but explaining the differences in verdicts was the main reason for asking. Abacus 9000 may insist there was no scandal then or now but were some questions raised.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So presumably you're perfectly fine with cops planting evidence to ensure conviction because they "know" that someone is guilty?

Yes because that happens all of the time.

Just the other day I was watching the crime channel and was thinking that in reality out of three weeks worth of murders reported on the local news, usually most murderers are never caught. So just think of how many are roaming the streets freely. Heck one of you guys could be a murderer for all I know. Consider the United States homicide rate, that is extremely likely.

So I agree six, lets make a difficult job even harder to do. It doesn't take a genius to hide a crime. Contrary to CSI, most times the police have nothing to go by.

So you think the police should *fix* evidence to ensure convictions?

I guess I'm not surprised.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

After the obligatory nonsense we get some stabs at answering my question.

Nope. I never supported OJ.

Never claimed otherwise. Just for somebody to explain the difference between OJ trials. An OJ supporter would presumably be more dedicated in offering a defense but explaining the differences in verdicts was the main reason for asking. Abacus 9000 may insist there was no scandal then or now but were some questions raised.

Well its obvious isn't it - the trial took place in a different jurisdiction, an armed robbery doesn't have the headline interest of a triple murder (complete with a freeway car chase plastered all over the evening news). Nor does it seem that OJ had a lawyer who was able to build a case for racial discrimination and play on the fears and prejudices of the black community in LA.

[Peikko 1,575]

Alien, you do understand how trials work, right? I mean - the jury have to go on the evidence presented in court The difference between the two trials would seem to be that in trial one, there wasn't enough evidence to convict Simpson, whereas in this trial, there quite clearly was.

[alienlovechild 75]

triple murder?

Is that the BBC was reporting?

[Heracles 417]

So you think the police should *fix* evidence to ensure convictions?

I guess I'm not surprised.

They shouldn't need to do it but the system can be unrealistic. Like in cases such as that cop whose three wives have mysteriously died. He is a cop so he obviously got rid of the evidence. The only thing they have to go by is circumstances. Same with the Casey Anthony case.

Unless we develop technology that can forcefully scan someones mind and retrieve what thy have seen or there are multiple security cameras filming something at once, we will never have a clear cut case.

Edited December 5, 2008 by Aficionado

[amiquechu 0]

I read in an article on ESPN last night (can't find it now) that the prison OJ is most likely to end up in is in Ely, Nevada. I think the article said the main group there that more or less "runs things" was called something like the Aryan Warriors. I'm guessing if OJ does end up there, his new Warrior friends will see to it that he receives a fair "delayed sentence" for the two murders

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So you think the police should *fix* evidence to ensure convictions?

I guess I'm not surprised.

They shouldn't need to do it but the system can be unrealistic. Like in cases such as that cop whose three wives have mysteriously died. He is a cop so he obviously got rid of the evidence. The only thing they have to go by is circumstances. Same with the Casey Anthony case.

Unless we develop technology that can forcefully scan someones mind and retrieve what thy have seen or there are multiple security cameras filming something at once, we will never have a clear cut case.

Exactly the point - its never clear cut.

You can't justify breaking the law simply because you think that the person is guilty.

[Peikko 1,575]

Presumably the likes of BY don't really need a criminal justice system - all they need to do is declare someone guilty and off with their heads!