OJ Simpson Guilty on ALL 12 Counts!!!

bootlegger10

What is disgusting about this world, is that there is always someone to stand up for murderers. Why pick OJ's side? What drives people to do this, when he is so obviously guilty. 100% guilty.

brandon10

It's tough to argue something with people who are too slow to even understand my arguement.

1. I'm not sticking up for OJ. He may very well be getting what he deserves. But I don't give a shit about him. One way or the other.

2. His murder trial should have no bearing on this new case! But it's quite obvious from the majority here, that's almost an impossibility.

3. People keep saying they know for sure he was guilty. Some even say 100%. But as I said in 1 and 2, I don't give a fuck. It shouldn't pertain to this case.

4. When I was mentioning the West Memphis 3, I was stating what would be an opinion. Not ny opinion, just an opinion.

5. Do I believe in vigilante justice? It all depends. If my stuff was stolen, and I felt going to the police would never achieve getting it back, well then I may gather a few buddies and go try to get my stuff back. And if I did just that, and one of my friends brought a gun and some yelling and shouting ensued, no one got hurt, I left with a few of my things, Then I would never expect to go to prison for an extended period of time. But if someone at the room did tape it( which is very suspicious in itself, it's pretty obvious OJ was set up) and I got caught, I would expect to be punished. But with no previous record, and what happened, I certainly wouldn't expect to serve any significant time.

He was railroaded.

sponger

brandon10 wrote:

But with no previous record, and what happened, I certainly wouldn't expect to serve any significant time.

He was railroaded.

That's what I think too. Statistically, life sentences aren't handed out for what he did, especially with our jails and prisons being so overcrowded.

What happened to OJ could happen to any one of us. Guilty or innocent, we could end up in front of a judge and jury that for whatever reason personally dislikes us, and we would be at the mercy of their prejudice.

wolfbear

brandon10 wrote:

It's tough to argue something with people who are too slow to even understand my arguement.

1. I'm not sticking up for OJ. He may very well be getting what he deserves. But I don't give a shit about him. One way or the other.

2. His murder trial should have no bearing on this new case! But it's quite obvious from the majority here, that's almost an impossibility.

3. People keep saying they know for sure he was guilty. Some even say 100%. But as I said in 1 and 2, I don't give a fuck. It shouldn't pertain to this case.

4. When I was mentioning the West Memphis 3, I was stating what would be an opinion. Not ny opinion, just an opinion.

5. Do I believe in vigilante justice? It all depends. If my stuff was stolen, and I felt going to the police would never achieve getting it back, well then I may gather a few buddies and go try to get my stuff back. And if I did just that, and one of my friends brought a gun and some yelling and shouting ensued, no one got hurt, I left with a few of my things, Then I would never expect to go to prison for an extended period of time. But if someone at the room did tape it( which is very suspicious in itself, it's pretty obvious OJ was set up) and I got caught, I would expect to be punished. But with no previous record, and what happened, I certainly wouldn't expect to serve any significant time.

He was railroaded.

I can see the points you're trying to make, but disagree with the outcome of this.
It was caught on tape and regardless of how it got there, hard to argue that.
How would you feel if you were the person they went after? You say you'd go after your stuff, but would you really go this far? I'd like to think not. If so, I think you should be in jail as well.
I feel that OJ felt he was "above" the law and could do what ever he wanted and got caught. End of story as far as I'm concerned.

SoonForgotten2

sponger wrote:

That's what I think too. Statistically, life sentences aren't handed out for what he did, especially with our jails and prisons being so overcrowded.

What happened to OJ could happen to any one of us. Guilty or innocent, we could end up in front of a judge and jury that for whatever reason personally dislikes us, and we would be at the mercy of their prejudice.

I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where it's December 6 and OJ was sentenced already.

Simpson was at the mercy of the evidence in the case. He was found guilty of 12 charges. He broke the law. It doens't matter what your opinion of those laws are. As they stand, he broke them and has been found guilty of that. Make no mistake, OJ got more breaks in life than you ever will. This time he was caught. It sounds like no matter what the charges or the evidence some people here would believe that he was "railroaded". That's no better than what you're accusing the court of.

If anyone happens to be a practising criminal attorney in Nevada has any input on exactly how OJ was "railroaded" I'd really appreciate hearing it. Otherwise, I don't think anyone else has much to offer.

sponger

SoonForgotten2 wrote:

Make no mistake, OJ got more breaks in life than you ever will.

You see, that's what I'm talking about right there when I say prejudice. Just about everybody on the planet thinks OJ deserves pretty much anything bad that happens to him.

I don't know about the UK, but in the Unites States, a lot of charges in many cases are thrown out for the sake of expedience and a few core charges remain to make sure that at least some crimes are punished.

In this case, the system prosecuted him for everything it could think of.

That's why if this was 1996 and OJ had never had any previous felonious entanglements with the law, the jury wouldn't have convicted him in a matter of weeks, and the general public wouldn't be screaming hooray.

SoonForgotten2

sponger wrote:

In this case, the system prosecuted him for everything it could think of.

That's why if this was 1996 and OJ had never had any previous felonious entanglements with the law, the jury wouldn't have convicted him in a matter of weeks, and the general public wouldn't be screaming hooray.

But the prosecution were within their legal right to do so. They were at no point obligated to throw out any charges. Very strictly legally speaking, Simpson got what he deserved for the crimes he committed.

THC

I am shocked O.J. is going to jail. he seemed like such a likable guy...??!!??

THC

THC wrote:

I am shocked O.J. is going to jail. he seemed like such a likable guy...??!!??

he is probably most pissed that he never found the real killer of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson...he said he was looking for him....never got him it seams...and now the search ends...sad in a way.

sponger

SoonForgotten2 wrote:

But the prosecution were within their legal right to do so. They were at no point obligated to throw out any charges. Very strictly legally speaking, Simpson got what he deserved for the crimes he committed.

The prosecution was within its uncontested legal right to do so. That is, it was a legal right that held ground only because there was no one getting in its way.

OJ's attorney seemed to be just a step above courted appointed. He couldn't even pick a decent jury. And neither the judge nor the jury wanted to stand in the way of the prosecution's position.

And those circumstances aren't typical for the American justice system. A good lawyer will pick a good jury and hold the prosecution's feet to the fire.

SoonForgotten2

sponger wrote:

The prosecution was within its uncontested legal right to do so. That is, it was a legal right that held ground only because there was no one getting in its way.

OJ's attorney seemed to be just a step above courted appointed. He couldn't even pick a decent jury. And neither the judge nor the jury wanted to stand in the way of the prosecution's position.

And those circumstances aren't typical for the American justice system. A good lawyer will pick a good jury and hold the prosecution's feet to the fire.

There's nothing that guarantees the defendant the best defense attorneys in the country to be at his side. He had adequate legal representation, did he not?

Sure, maybe Simpson could have bought his way out if he had any money to do so. Hmmm, I wonder what happened to all those millions anyway...

sponger

SoonForgotten2 wrote:

There's nothing that guarantees the defendant the best defense attorneys in the country to be at his side. He had adequate legal representation, did he not?

Sure, maybe Simpson could have bought his way out if he had any money to do so. Hmmm, I wonder what happened to all those millions anyway...

I'm not talking about the best attorneys in the world. I'm talking ones that have common sense. No attorney in his right mind would allow 11 white peope to serve in a black person's trial.

On top of that, 5 of the jurors disagreed with the 1995 verdict.

He was facing a level of prejudice not commonly seen in American courtrooms. A top rate lawyer would've put a stop to it, but any lawyer with common sense would've at least had more control over it.

SoonForgotten2

sponger wrote:

I'm not talking about the best attorneys in the world. I'm talking ones that have common sense. No attorney in his right mind would allow 11 white peope to serve in a black person's trial.

On top of that, 5 of the jurors disagreed with the 1995 verdict.

He was facing a level of prejudice not commonly seen in American courtrooms. A top rate lawyer would've put a stop to it, but any lawyer with common sense would've at least had more control over it.

Las Vegas has a 10% black population. Two of the six alternate jurors were black. I really doubt this was going to make any difference. Simpson was on tape instructing his accomplices.

Because of his past, there is no way Simpson was ever going to get the same type of "fair" trial that someone without a history would get. That's simply reality. Should that mean OJ can do what he wants without fear of repercussions?

It's funny, I'm used to people complaining when celebrities get special treatment by the courts, but to complain when they're treated like any average (not rich) defendant too?

Anyway you slice it, OJ is to blame for where he's at today.

sponger

SoonForgotten2 wrote:

Las Vegas has a 10% black population. Two of the six alternate jurors were black. I really doubt this was going to make any difference. Simpson was on tape instructing his accomplices.

Because of his past, there is no way Simpson was ever going to get the same type of "fair" trial that someone without a history would get. That's simply reality. Should that mean OJ can do what he wants without fear of repercussions?

It's funny, I'm used to people complaining when celebrities get special treatment by the courts, but to complain when they're treated like any average (not rich) defendant too?

Anyway you slice it, OJ is to blame for where he's at today.

Did at anytime did I say that he should be able to do what he wants without fear of repercussion? That's the second time that you stretched my viewpoint beyond what I actually said. The first time you insinuated that I thought OJ should have the best attorneys in the world. Now you're saying that I think he should be able to do what he really wants.

I think when we cut through the exaggerations, we'll find that our opinions are not all that dissimilar. We both feel that he didn't get a "fair" trial, and we both feel that he is of course guilty of serious crimes.

SoonForgotten2

sponger wrote:

Did at anytime did I say that he should be able to do what he wants without fear of repercussion? That's the second time that you stretched my viewpoint beyond what I actually said. The first time you insinuated that I thought OJ should have the best attorneys in the world. Now you're saying that I think he should be able to do what he really wants.

I think when we cut through the exaggerations, we'll find that our opinions are not all that dissimilar. We both feel that he didn't get a "fair" trial, and we both feel that he is of course guilty of serious crimes.

I never said that you stated those things, I was asking a question after stating the facts of the circumstances.

I believe OJ Simpson got as fair a trail as OJ Simpson was ever going to get in this lifetime. You can either blame the legal system for that or you can blame OJ himself.

Look, I'm all for the ideal of justice being blind, but the fact of the matter is that it's just not true. There are some many factors that play into the decision of any trial, who's to say that any of them are truly fair? Hell, where's the fairness in innocent men (and women, ladies) taking a plea bargain because they'd have to gamble on that same justice system in order to avoid prison time or a death sentence otherwise?

In reality, the justice system is far from fair, but there are likely thousands upon thousands of cases where a defendant has been truly "railroaded".There are surely those more deserving of such an outcry over their verdicts.

ACCBootlegGoddess

brandon10 wrote:

If he isn't guilty, then he's innocent. And how the fuck do you know he's guilty? Were you there? The West Memphis #3 are a product of our justice system and so is O.J. It's like me coming on here and saying they are guilty and they are getting what they deserve. It would only be an opinion. You don't know shit for sure. But as far as the justice system is concerned, this case is fucked. 9 counts??? Kidnapping???! Have you even followed this case?

Ok for someone who claims not to give a shit about OJ you sure are getting worked up here.
Secondly...have YOU forgotten about the DNA evidence in the first trial???

The jury at the time sure did..they bought into all the smoke and mirrors that Johnny Cochrane (sp) and David Shapiro put up to divert the juries attention away from the evidence presented.

You can't compare this to the West Memphis 3 because A) They were convicted and There was no DNA evidence linking them to the crime at the time (if memory serves) They are in the process of doing DNA testing NOW that will hopefully exhonorate them. Where as in OJ's trial that DNA evidence should have CONVICTED him was there if the jury wasn't so hung up on Mark Furman being a racist and stuff (and I agree he was and do NOT condone what he did AT ALL but thats no reason to let a murderer go free IMO).

As for the charges...I am not familiar with all the laws in Vegas so I can't argue with that one there...I've heard some of the recording and I can believe armed robbery, and forcible confinement....kidnapping? I dunno their laws down there.

sponger

SoonForgotten2 wrote:

I never said that you stated those things, I was asking a question after stating the facts of the circumstances.

I believe OJ Simpson got as fair a trail as OJ Simpson was ever going to get in this lifetime. You can either blame the legal system for that or you can blame OJ himself.

Look, I'm all for the ideal of justice being blind, but the fact of the matter is that it's just not true. There are some many factors that play into the decision of any trial, who's to say that any of them are truly fair? Hell, where's the fairness in innocent men (and women, ladies) taking a plea bargain because they'd have to gamble on that same justice system in order to avoid prison time or a death sentence otherwise?

In reality, the justice system is far from fair, but there are likely thousands upon thousands of cases where a defendant has been truly "railroaded".There are surely those more deserving of such an outcry over their verdicts.

They appeared to me to be rhetorical questions designed to imply that my statements were hinting at those underlying assumptions. If that was not the case, then I take back my accusatory response.

Yes, the justice system has its shortcomings, and many people every day are railroaded much harder than OJ was.

But, my point is that this instance of railroading, with all of its publicity, brings to light exactly how that railroading takes place, and that it's a reality that -like you said- the everyday working man has to contend with whether or not he is truly deserving of it in the grand spectrum of things.

ACCBootlegGoddess

Also I dunno that he'd get a life sentence BUT remember he is 61 years old.
I think the Kidnapping has a manditory 15 year sentence (I think they said that on CNN the night the verdict came in)...so that means he'd be 76 when he gets out on that charge alone. He could get what would amount to be a life sentence for him depending on how long he lives.

the wolf

okay. i do think he was set up this time around.

and i do think he got away with murder.

and for all the obvious reasons, that should have had no bearing on this trial. so yes, this makes our justice system look like a joke.


with all that being said SO WHAT !!!!!

Karma's a fuckin' bitch, and O.J. is getting what he has coming to him.

fuck O.J. !!

silas23

I hope you wrot in jail fucker!!!!!