Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder In case anyone cares: <a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/more/08/03/oj.ap/index.html" target="_blank">http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...dex.html</a> This guy has more lives than a cat.
Originally Posted By SuperDry I don't see anything in this story that says it's at all likely that bail will be granted. Rather, it sounds like a routine hearing.
Originally Posted By LuvnDL I wanted to care about this guy. The first few times. Now, He just won't learn what acceptable behavior in society is. I just don't care SPP.
Originally Posted By ecdc Well it sounds like OJ isn't going anywhere. That said, if he's released, I expect everyone to admit the obvious: there is no God.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder If they actually release him on appeal, no matter what happens after that, getting him released will have to be considered one helluva bit of lawyering. No matter what we might think of Simpson at this point, my hat would be off to whoever he's got working for him.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 OJ did get the shaft at his last trial as he was "punished" for his previous crimes... You have to love our justice system....
Originally Posted By ecdc >>OJ did get the shaft at his last trial as he was "punished" for his previous crimes... You have to love our justice system....<< I didn't follow his last trial. Why do you say that? Was the evidence weak?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 He was guilty but like Mr. X said, he was given a harsh sentence. If it was me in the same situation, I may have gotten probabtion or maybe 1 or 2 years in prison, OJ got the entire library thrown at him.... Did he deserve the payback? Probably, but our justice system is not meant to deliver payback no matter what happened in his first court case.
Originally Posted By mele Past behavior/crimes aren't supposed to be used to decide guilt but it is used all of the time during the penalty phase of the trial.
Originally Posted By mele Or maybe their past behavior isn't used against them. I know it factors in w/juveniles, etc. It seems that judges get to decide the severity of the punishments all of the time. SPP?
Originally Posted By Mr X **Past behavior/crimes aren't supposed to be used to decide guilt but it is used all of the time during the penalty phase of the trial.** I thought that acquittals were never to be used. ??
Originally Posted By mele This is true but when you're dealing with a system where there's a minimum and maximum and it's up the judge to decide, you can only do so much. It makes me laugh when you hear a judge tell a jury to disregard something they've heard in court. I'm sure people try to forget it but I think it's impossible to completely forget it.
Originally Posted By Mr X Yup...does seem kinda silly doesn't it (I mean, for be being instructed to "disregard" something only turns it into something of interest to me ). Anyway, with a notorious guy like O.J., there's really no way to set things up so it's completely fair (or at least, not completely impartial, since EVERYONE in the WORLD has an opinion about the guy one way or the other)...I'm sure they just have to do their best.
Originally Posted By mele Exactly. (And I, too, take more interest when I'm told not to. LOL) I am perfectly fine with OJ rotting in jail. He was too stupid to stay out of trouble and, ultimately, I think he deserves to be in jail. I don't care how he got there.
Originally Posted By Mr X **I am perfectly fine with OJ rotting in jail** LPers are instructed to disregard that statement.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***ultimately, I think he deserves to be in jail. I don't care how he got there*** While I agree with you emotionally, much like the "no rights for terrorists" argument I can't agree on principle. Not because I think O.J. is a great guy who got shafted, far from it, but only because if it happens there it can happen elsewhere and under truly unjust circumstances as well.
Originally Posted By mele He committed the crime and was sentenced to the legal amount of time...that isn't unjust.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Or maybe their past behavior isn't used against them. I know it factors in w/juveniles, etc. It seems that judges get to decide the severity of the punishments all of the time. SPP?" Well, as far as I'm concerned, the prosecutors in Vegas were more than a little overzealous pursuing Simpson here, so to the extent his past notoriety was considered I'd say it was a factor. The judge isn't supposed to allow that to weigh on a decision, but again, here, I don't think there's any question it did. Most people would have done light time or probation after busting down the gun charge. Just the same, Simpson should never have been in a position to be in Vegas because he should have been locked up since 1994. As I'm fond of saying, karma can be a real bitch.
