Originally Posted By kennect OH Barboy, Try the same bit that OJ pulled in Nevada and see how nice the courts there will treat you...And after you do let us know if you still feel the same way....
Originally Posted By Elderp I think OJ is dumb for trying a stunt like he did. I also think he didn't get a fair trial. All the jurors on his trial said in their dispos that they were predisposed to declare him guilty. If I were him I would of sat down and shut up after that last trial, but I guess when you have been in the limelight it is hard to get out of it.
Originally Posted By barboy Is that your way of saying he was not railroaded? ///OH Barboy, Try the same bit that OJ pulled in Nevada and see how nice the courts there will treat you./// No...... but if I did then I predict I would have not been charged with felony after felony and I would have seen some type of bargain in front of me.
Originally Posted By Mr X Here's my take on things... People complain that others might have not gotten as harshly charged, and that's not a fair point. The BASIC principle, it seems to me, is that you get charged with what you did. Apparently in this case it means he got hit with a whole bunch of crimes (which he was found guilty of on all counts). The strange angle of thinking here is that SOME people get away with a plea bargain, or a lesser charge, and therefore O.J. got "screwed" because he was prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Well, THAT'S what is supposed to happen. D.A. types do all kinds of plea bargain sort of stuff (call me Sarah), but the reasons are numerous...to try and catch a bigger fish, or because the prisons are overcrowded, or perhaps because they personally don't feel the laws are all that just to begin with (touchy subject, but it does happen). But anyway my main point is that IN PRINCIPLE, you should be charged with your crime(s) and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, barring any mitigating circumstances that might call for some measure of leniency for whatever reason. As far as I've heard, O.J. was culpable, and there was no particular mitigating factor that would cause them to lean towards leniency. Was there? If not..full extent of the law works fine in this case (even if not in others).
Originally Posted By Mr X ***if I did then I predict I would have not been charged with felony after felony and I would have seen some type of bargain in front of me.*** That very well may be true, but even if so it's entirely irrelevant. Do you feel that you are ENTITLED to some type of bargain? Or are you just assuming that's what usually happens. No one is entitled to "a deal", per se..deals happen as a matter of practicality for one reason or another. In this case, nobody was inclined to offer a deal. And I've never heard of any laws regarding the automatic offering of a deal. All people can reasonably expect is to receive the fullest punishment if found guilty. Anything less is simply luck or circumstance. And by the way, in these 2 posts I am in no way commenting on the jury..I have no opinion on that since I haven't read much on it. I'm just talking about the law and how I view it to apply to everyone. Passholder or others please feel free to correct me if I'm in error, I don't know much about the law aside from my basic instincts from reading a very limited number of example cases.
Originally Posted By barboy ///That very well may be true, but even if so it's entirely irrelevant./// ---irrelevant to your point but not to mine I see what you're saying about charging, even hitting one with the whole truckload, if sufficient evidence merits. And as for this current case I can't prove anything but I absolutely know to be straight up fact that OJ was aggressively, selectively prosecuted based on what went down in '94. Just as his previous jurors were predisposed to aquit(I'm not saying that under no circumstance would they have convicted either; just that they came to the table with their own biases) this new set of police/prosecutors/judge/jury held deep down pro conviction---- I think many people need reminding that courts for good, bad or indifferent are 'people' who feel and carry inherent biases.
Originally Posted By barboy Do you feel that you are ENTITLED to some type of bargain? Or are you just assuming that's what usually happens. ---that's what usually happens when there are no external pressures on the case such as a publically despised OJ as a defendant --- charges dropped, a bargain or an acquittal would have been very unexpected here
Originally Posted By mawnck >>I think many people need reminding that courts for good, bad or indifferent are 'people' who feel and carry inherent biases.<< Proving nothing about this particular jury, I'm afraid. Your only argument continues to be "cause I'm SURE of it, that's why." If there's an issue of judge or jury bias (even after the jury selection process? really?), then he'll be free on appeal in no time.
Originally Posted By barboy ///Proving nothing about this particular jury, I'm afraid. Your only argument continues to be "cause I'm SURE of it, that's why."/// You bet! And there are several things I can not prove but I know to be absolutely true. ///If there's an issue of judge or jury bias (even after the jury selection process? really?), then he'll be free on appeal in no time./// --highly unlikely that **any** appeal will fly --also, you are gravely mistaken on your 'in no time' angle as the system works at a snails pace especially when correcting errors or traveling the appellate road ---check out some of those who were released from prison based on exculpatory info/evidence--- every case I have read about takes years to get those cats free
Originally Posted By mawnck >>You bet! And there are several things I can not prove but I know to be absolutely true.<< Let me guess - Obama is a Muslim.
Originally Posted By barboy ///Let me guess - Obama is a Muslim/// I have no idea and I wouldn't care if he proclaimed to be one; I wouldn't care if he practices scientology and worships L. Hubbard either. and I don't care in the slightest if he's related to Vanila Ice, owns a Chevy Malibu or prefers red wine over white. Like McCain the guy means practically nothing to me.
