Jump to content

OJ


king

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, png9mon said:

He is better off in jail.  He can't profit from book, or movie deals.  Who is going to hire him? 

He has a room, food, tv. 

Stay OJ Stay!!!!   No need to bother to "Go"

I think he gets like 25 grand a month from NFL

 

They're really milking this hearing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, king said:

I think he gets like 25 grand a month from NFL

 

They're really milking this hearing

Just like they milked his murder arrest. How many of us would have been escorted in that way? They would have pulled us over with guns drawn. The whole thing was a circus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, new tobie said:

OJ needs to take his 25,000 per month and keep his mouth shut.The court system granted him the same innocence that it has granted all of these cops that got away with murder.

Name one of these cops that got away with murder. Please enlighten us with your clairvoyant facts. Better yet, why don't you start a new thread on this and we can discuss it. I know you won't because you don't want to hear the truth, but I figured I would ask anyway. I have a strong feeling that was a wasted 10 seconds of my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Englebert said:

Name one of these cops that got away with murder. Please enlighten us with your clairvoyant facts. Better yet, why don't you start a new thread on this and we can discuss it. I know you won't because you don't want to hear the truth, but I figured I would ask anyway. I have a strong feeling that was a wasted 10 seconds of my life.

The court system said that oj was innocent,  just like it has for the cops. For the cops you side with the judicial system though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, new tobie said:

When the courts said that Zimmerman was innocent,  we needed to listen to the courts, but with oj we shouldn't. 

Not the same at all. In the O.J. Case, all the evidence was thrown out in the criminal trial so there was not enough facts to convict. In the civil trial, however, the same evidence was admitted and he was convicted of murder. Anyone who sides with O.J. is a POS! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, new tobie said:

The court system said that oj was innocent,  just like it has for the cops. For the cops you side with the judicial system though. 

Just as I thought, you can't name a single cop that got away with murder. Who would have guessed you just run your mouth then run like a little schoolgirl when challenged to back up your lies. You must be so proud. If you want to know why racism exists in the country, you need look no further than in the mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always said that OJ did it.  He was the only one that had a motive.  He got off on legal technicalities.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  I've seen white privilege in the court system all my life. So the OJ verdict in '94 '95 didn't bother me all that much.  Besides, heaven is going to get all these injustices corrected.  Nobody gets away with anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2017 at 8:51 AM, new tobie said:

When the courts said that Zimmerman was innocent,  we needed to listen to the courts, but with oj we shouldn't. 

Yes we should listen as that is the law. They are not quite the same though and not just being different facts.

OJ was a popular and rich celebrity. Zimmerman, not so much. 

The one juror that spoke after the Zimmerman verdict said that the jury "wanted to" convict him of murder but the evidence simply was not there. I think the jury in the Simpson trial had the exact opposite take and it was a case of jury nullification. If they "wanted to" convict him, they would have.

Both certainly reach the same legal standing and they are both not guilty. There is a huge difference in the way the cases were handled and the popularity of the suspects however. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Yes we should listen as that is the law. They are not quite the same though and not just being different facts.

OJ was a popular and rich celebrity. Zimmerman, not so much. 

The one juror that spoke after the Zimmerman verdict said that the jury "wanted to" convict him of murder but the evidence simply was not there. I think the jury in the Simpson trial had the exact opposite take and it was a case of jury nullification. If they "wanted to" convict him, they would have.

Both certainly reach the same legal standing and they are both not guilty. There is a huge difference in the way the cases were handled and the popularity of the suspects however. 

Agree with what you stated. In short, O.J. was found not guilty because Mark Furman used the "N" word 10 years prior. Johnny Cochran turned it into a racially motivated trial. It was never about the evidence or he wouldn't have been convicted of murder in civil court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,935
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...