rwbeagles-OJ guilty...finally.

 "Oh happy day..... oh happy day...."

doing cartwheels here in Virginia! 

People's opinion on his murder trial aside, it would appear, based on the evidence here that he was guilty of at least aggravated assault, even if the defendent was in illegal possession of the items. The proper way to deal with that is alert the authorities to theft of memorabilia. For that, Simpson will pay.

As for the murder trial, thanks to racism within the LAPD, we'll never know the true story. I don't think Simpson did the murders. My first thought when that case broke was that he hired someone to do it and they boogied on, leaving him twisting in the wind. But investigations along the line of conspiracy got obliterated by tainted evidence and a presupposition that he physically, in spite of arthritis and a lifetime of football injuries was able to overpower and kill two people younger than he was and in their prime. Fact of the matter is, Goldman had fight bites on his hands. These are cuts and abrasions that you get on your knuckles and hands when you punch someone in the mouth. Your skin gets lacerated by the teeth of your opponent. Whoever killed Goldman paid for it dearly as he fought back and he did so very well, considering the damage to his hands. Simpson had no such injuries or marks upon him. But, as I said, he could have hired or put out a contract.

So, it was a miscarriage of justice back then and it would be a miscarriage of justice to prosecute him through Agg Assault on this the murder of his ex-wife and her current boyfriend.

ron2

So, it was a miscarriage of justice back then and it would be a miscarriage of justice to prosecute him through Agg Assault on this the murder of his ex-wife and her current boyfriend.

Huh? This makes no sense.  He entered a hotel room with others who were wielding and brandishing weapons and stole things.  What he said during the robbery or how "nice" he was during the robbery, or whether he had a weapon himself does not make it any less armed robbery, which he was properly found guilty of.  Regardless what you think or believe about his murder trial, he was dead on guilty on this charge, and was properly found guilty.  HOOOOOORAAAYYYY!  A man who flagrantly flaunts the judicial system, believing himself above the law, who moves to Florida to guard his assets from a civil judgment, works and weasels to avoid paying "one red cent" of that judgment and continues to abuse his intimate partners without consequence IS FINALLY GOING TO JAIL!!!!!  Can't hide in Florida from this one OJ, toooo bad! 

BCMixs

Huh? This makes no sense.

I thought I made it clear. Evidently, not. He is guilty on this charge and he will pay. I was only saying that it shouldn't be that he's guilty on this charge to make up for the murder charge for which he was acquited. If you re-read my post will see that I can see that the evidence is plain in this case and there's no backing out of it for him.

To assume that his action in this case presupposes a behavior pattern to establish guilt in the previous is case is, I think, without legal precedent and can't be used. But that's just an academic point, really.

I realize that you may not have like my points about his previous case and I can't help that. Notice that I didn't think he was innocent of any involvement, only that the case was mishandled from the start and there is no denying that.

ron2

BCMixs

Huh? This makes no sense.

I thought I made it clear. Evidently, not. He is guilty on this charge and he will pay. I was only saying that it shouldn't be that he's guilty on this charge to make up for the murder charge for which he was acquited. If you re-read my post will see that I can see that the evidence is plain in this case and there's no backing out of it for him.

Gotcha.  The wording was awkward and I didn't understand what you were saying.  I'm not saying his past behavior has any bearing *legally* on this case or his guilt in this case.  I'm saying his past behavior and attitude in general about what he can get away with not only lead him to behave finally in a way that cooked his goose but also makes me personally deliriously happy that's he going to PRISON.  Waaaa Hooooo!!!!

I watched the trial religiously every single day. I was a bored SAHM at the time, so basically I saw everything a juror would.  I would have convicted him.  But yes, LAPD could not have screwed up worse if they tried.  

BCMixs

I'm saying his past behavior and attitude in general about what he can get away with not only lead him to behave finally in a way that cooked his goose

And that does make sense as it goes to character and a pattern of behavior, though it may not be admissable as evidence, especially since he was acquitted, as in, one can't use a behavior pattern from an acquitted case. Fortunately, though, this case doesn't rest on a tenuous legal theory but does rest on irrefutable evidence. IOW, he finally messed up in a way that can't be denied and it could certainly be a pattern of behavior that has caught up with him.

I think he was guilty of the murders. He ran away with a bag full of cash which IMO points to guilt, why else would he run?

When told of the murders of his wife he did not ask the officers about his children, IMO that would have been the first question asked of a normal parent. You know your kids are with your ex wife, someone murders your ex-wife, your first question should be "what about my kids, are they ok?". He never asked that question.

  It is about time he is getting his just rewards.

He was guilty the first time but could afford the best lawyers. It was smoke and mirrors and he got off. This time he didn't have that luxuary, and so he must pay for this crime. In the article I saw in my local paper (I did not see Gina's link one yet) it didn't say how much time he will do. Has that been decided? I also want to mention in our local paper it was on page 4. He is not even worthy of front page anymore. That in itself is a win!

Maxs Mom

didn't say how much time he will do. Has that been decided?

I think I heard that he could get life in prison. Apparently that's the max sentence and the judge that will decide is known for going for the max.

I doubt he'd get the max because there wasn't extreme violence involved.  Even in very violent cases, I've rarely seen the max sentence of life given for armed robbery or kidnapping.  What she could do, and I pray that she does, is sentence him on each of the multiple counts (I think there were something like 6 total) and then make him serve each consecutively rather than concurrently.  But even in Nevada, Warren Jeffs (that polygamist guy) would serve at least 10 years and Probation and Parole is the one who determines when and how he would get out.  He won't be in forever, but at least he'll be there for a good while.

***ETA: There were 12 counts he was found guilty on (oooh, that could add up!) and he's due for sentencing in December.  Goodie, just in time for Christmas!  mmmmwahhahahaha!*** 

 OH, one more thing I was just thinking..... if he's detained in NV and the requirement for probation or parole is that he remain in NV, wouldn't that make him a NV resident and then the civil judgment could be collected???  I wonder if the Browns and Goldmans could collect money he earns in prison doing laundry???? hahaha that would be SWEET!