[Hi-Definition]

You'd think posting in a thread related to the crap I've been working on all day....would deter me since I've been buried in this kind of stuff all damn day; but no.

rk bright...God how simplistic your approach to this is. Mr. T said it best when he told the world what he pities .

[luvitlo]

Yes OJ was guilty the first time too. Innocent people don't run from the cops. Explain that one, he should get life. He is a criminal.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[amazinglygraceless]

Yes OJ was guilty the first time too. Innocent people don't run from the cops. Explain that one, he should get life. He is a criminal.

There is just far too much mindlessness in that to deal with at this time a day.

I find it amazing and somewhat appalling that a lot of you are treating OJ's
conviction as some sort of personal triumph, not unlike the way most of you
probably took his acquittal as a personal indignation.

I also find it absolutely hilarious how everyone says we must respect the
verdict rendered by the jury. That didn't happen the first time and now all of
you are here celebrating the verdict you ALL thought he should have gotten
in the first place. Hypocritical much?

And just one more thing, and I may need Hi-Def to explain this to me. In the
judges sentencing she went on and on about how dangerous the situation
was with the presence of a gun. How all kinds of bad things could have
happened, and how the potential for the loss of life was greatly enhanced.

If all that is true, why exactly is OJ going to prison and the actual moron
that was brandishing the weapon will do ZERO jail.

Yes, OJ should have been convicted for this stupidity, but he was not by
any stretch the worst of the bad actors on that day. But I guess for all
of you clinking your glasses, as long as they got that bas%$#d behind bars
it does not matter about the rest of his equally guilty cohorts. Pitiful.

[xxxxpradaxxxx]

Justice is supposed to be equally fair to all.

When it isn't, because of someone's money or status in society, I find it offensive.

When Rich little Crack Hoes go to jail for 10 minutes, it offends me.

When Serial Killing Ex Football Players get off from jail time, it offends me.

When Crotch-Grabbing pseudo-black pedophiles pay off victims to escape jail time, it offends me.

It's bad enough that since the penalty was so small the first time (if any), they feel its acceptable to dance around the law again.

I think he deserves every bit of time given to him.

If it's less than he deserves, God will serve him the Difference.

[Hi-Definition]

There is just far too much mindlessness in that to deal with at this time a day.

I find it amazing and somewhat appalling that a lot of you are treating OJ's
conviction as some sort of personal triumph, not unlike the way most of you
probably took his acquittal as a personal indignation.

I also find it absolutely hilarious how everyone says we must respect the
verdict rendered by the jury. That didn't happen the first time and now all of
you are here celebrating the verdict you ALL thought he should have gotten
in the first place. Hypocritical much?

And just one more thing, and I may need Hi-Def to explain this to me. In the
judges sentencing she went on and on about how dangerous the situation
was with the presence of a gun. How all kinds of bad things could have
happened, and how the potential for the loss of life was greatly enhanced.

If all that is true, why exactly is OJ going to prison and the actual moron
that was brandishing the weapon will do ZERO jail.

Yes, OJ should have been convicted for this stupidity, but he was not by
any stretch the worst of the bad actors on that day. But I guess for all
of you clinking your glasses, as long as they got that bas%$#d behind bars
it does not matter about the rest of his equally guilty cohorts. Pitiful.

From the circumstantial evidence presented to the D.A., the judge and jury in the case...there apparently was a lot of heavy back-end plea bargaining with the other cohorts involved in the charges brought against OJ.

The gun charges were definitely major; however the charge that tipped the iceberg...were the kidnapping charges. Plea bargaining is a powerful tool to build a case against a party that has had prior run-ins with the law (even w/o conviction...which was OJ's plight). In criminal law; often times the conspirator has the greater burden of proof than the co-conspirators do (e.g. guy brandishing the gun for OJ). Under plea-bargainings; as many of the stipulations arising out of them arent fully disclosed anyways...co-conspirators will often get less punishment; or none whatsoever...if they can simply convince the judge that they were greatly coerced and under duress.

The legal system in America is by no means perfect (surprise there huh?). I will be the first one to acknowledge that. Personally; this is one HUGE reason I did not and could not deal with any tort/criminal law work...it frustrates me because if there are any GAPING holes in our judicial system...it's in the criminal/sentencing sector. To me, the application of plea bargains as they are practiced...are the crux of the effectiveness of our criminal laws.

[TonyChaos]

Rofl @ OJ

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Optid]

Its about time!

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Crucial_Xtreme]

There is just far too much mindlessness in that to deal with at this time a day.

I find it amazing and somewhat appalling that a lot of you are treating OJ's
conviction as some sort of personal triumph, not unlike the way most of you
probably took his acquittal as a personal indignation.

I also find it absolutely hilarious how everyone says we must respect the
verdict rendered by the jury. That didn't happen the first time and now all of
you are here celebrating the verdict you ALL thought he should have gotten
in the first place. Hypocritical much?

And just one more thing, and I may need Hi-Def to explain this to me. In the
judges sentencing she went on and on about how dangerous the situation
was with the presence of a gun. How all kinds of bad things could have
happened, and how the potential for the loss of life was greatly enhanced.

If all that is true, why exactly is OJ going to prison and the actual moron
that was brandishing the weapon will do ZERO jail.

Yes, OJ should have been convicted for this stupidity, but he was not by
any stretch the worst of the bad actors on that day. But I guess for all
of you clinking your glasses, as long as they got that bas%$#d behind bars
it does not matter about the rest of his equally guilty cohorts. Pitiful.

A couple things AG. First off he had it coming. Second, he was trying to get his stuff back secretly so as to continue not giving the Goldman family the monies they are due. You know he does owe millions, and has avoided/scammed his way along thus far and lives well, yet they're still not getting paid. Next, when he called his buddies to tell them they didn't have guns, he f***** up. In regards to his cohorts, am I concerned? Yes, they deserve something, but then again, to the best of my knowledge they haven't killed two people in cold blood and got away with it. As I said in my OP, what comes around goes around....

[amazinglygraceless]

Crucial, I am in no way arguing that the sentence OJ received was
not warranted. But all this "he had it coming to him" and "karma is
a b!tch" stuff shows that people, in this thread at least, aren't
even slightly interested in the rule of law or respecting the verdicts of juries.

The Goldmans can f*^$ing suck my left nut, as they seem to
only be interested in a payday. There is nothing in the carriage
of any of those money hungry cretins that shows even the
slightest reflection on their dead son.

Regardless of what the Civil Courts says OJ owes them, a Civil
verdict is not a criminal conviction. But it seems that everyone
who wishes to dismiss the Criminal juries verdict hangs their hat
on the verdict in the Civil trial.

OJ belongs in jail for this third rate robbery, I admit that. How
many of you are willing to admit you are glad he is in jail not for
this robbery, but because it gives you a reason to celebrate
what you all essentially see as a nullification of the first
Criminal juries verdict.

And since you brought up his cohorts, are you aware that
of all the "bad actors" arrested in this incident the only one
who had no criminal record was, you guessed it, OJ.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Crucial, I am in no way arguing that the sentence OJ received was
not warranted. But all this "he had it coming to him" and "karma is
a b!tch" stuff shows that people, in this thread at least, aren't
even slightly interested in the rule of law or respecting the verdicts of juries.

The Goldmans can f*^$ing suck my left nut, as they seem to
only be interested in a payday. There is nothing in the carriage
of any of those money hungry cretins that shows even the
slightest reflection on their dead son.

Regardless of what the Civil Courts says OJ owes them, a Civil
verdict is not a criminal conviction. But it seems that everyone
who wishes to dismiss the Criminal juries verdict hangs their hat
on the verdict in the Civil trial.

OJ belongs in jail for this third rate robbery, I admit that. How
many of you are willing to admit you are glad he is in jail not for
this robbery, but because it gives you a reason to celebrate
what you all essentially see as a nullification of the first
Criminal juries verdict.

And since you brought up his cohorts, are you aware that
of all the "bad actors" arrested in this incident the only one
who had no criminal record was, you guessed it, OJ.

The Goldmans are only trying to stick it to OJ the only legal way they can. Especially considering they were shafted during the first trial. Let's get something right, they don't need the money. It's simply a way to try and make OJ pay for killing their son. It's not their fault OJ murdered their son.

Secondly, OJ did have it coming. Plain and simple. Why? Because he got away with murder. I also believe the Enron execs had it coming too, and am glad some are in prison and had to pay back millions. I also think a bunch of people on Wall Street have it coming. Just because he wasn't convicted doesn't mean he didn't do it, so I believe it's fair to say he had it coming.

It's not about hanging ones hat on the Civil Verdict. But he was convicted, and scams his way out of paying the debt. He has hidden tons of stuff to avoid paying the debt. Less we forget that.

OJ deserves more time in prison for this crime because he was the mastermind of the scheme. He knew what he was going to do all along. He wanted the guns there. He was the one who was caught on tape also trying to convince those that were there, that no guns were present. Considering involvement levels were different, I would expect the sentences to be as well.

Bottom line is he broke the law and is paying for it.

[Hi-Definition]

Here are some facts; yes facts. Plea bargaining in this case was used as the sharpest tool in the shed to vicariously create a situation for OJ to serve time for crimes that he avoided years ago.

Hypothetically; let's say OJ didn't even do what he did many years ago...and this kidnapping/robbery case was his FIRST slip-up...I can promise you he would have evaded prison time and a guilty verdict.

In sentencing and in the trial process...often times the law is acted on with the catalyst of emotions fueling the law. This case is prime example of it. I feel that there should be objective autonomy between the law and emotions...however this is idealistic thinking; as the real world doesn't operate as such. In this case; the juice was the receipient of a snowball of emotions produced by the public and delivered via the media...and ultimately this verdict.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Here are some facts; yes facts. Plea bargaining in this case was used as the sharpest tool in the shed to vicariously create a situation for OJ to serve time for crimes that he avoided years ago.

Hypothetically; let's say OJ didn't even do what he did many years ago...and this kidnapping/robbery case was his FIRST slip-up...I can promise you he would have evaded prison time and a guilty verdict.

In sentencing and in the trial process...often times the law is acted on with the catalyst of emotions fueling the law. This case is prime example of it. I feel that there should be objective autonomy between the law and emotions...however this is idealistic thinking; as the real world doesn't operate as such. In this case; the juice was the receipient of a snowball of emotions produced by the public and delivered via the media...and ultimately this verdict.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Negative. The crimes committed carried mandatory sentences. Bottom line. Also, the judge could have sentenced him to many many more years than he received. The reason he didn't, was his past. So in fact his past believe it or not, in this case helped him out.

[Hi-Definition]

Negative. The crimes committed carried mandatory sentences. Bottom line. Also, the judge could have sentenced him to many many more years than he received. The reason he didn't, was his past. So in fact his past believe it or not, in this case helped him out.

Saying this isn't even trying to toot my own horn; in fact the profession isnt always all what it's made out to be...especially when delved in the specialty I'm in within law...but you speak pretty damn confident (and painfully inept) for someone who probably knows what he/she knows about the legal system from television shows. In fact; one doesn't even have to have a J.D. to make sense of the circumstances and reasoning here pertaining to the OJ case.

MANY types of crimes carry mandatory/minimum sentences....but only so if you're found guilty of the crime. The point here is why OJ was even found guilty of the charges in this case to begin with. No one's doubting the type and extent of punishment accompanying the charges. How do you EXACTLY conclude that the past charges brought against OJ...have any correlation with not receiving the maximum prison time OJ could have for the charges in this case.

[latinatwix28]

who cares?

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Saying this isn't even trying to toot my own horn; in fact the profession isnt always all what it's made out to be...especially when delved in the specialty I'm in within law...but you speak pretty damn confident (and painfully inept) for someone who probably knows what he/she knows about the legal system from television shows. In fact; one doesn't even have to have a J.D. to make sense of the circumstances and reasoning here pertaining to the OJ case.

MANY types of crimes carry mandatory/minimum sentences....but only so if you're found guilty of the crime. The point here is why OJ was even found guilty of the charges in this case to begin with. No one's doubting the type and extent of punishment accompanying the charges. How do you EXACTLY conclude that the past charges brought against OJ...have any correlation with not receiving the maximum prison time OJ could have for the charges in this case.

You're a joke. We all know OJ is in fact guilty of these crimes, and the fact you are trying to obscure the truth and oversimplify the truth, shows me you know the right thing was done. The fact remains he did the crime he was charged with. He ll he's caught on tape trying to get people to cover it up. Any jury anywhere would have convicted him, because he's guilty.
The judge specifically took it easy on him during sentencing and did not hand out the maximum to avoid a media controversy with them saying she stuck it to him for what he did in the past. The fact you're making the argument that he's not guilty of this is at best laughable.

[Hi-Definition]

who cares?

It's called having a discussion and a little healthy bantering. That doesn't mean I; and perhaps most everyone else in this thread...cares.

You're a joke. We all know OJ is in fact guilty of these crimes, and the fact you are trying to obscure the truth and oversimplify the truth, shows me you know the right thing was done.

I think (actually; I know) you're missing the point...I never stated OJ is not guilty of these recent crimes; nor of murdering Nicole Simpson (even though he wasn't convicted in the criminal case).

The fact remains he did the crime he was charged with. He ll he's caught on tape trying to get people to cover it up. Any jury anywhere would have convicted him, because he's guilty.

Right...I'm still trying to see how any of what you've said thus far; differs from what I've said in this thread.

The judge specifically took it easy on him during sentencing and did not hand out the maximum to avoid a media controversy with them saying she stuck it to him for what he did in the past. The fact you're making the argument that he's not guilty of this is at best laughable.

Good Lord, baby Jesus...you are oblivious to comprehending what I've said in this thread!!!

I have in no capacity, manner or intention argued that OJ is not guilty! Should I re-type all my previous posts in this thread in alphabets you'll understand? I've said he's guilty...I simply said plea bargaining is why his henchmen/cohorts/robins/accessories to the crime/etc. didn't receive prison time. I also DID say that OJ's previous case in Nicole Simpson's murder played a part in OJ's sentencing for this case.

Stick to comprehending BB model numbers and which version OS they are running. Thanks.