http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15723351/ How could he possibly think this is a good idea? How revolting for the victim's families. Loser with a capital L! :evil:
I don't think it's possible to be more narcissistic than OJ! It's not enough that he got away with 2 murders, he won't be satisfied until everyone in the world knows for sure that he got away with them. (Like we didn't already know.) I wonder if he is still searching golf courses for that elusive real killer. :twisted: BTW kdc, my daughter loves your avatar.
I wonder if the victim's families will finally be able to collect the money they were awarded in the civil suit, from the proceeds of this book... ...or if he'll find a way to shelter those funds too. :evil:
Well I for one will not buy the book nor watch the interview. If it is publicity they are looking for, they came to the wrong place!
I hope nobody buys the book. What an arrogant, self-serving moron he is. I hope the book sales will be such a flop he won't have any proceeds to worry about sheltering.
He's getting $3.5 million for the book and another six or seven figures for the TV show. This will help reduce the debt he still owes to the jurors.
Wouldn't it be great if this guy could think about how his actions would affect his kids - just once - before he follows through with his plans. He's already mentioned publicly on more than one occassion just how "emotional" his daughter is. I'm sure bringing this situation back into the media again is going to be wonderful for his kids' emotional well beeing. OJ Simpson is a self centered, thoughtless, piece of poo. Hopefully noone buys the book and OJ can go sulking into a dark corner somewhere like the worthless nobody that he is.
Race hasn't got a blessed thing to do with it. I hope you were being sarcastic............................ And he certainly isn't the only one running around free who most likely commited a crime for which he was not convicted. Just because he was found innocent in a court of law doesn't make him innocent in my book, but God will take care of him due time. :wink: If he was innocent, I can't imagine that he would be so disrespectful to the families of the deceased. Seems to me he's just thumbing his nose at them and law enforcement. But that's just my opinion.
The choices for a verdict are "guilty" and "not guilty." Not many people in this world are "innocent." It is always the state's job to prove the defendant is guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." Reasonable doubt, obviously, means doubt based on reason, not beyond a shadow of a doubt. The defense can win by raising "reasonable doubt" in the mind of at least one of 12 jurors, since conviction requires a unanimous vote. I have always personally believed he was guilty, and I think I am entitled to my opinion. It is a fact that juries do not always get it right, for a variety of reasons. There are people walking around who got away with something. There are also people serving time for crimes they did not commit. In our system of justice, each side vigorously and zealously presents its case, and the finder of fact, whether judge or jury, considers all the evidence and makes a determination. In some other places, part of the "defense" attorney's job is to get the suspect to make a confession. Of those two systems, I think ours is more likely to serve the cause of justice. I heard OJ is directing the money to some entity other than himself, to shelter it from the judgment of the victims families. Not sure how that's going to work out for him, I think they have pretty smart lawyers who can find a way to pierce that fiction and get the money, or what's left of it by the time they get a court order.
Everyone is innocent in the legal sense relating to whether they can be punished by the state, but not in the sense they have committe no crime. The civil courts did find him guilty, which is the reason for the judgements which caused him to be so secretive in the arrangements concerning payment. Even those who have been found later to have been guilty were originally found "not guilty" under the law, just as those who have later been found to be innocent after a verdict of "guilty" in the courts.
The phrase "innocent until proven guilty" is not in the U.S. Constitution, nor the Declaration of Independence, nor even the Magna Carta. It is shorthand for what the Fifth Amendment provides, in the same way "separation of church and state" is shorthand for the first amendment. The Constitution does not define "due process" either, but Courts have been called upon to rule on that issue hundreds of times, maybe thousands of times. Innocent until proven guilty is a courtroom standard; we are certainly all entitled to our own opinions. Our opinions do not deprive anyone of life, liberty, or property. Strongly held opinions may disqualify us from sitting on a jury, although the prosecutor may try to rehabilitate a prospective juror by asking whether he or she will listen to all the evidence and could be persuaded by the evidence to change his or her mind. There is no such thing as a verdict of "innocent." In the civil case, Simpson was found liable. Civil courts find liability, not guilt. The standard of proof is different in civil cases.
That you do. Unfortunately, around here, my belief that he is innocent (ie, did not commit the crimes he was accused of) does not afford me that right.
But you are entitled to your opinion! How could I claim free speech rights for myself while denying the same to others?
Correct, and I should have made it clear. However, the finding of liability indicates a level of guilt based on the lower standard of proof required in civil court.
Our legal system was designed with the intent there would be less chance of innocent parties being punished knowing that as a result some guilty parties would avoid punishment as well. This is the system we have and it seems to work at least as well as any other, if not better in some cases.
I'm trying to figure out where that came from, Clif. You certainly have the right to believe that and to express that belief. Isn't that what we do on here all the time? You don't have to let being in the minority stop you from expressing your opinions here, Lord knows I don't! Snuff
