RE: OJ gets 15 years

RE: OJ gets 15 years (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

celticlord2112 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 1:56:17 PM)
quote: Fortunately, neither O.J., nor you, nor anyone else without legal arrest authority can hold anyone for questioning. In most states (certainly here in Texas), every citizen has legal arrest authority. Also, in most states (certainly in Texas), only a magistrate can discharge a person once they have been arrested.

Mercnbeth -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 2:03:28 PM)
*~ Fast Reply ~* The best way not to be a 'victim' of prejudicial judgment, harsh sentencing, or be concerned about having the parents of murdered ex in the courtroom is to not get arrested. Carrying guns and bringing in muscle to collect property isn't indicative of picking up some property from, as OJ says, "friends". Remember, technically any property of value belonged to the Goldman's per a $33.5 judgment they have on him. Perhaps the Goldman's were there to see if they could find more. Kinda surprised that OJ didn't say he was just there trying to collect the goods on their behalf. Did OJ need the money? Well, only if you consider it difficult for him to survive on $25,000/month. quote: Today he draws $25,000 per month from the NFL pension alone. Source: http://happycapitalist.blogspot.com/2006/11/oj-pensions-erisa-and-golf.html Even I didn't use that many golf balls when I played 4 times a week. Damn, Michael Vick, OJ, and in March, Burriss;if they can get some big lineman that's a hella offense for 'The Longest Yard II'. Although OJ may have lost a step or two.

slvemike4u -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 2:26:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: awmslave In my opinion O.J. Simpson was sentenced for murder he commited 13 years ago. Las Vegas incident should have been misdemenour: there was no seriouus harm done (a few crooks were held for questioning in the hotelroom), nobody was actually kidnapped. Is it the way court system should work? OJ or anyone else bitching about how the court system worsk ,as it pertains to OJ is just a little rediculous As for the Goldman's presence at the sentencing ,there would be no power on earth that would have kept me out of that courtroow were I in their shoes....Las Vegas isn't Los Angeles ,and this wasn't the LA DA's office and Judge Ito...he doesn't have ground for an appeal.The sentencing was well within reason and any appeal based on the harshness of sentence is therefore a nonstarter....Bye Bye OJ,it's about time.

DedicatedDom40 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 3:08:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife In this case, yes. Sometimes justice is slow in coming. Yes, the system was broken 13 years ago when he got away with it. But fixing that injustice by making the system more broken certainly isnt the answer. You seem to think that 'exceptions' to the legal process to right a long standing wrong are only one-time incidents. But those exceptions have this funny way of becoming normalized/precedent. It really alarms me the way people give a pass to the stalking-for-publicity behavior of the Goldmans, involving themselves in the trial of OJ crimes that do not directly involve them. No wonder the system is broken. Nobody is working to keep it honest. Too many people are making excuses for their behavior, claiming its "justified".

celticlord2112 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 3:18:42 PM)
quote: Yes, the system was broken 13 years ago when he got away with it. No, it wasn't. The prosecution fucked up the case royally. Based on the evidence presented, the prosecution's theory of the crime didn't hold up. Was OJ involved? Very likely. Was he guilty of the specific acts alleged by the prosecution 13 years ago? Not at all. The prosecution dropped the ball, but the jury reached the proper verdict. That's a working system, not a broken one.

JerryFrankster -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 3:52:31 PM)
He could have gotten out of this if he still had the money to do it. He should have known he wasn't wealthy enough to get away with murder anymore. or armed robbery.

masterBruce -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 4:03:08 PM)
well the law in nv said their was a law broken

rulemylife -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 4:25:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: Fortunately, neither O.J., nor you, nor anyone else without legal arrest authority can hold anyone for questioning. In most states (certainly here in Texas), every citizen has legal arrest authority. Also, in most states (certainly in Texas), only a magistrate can discharge a person once they have been arrested. Why does the image of Barney Fife yelling "citizens arrest, citizens arrest" suddenly spring to mind? What you are saying is accurate but completely ignoring relevant facts. The statutes regarding a citizen's arrest authority are extremely limited, as they should be. The potential for abuse is too great. In every state, anyone making a citizen's arrest must abide by the same standards as any legal authority. As such, they are liable for criminal and/or civil prosecution in making a false arrest, and more than an actual legal authority because they have a higher burden of proof in saying what they were doing was justified. From your own state's legal precedent: Miles v. State, 241 S.W.3d 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007): Based on the history and purpose of Article 14.01(a), as well as precedent, we reaffirm the reasoning in Woods and conclude that a citizen may make a warrantless arrest of a person who commits a misdemeanor within the citizen's presence or view if the evidence shows that the person's conduct poses a threat of continuing violence or harm to himself or the public. It is the exigency of the situation, not the title of the offense, that gives both officer and citizen statutory authorization to protect the public from an ongoing threat of violence, harm, or danger by making a warrantless arrest. A very narrow standard, and one in which O.J.'s actions would not have met in Texas, and Nevada as well based on his conviction. There is a fine line between a legal citizen's arrest and unlawful detention. In any case, there is no law anywhere that authorizes a citizen to hold another person for "questioning". There must be substantial proof of a violation of the law or the person going to jail will be the one making trying to make a citizen's arrest.

laura2161 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 4:41:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: Yes, the system was broken 13 years ago when he got away with it. No, it wasn't. The prosecution fucked up the case royally. Based on the evidence presented, the prosecution's theory of the crime didn't hold up. Was OJ involved? Very likely. Was he guilty of the specific acts alleged by the prosecution 13 years ago? Not at all. The prosecution dropped the ball, but the jury reached the proper verdict. That's a working system, not a broken one. I agree. I watched that whole trial and based on what the prosecution brought to the table, the jury had to find not guilty. I do think this sentencing is much harsher then it should be; The system should not be used to 'fix' past mistakes. He was found not guilty years ago, whether we agree with it or not that was the verdict. A sentence this harsh is clearly to 'make up' for what happened before and it's not right.

rulemylife -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 4:53:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DedicatedDom40 quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife In this case, yes. Sometimes justice is slow in coming. Yes, the system was broken 13 years ago when he got away with it. But fixing that injustice by making the system more broken certainly isnt the answer. You seem to think that 'exceptions' to the legal process to right a long standing wrong are only one-time incidents. But those exceptions have this funny way of becoming normalized/precedent. No, I don't, but you seem to think the law exists outside of external influences. That's the ideal it strives for but is rarely the reality.

tweedydaddy -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 5:40:32 PM)
I feel for the Goldmans, if that drooling thug had killed one of my family, you bet I would want to watch that spoiled bastard go down. I bet it makes them sleep better at night, I know I would.

celticlord2112 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 6:50:47 PM)
quote: The statutes regarding a citizen's arrest authority are extremely limited, as they should be. The potential for abuse is too great. From the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure §14.01(a): quote: A peace officer or any other person, may, without a warrant, arrest an offender when the offense is committed in his presence or within his view, if the offense is one classed as a felony or as an offense against the public peace. The notion that citizen arrest powers are limited is not true within the State of Texas. They are fairly broad--as the text of the court case you cited makes clear. quote: There must be substantial proof of a violation of the law or the person going to jail will be the one making trying to make a citizen's arrest. This is very true. It should be noted, however, that this standard applies to citizen and peace officer alike.

xxblushesxx -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/5/2008 7:27:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: awmslave there was no seriouus harm done (a few crooks were held for questioning in the hotelroom), nobody was actually kidnapped. Do you know the legal definition of kidnapping? It is (basically) holding someone against their will. So, yeah...they were.

popeye1250 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/6/2008 12:43:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweedydaddy I feel for the Goldmans, if that drooling thug had killed one of my family, you bet I would want to watch that spoiled bastard go down. I bet it makes them sleep better at night, I know I would. If it was one of my family I'd have popped him on the golf course long ago. Maybe there'll be a new book out by O.J. ; "If I'm stupid."

housesub4you -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/6/2008 4:09:05 AM)
Plus it seems OJ turned done a Plea for less time, and when you turn down a plea you get what you deserve

marie2 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/6/2008 5:14:45 AM)
Kudos to this judge, she knew she'd be under scrutiny for this, but she had the balls to not give a fuck. Armed robbery and kidnapping are pretty serious crimes. And if you're about to commit a crime, and you bring a gun with you, chances are you're willing to use it. He should be behind bars for that alone. It's about time someone gave this guy the message that he's not above the law. I'm happy for the Goldmans, but that's because I believe he was guilty of the murders back in 94. I hope it was a prejudiced decision on the Judge's part. Most of all I hope OJ thinks it was too.

MarsBonfire -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/6/2008 5:56:45 AM)
Did OJ ever find the "real killer?" I think he did. The very next morning, when he got up to shave and looked in the mirror. Murdering fuck. I hope he gets shanked in the excersise yard. Just because some murdering bastard can throw a football down a fucking feild does NOT give him the right to kill two people and get away with it!

Lorr47 -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/6/2008 7:26:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: awmslave In my opinion O.J. Simpson was sentenced for murder he commited 13 years ago. Las Vegas incident should have been misdemenour: there was no seriouus harm done (a few crooks were held for questioning in the hotelroom), nobody was actually kidnapped. Is it the way court system should work? "No serious harm?" "Nobody was actually kidnapped?" Michigan's definition of "kidnapping" (apparently like Nevada's) applies not only to the classic situation where a person is forced to go somewhere where he doesn't want to go, but also applies if you force a person to stay at a location when he does not want to stay; forcibly resticting a person's right of movement. Couple that with using a firearm. If Simpson forced you to stay where you did not want to stay by using a firearm, would you feel that there was no serious harm? One mistake and you could have easily been shot. The risk was enormous that someone would be harmed. Simpson should have received a life sentence.

Aneirin -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/6/2008 7:35:09 AM)
I wonders about all this, I do not know your justice system, but OJ being a public figure and all, is it likely he got panned big time because he is a public figure ? What would a non public figure get in a similar position ? I can't help but feel there is a lot of his last trial in this, he got away whether he was guilty or not, but that is not his fault, but the fault of the prosecution, if he did the murders, the prosecution failed, he was found innocent. Innocent in a court of law, as to what everyone else thinks, is immaterial, the justice system you all believe in found OJ innocent, but thirteen years ago, that was a different trial for a differenet offence. So this latest court appearance, trial and sentencing, I hear retribution, as if it was another go at OJ, because the last trial was a failure in people's eyes, so in reality, was OJ in a sense being retried for the prosecution's failings thirteen years ago ? Is this sentence typical of any other, non public, non notorious defendant in a similar position ?

MrQwerty -> RE: OJ gets 15 years (12/6/2008 7:39:09 AM)
It's a political process as much as a legal one these days sadly. If not why do they call it fifteen years when in reality it is only six with parole? Legal experts are really bad at maths because six isn't fifteen. What is fifteen years with parole, does that mean he is punished for fifteen years? They should stop quoting nonsense sentences and give the actual time someone is likely to serve. Then we would all know where we stood and we there'd be more respect for the law. It would be consistent for all to see.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875