O.J. is going to prison
Christopher Tidy
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUNgbOr-2bnpFUX0MiII6je2CkRAD93JGAUO0
I know a lot of you will be celebrating. But strangely I feel less
impressed with your criminal justice system than I was the last time.
This case has been a farce. As I see it, pretty much every witness is
dirty, and there are numerous significant uncertainties. And after all,
it was just a bunch of guys who got into a scrape in hotel room. Does it
matter? I am not convinced that the case should have come to trial, and
neither do I feel confident that the verdict has nothing to do with his
1995 acquittal.
There will be an appeal I'm sure. We'll see which way it goes.
Guess I tend to take the side of the defendant.
Best wishes,
Chris
azotic
"Christopher Tidy" <cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote in message
news:48E71DEC...@cantabgold.net...
> Just heard the news...
> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUNgbOr-2bnpFUX0MiII6je2CkRAD93JGAUO0
>
> I know a lot of you will be celebrating.
Maybe Fred Goldman orchistrated the series of events that have led to OJs
current predicament ?
Best Regards
Tom.
Michael A. Terrell
From another newsgroup:
Simpson's response: http://boners.com/content/807749.1.jpg
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy.
Cydrome Leader
> Just heard the news...
> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUNgbOr-2bnpFUX0MiII6je2CkRAD93JGAUO0
>
> I know a lot of you will be celebrating. But strangely I feel less
> impressed with your criminal justice system than I was the last time.
> This case has been a farce. As I see it, pretty much every witness is
> dirty, and there are numerous significant uncertainties. And after all,
If you don't hang out with crooks in the first place, this tends to not be
a problem.
You are the company you keep sums this up pretty good.
Christopher Tidy
It is not beyond the bounds of possibility.
Best wishes,
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> Christopher Tidy wrote:
>
>>Just heard the news...
>>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUNgbOr-2bnpFUX0MiII6je2CkRAD93JGAUO0
>>
>>I know a lot of you will be celebrating. But strangely I feel less
>>impressed with your criminal justice system than I was the last time.
>>This case has been a farce. As I see it, pretty much every witness is
>>dirty, and there are numerous significant uncertainties. And after all,
>>it was just a bunch of guys who got into a scrape in hotel room. Does it
>>matter? I am not convinced that the case should have come to trial, and
>>neither do I feel confident that the verdict has nothing to do with his
>>1995 acquittal.
>>
>>There will be an appeal I'm sure. We'll see which way it goes.
>>
>>Guess I tend to take the side of the defendant.
>>
>>Best wishes,
>>
>>Chris
>
>
>
> From another newsgroup:
>
> Simpson's response: http://boners.com/content/807749.1.jpg
I'm not sure I get this, but it looks funny. Can someone explain it to me?
Chris
Christopher Tidy
Cydrome, that is a pretty wise piece of advice.
Best wishes,
Chris
Christopher Tidy
that would be a rather heavy punishment for the crime.
Compare what happened here - no guns were fired and there was little, if
any, actual violence - to the Rodney King beating, for example. That was
far more violent, and yet the two cops convicted got just 30 months.
There's not much logic to that.
Best wishes,
Chris
Christopher Tidy
Thinking about this, I guess one can argue that the presence of guns
made it a more serious crime. But I don't find that logic entirely
satisfactory. I think actual violence should be the key to sentencing.
To do otherwise sends out the message that in some cases a threat of
violence is worse than violence itself. To me, that's wrong. But it's a
matter of opinion, I guess.
Best wishes,
Chris
SteveB
I'm sorry, my computer must be on the blink. I missed the part where you
cited your legal education, professional experience, and credits.
Damn computer!
Steve
Christopher Tidy
Since when did you need to be a lawyer to have an opinion?
Chris
SteveB
Since never. It is just that you went into the subject with such verve that
it appeared that you were spouting facts rather than opinion. My mistake.
Steve
Christopher Tidy
> Since never. It is just that you went into the subject with such verve that
> it appeared that you were spouting facts rather than opinion. My mistake.
It's interesting to note that the verdict returned by the jurors is
based on their opinion of the evidence. What is reasonable doubt? It's a
matter of opinion. There isn't any useful definition. So like I said, in
certain cases when it's borderline as to whether there is reasonable
doubt, two juries can return different verdicts without either of them
being wrong.
I am just saying that if I had been on that jury, I am not sure I would
have reached the same conclusion. I think that's a reasonable thing to say.
Best wishes,
Chris
jonathan
> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUNgbOr-2bnpFUX0MiII6je2CkRAD93JGAUO0
>
> I know a lot of you will be celebrating. But strangely I feel less impressed
> with your criminal justice system than I was the last time. This case has been
> a farce. As I see it, pretty much every witness is dirty, and there are
> numerous significant uncertainties. And after all, it was just a bunch of guys
> who got into a scrape in hotel room. Does it matter? I am not convinced that
> the case should have come to trial, and neither do I feel confident that the
> verdict has nothing to do with his 1995 acquittal.
Don't you owe me money? You look like that guy that stole
some stuff from me.
No, I'm not going to call the police, or get a lawyer. I don't want
to get into all that "he said she said" stuff about who owns what.
Just give me your address please? Some of my friends
and I would like to stop by and 'discuss' the matter
and collect what I'm owed. Oh, and some of us
will be carrying guns, so don't get any ideas or things
might ...'get ugly'. If you know what I mean.
Don't worry, if you don't resist no one should get shot.
You obviously agree it's best to take the law
into your own hands, right?
>
> There will be an appeal I'm sure. We'll see which way it goes.
>
> Guess I tend to take the side of the defendant.
In Florida it's a ten year mandatory sentence for committing
a crime while using a gun, even for first timers.
As it should be.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Chris
>
Steve Lusardi
but in this case OJ did have legitimate rights and he could have requested
the police to investigate. He didn't and he will regret this for a very long
time, but I am very concerned about the fairness of the court, the judge,
the police and the system. OJ was very clearly set up. There is no other
explanation of either the guns or the recorders. You just don't happen to
have these in place. Everybody knew what was going down except OJ and it is
so obvious, it never should have gone to court. This is just another example
of a corrupt, unjust system and is deserving of a public investigation. As
an American, it scares me to death. This could happen to anyone.
Steve
"Christopher Tidy" <cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote in message
news:48E71DEC...@cantabgold.net...
Christopher Tidy
>
> There are two types of justice in America: white justice & black justice.
> Sad but true.
I don't see this as being a case about race. Neither did the lawyers, as
far as I can tell. But it is possible that a predominantly black jury
could have delivered a different verdict. It isn't necessarily racism.
Different people honestly see evidence in different ways.
Best wishes,
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> OJ was stupid in doing what he did and stupid does have its just rewards,
> but in this case OJ did have legitimate rights and he could have requested
> the police to investigate. He didn't and he will regret this for a very long
> time, but I am very concerned about the fairness of the court, the judge,
> the police and the system. OJ was very clearly set up. There is no other
> explanation of either the guns or the recorders. You just don't happen to
> have these in place. Everybody knew what was going down except OJ and it is
> so obvious, it never should have gone to court. This is just another example
> of a corrupt, unjust system and is deserving of a public investigation. As
> an American, it scares me to death. This could happen to anyone.
> Steve
Steve, you've hit the nail on the head. It scares me too. I don't think
the state should be allowed to bear grudges.
Best wishes,
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> You obviously agree it's best to take the law
> into your own hands, right?
If the stuff didn't belong to him, what he did was morally wrong. If it
did belong to him, then retrieving the stuff was morally acceptable, and
the state just has an issue with the way he did it. Surely you can see
the moral difference?
I believe that the law should recognise this moral difference with
different sentences.
Best wishes,
Chris
Gunner Asch
>On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 02:05:19 +0000, Christopher Tidy
><cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote:
>
>The logic is called racism; I'm afraid.
>
>There are two types of justice in America: white justice & black justice.
>Sad but true.
Oh come off it, dickhead
Is it racism that caused 51% of the US prison population to be made up
of the males from 15% of the population?
Is it Racism that the #2 cause of death among males 14-26 yrs old, to
be other males of the Same race?
Is it racism that 1 in 3 males in that group are convicted felons?
And convicted by a jury made up of members of that same group???
Cut me a huss you buffoon.
Its called a Cultural Defect in that particular race. A gutter
culture that emphesises ignorance, violence against women and other
members of that same group, and glorifies the commission of crimes,
drug dealing and murder.
Double standard my ass.
Gunner
"Obama, raises taxes and kills babies. Sarah Palin - raises babies
and kills taxes." Pyotr Flipivich
Gunner Asch
<steve...@lusardi.de> wrote:
>OJ was stupid in doing what he did and stupid does have its just rewards,
>but in this case OJ did have legitimate rights and he could have requested
>the police to investigate. He didn't and he will regret this for a very long
>time, but I am very concerned about the fairness of the court, the judge,
>the police and the system. OJ was very clearly set up. There is no other
>explanation of either the guns or the recorders. You just don't happen to
>have these in place. Everybody knew what was going down except OJ and it is
>so obvious, it never should have gone to court. This is just another example
>of a corrupt, unjust system and is deserving of a public investigation. As
>an American, it scares me to death. This could happen to anyone.
>Steve
huh?????
>
>
>"Christopher Tidy" <cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote in message
>news:48E71DEC...@cantabgold.net...
>> Just heard the news...
>> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUNgbOr-2bnpFUX0MiII6je2CkRAD93JGAUO0
>>
>> I know a lot of you will be celebrating. But strangely I feel less
>> impressed with your criminal justice system than I was the last time. This
>> case has been a farce. As I see it, pretty much every witness is dirty,
>> and there are numerous significant uncertainties. And after all, it was
>> just a bunch of guys who got into a scrape in hotel room. Does it matter?
>> I am not convinced that the case should have come to trial, and neither do
>> I feel confident that the verdict has nothing to do with his 1995
>> acquittal.
>>
>> There will be an appeal I'm sure. We'll see which way it goes.
>>
>> Guess I tend to take the side of the defendant.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>
"Obama, raises taxes and kills babies. Sarah Palin - raises babies
Gunner Asch
So Typhoid Mary should have just been allowed to roam free?
Christopher Tidy
the guy who testified that O.J. gave him the memorabilia, and
therefore his testimony was key to the making the robbery charges stick:
"According to one tape, one of his closest friends once paid a woman to
seduce Simpson in a hotel room in the hope of secretly videotaping the
encounter and selling it to a supermarket tabloid. The friend, Simpson’s
former agent Mike Gilbert, was also alleged to have offered Simpson’s
girlfriend, Christie Prody, $1m to install cameras in her bedroom. Prody
said she asked Simpson incredulously: 'This is your friend?'"
Can you really trust a guy like that? I think they're all full of shit
in this case. Every one. To me, that means it's very difficult to be
sure of anything. So to paraphrase Johnnie Cochran "If they're full of
shit, you must acquit".
That's the way I see it anyway.
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 07:09:06 -0700, c_mulh...@nym.hush.com wrote:
>
>
>>On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 02:05:19 +0000, Christopher Tidy
>><cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It is also worth noting that if O.J. gets a 15-year prison sentence,
>>>that would be a rather heavy punishment for the crime.
>>>
>>>Compare what happened here - no guns were fired and there was little, if
>>>any, actual violence - to the Rodney King beating, for example. That was
>>>far more violent, and yet the two cops convicted got just 30 months.
>>>
>>>There's not much logic to that.
>>>
>>>Best wishes,
>>>
>>>Chris
>>
>>The logic is called racism; I'm afraid.
>>
>>There are two types of justice in America: white justice & black justice.
>>Sad but true.
> Its called a Cultural Defect in that particular race. A gutter
> culture that emphesises ignorance, violence against women and other
> members of that same group, and glorifies the commission of crimes,
> drug dealing and murder.
It may or may not be the case that black people commit more murders per
capita than whites. I'm not going to get into that discussion. But many
legal scholars have pointed out that if you're a black murderer, you're
significantly more likely to receive a death sentence than if you're a
white murderer. There have been several books written on the subject,
such as:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&id=KqZHy84dR0IC
That's worrying, isn't it?
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 16:40:53 +0200, "Steve Lusardi"
> <steve...@lusardi.de> wrote:
>
>
>>OJ was stupid in doing what he did and stupid does have its just rewards,
>>but in this case OJ did have legitimate rights and he could have requested
>>the police to investigate. He didn't and he will regret this for a very long
>>time, but I am very concerned about the fairness of the court, the judge,
>>the police and the system. OJ was very clearly set up. There is no other
>>explanation of either the guns or the recorders. You just don't happen to
>>have these in place. Everybody knew what was going down except OJ and it is
>>so obvious, it never should have gone to court. This is just another example
>>of a corrupt, unjust system and is deserving of a public investigation. As
>>an American, it scares me to death. This could happen to anyone.
>>Steve
>
>
>
> huh?????
I agree with Steve. That makes two of us.
Chris
Gunner Asch
>Spoken by a 100% certified, bonified racist.
Tell that to the FBI, the Department of Justice (whom provided the
figures) and my black girlfriend (a very strong Conservative)
So Falseteller, why are you both a racist and in denial?
Got gangsta rap playing into your brain at the moment? Best be
careful, one of the 20,000 Bloods, or 45,000 Crips might come up
behind you and steal your Ipod, after pumping a 9 into your ass.
Gunner Asch
<cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Chris
>>>
>>>The logic is called racism; I'm afraid.
>>>
>>>There are two types of justice in America: white justice & black justice.
>>>Sad but true.
>
>> Its called a Cultural Defect in that particular race. A gutter
>> culture that emphesises ignorance, violence against women and other
>> members of that same group, and glorifies the commission of crimes,
>> drug dealing and murder.
>
>It may or may not be the case that black people commit more murders per
>capita than whites. I'm not going to get into that discussion. But many
>legal scholars have pointed out that if you're a black murderer, you're
>significantly more likely to receive a death sentence than if you're a
>white murderer. There have been several books written on the subject,
>such as:
>http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&id=KqZHy84dR0IC
>
There are many books claiming that Elvis is still alive. Doesnt make
it true however.
And your avoidence of the key issue is bothersome. So you chose to
not address the problem of crime, because it may make you
uncomfortable?
Im curious Chris...are 1 out of three of your friends convicted
felons?
Why not?
>That's worrying, isn't it?
>
>Chris
Not really, given that 10% of all criminals commit 80% of all crimes.
That would mean that they commit multiple crimes, no?
Carreer criminals who have murdered, tend to repeat their offenses.
So if one of them gets a dirt nap because of a convition for a
murder..the chances are good he committed others.
So the dirt nap works just fine for me. It means the recidivism rate
is Zero.
Gunner Asch
Did OJ and friends, armed with guns, enter a hotel suite and prevent
the occupants from leaving or not?
Yes or no?
Gunner
foj...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
A LV jury pool would likely be conservative retirees or rednecks. 12
counts of felony for a a madcap escapade of a "crime" by a defendent
who thought he was reclaiming his property? What if the defendent was
just Joe Blow or a popular celebrity? OJ was convicted on the jury's
certainity of his guilt 13 years. OJ couldn't have had an untainted
jury pool in the USA especially in conservative white neighborhoods.
The legal system has been arrogant with their power of state
especially since the Reagan era.
Christopher Tidy
Yes, however:
(i) It is debatable if O.J. knew about the guns beforehand.
(ii) It is debatable if the stuff seized belonged to O.J.
(iii) It is not what most people would consider to be kidnapping.
(iv) It is highly likely that the guy who organised the meeting
was trying to get O.J. to commit a crime.
Altogether this makes the case rather more complex and debatable.
Chris
Gunner Asch
<cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 00:17:15 +0000, Christopher Tidy
>> <cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I read the following in the Sunday Times newspaper today. This refers to
>>> the guy who testified that O.J. gave him the memorabilia, and
>>>therefore his testimony was key to the making the robbery charges stick:
>>>
>>>"According to one tape, one of his closest friends once paid a woman to
>>>seduce Simpson in a hotel room in the hope of secretly videotaping the
>>>encounter and selling it to a supermarket tabloid. The friend, Simpson’s
>>>former agent Mike Gilbert, was also alleged to have offered Simpson’s
>>>girlfriend, Christie Prody, $1m to install cameras in her bedroom. Prody
>>>said she asked Simpson incredulously: 'This is your friend?'"
>>>
>>>Can you really trust a guy like that? I think they're all full of shit
>>>in this case. Every one. To me, that means it's very difficult to be
>>>sure of anything. So to paraphrase Johnnie Cochran "If they're full of
>>>shit, you must acquit".
>>>
>>>That's the way I see it anyway.
>>>
>>>Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> Did OJ and friends, armed with guns, enter a hotel suite and prevent
>> the occupants from leaving or not?
>>
>> Yes or no?
>
>Yes, however:
>
>(i) It is debatable if O.J. knew about the guns beforehand.
Too bad. He allowed it to continue.
>(ii) It is debatable if the stuff seized belonged to O.J.
Yes and?
>(iii) It is not what most people would consider to be kidnapping.
Wrong. Most US states consider a restriction of movement to be
kidnapping, or false imprisonment
>(iv) It is highly likely that the guy who organised the meeting
> was trying to get O.J. to commit a crime.
Yet OJ went ahead and stepped on his own dick.
>
>Altogether this makes the case rather more complex and debatable.
>
>Chris
Hardly. He fucked up. He got convicted by a jury of his peers
Now he does the time for the crime.
Do you believe it to be fair that the driver in an armed robbery,
where someone is killed, either a victim, or a robber....is charged
with and convicted of murder?
He only sat outside with the motor running.......
Yes or no?
Whenever a Liberal utters the term "Common Sense approach"....grab your
wallet, your ass, and your guns because the sombitch is about to do
something damned nasty to all three of them.
Christopher Tidy
>>>Its called a Cultural Defect in that particular race. A gutter
>>>culture that emphesises ignorance, violence against women and other
>>>members of that same group, and glorifies the commission of crimes,
>>>drug dealing and murder.
>>
>>It may or may not be the case that black people commit more murders per
>>capita than whites. I'm not going to get into that discussion. But many
>>legal scholars have pointed out that if you're a black murderer, you're
>>significantly more likely to receive a death sentence than if you're a
>>white murderer. There have been several books written on the subject,
>>such as:
>>http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&id=KqZHy84dR0IC
>>
>
>
> There are many books claiming that Elvis is still alive. Doesnt make
> it true however.
> And your avoidence of the key issue is bothersome. So you chose to
> not address the problem of crime, because it may make you
> uncomfortable?
No, you're avoiding the issue. If you take convicted murderers as a
group, murderers who are also black are more likely to receive the death
sentence. That is what I said was worrying, and you didn't comment on it.
> Not really, given that 10% of all criminals commit 80% of all crimes.
> That would mean that they commit multiple crimes, no?
>
> Carreer criminals who have murdered, tend to repeat their offenses.
> So if one of them gets a dirt nap because of a convition for a
> murder..the chances are good he committed others.
That's untrue. Just as an example, read this report:
http://www.sgc.wa.gov/PUBS/Recidivism/Adult_Recidivism_CY04.pdf
In particular, note this part:
"Despite generally held views, the more violent crimes
including manslaughter, murder and robbery, accounted
for the smallest number of offenses and, along with sex
offenses, the lowest recidivism rates (Figures 2 and 3)."
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> Do you believe it to be fair that the driver in an armed robbery,
> where someone is killed, either a victim, or a robber....is charged
> with and convicted of murder?
>
> He only sat outside with the motor running.......
>
> Yes or no?
Depends on the case. There could be a number or incriminating or
mitigating factors.
Try this hypothetical situation. I'm in South California. I hire a car
and stop by your shop. You tell me your truck is broken down. Can I give
you a lift into town? You ask me to wait while you go into the bank. You
go in, try to rob the place unsuccessfully, shoot a guy, and then leave,
get in the car and tell me nothing. Is it fair if I'm later charged with
murder?
You see what I mean? I just think there is a combination of significant
doubts and mitigating factors in the Simpson case.
Chris
Gunner Asch
Robbery? They are often committed by career criminals who do so many
times before being captured
Btw....your article was for the state of Washington.... which has a
60% recidivism rate for robbery.....
Most murders are due to Crimes of Passion...on the other hand....
Texas for example....
Then there is this....
http://www.nicedoggie.net/2008/?p=964
http://www.gov.state.md.us/speeches/080213.html
http://www.lexingtonprosecutor.com/r_o_p_e1.htm
When I was a police officer, it was Fact that the average felon
commited aprox 20 felonies before his first conviction, and as a
repeat offender, had on average10 convictions before winding up in
prison for a very very long time for murder, rape etc.
Criminals tend to escalate their crimes, then fuck up badly and get
hit with a huge prison term.
Then of course..the figures we have been bantering about do NOT apply
to juvinile offenders. Until they turn 18, their records are
generally sealed and cannot be used after they turn 18. A terrific
number of violent crimes are committed by juviniles, simply because
they can and do get away with it. The Justice System generally goes
easy on them time after time after time, until they turn 18, at which
point their life of crime as an adult kicks in.
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05201
Gunner Asch
If you can prove such, you are found innocent. However..its the LAW
in most states that any participant in a crime that involves a
homicide, all the actors are guilty of the homicide.
And thats rather fair to me.
Think your strawman argument above is common?
Gunner
obbz...@yahoo.com
> Maybe Fred Goldman orchistrated the series of events that have led to OJs
> current predicament ?
No need. OJ was already a violent, stupid, bullying, lying criminal
lowlife without any help from Goldman. His "current predicament" is
utterly and completely of his own doing and the result of his nature.
Forget any lingering good-guy image of OJ, it was all PR bullshit. The
guy you hear screaming in the background on Nicole's 911 calls, the
guy you hear in the audio of the holdup, the guy who murdered Nicole
Simpson and Ron Goldman is the real OJ.
obbz...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> It is also worth noting that if O.J. gets a 15-year prison sentence,
> that would be a rather heavy punishment for the crime.
>
> Compare what happened here - no guns were fired and there was little, if
> any, actual violence - to the Rodney King beating, for example. That was
> far more violent, and yet the two cops convicted got just 30 months.
>
Simpson - breaks into a room to steal items at gunpoint - i.e. the
threat of lethal violence.
So-called Rodney King "beating" - A lowlife with a long criminal
history, high on drugs refuses to pull over when lawfully directed to
do so by police, instead fleeing at high speed endangering the public.
He refuses to cooperate and is subdued by police who use batons
applied primarily to fleshy areas of his body as per procedure. Note
that when he quits resisting, they quit using batons. Note that he is
able to walk under his own power and sustains only minor injuries. No
broken bones, no organs injured. If they had been interested in
genuinely harming him, do you think he would have walked under his own
power?
Simpson - rightfully convicted of a criminal act.
Rodney King cops - railroaded by political correctness and neverending
black indignation and refusal to accept responsibility for actions.
> There's not much logic to that.
The illogic is that Simpson was given a pass at his first trial and
that the cops did any time at all.
Christopher Tidy
You were talking about murder, and that was what I was responding to.
Chris
Christopher Tidy
No, I'm just making the point that I can't say if it's fair for the
driver to be charged with murder without knowing the details of the case.
Surely it is in fact the prosecutor's obligation to prove that the
driver was a knowing participant, rather than the defence lawyer's
obligation to prove that he was not? That is, the defendant gets the
benefit of the doubt?
In most armed robbery cases, I would not expect it to be too hard to
prove that the driver was a knowing participant.
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> On Oct 4, 10:05 pm, Christopher Tidy <cdt22NOS...@cantabgold.net>
> wrote:
>
>>It is also worth noting that if O.J. gets a 15-year prison sentence,
>>that would be a rather heavy punishment for the crime.
>>
>>Compare what happened here - no guns were fired and there was little, if
>>any, actual violence - to the Rodney King beating, for example. That was
>>far more violent, and yet the two cops convicted got just 30 months.
>>
>
>
>
> Simpson - breaks into a room to steal items at gunpoint - i.e. the
> threat of lethal violence.
>
> So-called Rodney King "beating" - A lowlife with a long criminal
> history, high on drugs refuses to pull over when lawfully directed to
> do so by police, instead fleeing at high speed endangering the public.
> He refuses to cooperate and is subdued by police who use batons
> applied primarily to fleshy areas of his body as per procedure. Note
> that when he quits resisting, they quit using batons.
That is untrue. If you watch the video, you'll see that early on (after
they have hit him just a few times), he stops resisting and trying to
crawl away. At that point they could easily have put the cuffs on him,
but instead they keep beating and kicking him. That's misconduct.
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> On Oct 4, 4:14 am, "azotic" <azo...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Maybe Fred Goldman orchistrated the series of events that have led to OJs
>>current predicament ?
>
>
>
> No need. OJ was already a violent, stupid, bullying, lying criminal
> lowlife without any help from Goldman. His "current predicament" is
> utterly and completely of his own doing and the result of his nature.
If this was the public opinion in 1994/5, why was there such interest in
the trial? I think the interest was because his public image was
actually pretty good.
Chris
Gunner
Chris...crawling away is resisting arrest. When they tell you to stay
put..you stay put.
Doing anything other than what they tell you...is resisting
arrest..and is very stupid.
Gunner
<cdt22...@cantabgold.net> wrote:
You mentioned robbery.
Gunner
Michael A. Terrell
Did you ever see the unedited video, where he was attacking the
police officers? It aired live, then was edited, and played over z&
over to give the impression that he was the only victim. Another fine
example of the media twisting the truth.
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy.
Christopher Tidy
>>That is untrue. If you watch the video, you'll see that early on (after
>>they have hit him just a few times), he stops resisting and trying to
>>crawl away. At that point they could easily have put the cuffs on him,
>>but instead they keep beating and kicking him. That's misconduct.
>>
>>Chris
>
>
> Chris...crawling away is resisting arrest. When they tell you to stay
> put..you stay put.
I meant that he stopped resisting and also stopped crawling away.
Chris
Christopher Tidy
> Did you ever see the unedited video, where he was attacking the
> police officers? It aired live, then was edited, and played over z&
> over to give the impression that he was the only victim. Another fine
> example of the media twisting the truth.
You got a link to that unedited video? The video I've seen makes the
cops look way out of line.
Chris
Michael A. Terrell
There was no internet or video archive sites when I watched it on a
live newscast in the middle of the night. He was kicking and punching
the same cops that took him down. Then the network edited out about 90%
of the incident, only leaving the last part. I still think the
networks should have been held responsible for all damages in the
aftermath.
Gunner
But he didnt. Ive seen the complete RAW video, before the media and
the bleeding hearts hacked it up
Gunner
Christopher Tidy
> Christopher Tidy wrote:
>
>>Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Did you ever see the unedited video, where he was attacking the
>>>police officers? It aired live, then was edited, and played over z&
>>>over to give the impression that he was the only victim. Another fine
>>>example of the media twisting the truth.
>>
>>You got a link to that unedited video? The video I've seen makes the
>>cops look way out of line.
>
>
>
> There was no internet or video archive sites when I watched it on a
> live newscast in the middle of the night. He was kicking and punching
> the same cops that took him down. Then the network edited out about 90%
> of the incident, only leaving the last part. I still think the
> networks should have been held responsible for all damages in the
> aftermath.
Well if anyone discovers a copy of that video, please let me know. I
would be interested to see it, because all the versions I've seen (some
dating back to shortly after the incident) have made the cops look very bad.
Best wishes,
Chris