OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
$Zero
let's face it.
he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
that's outrageous.
if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, that wouldn't even have
arrested him.
mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes the
American justice system look ridiculous.
-$Zero...
A Dick's Review of dickipedia.org
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/244ba563a1ffe37d
Towse
> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>
> let's face it.
>
> he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>
> that's outrageous.
>
> if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, that wouldn't even have
> arrested him.
>
> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes the
> American justice system look ridiculous.
Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
--
Sal
Ye olde swarm of links: thousands of links for writers, researchers and
the terminally curious <http://writers.internet-resources.com>
$Zero
> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>
> let's face it.
>
> he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>
> that's outrageous.
>
> if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, that wouldn't
> even have arrested him.
replace "that" with "they".
> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this
> makes the American justice system look ridiculous.
-$Zero...
Dick, W, and OJ
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/f5bb78ae3777dffb
$Zero
> $Zero wrote:
> > OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>
> > let's face it.
>
> > he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>
> > that's outrageous.
>
> > even have arrested him.
>
> > mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes
> > the American justice system look ridiculous.
>
> Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
for what he did to his wife and her buddy.
-$Zero...
procrastination implies a certain set of priorities.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/8defef870a434222
serenebabe
> On Dec 5, 2:42 pm, Towse <s...@towse.com> wrote:
>> $Zero wrote:
>>> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>>
>>> let's face it.
>>
>>> he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>>
>>> that's outrageous.
>>
>>> if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, [they] wouldn't
>>> even have arrested him.
>>
>>> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes
>>> the American justice system look ridiculous.
>>
>> Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
>
> for what he did to his wife and her buddy.
Do you not agree, Sal?
--
It's All About We! (the column)
http://www.serenebabe.net/ - new 11/25
Pies de Arcilla
>
> let's face it.
I'm inclined to think the jury got it right both times. He was
punished for the crime where there was sufficient evidence to convict.
I think the justice system works better than you give it credit for.
serenebabe
Did you follow the first trial? The DNA evidence was complicated (hard
to follow for some, probably) but totally convincing.
ing
> On 2008-12-05 14:47:29 -0500, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> said:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 5, 2:42 pm, Towse <s...@towse.com> wrote:
> >> $Zero wrote:
> >>> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>
> >>> let's face it.
>
> >>> he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>
> >>> that's outrageous.
>
> >>> if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, [they] wouldn't
> >>> even have arrested him.
>
> >>> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes
> >>> the American justice system look ridiculous.
>
> >> Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
>
> > for what he did to his wife and her buddy.
>
> Do you not agree, Sal?
Don't know about Sal, but fact is, OJ wasn't convicted of his wife's
killing. He was found not guilty of that, regardless of what people
believe about who actually did it, so really, you can't impose
punishment on him for THAT crime.
This was a conviction for armed robbery. 12 counts or something like
that. Does the man have a prior record for armed robbery? I'm not
sure he does.
Thing is -- what's the average sentence for armed robbery in Nevada
for someone with no prior record for that offence? Does 15 years sound
a bit long or what? Or -- does the length of the sentence reflect some
kind of secondary punishment being imposed for something he wasn't
convicted of? If so, it's a travesty of justice, really.
ing
$Zero
> > On Dec 5, 2:42 pm, Towse <s...@towse.com> wrote:
> >> $Zero wrote:
> >>> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>
> >>> let's face it.
>
> >>> he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>
> >>> that's outrageous.
>
> >>> if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, [they] wouldn't
> >>> even have arrested him.
>
> >>> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes
> >>> the American justice system look ridiculous.
>
> >> Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
>
> > for what he did to his wife and her buddy.
>
> Do you not agree, Sal?
haven't you noticed by now that Sal never actually expresses any
actual opinions about anything?
it's a unique talent.
of sorts.
-$Zero...
who the fuck needs "acclaim"?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/ae1eff4c0ecc2dad
$Zero
> On Dec 5, 2:41 pm, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>
> > let's face it.
>
> I'm inclined to think the jury got it right both times.
and you'd be wrong on both counts.
bravo.
> He was punished for the crime where there was sufficient
> evidence to convict.
Gawd.
> I think the justice system works better than you give
> it credit for.
it would have to.
-$Zero...
Dick, W, and OJ
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/f5bb78ae3777dffb
serenebabe
> On Dec 5, 3:39 pm, serenebabe <sereneb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2008-12-05 14:47:29 -0500, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> said:
<...>
>>>>> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes
>>>>> the American justice system look ridiculous.
>>
>>>> Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
>>
>>> for what he did to his wife and her buddy.
>>
>> Do you not agree, Sal?
>
> Don't know about Sal, but fact is, OJ wasn't convicted of his wife's
> killing. He was found not guilty of that, regardless of what people
> believe about who actually did it, so really, you can't impose
> punishment on him for THAT crime.
Of course. I agree. Doesn't stop me from believing a mistake was made.
But, yes, we can't/shouldn't punish him him for that crime.
> This was a conviction for armed robbery. 12 counts or something like
> that. Does the man have a prior record for armed robbery? I'm not
> sure he does.
>
> Thing is -- what's the average sentence for armed robbery in Nevada
> for someone with no prior record for that offence? Does 15 years sound
> a bit long or what? Or -- does the length of the sentence reflect some
> kind of secondary punishment being imposed for something he wasn't
> convicted of? If so, it's a travesty of justice, really.
I also agree with these thoughts.
It wasn't my intention to imply that I thought he should get extra jail
time since he wasn't convicted for the murders.
serenebabe
<...>
> haven't you noticed by now that Sal never actually expresses any
> actual opinions about anything?
Why, that's simply not true. What a silly thing to say!
She doesn't always post her own opinions when she shares interesting
stories, but, often she does. And almost always (can't think of a time
she didn't) answers my questions when I ask...
It's a bit funny that you're sitting in your glass house throwing
stones, isn't it?
$Zero
> On 2008-12-05 17:09:58 -0500, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> said:
> <...>
>
> > haven't you noticed by now that Sal never actually
> > expresses any actual opinions about anything?
>
> <...>
>
> Why, that's simply not true.
oh.
> What a silly thing to say!
it's silly?
is that an opinion you're stating or a fact?
> She doesn't always post her own opinions when she shares
> interesting stories, but, often she does.
only reluctantly.
but mostly it depends on the subject.
> And almost always (can't think of a time
> she didn't) answers my questions when I ask...
>
> It's a bit funny that you're sitting in your glass
> house throwing stones, isn't it?
what?!
are you actually claiming i don't express my opinions?
LOL
well then, if my opinions aren't coming thru, i guess i'd better
rethink the way i express myself.
-$Zero...
Happy Thanksgiving! and a fairness doctrine equal time proposal
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/ec5f4d07d08aa4e2
serenebabe
> On Dec 5, 5:23 pm, serenebabe <sereneb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2008-12-05 17:09:58 -0500, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> said:
>> <...>
>>
>>> haven't you noticed by now that Sal never actually
>>> expresses any actual opinions about anything?
>>
>> <...>
>>
>> Why, that's simply not true.
>
> oh.
>
>> What a silly thing to say!
>
> it's silly?
>
> is that an opinion you're stating or a fact?
I found what you said silly. It's a fact that that is my opinion. :-)
>> She doesn't always post her own opinions when she shares
>> interesting stories, but, often she does.
>
> only reluctantly.
How can you determine reluctance?
> but mostly it depends on the subject.
>
>> And almost always (can't think of a time
>> she didn't) answers my questions when I ask...
>>
>> It's a bit funny that you're sitting in your glass
>> house throwing stones, isn't it?
>
> what?!
>
> are you actually claiming i don't express my opinions?
>
> LOL
>
> well then, if my opinions aren't coming thru, i guess i'd better
> rethink the way i express myself.
You express your opinions, but not in relation to what other people are
saying (typically).
Towse
> On 2008-12-05 14:47:29 -0500, "$Zero" <zero...@gmail.com> said:
>
>> On Dec 5, 2:42 pm, Towse <s...@towse.com> wrote:
>>> $Zero wrote:
>>>> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>>>
>>>> let's face it.
>>>
>>>> he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>>>
>>>> that's outrageous.
>>>
>>>> if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, [they] wouldn't
>>>> even have arrested him.
>>>
>>>> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes
>>>> the American justice system look ridiculous.
>>>
>>> Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
>>
>> for what he did to his wife and her buddy.
>
> Do you not agree, Sal?
Do I agree that OJ totally deserves to rot in jail?
A jury found OJ not guilty. There are people out there who believe he
was not guilty. This guy, for instance: <http://wagnerandson.com/oj/OJ.htm>
If I were Queen and could throw anyone into jail who I thought totally
deserved to rot, would OJ be on my top ten list? top one hundred?
I think Zero wouldn't have decided that OJ totally deserved to rot if OJ
weren't a celeb. The crime OJ was found not guilty of was murder -- but
there are far more horrific crimes.
Why does OJ get his/yours "totally deserves to rot"? Who else shall we
put on the list while we're at it?
$Zero
> On 2008-12-05 17:33:21 -0500, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> said:
> > On Dec 5, 5:23 pm, serenebabe <sereneb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 2008-12-05 17:09:58 -0500, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> said:
> >> <...>
>
> >>> haven't you noticed by now that Sal never actually
> >>> expresses any actual opinions about anything?
>
> >> <...>
>
> >> Why, that's simply not true.
>
> > oh.
>
> >> What a silly thing to say!
>
> > it's silly?
>
> > is that an opinion you're stating or a fact?
>
> I found what you said silly.
oh.
> It's a fact that that is my opinion. :-)
i see.
> >> She doesn't always post her own opinions when she shares
> >> interesting stories, but, often she does.
>
> > only reluctantly.
>
> How can you determine reluctance?
by polling a jury of twelve totally objective citizens.
(with five alternates)
but seriously, it just comes thru somehow.
> > but mostly it depends on the subject.
>
> >> And almost always (can't think of a time
> >> she didn't) answers my questions when I ask...
>
> >> It's a bit funny that you're sitting in your glass
> >> house throwing stones, isn't it?
>
> > what?!
>
> > are you actually claiming i don't express my opinions?
>
> > LOL
>
> > well then, if my opinions aren't coming thru, i guess i'd better
> > rethink the way i express myself.
>
> You express your opinions, but not in relation to what other
> people are saying (typically).
i'm sorry, is there a special text translator on the web somewhere
that i can run that thru?
because i can't make heads or tails of it.
-$Zero...
anyway, it's Zero Isms, not Zeroisms.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/b60316b069fe0edf
$Zero
>
> >> On Dec 5, 2:42 pm, Towse <s...@towse.com> wrote:
> >>> $Zero wrote:
> >>>> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
>
> >>>> let's face it.
>
> >>>> he got 15 years for trying to get his stolen stuff back.
>
> >>>> that's outrageous.
>
> >>>> if he were some redneck cowboy from Nevada, [they] wouldn't
> >>>> even have arrested him.
>
> >>>> mind you, OJ totally deserves to rot in jail, but this makes
> >>>> the American justice system look ridiculous.
>
> >>> Why does he deserve to rot in jail, Zero?
>
> >> for what he did to his wife and her buddy.
>
> > Do you not agree, Sal?
>
> Do I agree that OJ totally deserves to rot in jail?
>
> A jury found OJ not guilty.
true.
> There are people out there who believe he
> was not guilty.
seriously?
> This guy, for instance: <http://wagnerandson.com/oj/OJ.htm>
what's his angle?
> If I were Queen and could throw anyone into jail who I thought totally
> deserved to rot, would OJ be on my top ten list? top one hundred?
top fifty thousand?
> I think Zero wouldn't have decided that OJ totally deserved to rot if OJ
> weren't a celeb.
his celebrity has not one thing to do with it, AFAIC.
i'm just convinced he did it.
> The crime OJ was found not guilty of was murder -- but
> there are far more horrific crimes.
tell that to Nicole and Ron.
and her children, and their families.
oh, wait.
strike those first two.
> Why does OJ get his/yours "totally deserves to rot"?
because we're nearly not as enlightened as vous?
> Who else shall we put on the list while we're at it?
the kid who took a lemon drop from his neighbor's candy dish without
permission.
-$Zero...
hell, you might even enlighten yourself in the
process of attempting to describe such a thing.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/msg/8239cad5a811a793
Skipper
<seren...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2008-12-05 16:02:03 -0500, Pies de Arcilla <dear...@gmail.com> said:
>
> > On Dec 5, 2:41 pm, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> OJ gets 15 years for being found not guilty of murder
> >>
> >> let's face it.
> >
> > I'm inclined to think the jury got it right both times. He was
> > punished for the crime where there was sufficient evidence to convict.
> > I think the justice system works better than you give it credit for.
>
> Did you follow the first trial? The DNA evidence was complicated (hard
> to follow for some, probably) but totally convincing.
Most people forget that a woman saw his white van drive away down that
street but she sold her story to the National Enquirer for $100,000 or
so and it wasn't allowed in evidence. I believe I'm recalling that
correctly. I knew a guy who went to USC with him, voted against him
being allowed to join a country club in Bel Air - he was known as
really bad news long before he killed his wife.
Alan Hope
>I knew a guy who went to USC with him, voted against him
>being allowed to join a country club in Bel Air - he was known as
>really bad news long before he killed his wife.
Of course your friend voted against him. He's a black man.
serenebabe
> On Dec 5, 5:42 pm, serenebabe <sereneb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2008-12-05 17:33:21 -0500, "$Zero" <zeroi...@gmail.com> said:
<...>
>>> well then, if my opinions aren't coming thru, i guess i'd better
>>> rethink the way i express myself.
>>
>> You express your opinions, but not in relation to what other
>> people are saying (typically).
>
> i'm sorry, is there a special text translator on the web somewhere
> that i can run that thru?
>
> because i can't make heads or tails of it.
You're not usually very interactive. You usually state your opinions
and ask other people to state theirs. Sometimes you'll do this back and
forth, but, as far as I can see, mostly you like to just start things.
Just my perception at the moment. :-)
Ray Haddad
<usenet....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Skipper goes:
>
>>I knew a guy who went to USC with him, voted against him
>>being allowed to join a country club in Bel Air - he was known as
>>really bad news long before he killed his wife.
>
>Of course your friend voted against him. He's a black man.
How do you know his friend is black?
--
Ray
Alan Hope
Ray Haddad
<usenet....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Ray Haddad goes:
>
>>On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 01:43:43 +0100, Alan Hope
>><usenet....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Skipper goes:
>>>
>>>>I knew a guy who went to USC with him, voted against him
>>>>being allowed to join a country club in Bel Air - he was known as
>>>>really bad news long before he killed his wife.
>>>
>>>Of course your friend voted against him. He's a black man.
>>
>>How do you know his friend is black?
>
>Shut the fuck up, scumbag.
So you don't know. Next time perhaps you'll think before you type
something so stupid.
--
Ray