OJ Simpson sentenced 15 years to life!

Discussion in 'New Roundtable' started by islstl, Dec 5, 2008.

  1. CajunlostinCali

    CajunlostinCali Booger Eatin Moron

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    13,180
    Likes Received:
    8,283

    I am gonna roll with SF on this one, kinda. Although I agree with your assessment on JC's placement I also agree he assisted greatly in letting a murderer walk the streets. Every last member of the Juice dream team profits heavily from their success in getting OJ off. Like they actually cared about the dead? Hardly and that is summarized by never making any attempt to try and outline who they believed really done it. All due respect but he held the door open for OJ to exit the building and later commit senseless crimes. For that he gets at best, seated well in the “I could have done without that” category. In respect, there are a million other lawyers that are doing just the same today.

    That case set precedence in the courtroom today and it is for that reason I say every lawyer should minimally be spayed or neutered or simply forced from reproducing. Right and wrong have, for the most part left the courtroom and been replaced by strategy and spin tactics. The rules allow for the spin and it is nauseating to say the very least that that is the true cause for any attorneys these days.

    For those who have never experienced litigation, great and here is to your never having to but for those who get mad and say I am gonna sick an attorney on the issue, careful what you wish for. And if you do always remind yourself to ask, does my lawyer really have my best intentions in mind? You can only answer that if you are watching what is going on, otherwise NEVER let a lawyer tell you “I am the lawyer and you will follow my advice”. You hear those words from any attorney, you need go to bed with their intentions or you need to fire em, then and there. Only you control the battle, attorneys are the vehicle to carry it through.
     
  2. LSUMASTERMIND

    LSUMASTERMIND Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    12,992
    Likes Received:
    2,461

    So if you were a juror during the trial and you strongly believed in your heart that, that bastard was guilty. Cochran would have had enough ability to sway your opinion? Doesnt wash to me, lawyers do what they are paid to do. So trying to demonize a defense lawyer is bs to me, they only have so much power in a trial by juror. I guess he should have said "Yea that bastard killed those folk, but dont convict him" ?

    Now, there are men in jail who didnt do it and didnt have a great lawyer to defend them. Since thats where the discussion seems to be headed.

    Like the Micheal Jackson trial, now the prosecution screwed that up by putting the mother on the stand. However, if I was a juror in that trial, I would have voted guilty, because no 40 year old man wants to sleep with a strangers kid and give them Jesus Juice and not be guilty of something.
     
  3. CajunlostinCali

    CajunlostinCali Booger Eatin Moron

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    13,180
    Likes Received:
    8,283
    I do believe that half the jurors+ in the first trial stated that reasonable doubt was created but still felt OJ was guilty. Can't vote with your gut, that is the law.

    Between lawyers, that is the game of spin, depends just how good your spin/counter spin really is. That goes for those who are wrongfully incarcerated today.

    JC and company did their jobs well and got a guilty man free cause thats how the law allows. Blame goes doubly to the DA for not doing a better job. They got out spun.
     
  4. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    The best one was "Outrage" by Vince Bugliosi, the prosecutor that put Manson behind bars. When Nichole's blood was found in Simson's vehicle, the case should have been over and done.

    No, lawyers are hired guns for their clients and it's their job to do anything that they can to get them off. Cochran was a damn good lawyer.

    The animosity here belongs to the DA and the judge. Those two lousy prosecutors the DA put in charge allowed a mostly black female jury to be seated because they thought the trial was going to be a wife-abuse case. Any fool could see that it was going to be a race case.

    Then that fool of a judge allowed the trial to be turned into an unjustified indictment of the police instead of a trial of Simpson.
     
  5. LSUMASTERMIND

    LSUMASTERMIND Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    12,992
    Likes Received:
    2,461
    That is the law, however, you can vote your gut, you dont have to reveal that you felt that there was some reasonable doubt.

    I do agree that the DA screwed up considerably. They could have won that case.
     
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    Be fair. Furman was not a Klansman. No evidence was ever introduced that had him interferring with the evidence. It was a preposterous notion that would have required 30 police officers and investigators to have premeditatedly conspired to frame OJ. The main failure was the DA's failure to point out that a contaminated DNA sample never produces a false positive! It produces inconclusive results.

    With all due respect . . . so friggin' what?
     
  7. LSUMASTERMIND

    LSUMASTERMIND Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    12,992
    Likes Received:
    2,461
    Be fair about what? Before you prematurely claim that I called Furman a Klansman, you need to read the post again. I was referring to Sabanfan, saying that " but even if Furman had been conducting the investigation in a sheet and a hood" Thats what I made the comparison about a klansmen. I never said Furman was a klansman, so back off with that.

    And me saying that he was a family friend, has do with someone implying that he went to hell because he defended a murderer.

    You really should read before you jump to conclusions
     
  8. StaceyO

    StaceyO Football Turns Me On

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2003
    Messages:
    15,643
    Likes Received:
    8,487
    I agree that OJ's lawyers did their job. With that being said, I don't know how some lawyers can sleep at night, knowing that they defend murderers.

    But I digress...Marcia Clark, Christopher Darden, and Judge Ito blew that case from Day One.
     
    1 person likes this.
  9. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Obviously, I was using hyperbole, but my point was that OJ was obviously guilty and allegations of Furman's racism did nothing to change that. Cochran knew it, the judge and jury knew it, and the American public knew it.

    I read it and you are correct.

    Let me clarify. Cochran was doing his job and I agree that everyone is entitled to a competent defense. My problem with Johnny was that he turned the case into a racial statement which played right into that jury's hands. There was no reasonable doubt of OJ's guilt. The only thing in doubt was whether Furman was racist.
     
  10. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    Back off? Listen chief, I backed you up on Cochran. But you did compare Furman to a Klansman and very much suggested that police racism trumped physical evidence. That's what I mean when I say "be fair."
     

Share This Page