General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf you're really a liberal, you must applaud the Simpson parole.
Let me preface my comments with this preamble: I believe there to be absolutely no doubt he killed his wife and her friend. I also have no doubt the acquittal was a miscarriage of justice. BUT . . . that miscarriage of justice was NOT Simpson's doing. Lance Ito was a terrible judge. Gil Garcetti assigned a weak prosecutorial team. Ito, Clark, and Darden were starstruck. Last, the jury was tainted by unrelated facts, as admitted years later by members; the Rodney King trial influenced them to let this murderer walk. With that, my feelings about today's hearing and decision follow.
The fact is, for the crime for which he is serving time, he was sentenced overly harsh. We can discuss the "why" of that, but the fact is, he was. Given that, he has been a model prisoner. He met the standards in place by the State of Nevada for granting parole. Again, you may not like these standards, but they are the in place regulations.
His previous trial, his murder of two people, and the injustice of that acquittal have absolutely nothing to do with the decision rendered by the Nevada Parole Board.
The laws in place in all instances - the murder trial and all proceedings up to today - were followed.
If you want to rail against someone or something, rail against the State's team in the murder trial.
We can NOT ignore laws because with think a prior event went unpunished. We CAN NOT.
For me, the biggest problem was Ito. Clark and Darden were simply over their heads, there because of the poor judgement of Gil Garcetti. All were starstruck by the media. As but one tiny, inconsequential bit of evidence was Clark's make-over during the trial. Ito's preening was a day-in, day-out occurrence. And on and on. If you want to be pissed at anyone, be pissed at this band of clowns and incompetents.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)fHe was found not guilty of murder charges, so that's legally at an end. Robbery? I'm not called on to decide if parole is appropriate.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Alice11111
(5,730 posts)Ok. Time for parole for THIS case. He still showed no remorse and made excuses. Slime
Agree, bad OP line. Nothing to do w being liberal.
Watchfoxheadexplodes
(3,496 posts)Sorry
Response to Watchfoxheadexplodes (Reply #2)
Post removed
Stinky The Clown
(67,757 posts)As in the preamble to the OP, but possibly missed by you is that we agree he is a murderer.
There was no applaud of that. Sorry.
Johnny2X2X
(18,967 posts)Whether or not you approve or disapprove of OJ's parole has little to do with being liberal.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)He shouldn't have had that long a sentence for the robbery.
He'll pay for the murders semewhere down the line.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Hopefully it will be the instant variety as soon as he's released.
Lochloosa
(16,057 posts)Burglary really gets States attention. That involves entering a dwelling where people work or live. They consider worse than robbery.
Count 1: Conspiracy to commit a crime
Count 2: Conspiracy to commit kidnapping
Count 3: Conspiracy to commit robbery
Count 4: Burglary while in possession of a deadly weapon
Count 5: 1st degree kidnapping with use of a deadly weapon (for Bruce Fromong)
Count 6: 1st degree kidnapping with use of a deadly weapon (for Alfred Beardsley)
Count 7: Robbery with use of a deadly weapon (for Bruce Fromong)
Count 8: Robbery with use of a deadly weapon (for Alfred Beardsley)
Count 9: Assault with a deadly weapon (for Bruce Fromong)
Count 10: Assault with a deadly weapon (for Alfred Beardsley)
sarisataka
(18,472 posts)His murder trial was not the first miscarriage of Justice nor was it the last, there have been many since then. He served the punishment for which he was convicted.
Rather than cheer or gnash my teeth I will simply ignore him. I will not give him profit for his crimes with my money or attention.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)This case has ZERO to do with murder
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)The inability of some folks to separate a Felony Conviction versus a Civil Judgment (in the Brown/Goldman Case) continues to baffle the imagination.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)I don't like him being a free man, but he was aquited for the murder charge. Parole for robbery has nothing to do with the previous crime he was tried for.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Much as it was twenty years ago, everyone is an expert on Simpson.
The hunger for the lowest common denominator of delicious gossip has again, seemingly created a nation who are experts on law, on justice, on the legal system, on sentencing, on guilt, and on every other bit of distemper a creative imagination can justify as an absolute.
We get to pretend we know what others may or may not deserve. And pat ourselves on the back for instructing our peers in what to believe...
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)Stinky The Clown
(67,757 posts)Yavin4
(35,415 posts)Unfortunately, it's very common that victims of domestic abuse are often killed by their abusers. If you have enough anger inside of you to strike a person, then you have enough anger to kill that person.
Stinky The Clown
(67,757 posts)That's a big issue that never gets discussed in this case.
Yavin4
(35,415 posts)So, that major piece of the evidence was lost entirely.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)No question.
Crunchy Frog
(26,574 posts)I can understand it, but I don't have to like it and I definitely don't have to applaud it.
Stinky The Clown
(67,757 posts)You may not like it. I do. It was the murder trial's outcome I found to be a miscarriage of justice.
B2G
(9,766 posts)their full sentence is up?
He was ELIGIBLE for parole. There's no law that said he had to be released, and some disagree because based on his history, they think he is prone to violence.
Count me in that camp.
onenote
(42,531 posts)of having committed violent acts, whether or not they resulted in an arrest and/or conviction?
Do you support no parole sentences?
B2G
(9,766 posts)Again, I understand why they did this. I just don't t like it.
whathehell
(29,026 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)According to the laws of Nevada he was a model prisoner and eligible for parole.
onenote
(42,531 posts)since conservatives generally aren't fans of parole or of accused criminals getting off on a "technicality" (unless of course it's a conservative on trial or seeking parole).
Brother Buzz
(36,364 posts)Does that make me a bad person?
Stinky The Clown
(67,757 posts)Except you're not indifferent. You made this post.
Most people brag to be immune to such events, but lick the lollipop when in private.
Have a good day.
nycbos
(6,034 posts)tavernier
(12,367 posts)who swooned and slobbered over him and had no intention of finding him guilty. I watched every second of that trial and Clark and Darden did all but show actual film of him murdering the victims. All that over their heads and poor judgement stuff is hooey. That jury was to OJ as the MAGA morons are to trump.
B2G
(9,766 posts)when cops who shoot people are found not guilty.
tavernier
(12,367 posts)and ranted loudly, so attempting to guilt me because I loathe a man who sliced open the throats of two people and destroyed the lives of their families just ain't happening. They are both equally ugly and heartbreaking crimes.
Stinky The Clown
(67,757 posts)You seem not to have read the OP to the point of understanding it. This is a direct quote:
Have a nice day.
miyazaki
(2,239 posts)Awsi Dooger
(14,565 posts)Unfortunately she knew her stuff and did her job extremely well, as jury consultant for O.J.'s team. Dimitrius' research indicated that women and especially black women would not have typical sympathy toward Nicole -- as a younger white woman married to a black man -- or outrage toward O.J.
Marcia Clark had won several slam dunk cases and thought she had bonded with black women on those juries. Therefore she made a tragic poor assumption and allowed the jury to be loaded with black women.
Obviously the relocation didn't help. That was on Garcetti. The sequestered aspect also undoubtedly further limited the potential juror pool and gave us not the brightest bulbs.
Even a moderately intelligent jury would have convinced O.J. based on math and science alone. Clark and Darden were hardly the worst I've ever seen. Not close. The glove demonstration was idiotic but the totality was average among televised court cases I've watched. But once you get dunces on that panel who have no clue toward probability then sure you're subject to morons who over value Barry Scheck's cross of Dennis Fung, or F. Lee Bailey's indictment of Mark Fuhrman, or Phil Vannatter's transport of the evidence, etc.
***
Regarding the Palace Station episode that landed O.J. in jail, I have to say I witnessed far more confrontational and dangerous situations in casino parking lots or in casino sports books, during the 25 years I lived in Las Vegas. There were plenty of thug types in that environment and countless times I was told this person had a mob connection, or that person had a mob connection. When somebody owed money or had done something wrong they were confronted and it could get violent. I always kept a distance, both in knowledge and safe location. The O.J. Las Vegas verdict has always been considered an absolute joke by locals who know how the town operates.
H2O Man
(73,506 posts)One can simply ignore it, and concentrate on what is important.
Stinky The Clown
(67,757 posts)H2O Man
(73,506 posts)I thought that in the movie, they caught the one-armed man who killed his wife anyway?
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Our system of government, and of justice, is not about outcomes. It is about the process.
I'm amazed at how many folks don't seem to get that.
leftstreet
(36,097 posts)Not him, not his parole, nor what happens to him from here
Although I don't think being 'liberal' or 'conservative' or whatever people choose has much to do with anything here
onenote
(42,531 posts)The process failed in the murder trial imo for the reasons outlined in the OP and I won't and don't applaud the result of the process in that case. But the process in the parole hearing worked and its hard not to agree with and applaud that it produced the correct outcome given the situation.
Calculating
(2,955 posts)OJ was found not guilty in the murder trial, and it would be an injustice to simply hold him forever over a robbery to make up for the failure in the murder trial. Due process was followed here. I dislike the outcome, but I understand why it had to be this way.
Progressive dog
(6,898 posts)would applaud Simpson's parole.
Joe941
(2,848 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,311 posts)MrsCoffee
(5,801 posts)Squinch
(50,901 posts)DinahMoeHum
(21,771 posts)AFAIC, OJ is a dead man walking outside of custody. . .and it would not shock me if somewhere there is a hit man on retainer waiting for the green light.
Lotusflower70
(3,077 posts)No applause here. And not because he got away with 2 murders. I can separate the 2 crimes. He faced a multitude of charges (armed robbery, kidnapping, etc) and the sentencing guidelines were followed. He served 9 years of a 33 year sentence. As far as the murder case, there were so many errors there. But my being liberal or my respect and appreciation of justice have nothing to do with OJ Simpson. Maybe he can go hang out with Trump now.
jehop61
(1,735 posts)As much as I hate it, he was eligible for the crime he was convicted of. But, he'll likely do something to violate that parole sooner or later, I'm betting.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)That's what right wingers do.
I don't care about OJ Simpson and that does not preclude me from being a liberal.
We don't have to take a side in every issue. And we don't have check with someone to see what the correct liberal view is.
We all have the ability to use are own understanding and if we let others do our thinking for us we are immature and not enlightened.
Google Immanuel Kant. What is enlightenment
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)Nailzberg
(4,610 posts)I don't applaud the system for one instance of doing what it should. Its still deeply flawed.
onenote
(42,531 posts)Nailzberg
(4,610 posts)Skittles
(153,104 posts)the idea that man walks the streets FOR ANY REASON makes me sick
TrishaJ
(797 posts)He's served his time for the crime of which he was convicted. Now he should go away and live out the rest of his life in quiet and peace, as if he really understands the blessing he got from the double murder acquittal.
BannonsLiver
(16,288 posts)linuxman
(2,337 posts)The system served it's function and he was released. That's how it works. Pretty standard situation, no applause needed.
Binkie The Clown
(7,911 posts)AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)The reasons, while true, would not make people around here happy.