O.J. and the rule of law

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Regardless of what you think of him and by my posts you can see I don't think much he was paroled in accordance with the laws of the state of Nevada. We do not have to embrace the decision just as I and many of us didn't embrace the decision when he was acquitted in his double murder trial. But we must abide by it. The rule of law protects us all, the bad and the good.

Fealty to the rule of law is what separates us from the Deplorables and the criminal gang in the White House.

[jberryhill]

1. "we must abide by it"

I don't have to "abide by" jack shit, since I'm obviously not keeping him locked up in Nevada in the first place.

He's still not coming over to my house for dinner, and he'll just have to "abide by" that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Maybe I could have stated it more elegantly.

The parole board decided he was a model prisoner and a low risk for recidivism and in accordance with the laws they are obliged to carry out paroled him.

[B2G]

3. Because he has such a great track record

outside of prison.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. He was able to stay on the right side of the law for twelve years.

It is unlikely he is going to be lobbing any more people's domes off.

[freddyvh]

5. in the eyes of the law he has a great track record

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. In the eyes of the law he is not a murderer. In many of our eyes he is.

[jberryhill]

10. In the eyes of the law, he's liable for the wrongful death of those two people

A court found him liable for wrongful death.

That's why he was selling his souvenirs on the sly in the first place, had them stolen, and showed up to get them back.

[Voltaire2]

22. that is a civil liability.

It has no bearing on his criminality or suitability for parole. As the op said, the parole board did the right thing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. OJ is a miscreant who lobbed off the domes of his ex wife and her friend.

But the process that found him not guilty protects all of us.

In the present instance the parole board followed the law , determined he met the conditions for parole, and paroled him.

[DLevine]

14. Well, he did beat up his wife Nicole. That's usually frowned upon by the law. nt

[jberryhill]

19. Yeah, but he stopped doing that years ago

[freddyvh]

24. not in this case

he was never arrested or convicted of that...according to public records

[DLevine]

26. He pleaded no contest to beating her up.

He was given probation and community service. Nicole called 911 on 9 separate occasions when he beat her. He was also found responsible for the death of Ron and Nicole in a civil suit. Not exactly a pillar of the community.

He lied to the parole board when he said he led a conflict-free life and had never before been accused of threatening anyone with a weapon. At the very least the parole board should have called him out on that lie.

[freddyvh]

27. but

i read that incident was scrubbed from his record after completing his service.

and in the eyes of law enforcement, the civil case is not considered.

[jberryhill]

9. That's fine

But there are some weird things that people believe, which sometimes make it seem as if there are those who believe that any individual person has an obligation to agree with outcomes.

I support the process. Whether I agree with any outcome is entirely a different question.

It's sort of like the craptastic understanding people have of the presumption of innocence.

I don't have to consider anyone to be innocent of anything. If someone punches me in the face and takes my wallet, I don't need to wait and find out from any court whether or not they are guilty of doing that. Neither does the prosecutor, whose JOB is to go to court and say "That sonofabitch is guilty" every damned day in every case. It's the first thing the prosecutor says, "I'm going to prove to you that sonofabitch is guilty."

The "presumption of innocence" is a procedural rule which merely establishes the burden of proof at trial - i.e. that in order to obtain a conviction, the prosecutor must show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not some kind of "rule to live by" for everyone else.

I don't have any obligation as an ordinary person to consider anyone innocent of a damned thing.

I mean, can you imagine how a 911 call is supposed to work? Your neighbor Joe Blow breaks into your house, points a gun at you, tells you to get out, and lights your house on fire.

"Hello 911, I really can't be sure, but there might be a guy who broke into my house, pointed a gun and me and told me to leave, and then lit my house on fire. He looks a lot like my neighbor Joe Blow, but unless he's been tried and convicted, I really can't say whether or not he's committed a crime of any sort. You know what, maybe let's just forget about that part, since he's still innocent right now...."

Bullshit. You call 911 and you say, "My idiot neighbor Joe Blow just pointed a gun at me, lit my house on fire, and I need a cop out here to take that motherfucker away".

It's just silly what some people believe.

[forgotmylogin]

6. Remember he's wasn't in jail for murder...

...though many people would like to make this payback for his acquittal.

He was in jail for armed robbery when he tried to get his football memorabilia back from a collector because he's broke.

[B2G]

8. He's not broke

His pension from the NFL alone is 25K a MONTH.

[jberryhill]

11. That's all attached by the Goldmans

[B2G]

17. Nope. He gets to keep that.

Retirement funds are protected under federal law. He has a SAG pension too.

[jberryhill]

20. Well that sucks

If he hadn't been trying to evade attachment of his assets in the first place, then he wouldn't have wound up in this situation either.

[B2G]

21. Yep. Dude's nuts.

But he won't starve, unfortunately.

[jberryhill]

12. Do I look like a Nevada court to you?

[forgotmylogin]

15. Um... "No?"

Though I can't technically see you.

I was actually speaking in general, not specifically addressing you, I apologize if I affronted you with a seemingly mistargeted comment.

[jberryhill]

16. AHA!

Well, then I should reveal myself:



Fooled you, didn't I?

Oh, well, I gotta get back to work.

[dubyadiprecession]

13. OJ is a real hothead, he'll be in prison again before you know it.

[imanamerican63]

18. Trump will offer him a job on his staff as a advisor.....

on how to act like an adult in prison!


I am not a fan of OJ, but if he did what he had to do to, make his parole? Well! Who is argue with that? I just thought that he put the blame for his actions on the others who were involved!

[MyNameGoesHere]

23. You're assuming we live in a classless society

Here and now money and fame can buy a not guilty verdict.
If you're rich or have some fame you can pretty much get off free. I look at his 11 years as karma. Not quite enough but it will do for now.