Derby Trail Forums
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 34 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   OJ Sentencing (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26579)

AeWingnut 12-05-2008 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
Stop trying to produce common sense. Anyone can walk around with a gun, tout it around and show people, point it at people, threaten people, but if the trigger aint pulled, then there is no crime.

Matter of fact, on my Friday night, I am about to go get my grandpa's rifle and sit on the corner and point it at cars driving by, see if I just can't get myself in a little trouble.

I know you are kidding but you can be arrested for making your hand into the shape of a gun and pointing it at someone. I believe they call it an assertive action.

Doesn't make it right but ****

somerfrost 12-05-2008 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
I am happy as hell man, OJ KILLED HIS WIFE and innoncent people. Karma got his ass big time. Ole boy thought he was higher then the rest of the world. It always does. that is why Karma and I have become friends and I do EVERYTHING not to piss it off.

I am not the smartest person in the world, but I for sure know that I shouldn't be walking into a room with a gun to steal something.

You understand that if he didn't bring the gun, he is probably not in jail now. Guns are NO JOKE, just ask Plex and the 3.5 years he will be serving

Scavs, you know I likewise believe in karma, I agree with your assessment of the crime, guns are a "big deal", saw first hand what they do in the Army...no problem with the conviction. Let's see what Plex gets, hopefully it will be just...IF he is convicted...right now he's still innocent under our laws.
My problem is you are stating a personal belief as a fact...yes, I agree with your belief but please call it that! If you want to live in a society with respect for the law, then the process is important...regardless whether one agrees with the results.

Hickory Hill Hoff 12-05-2008 03:46 PM
In better days....my dad had a car just like that one!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7raVF...eature=related

Mortimer 12-05-2008 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by somerfrost
Scavs, you know I likewise believe in karma, I agree with your assessment of the crime, guns are a "big deal", saw first hand what they do in the Army...no problem with the conviction. Let's see what Plex gets, hopefully it will be just...IF he is convicted...right now he's still innocent under our laws.
My problem is you are stating a personal belief as a fact...yes, I agree with your belief but please call it that! If you want to live in a society with respect for the law, then the process is important...regardless whether one agrees with the results.

Oh will you stop acting like no one can state an opinion here?

That's a fucl<in' jury instruction ,you horn blowing idiot.


If it was meant otherwise....why the fucl< would anybody ever be arrested????



You gotta start being someone else....ya dope.

somerfrost 12-05-2008 04:01 PM
I find it funny...not you Morty, you're simply irrelevant...everytime I express any opinion that some folks here disagree with, the personal attacks start...explain why my opinion is me acting superior, getting on a soapbox etc while other's opinions when stated by them, are exempt from the same definition. I have an opinion, someone else has a different one...I express mine, they express their's....that's referred to as debate or simply a difference of opinion.
Anyway, I knew in advance the response I'd get so it's clearly on me...free will...but I stand by my posts and I trust Morty does also...and that speaks for itself!

Mortimer 12-05-2008 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by somerfrost
I find it funny...not you Morty, you're simply irrelevant...everytime I express any opinion that some folks here disagree with, the personal attacks start...explain why my opinion is me acting superior, getting on a soapbox etc while other's opinions when stated by them, are exempt from the same definition. I have an opinion, someone else has a different one...I express mine, they express their's....that's referred to as debate or simply a difference of opinion.
Anyway, I knew in advance the response I'd get so it's clearly on me...free will...but I stand by my posts and I trust Morty does also...and that speaks for itself!
Good for you.


Now listen carefully you pompous fucl<.

You keep throwing around the "innocent until proven guilty" nonsense everytime someone posts an opinion about a guy being guilty.

It's a jury instruction. They did not arrest Simpson because they presumed he was innocent.

Is this sinking into your fucl<in' numb skull?

Mortimer 12-05-2008 04:09 PM
Oh my God.











leff-eng may ess oaf!!!!

Late Fires 12-05-2008 04:10 PM
onebadbeast definitely had it right when he posted this in the smart threads to begin with.

somerfrost 12-05-2008 04:13 PM
Why am I preaching and you using "common sense"? I believe one way and you another...it's not preaching to express in a semi-articulate (I hope) manner what I think...any more than it is for you to state your's. I do understand the uneasyness that some folks feel about OJ walking the streets, as a parent, I feel uneasy about child molesters living among us...the system will never be perfect. It's hardly about me anymore than your opinions are about you. I don't say that you don't have the right to express your opinions and try to demean them by saying they are all about you...yet folks want to make mine "all about me"...believe me when I say at the very heart of my belief system is the core belief that we are all equal...so why would I need to feel superior?????

somerfrost 12-05-2008 04:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mortimer
Good for you.


Now listen carefully you pompous fucl<.

You keep throwing around the "innocent until proven guilty" nonsense everytime someone posts an opinion about a guy being guilty.

It's a jury instruction. They did not arrest Simpson because they presumed he was innocent.

Is this sinking into your fucl<in' numb skull?

My my...musta hit a nerve! Innocent until proven guilty isn't nonsense and I don't care about folks opinions UNTIL they are presented as FACT. Using your logic, EVERY suspect ever arrested must be guilty cause they weren't arrested because the police thought they were innocent. It's much much more than a jury instruction...it's the foundation of our legal system.

Mortimer 12-05-2008 04:19 PM
You certainly have no idea what you are talking about....so that's a common trait.

Mortimer 12-05-2008 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by somerfrost
My my...musta hit a nerve! Innocent until proven guilty isn't nonsense and I don't care about folks opinions UNTIL they are presented as FACT. Using your logic, EVERY suspect ever arrested must be guilty cause they weren't arrested because the police thought they were innocent. It's much much more than a jury instruction...it's the foundation of our legal system.
You are one of the biggest fools here.


"You are being arrested for the murder of _______as we believe you are innocent of this crime."



And that's just for starters....FOOL.


Other things such as high or no bail...and a PROSECUTION team kinda infer otherwise, you blithering idiot.

GBBob 12-05-2008 04:33 PM
I'll wade into this hostile thread to say that these f^ck faces better get more time than OJ did

http://news.aol.com/article/chained-...295x1200935562

declansharbor 12-05-2008 04:35 PM
The Juice does a nickel, comes out Martha Stewart style and patents his own flavor of chee-chee mixture, thus restoring his 'roll.

King Glorious 12-05-2008 04:47 PM
If a man is believed by most everyone to have killed a child but he goes through the justice system and is found not guilty........then the parent of that child goes and kills the alleged killer........it's my belief that the parent should be prosecuted fully. I may totally understand where they were coming from and to everyone, the killing may be justified. But going soft on the parent is not how the system is supposed to work. Allowing judges to put their personal feelings into decisions is scary. I thought that a man couldn't be tried for the same crime twice. Something about double jeopardy. The truth of the matter is that this judge today decided that she wasn't happy with the decision of his murder trial and imposed her own sentence for THAT trial, even though fairly or unfairly, he already went through that and was found not guilty. There's no way that any rational thinking person can agree that the punishment received fit THIS crime. In my opinion, this decision is as much a breakdown in the system as the one that found him not guilty in the murder trial.

somerfrost 12-05-2008 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Where did I say common sense? You're still not understanding my point. YOU turn most threads you participate into a chance to tell everyone about what YOUR belief system is. Look at this post. Me, me,me,me,me. We get it. The justice system has a lot of flaws. I'm happy it's flaws are going to put a guy who should already be in jail in there. That's it. That's all people are saying.
Seriously now, how can you express an opinion without referencing that it's your opinion? Should I preference it with "some folks think"? Do your opinions directly conflict with your belief system? This is of course a tactic, attack the messenger to deflect from the message. Perhaps I've been too honest in the past, when folks ask me a personal question I will usually answer it...see no reason not to. For example...on ESPN board I was attacked as being "non-Christian" in my beliefs, I was truthful about that subject and from then on...I hear about it whenever I disagree with someone (latest example being TIMM). That's cool...and expected, but if you read the threads, it's usually in direct response to remarks from another. My beliefs are what they are and ironically, by definition, not a personal "need" to discuss. So again....a post with a lot of "me, me, me...but hard to see how else "some folks" could reply.

somerfrost 12-05-2008 04:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
If a man is believed by most everyone to have killed a child but he goes through the justice system and is found not guilty........then the parent of that child goes and kills the alleged killer........it's my belief that the parent should be prosecuted fully. I may totally understand where they were coming from and to everyone, the killing may be justified. But going soft on the parent is not how the system is supposed to work. Allowing judges to put their personal feelings into decisions is scary. I thought that a man couldn't be tried for the same crime twice. Something about double jeopardy. The truth of the matter is that this judge today decided that she wasn't happy with the decision of his murder trial and imposed her own sentence for THAT trial, even though fairly or unfairly, he already went through that and was found not guilty. There's no way that any rational thinking person can agree that the punishment received fit THIS crime. In my opinion, this decision is as much a breakdown in the system as the one that found him not guilty in the murder trial.

Agree with most of that...not ready to say the judge did that, as "some folks" stated earlier, if the sentence is upheld on what surely will be an appeal, then only she will know.

Coach Pants 12-05-2008 04:57 PM
Kill him and his supporters. Public hangings for all.

Mortimer 12-05-2008 05:02 PM
The judge has a reputation for being a hardliner on those found guilty...although the jury presumed them to be innocent.




And so did the police...and the prosecution team.

Payson Dave 12-05-2008 05:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by somerfrost
Why am I posting this? I must be a complete idiot but...what the hell!
Did OJ kill his wife and her friend?
Everybody has an opinion but the jury found him not guilty,
Had I been on that jury I would have voted likewise...Mark Furhman (sp?) made it impossible to convict him.
Is he an idiot? His actions since the crime scream "YES"
But...if we incarcerated folks for being idiots....
This latest crime is hardly worth a long sentence...
Our legal system don't state that it's ok to "get even" or balance the scales...
He should have been sentenced solely on the merits of this conviction...
Was he?
Even if he is guilty of murder...he didn't get away with anything...he simply avoided man's law...I believe there is a higher justice.
I also believe that it is better to let a guilty man go free than to punish an innocent man...isn't that a cornerstone of our system?
I find no joy in this....I find the man pathetic, yes...distasteful, but I don't get the vulturistic joy of some...
fwiw..
Somer for the most part I don't see alot (some but not a lot) that I disagree with in your post....it does seem like you are saying that there was some "get even" or "balancing of the scales"..... that might be your opinion, but not necassarilly fact....
Your statement regarding "the latest crime is hardly worth a long sentence".... is also opinion that seems to be stated a bit more like "fact"


anyhoo....perhaps some see "justice" differently than you..... maybe even some see karma as a form of "higher justice"....and that may explain the "vulturistic joy" that seems to be bothering you.

Mortimer 12-05-2008 05:09 PM
SomerTossed is a rambling fool---there is no reasoning with this pontificating cretin.

Coach Pants 12-05-2008 05:11 PM
Hey somerseve...

King Glorious 12-05-2008 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Pants
Hey somerseve...
Obviously, you don't believe in our criminal justice system.

Danzig 12-05-2008 05:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by somerfrost
I agree he's a pathetic person, but I question the sentence based on the details of the event as reported....perhaps the judge had info that we do not, I don't know but it seems pretty steep....again, all I'm saying is that the sentence SHOULD reflect this case only...I can't see inside the judge's mind but I think the concern is valid enough to express.
Of course I remember the results of the civil case, but in Civil Court, the standard of proof is a lot lower, he wasn't found "guilty" he was held "responsible"...we don't use civil decisions against a person's criminal record!
How do you know the decision was racist? As I said, I would have voted not guilty and last time I checked, I was white....let me look again.........yep, still white. How can one vote to convict with a clear conscience when an admittedly racist cop handled key evidence, the same cop who admitted planting evidence in the past on black defendants because they were involved with a white woman, and bragged that he would do it again? When several other investigating officers shared his views, when key evidence was carried around in an officer's trunk instead of being turned into the evidence locker thus violating chain-of-custody regs, when the time line never quite fit, when Simpson's medical condition raised questions concerning his physical ability to commit such a violent act(s), and yes...when the damn glove didn't fit!!! (i know all about the science there but the glove didn't fit in front of the jury and the inept prosecutors had no answer). Simpson had the dream team and Darden and what's her name had no answers to much of the science...I mean hell, Simpson had F. Lee Bailey third chair!!! Bottom line...the case as presented fell well short of "beyond a reasonable doubt". I watched the circus every day, right or wrong, the jury had little choice...to call it racist is over-simplistic at best!
i disagree that furmans being part of the case was enough to produce reasonable doubt.
a finding of not guily in no way means innocent. that a lot of people feel he's finally getting delayed justice is in no way shocking, or worth of condemnation.

cowgirlintexas 12-05-2008 05:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Arletta!!!!
:mad:

Coach Pants 12-05-2008 05:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
Obviously, you don't believe in our criminal justice system.
Of course not.

somerfrost 12-05-2008 05:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Payson Dave
fwiw..
Somer for the most part I don't see alot (some but not a lot) that I disagree with in your post....it does seem like you are saying that there was some "get even" or "balancing of the scales"..... that might be your opinion, but not necassarilly fact....

perhaps some see "justice" differently than you..... maybe even some see karma as a form of "higher justice"....and that may explain the "vulturistic joy" that seems to be bothering you.
Dave,
Sorry if I implied that the judge DID use the sentencing to "get even", I think I stated several times in different posts that i surely don't KNOW that for a fact, merely that it was a concern that it may have happened. Also, to reiterate, it appears very likely that the sentence will be appealed so that will determine a lot imo...if the sentence is upheld then end of story. Regarding concepts of "justice"...if I address that issue then I'll be accused of preaching again, I guess a short comment would be ...it depends upon one's belief regarding dominion of "justice"

somerfrost 12-05-2008 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig
i disagree that furmans being part of the case was enough to produce reasonable doubt.
a finding of not guily in no way means innocent. that a lot of people feel he's finally getting delayed justice is in no way shocking, or worth of condemnation.
Mrs Z, if you recall, I listed a litany of concerns regarding the evidence. We can disagree on the importance of an admittedly racist cop handling key evidence after admitting to having "planted" evidence in the past. Not guilty in the context of the legal system is the same as innocent, I agree that morally it is not.

King Glorious 12-05-2008 05:31 PM
I'll say it for you. She absolutely did use this opportunity to get even. That's why she went through the trouble of stressing that this was exactly what she wasn't doing. Otherwise, there's no point in even mentioning that. If she's doing her job as she's supposed to be, it wouldn't even be a thought that her sentencing would have anything to do with the previous case. But she KNEW this sentence was ridiculous and that everyone would jump to that conclusion.

Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Romans 12:19

Mortimer 12-05-2008 05:31 PM
EAUXH .....well then the racist limo driver removed the Bronco when he arrived...and put it back when he left.

Coach Pants 12-05-2008 05:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
I'll say it for you. She absolutely did use this opportunity to get even. That's why she went through the trouble of stressing that this was exactly what she wasn't doing. Otherwise, there's no point in even mentioning that. If she's doing her job as she's supposed to be, it wouldn't even be a thought that her sentencing would have anything to do with the previous case. But she KNEW this sentence was ridiculous and that everyone would jump to that conclusion.

Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Romans 12:19
Don't quote that make believe s.hit.

Payson Dave 12-05-2008 05:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
I'll say it for you. She absolutely did use this opportunity to get even. That's why she went through the trouble of stressing that this was exactly what she wasn't doing. Otherwise, there's no point in even mentioning that. If she's doing her job as she's supposed to be, it wouldn't even be a thought that her sentencing would have anything to do with the previous case. But she KNEW this sentence was ridiculous and that everyone would jump to that conclusion.

Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Romans 12:19


hmmm.....is this an opinion or is it undeniable fact????


opinions are kinda like assholes.....just because you have one does not mean you have to wave it around in everyones face...

somerfrost 12-05-2008 05:36 PM
[quote=King Glorious]I'll say it for you. She absolutely did use this opportunity to get even. That's why she went through the trouble of stressing that this was exactly what she wasn't doing. Otherwise, there's no point in even mentioning that. If she's doing her job as she's supposed to be, it wouldn't even be a thought that her sentencing would have anything to do with the previous case. But she KNEW this sentence was ridiculous and that everyone would jump to that conclusion.

Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Romans 12:19[/QUOTE

I understand how you feel but again, the system will decide...the sentence will be appealed and that should answer the question of fairness...only the judge knows what her decision was based upon. I'm sure Simpson's legal team will look at her previous sentencing structure and see if this is in line or not and that will be part of the appeal if different.

Danzig 12-05-2008 05:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
I'll say it for you. She absolutely did use this opportunity to get even. That's why she went through the trouble of stressing that this was exactly what she wasn't doing. Otherwise, there's no point in even mentioning that. If she's doing her job as she's supposed to be, it wouldn't even be a thought that her sentencing would have anything to do with the previous case. But she KNEW this sentence was ridiculous and that everyone would jump to that conclusion.

Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Romans 12:19
i disagree.
you know, if more people got sentences with teeth in them, maybe they wouldn't get in trouble a second time around. an armed robbery and kidnapping, basically that's what occurred. he's lucky he only got what he got.

somerfrost 12-05-2008 05:40 PM
Mrs Z, you're using a generalized argument in a specific case.

Mortimer 12-05-2008 05:44 PM
The racist limo driver also saw a large white man entering the house the about 10:55...not a black man.


The racist house guest,Kay-Toe ,( Simpsons lee-tel yallow frand) just minutes before the large white man entered the house heard Fuhrman planting the glove behind his room.

Danzig 12-05-2008 05:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by somerfrost
Mrs Z, you're using a generalized argument in a specific case.
so?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:43 AM.
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 34 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.