Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   Sports Bar & Grill (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Simpson arrested (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16781)

Mortimer 09-25-2007 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Sorry. I'm so dumb.

Morty=Cochrane Jr.





Well I would certainly hope so!

Mortimer 09-25-2007 09:41 PM

Say Pillow...is that BrownSugar?

Coach Pants 09-25-2007 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mortimer
Say Pillow...is that BrownSugar?

I believe so.

Mortimer 09-25-2007 09:49 PM

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

my miss storm cat 09-25-2007 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
It really doesn't matter to him obviously. OJ was nice to him, so there is no way possible he could be a guy who commits crimes like these. I will say, people never cease to amaze me. Like I said, phuck OJ, may he rot in hell with the rest of the scumbag murderers.

Him?

I don't think it's a him.

Oh yeah and OJ can burn in hell.

my miss storm cat 09-25-2007 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mortimer
Say Pillow...is that BrownSugar?

:eek:

You need a spanking.:D

pgardn 09-25-2007 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani
I am american...i believe in our justice system.

He was found not guilty in the criminal case.
That does not mean he is innocent,
this is a very different outcome.

The guy cut up two people in a rage.
This is my assessment. I believe the probability
that I am correct is very high having watched the
trial and looking at the complete distortion of evidence
and the crappy job done by the prosecution.
Slick lawyers duped a frightened jury in a racially charged case.

I sorta have a hard time believing they charged him with
anything in Vegas though. Evidence, witnesses...
all lacking and very suspect based on what I
have read and seen.

dalakhani 09-25-2007 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn
He was found not guilty in the criminal case.
That does not mean he is innocent,
this is a very different outcome.

The guy cut up two people in a rage.
This is my assessment. I believe the probability
that I am correct is very high having watched the
trial and looking at the complete distortion of evidence
and the crappy job done by the prosecution.
Slick lawyers duped a frightened jury in a racially charged case.

I sorta have a hard time believing they charged him with
anything in Vegas though. Evidence, witnesses...
all lacking and very suspect based on what I
have read and seen.

Very fair. Very well said.

Crown@club 09-26-2007 12:21 AM

Whoopie! NEXT!

King Glorious 09-26-2007 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn
He was found not guilty in the criminal case.
That does not mean he is innocent,
this is a very different outcome.

The guy cut up two people in a rage.
This is my assessment. I believe the probability
that I am correct is very high having watched the
trial and looking at the complete distortion of evidence
and the crappy job done by the prosecution.
Slick lawyers duped a frightened jury in a racially charged case.

I sorta have a hard time believing they charged him with
anything in Vegas though. Evidence, witnesses...
all lacking and very suspect based on what I
have read and seen.

Glad u posted this. One crime committed, allegedly, doesn't have anything to do with the other. U wouldn't take a guy that's been charged with tax evasion, gotten off, and then say that because u think he was guilty of that, he should not be treated fairly in any subsequent cases. Whether or not u think he was guilty in the murders is beside the point. He didn't do anything that any of us wouldn't have done in the same situation. He had the money and the ability to hire the best lawyers out there and it was them that got OJ off. OJ didn't get himself off. Most important to me is that he should get the same rights any other citizen would get under the constitution. He was tried in a court and found not guilty. Making him guilty in this case to make him pay for the last one is not right.

Sometimes I'm amazed by the things I read on here. One of the things that make this country great is our constitution. So many people have fought and died for us to have the rights and freedoms we have now. It's amazing to me the little amount of respect it gets these days.

Mortimer 09-26-2007 07:43 AM

Hang 'im.

Mortimer 09-26-2007 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by my miss storm cat
:eek:

You need a spanking.:D


ror!!




Ya baby!!..spank me honey...you know I love it when you do that!

Danzig 09-26-2007 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious
Glad u posted this. One crime committed, allegedly, doesn't have anything to do with the other. U wouldn't take a guy that's been charged with tax evasion, gotten off, and then say that because u think he was guilty of that, he should not be treated fairly in any subsequent cases. Whether or not u think he was guilty in the murders is beside the point. He didn't do anything that any of us wouldn't have done in the same situation. He had the money and the ability to hire the best lawyers out there and it was them that got OJ off. OJ didn't get himself off. Most important to me is that he should get the same rights any other citizen would get under the constitution. He was tried in a court and found not guilty. Making him guilty in this case to make him pay for the last one is not right.Sometimes I'm amazed by the things I read on here. One of the things that make this country great is our constitution. So many people have fought and died for us to have the rights and freedoms we have now. It's amazing to me the little amount of respect it gets these days.

that's true!!

King Glorious 09-26-2007 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
I don't think anyone here is saying he's guilty in this case for some sort of revenge in the last case. That's ridiculous. However, his being guilty of committing those murders should be part of this discussion. It's a little more serious than tax evasion. I realize you were trying to be comparitive, but the murder of 2 people and they horrific way it was done does stick out and will for the rest of that piece of sh*t's life.

The guy was found guilty in the civil trial and paid virtually no restitution to the families that lost their loved ones. He did however co write a book entitled "If I did It". When he found out that if he made money from the book, he would have to give some to the Goldman's or Brown's, he tried to stop it from being published. Nice.

Sometimes I'm amazed at the lengths you will go to to defend scumbags. Dog killers, murderers they have a voice with you. Makes me sick.

Just as in the Vick case, I'm being accused of defending someone when I'm not defending him at all. Did I say at any point that he's not guilty? No. I am only speaking to the fact that everyone deserves the same rights and protections, whether it's you, me, or OJ. You also might notice that I didn't chime in on my feelings about the murder and whether I think he's guilty or innocent there. Why should I? Look at what you said, "his being guilty of committing those murders should be part of this discussion." That's fine except for one important thing.........he was tried in a court of law and found not guilty. Whether or not you believe that was the wrong decision is irrelevant now. According to the records, by him being found not guilty, it would be absolutely wrong to use that past crime to establish any kind of pattern of behavior for him. In my opinion, that makes the murders a non-issue here. This case should only be about whether or not he committed THIS crime and this crime only.

Danzig 09-26-2007 02:06 PM

speaking of vick...that one tested positive for marijuana earlier this month. oops.

dalakhani 09-26-2007 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Please. You are so transparent.

transparent only that he respects the constitution and our justice system. If a man is found "not guilty" in a criminal court of law on one crime, why should that be even considered when judging him on a totally seperate matter?

How does that make logical sense?

dalakhani 09-26-2007 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Again, please. This is a guy, who you yourself said, based on the evidence he probably did it. Yet you speak about what a charming person he is. Charming as long as he's not slicing your throat.

I said, one crime has nothing to do with the other, obviously. However, knowing what he was tried for, and that most people with a brain think he did it, it doesn't speak well that he would get involved in something else like this. Or the book, which you have avoided making a comment on. Wonder why......Let me guess, you defended Vick blindly also.

But that is not how the justice system works. If I were tried (and acquitted) for robbing a bank ten years ago why should it have that anything to do with say a manslaughter charge 12 years later? What if i were wrongly charged for the first crime?

I can only speak to what i know. Do i think he probably killed those people? Yes, I do. Do i know for sure? No i dont. Neither do you! There is reasonable doubt you, me and everyone else might be wrong...but it still has nothing to do with this case.

Look at the facts for this case as what they are. Check out the witnesses. A little shaky huh?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:35 PM.

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