O.J. Simpson found GUILTY!

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
W

Wingznut

Elite Member
Dec 28, 1999
16,968
2
0
OJ Simpson Told to Pay DirecTV $25G, Fees
MIAMI - A federal judge has ordered former football star O.J. Simpson to pay $25,000 in damages for pirating satellite television signals from DirecTV.
U.S. District Judge Joan Lenard awarded the damages, plus attorneys' fees and other costs, after granting a motion for summary judgment in a civil suit against Simpson.

In a raid on Simpson's Miami home in 2001, federal agents seized illegal devices known as "bootloaders" that authorities said were used to steal television programming.

Simpson's attorney, Yale Galanter, said Tuesday that the judge "basically denied us our right to a jury trial. ... This was a decision made by a judge in chambers. They say he did it; we say he didn't. A jury should be able to make that decision."

Simpson was aware of Friday's ruling, Galanter added. Asked whether Simpson would pay the damages and other costs, the attorney said: "We are examining our legal options. ... We want our day in court."

Galanter has 10 days to respond, or the summary judgment stands.

DirecTV executives were pleased with the ruling.

"The evidence was overwhelming since the devices seized in Simpson's home were connected to his TV and in operation and receiving unauthorized signals at the time of the raid," said Dan Fawcett, an executive vice president with El Segundo, Calif.-based DirecTV Inc.

Simpson moved to Florida from California after he was acquitted of murder charges in the 1994 stabbing deaths of his wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman.

A civil jury in 1997 held Simpson liable for the killings and ordered him to pay the victims' survivors $33.5 million. Much of that judgment remains unpaid.
Click to expand...
 
BlueWeasel

BlueWeasel

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
15,944
475
126
How much freakin' equipment did he have? A $25K fine seems kinda excessive unless he was distributing the equipment. I guess they are just trying to make a example of him, though.
 
B

bmacd

Lifer
Jan 15, 2001
10,869
1
0
"that TV stuff? I never knew what Nicole was doing with that stuff. She was always playing with the satellite". "We move for acquittal your honor!"

-=bmacd=-
 
Queasy

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Clearly he needed to steal DirecTV in order to help him with his hunt for the real killers.
 
B

BigB10293

Senior member
Mar 23, 2005
358
0
0
What's TV stand for anyway? It's just two little letters. Probably stands for terrible verdict.
 
N

notfred

Lifer
Feb 12, 2001
38,241
4
0
Personally, I think it should be legal to do anything you want with a signal that's being broadcast into your home.
 
KK

KK

Lifer
Jan 2, 2001
15,903
4
81
Doesn't the government have to have a search warrant and list out the exact reason why they are going into someone's house. And say if they don't list pirated dtv devices on the warrant, doesn't that make the devices exempt from being confiscated and charged. Wouldn't they need to get a second warrant for these devices.
 
cruzer

cruzer

Senior member
Dec 30, 2001
482
0
0
Originally posted by: KK
Doesn't the government have to have a search warrant and list out the exact reason why they are going into someone's house. And say if they don't list pirated dtv devices on the warrant, doesn't that make the devices exempt from being confiscated and charged. Wouldn't they need to get a second warrant for these devices.
Click to expand...

I remember hearing the 2001 raid was made due to a tip that OJ was stealing directv so I'm sure they had there bases covered on the search warrant. What I don't get is why this is a civil suit. Why was he not prosecuted?
 
KK

KK

Lifer
Jan 2, 2001
15,903
4
81
Originally posted by: cruzer
Originally posted by: KK
Doesn't the government have to have a search warrant and list out the exact reason why they are going into someone's house. And say if they don't list pirated dtv devices on the warrant, doesn't that make the devices exempt from being confiscated and charged. Wouldn't they need to get a second warrant for these devices.
Click to expand...

I remember hearing the 2001 raid was made due to a tip that OJ was stealing directv so I'm sure they had there bases covered on the search warrant. What I don't get is why this is a civil suit. Why was he not prosecuted?
Click to expand...

Since it was between dtv and simpson, wouldn't that be a civil suit? Anyways, I feel like notfred on this type of incident. If direct tv is broadcasting it out to everybody, then it is fair game. You don't see local tv stations filing suit on everyone with rabbit ears, do you?
 
T

tm37

Lifer
Jan 24, 2001
12,436
1
0
Originally posted by: cruzer
Originally posted by: KK
Doesn't the government have to have a search warrant and list out the exact reason why they are going into someone's house. And say if they don't list pirated dtv devices on the warrant, doesn't that make the devices exempt from being confiscated and charged. Wouldn't they need to get a second warrant for these devices.
Click to expand...

I remember hearing the 2001 raid was made due to a tip that OJ was stealing directv so I'm sure they had there bases covered on the search warrant. What I don't get is why this is a civil suit. Why was he not prosecuted?
Click to expand...

Civil Suits are won easier.
 
B

Britboy

Senior member
Jul 25, 2001
818
0
0
I remember reading a while back that $25K was the standard amound of damages the satellite thieves were required to pay. Seems pretty excessive to me, seeing as it was done for personal use rather than selling to others for profit.

However, I don't feel sorry for OJ, he's lucky not to be waiting for his day on the chair!
 
mugs

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: notfred
Personally, I think it should be legal to do anything you want with a signal that's being broadcast into your home.
Click to expand...

That'd be nice, but allowing that would pretty much rule out the possibility of satellite tv and radio being profitable. That's a bad thing.

If cable lines pass over or under my property, should I have the right to just splice in and borrow their signal too?
 
KK

KK

Lifer
Jan 2, 2001
15,903
4
81
Originally posted by: mugs


If cable lines pass over or under my property, should I have the right to just splice in and borrow their signal too?
Click to expand...

Yes, if it's not in a right-of-way and that you don't have services with said company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom