OJ's road rage!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Yzzim

Lifer
Feb 13, 2000
11,990
1
76
I was watching NBC this morning and they said that he can take anger management classes and not have to serve any jail time.
 

EmperorNero

Golden Member
Jun 2, 2000
1,911
0
0


<< Yakko: you better talk a little louder, its hard to hear you from way up there on your throne >>



LOL.
 

Midnight Rambler

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,200
0
0
I have an idea ...

Arrange so OJ meets Hannibal.

Hannibal eats OJ.

Solves two dilemmas at once (what to do with OJ, and more importantly, how do you tame a riled up and very hungry cannibal).
 

DABANSHEE

Banned
Dec 8, 1999
2,355
0
0
Hey Yakko,what crawled up your ass? So your of the opinion that everyone should just forget about the fact that Simpson killed two young people in cold blood and walked? I hope thats not what you were implying and if you were not I apologise. If you were implying it should be forgotten then I must say that your view is a bit skewered,and definitely not the sentiments of the majority.

Yep Yakko is right, this all all pointless dribble, no more important than Tom &amp; Nicole splitting up. Who gives a fuk. It they werent celibrities no one whould have heard about Tom &amp; Nicoles divorce or the Brentwood (or whereever it was) murders or this latest case of someone chucking a wobblie &amp; driving after Simpson, because Simpson ran a stop sign, then Simpson Chucking a wobbly &amp; grabbing the bloke's glasses.

People get murdered all the time &amp; nothing's ever heard about it again (look at all the postitutes &amp; homeless people that get murdered &amp; its not even consided news worthy), yet just because celibrities are involved Veryape can't get over it.

Besides the reality is that the law's designed where all the defence has to show is reasonable doubt, that means all they have to do is descredit the prosecutions case.

In the case of OJ Simpson, it seems pretty obvious he's guilty (well to me anyway) but its again pretty obvious that the cops fiddled with the evidence (or to use cop parlance 'loaded the evidence up'), so the jury was duty bound to aquit, even if he was guilty - cops fiddling the evidence (remember the blood samples from the crime scene that contained a preservative) makes all the evidence suspect &amp; thus raises reasonable doubt.

Does anyone remember the scene in 'LA Confidential', when the 'prat' cop sargent asks the homicide boss, about joining the detective squad, &amp; the homicide boss askes him if he was willing to falsify evidence to get a conviction on someone he know's is guilty, but otherwise doesn't have the evidence to convict (or something like that). It happens all the time, ever heard of 'verbals'?

Look at all the plea bargin snowballs going on in the states (such as in Tulia, Texas &amp; Union, Alabama) where there's no more evidence than the uncorrobarated testimony of a paid snitch, because the cops are running forfeiture scams for bonus allowances.

I'd say the general opinion is that its better for a guilty person to go free than for an innocent person to be found guilty.
 

TRUMPHENT

Golden Member
Jan 20, 2001
1,414
0
0
Were you confusing the Miami mayor Carollo arrest with the Simpson one? They were both going on at the same time. Carollo is the mayor that purged his police force for being public safety officers during the Elian situation.
 

element

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,635
0
0
&quot;just because celibrities are involved Veryape can't get over it.&quot;

DABANSHEE,
Veryape isn't going to talk about cases he's never heard of, I would think that is obvious. It's not his fault the media only reports about celebrities now is it?

I don't see anything wrong with the outrage people have over guilty murderers running around rampant. I'll also add that if you don't care, then you are part of the problem.