Skip to comments.
I need help on OJ's case
11/22/2006
| color_tear
Posted on 11/22/2006 12:12:09 PM PST by color_tear
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-145 next last
To: color_tear
Does it mean non of them believe our court system?No conservative worth his salt has ever believed in the infallibility of the court system.
2
posted on
11/22/2006 12:13:44 PM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: color_tear
Does it mean non of them believe our court system? OJ was found not guilty by 12 peers.
And yet he is certainly guilty. Trial by a jury of peers does not guarantee infallible results - it's simply a time-tested method of achieving justice most of the time.
To: color_tear
4
posted on
11/22/2006 12:14:24 PM PST
by
theDentist
(Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
To: color_tear
He was found guilty in civil court.
To: color_tear
OJ was found not guilty by 12 peersThe jury was from Brentwood?
6
posted on
11/22/2006 12:15:14 PM PST
by
frogjerk
(REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
To: color_tear
OJ was found not guilty by 12 peers.Not his peers in the strictest sense, because as far as I know, the jury didnt include murderers.
7
posted on
11/22/2006 12:15:56 PM PST
by
dighton
To: color_tear
Why that must mean Michael Jackson is innocent too! Who'd a-thunk it?
8
posted on
11/22/2006 12:16:13 PM PST
by
rhombus
To: color_tear
No...the jury verdict simply meant that the state did not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I agree with that, but still believe OJ's guilty as sin. I would recommend you read Vince Bugliosi's book "Outrage" about the case. (VB is a former LA county prosecutor who tried Manson and wrote "Helter Skelter," about the case.)
9
posted on
11/22/2006 12:16:23 PM PST
by
Joe 6-pack
(Voted Free Republic's Most Eligible Bachelor: 2006. Love them Diebold machines.)
To: color_tear
Where is the "defendent does not have to prove innocent?"The concept of "innocent until proven guilty" binds the courts.
It does not in any way affect public opinion, personal opinion, or common sense.
10
posted on
11/22/2006 12:16:29 PM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: color_tear
11
posted on
11/22/2006 12:16:49 PM PST
by
Albion Wilde
(...where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. -2 Cor 3:17)
To: color_tear
Where is the "reasonable doubt"?Show me one reasonable doubt.
12
posted on
11/22/2006 12:16:56 PM PST
by
frogjerk
(REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
To: color_tear
The evidence is clear...as long as you aren't one of the 12 morons in the jury that inexplicably declared him not guilty.
I can't help you see if you choose to be blind.
13
posted on
11/22/2006 12:16:57 PM PST
by
JRios1968
(Tagline wanted...inquire within)
To: color_tear
I know OJ was guilty the same way I know water doesn't run uphill.
14
posted on
11/22/2006 12:17:11 PM PST
by
kjo
To: color_tear
"DNA don't mean nuffin...lotsa peoples gots the same blood type":
--verbatim quote from one of the jurors.
15
posted on
11/22/2006 12:17:18 PM PST
by
ErnBatavia
(recent nightmare: Googled up "Helen Thomas nude"....)
To: theDentist
Why do you say that? Please explain.
I'm confused.
BTW, I'm a natuiralized American and I've always thought this is the best system in the world. If non of you believe it, why don't we change it? I don't understand. Educate me please.
To: color_tear
I'm afriad you aren't going to get much help on this one. The premise that he is innocent because his "peers" said he was is preposterous. Our courts are not infallible, if anything they're simply laughable, but it's the best we've got.
17
posted on
11/22/2006 12:17:48 PM PST
by
EarthBound
(Ex Deo, gratia. Ex astris, scientia)
To: color_tear
He is no longer criminally accountable (double jeopardy). He still did it.
The system is set up so guilty people go free on occasion so that innocent person don't routinely get falsely convicted.
Basic civics.
To: color_tear
Does it mean non of them believe our court system? OJ was found not guilty by 12 peers. Stop being clueless. He was not found not guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. That is very much different than he was found innocent. All it means is that the 'court system', i.e. prosecution, screwed up badly.
To: color_tear
OJ was found not guilty by 12 peers.
In the second trial he was found guilty. Don't let the facts get in the way ...
20
posted on
11/22/2006 12:18:30 PM PST
by
John Lenin
(The most dangerous place for a child in America is indeed in its mother's womb)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-145 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson