O.J. In The News Again

[William Anthony]

Looks like they are coming from the other camp. :)

[weezer]

Lawsuit over Simpson acquittal suit due in court
The Associated Press
Posted: 06/15/2009 08:30:22 AM PDT
Updated: 06/15/2009 08:30:23 AM PDT


SANTA MONICA, Calif.—The onetime O.J. Simpson manager who claims to have the suit the football star wore when he was acquitted of murder is due in court to answer a lawsuit asking him to turn it over to survivors of Ronald Goldman.
But whether Mike Gilbert will appear Monday in Santa Monica Superior Court remains in question. Gilbert filed papers last week saying he does not have a lawyer and is being treated for stress-related disabilities. He claimed that Simpson made death threats against him.

The document said he is willing to comply with court orders. Another figure in Simpson's kidnapping and robbery trial in Las Vegas, Alfred Beardsley, is also expected to appear. Simpson is in a Nevada prison and recently appealed his conviction.

[weezer]

anybody see/hear anything about today's hearing?

[weezer]

Calif. judge orders O.J. Simpson's former manager to keep 'acquittal suit' in storage for now

LINDA DEUTSCH | AP Special Correspondent
4:04 PM EDT, June 15, 2009

SANTA MONICA, Calif. (AP) — A California judge has ordered O.J. Simpson's former manager to keep the former football star's so-called acquittal suit in storage until it is determined who rightfully owns it.

Santa Monica Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg heard Monday from a lawyer for Fred Goldman, who is seeking to sell the suit Simpson wore to court when he was acquitted on murder charges.

Fred Goldman is the father of Ronald Goldman, who was slain alongside Simpson's ex-wife 15 years ago. He is trying to recover a civil judgment against Simpson.

The judge also heard from Mike Gilbert, the manager who said Simpson gave him the suit the day after his Oct. 3, 1995, acquittal on murder charges.

Gilbert claims it is his property because Simpson had not yet been found civilly liable for the two deaths.

[William Anthony]

Did Gilbert appear in court "under oath" to say that he has the suit?

[weezer]

'Lucky suit' ends in suit for O.J. Simpson attorney
BY Nancy Dillon
DAILY NEWS WEST COAST BUREAU CHIEF

Tuesday, June 16th 2009, 4:00 AM

The notorious "lucky suit" that O.J. Simpson wore the day a jury found him not guilty of murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman has finally been found.

It's hanging in a storage locker in Fresno, Calif., Simpson's former agent Mike Gilbert revealed under oath yesterday.

The khaki suit, which Gilbert claims is worth $20,000 to $50,000, was one of the items Simpson hoped to recover when he led a group of thugs on an armed robbery at a Las Vegas hotel in 2007. Simpson never got the suit, and he's now serving 33 years for the botched heist.

Goldman's dad, Fred, sued Gilbert in December to seize the suit to help pay the $43 million Simpson owes on a 1997 wrongful-death civil judgment.

Gilbert, author of the book "How I Helped O.J. Get Away with Murder," said in an appearance on a "Dr. Phil" show last September that he had the suit, but later denied possession to Fred Goldman's lawyers.

"This is a witch hunt," Gilbert complained yesterday. "It's been 14-1/2 years. When are we going to be able to move on with our lives?"

Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg ordered Gilbert to keep the suit safe pending the lawsuit's outcome. Goldman lawyer David Cook conceded the effort involved in pursuing the suit might exceed the reward. "The prices for these [memorabilia] items are bargain-basement, Kmart prices now," Cook said.

ndillon@nydailynews.com

[William Anthony]

Thanks.:)

[William Anthony]

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/06/16/2009-06-16_lucky_suit_ends_in_suit_for_oj_atty.html

Is this a credible gossip column, smile?

[weezer]

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/06/16/2009-06-16_lucky_suit_ends_in_suit_for_oj_atty.html

Is this a credible gossip column, smile?

well, if you don't believe the New York Daily News, then maybe Las Angeles Times:

Lawyers haggle over O.J. Simpson's suit
1:34 PM | June 15, 2009
While O.J. Simpson wiled away another morning in a Nevada prison, a group of attorneys and former acquaintances gathered in a Santa Monica courtroom to debate the rightful ownership of assorted memorabilia, including the brownish-green suit Simpson wore during his 1995 acquittal.

A onetime agent for the NFL star, Mike Gilbert, said at the hearing that he had the jacket, trousers and dress shirt locked in a storage unit near his home in Fresno. Gilbert says Simpson gave him the suit the morning after the acquittal, although Simpson’s current lawyer says the garments are fakes.

Judge Gerald Rosenberg ordered Gilbert not to sell or otherwise dispose of the suit until he determined if it belonged to the father of slaying victim Ronald Goldman, Fred Goldman, who is trying to collect his portion of the $33.5-million civil judgment against Simpson.

Gilbert contends the acquittal suit is his sole property because Simpson gave it to him prior to the 1997 civil verdict.

“I should have worn it today,” he quipped to the judge.

The judge gave attorneys for Goldman permission to depose Gilbert about other items he has that are connected to Simpson. The agent said a host of Simpson memorabilia -- footballs, golf clubs and even the retired athlete’s Bentley -- has been turned over to authorities in the last dozen years, but he refused to give the Goldman attorneys an accounting of items he currently has.

According to his comments at the courthouse, those items range from the Coke can he drank from during his first visit to Simpson’s home two decades ago to 5,000 envelopes he paid Simpson to autograph at the time of his murder trial. Also during the hearing, the two collectibles dealers Simpson was convicted of robbing in Las Vegas said they will contest a planned sheriff’s sale of two boxes of memorabilia used as evidence last year in the Nevada trial.

Simpson is serving nine to 33 years for armed robbery and kidnapping. The victims, Bruce Fromong and Alfred Beardsley, told the judge they will argue that jerseys and other items belong to them. A hearing is scheduled for next month.

-- Harriet Ryan

[William Anthony]

It appears that there is some question as to the authenticity of the items MG claims to have and that question was not presented in the "gossip" link. Is this gossip link a credible source?

[weezer]

It appears that there is some question as to the authenticity of the items MG claims to have and that question was not presented in the "gossip" link. Is this gossip link a credible source?

william, if you have a problem with the New York Daily and/or the Los Angeles Times, you can simply ignore the articles. :rolleyes:

psst -- I wouldn't take galanter's word for what is or is not authentic if I were you! :eek:

[William Anthony]

I have no problem with the LA Times article as it gave both sides. I do have a problem with the gossip source. I simply asked you, if you considered the gossip source credible.

[weezer]

I have no problem with the LA Times article as it gave both sides. I do have a problem with the gossip source. I simply asked you, if you considered the gossip source credible.

I believe it is as credible as the LA Times but then I do not hold media in very high esteem which is why I usually always look for more than one source.

[William Anthony]

I think I understand, :).

[weezer]

I think I understand, :).

hey give me credit! I didn't quote smartfellows. . . . . .:eek:

[William Anthony]

Perhaps, you should have but that is a term used by Gs. :)

[weezer]

Dealer objects to auction of OJ Simpson items
14 hours ago

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A memorabilia dealer O.J. Simpson was convicted of robbing at a Las Vegas hotel is trying to stop a public auction of footballs, jerseys and other items seized by authorities after the stickup.

Los Angeles County sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore said Thursday his department began the auction process by notifying Simpson about the sale.

But Whitmore says Bruce Fromong, one of two memorabilia dealers who were robbed in 2007, has claimed ownership of the collectibles.

An attorney for Fred Goldman wants to proceed with the sale. He says proceeds from the auction will help satisfy a wrongful death judgment the families of slaying victims Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson won against Simpson in 1995.

[weezer]

:shrug: NY Post article

Posted: 2:09 am
June 19, 2009

A dump-all book by O.J.'s last lady friend is making the rounds. Chris tine Prody, the nubile blond wait ress who took up where his murdered blond wife, Nicole, left off, is now looking to rat on 13 years of cocaine, pregnancy, abuse, jealousy, possessiveness, manipulation, rage. And those are just her nicer topics.

She writes he controlled her, lured her in, and when she lived with him and no longer maintained her own work schedule, repeatedly kicked her out when she had no place to go and no income. Like pushing her out of a car at 11 p.m. with their destination 12 miles away. Wearing heels and without a dollar in her pocket, she was "forced" to stay with friends, but since the only so-called friends he allowed her to have were his hangers-on, he always remained the master puppeteer.

She says he allowed her neither emotional nor financial support. He saw to it she had no life or connections of her own. He even called her mother "evil personified."

She writes he constantly tore her down. He'd tell her family she was drunk or high. If she gained a few pounds, he'd belittle her. Taunt her with complaining he had to turn the lights off before he could stand making love to her because she looked so awful.

She recalls arguments, hostility and the fact that he was unfeeling. She says after he wore her down and made her have an abortion, he "refused" to accompany her to the hospital. He abandoned her, left her at the curb, made her go alone and then left for a game of golf, and she had to get one of his associates to fetch her. Page 9 of her book proposal refers to that as one of two abortions O.J. made her have.

Christine on O.J.'s obsessive jealousy: He'd scour telephone records to see who called me.

A male gardener who befriended her was threatened by O.J. with a gun in his pocket. When, out of fear, she left O.J., her Page 7 says, he threatened to come with a gun to kill me.

He'd continually refer to Nicole. He'd compare their bodies and say Nicole's was better. And Nicole was smarter. He suggested cosmetic surgery so Christine could look more like Nicole. A night Christine wore black he said, "Nicole wore black the night of her murder." He said often that Nicole was an awful mother. He convinced Christine it was he who'd been the victim.

Christine Prody remembers one night in a restaurant when a man shouted: "Murderer! You killed two innocent people and got away with it." Like it was a joke, Simpson laughingly replied: "You're entitled to your opinion."

[William Anthony]

It seems that I remember numerous posts on not playing the victim and taking personal responsibility. Has this view somehow changed?

[tv]

It seems that I remember numerous posts on not playing the victim and taking personal responsibility. Has this view somehow changed?

Apparently not for OJ Simpson, the butcher of Brentwood.

[William Anthony]

Apparently not for OJ Simpson, the butcher of Brentwood.

How about for Ms. Prody.

[tv]

How about for Ms. Prody.

What about her?

[William Anthony]

What about her?

Read post #5018.

[tv]

Read post #5018.

I already read it. :shrug:

[William Anthony]

I already read it. :shrug:

How about for Ms. Prody.

[fgump2]

Read post #5018.

I give very little credibility to Prody (Miss or Ms). For one thing, what kind of woman wants a relationship with a drug taking psychopath? For another thing, there is too much chance that what she said or wrote is influenced by financial considerations. I might give it credibility if other sources support it.

Orenthal SImpson has had a lot of fair weather friends who deserted him when it was convenient. I seem to be one of the few people who paid much attention to the fact that he got very little public support from former team mates and coaches. I don't believe that they withheld support out of fear.
It wouldn't take much guts to say something like "I didn't think he was that kind of guy".

Michael Vick got a lot of bad publicity, and yet team mates stood up for him.

Immediately after the murders in 94 Simpson got a lot of support from people he knew in Hertz and broadcasting; but far less from the people from his football years. Does this mean that the people he worked with in Hertz had more guts than his former team mates and coaches? I think it was because the people he knew from football saw some of the nastiness in him.

Robert Kardashian was another fair weather friend who stuck buy him right up until he realized that Simpson was a social (and possibly business) liability.

[William Anthony]

I give very little credibility to Prody (Miss or Ms). For one thing, what kind of woman wants a relationship with a drug taking psychopath? For another thing, there is too much chance that what she said or wrote is influenced by financial considerations. I might give it credibility if other sources support it.

Orenthal SImpson has had a lot of fair weather friends who deserted him when it was convenient. I seem to be one of the few people who paid much attention to the fact that he got very little public support from former team mates and coaches. I don't believe that they withheld support out of fear.
It wouldn't take much guts to say something like "I didn't think he was that kind of guy".

Michael Vick got a lot of bad publicity, and yet team mates stood up for him.

Immediately after the murders in 94 Simpson got a lot of support from people he knew in Hertz and broadcasting; but far less from the people from his football years. Does this mean that the people he worked with in Hertz had more guts than his former team mates and coaches? I think it was because the people he knew from football saw some of the nastiness in him.

Robert Kardashian was another fair weather friend who stuck buy him right up until he realized that Simpson was a social (and possibly business) liability.

I wondered, if they thought Ms. Prody should have taken personal responsibility for her choices? The one difference as I see it is that people can not choose their race or the color of their skin.

[weezer]

NATION & WORLD
O.J. Simpson seeking bond during appeal
June 30, 2009

A state Supreme Court panel will hear oral arguments on O.J. Simpson's bid to get out of a Nevada prison pending his appeal to overturn a conviction in an armed hotel room heist, officials said Monday.

A three-member panel of the state's only appellate court will hear 30 minutes of arguments in Las Vegas from Simpson's lawyers seeking his release on bond and from prosecutors opposing the request, court spokesman Bill Gang said. The hearing was scheduled for Aug. 3, he said.

"We're thrilled they're entertaining oral arguments on our motion," Simpson lawyer Yale Galanter said by telephone from Miami. "We're hopeful the court will grant our request for bond."

Clark County District Attorney David Roger declined to comment.

Simpson, 61, was convicted of kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon in the gunpoint robbery of two sports memorabilia dealers in September 2007. He is serving nine to 33 years at Lovelock Correctional Center in northern Nevada.

[weezer]

once again this POS gets 'special treatment/consideration' by the justice system as if he's something special -- what an outrage: :cuss: :mad:

Could O.J. Simpson Get Out Of Jail Pending An Appeal Hearing?
Posted by: Larry Riggs Created: 7/20/2009 10:04:35

Las Vegas, NV -- A lot of people were shocked that O.J. Simpson beat a double murder charge back in 1995. But might he be in position to pull off another legal surprise? The former football star is currently in a Nevada prison after being convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping.

He has launched an appeal -- and has also filed paperwork asking to be set free while he seeks to have his case overturned. Few in Nevada legal circles believe Simpson has any real chance of being set free pending appeal. However, they have taken note that the state's only appellate court has agreed to set oral arguments August 3 to hear Simpson's plea to be allowed to post bond.

It has been more than 30 years since the Nevada Supreme Court granted a high-profile defendant freedom pending appeal. That man, Lawrence Arvey, skipped town.

Associated Press

[weezer]

O.J. Simpson wants items that were seized in Vegas
By JOHN ROGERS (AP) – 15 hours ago

LOS ANGELES — O.J. Simpson filed a declaration in court Friday claiming that several items seized by authorities following the bungled hotel heist that sent him to prison are rightfully his and should be returned.

The declaration in Superior Court lists numerous signed footballs Simpson says he was awarded during his glory days as a college and pro athlete in the 1960s and 1970s. Others include ties Simpson says he wore during his murder trial and a picture he says the late FBI director J. Edgar Hoover gave him.

Simpson says most of the items disappeared when he moved from Los Angeles to Miami after being acquitted of the 1994 murders of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman.

"These items were utilized in my daily life," he says in the declaration filed by his lawyer. A hearing is scheduled for Aug. 18.

The items include a ball he was awarded in 1975 for scoring four touchdowns in a single game, others commemorating seasons in which he gained more than 1,000 yards and a ball commemorating his selection as a college All American in 1968.

Since his Sept. 13, 2007, arrest in Las Vegas, Simpson has insisted he was only trying to retrieve property stolen from him when he and several others burst into a hotel room and confronted a pair of memorabilia dealers who were led to believe they were offering the items for sale to a private collector.

Simpson, who was convicted of armed robbery, kidnapping and other charges, was sentenced to nine to 33 years in prison. Most of the others pleaded guilty to lesser charges.

Almost since the day of the arrest, the items have been the subject of a legal tug-of-war between Simpson and others.

One of the memorabilia dealers has laid claim to them and Ronald Goldman's father, Fred Goldman, wants them to help satisfy his share of a $33.5 million wrongful death judgment he and Brown's survivors obtained against Simpson.

"Tragically, we support Mr. Simpson's claim of ownership," said Goldman's lawyer, David Cook. He added he believes if Simpson prevails in court the items will eventually be turned over to Goldman.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[weezer]

". . .numerous signed footballs Simpson says he was awarded during his glory days as a college and pro athlete in the 1960s and 1970s. Others include ties Simpson says he wore during his murder trial and a picture he says the late FBI director J. Edgar Hoover gave him. . ."

"These items were utilized in my daily life," he says in the declaration filed by his lawyer. A hearing is scheduled for Aug. 18. . ."

of course they were! ;)

[weezer]

O.J. Simpson Lives In Fear: Cellmates Plot To Kill?
by Staff


Incarcerated O.J. Simpson is living in fear behind bars because he's convinced his cellmate is plotting to kill him.

The former American footballer was sentenced to serve at least 15 years in a Nevada prison last December (08) after his conviction for armed robbery relating to a September 2007 sports memorabilia heist.

He is serving his time at Lovelock Correctional Center as he awaits progress on his appeal, but according to the National Enquirer, Simpson is terrified his cellmate is plotting to take revenge on him for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Simpson-Brown.

The retired sportsman was cleared of killing his ex and her friend Ron Goldman in 1995, but the shamed star is allegedly fearful he will become the target of a revenge attack.

According to the tabloid, Simpson has told pals, "My cellmate is nuts. He's a killer, and he hates me. He told me that he is in prison for murder and rape, and he hates my guts because I got away with murdering my ex-wife.

"He's told me he is going to strangle me in my sleep the first chance he gets."

Friends of Simpson are worried The Naked Gun star is gradually being driven to insanity and are concerned he will not survive his prison stint.

An insider says, "I think O.J. is finally losing it. If he has to stay in prison for a long time, he won't make it."

Simpson is due back in court on 3 August (09) when a judge will decide whether to grant him bail pending his appeal. (c) WENN

[tv]

Sounds like he's getting a little paranoid...or is the devil chasing him after all these years? Maybe now he knows what it's like to live in fear...too bad. :)

[weezer]

Sounds like he's getting a little paranoid...or is the devil chasing him after all these years? Maybe now he knows what it's like to live in fear...too bad. :)

or he's wanting to make the situation look worse for the hearing.

I have to admit, I hope what he says is true -- I hope he lives everyday afraid for his life, never knowing when it's going to happen, afraid to close his eyes at night, not trusting the person sleeping next to you.

I keep thinking of his words after the armed robbery -- "I can't do no lockdown."

[tv]

or he's wanting to make the situation look worse for the hearing.

I have to admit, I hope what he says is true -- I hope he lives everyday afraid for his life, never knowing when it's going to happen, afraid to close his eyes at night, not trusting the person sleeping next to you.

I keep thinking of his words after the armed robbery -- "I can't do no lockdown."

Karma -- you've got to love it. :D

[socaldiva]

Karma -- you've got to love it. :D

I absolutely LOVE it. I can picture him lying awake at night, afraid to fall asleep. I also love that the article refers to him as the "shamed" star.

[weezer]

I absolutely LOVE it. I can picture him lying awake at night, afraid to fall asleep. I also love that the article refers to him as the "shamed" star.

he's probably missing his lingerie right about now. :tongue:

[tv]

he's probably missing his lingerie right about now. :tongue:

Maybe his cellmate will give him some for Christmas. :D

[weezer]

DID O.J. simpson kill his wife created by: Nov 19, 2008
VoteResults

yes 68 73%
no 21 22%
his friend killed her 4%

[tv]

DID O.J. simpson kill his wife created by: Nov 19, 2008
VoteResults

yes 68 73%
no 21 22%
his friend killed her 4%

Every now and then the murders are mentioned on talk shows, sit coms or whatever and I haven't heard anyone say they think he's innocent in years.

[socaldiva]

he's probably missing his lingerie right about now. :tongue:

Maybe Bubba will buy him some real soon :tongue:

[William Anthony]

Jealousy and envy are wasted emotions that can some times make us seem mean spirited and overbearing .

[martin II]

Jealousy and envy are wasted emotions that can some times make us seem mean spirited and overbearing .

William
Thanks for this much needed thought.

[martin II]

Cochran made this quote right after the jury selection was made. I remember it irritated me at the time. I don't think he explained what he meant, or whether the jury selection guaranteed a non guilty virdict (that is hung jury the worst possible case).

I still don't know if Darden was correct, but the fact that more has been written about Darden crying than about whether he was correct about the prospective jurors (he wasn't just talking about the jurors selected) is important. I suppose this sort of thing, more emphasis on Darden crying is what you have to expect in tinsle town.

Cochran's statements have to do with Darden in that these two were part of the trial. I am more justified in bringing up Cochrans statements than you are in bringing up stuff about slavery.


if you don't know anything about race i assume you know less about slavery.you agree?

[socaldiva]

if you don't know anything about race i assume you know less about slavery.you agree?

Orenthal was never a slave. I don't even think he considers himself black, so I'm not sure why you are bringing up race on this board.

[martin II]

I have no problem with the LA Times article as it gave both sides. I do have a problem with the gossip source. I simply asked you, if you considered the gossip source credible.

the best advice to people that read the NY DAILY news is to forget all you read asap.

[martin II]

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/sep/25/former-friend-testifies-oj-simpson-trial/

[weezer]

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/sep/25/former-friend-testifies-oj-simpson-trial/

even his accomplice's audio recordings after the armed robbery? the one where orenthal laughed about scaring the victims, said he didn't care what happened to the 'sh*t', and asked if the gun had been taken out of the pocket in the hall? those tapes or some other ones?

[khristmaskathy]

I believe that OJ's older son Jason killed Nicole and Ron. There is a book out OJ is Guilty but not of Murder and it's a compelling argument in favor of the aforementioned theory.

[socaldiva]

I believe that OJ's older son Jason killed Nicole and Ron. There is a book out OJ is Guilty but not of Murder and it's a compelling argument in favor of the aforementioned theory.


Then why was OJ's blood, hair & fibers found at the crime scene & not Jason's?

[tv]

Poor Jason. People will accuse anyone that puts OJ Simpson in the clear. It also has the added benefit of making Simpson look like a hero for shielding his son.

[weezer]

today is orenthal's big day -- the sociopath is hoping the courts will turn him loose on society AGAIN.

Nevada Supreme Court to weigh OJ release on appeal
(AP) – 55 minutes ago

LAS VEGAS — O.J. Simpson and a former golfing buddy are hoping their lawyers can convince a Nevada Supreme Court panel to release them from prison while the high court reviews their convictions in a gunpoint hotel room heist.

Simpson and convicted co-defendant Clarence "C.J." Stewart won't be in a Las Vegas courtroom Monday when their lawyers get 30 minutes to argue for bond pending appeal.

The three justices from Nevada's only appellate court won't make an immediate decision.

It's rare for the court to hear oral arguments on bond, and even more rare to grant release.

Simpson is serving nine to 33 years for kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon in a September 2007 confrontation with two sports memorabilia dealers.

Stewart is serving 7 1/2 to 27 years.

[GreenIce]

I believe that OJ's older son Jason killed Nicole and Ron. There is a book out OJ is Guilty but not of Murder and it's a compelling argument in favor of the aforementioned theory.

Hello,

Mr. Dear did a great job with his book. However, I don't believe that Simpson would have covered for his son if he came to believe that Jason did this. He did hire his son a top-notch criminal defense lawyer very shortly after the murders. Some books have it before he landed back in LA, in other's, it was the day after. I want to say the name of the lawyer was Carl Jones. I am sure of the first name, just not the last name.

Also, the crime scence and how the victims were killed, IMO was done by more then one person and for the most part, it was done a professional manner. Ron Goldman had "torture" or "control" wounds on his neck. If Nicole was the sole target, then why would Goldman have these wounds.

When Jason got in trouble with the law before, his father made sure a public defender was his lawyer. There is no evidence that Simpson ever tried to buy any of his children out of trouble or cover for them.

[socaldiva]

*snip*

When Jason got in trouble with the law before, his father made sure a public defender was his lawyer. There is no evidence that Simpson ever tried to buy any of his children out of trouble or cover for them.

Nothing like spending millions on attorneys for yourself & getting public defenders for your kids. What a guy. :rolleyes:

[tv]

Nothing like spending millions on attorneys for yourself & getting public defenders for your kids. What a guy. :rolleyes:

Exactly what I was thinking and why did OJS have to 'make sure' that Jason had a public defender? That's his right under the law and he looks like a smart guy who can ask for a public defender on his own if his father isn't willing to part with any money. Now I've heard it all! :tongue:

[GreenIce]

khristmaskathy,

Obviously comments have been made and will be made about Simpson allowing his son to be represented by a public defender. However, in all fairness, it must be remembered that Mr. Goldman allowed Ron to spend at least one night on jail because he refused to bail him out.

Please note that Kim and her brother had a major falling out over money as well. Also, Ron did have to file bankruptacy because his family refused to bail out of trouble.

I believe both father's did what they thought was best for their son. When Jason was getting into trouble and was too much to handle for his mother, he moved in Simpson. When Jason continued to get in trouble, he was sent to a military school.

I believe once a child reaches 18, if a parent feels that they are at the legal age where they choose to get into trouble, then they are on their own to get themselves out.

[weezer]

funny that the NG's believe it was the right thing for orenthal to do to Jason but bash Mr. Goldman for letting Ron work out his problems. :shrug:

I've never seen anything that states that orenthal hired Jason a 'top-notch criminal lawyer' -- anyone have a link?

[tv]

funny that the NG's believe it was the right thing for orenthal to do to Jason but bash Mr. Goldman for letting Ron work out his problems. :shrug:

I've never seen anything that states that orenthal hired Jason a 'top-notch criminal lawyer' -- anyone have a link?

I haven't seen anything about a top-notch lawyer or any kind of lawyer regarding Jason but I'll be on the look out. It seems to me if Jason was 18 he could agree to the public defender on his own. I wonder if Arnelle had a public defender for her DUI?

[weezer]

I haven't seen anything about a top-notch lawyer or any kind of lawyer regarding Jason but I'll be on the look out. It seems to me if Jason was 18 he could agree to the public defender on his own. I wonder if Arnelle had a public defender for her DUI?

now that I think about it, I kind of remember wm dear making the claim about the attorney for Jason. Not sure if it was ever proven to be true --

[tv]

now that I think about it, I kind of remember wm dear making the claim about the attorney for Jason. Not sure if it was ever proven to be true --

I've been reading Jason's testimony and he said a lot of interesting things. One of the things that stuck out is that he testified that he made it a point to look at OJ Simpson's hands when he saw him after he returned from Chicago and he saw no cuts or injuries to his hands. If Jason didn't see any injuries why would anyone else have noticed anything especially when they weren't looking for injuries? How was anyone on a red-eye flight with dim lighting supposed to see something that Jason didn't see even though he was deliberately looking? We know that by the time Jason saw his father the deep cut to his left middle finger was there.

[Kate Sachel]

In oral argument yesterday at OJ Simpson's hearing, Yale Galanter made the statement "“The unjust outcome of not granting him a bond is that if the case is reversed, he will have sat in prison and been punished for nothing, while the appeal winds its way through the system.”

I personally believe he should count himself lucky for not having had to spend the past fourteen years in prison.

Kate

[weezer]

In oral argument yesterday at OJ Simpson's hearing, Yale Galanter made the statement "“The unjust outcome of not granting him a bond is that if the case is reversed, he will have sat in prison and been punished for nothing, while the appeal winds its way through the system.”

I personally believe he should count himself lucky for not having had to spend the past fourteen years in prison.

Kate

I'm just flabbergasted at the argument -- as if we didn't all hear him planning, committing, and then regaling the armed robbery.

[tv]

I'm flabbergasted at the assertion that OJS isn't a flight risk. He's fled two times in the past and this time the stakes are much higher. If he got out and didn't flee he'd probably end up spending the rest of his life in prison. He'd be separated from his former life anyway so what does he have to lose?

[socaldiva]

I'm amazed they are even giving the crybaby an opportunity to be heard at this juncture. They should make him sit & wait years for his appeal to come up, like they do the average Joe. He stopped being special decades ago. Does anyone here know when the court will respond to his request?

[weezer]

I'm amazed they are even giving the crybaby an opportunity to be heard at this juncture. They should make him sit & wait years for his appeal to come up, like they do the average Joe. He stopped being special decades ago. Does anyone here know when the court will respond to his request?

there's nothing in anything I've read gives any timeline for a decision.

[weezer]

Christie Prody: Don't Let O.J. Simpson Out on Bail!
August 5th, 2009 8:12 AM

One person hoping O.J. Simpson is even released from prison? Well, that's pretty much every person. But girlfriend Christie Prody doesn't want him set free!

The former Heisman Trophy winner was convicted last December on robbery, kidnapping and weapons charges and sentenced to 9-33 years in prison.

His attorneys on Monday argued before the Nevada Supreme Court that the former football star and two-time murderer should be released pending appeal.

"Christie Prody would not want to see him released because she is concerned that he might try to see her," her attorney, none other than Gloria Allred, said.

"She is concerned that he is dangerous and she fears for her safety."

Which is why you date freaking O.J. Simpson in the first place. He beat his first wife and killed the second? You'd think that would turn her off, but no.

A decision on O.J. Simpson's request for bail could come at any time. If it's granted, Christie Prody might want to get the f*%k out of dodge. Dude hasn't killed since '94.

Christie Prody was a fresh-faced 20-year-old when she met Simpson. Back then she told her family she didn't believe he'd murdered his ex-wife Nicole.

Over their 13 years together, however, their relationship became a bit violent, with numerous calls to 911 and allegations of drug and alcohol abuse.

Most recently, his daughter Arnelle brutally attacked both of them.

Prody hurt herself "falling at a gas station" awhile back, and on another occasion had both her legs broken by a speeding car that hit her. Not at all suspicious.

[martin II]

I've been reading Jason's testimony and he said a lot of interesting things. One of the things that stuck out is that he testified that he made it a point to look at OJ Simpson's hands when he saw him after he returned from Chicago and he saw no cuts or injuries to his hands. If Jason didn't see any injuries why would anyone else have noticed anything especially when they weren't looking for injuries? How was anyone on a red-eye flight with dim lighting supposed to see something that Jason didn't see even though he was deliberately looking? We know that by the time Jason saw his father the deep cut to his left middle finger was there.

TV

Please

The plane piot sat next to oj in first class and talked to him for a while and he testified that he did not see any cuts or bandages on his hands. i think he also testified that he looked at ojs hands looking for his football ring. He also testified that oj signed a autograsph for him during that conversation. Mohammad Ali photographer also sat with oj and testified he saw no cuts on ojs hands.Neither did either of the three sky caps at LAX.

Who in the world do you think testified that the lighting on the plane was dim.
oh i know, no one.

[martin II]

oj hired a lawyer for jason immediately after learning about the murders.

[martin II]

The deck is stacked against oj in Nevada and i doubt he will get bail.But i
do wonder why the court decided to hear the bail request which they have not done for some time.Sounds like for some reason they are willing to break
from normal procedures. :shrug:

[weezer]

TV

Please

The plane piot sat next to oj in first class and talked to him for a while and he testified that he did not see any cuts or bandages on his hands. i think he also testified that he looked at ojs hands looking for his football ring. He also testified that oj signed a autograsph for him during that conversation. Mohammad Ali photographer also sat with oj and testified he saw no cuts on ojs hands.Neither did either of the three sky caps at LAX.

Who in the world do you think testified that the lighting on the plane was dim.
oh i know, no one.That must have been a effort by you to massage the facts a little. I give you credit for attempts to change the facts but cannot give a cigar. hahaha


DR. ROBERT HUIZENGA, former Los Angeles Raiders physician: Examined Simpson twice the week after killings, noted three cuts and seven abrasions on left hand; estimated wounds were five to seven days old, which would include date of killings; Simpson had arthritis and other football-related problems.

LEROY "SKIP" TAFT, Simpson friend, attorney: Saw just one cut on Simpson's hand day after killings; saw more cuts later in photos.

WAYNE STANFIELD, American Airlines captain: Got autograph from Simpson, described him as "calm, cool and collected"; saw no cuts on left hand but never carefully looked at Simpson's hands. Dec. 12, 1996:


BY MR. PETROCELLI:

Now, Mr. Simpson, on the plane ride to Chicago, did you make any phone calls?

A: No.

Q: Did you sleep?

A: I may have dozed, yes.

Q: That was a red-eye. Right?

A: Yes.

Q: And it was dark. Right?

A: Yes.

Q: You were sitting in First Class?

A: Yes.

Q: Was there somebody right next to you?

A: No.

Q: And were you on the aisle or near the window?

A: I probably sat in both seats.

Q: Did you -- How long did you sleep?

A: I told you I may have dozed. I'm not sure.

Q: Did you read?

A: Some, yes.

Q: How long do you think you dozed?

A: I don't know.

Q: Do you sleep on airplanes?

A: Sometimes.

Q: Do you sleep on red-eyes?

A: Sometimes.

Q: Did you sleep more or less the same that you usually sleep on this particular flight?

A: No,

Q: You slept less?

A: Normally my red-eyes are to New York. This was a much shorter flight.

Q: So you slept less?

A: If I dozed, yes.

Q: You slept less because it was a shorter flight. Right?

A: I don't know.

Q: Were you agitated at all?

A: No .

Q: Upset about anything?

A: No.

Q: Were you Betting up to go to the bathroom?

A: I did, yes.

MR. BAKER: More than one?

BY MR. PETROCELLI:

Did you get up to go to the bathroom at all?

A: Yes.

Q: More than once?

A: Yes.

Q: How many times?

A: A few times.

Q: Three or four?

A: Possibly.

Q: Five or six?

A: I doubt that, but possibly.

Q: Possibly l0?

A: I don't think so.

Q: Under 10?

A: Yes, I'm sure under l0.

Q: Somewhere between 5 and 10?

A: No, I'm not saying that. I said may have been three or four. May have been five.

Q: How long was the flight?

A: I don't know.

Q: Did you drink a lot of water?

A: Yes.

Q: About how many glasses of water?

A: A lot.

Q: Five or six?

A: At least.

Q: Maybe 10?

A: I don't think so.

[weezer]

TV

Please

The plane piot sat next to oj in first class and talked to him for a while and he testified that he did not see any cuts or bandages on his hands. i think he also testified that he looked at ojs hands looking for his football ring. He also testified that oj signed a autograsph for him during that conversation. Mohammad Ali photographer also sat with oj and testified he saw no cuts on ojs hands.Neither did either of the three sky caps at LAX.

Who in the world do you think testified that the lighting on the plane was dim.
oh i know, no one.That must have been a effort by you to massage the facts a little. I give you credit for attempts to change the facts but cannot give a cigar. hahaha

Q: Did you get out of your seat at all to go speak to anybody?

A: Once the plane was in flight?

Q: Yes.

A: I don't believe so.

Q: What about before it was in flight?

A: Yes.

Q: Who?

A: Bingham and this other guy.

Q: And you went to each of their seats?

A: No. I just stood up in the aisle and talked.

Q: Just chitchat?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you talk to any of the flight attendants?

A: Possibly.

Q: Do you remember their names?

A: No.

Q: Did you talk to the pilot?

A: Yes.

Q: When?

A: At some point during the flight.

Q: He came back to talk to you?

A: Yes.

Q: And what did you and he talk about?

A: I don't recall. Football maybe.

Q: How long?

A: I don't know.

Q: Did you give any autographs on the airplane?

A: Yes.

Q: To whom?

A: To the pilot for sure and maybe to one or two other people. I'm not sure.

Q: That came up to you in the cabin?

A: Yes. Possibly, yes.

[weezer]

I think it's funny that the NG's slam Park and Kato for not remembering certain things from that night when even orenthal wasn't sure about what HE did or didn't do:

A: As I said, if they--possibly, if they weren't on then before then, I may have turned them on then. I don't recall..

Q: Before you actually stepped out?

A: I don't recall if I did it before or as I turned and came back in. I just don't recall.

Q: The light switch is on the inside?

A: Yeah. And I may have done that, yes.

Q: May have done what?

A: Turned on the coach lights.

Q: Before you picked up the golf bag and showed it to the limo driver or after?

A: As I told you, I'm not sure if I did it before or after, but I may have. One or the other.

Q; Was the entryway light on at that time when you came down the stairs?

A: I don't believe so.

Q: And did you turn that light on when you went in the house after you picked up the golf cover bag?

A: I may have, but I know my lamp was on, so I may not have.

Q: You have a separate lamp and a separate light in the entryway. Correct?

A: Yes.

Q: So your best recollection now is that you turned the coach lights on but not the entryway light?

A: I may have.

Q: You may have.

A: Yes.

Q: You're just not sure.

A: Just not sure.

Q: And you are not sure if you turned it on before or after you came out of the house?

[tv]

TV

Please

The plane piot sat next to oj in first class and talked to him for a while and he testified that he did not see any cuts or bandages on his hands. i think he also testified that he looked at ojs hands looking for his football ring. He also testified that oj signed a autograsph for him during that conversation. Mohammad Ali photographer also sat with oj and testified he saw no cuts on ojs hands.Neither did either of the three sky caps at LAX.

Who in the world do you think testified that the lighting on the plane was dim.
oh i know, no one.That must have been a effort by you to massage the facts a little. I give you credit for attempts to change the facts but cannot give a cigar. hahaha

I'm going by the fact that all the night flights I've been on the lights were dimmed. If you have had a different experience that's okay too. Jason testified that he was looking at his father's hands and saw no injuries so it's not surprising that no one on the plane saw them either.

[weezer]

SNIPES FOR OJ

JAILBIRD actor OJ Simpson will be played by convicted tax cheat Wesley Snipes in a new film.

And the movie, about the bungled Vegas robbery which landed former American football hero Simpson behind bars, is already the subject of a studio bidding war.

It’s based on the book Busted – ex-con Thomas Riccio’s account of a 2007 Sin City heist.

The raid was led by Simpson, 62, on the hotel room of sports memorabilia dealers.

But a Simpson pal said: “OJ has been told the script paints him as an evil buffoon and he’s fuming about it.”

LOL -- guess he thought they'd make something up!

[weezer]

orenthal's civil deposition:

Q: Did you sleep?

A: I may have dozed, yes.

Q: That was a red-eye. Right?

A: Yes.

Q: And it was dark. Right?

A: Yes.

Q: You were sitting in First Class?

A: Yes.

Q: Was there somebody right next to you?

A: No.

[tv]

So even OJ Simpson says the plane was dark -- thanks, weezer! :)

[weezer]

not only orenthal but the pilot also:

MR. DARDEN: Now, when you fly at night, do you turn the cabin lights down?

MR. STANFIELD: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And you do that particularly when you're flying a red-eye flight, right?

MR. STANFIELD: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And is that so that the passengers on the plane can sleep?

MR. STANFIELD: Absolutely.

MR. DARDEN: In fact, you expect that the passengers to sleep, don't you?

MR. STANFIELD: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Simpson wasn't asleep?

MR. STANFIELD: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: And so were the cabin lights down during the time that you were speaking to Mr. Simpson?

MR. STANFIELD: They were dimmed, yes.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And there's an overhead light; is that correct?

MR. STANFIELD: Yes.

[tv]

SNIPES FOR OJ

JAILBIRD actor OJ Simpson will be played by convicted tax cheat Wesley Snipes in a new film.

And the movie, about the bungled Vegas robbery which landed former American football hero Simpson behind bars, is already the subject of a studio bidding war.

It’s based on the book Busted – ex-con Thomas Riccio’s account of a 2007 Sin City heist.

The raid was led by Simpson, 62, on the hotel room of sports memorabilia dealers.

But a Simpson pal said: “OJ has been told the script paints him as an evil buffoon and he’s fuming about it.”

LOL -- guess he thought they'd make something up!

Evil buffoon -- I like that!

[tv]

TV

Please

The plane piot sat next to oj in first class and talked to him for a while and he testified that he did not see any cuts or bandages on his hands. i think he also testified that he looked at ojs hands looking for his football ring. He also testified that oj signed a autograsph for him during that conversation. Mohammad Ali photographer also sat with oj and testified he saw no cuts on ojs hands.Neither did either of the three sky caps at LAX.

Who in the world do you think testified that the lighting on the plane was dim.
oh i know, no one.

So far, OJ Simpson and the pilot have testified to the lights being dim.

[weezer]

So far, OJ Simpson and the pilot have testified to the lights being dim. It appears you're mistaken AGAIN.

I re-read the pilot's testimony and guess what? no mention of looking for a ring.

[tv]

a reasonable person 'woulda' thought that! :tongue:

The key word is 'reasonable'. :)

[weezer]

SNIPES FOR OJ

JAILBIRD actor OJ Simpson will be played by convicted tax cheat Wesley Snipes in a new film.

And the movie, about the bungled Vegas robbery which landed former American football hero Simpson behind bars, is already the subject of a studio bidding war.

It’s based on the book Busted – ex-con Thomas Riccio’s account of a 2007 Sin City heist.

The raid was led by Simpson, 62, on the hotel room of sports memorabilia dealers.

But a Simpson pal said: “OJ has been told the script paints him as an evil buffoon and he’s fuming about it.”

LOL -- guess he thought they'd make something up!

so who's going to play arnelle? I vote whoopi or wanda sykes

[tv]

so who's going to play arnelle? I vote whoopi or wanda sykes

Between those two I vote Wanda Sykes. Her nasty expression fits the part better.

[tv]

the one where she looks like she just smelled something nasty?

wanda may be too young to play arnelle.Yep, that's the one. You might be right about her age -- I hadn't thought of that.

[GreenIce]

Maybe the poster needs to start reading the testimony instead of relying on woulda, coulda, shoulda AGAIN.

From July 13, 1995:

MR. COCHRAN: And what, if anything, did you see with regard to his hands?

MR. VALERIE: Umm, I viewed Mr. Simpson's hands at that time looking for championship ring. Given he is a famous professional player, that was the motivation for my looking at his hands. I didn't see anything unusual, no Band-Aids, no large abrasions or anything to that effect.

[weezer]

From July 13, 1995:

MR. COCHRAN: And what, if anything, did you see with regard to his hands?

MR. VALERIE: Umm, I viewed Mr. Simpson's hands at that time looking for championship ring. Given he is a famous professional player, that was the motivation for my looking at his hands. I didn't see anything unusual, no Band-Aids, no large abrasions or anything to that effect.

so it looks like there were quite possibly small abrasions. good job!

[weezer]

MR. DARDEN: Did the Defendant have a cut on his left hand?

MR. GLADDEN: No, I didn't see one.

MR. DARDEN: Did you look at his left hand?

MR. GLADDEN: I mean, I didn't come up to him and start examining his hand. I just asked for an autograph.

MR. DARDEN: Well, did you see his left hand?

MR. GLADDEN: Yes, I seen both his hands.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Did you see both of his hands, his entire left and right hand?

MR. GLADDEN: Pretty much so.

MR. DARDEN: You saw the top of his hand, the palm?

MR. GLADDEN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: You saw the bottom of his hand?

MR. GLADDEN: Well, he held the thing like this when he signed it and just handed it back so--

MR. DARDEN: Did you see the bottom of his hand?

MR. GLADDEN: Not really that closely.

MR. DARDEN: Did you see the bottom of his hand?

MR. GLADDEN: No.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, when he says "Bottom"--

THE COURT: Excuse me, Mr. Darden. When you were saying "The bottom of your hand" and asking the question, you were rubbing the back of your left hand with the palm of your right hand.

MR. DARDEN: Exactly.

MR. DARDEN: Did you see the back of the Defendant's hand left?

MR. GLADDEN: Not when I was standing real close, no.

MR. DARDEN: Did you ever see the back of the Defendant's left hand?

MR. GLADDEN: When he got out of the limo I seen how big he was and I was like checking out how big his hands were and stuff.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, on October 7, 1994, you received a telephone call from LAPD Detective Richard Crotsly; is that correct?

MR. GLADDEN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And he read to you a written statement that you had given the Defense; is that right?

MR. GLADDEN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And he asked you whether or not you had observed the bottom of the Defendant's left hand, didn't he?

MR. COCHRAN: One minute, your Honor. I don't think I have seen this statement.

(Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)

MR. GLADDEN: Yes, he asked.

MR. DARDEN: And you told him that you had not seen the bottom or observed the bottom of the Defendant's hand that night, correct?

MR. GLADDEN: Right.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And when you referred or rather used the term "Bottom," you were referring to the back of the Defendant's hand, weren't you?

MR. GLADDEN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: You cannot tell this jury that the Defendant did not have a cut on his left hand when you saw him?

MR. GLADDEN: I can tell if he was bleeding or not.

MR. DARDEN: You can tell?

MR. GLADDEN: I mean, he asked me did I see any blood and I said no.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. You didn't see any blood on the Defendant?

MR. GLADDEN: No.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. You didn't see any blood on the back of his left hand?

MR. GLADDEN: No.

MR. DARDEN: Then again, you didn't see the back of his left hand, right?

MR. GLADDEN: Right.

MR. DARDEN: So you don't know whether the Defendant's--whether the back of the Defendant's finger or finger on the left hand was cut or not, do you?

MR. GLADDEN: No.

[weezer]

MR. COCHRAN: And when you saw that, could you see his hand? Let's say, first of all, could you see his left hand?

MR. BINGHAM: I saw his--I saw his--I saw his left and right hand.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And did you notice anything unusual about either his left or right hand?

MR. BINGHAM: I did not notice anything unusual.

MR. COCHRAN: Did you see any cuts on either his left or right hand?

MR. BINGHAM: I don't think so, no.

[tv]

Jason Simpson civil trial deposition --


Q: Okay. When you first saw your father, did you notice if he had a cut on his finger?

A: No. I actually looked at his hands, and I didn't notice anything.

Q: No cuts?

A: Uh-uh.

Q: Why did you look?

A: Curiosity.

[socaldiva]

Jason Simpson civil trial deposition --


Q: Okay. When you first saw your father, did you notice if he had a cut on his finger?

A: No. I actually looked at his hands, and I didn't notice anything.

Q: No cuts?

A: Uh-uh.

Q: Why did you look?

A: Curiosity.

Curiosity? Sounds like even Jason doubted OJ from the get go. hmmm....

[tv]

Curiosity? Sounds like even Jason doubted OJ from the get go. hmmm....

He sure did. He knows what rage his father is capable of venting. He tried not to make him look bad in his civil trial testimony but you could tell it was hard for him.

[weezer]

He sure did. He knows what rage his father is capable of venting. He tried not to make him look bad in his civil trial testimony but you could tell it was hard for him.

I've always felt awful for Jason and the unfounded, unreasonable accusations directed toward him. :(

[martin II]

He sure did. He knows what rage his father is capable of venting. He tried not to make him look bad in his civil trial testimony but you could tell it was hard for him.

I think most friends and others looked at ojs hands after the murders. nobody found anything.

In the civil trial jason blew Petros goofy idea that oj climbed on the salingers carport and jumped to the walkway clean out of the water.

[socaldiva]

*snip*
I think most friends and others looked at ojs hands after the murders. nobody found anything.


Are you joking again? Have you forgotten about the police photos of his hands? :confused:

[GreenIce]

I think most friends and others looked at ojs hands after the murders. nobody found anything.

In the civil trial jason blew Petros goofy idea that oj climbed on the salingers carport and jumped to the walkway clean out of the water.

Martin,

By the time OJ landed back in and LA and got back from the interview, it was already leaked about blood drops being found at Bundy and how could you not miss that bandage on his finger?

Please note that the Vanatter and Lange made sure that other pictures of cuts on OJ's hands were not taken. Also remember, they never asked him to take his shirt off or pants to see if he had any other injuries that were consistent with being in a struggle that night. IMO, this is another indication they thought they had their man.

[martin II]

GI
Considering the plan Vanhatter and Lang "twin Devils of Deception" and Furhman had in place they had reason to believe they had their man.Until the dream team was assembeled and stuff started to unravel quickly.

[socaldiva]

I can't believe that even though this has been argued a million times on these boards, you two are still disputing the cuts on OJ's hands even though they were photographed & acknowledged by Simpson himself. What a hoot.

btw, this is the "OJ Simpson in the News" thread & I think you've gone off topic ;)

[tv]

GI
Considering the plan Vanhatter and Lang "twin Devils of Deception" and Furhman had in place they had reason to believe they had their man.Until the dream team was assembeled and stuff started to unravel quickly.

I believe the word 'devils' was used because it's derogatory to whites. Very clever way for Johnnie Cochran to send a message to the jury about the race of the detectives. Got to give him credit for that one! ;)

[GreenIce]

GI
Considering the plan Vanhatter and Lang "twin Devils of Deception" and Furhman had in place they had reason to believe they had their man.Until the dream team was assembeled and stuff started to unravel quickly.

Martin,

I will answer this on the other thread.

[martin II]

I believe the word 'devils' was used because it's derogatory to whites. Very clever way for Johnnie Cochran to send a message to the jury about the race of the detectives. Got to give him credit for that one! ;)

I think Cochran was referring to Vanhatter and Langs habit of not being truthful in their actions and testimony. That is how i read it. I didn't streatch
his words to mean something other that what was said and in the context that they were said. I saw no referance to white people. If you want to talk about race DW has set up a thread for those comments. The word devil is usually associated with satan the thing that lives in hell.According to the bible.

Some glaring example is when Vanhatter deceived the judge in his reasons for the searh warrant and his actions when he got his hands on Rons and Nicoile blood samples.

[martin II]

Martin,

I will answer this on the other thread.

GI
Thanks

[martin II]

GI

what i have wondered is why would Vanhatter get Clarke to assist him in writing the request for the search warrant that he knew was not truthful.
Did he know the judge would ignore how he lied. He must have known the defence would contest the lies he told to the judge to get the warrant.
Or is this just another instance of Vanhatter not caring and being reckless
and deceptive and leaving it to the prosecution to try to clean up his lies as long as he was able to search the property?

The other question is why did Clarke help him write the request with the lies included.

[tv]

I think Cochran was referring to Vanhatter and Langs habit of not being truthful in their actions and testimony. That is how i read it. I didn't streatch
his words to mean something other that what was said and in the context that they were said. I saw no referance to white people. If you want to talk about race DW has set up a thread for those comments. The word devil is usually associated with satan the thing that lives in hell.According to the bible.

Some glaring example is when Vanhatter deceived the judge in his reasons for the searh warrant and his actions when he got his hands on Rons and Nicoile blood samples.

I responded to you before DW started the other thread but I made my point so there's no need for me to go into a thread where it's open season on being bashed for even mentioning certain foods. :seeya:

[weezer]

Judge divides O.J. Simpson memorabilia
By Associated Press
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 - Added 11h ago

SANTA MONICA, Calif. — A California judge ordered some memorabilia returned to O.J. Simpson Tuesday, even as the football Hall of Famer sits in a Nevada prison for stealing it during a hotel room heist.

In a ruling that capped more than a year of legal wrangling, Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg on Tuesday gave nine souvenir footballs and a few other items to a lawyer for Simpson nemesis Fred Goldman for auction. Goldman is trying to collect on a $33.5 million civil judgment against Simpson.

But in another odd twist, the judge said Simpson must get the first $6,075 from the auction.

Rosenberg said it was possible that figure would not be reached, and then Goldman would get nothing.

The most satisfied litigant was memorabilia dealer Bruce Fromong, who was able to reclaim about 600 photographs and several books that he said were taken from him during the Las Vegas hotel room confrontation on Sept. 13, 2007.

During his trial, Simpson called it a sting operation designed to recover his memorabilia, which he said had been stolen from him.

Another of the participants in the dispute was Simpson’s former manager Mike Gilbert, who asked for nothing at the hearing and received nothing.

Outside of court, Gilbert grumbled, "I think America is tired of O.J. Simpson, tired of Fred Goldman and tired of me. I just want it over."

Because of the hotel room standoff, Simpson was sentenced to nine to 33 years for convictions on armed robbery, kidnapping and other charges. He has applied for release on bond while he appeals.

Rosenberg had all of the items seized from the hotel room brought to his courtroom in cartons, which he opened and displayed. Among the items returned to Simpson were framed awards, a signed photo of him and others with former FBI Chief J. Edgar Hoover and three neckties that he wore at his murder trial. Simpson also received a few souvenir footballs.

One of the men who was in the hotel room, Alfred Beardsley, was given back only the baseball hat he wore the night of the heist. He proudly put it on.

Attorney David Cook, representing Goldman, received nine game balls and two pillow cases from the hotel room, for the auction.

Beardsley, who took up Simpson’s cause after he blew the whistle on him, said outside court: "I’m happy and excited for O.J., that he’ll be getting some of his stuff back."

Meanwhile, Simpson attorney Ronald P. Slates, told the court clerk that if the $6,075 is obtained, it should be deposited in a trust account because "it’s tough cashing checks in prison."

Cook, who initiated the campaign to seize the items, acknowledged that "it’s chump change" and his battle to collect on the memorabilia has been "enormously futile." Cook has collected substantial amounts in other proceedings.

The judge said he was following a law that exempted certain items from civil judgments, including household furnishings, decorations and items used in business. Awards that were displayed in Simpson’s house fell into that category, he said.

Fromong estimated he could sell his photos and books for $15,000 to $30,000, but the sports market is flooded with Simpson memorabilia now, he said, so prices may be down.

Slates acknowledged there was an irony in Simpson receiving items he always claimed were his.

"It was his," he said, "but you have to go about getting the things lawfully."

[serpentsfall]

Thanks for the update, weezer!

[William Anthony]

Thanks for the update, weezer!

Ditto. It appears that Simpson was trying to reclaim some property that belonged to him.

[weezer]

and took everybody else's in the process! :eek: LOL

[tv]

and took everybody else's in the process! :eek: LOL

I still think there's a chance he might get out on appeal. He's led a charmed life and I see no reason why things should change.

[weezer]

I still think there's a chance he might get out on appeal. He's led a charmed life and I see no reason why things should change.

anything is possible -- he did walk away from a double murder -- but I think this one may be harder in that there are the tapes of his planning, committing, reveling the armed robbery, his gang of thugs that testified against him and, of course, the criminal jury isn't deciding Nevada Supreme Court cases. :rolleyes:

[tv]

anything is possible -- he did walk away from a double murder -- but I think this one may be harder in that there are the tapes of his planning, committing, reveling the armed robbery, his gang of thugs that testified against him and, of course, the criminal jury isn't deciding Nevada Supreme Court cases. :rolleyes:

If he were an ordinary defendant I would agree but you know he was just trying to get his 'stuff' back. So what if a gun could have gone off and someone could have been killed? So what if Bruce Fromong could have died from his heart attack? Add to that the idiot Beardsley who worships at OJ Simpson's feet and might have IT and the outcome might surprise us.

[William Anthony]

If he were an ordinary defendant I would agree but you know he was just trying to get his 'stuff' back. So what if a gun could have gone off and someone could have been killed? So what if Bruce Fromong could have died from his heart attack? Add to that the idiot Beardsley who worships at OJ Simpson's feet and might have IT and the outcome might surprise us.

Cases are brought to try actual controversies, not hypothetical ones.

[weezer]

If he were an ordinary defendant I would agree but you know he was just trying to get his 'stuff' back. So what if a gun could have gone off and someone could have been killed? So what if Bruce Fromong could have died from his heart attack? Add to that the idiot Beardsley who worships at OJ Simpson's feet and might have IT and the outcome might surprise us.

I'm still trying to figure out how the ruling -- although some of the stuff was returned to him, are they still going to auction? and, once they are sold, will the Goldmans be able to go after the $6k as orenthal income?

[William Anthony]

I'm still trying to figure out how the ruling -- although some of the stuff was returned to him, are they still going to auction? and, once they are sold, will the Goldmans be able to go after the $6k as orenthal income?

If the stuff was returned to him, it would seem to me that it is his decision what should be done with it.

[tv]

I'm still trying to figure out how the ruling -- although some of the stuff was returned to him, are they still going to auction? and, once they are sold, will the Goldmans be able to go after the $6k as orenthal income?

I thought it meant that the stuff is his now including the $6,000. You know once he gets his hands on it no one will ever see it again.

[William Anthony]

I thought it meant that the stuff is his now including the $6,000. You know once he gets his hands on it you know no one will ever see it again.

The judge has spoken but there can always be an appeal taken.

[weezer]

I thought it meant that the stuff is his now including the $6,000. You know once he gets his hands on it no one will ever see it again.

I cracked up when the lawyer said to put it in a cash account because checks are hard to cash in prison -- :tongue:

[weezer]

I thought it meant that the stuff is his now including the $6,000. You know once he gets his hands on it no one will ever see it again.

I read it that the stuff was going to be auctioned:

"But in another odd twist, the judge said Simpson must get the first $6,075 from the auction."

someone out there understand the ruling? tv and I are talking ourselves into confusion! LOL

[tv]

I read it that the stuff was going to be auctioned:

"But in another odd twist, the judge said Simpson must get the first $6,075 from the auction."

someone out there understand the ruling? tv and I are talking ourselves into confusion! LOL

It really is confusing but why would they give him the money and then take it away or why would they give him the items if they're going to be auctioned anyway?

[William Anthony]

I read it that the stuff was going to be auctioned:

"But in another odd twist, the judge said Simpson must get the first $6,075 from the auction."

someone out there understand the ruling? tv and I are talking ourselves into confusion! LOL

Did you understand this part?

"The judge said he was following a law that exempted certain items from civil judgments, including household furnishings, decorations and items used in business. Awards that were displayed in Simpson’s house fell into that category, he said."

[weezer]

It really is confusing but why would they give him the money and then take it away or why would they give him the items if they're going to be auctioned anyway?

okay -- put on my reasoning hat and this is what I think: orenthal was 'awarded' some of the stuff that was in the room but it will be auctioned to satisfy the civil suit but since california is california, he gets to keep the first $6k.

someone with a better idea, please step forward.

[weezer]

this is obscene -- only in the land of fruits and nuts:

O.J. Simpson's Footballs Intercepted in Court
By Steven Mikulan in crimeThursday, Aug. 20 2009 @ 3:19PM
Like Jake Gittes' Chinatown, nothing is ever what it seems in O.J. Simpson Land. Simpson, of course, was sentened last year from nine to 33 years in prison for using muscle and guns in a Las Vegas hotel room to get back memorabilia he claimed belonged to him. According to Associated Press' Linda Deutsch, an irony to this is that now a judge has declared the disputed property really did belong to Simpson. But then things become weirder still. In a judicial twist Tuesday, L.A. Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg ruled that the property must be returned to the imprisoned Simpson.

Well, make that most of the memorabilia items. Nine footballs, Rosenberg said, should go to Fred Goldman as part of the restitution Goldman won from Simpson in a civil suit stemming from the 1994 slaying of Goldman's son, Ron, and Simpson's former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson. That would seem to be the end of it, except that Judge Rosenberg also said Simpson is entitled, due to a legal exemption, to the first $6,075 of any proceeds generated by the footballs' sale by Goldman.

Goldman's attorney, David Cook, then asked Simpson to donate that $6,075 to the Ron Goldman Foundation for Justice. Simpson's lawyer, to no one's surprise, said "Thanks, we'll pass." So now Goldman's lawyer refuses to sell the footballs, in order to deprive Simpson of getting that $6,075. Call it a case of lawyering gone wild or intentional grounding.

[weezer]

what a freakin' idiot:

". . .The judge said he was following a law that exempted certain items from civil judgments, including household furnishings, decorations and items used in business. Awards that were displayed in Simpson’s house fell into that category, he said. . ."

[serpentsfall]

what a freakin' idiot:

". . .The judge said he was following a law that exempted certain items from civil judgments, including household furnishings, decorations and items used in business. Awards that were displayed in Simpson’s house fell into that category, he said. . ."

Um, wasn't the Heisman supposedly in the same trophy room as the picture of OJ & Hoover?

[martin II]

what a freakin' idiot:

". . .The judge said he was following a law that exempted certain items from civil judgments, including household furnishings, decorations and items used in business. Awards that were displayed in Simpson’s house fell into that category, he said. . ."

Two things
1. Oj did go into the hotel to retrieve HIS STUFF.
2. Fred has the footballs but he cannot sell them. hmmm
Maby he can play touch footbal with the kids in the neighborhood.
I bet fred is one pissed guy today.

[weezer]

Um, wasn't the Heisman supposedly in the same trophy room as the picture of OJ & Hoover?

exactly -- and the tiffany lamps, etc. . . .

[William Anthony]

this is obscene -- only in the land of fruits and nuts:

O.J. Simpson's Footballs Intercepted in Court
By Steven Mikulan in crimeThursday, Aug. 20 2009 @ 3:19PM
Like Jake Gittes' Chinatown, nothing is ever what it seems in O.J. Simpson Land. Simpson, of course, was sentened last year from nine to 33 years in prison for using muscle and guns in a Las Vegas hotel room to get back memorabilia he claimed belonged to him. According to Associated Press' Linda Deutsch, an irony to this is that now a judge has declared the disputed property really did belong to Simpson. But then things become weirder still. In a judicial twist Tuesday, L.A. Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg ruled that the property must be returned to the imprisoned Simpson.

Well, make that most of the memorabilia items. Nine footballs, Rosenberg said, should go to Fred Goldman as part of the restitution Goldman won from Simpson in a civil suit stemming from the 1994 slaying of Goldman's son, Ron, and Simpson's former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson. That would seem to be the end of it, except that Judge Rosenberg also said Simpson is entitled, due to a legal exemption, to the first $6,075 of any proceeds generated by the footballs' sale by Goldman.

Goldman's attorney, David Cook, then asked Simpson to donate that $6,075 to the Ron Goldman Foundation for Justice. Simpson's lawyer, to no one's surprise, said "Thanks, we'll pass." So now Goldman's lawyer refuses to sell the footballs, in order to deprive Simpson of getting that $6,075. Call it a case of lawyering gone wild or intentional grounding.

Perhaps you now understand what I said in post #5119.

[martin II]

Um, wasn't the Heisman supposedly in the same trophy room as the picture of OJ & Hoover?

It was a award but they already took it.right. Impossible to bring it back.

Question
OJ was convicted of stealing the stuff.If the judge says it was his stuff all along does this impact that charge/conviction?

[martin II]

this is obscene -- only in the land of fruits and nuts:

O.J. Simpson's Footballs Intercepted in Court
By Steven Mikulan in crimeThursday, Aug. 20 2009 @ 3:19PM
Like Jake Gittes' Chinatown, nothing is ever what it seems in O.J. Simpson Land. Simpson, of course, was sentened last year from nine to 33 years in prison for using muscle and guns in a Las Vegas hotel room to get back memorabilia he claimed belonged to him. According to Associated Press' Linda Deutsch, an irony to this is that now a judge has declared the disputed property really did belong to Simpson. But then things become weirder still. In a judicial twist Tuesday, L.A. Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg ruled that the property must be returned to the imprisoned Simpson.

Well, make that most of the memorabilia items. Nine footballs, Rosenberg said, should go to Fred Goldman as part of the restitution Goldman won from Simpson in a civil suit stemming from the 1994 slaying of Goldman's son, Ron, and Simpson's former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson. That would seem to be the end of it, except that Judge Rosenberg also said Simpson is entitled, due to a legal exemption, to the first $6,075 of any proceeds generated by the footballs' sale by Goldman.

Goldman's attorney, David Cook, then asked Simpson to donate that $6,075 to the Ron Goldman Foundation for Justice. Simpson's lawyer, to no one's surprise, said "Thanks, we'll pass." So now Goldman's lawyer refuses to sell the footballs, in order to deprive Simpson of getting that $6,075. Call it a case of lawyering gone wild or intentional grounding.

The judge can order fred to sell the items and give the money to oj.

[William Anthony]

It was a award but they already took it.right. Impossible to bring it back.

Question
OJ was convicted of stealing the stuff.If the judge says it was his stuff all along does this impact that charge/conviction?

It may help if they argue for the need for uniformity under the various state robbery laws and the applicability of the claim of right defense. It might be a persuasive, although not controlling argument.

[William Anthony]

The judge can order fred to sell the items and give the money to oj.

Simpson recieves the first 6,075 of the proceeds of an auction. I wonder if Simpson can sue Mr. Goldman and seek to enforce a judgment that he is owed the aforementioned sum of money.

[martin II]

and took everybody else's in the process! :eek: LOL

He gets all of what was his and Fumong gets the balance.

[martin II]

Um, wasn't the Heisman supposedly in the same trophy room as the picture of OJ & Hoover?

Did the judge say only stuff in the trophy room?

[martin II]

I still think there's a chance he might get out on appeal. He's led a charmed life and I see no reason why things should change.

If he is not a flight risk he should be given bail.Bail is not for punishment.

[martin II]

Fred spent a year going after this stuff running up large legal bills and may end up with zero or owing oj 6 grand. His lawyer didn't know the law.Only how to send fred bills.

[martin II]

this is obscene -- only in the land of fruits and nuts:

O.J. Simpson's Footballs Intercepted in Court
By Steven Mikulan in crimeThursday, Aug. 20 2009 @ 3:19PM
Like Jake Gittes' Chinatown, nothing is ever what it seems in O.J. Simpson Land. Simpson, of course, was sentened last year from nine to 33 years in prison for using muscle and guns in a Las Vegas hotel room to get back memorabilia he claimed belonged to him. According to Associated Press' Linda Deutsch, an irony to this is that now a judge has declared the disputed property really did belong to Simpson. But then things become weirder still. In a judicial twist Tuesday, L.A. Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg ruled that the property must be returned to the imprisoned Simpson.

Well, make that most of the memorabilia items. Nine footballs, Rosenberg said, should go to Fred Goldman as part of the restitution Goldman won from Simpson in a civil suit stemming from the 1994 slaying of Goldman's son, Ron, and Simpson's former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson. That would seem to be the end of it, except that Judge Rosenberg also said Simpson is entitled, due to a legal exemption, to the first $6,075 of any proceeds generated by the footballs' sale by Goldman.

Goldman's attorney, David Cook, then asked Simpson to donate that $6,075 to the Ron Goldman Foundation for Justice. Simpson's lawyer, to no one's surprise, said "Thanks, we'll pass." So now Goldman's lawyer refuses to sell the footballs, in order to deprive Simpson of getting that $6,075. Call it a case of lawyering gone wild or intentional grounding.

I call it knowing the law.This judges ruling seems to be in conflict with the civil judges list of items that oj had to surrender. The lamps are furniture and the trophy was a award.

[martin II]

what a freakin' idiot:

". . .The judge said he was following a law that exempted certain items from civil judgments, including household furnishings, decorations and items used in business. Awards that were displayed in Simpson’s house fell into that category, he said. . ."

Did you think the judge was a idiot when you thought everything had to go to fred.Its the same judge.

[tv]

what a freakin' idiot:

". . .The judge said he was following a law that exempted certain items from civil judgments, including household furnishings, decorations and items used in business. Awards that were displayed in Simpson’s house fell into that category, he said. . ."

I'm telling you guys, I won't be surprised if he gets out. Arnelle better start thinking about vacating the master bedroom. :)

[weezer]

I'm telling you guys, I won't be surprised if he gets out. Arnelle better start thinking about vacating the master bedroom. :)

or not. . .;)

[martin II]

I'm telling you guys, I won't be surprised if he gets out. Arnelle better start thinking about vacating the master bedroom. :)

Did she tell you she uses a master bedroon.

[martin II]

When willian and others made the argument that oj went to get HIS STUFF many attacked that as nonsense.Claiming that the stuff belonged to fred
for the judgement payout. This judge ruled against fred when fred tried to get the goods when oj was first arrested. When oj was convicted some said fred gets the goods.Don't count your chickens before they hatch.

[William Anthony]

When willian and others made the argument that oj went to get HIS STUFF many attacked that as nonsense.Claiming that the stuff belonged to fred
for the judgement payout. This judge ruled against fred when fred tried to get the goods when oj was first arrested. When oj was convicted some said fred gets the goods.Don't count your chickens before they hatch.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.:)

[serpentsfall]

Did the judge say only stuff in the trophy room?

People who have a trophy room tend to use that room to display their awards. The Heisman was surely an award yet it was ordered sold as part of the civil judgment. I'm not sure how a football that is awarded as acknowledgement of an athletic feat is any different than the Heisman.

I also thought there should have been some testimony about whether or not OJ forfeited ownership when he asked others to take his stuff so Goldman couldn''t get it. To me that mean he's either given his stuff away and forfeited ownership or he admits under oath he intentionally defied a previous court's turn over order.

Regardless of ownership, the way he went about gaining possession of the items was illegal, plus the also took items that were not his. I don't think ownership of the items will ultimately have any effect on the decision about bail pending the appeal - or the appeal itself for that matter.

[William Anthony]

People who have a trophy room tend to use that room to display their awards. The Heisman was surely an award yet it was ordered sold as part of the civil judgment. I'm not sure how a football that is awarded as acknowledgement of an athletic feat is any different than the Heisman.

I also thought there should have been some testimony about whether or not OJ forfeited ownership when he asked others to take his stuff so Goldman couldn''t get it. To me that mean he's either given his stuff away and forfeited ownership or he admits under oath he intentionally defied a previous court's turn over order.

Regardless of ownership, the way he went about gaining possession of the items was illegal, plus the also took items that were not his. I don't think ownership of the items will ultimately have any effect on the decision about bail pending the appeal - or the appeal itself for that matter.

You may be correct but I do believe that most people not predisposed to hanging Simpson for a crime for which he has been acquitted will consider the crime for what it is and a larger view of what is considered a crime in other states and the idea that the claim of right is allowed in Nevada for burglary but not for the ensuing robbery charge will be a strong and possible persuasive argument for the need for conformity in the laws and the applicable defenses, especially since the judge's ruling concedes that Simpson may have believed the property in question was his and he expressed the intention not to permanently deprive anyone of property that was not his.

[martin II]

People who have a trophy room tend to use that room to display their awards. The Heisman was surely an award yet it was ordered sold as part of the civil judgment. I'm not sure how a football that is awarded as acknowledgement of an athletic feat is any different than the Heisman.

I also thought there should have been some testimony about whether or not OJ forfeited ownership when he asked others to take his stuff so Goldman couldn''t get it. To me that mean he's either given his stuff away and forfeited ownership or he admits under oath he intentionally defied a previous court's turn over order.

Regardless of ownership, the way he went about gaining possession of the items was illegal, plus the also took items that were not his. I don't think ownership of the items will ultimately have any effect on the decision about bail pending the appeal - or the appeal itself for that matter.

i guess the civil judge was not aware that stuff on his list was in ojs house.
He seems to be in conflict with the CA judge judge current ruling.

[martin II]

People who have a trophy room tend to use that room to display their awards. The Heisman was surely an award yet it was ordered sold as part of the civil judgment. I'm not sure how a football that is awarded as acknowledgement of an athletic feat is any different than the Heisman.

I also thought there should have been some testimony about whether or not OJ forfeited ownership when he asked others to take his stuff so Goldman couldn''t get it. To me that mean he's either given his stuff away and forfeited ownership or he admits under oath he intentionally defied a previous court's turn over order.

Regardless of ownership, the way he went about gaining possession of the items was illegal, plus the also took items that were not his. I don't think ownership of the items will ultimately have any effect on the decision about bail pending the appeal - or the appeal itself for that matter.


You have two people saying ojs stuff was stolen from his house and one saying oj gave it to him. I am not sure there was proof that he gave the stuff to evade goldman.

[serpentsfall]

You have two people saying ojs stuff was stolen from his house and one saying oj gave it to him. I am not sure there was proof that he gave the stuff to evade goldman.

Did you not hear OJ talking about it on the tape? His version of a friends and family plan includes having a group of people remove items from your house to avoid a court order.

[martin II]

Did you not hear OJ talking about it on the tape? His version of a friends and family plan includes having a group of people remove items from your house to avoid a court order.

My point is the CA superior court judge saw the situation differently than whatever was reported on the tapes.He said he used CA law to come to his decision. If this is true i am trying to understand if/why it did not cover the trophy that you mentioned.can you help with that?

[William Anthony]

My point is the CA superior court judge saw the situation differently than whatever was reported on the tapes.He said he used CA law to come to his decision. If this is true i am trying to understand if/why it did not cover the trophy that you mentioned.can you help with that?

I will try to assist, as I believe it did. Under the law Simpson was allowed to exempt $6,075.00 of those aforementioned items. Therefore, according to my understanding, despite what was sold and for how much, as long as it qualified for the exemption, Simpson was supposed to receive said amount, which may have been previously overlooked. However, I may be wrong as there seems to be another qualifier, which is based on the definition of memorabilia.

[tv]

Did you not hear OJ talking about it on the tape? His version of a friends and family plan includes having a group of people remove items from your house to avoid a court order.

There was also a video clip aired on Gerald At Large last December in which OJ Simpson clearly says that the items were removed from his home at his request to keep them from Fred Goldman.

[William Anthony]

There was also a video clip aired on Gerald At Large last December in which OJ Simpson clearly says that the items were removed from his home at his request to keep them from Fred Goldman.

It would appear that Simpson was within his rights to the degree of $6,075.00 by the latest judicial ruling. :) On which channel can I find Gerald at large, smile?

[martin II]

I will try to assist, as I believe it did. Under the law Simpson was allowed to exempt $6,075.00 of those aforementioned items. Therefore, according to my understanding, despite what was sold and for how much, as long as it qualified for the exemption, Simpson was supposed to receive said amount, which may have been previously overlooked. However, I may be wrong as there seems to be another qualifier, which is based on the definition of memorabilia.

hhhmmm

We don't know what memorabilla is.Is there a differance in that and a award?
or did the civil judges list include any items that the CA Superior judge gave to oj????

[martin II]

There was also a video clip aired on Gerald At Large last December in which OJ Simpson clearly says that the items were removed from his home at his request to keep them from Fred Goldman.

If true it appears that the CA Superior judge did not use the tapes in making his decision.It may be that the law this judge used was stronger that any vegas trial info. Or he may have decided that the tapes were not authenticated as far as he was concerned but i think it was not a issue for him.

i am interested to know if his decision impacts on the trophy that was turned over and sold.

[martin II]

Is fred under order to sell his footballs and pay oj or does it remain in a stalemate? It seems that when fred accepts the footballs he ows oj money that fred cannot take.

[weezer]

There was also a video clip aired on Gerald At Large last December in which OJ Simpson clearly says that the items were removed from his home at his request to keep them from Fred Goldman.

I thought it was very telling when he was laughing and hoorahing before the armed robbery about how he had family and friends the night before the order was served, over at his house hauling stuff out in every vehicle and stashing it all over LA so that the Goldmans couldn't get it. And then, after the armed robbery to "get my sh*t", he tells his gang of thugs that he doesn't care what happens to the "sh*t" -- they can have it.

[William Anthony]

hhhmmm

We don't know what memorabilla is.Is there a differance in that and a award?
or did the civil judges list include any items that the CA Superior judge gave to oj????

Does memorabilia include an award? I don't think the items given to Simpson are included in the $6,075 exemption.

[William Anthony]

I thought it was very telling when he was laughing and hoorahing before the armed robbery about how he had family and friends the night before the order was served, over at his house hauling stuff out in every vehicle and stashing it all over LA so that the Goldmans couldn't get it. And then, after the armed robbery to "get my sh*t", he tells his gang of thugs that he doesn't care what happens to the "sh*t" -- they can have it.

The only thing is that Simpson was given some stuff and has a $6.075.00 interest in other stuff, which means he was in his right to protect his property until the court rightly decided which was his and which was a matter of exemption. Of course, an appeal can be taken from this judge's ruling.

[tv]

I thought it was very telling when he was laughing and hoorahing before the armed robbery about how he had family and friends the night before the order was served, over at his house hauling stuff out in every vehicle and stashing it all over LA so that the Goldmans couldn't get it. And then, after the armed robbery to "get my sh*t", he tells his gang of thugs that he doesn't care what happens to the "sh*t" -- they can have it.

IIRC, in the video he said something very similiar. Even with a video there are people that will deny his guilt. My feeling is that if he gave the stuff away and didn't care who had it he forfeited any claim to it.

[William Anthony]

IIRC, in the video he said something very similiar. Even with a video there are people that will deny his guilt. My feeling is that if he gave the stuff away and didn't care who had it he forfeited any claim to it.

That may be your feeling but it is the court's rulings that count, imho.

[martin II]

I thought it was very telling when he was laughing and hoorahing before the armed robbery about how he had family and friends the night before the order was served, over at his house hauling stuff out in every vehicle and stashing it all over LA so that the Goldmans couldn't get it. And then, after the armed robbery to "get my sh*t", he tells his gang of thugs that he doesn't care what happens to the "sh*t" -- they can have it.

It appears that the Superior judge did not see that tape as something that he
should consider. So what you thought was telling meant nothing to the judge. His order is what is telling and what counts.

[martin II]

There was also a video clip aired on Gerald At Large last December in which OJ Simpson clearly says that the items were removed from his home at his request to keep them from Fred Goldman.

Maby the superior court judge thought the tapes were not accurate and therefore he dismissed them.The law he used was superior to and tape.Obviously. This is the same judge that ruled against fred when he tried to snatch all the items right after the vegas arrest.

[weezer]

IIRC, in the video he said something very similiar. Even with a video there are people that will deny his guilt. My feeling is that if he gave the stuff away and didn't care who had it he forfeited any claim to it.

personally, I think he makes it pretty clear that because of the judgment, he didn't consider the stuff his.

[tv]

personally, I think he makes it pretty clear that because of the judgment, he didn't consider the stuff his.

Exactly, and in the video, he is laughing like it's a big joke. It was obvious to me that the only thing he cared about was keeping it out of Fred Goldman's hands.

[martin II]

IIRC, in the video he said something very similiar. Even with a video there are people that will deny his guilt. My feeling is that if he gave the stuff away and didn't care who had it he forfeited any claim to it.

The guy that claimed oj gave him the stuff was in court with his hand out also.The judge gave him nothing.So the judge didn't believe oj gave him anything and there was no forfeite to be considered.

[martin II]

Exactly, and in the video, he is laughing like it's a big joke. It was obvious to me that the only thing he cared about was keeping it out of Fred Goldman's hands.

The judge decided that everything but the footballs belonged to oj and that fred owed oj $6 grand for the footballs.So actually oj got everything.If fred does not sells the footballs he can mount them on his wall and send oj his $6 grand.But i think the judge will cause fred to give them for auction.

[martin II]

personally, I think he makes it pretty clear that because of the judgment, he didn't consider the stuff his.

He and everyone involved said they went to get ojs stuff.The judges ruling proves that that was in fact what he was doing.GETTING HIS STUFF.This proves that the crazy lady, Glass was wrong.

[martin II]

Exactly, and in the video, he is laughing like it's a big joke. It was obvious to me that the only thing he cared about was keeping it out of Fred Goldman's hands.

If the coppers had not arrested everyone all of that stuff would be in Florida now.

[William Anthony]

I think that I would take all necessary precautions to keep stuff that I considered mine out of the hands of those, who were out to take it. Because I hid the stuff, did not mean I did not consider it to be my stuff-just the opposite.

[tv]

personally, I think he makes it pretty clear that because of the judgment, he didn't consider the stuff his.

If he truly considered it his stuff he had the recourse of using legal means to keep it or get it back. He made a statement about the law 'not working' for him...is he kidding? He slaughtered two human beings and walked free. Now it looks like he may prevail in getting at least some of his stuff back. IMO, the legal system has bent over backwards to give him more than he deserves including hearing oral arguments in his bid to be on out bail.

[William Anthony]

I wonder what it is about Simpson that makes people think he is not entiltled to the protections the law affords others or should their post and this response be made on another thread.

[weezer]

If he truly considered it his stuff he had the recourse of using legal means to keep it or get it back. He made a statement about the law 'not working' for him...is he kidding? He slaughtered two human beings and walked free. Now it looks like he may prevail in getting at least some of his stuff back. IMO, the legal system has bent over backwards to give him more than he deserves including hearing oral arguments in his bid to be on out bail.

I think the Goldmans should challenge the judge's decision -- his ruling makes no sense.:confused:

[tv]

I think the Goldmans should challenge the judge's decision -- his ruling makes no sense.:confused:

It really doesn't. If anyone has a theory I'd like to hear it. :shrug:

[William Anthony]

Oh, we now recognize the value of the appellate system, although the judge's ruling makes sense to me.

[William Anthony]

I thought the ruling was quite clear. The only thing that was subject to seizure by Mr. Goldman were the nine footballs, of which a portion of those were exempt. The other stuff either belonged to Simpson or Mr. Beardsley or Fromong.

[weezer]

It really doesn't. If anyone has a theory I'd like to hear it. :shrug:

you know though, with the judge ruling that orenthal did take stuff that belonged to his victims, it sure supports the armed robbery. maybe this little foray into the courtroom doesn't bode so well for orenthal after all -- :eek:

[tv]

you know though, with the judge ruling that orenthal did take stuff that belonged to his victims, it sure supports the armed robbery. maybe this little foray into the courtroom doesn't bode so well for orenthal after all -- :eek:

For some reason, there are people that think it's okay to confront someone with weapons and forcibly remove 'stuff'. They don't get that it's not okay to go outside the law. Maybe he'll get his stuff back but what good will it do him in jail?

[William Anthony]

Well, again there is some value in having studied the law, as the claim of right defense is not contingent on whether or not the property actually belonged to the person reclaiming it but whether or not the person could have believed the property was his.

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Maybe he'll get his stuff back but what good will it do him in jail?

Maybe he'll bribe the inmate that's threatening to kill him in his sleep :)

[William Anthony]

I go back to the issue of a property owner's rights and revert to the ruling that a slave was personal property, which gave the property owner the right to use a gun to retrieve his property. Before anyone argues that slavery is abolished, it is the right of the property owner to retrieve his property and how he is allowed to so do, which is of significance.

[martin II]

I think the Goldmans should challenge the judge's decision -- his ruling makes no sense.:confused:

Freds lawyer obviously knew the judges decision was final otherwise he would not have begged oj to give it to fred.

[martin II]

For some reason, there are people that think it's okay to confront someone with weapons and forcibly remove 'stuff'. They don't get that it's not okay to go outside the law. Maybe he'll get his stuff back but what good will it do him in jail?

oj got his stuff back through the application of the law.Regardless of what you think.

[tv]

Maybe he'll bribe the inmate that's threatening to kill him in his sleep :)

LOL, you means there's actually someone that doesn't love the juice? :tongue:

[William Anthony]

oj got his stuff back through the application of the law.Regardless of what you think.

In a ironic manner, it was Simpson's actions that permitted the law to work.

[weezer]

For some reason, there are people that think it's okay to confront someone with weapons and forcibly remove 'stuff'. They don't get that it's not okay to go outside the law. Maybe he'll get his stuff back but what good will it do him in jail?

I don't know -- I guess those folks, like cockroach, live and defend the same lifestyle -- abuse, adultry, armed robbery. :shrug:

[martin II]

It really doesn't. If anyone has a theory I'd like to hear it. :shrug:

The ruling made sense according to the CA law.If the judge had given everything to fred you would be jumping for joy.Now you sat this CA Superior court judge dosen't know the law??Gees how did you come up with.

[William Anthony]

Remember the slave owner and his property rights.

[tv]

I don't know -- I guess those folks, like cockroach, live and defend the same lifestyle -- abuse, adultry, armed robbery. :shrug:

That's certainly the way it appears. :shrug:

[martin II]

In a ironic manner, it was Simpson's actions that permitted the law to work.

What is also ironic is that fred has to pay oj $6 grand.I wonder how he took that twist of events.

[martin II]

For some reason, there are people that think it's okay to confront someone with weapons and forcibly remove 'stuff'. They don't get that it's not okay to go outside the law. Maybe he'll get his stuff back but what good will it do him in jail?

Are you positive that he will remain in jail.

[weezer]

That's certainly the way it appears. :shrug:

I was reading the Times online and it didn't list his current wife -- but does list the former wife/daughters, mistress/son, and his dad.

[tv]

I was reading the Times online and it didn't list his current wife -- but does list the former wife/daughters, mistress/son, and his dad.

I read somewhere that his widow's name is Dale.

[William Anthony]

I don't know -- I guess those folks, like cockroach, live and defend the same lifestyle -- abuse, adultry, armed robbery. :shrug:

Sounds like some slave owners' lifestyles to me. I guess what's fair for some is immoral for others.

[William Anthony]

What is also ironic is that fred has to pay oj $6 grand.I wonder how he took that twist of events.

He should have looked before he took the leap. :)

[martin II]

I guess you and never understood how some not involved in the case could be so devistated by a verdict that it would cause them to see themselves as a moral authority of those involved in the defense side of the case and go on a digging expidition of the winning lawyerts personal life and then make public
moral evations of that man.I am wondering what the reward is for this kind of activity.What is the specific need they have for this activity. It is the worse form of gossip and character assination and has been identified by some authorities as a activity of those that don't have a life of their own.

J C REST IN PEACE.:rose::rose:

[William Anthony]

I guess you and never understood how some not involved in the case could be so devistated by a verdict that it would cause them to see themselves as a moral authority of those involved in the defense side of the case and go on a digging expidition of the winning lawyerts personal life and then make public
moral evations of that man.I am wondering what the reward is for this kind of activity.What is the specific need they have for this activity. It is the worse form of gossip and character assination and has been identified by some authorities as a activity of those that don't have a life of their own.

J C REST IN PEACE.:rose::rose:

I find it strange that some can distinguish between JFK's performance as President and his personal life but are not able to do the same for others.

[martin II]

I find it strange that some can distinguish between JFK's performance as President and his personal life but are not able to do the same for others.

There is a reason why but some may be too shy to say.

The thread has become so mean and nasty that i am leaving now and will return later.

[William Anthony]

There is a reason why but some may be too shy to say.

The thread has become so mean and nasty that i am leaving now and will return later.

I agree and don't blame you a bit.

[weezer]

Former O.J. Simpson co-defendant completes drug treatment, back on probation
By Associated Press

August 26, 2009 | 2:12 p.m.
E-mail Print Share Text size

LAS VEGAS (AP) — A former O.J. Simpson co-defendant says he's completed the inpatient drug treatment a judge sent him to instead of prison for a probation violation.

Charles Cashmore said Wednesday he's looking for work after a nearly six-month Salvation Army treatment program in Las Vegas. He'll be on probation until December 2011.

The 42-year-old Cashmore had been arrested after testing positive for methamphetamine.

Cashmore took a plea deal and testified against the former football star at his trial last year.

Simpson was convicted of kidnapping and robbing two sports memorabilia dealers in September 2007 at a Las Vegas casino-hotel. He's serving nine to 33 years in prison.

Convicted co-defendant Clarence "C.J." Stewart is serving 7 1/2 to 27 years.

[weezer]

Did O.J. Simpson do it? Here's what Dominick Dunne had to say
posted by halboedeker on Aug 26, 2009 5:47:25 PM

When I heard that Dominick Dunne had died, I first thought of O.J. Simpson.

Dunne gave the most scintillating commentary on Simpson's murder trial and everything that came after it. Dunne wrote for Vanity Fair and had a truTV series, "Dominick Dunne's Power, Privilege and Justice," in which he explored famous crimes.

Dunne died today at age 83. His anguish over his own daughter's murder propelled him into examining crimes among the powerful and privileged. His book "Justice: Crimes, Trials and Punishments" gathered his reporting on Simpson, Claus von Bulow and the Menendez brothers. He also wrote popular fiction, such as "The Two Mrs. Grenvilles," later an entertaining miniseries with Ann-Margret and Claudette Colbert.

In a 2001 interview with former Orlando Sentinel book critic Nancy Pate, Dunne made some memorable comments about Simpson.

Pate wrote: "His voice is filled with polite disdain that curdles into disgust as the conversation turns to O.J. Simpson, the subject of a story in the current issue of The New Yorker.


"O.J.'s name is splashed all over the papers here because of this interview with The New Yorker,'' Dunne told Pate. "His sense of reality is pathetic. It is utterly pathetic. He is so out of it. Imagine calling up Robert Blake after his wife was murdered and offering advice: `Don't take a lie detector test. Don't say anything bad about your wife.' It's just pathetic.''

Pate added: "He can hardly believe people still ask him, Did O.J. do it? 'YES!' he says. That's in capital letters with an exclamation point. Yes, he did it.' ''

That passion enlivened his reportage and made him worth watching on television.

Pate recalls that Dunne came to Orlando and Winter Park several times for speaking engagements. One time he wanted to ride around town and see where the rich people lived. Pate played his chauffeur, and he loved to gossip.

"He was great fun," Pate says. "He was wonderful. I just adored him. He was such a nice man. He always kissed me goodbye. He remembered who you were. "

[socaldiva]

I remember Dominick Dunne being horrified that Simpson was found not guilty in the crimminal trial. IIRC he attended court every day. He knew what it was like to have a loved one murdered :(

[weezer]

I remember Dominick Dunne being horrified that Simpson was found not guilty in the crimminal trial. IIRC he attended court every day. He knew what it was like to have a loved one murdered :(

I really liked him --

[fgump2]

I guess you and never understood how some not involved in the case could be so devistated by a verdict that it would cause them to see themselves as a moral authority of those involved in the defense side of the case and go on a digging expidition of the winning lawyerts personal life and then make public
moral evations of that man.I am wondering what the reward is for this kind of activity.What is the specific need they have for this activity. It is the worse form of gossip and character assination and has been identified by some authorities as a activity of those that don't have a life of their own.

J C REST IN PEACE.:rose::rose:

I disagree with you, but there is a small amount of truth to that. People who still get emotional about the Simpson trial of 95 are probably over reacting, including me. But what about yourself? You have posted a lot of rude remarks.

Johnnie Cochran is a hero to many, so his faults are fair game. Who a country's heros are is imortant.

[William Anthony]

I disagree with you, but there is a small amount of truth to that. People who still get emotional about the Simpson trial of 95 are probably over reacting, including me. But what about yourself? You have posted a lot of rude remarks.

Johnnie Cochran is a hero to many, so his faults are fair game. Who a country's heros are is imortant.

The magnificent one is admired and praised for his performance in the courtroom, not for in his home or bedroom.

[William Anthony]

As we see the death of Dominick Dunne caused the 1995 Simpson trial to be mentioned as it was on Fox this morning in their brief tribute to Mr. Dunne.

[martin II]

I disagree with you, but there is a small amount of truth to that. People who still get emotional about the Simpson trial of 95 are probably over reacting, including me. But what about yourself? You have posted a lot of rude remarks.

Johnnie Cochran is a hero to many, so his faults are fair game. Who a country's heros are is imortant.

I think you would agree that Cochrans personal life has nothing to do with the trial especially what has been said about what may have been on his sons birth certificate. I think these type post are made out of anger and to get aruguments from those that oppose these type personal comments against Cochran. i don't think we are making the countrys heros on this thread. Right?

[martin II]

I do not engage in victim or victim family bashing but there are some on this board, who engage in bashing Simpson's dead father, the magnificent one, who is also dead and make nasty comments about Simpson's all Black daughter and the predominately Black jury but protest that the victims and their families should be off limits.

Agreed.

[tv]

I remember Dominick Dunne being horrified that Simpson was found not guilty in the crimminal trial. IIRC he attended court every day. He knew what it was like to have a loved one murdered :(

I really enjoyed Dominick Dunne. He wrote a book ANOTHER CITY, NOT MY OWN that was based on the Simpson case that was very good. Ryan O'Neal said that the only tv show that Farrah watched near the end was Dominick Dunne's. I'll miss him. :rose:

[William Anthony]

Dominick Dunne will be missed and I found some of his programs on courttv to be very interesting.

[William Anthony]

Anyone know if Gilbert has been torn away from and turned over the suit, he claimed to have?

[weezer]

". . .Football legend and actor O.J. Simpson was a truly beloved American icon. The quintessential American success story, he projected an amicable, wholesome, larger-than-life figure. His triumphs were even more noteworthy because he was a black man who had risen to fame and fortune during the Civil Rights Movement era.

In 1995, Simpson was put on trial for the murders of Nicole Brown (his second ex-wife) and a male friend. As a result, authorities and the press were able to delve into his affairs as no one had previously done. Only then did Americans learn that he was a beast and a brute, an obsessively controlling, chronic wife beater, emotional abuser and philanderer. In short, he was a pathological narcissist for whom whimsy, pleasure and image were paramount. Worse, his behavior had been validated and reinforced by the fact that he had been catered to by those around him, personally and professionally, for decades. After beating the murder rap, Simpson continued to manipulate and bully those around him. Twelve years later, his capricious conduct earned him a lengthy prison sentence for numerous firearms charges, robbery, burglary, assault and kidnapping. . ."

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909030039

[tv]

weezer, this description of OJ Simpson is dead on...:beer:

[socaldiva]

weezer, this description of OJ Simpson is dead on...:beer:

I agree. Especially this part:

"he was a beast and a brute, an obsessively controlling, chronic wife beater, emotional abuser and philanderer. In short, he was a pathological narcissist for whom whimsy, pleasure and image were paramount"

[chalkoutline]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,546801,00.html?test=latestnews

[tv]

Thank you, chalkoutline. :)

[martin II]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,546801,00.html?test=latestnews

Most never expected that he would get bail.

[weezer]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,546801,00.html?test=latestnews

excellent news! :beer::beer:

[socaldiva]

excellent news! :beer::beer:

Most excellent news indeed :biggrin:

[William Anthony]

To each his own.

[socaldiva]

I was just watching ABC & they said that OJ Simpson's ex girlfriend is going to be on Good Morning America next week & she's going to tell what Orenthal said about the murders & more. Should be interesting. I just checked the listing, it's on Wed.

[tv]

I was just watching ABC & they said that OJ Simpson's ex girlfriend is going to be on Good Morning America next week & she's going to tell what Orenthal said about the murders & more. Should be interesting. I just checked the listing, it's on Wed.

Yes, it should be interesting. I notice she waited to come forward after she knew he wasn't getting out on appeal. Very telling. ;)

[William Anthony]

Yes, it should be interesting. I notice she waited to come forward after she knew he wasn't getting out on appeal. Very telling. ;)

Interesting even if not true. The name Mike Gilbert comes to mind.

[weezer]

Yes, it should be interesting. I notice she waited to come forward after she knew he wasn't getting out on appeal. Very telling. ;)

wonder if she'll talk about her 'fall' at the gas station and the 'flat tires' on the freeway. . . ;) heck, we might even get to hear about orenthal's smack down by his co-conspirator. . .:tongue:

[William Anthony]

wonder if she'll talk about her 'fall' at the gas station and the 'flat tires' on the freeway. . . ;) heck, we might even get to hear about orenthal's smack down by his co-conspirator. . .:tongue:


I don't think she will be forth coming in her recitals of her drunken episodes but I might be wrong and I now respectfully request proof that Simpson had a co-conspirator, since the rule say, "NEW GUIDELINE: STATEMENTS OF FACTS WITH WHICH POSTERS ARE UNFAMILIAR SHOULD BE QUALIFIED WITH A LINK, QUOTE, OR DETAILED REFERENCE."

[tv]

wonder if she'll talk about her 'fall' at the gas station and the 'flat tires' on the freeway. . . ;) heck, we might even get to hear about orenthal's smack down by his co-conspirator. . .:tongue:

The possiblities are endless...didn't she give a story a long time ago to the Enquirer or some magazine about Simpson telling her he killed Ron and Nicole? Maybe she's going to expand on that...hope so. :)

[William Anthony]

It seems that it is easy to believe that someone has some information, if one is so inclined, no matter how preposterous the claim is. I am reminded of Mike Gilbert who also gained publicity.:)

[weezer]

OJ still hopeful about appeal despite bail setback
By KEN RITTER (AP) – 9 hours ago

LAS VEGAS — O.J. Simpson's hopes of being let out of prison while the Nevada Supreme Court considers his appeal have been dashed.

His lawyer say there's not much to be made of the decision that followed a rare hearing before the state high court, and the former football star remains optimistic about getting his conviction in a gunpoint hotel room heist overturned.

Other veteran defense lawyers not connected to the case said the court did not tip its hand on how it might rule on the appeal but predicted the justices would continue to give the case special treatment because of Simpson's celebrity.

"The shocking thing is that they gave a hearing on bail at all," said Howard Brooks, the Clark County public defender who handles appeals for the busiest court in the state. It was more than eight years since the Nevada Supreme Court heard such an argument.

"This is never going to be a normal case, because it's O.J. Simpson," Brooks said.

Lawyers for Simpson and convicted co-defendant Clarence "C.J." Stewart's lawyer had hoped being granted the bail hearing last month signaled that the state's only appellate court might see faults in their clients' convictions and be ready to rule they didn't receive a fair trial.

Afterward?

"I can't read anything from it," Simpson's attorney Yale Galanter said. "I'm not sure why they granted these hearings to begin with."

Despite Galanter's argument that Simpson is one of the most recognizable people on the planet and couldn't possibly run and hide, justices Michael Cherry, Nancy Saitta and Mark Gibbons ruled Sept. 4 that it would be too tempting for Simpson and Stewart to flee to avoid going back to prison if they lose their appeals.

Robert Langford, a Las Vegas defense lawyer who has argued cases before state and federal appeals courts, said he didn't read anything into the terse unanimous ruling by the three-judge panel "other than that they didn't believe bond is appropriate pending appeal."

"I don't think it says much about what might happen on the merits of the appeal," Langford said.

Galanter said Simpson believes the appellate process will ultimately vindicate him. Meanwhile his famous client will remain in state prison while the Supreme Court decides whether to uphold his conviction or order a new trial on kidnapping, armed robbery and other charges. That could take a year or more.

If his appeal is denied, the 62-year-old NFL Hall of Famer who had been acquitted in the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in Los Angeles will serve nine to 33 years in Nevada for an armed escapade with golfing buddies to retrieve items that he claimed were stolen from him. Simpson is being held at Lovelock Correctional Center, 90 miles northeast of Reno. Stewart, 55, is serving 7 1/2 to 27 years at Northern Nevada Correctional Center in Carson City.

Galanter and Stewart's lawyer, Brent Bryson, said they would not challenge the bail decision but instead focus on their respective appeals, filed last May.

"I think once they do an in-depth analysis of the appellate issues, that we have a strong chance of getting another trial for Mr. Stewart," he said.

Bryson said Stewart remains upbeat and optimistic. Meanwhile Bryson said he has asked for the chance to argue his appeal before the justices.

Brooks predicted the court would agree to hear oral arguments.

"I guarantee that if it wasn't O.J. Simpson, this type of case wouldn't get oral arguments," he said.

Holding oral arguments on their appeals would not be as uncommon as their bond hearing. However, court spokesman Bill Gang said that of about 1,850 criminal and civil appeals filed annually, the state Supreme Court hears fewer than 100 oral arguments.

Such arguments wouldn't be scheduled for at least another month, Gang said, after written briefs are submitted.

Clark County District Attorney David Roger, who declined comment about the bail decision, had opposed the rare bond hearing as "preferential treatment," and has said he has no doubt the Simpson and Stewart convictions will be upheld.

The men were tried together and found guilty last October of all 12 charges stemming from a confrontation with sports memorabilia dealers in a Las Vegas casino hotel room in September 2007. Four other men who were with them took plea deals and received probation after testifying for the prosecution.

Simpson's lawyers maintained he was trying to retrieve personal items that had been stolen from him and didn't know guns were involved.

Stewart's lawyers said he went with Simpson to the Palace Station hotel-casino to help retrieve belongings and had no knowledge a crime would be committed.

Galanter challenged Simpson's conviction on grounds including judicial misconduct, insufficient evidence, a lack of racial diversity on the jury and errors in sentencing and jury instructions. Simpson's appeal accused Glass of preventing him from getting a fair trial, and accused prosecutors of improperly asking questions about allegations of witness intimidation in front of the jury.

Bryson said Stewart suffered "spillover prejudice" from being tried with Simpson, that crucial audio recordings were improperly admitted as evidence and that the jury foreman committed misconduct by withholding his bias toward Simpson until after the pair were convicted and sentenced.

"The severance issue is paramount," Bryson said this week. "Everything else just kind of flows form the fact that Mr. Stewart should have never been tried with Mr. Simpson."

[weezer]

DA responds to OJ's appeal to state Supreme Court
By OSKAR GARCIA (AP) – 1 day ago

LAS VEGAS — A Las Vegas prosecutor said Friday that O.J. Simpson was fairly convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping, responding to the football legend's appeal in a sports memorabilia case.

Clark County District Attorney David Roger filed a brief with the state's high court challenging Simpson's appeal of his conviction on 12 charges related to a confrontation with dealers of sport mementos in a Las Vegas casino hotel room.

Simpson was convicted in October and sentenced in December to nine to 33 years in state prison. He is housed at a medium-security prison in Lovelock, about 90 miles east of Reno.

The NFL Hall of Famer who had been acquitted in the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in Los Angeles, has maintained he was trying to retrieve personal items that had been stolen from him and didn't know guns were involved when led the armed escapade with golfing buddies.

The 62-year-old's lawyers want him exonerated of all charges and have cited judicial misconduct, insufficient evidence, a lack of racial diversity on the jury and errors in sentencing and jury instructions in arguing that he should be set free.

Roger outlined eight reasons to uphold the conviction in a 46-page brief, arguing among other things that the court didn't remove two black women from the jury pool because of their race. The jury didn't include any black members.

Neither Roger nor Simpson attorney Yale Galanter immediately responded to messages seeking comment from The Associated Press late Friday.

In the document, Roger said the women were removed, in part, because prosecutors believed they wouldn't convict Simpson despite the state's evidence because of their religious convictions.

One of the women was a pastor in her church, and prosecutors worried that she might be forgiving by nature and able to influence other jurors.

"Prosecutors feared that a minister, whom many believe possesses a higher moral authority, could influence and sway jurors who might otherwise be inclined to convict and punish," the brief said. "Indeed, the state's apprehension ... had nothing to do with her racial background and everything to do with her ministerial position."

Another woman was removed from the jury pool because she made several Biblical references while being questioned by prosecutors and said her beliefs would make it hard to judge someone else's conduct. She said she would not send anybody to jail, Roger said in the brief.

In the brief, Roger also argues that Simpson's belief that he was retrieving his own property is not a defense against robbery and the court was not obligated to give instructions that would have misstated the law.

He also said Judge Jackie Glass properly stopped Simpson's lawyers from cross-examining a witness about things that didn't relate to the charges Simpson faced.

Roger also said in his filing that his attempt to show memorabilia dealer Alfred Beardsley's bias toward Simpson did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct. Beardsley was one of the peddlers whom Simpson confronted on Sept. 13, 2007, for selling mementoes of his career.

The district attorney's brief did not respond to the appeal of Clarence "C.J." Stewart, a 55-year-old friend of Simpson's who was convicted with him and is serving a 7 1/2- to 27-year sentence. Stewart's lawyers have argued that he should have been tried separately from Simpson.

Simpson and Stewart were tried together. Four other men who were with them took plea deals and received probation after testifying for the prosecution.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[tv]

DA responds to OJ's appeal to state Supreme Court
By OSKAR GARCIA (AP) – 1 day ago

LAS VEGAS — A Las Vegas prosecutor said Friday that O.J. Simpson was fairly convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping, responding to the football legend's appeal in a sports memorabilia case.

Clark County District Attorney David Roger filed a brief with the state's high court challenging Simpson's appeal of his conviction on 12 charges related to a confrontation with dealers of sport mementos in a Las Vegas casino hotel room.

Simpson was convicted in October and sentenced in December to nine to 33 years in state prison. He is housed at a medium-security prison in Lovelock, about 90 miles east of Reno.

The NFL Hall of Famer who had been acquitted in the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in Los Angeles, has maintained he was trying to retrieve personal items that had been stolen from him and didn't know guns were involved when led the armed escapade with golfing buddies.

The 62-year-old's lawyers want him exonerated of all charges and have cited judicial misconduct, insufficient evidence, a lack of racial diversity on the jury and errors in sentencing and jury instructions in arguing that he should be set free.

Roger outlined eight reasons to uphold the conviction in a 46-page brief, arguing among other things that the court didn't remove two black women from the jury pool because of their race. The jury didn't include any black members.

Neither Roger nor Simpson attorney Yale Galanter immediately responded to messages seeking comment from The Associated Press late Friday.

In the document, Roger said the women were removed, in part, because prosecutors believed they wouldn't convict Simpson despite the state's evidence because of their religious convictions.

One of the women was a pastor in her church, and prosecutors worried that she might be forgiving by nature and able to influence other jurors.

"Prosecutors feared that a minister, whom many believe possesses a higher moral authority, could influence and sway jurors who might otherwise be inclined to convict and punish," the brief said. "Indeed, the state's apprehension ... had nothing to do with her racial background and everything to do with her ministerial position."

Another woman was removed from the jury pool because she made several Biblical references while being questioned by prosecutors and said her beliefs would make it hard to judge someone else's conduct. She said she would not send anybody to jail, Roger said in the brief.

In the brief, Roger also argues that Simpson's belief that he was retrieving his own property is not a defense against robbery and the court was not obligated to give instructions that would have misstated the law.

He also said Judge Jackie Glass properly stopped Simpson's lawyers from cross-examining a witness about things that didn't relate to the charges Simpson faced.

Roger also said in his filing that his attempt to show memorabilia dealer Alfred Beardsley's bias toward Simpson did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct. Beardsley was one of the peddlers whom Simpson confronted on Sept. 13, 2007, for selling mementoes of his career.

The district attorney's brief did not respond to the appeal of Clarence "C.J." Stewart, a 55-year-old friend of Simpson's who was convicted with him and is serving a 7 1/2- to 27-year sentence. Stewart's lawyers have argued that he should have been tried separately from Simpson.

Simpson and Stewart were tried together. Four other men who were with them took plea deals and received probation after testifying for the prosecution.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Insufficient evidence? A tape of the robbery in progress and Simpson talking about the gun wasn't sufficient? Too funny. :D

[weezer]

Insufficient evidence? A tape of the robbery in progress and Simpson talking about the gun wasn't sufficient? Too funny. :D

sad isn't it? :eek::tongue:

[tv]

sad isn't it? :eek::tongue:

Very sad but I suppose his attorneys have to work with what they've got. :tongue:

[weezer]

Very sad but I suppose his attorneys have to work with what they've got. :tongue:

so if orenthal doesn't have any money (Galanter says) -- how are these attorneys getting paid? I think Galanter would do it for his one claim to fame but what about the other guy? and I wonder if the vegas trial lawyer got paid -- we do know how orenthal hates to pay what he owes.

[tv]

so if orenthal doesn't have any money (Galanter says) -- how are these attorneys getting paid? I think Galanter would do it for his one claim to fame but what about the other guy? and I wonder if the vegas trial lawyer got paid -- we do know how orenthal hates to pay what he owes.

Simpson has always said he has no money but there has been some talk among people close to him that he has money in off-shore accounts. I guess it could be they're doing it for the exposure but that's a lot of billable hours down the drain if that's so.

[weezer]

Simpson has always said he has no money but there has been some talk among people close to him that he has money in off-shore accounts. I guess it could be they're doing it for the exposure but that's a lot of billable hours down the drain if that's so.

hmmmm -- maybe fromong and gilbert spouting off about those accounts might have some merit.

[William Anthony]

OJ still hopeful about appeal despite bail setback
By KEN RITTER (AP) – 9 hours ago

LAS VEGAS — O.J. Simpson's hopes of being let out of prison while the Nevada Supreme Court considers his appeal have been dashed.

His lawyer say there's not much to be made of the decision that followed a rare hearing before the state high court, and the former football star remains optimistic about getting his conviction in a gunpoint hotel room heist overturned.

Other veteran defense lawyers not connected to the case said the court did not tip its hand on how it might rule on the appeal but predicted the justices would continue to give the case special treatment because of Simpson's celebrity.

"The shocking thing is that they gave a hearing on bail at all," said Howard Brooks, the Clark County public defender who handles appeals for the busiest court in the state. It was more than eight years since the Nevada Supreme Court heard such an argument.

"This is never going to be a normal case, because it's O.J. Simpson," Brooks said.

Lawyers for Simpson and convicted co-defendant Clarence "C.J." Stewart's lawyer had hoped being granted the bail hearing last month signaled that the state's only appellate court might see faults in their clients' convictions and be ready to rule they didn't receive a fair trial.

Afterward?

"I can't read anything from it," Simpson's attorney Yale Galanter said. "I'm not sure why they granted these hearings to begin with."

Despite Galanter's argument that Simpson is one of the most recognizable people on the planet and couldn't possibly run and hide, justices Michael Cherry, Nancy Saitta and Mark Gibbons ruled Sept. 4 that it would be too tempting for Simpson and Stewart to flee to avoid going back to prison if they lose their appeals.

Robert Langford, a Las Vegas defense lawyer who has argued cases before state and federal appeals courts, said he didn't read anything into the terse unanimous ruling by the three-judge panel "other than that they didn't believe bond is appropriate pending appeal."

"I don't think it says much about what might happen on the merits of the appeal," Langford said.

Galanter said Simpson believes the appellate process will ultimately vindicate him. Meanwhile his famous client will remain in state prison while the Supreme Court decides whether to uphold his conviction or order a new trial on kidnapping, armed robbery and other charges. That could take a year or more.

If his appeal is denied, the 62-year-old NFL Hall of Famer who had been acquitted in the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in Los Angeles will serve nine to 33 years in Nevada for an armed escapade with golfing buddies to retrieve items that he claimed were stolen from him. Simpson is being held at Lovelock Correctional Center, 90 miles northeast of Reno. Stewart, 55, is serving 7 1/2 to 27 years at Northern Nevada Correctional Center in Carson City.

Galanter and Stewart's lawyer, Brent Bryson, said they would not challenge the bail decision but instead focus on their respective appeals, filed last May.

"I think once they do an in-depth analysis of the appellate issues, that we have a strong chance of getting another trial for Mr. Stewart," he said.

Bryson said Stewart remains upbeat and optimistic. Meanwhile Bryson said he has asked for the chance to argue his appeal before the justices.

Brooks predicted the court would agree to hear oral arguments.

"I guarantee that if it wasn't O.J. Simpson, this type of case wouldn't get oral arguments," he said.

Holding oral arguments on their appeals would not be as uncommon as their bond hearing. However, court spokesman Bill Gang said that of about 1,850 criminal and civil appeals filed annually, the state Supreme Court hears fewer than 100 oral arguments.

Such arguments wouldn't be scheduled for at least another month, Gang said, after written briefs are submitted.

Clark County District Attorney David Roger, who declined comment about the bail decision, had opposed the rare bond hearing as "preferential treatment," and has said he has no doubt the Simpson and Stewart convictions will be upheld.

The men were tried together and found guilty last October of all 12 charges stemming from a confrontation with sports memorabilia dealers in a Las Vegas casino hotel room in September 2007. Four other men who were with them took plea deals and received probation after testifying for the prosecution.

Simpson's lawyers maintained he was trying to retrieve personal items that had been stolen from him and didn't know guns were involved.

Stewart's lawyers said he went with Simpson to the Palace Station hotel-casino to help retrieve belongings and had no knowledge a crime would be committed.

Galanter challenged Simpson's conviction on grounds including judicial misconduct, insufficient evidence, a lack of racial diversity on the jury and errors in sentencing and jury instructions. Simpson's appeal accused Glass of preventing him from getting a fair trial, and accused prosecutors of improperly asking questions about allegations of witness intimidation in front of the jury.

Bryson said Stewart suffered "spillover prejudice" from being tried with Simpson, that crucial audio recordings were improperly admitted as evidence and that the jury foreman committed misconduct by withholding his bias toward Simpson until after the pair were convicted and sentenced.

"The severance issue is paramount," Bryson said this week. "Everything else just kind of flows form the fact that Mr. Stewart should have never been tried with Mr. Simpson."

"I don't think it says much about what might happen on the merits of the appeal," Langford said.

Galanter said Simpson believes the appellate process will ultimately vindicate him."

[William Anthony]

DA responds to OJ's appeal to state Supreme Court
By OSKAR GARCIA (AP) – 1 day ago

LAS VEGAS — A Las Vegas prosecutor said Friday that O.J. Simpson was fairly convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping, responding to the football legend's appeal in a sports memorabilia case.

Clark County District Attorney David Roger filed a brief with the state's high court challenging Simpson's appeal of his conviction on 12 charges related to a confrontation with dealers of sport mementos in a Las Vegas casino hotel room.

Simpson was convicted in October and sentenced in December to nine to 33 years in state prison. He is housed at a medium-security prison in Lovelock, about 90 miles east of Reno.

The NFL Hall of Famer who had been acquitted in the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in Los Angeles, has maintained he was trying to retrieve personal items that had been stolen from him and didn't know guns were involved when led the armed escapade with golfing buddies.

The 62-year-old's lawyers want him exonerated of all charges and have cited judicial misconduct, insufficient evidence, a lack of racial diversity on the jury and errors in sentencing and jury instructions in arguing that he should be set free.

Roger outlined eight reasons to uphold the conviction in a 46-page brief, arguing among other things that the court didn't remove two black women from the jury pool because of their race. The jury didn't include any black members.

Neither Roger nor Simpson attorney Yale Galanter immediately responded to messages seeking comment from The Associated Press late Friday.

In the document, Roger said the women were removed, in part, because prosecutors believed they wouldn't convict Simpson despite the state's evidence because of their religious convictions.

One of the women was a pastor in her church, and prosecutors worried that she might be forgiving by nature and able to influence other jurors.

"Prosecutors feared that a minister, whom many believe possesses a higher moral authority, could influence and sway jurors who might otherwise be inclined to convict and punish," the brief said. "Indeed, the state's apprehension ... had nothing to do with her racial background and everything to do with her ministerial position."

Another woman was removed from the jury pool because she made several Biblical references while being questioned by prosecutors and said her beliefs would make it hard to judge someone else's conduct. She said she would not send anybody to jail, Roger said in the brief.

In the brief, Roger also argues that Simpson's belief that he was retrieving his own property is not a defense against robbery and the court was not obligated to give instructions that would have misstated the law.

He also said Judge Jackie Glass properly stopped Simpson's lawyers from cross-examining a witness about things that didn't relate to the charges Simpson faced.

Roger also said in his filing that his attempt to show memorabilia dealer Alfred Beardsley's bias toward Simpson did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct. Beardsley was one of the peddlers whom Simpson confronted on Sept. 13, 2007, for selling mementoes of his career.

The district attorney's brief did not respond to the appeal of Clarence "C.J." Stewart, a 55-year-old friend of Simpson's who was convicted with him and is serving a 7 1/2- to 27-year sentence. Stewart's lawyers have argued that he should have been tried separately from Simpson.

Simpson and Stewart were tried together. Four other men who were with them took plea deals and received probation after testifying for the prosecution.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Does the DA not know that the Batson challenge has been interpreted to include the exclusion of jurors based on religion?

[William Anthony]

Insufficient evidence? A tape of the robbery in progress and Simpson talking about the gun wasn't sufficient? Too funny. :D

Insufficient because it lacked proper authentication. :);):cool:

[William Anthony]

hmmmm -- maybe fromong and gilbert spouting off about those accounts might have some merit.

More lies for money, IMHO.

[tv]

hmmmm -- maybe fromong and gilbert spouting off about those accounts might have some merit.

I first heard about his off-shore accounts from one of his most ardent supporters on this board -- he has stated several times that Simpson has hidden money in these accounts. How he knows this I'm not sure except it does fit into the character of OJ Simpson. It makes sense to me because Simpson would go to any means to withhold money from Mr. Goldman. Has anyone else ever noticed that his anger at Mr. Goldman seems to be because he wants the judgement satisfied but doesn't seem to be mad at him because he thinks he killed his son? That's an odd reaction for an innocent man to take, imo.

[William Anthony]

I first heard about his off-shore accounts from one of his most ardent supporters on this board -- he has stated several times that Simpson has hidden money in these accounts. How he knows this I'm not sure except it does fit into the character of OJ Simpson. It makes sense to me because Simpson would go to any means to withhold money from Mr. Goldman. Has anyone else ever noticed that his anger at Mr. Goldman seems to be because he wants the judgement satisfied but doesn't seem to be mad at him because he thinks he killed his son? That's an odd reaction for an innocent man to take, imo.

I don't think anyone would have noticed this, as I don't think anyone else, save maybe a couple, would divorce the unwillingness to pay the judgment from the fact that he did not feel liable for causing Mr. RG's death. However, I do think there is a tendency to over analyze a thing to make it fit our predisposed conclusions.

[weezer]

I first heard about his off-shore accounts from one of his most ardent supporters on this board -- he has stated several times that Simpson has hidden money in these accounts. How he knows this I'm not sure except it does fit into the character of OJ Simpson. It makes sense to me because Simpson would go to any means to withhold money from Mr. Goldman. Has anyone else ever noticed that his anger at Mr. Goldman seems to be because he wants the judgement satisfied but doesn't seem to be mad at him because he thinks he killed his son? That's an odd reaction for an innocent man to take, imo.

I hadn't thought about it that way but now that you say it, it is an odd reaction to being filed liable for the death of one person and the battering of another (also dead) to be about not paying money. In fact, I don't think I've ever read/heard/seen orenthal ever say a kind thing about Ron and/or the Goldman's loss. Have you ever even heard him mention Ron?

[weezer]

I first heard about his off-shore accounts from one of his most ardent supporters on this board -- he has stated several times that Simpson has hidden money in these accounts. How he knows this I'm not sure except it does fit into the character of OJ Simpson. It makes sense to me because Simpson would go to any means to withhold money from Mr. Goldman. Has anyone else ever noticed that his anger at Mr. Goldman seems to be because he wants the judgement satisfied but doesn't seem to be mad at him because he thinks he killed his son? That's an odd reaction for an innocent man to take, imo.

I'd forgotten about the boasting that the poster did about those accounts and how it was going to keep the families from getting what they were awarded when orenthal was found liable for Ron's death and the battering (also dead) of Nicole but orenthal would be able to continue living the good life just like he'd always done. Funny how things like that seem to work themselves out, isn't it?

[tv]

I hadn't thought about it that way but now that you say it, it is an odd reaction to being filed liable for the death of one person and the battering of another (also dead) to be about not paying money. In fact, I don't think I've ever read/heard/seen orenthal ever say a kind thing about Ron and/or the Goldman's loss. Have you ever even heard him mention Ron?

The only time I've really heard him mention Ron is to ridicule him.

[William Anthony]

I hadn't thought about it that way but now that you say it, it is an odd reaction to being filed liable for the death of one person and the battering of another (also dead) to be about not paying money. In fact, I don't think I've ever read/heard/seen orenthal ever say a kind thing about Ron and/or the Goldman's loss. Have you ever even heard him mention Ron?

I don't see anything odd about it. If someone feels they are not liable and takes all legal steps to avoid paying the judgment, that is what our system allows. Why would he mention Ron?

[William Anthony]

The only time I've really heard him mention Ron is to ridicule him.

I don't remember him ridiculing Ron but I have heard him say that Mr. Fred Goldman should get a job.

[weezer]

I've been trying to find info on Christie's tv appearance. anyone have a link to anything about it?

[weezer]

Christine Prody To Write Tell-All Book About Ex OJ Simpson
Share: by Jon Azpiri | June 21, 2009 at 09:47 am

Christine Prody, the longtime girlfriend of O.J. Simpson, plans to write a tell-all book about her relationship with the ex-football star.

The book entitled Spellbound: My Life With O.J. Simpson, talks about Prody's time with Simpson and--surprise, surprise--it turns out that O.J. isn't a very nice guy. In the book, she talks about his cocaine use, jealousy, possessiveness, and anger. . .

[weezer]

O.J.'s Ex Hurls Serious Accusations in New Tell-All
June 19, 2009

And the hits just keep on coming for O.J. Simpson.
While the ex-footballer is locked away in prison — doing nine to 33 years for armed robbery — his ex-girlfriend plans to tell all about their life together in a proposed memoir. The New York Post reports that Christine Prody — who met O.J. as a 20-year-old tourist from Minnesota when she stopped to gawk at his infamous Brentwood, Calif. mansion — has a book in the works — to be called Spellbound: My Life With O.J. Simpson — about her turbulent relationship with the acquitted murderer, including 13 years of cocaine, pregnancy, abuse, jealousy, possessiveness, manipulation and rage.

"She says after he wore her down and made her have an abortion, he 'refused' to accompany her to the hospital," reports the NY Post. "He abandoned her, left her at the curb, made her go alone and then left for a game of golf, and she had to get one of his associates to fetch her. Page 9 of her book proposal refers to that as one of two abortions O.J. made her have."

Prody — a former waitress who moved with O.J. to Miami and helped care for his children Sydney and Justin — says her famous ex-boyfriend often spoke about Nicole Brown Simpson, his ex-wife whom he was acquitted of murdering — along with her friend Ron Goldman — in 1995.

"He'd continually refer to Nicole," reports the Post. "He'd compare their bodies and say Nicole's was better. And Nicole was smarter. He suggested cosmetic surgery so Christine could look more like Nicole. A night Christine wore black he said, 'Nicole wore black the night of her murder.' He said often that Nicole was an awful mother. He convinced Christine it was he who'd been the victim."

A trail of police reports can also document O.J.'s rocky relationship with Prody. Among them is a 1999 call Simpson made to 911 in which he said, “She's been doing drugs for two days ... I'm trying to get her to leave her house to go into rehab right now.” One year later, police were called to a Miami hotel for a disturbance involving the couple. O.J. said she kicked him and slapped but declined to press charges. Then a year after that, she accused him of breaking into her home, but that time she didn’t press charges.

[tv]

O.J.'s Ex Hurls Serious Accusations in New Tell-All
June 19, 2009

And the hits just keep on coming for O.J. Simpson.
While the ex-footballer is locked away in prison — doing nine to 33 years for armed robbery — his ex-girlfriend plans to tell all about their life together in a proposed memoir. The New York Post reports that Christine Prody — who met O.J. as a 20-year-old tourist from Minnesota when she stopped to gawk at his infamous Brentwood, Calif. mansion — has a book in the works — to be called Spellbound: My Life With O.J. Simpson — about her turbulent relationship with the acquitted murderer, including 13 years of cocaine, pregnancy, abuse, jealousy, possessiveness, manipulation and rage.

"She says after he wore her down and made her have an abortion, he 'refused' to accompany her to the hospital," reports the NY Post. "He abandoned her, left her at the curb, made her go alone and then left for a game of golf, and she had to get one of his associates to fetch her. Page 9 of her book proposal refers to that as one of two abortions O.J. made her have."

Prody — a former waitress who moved with O.J. to Miami and helped care for his children Sydney and Justin — says her famous ex-boyfriend often spoke about Nicole Brown Simpson, his ex-wife whom he was acquitted of murdering — along with her friend Ron Goldman — in 1995.

"He'd continually refer to Nicole," reports the Post. "He'd compare their bodies and say Nicole's was better. And Nicole was smarter. He suggested cosmetic surgery so Christine could look more like Nicole. A night Christine wore black he said, 'Nicole wore black the night of her murder.' He said often that Nicole was an awful mother. He convinced Christine it was he who'd been the victim."

A trail of police reports can also document O.J.'s rocky relationship with Prody. Among them is a 1999 call Simpson made to 911 in which he said, “She's been doing drugs for two days ... I'm trying to get her to leave her house to go into rehab right now.” One year later, police were called to a Miami hotel for a disturbance involving the couple. O.J. said she kicked him and slapped but declined to press charges. Then a year after that, she accused him of breaking into her home, but that time she didn’t press charges.

They were together almost as long as he and Nicole. Her claims are very familiar -- it seems to be a reoccurring theme in Simpson's life.

[weezer]

They were together almost as long as he and Nicole. Her claims are very familiar -- it seems to be a reoccurring theme in Simpson's life.

I was thinking the same thing. I'm going to see what all I can find and brush up on it before the tv appearance. might be interesting to compare what was reported, timeframe, etc. if you find anything, let me know.

[tv]

I'd forgotten about the boasting that the poster did about those accounts and how it was going to keep the families from getting what they were awarded when orenthal was found liable for Ron's death and the battering (also dead) of Nicole but orenthal would be able to continue living the good life just like he'd always done. Funny how things like that seem to work themselves out, isn't it?

Karma is a powerful thing. You know the old saying 'nothing goes over the devil's back that doesn't come back under his belly'...imo, it may take a while but everything comes full circle in the end.

[weezer]

Karma is a powerful thing. You know the old saying 'nothing goes over the devil's back that doesn't come back under his belly'...imo, it may take a while but everything comes full circle in the end.

I agree. when I read the articles about the police calls to hotels, apartments, homes and the hospitalizations of christie, it's eery.