O.J. In The News Again

[tv]

Without any blood?Maybe the knife in the kitchen had nothing to do with the crime, maybe she put it there as a back-up to the other knife, maybe he took it away from her and put it on the counter.

[William Anthony]

O.J. Simpson's Girlfriend Suffers Two Broken Legs
Associated Press
7:17 PM EDT, May 14, 2008
Article tools
E-mail Share
Digg Del.icio.us Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo Print Reprints Post comment Text size: MIAMI -- A highway patrol official says O.J. Simpson's girlfriend has been seriously injured in a car accident in Miami.

Florida Highway Patrol Lt. Pat Santangelo says Christie Prody was injured early Saturday morning after pulling over to an expressway emergency lane because she had two flat tires.

When the 32-year-old got out and walked around the car, Santangelo says she was hit by another car. Her head and arms went through that car's windshield.

She was airlifted to Ryder Trauma Center at Miami's Jackson Memorial Hospital where Santangelo says she was still being treated Wednesday for broken legs.

Santangelo says Prody was cited for the accident. Troopers found an empty bottle of alcohol in her car but could not say if Prody was intoxicated.

Thanks.

[weezer]

Maybe the knife in the kitchen had nothing to do with the crime, maybe she put it there as a back-up to the other knife, maybe he took it away from her and put it on the counter.

maybe he made her put it down --

[William Anthony]

Maybe the knife in the kitchen had nothing to do with the crime, maybe she put it there as a back-up to the other knife, maybe he took it away from her and put it on the counter.

Where there two knives found on the counter?

[tv]

oh dear --

EXCLUSIVE: OJ's GIRLFRIEND RUN OVER
O.J. Simpson’s girlfriend Christie Prody has been hospitalized after being hit by a car, The NATIONAL ENQUIRER has learned exclusively.

Prody, 32, was airlifted to Jackson Memorial Hospital’s Ryder Trauma Center, where she remains in the critical care unit with two broken legs.

According to police sources, at 4:40 a.m on May 10, Prody’s car broke down on Miami’s Don Shula Expressway.

She attempted to walk for help and was struck by a car.

Prody had been hospitalized on Feb. 11 with severe brain injuries after collapsing at a gas station.

She was taken to intensive care with doctors worried she would need brain surgery. But she recovered and returned to her life with Simpson at his Miami home.

A Florida Highway Patrol spokesman told the ENQUIRER that no one was arrested in the latest incident.Why in the world would she try to walk for help? People these days normally use a cell phone to call for help.

[tv]

Where there two knives found on the counter?As a back-up to the knife she came to the door holding, if she did.

[weezer]

Why in the world would she try to walk for help? People these days normally use a cell phone to call for help.

one of the articles says she got out to walk to a call box --

you don't suppose orenthal was out cruising that day do you? or maybe he made the tires flat. just a thought :D

[William Anthony]

As a back-up to the knife she came to the door holding, if she did.

Are you saying that there was a knife found in the kitchen and one found on a counter in another room or one found in the kitchen and another found on the counter in the kitchen? Was one knife found in the kitchen and an additional one found on a counter?

[tv]

Are you saying that there was a knife found in the kitchen and one found on a counter in another room or one found in the kitchen and another found on the counter in the kitchen? Was one knife found in the kitchen and an additional one found on a counter?All of the above. I'm glad no further explanations will be necessary.

[weezer]

Are you saying that there was a knife found in the kitchen and one found on a counter in another room or one found in the kitchen and another found on the counter in the kitchen? Was one knife found in the kitchen and an additional one found on a counter?

one knife found on the counter in the kitchen.

[William Anthony]

one of the articles says she got out to walk to a call box --

you don't suppose orenthal was out cruising that day do you? or maybe he made the tires flat. just a thought :D

I think I will leave that to your speculation. :D

[weezer]

I think I will leave that to your speculation. :D

then I'm going to speculate that orenthal . . .

[William Anthony]

one knife found on the counter in the kitchen.

Was that the knife that you think might have been the back up? Are you saying she had a knife in the kitchen, took it to the door, Simpson took it away and at sometime placed it on the counter?

[William Anthony]

then I'm going to speculate that orenthal . . .

was nowhere in the vicinity and that the flat was a natural event?

[martin II]

you have to admit that the empty knife box in orenthal's bathroom AND his ex-wife and Ron Goldman laying butchered 5 minutes away does make for interesting speculation.

Vanhatter & Lang against your speculation and creative ideas, I think i take their positions.
imo

[tv]

Was that the knife that you think might have been the back up? Are you saying she had a knife in the kitchen, took it to the door, Simpson took it away and at sometime placed it on the counter?No, we're speculating. Only two people know whether or not the knife on the kitchen counter played a part in the crimes that night and one of them is dead.

[weezer]

Vanhatter & Lang against your speculation and creative ideas, I think i take their positions.
imo

you meant their 'speculations' didn't you?

[martin II]

Are you saying that there was a knife found in the kitchen and one found on a counter in another room or one found in the kitchen and another found on the counter in the kitchen? Was one knife found in the kitchen and an additional one found on a counter?

The knife found on the counter was a butcher knife.Did she back it up with another kitchen butcher knife. Was she killed with the butcher knife she brought to the door?

[weezer]

The knife found on the counter was a butcher knife.Did she back it up with another kitchen butcher knife. Was she killed with the butcher knife she brought to the door?

maybe she was afraid of the knife he had and laid hers down? anything is possible and as tvdinner says, 'only two people know and one of them is dead.'

[martin II]

you meant their 'speculations' didn't you?

nope.
I take their knowledge of that issue as opposed to uninformed wild speculation.imo

[martin II]

maybe she was afraid of the knife he had and laid hers down? anything is possible and as tvdinner says, 'only two people know and one of them is dead.'

Then there is the more reasonable and more likely answer is that Mike Gilbert just told another hugh lie to try to sell 20 books.imo

[martin II]

maybe she was afraid of the knife he had and laid hers down? anything is possible and as tvdinner says, 'only two people know and one of them is dead.'

You support the idea that she was killed with a 3 inch knife. The kitchen knife was a butcher knife.hahahaha

[tv]

You support the idea that she was killed with a 3 inch knife. The kitchen knife was a butcher knife.hahahahaWho said she was killed with the kitchen knife?

[weezer]

Then there is the more reasonable and more likely answer is that Mike Gilbert just told another hugh lie to try to sell 20 books.imo

I don't know -- he came across as being able to back up what he was saying. wonder who the lawyers were that took some of orenthal's 'stuff' as payment?

[weezer]

You support the idea that she was killed with a 3 inch knife. The kitchen knife was a butcher knife.hahahaha

ahh yes -- the 'rush to judgment' -- no one said she was killed with a butcher knife.

[tv]

I don't know -- he came across as being able to back up what he was saying. wonder who the lawyers were that took some of orenthal's 'stuff' as payment?I wonder if one of them is sometimes mistakenly described as "magnificant"? :D

[weezer]

I wonder if one of them is sometimes mistakenly described as "magnificant"? :D

could be -- I hear he was fond of fancy cars!

of course there is the one that lost his license and then the one that was sanctioned -- oh dear! such a cast to chose from. :tongue:

[William Anthony]

No, we're speculating. Only two people know whether or not the knife on the kitchen counter played a part in the crimes that night and one of them is dead.

I understand your point. However, your speculation only involves the possibility of one killer. Let's not limit our speculations.

[weezer]

I understand your point. However, your speculation only involves the possibility of one killer. Let's not limit our speculations.

well we do have to keep the speculation within the limits of the credible evidence and that evidence says there was one killer: orenthal james simpson.

[SlowHandSam]

could be -- I hear he was fond of fancy cars!

of course there is the one that lost his license and then the one that was sanctioned -- oh dear! such a cast to chose from. :tongue:

Man, would I love to be able to get access to the homes to all those who were conspirators to oj hiding and disposing of his stuff. I'd suspect there'd be some gorgeous lamps lighting up rooms and so many other things.

Do you suppose it would be possible, with Gilbert's comments, for someone in LE to get a warrant to search for said property? I guess that would be supposing that they could compel Gilbert to disclose the exact names of who participated and what all they each took.

[tv]

I understand your point. However, your speculation only involves the possibility of one killer. Let's not limit our speculations.I'm going to have to speculate my way. The two killer theory is fantasy not speculation.

[tv]

Man, would I love to be able to get access to the homes to all those who were conspirators to oj hiding and disposing of his stuff. I'd suspect there'd be some gorgeous lamps lighting up rooms and so many other things.

Do you suppose it would be possible, with Gilbert's comments, for someone in LE to get a warrant to search for said property? I guess that would be supposing that they could compel Gilbert to disclose the exact names of who participated and what all they each took.I'm sure all those goodies are in hiding right now and the people that have them are sweating bullets. :tongue:

[martin II]

well we do have to keep the speculation within the limits of the credible evidence and that evidence says there was one killer: orenthal james simpson.

CREDIBLE is the turn word.
haha

[weezer]

Man, would I love to be able to get access to the homes to all those who were conspirators to oj hiding and disposing of his stuff. I'd suspect there'd be some gorgeous lamps lighting up rooms and so many other things.

Do you suppose it would be possible, with Gilbert's comments, for someone in LE to get a warrant to search for said property? I guess that would be supposing that they could compel Gilbert to disclose the exact names of who participated and what all they each took.

we haven't heard the last of this -- woohoo

[weezer]

CREDIBLE is the turn word.
haha

yes it is -- hahaha

[William Anthony]

well we do have to keep the speculation within the limits of the credible evidence and that evidence says there was one killer: orenthal james simpson.

There is credible evidence that Simpson was not the killer and there was more than one. Let's expand our minds by letting our speculations run rampant, such as finding MG credible without cross examination of his statements.

[tv]

CREDIBLE is the turn word.
hahaNo argument about that. haha

[William Anthony]

we haven't heard the last of this -- woohoo

It should keep our fingers posting.

[weezer]

There is credible evidence that Simpson was not the killer and there was more than one. Let's expand our minds by letting our speculations run rampant, such as finding MG credible without cross examination of his statements.

there was no evidence that anyone was at the murder scene besides Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown and their murderer: orenthal james simpson.

as far as MG is concerned, he has as much credibility as orenthal and you believe everything he says. :tongue:

[tv]

There is credible evidence that Simpson was not the killer and there was more than one. Let's expand our minds by letting our speculations run rampant, such as finding MG credible without cross examination of his statements.There is no credible evidence that points to anyone else other than OJ Simpson. As far as finding MG credible -- it's been somewhat common knowledge that Simpson had things removed from his house to avoid paying Fred Goldman -- this is just more confirmation of that.

[tv]

It should keep our fingers posting.I'm counting on it. You know what they say -- three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead. ;)

[William Anthony]

No argument about that. haha

It is incredible that what some find credible is based on the same thing that others find incredible. It is equally amazing that credible is proven not by what one finds credible but incredible, while another finds incredible that the one could have found it credible. I find it more credible to say that credible is not an absolute and I am aware the some will find this absolutely incredible.

[William Anthony]

I'm counting on it. You know what they say -- three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead. ;)

If we believe what MG says is true, then that saying is untrue.

[tv]

If we believe what MG says is true, then that saying is untrue.Nope, it's true.

[weezer]

I'm counting on it. You know what they say -- three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead. ;)

I hope MG keeps that in mind! :eek:

[tv]

It is incredible that what some find credible is based on the same thing that others find incredible. It is equally amazing that credible is proven not by what one finds credible but incredible, while another finds incredible that the one could have found it credible. I find it more credible to say that credible is not an absolute and I am aware the some will find this absolutely incredible.William, that hinged tongue is getting away from you again. ;)

[William Anthony]

Let me inform everyone that the lamp that guides my footsteps never belonged to Simpson.

[tv]

I hope MG keeps that in mind! :eek:Who knows what else he knows that someone would want to keep him from telling...scary.

[William Anthony]

Nope, it's true.

Then Simpson can't be the murderer.

[William Anthony]

Who knows what else he knows that someone would want to keep him from telling...scary.

He's safe. I think the public is ready to hear his tales.

[tv]

Let me inform everyone that the lamp that guides my footsteps never belonged to Simpson.Let me say that I'm glad you acknowledge that. :)

[tv]

Then Simpson can't be the murderer.Okay, William, I'll play. :tongue:

[William Anthony]

William, that hinged tongue is getting away from you again. ;)

Not really. I just wanted to sound credible.:)

[William Anthony]

Let me say that I'm glad you acknowledge that. :)

Yes, I did not want the speculations to run that wild. :)

[tv]

Not really. I just wanted to sound credible.:)You're credible. It's your wild speculation and theories that are incredible. :)

[William Anthony]

You're credible. It's your wild speculation and theories that are incredible. :)

I find it incredible that you could credibly believe that. I think we should get back on topic before we loose our credibility and some say:) they find these post incredibly off topic. :)

[weezer]

I find it incredible that you could credibly believe that. I think we should get back on topic before we loose our credibility and some say:) they find these post incredibly off topic. :)

or, you could 'lose' your credibility. :D

[William Anthony]

or, you could 'lose' your credibility. :D

I have not retired you, yet. :)

[martin II]

[*QUOTE=tvdinner;9099698]There is no credible evidence that points to anyone else other than OJ Simpson. As far as finding MG credible -- it's been somewhat common knowledge that Simpson had things removed from his house to avoid paying Fred Goldman -- this is just more confirmation of that.[/QUOTE]

Two of MG Close business associates, men selling, spit out the fact that MG stole the stuff from ojs throphy room without even being asked where they got the stuff from. There had been a post that oj had hid the Heisman throphy from FRED. This came from common knowledge. But the fact is that this Heisman was auctioned off after the civil trial and the money split between fred and Nicoles estate.
imo

[tv]

[*QUOTE=tvdinner;9099698]There is no credible evidence that points to anyone else other than OJ Simpson. As far as finding MG credible -- it's been somewhat common knowledge that Simpson had things removed from his house to avoid paying Fred Goldman -- this is just more confirmation of that.

Two of MG Close business associates, men selling, spit out the fact that MG stole the stuff from ojs throphy room without even being asked where they got the stuff from. There had been a post that oj had hid the Heisman throphy from FRED. This came from common knowledge. But the fact is that this Heisman was auctioned off after the civil trial and the money split between fred and Nicoles estate.
imo[/QUOTE]It was auctioned off after Mike Gilbert handed it over.

[tv]

Two of MG Close business associates, men selling, spit out the fact that MG stole the stuff from ojs throphy room without even being asked where they got the stuff from. There had been a post that oj had hid the Heisman throphy from FRED. This came from common knowledge. But the fact is that this Heisman was auctioned off after the civil trial and the money split between fred and Nicoles estate.imo

It was auctioned off after Mike Gilbert handed it over.

[martin II]

It was auctioned off after Mike Gilbert handed it over.

I am not sure of that. you got a link that?

[tv]

I am not sure of that. you got a link that?

http://www.cnn.com/US/9706/27/simpson/index.html

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070916/oj_simpson_070915?s_name=&no_ads=

[William Anthony]

http://www.cnn.com/US/9706/27/simpson/index.html

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070916/oj_simpson_070915?s_name=&no_ads=

In this link MG gives another reason for stealing the trophy. Talk about credibility issues. Who knows whether he stole it or turned it over.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/16520887/oj_simpson_incorporated/print

[tv]

In this link MG gives another reason for stealing the trophy. Talk about credibility issues. Who knows whether he stole it or turned it over.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/16520887/oj_simpson_incorporated/print

IMO, it's reasonable to believe that OJ Simpson gave MG the trophy to keep it from Fred Goldman. He was then forced to turn it over for auction. I don't believe for one minute that Simpson didn't know his Heisman trophy was missing -- that was likely a cover story to keep him from getting in trouble for hiding assets from the Goldman family.

[William Anthony]

IMO, it's reasonable to believe that OJ Simpson gave MG the trophy to keep it from Fred Goldman. He was then forced to turn it over for auction. I don't believe for one minute that Simpson didn't know his Heisman trophy was missing -- that was likely a cover story to keep him from getting in trouble for hiding assets from the Goldman family.

In one of your links, I believe MG said that he stole it because Simpson owed him money. In my link Mg said he cried when he had to turn it over. I think he cried, because he did not get a chance to enjoy the financial benefit from his theft, which would mean that Simpson was telling the truth that the trophy was stolen, imho. Who knows who to believe?

[tv]

In one of your links, I believe MG said that he stole it because Simpson owed him money. In my link Mg said he cried when he had to turn it over. I think he cried, because he did not get a chance to enjoy the financial benefit from his theft, which would mean that Simpson was telling the truth that the trophy was stolen, imho. Who knows who to believe?Do you really think that MG or anyone would have the nerve to steal his Heisman trophy which was his most prized possession? He had MG take the trophy to keep it from Fred Goldman. If Simpson didn't know who had the trophy MG could have kept it and no one would have been the wiser. Also, their friendship continued many years after the supposed theft. Most people would cut ties with someone that stole their most prized possession.

[William Anthony]

Do you really think that MG or anyone would have the nerve to steal his Heisman trophy which was his most prized possession? He had MG take the trophy to keep it from Fred Goldman. If Simpson didn't know who had the trophy MG could have kept it and no one would have been the wiser. Also, their friendship continued many years after the supposed theft. Most people would cut ties with someone that stole their most prized possession.

It seems that Goldman and Gilbert put more value on the trophy than Simpson did. I think Simpson's children are who he loves most, or if you will, his most prized possessions. I think that Simpson could have been fooled into believing that MG took the trophy and hid it and wanted to keep it for Simpson, because it had some weird sentimental value to MG that the destruction of the trophy with a hammer by Goldman would somehow eradicate Simpson's college accomplishments. Perhaps, Simpson was afraid of the, imho, the psychotic MG.

[tv]

It seems that Goldman and Gilbert put more value on the trophy than Simpson did. I think Simpson's children was what he loved most. I think that Simpson could have been fooled into believing that MG took the trophy and hid it and wanted to keep it for Simpson, because it had some weird sentimental value to MG that the destruction of the trophy with a hammer by Goldman would somehow eradicate Simpson's college accomplishments. Perhaps, Simpson was afraid of the, imho, the psychotic MG.I'm talking about material possessions. I don't consider children possessions but I wouldn't be surprised if OJ Simpson does.

[William Anthony]

I'm talking about material possessions. I don't consider children possessions but I wouldn't be surprised if OJ Simpson does.

That is why I qualified my response. I do not think Simpson cared about material things, as much as Goldman and MG did, especially the trophy. I did not see any statement from Simpson saying he would smash it with a hammer before giving it to Goldman or that he cried when it was turned over. I think that Simpson only valued it, because it would be an asset to his children, if they ran into financial difficulty. Now, do you understand what I was saying?

[tv]

That is why I qualified my response. I do not think Simpson cared about material things, as much as Goldman and MG did, especially the trophy. I did not see any statement from Simpson saying he would smash it with a hammer before giving it to Goldman or that he cried when it was turned over. I think that Simpson only valued it, because it would be an asset to his children, if they ran into financial difficulty. Now, do you understand what I was saying?I understand but it's a bunch of bologna to assign those emotions to Simpson. This is the man that didn't see his children for days after their mother was brutally murdered.

[William Anthony]

I understand but it's a bunch of bologna to assign those emotions to Simpson. This is the man that didn't see his children for days after their mother was brutally murdered.

I have given you the possible reasons why that occurred. But, lets use your knife analogy in regard to the trophy. I do not think that was the only trophy he received throughout his illustrious athletic career. I do not think he spent his day gawking at the trophies, as he was a businessman. Just like you would not pay attention daily to the number of knives in your home, he would not pay attention to his trophies. I think the truth lies somewhere in between the fact that Simpson owed MG money and his, imho, unnatural obsession with Simpson as it pertains to the theft of the trophy.

[SlowHandSam]

In one of your links, I believe MG said that he stole it because Simpson owed him money. In my link Mg said he cried when he had to turn it over. I think he cried, because he did not get a chance to enjoy the financial benefit from his theft, which would mean that Simpson was telling the truth that the trophy was stolen, imho. Who knows who to believe?

MG stated that on that particular day "everyone" was loading up trucks, backseats of cars etc (paraphrasing) with valuable items for the estate, with oj. I suspect that MG got the Heisman since he was his agent and close friend.

I'm sure he cried when he had to give it up but for no other reason that he let down his friend/client ... whose image and etc he had worked so hard at building and protecting.

I'm sure that all that stuff in the storage room that he claimed belong to his mother was "stolen" too, right? He knew what he was doing when he emptied out that house. He's too much of a control freak with a bigger ego to not know where the most coveted college football award was ... imo.

[William Anthony]

MG stated that on that particular day "everyone" was loading up trucks, backseats of cars etc (paraphrasing) with valuable items for the estate, with oj. I suspect that MG got the Heisman since he was his agent and close friend.

I'm sure he cried when he had to give it up but for no other reason that he let down his friend/client ... whose image and etc he had worked so hard at building and protecting.

I'm sure that all that stuff in the storage room that he claimed belong to his mother was "stolen" too, right? He knew what he was doing when he emptied out that house. He's too much of a control freak with a bigger ego to not know where the most coveted college football award was ... imo.

You indicate that there was a lot of commotion on that day. Therefore, it would have been the perfect opportunity for a psychotic to abscond with a item that they would subsequently cry about when they had to turn it over. Whether those tears were due to,imho, an unnatural emotional attachment to a friend's accomplishments or money is another matter.

I think that the most coveted college football award would mean more to those, who had not made any recognized accomplishments in athletics, or who had done nothing athletically notable after their college career than it would to someone who had gained far greater fame as a pro football star.

[tv]

You indicate that there was a lot of commotion on that day. Therefore, it would have been the perfect opportunity for a psychotic to abscond with a item that they would subsequently cry about when they had to turn it over. Whether those tears were due to,imho, an unnatural emotional attachment to a friend's accomplishments or money is another matter.

I think that the most coveted college football award would mean more to those, who had not made any recognized accomplishments in athletics, or who had done nothing athletically notable after their college career than it would to someone who had gained far greater fame as a pro football star.Do you have any evidence that indicates that Mike Gilbert is psychotic?

[William Anthony]

Do you have any evidence that indicates that Mike Gilbert is psychotic?

I posted it and stated imho. Here is a link that talks about emotions and perceptions.

http://www.righthealth.com/Health/What%20Is%20Psychotic-s?lid=yhoo-ads-sb-7460722696

[tv]

O.J. Simpson's Girlfriend Suffers Two Broken Legs
Associated Press
7:17 PM EDT, May 14, 2008
Article tools
E-mail Share
Digg Del.icio.us Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo Print Reprints Post comment Text size: MIAMI -- A highway patrol official says O.J. Simpson's girlfriend has been seriously injured in a car accident in Miami.

Florida Highway Patrol Lt. Pat Santangelo says Christie Prody was injured early Saturday morning after pulling over to an expressway emergency lane because she had two flat tires.

When the 32-year-old got out and walked around the car, Santangelo says she was hit by another car. Her head and arms went through that car's windshield.

She was airlifted to Ryder Trauma Center at Miami's Jackson Memorial Hospital where Santangelo says she was still being treated Wednesday for broken legs.

Santangelo says Prody was cited for the accident. Troopers found an empty bottle of alcohol in her car but could not say if Prody was intoxicated.I just realized this reports says two flat tires. How did that happen?

[tv]

I posted it and stated imho.I'm just trying to find out what MG has done or said that you think fits the definition of psychotic.

[William Anthony]

I just realized this reports says two flat tires. How did that happen?

Two went flat. :)

[tv]

Two went flat. :)Thank you, William. How silly of me.

[William Anthony]

I'm just trying to find out what MG has done or said that you think fits the definition of psychotic.

" * Loss of touch with reality
* Emotion is exhibited in an abnormal manner
* Confusion
* Mistaken perceptions (illusions)
* False beliefs (delusions)"

[William Anthony]

Thank you, William. How silly of me.

Glad to be of assistance.

[William Anthony]

Thank you, William. How silly of me.

I guess some will blame Simpson for not buying the type of tires that allow you to drive 50 miles on them if they go flat.

[weezer]

That is why I qualified my response. I do not think Simpson cared about material things, as much as Goldman and MG did, especially the trophy. I did not see any statement from Simpson saying he would smash it with a hammer before giving it to Goldman or that he cried when it was turned over. I think that Simpson only valued it, because it would be an asset to his children, if they ran into financial difficulty. Now, do you understand what I was saying?

I think you are very wrong about orenthal and possessions. When you read/listen to him, his favorite words are 'I' and 'mine' -- orenthal valued the trophy because it was 'mine'! Now, do you understand?

orenthal wasn't worried about his children's future or he wouldn't have butchered the mother of two of them.

IIRC, one of the items that he was real upset about from the LV incident was the picture of him with Hoover -- LOL

[weezer]

I guess some will blame Simpson for not buying the type of tires that allow you to drive 50 miles on them if they go flat.

nah --

now, some will ask where orenthal was just before she drove that car! :tongue:

[weezer]

" * Loss of touch with reality
* Emotion is exhibited in an abnormal manner
* Confusion
* Mistaken perceptions (illusions)
* False beliefs (delusions)"

I find it funny that the NG's on this board are so very quick to diss anyone that speaks against orenthal. even his closest and/or ex friends. the part that is funny is that these are the people he surrounds himself with. you know -- birds of a feather. . . . .:eek:

[weezer]

I posted it and stated imho. Here is a link that talks about emotions and perceptions.

http://www.righthealth.com/Health/What%20Is%20Psychotic-s?lid=yhoo-ads-sb-7460722696

you know, there has been great debate as to which category orenthal falls in:

anti-social
psychopath

I think both -- but then that's just me.

[William Anthony]

nah --

now, some will ask where orenthal was just before she drove that car! :tongue:

What do you think the charges, if any, should be against Simpson, because she had a flat or two, and tried to walk across a freeway and there was a bottle of liquor found in her car?

[William Anthony]

I think you are very wrong about orenthal and possessions. When you read/listen to him, his favorite words are 'I' and 'mine' -- orenthal valued the trophy because it was 'mine'! Now, do you understand?

orenthal wasn't worried about his children's future or he wouldn't have butchered the mother of two of them.

IIRC, one of the items that he was real upset about from the LV incident was the picture of him with Hoover -- LOL

Who else's was it?

There is no verdict saying he did anything other than batter Nicole.

I suppose if I had a picture taken with Hoover and it was stolen I would be real upset.

[William Anthony]

you know, there has been great debate as to which category orenthal falls in:

anti-social
psychopath

I think both -- but then that's just me.

Well, I guess you have made up your mind.

[William Anthony]

I find it funny that the NG's on this board are so very quick to diss anyone that speaks against orenthal. even his closest and/or ex friends. the part that is funny is that these are the people he surrounds himself with. you know -- birds of a feather. . . . .:eek:

I am not dissing him. Just pointing to his inconsistent statements and his rather peculiar and unnatural attraction to Simpson and/or the trophy, imho. I said before there is no accounting for taste.

[SlowHandSam]

You indicate that there was a lot of commotion on that day. Therefore, it would have been the perfect opportunity for a psychotic to abscond with a item that they would subsequently cry about when they had to turn it over. Whether those tears were due to,imho, an unnatural emotional attachment to a friend's accomplishments or money is another matter.

I think that the most coveted college football award would mean more to those, who had not made any recognized accomplishments in athletics, or who had done nothing athletically notable after their college career than it would to someone who had gained far greater fame as a pro football star.

I didn't indicate there was a lot of commotion. I said there were many people there loading up oj's stuff, which I believe, was at his direction.

And I disagree that the Heisman loses its personal value as one grows his career in the NFL. It is, by far, the absolute most coveted award for any college football player. Period. To claim that it means nothing because he became an NFL "star" is baseless. Regardless of his fame as an NFL "star", the fact that he performed to the level to get the Heisman is an achievement that I'm sure the ego-centric oj recalled frequently, imho.

[William Anthony]

I didn't indicate there was a lot of commotion. I said there were many people there loading up oj's stuff, which I believe, was at his direction.

And I disagree that the Heisman loses its personal value as one grows his career in the NFL. It is, by far, the absolute most coveted award for any college football player. Period. To claim that it means nothing because he became an NFL "star" is baseless. Regardless of his fame as an NFL "star", the fact that he performed to the level to get the Heisman is an achievement that I'm sure the ego-centric oj recalled frequently, imho.

You believe it was at his direction. I believe that many people loading up stuff would be a commotion.

I never said it looses its personal value, nor that it did not mean anything. I took disagreement with the statement that it was his most prized possession, and the idea that he had a reason to keep a constant or daily eye on it.

[SlowHandSam]

What do you think the charges, if any, should be against Simpson, because she had a flat or two, and tried to walk across a freeway and there was a bottle of liquor found in her car?

The charges, if any, would be if it turns out her tires were tampered with ...

aside from that - there has been no indication if she had consumed any of that alcohol and it's not against the law to have a bottle - maybe she was driving home from the store. Maybe she was going to a party with friends. Maybe oj sent her to get him the spirits ... too many maybes.

Why didn't she have a cell phone? Did oj take it from her in another one of his controlling acts? Who's to say.

I'm with weezer though - sure would like to know where oj was right before she got in that car and what happened in the day or so before she drove.

[William Anthony]

The charges, if any, would be if it turns out her tires were tampered with ...

aside from that - there has been no indication if she had consumed any of that alcohol and it's not against the law to have a bottle - maybe she was driving home from the store. Maybe she was going to a party with friends. Maybe oj sent her to get him the spirits ... too many maybes.

Why didn't she have a cell phone? Did oj take it from her in another one of his controlling acts? Who's to say.

I'm with weezer though - sure would like to know where oj was right before she got in that car and what happened in the day or so before she drove.

What would the specific charges be? Not surprised to hear that you are with weezer. Are you saying he should be charged with theft of a cell phone? Do you know whether or not she lost hers, if she had one?

[SlowHandSam]

What would the specific charges be? Not surprised to hear that you are with weezer. Are you saying he should be charged with theft of a cell phone? Do you know whether or not she lost hers, if she had one?

I didn't state anything except to ask quite a few questions.

I didn't say he took it, I asked if he did. I asked why didn't she have it with her. I asked many questions but did not offer up what I think.

I share a lot of viewpoints with not only weezer, but tvdinner, socal, kate, bobaugust ... that surely isn't news worthy or necessary to point out.

[martin II]

I didn't state anything except to ask quite a few questions.

I didn't say he took it, I asked if he did. I asked why didn't she have it with her. I asked many questions but did not offer up what I think.

I share a lot of viewpoints with not only weezer, but tvdinner, socal, kate, bobaugust ... that surely isn't news worthy or necessary to point out.

SlowHandSam

I am not sure but i don't believe anyone posting here would be able to answer
your questions.

[William Anthony]

I didn't state anything except to ask quite a few questions.

I didn't say he took it, I asked if he did. I asked why didn't she have it with her. I asked many questions but did not offer up what I think.

I share a lot of viewpoints with not only weezer, but tvdinner, socal, kate, bobaugust ... that surely isn't news worthy or necessary to point out.

I asked a question in light (pun intended) of yours.

I was asking what you thought since you asked the questions.

I now ask, if you feel that it isn't news worthy or necessary to point out who you agree with, then why did you point out that you agreed with weezer? :)

[SlowHandSam]

You believe it was at his direction. I believe that many people loading up stuff would be a commotion.

I never said it looses its personal value, nor that it did not mean anything. I took disagreement with the statement that it was his most prized possession, and the idea that he had a reason to keep a constant or daily eye on it.

Oh William, William, William. I did not say that the Heisman was his most prized possession.

I'm sure that all that stuff in the storage room that he claimed belong to his mother was "stolen" too, right? He knew what he was doing when he emptied out that house. He's too much of a control freak with a bigger ego to not know where the most coveted college football award was ... imo.

And since I said it was the most coveted college football award ... and with his ego-centric personality, I still contend that he was aware of that award in his home and that he gave it to someone he thought would be able to keep it and hide it for him. Who knows ... perhaps even sell at some point.

[SlowHandSam]

I asked a question in light (pun intended) of yours.

I was asking what you thought since you asked the questions.

I now ask, if you feel that it isn't news worthy or necessary to point out who you agree with, then why did you point out that you agreed with weezer? :)

I'm not sure where the pun is on the first statement. But, nevertheless, I can formulate questions without having made a determination in my own mind. It was the questions that I am pondering as this unfolds. One does not always need to have an answer to the question one asks. Often times, it's used to show that there is a thought process going on.

[SlowHandSam]

SlowHandSam

I am not sure but i don't believe anyone posting here would be able to answer
your questions.

Martin, we probably finally agree on something.

To pose a question does not always mean I am looking for an answer. It's often used to show the thought process. :shrug:

[William Anthony]

Oh William, William, William. I did not say that the Heisman was his most prized possession.



And since I said it was the most coveted college football award ... and with his ego-centric personality, I still contend that he was aware of that award in his home and that he gave it to someone he thought would be able to keep it and hide it for him. Who knows ... perhaps even sell at some point.

This is the relevant part of my post to which you refer.

"I never said it looses its personal value, nor that it did not mean anything. I took disagreement with the statement that it was his most prized possession, and the idea that he had a reason to keep a constant or daily eye on it."

The statement that it was his most prized possession was made by another poster, who you have mentioned that you share their view points on some issues, which is not to say you share it on that particular one. I never said you said it was his most prized possession. My point was, when you decided to post and responded to my post, it was a post that I had responded to about the trophy being his most prized possession.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. I base mine on the statement of Fromong, the statements of others in the room on the tape, and MG's apparent unnatural affinity to the trophy and/or Simpson.

[SlowHandSam]

This is the relevant part of my post to which you refer.

"I never said it looses its personal value, nor that it did not mean anything. I took disagreement with the statement that it was his most prized possession, and the idea that he had a reason to keep a constant or daily eye on it."

The statement that it was his most prized possession was made by another poster, who you have mentioned that you share their view points on some issues, which is not to say you share it on that particular one. I never said you said it was his most prized possession. My point was, when you decided to post and responded to my post, it was a post that I had responded to about the trophy being his most prized possession.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. I base mine on the statement of Fromong, the statements of others in the room on the tape, and MG's apparent unnatural affinity to the trophy and/or Simpson.

wow, what a spin.

I'm dizzy. Time to sign off for a while.

[William Anthony]

I'm not sure where the pun is on the first statement. But, nevertheless, I can formulate questions without having made a determination in my own mind. It was the questions that I am pondering as this unfolds. One does not always need to have an answer to the question one asks. Often times, it's used to show that there is a thought process going on.

I think I got it. You had a thought process that you wanted to share with the community and that thought process caused you to have questions. You were not asking for answers to your questions or other's thought processes. You were simply alerting the community to the fact that you are thinking.:)

[William Anthony]

wow, what a spin.

I'm dizzy. Time to sign off for a while.

No spin. Go back and check the posts. Show me where I said you said it was his most prized possession. Why do we go through this everyday? That is a question after a thought process.:)

[tv]

This is the relevant part of my post to which you refer.

"I never said it looses its personal value, nor that it did not mean anything. I took disagreement with the statement that it was his most prized possession, and the idea that he had a reason to keep a constant or daily eye on it."

The statement that it was his most prized possession was made by another poster, who you have mentioned that you share their view points on some issues, which is not to say you share it on that particular one. I never said you said it was his most prized possession. My point was, when you decided to post and responded to my post, it was a post that I had responded to about the trophy being his most prized possession.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. I base mine on the statement of Fromong, the statements of others in the room on the tape, and MG's apparent unnatural affinity to the trophy and/or Simpson.I'm the one that thinks the Heisman trophy was at one time OJ Simpson's most prized possession. IMO, it symbolizes what makes OJ Simpson the 'juice' and that's why Fred Goldman felt the urge to smash it with a hammer. I didn't say anyone needed to keep a daily eye on it.

[William Anthony]

I'm the one that thinks the Heisman trophy was at one time OJ Simpson's most prized possession. IMO, it symbolizes what makes OJ Simpson the 'juice' and that's why Fred Goldman felt the urge to smash it with a hammer. I didn't say anyone needed to keep a daily eye on it.

Thank you for setting the record straight. When the other poster posted she posted a response to my response to you. Stay with me here. She then talked about it being most coveted and that he would have known if it was missing (I think or it may have been you, talking about the knowing it would be missing part). Anyway, I do remember posting something to the effect to you that he had many awards and made the analogy to your posts about the knives. Still with me? The point about keeping a daily eye on it, regardless of whether it was to you or SHS at this point, was meant to mean that, although he valued it, there was no need for him to keep a constant vigil over it.

[weezer]

Thank you for setting the record straight. When the other poster posted she posted a response to my response to you. Stay with me here. She then talked about it being most coveted and that he would have known if it was missing (I think or it may have been you, talking about the knowing it would be missing part). Anyway, I do remember posting something to the effect to you that he had many awards and made the analogy to your posts about the knives. Still with me? The point about keeping a daily eye on it, regardless of whether it was to you or SHS at this point, was meant to mean that, although he valued it, there was no need for him to keep a constant vigil over it.

you know, he DID have a trophy room. I guess that would qualify for keeping an eye on it.

[William Anthony]

I'm the one that thinks the Heisman trophy was at one time OJ Simpson's most prized possession. IMO, it symbolizes what makes OJ Simpson the 'juice' and that's why Fred Goldman felt the urge to smash it with a hammer. I didn't say anyone needed to keep a daily eye on it.

I think revenge and hatred is Fred's motivation. Hatred destroys a person, imho. The trophy did not make Simpson. Simpson made/earned the trophy. The trophy did not make him a better football player. It was because he was a better, the best that year, football player earned/made him the trophy. This is why hatred is such a wasted emotion, because it distorts one's perception of reality in a negative way. This is not to say that I do not empathize with Mr. Goldman. He sustained a loss that I have not. I can say that I hate no one. I do not know if I would be able to say that under the conditions that Mr. Goldman has had to endure.

[tv]

Thank you for setting the record straight. When the other poster posted she posted a response to my response to you. Stay with me here. She then talked about it being most coveted and that he would have known if it was missing (I think or it may have been you, talking about the knowing it would be missing part). Anyway, I do remember posting something to the effect to you that he had many awards and made the analogy to your posts about the knives. Still with me? The point about keeping a daily eye on it, regardless of whether it was to you or SHS at this point, was meant to mean that, although he valued it, there was no need for him to keep a constant vigil over it.I understand what you're saying but I wouldn't compare the most coveted award in college football with knives in a drawer. I suspect that the trophy was the most prominently displayed item in the trophy case and would easily be missed. I don't believe that Mike Gilbert took it without Simpson's permission. IMO, OJ Simpson gave it to him to keep it out of Fred Goldman's possession.

[William Anthony]

you know, he DID have a trophy room. I guess that would qualify for keeping an eye on it.

He had a room for his trophies. I believe he earned more than one. There was no need for him to keep an eye on them, until moving day. I guess in the commotion he lost sight of it and MG. The G is too close to the F. So, if I put MF but mean MG , it is inadvertent.

[tv]

I think revenge and hatred is Fred's motivation. Hatred destroys a person, imho. The trophy did not make Simpson. Simpson made/earned the trophy. The trophy did not make him a better football player. It was because he was a better, the best that year, football player earned/made him the trophy. This is why hatred is such a wasted emotion, because it distorts one's perception of reality in a negative way. This is not to say that I do not empathize with Mr. Goldman. He sustained a loss that I have not. I can say that I hate no one. I do not know if I would be able to say that under the conditions that Mr. Goldman has had to endure.William, I said it symbolized what made him what he was. Yes, I think Fred Goldman hates OJ Simpson and I would feel the same way if he killed one of my children. Hatred can destroy a person...look what it's done to OJ Simpson.

[tv]

He had a room for his trophies. I believe he earned more than one. There was no need for him to keep an eye on them, until moving day. I guess in the commotion he lost sight of it and MG. The G is too close to the F. So, if I put MF but mean MG , it is inadvertent. How did you manage to drag Mark Fuhrman into this again? :eek:

[William Anthony]

I understand what you're saying but I wouldn't compare the most coveted award in college football with knives in a drawer. I suspect that the trophy was the most prominently displayed item in the trophy case and would easily be missed. I don't believe that Mike Gilbert took it without Simpson's permission. IMO, OJ Simpson gave it to him to keep it out of Fred Goldman's possession.

I can't say for sure. However, I have had some limited experience with football players. They seem to glory more in their pro accomplishments. I honestly don't know how many times Simpson received the Player of the Year Award, or if it is a trophy. Perhaps, you are right but others say MG stole it.

[William Anthony]

How did you manage to drag Mark Fuhrman into this again? :eek:

I didn't. I often hit the F key for the G key. I did not want people to think I was dragging him into this. He did that himself on Fox, :). Seriously, I was just alerting others to my tendency in case I missed it.

[weezer]

I can't say for sure. However, I have had some limited experience with football players. They seem to glory more in their pro accomplishments. I honestly don't know how many times Simpson received the Player of the Year Award, or if it is a trophy. Perhaps, you are right but others say MG stole it.

obvously orenthal AND his dream team thought the trophy was a big deal -- remember that int he criminal trial (pun intended), arnelle's testimony was started with -- when were you born? on the day he won the heisman trophy. wonder where he was that day?

[martin II]

wow, what a spin.

I'm dizzy. Time to sign off for a while.

I think that Heisman is only a claim that the recepiant is the best football player that year. It is saught by players as it elavates one to the top of the list of NFL draftees and does increase ones salary in the NFL. Oj received many thropies as the best running back of his time for some years. So the Heisman became just anothet throphy in the case.imo

[martin II]

I understand what you're saying but I wouldn't compare the most coveted award in college football with knives in a drawer. I suspect that the trophy was the most prominently displayed item in the trophy case and would easily be missed. I don't believe that Mike Gilbert took it without Simpson's permission. IMO, OJ Simpson gave it to him to keep it out of Fred Goldman's possession.

fred. the showman he had become, would like to take a hammer and try to smash a piece of bronz metal? If he was able to dent it, then what,there would be a piece of dented Bronze metal.I doubt he had this in mind as he knew it would not have been able to receive the money he received from the auction if he had. And that would not be in character for fred.He wanted the money.imo

[weezer]

fred. the showman he had become, would like to take a hammer and try to smash a piece of bronz metal? If he was able to dent it, then what,there would be a piece of dented Bronze metal.I doubt he had this in mind as he knew it would not have been able to receive the money he received from the auction if he had. And that would not be in character for fred.He wanted the money.imo

he could have asked orenthal's son Jason to come help -- he knows how to beat up a metal statue of orenthal. ;)

[tv]

fred. the showman he had become, would like to take a hammer and try to smash a piece of bronz metal? If he was able to dent it, then what,there would be a piece of dented Bronze metal.I doubt he had this in mind as he knew it would not have been able to receive the money he received from the auction if he had. And that would not be in character for fred.He wanted the money.imoWhat he really wants is his son back. That's not possible so he'll do what he can to make OJ Simpson's life miserable. You already know all this but I just thought I'd remind you.

[tv]

he could have asked orenthal's son Jason to come help -- he knows how to beat up a metal statue of orenthal. ;)I forgot about that, ha ha.

[martin II]

What he really wants is his son back. That's not possible so he'll do what he can to make OJ Simpson's life miserable. You already know all this but I just thought I'd remind you.

hate will eat him up if it has not already. How is freds life made better by trying to make oj miserable. this puts oj in control of freds life based on what oj does or does not do.As you have suggested for others he needs to just move on.imo

[weezer]

hate will eat him up if it has not already. How is freds life made better by trying to make oj miserable. this puts oj in control of freds life based on what oj does or does not do.As you have suggested for others he needs to just move on.imo

Mr. Goldman has moved on -- it's orenthal that's stuck. Stuck in the time when he was 'somebody'.

[martin II]

Mr. Goldman has moved on -- it's orenthal that's stuck. Stuck in the time when he was 'somebody'.

Goldman seems to be moving from one lawyers office to the next court room he can find or tv when he can get invited.imo

[weezer]

Goldman seems to be moving from one lawyers office to the next court room he can find or tv when he can get invited.imo

better that than jail cell to jail cell like orenthal has managed to do. :rolleyes:

[William Anthony]

better that than jail cell to jail cell like orenthal has managed to do. :rolleyes:

Wasn't it Ruben Hurricane Carter that proved that the mind is the true jail?

[weezer]

Wasn't it Ruben Hurricane Carter that proved that the mind is the true jail?

the only correlation between Rubin Carter and orenthal simpson is that they both prove that murderers do and can walk free. imo

[William Anthony]

the only correlation between Rubin Carter and orenthal simpson is that they both prove that murderers do and can walk free. imo

There are more correlations than that. They were both black stars in athletics. A court of law ruled that the evidence was insufficient to convict them. I think that Mr. Carter would differ with your opinion that he walked free. He had to struggle for many years for his freedom. However, throughout that struggle, he did not allow himself to become bitter. He now works with the innocence project and has received two honorary juris doctorate degrees. He fights for those wrongly convicted. This is what I mean by saying he showed that the true prison is in a person's mind. This is why I do not hate anyone. Hatred only locks one into a deep chasm that is filled with revenge and void of productivity. This is why I empathize with Mr. Goldman. I saw nothing funny about the comment that Mr. Goldman could get Jason to help him destroy the trophy. I see nothing funny with two people so full of hatred that their perceptions are altered. However, I realize that my sense of humor is not the same as everyone's. My prayers go out to Mr. Goldman and Jason. As long as hate among people is alive, a peaceful and harmonious coexistence will not live, imho. Don't hate, cooperate.

[tv]

There are more correlations than that. They were both black stars in athletics. A court of law ruled that the evidence was insufficient to convict them. I think that Mr. Carter would differ with your opinion that he walked free. He had to struggle for many years for his freedom. However, throughout that struggle, he did not allow himself to become bitter. He now works with the innocence project and has received two honorary juris doctorate degrees. He fights for those wrongly convicted. This is what I mean by saying he showed that the true prison is in a person's mind. This is why I do not hate anyone. Hatred only locks one into a deep chasm that is filled with revenge and void of productivity. This is why I empathize with Mr. Goldman. I saw nothing funny about the comment that Mr. Goldman could get Jason to help him destroy the trophy. I see nothing funny with two people so full of hatred that their perceptions are altered. However, I realize that my sense of humor is not the same as everyone's. My prayers go out to Mr. Goldman and Jason. As long as hate among people is alive, a peaceful and harmonious coexistence will not live, imho. Don't hate, cooperate.What could Fred Goldman do that you and martin would find acceptable? I don't think you'll be happy until he kisses OJ Simpson's a** and thanks him for butchering his son.

[William Anthony]

What could Fred Goldman do that you and martin would find acceptable? I don't think you'll be happy until he kisses OJ Simpson's a** and thanks him for butchering his son.

Nothing about this situation makes me happy. I have said that I do not know what my emotions would be if someone killed my son and I received civil damages from a person who was intent on not paying them. I believe I would pursue all available legal options to obtain payment of the damages. I find not fault with Mr. Goldman in so doing. If on the other hand, I was proven not guilty in a court of law and I was not the killer, I would use all legal means available to avoid paying the damages. What I hope I would not do is come on tv and say that the best thing for Mr. Goldman to do is to get a job. Likewise, I would hope I would not try to beat to death a trophy in symbolization that I am killing the murder. I understood the terrible anger that Goldman felt when he heard the tapes. However, I hope I would not have come on tv and acted in the manner that he did. The thing is that these two have let their anger turn into hate and nothing productive has become of it, imho. That is the point of my post. I want Mr. Goldman to find healing and I don't think he will until he lets go of the hatred. I think that to fixate on the hatred does not allow a chance for healing or doing anything productive.

[martin II]

What could Fred Goldman do that you and martin would find acceptable? I don't think you'll be happy until he kisses OJ Simpson's a** and thanks him for butchering his son.

Accept the reality that he, like many others, was dealt a bad hand. That hate could eventually cause him harm. Turning his sons death into a mini
get oj/ money industry does not allow him to construct a happy life for himself. Look at what the lawyers did to him on that book deal.I actually believe the lawyers are using him. He will never get $38 mil from oj and he knows it but it seems that he somehow enjoys the tv exposure of saying to the people that think oj killed ron, don't worry i am after him.
IMO

[martin II]

better that than jail cell to jail cell like orenthal has managed to do. :rolleyes:

Not full of hate that you seem to support.imo
Actually one could say fred has locked himself up in his efforts to cause oj to suffer.imo

[weezer]

There are more correlations than that. They were both black stars in athletics. A court of law ruled that the evidence was insufficient to convict them. I think that Mr. Carter would differ with your opinion that he walked free. He had to struggle for many years for his freedom. However, throughout that struggle, he did not allow himself to become bitter. He now works with the innocence project and has received two honorary juris doctorate degrees. He fights for those wrongly convicted. This is what I mean by saying he showed that the true prison is in a person's mind. This is why I do not hate anyone. Hatred only locks one into a deep chasm that is filled with revenge and void of productivity. This is why I empathize with Mr. Goldman. I saw nothing funny about the comment that Mr. Goldman could get Jason to help him destroy the trophy. I see nothing funny with two people so full of hatred that their perceptions are altered. However, I realize that my sense of humor is not the same as everyone's. My prayers go out to Mr. Goldman and Jason. As long as hate among people is alive, a peaceful and harmonious coexistence will not live, imho. Don't hate, cooperate.

you've obviously gleaned your position from the denzel washington movie --

carter was not an athlete when he murdered three people and he was never proven nor declared innocent of the crimes.

[tv]

Accept the reality that he, like many others, was dealt a bad hand. That hate could eventually cause him harm. Turning his sons death into a mini
get oj/ money industry does not allow him to construct a happy life for himself. Look at what the lawyers did to him on that book deal.I actually believe the lawyers are using him. He will never get $38 mil from oj and he knows it but it seems that he somehow enjoys the tv exposure of saying to the people that think oj killed ron, don't worry i am after him.
IMOYou cannot be serious. Do you think if I saw a picture of my son laying crumbled on the ground in a pool of his own blood after being brutally murdered that I would consider it being 'dealt a bad hand'? OJ Simpson is lucky it's Fred Goldman's son he killed and not mine because he would have been playing golf where it's really, really hot for the last 13 years. Oh wait, I doubt if they do fun stuff like that where he's going. :flamemad:

[martin II]

the only correlation between Rubin Carter and orenthal simpson is that they both prove that murderers do and can walk free. imo

I would venture to say that you are not familiar with the Rubin Carter story.:cool:

[William Anthony]

you've obviously gleaned your position from the denzel washington movie --

carter was not an athlete when he murdered three people and he was never proven nor declared innocent of the crimes.

I glean my position from Mr. Carter's achievements after gaining his freedom. Yes, in fact Mr. Carter was an athlete at the time of the murders. Show me where I posted he was declared innocent. I understand that the ruling is either guilty or not guilty. When a verdict is overturned, it often means that there was not enough evidence or the character of the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I see that you continue to want to label some as murderers, even though the judicial disagrees. Tell me, do you think Edward Kennedy is a guilty of manslaughter or negligent homicide, and, if you do, why haven't you said so on this board?

[tv]

I glean my position from Mr. Carter's achievements after gaining his freedom. Yes, in fact Mr. Carter was an athlete at the time of the murders. Show me where I posted he was declared innocent. I understand that the ruling is either guilty or not guilty. When a verdict is overturned, it often means that there was not enough evidence or the character of the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I see that you continue to want to label some as murderers, even though the judicial disagrees. Tell me, do you think Edward Kennedy is a guilty of manslaughter or negligent homicide, and, if you do, why haven't you said so on this board?William, I'm not sure what Ted Kennedy could have legally been charged with but I was outraged and disgusted by the whole incident as were most people that I knew. Some of the Kennedy's think they're above the law but IMO it's more of a class and money issue than anything else. This has nothing to do with anything but my stepfather worked for the company that did maintenance on Ted and Bobby Kennedy's homes back in the 60's and early '70's...he always had interesting stories to tell...:eek:

[martin II]

You cannot be serious. Do you think if I saw a picture of my son laying crumbled on the ground in a pool of his own blood after being brutally murdered that I would consider it being 'dealt a bad hand'? OJ Simpson is lucky it's Fred Goldman's son he killed and not mine because he would have been playing golf where it's really, really hot for the last 13 years. Oh wait, I doubt if they do fun stuff like that where he's going. :flamemad:

Many people have lost love ones as fred has.It is up to the individual to find a way to continue to live or allowing oneself to be consumed by 'GETTING' the person they think killed their family member. Living with a load of hate, imo, is no way to live.

I would leave the hunt for the money to the lawyers if it is money he wants and go on with my life. Now certain media outlets like LK are using him for their own ratings as he continues to inform the public about his fight to get money from oj with little success.His lawyers are in court fighting to get some tee shirts and footballs.The book deal did not deliver much to him but a lot to lawyers and book retailers.OJ does not have the money to pay off that judgement and i believe his lawyers know this.But they continue to pile up large legal bills for him.
I would not allow this misfortune to control my current and future life.imo:cool:

[Kate Sachel]

Accept the reality that he, like many others, was dealt a bad hand. That hate could eventually cause him harm. Turning his sons death into a mini
get oj/ money industry does not allow him to construct a happy life for himself. Look at what the lawyers did to him on that book deal.I actually believe the lawyers are using him. He will never get $38 mil from oj and he knows it but it seems that he somehow enjoys the tv exposure of saying to the people that think oj killed ron, don't worry i am after him.
IMO

Was dealt a bad hand? Like many others?

I am speechless that this statement was made. I was dealt a bad hand that my father died far too young of a medical illness that no one had control over. Fred Goldman was "dealt" far more than a "bad hand" when his son was brutally butchered at 25 years old and cast into the media as some forgotten song lyric while OJ Simpson commanded the storylines. He was mocked and ridiculed by defense attorneys working for OJ Simpson, his son was mocked in open court during the civil proceeding by OJ's lead defense attorney. The man he believes murdered his son walked free and had the audacity to write a book on how he would have murdered Ron.

Somehow you have managed to overlook those things.

Kate

[martin II]

you've obviously gleaned your position from the denzel washington movie --

carter was not an athlete when he murdered three people and he was never proven nor declared innocent of the crimes.


A brief biography of Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, a middle weight, world-class professional boxer, who was found guilty of committing a triple murder.

http://www.essortment.com/all/rubinhurricane_rvdl.htm

[William Anthony]

William, I'm not sure what Ted Kennedy could have legally been charged with but I was outraged and disgusted by the whole incident as were most people that I knew. Some of the Kennedy's think they're above the law but IMO it's more of a class and money issue than anything else. This has nothing to do with anything but my stepfather worked for the company that did maintenance on Ted and Bobby Kennedy's homes back in the 60's and early '70's...he always had interesting stories to tell...:eek:

Thanks and I understand. My point is that 13 years later there is still so much argument about the Simpson trials. Honestly, Simpson's conduct helps to keep some of it alive. However, even before his episodes, people were outraged and would not let the subject drop. They seemed to have let Kennedy's drop.

[weezer]

I glean my position from Mr. Carter's achievements after gaining his freedom. Yes, in fact Mr. Carter was an athlete at the time of the murders. Show me where I posted he was declared innocent. I understand that the ruling is either guilty or not guilty. When a verdict is overturned, it often means that there was not enough evidence or the character of the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I see that you continue to want to label some as murderers, even though the judicial disagrees. Tell me, do you think Edward Kennedy is a guilty of manslaughter or negligent homicide, and, if you do, why haven't you said so on this board?

"Carter's boxing career was going down the tubes in 1966. In May - one month before the murders - the "Ring" magazine reported that Carter had plunged to No. 9 in the rankings. Carter's record for 1965-66 was a dismal 7-7-1."

and sometimes people outlive evidence and witnesses and, like orenthal, spend enough money to walk free. carter wasn't found not guilty -- he wasn't acquitted -- he was found guilty of murder twice -- twice -- his case was overturned because a technicality. he could have been retried but wasn't.

[William Anthony]

"Carter's boxing career was going down the tubes in 1966. In May - one month before the murders - the "Ring" magazine reported that Carter had plunged to No. 9 in the rankings. Carter's record for 1965-66 was a dismal 7-7-1."

and sometimes people outlive evidence and witnesses and, like orenthal, spend enough money to walk free. carter wasn't found not guilty -- he wasn't acquitted -- he was found guilty of murder twice -- twice -- his case was overturned because a technicality. he could have been retried but wasn't.

I think the links have been posted and, should the members decide to read them, they can determine for themselves what happened to Carter and what his achievements were.

[weezer]

I think the links have been posted and, should the members decide to read them, they can determine for themselves what happened to Carter and what his achievements were.

then we should let them weigh both sides don't you think?

http://www.graphicwitness.com/carter/

[martin II]

"Carter's boxing career was going down the tubes in 1966. In May - one month before the murders - the "Ring" magazine reported that Carter had plunged to No. 9 in the rankings. Carter's record for 1965-66 was a dismal 7-7-1."

and sometimes people outlive evidence and witnesses and, like orenthal, spend enough money to walk free. carter wasn't found not guilty -- he wasn't acquitted -- he was found guilty of murder twice -- twice -- his case was overturned because a technicality. he could have been retried but wasn't.

you do agree that he was a boxer before the murders RIGHT?

[William Anthony]

then we should let them weigh both sides don't you think?

http://www.graphicwitness.com/carter/

Why, but of course. This is the nature of an adversarial event. I was skimming your link until I reached approximately half way on the scroll section of my computer, when I saw the picture of the black gentleman, for the sake of being polite, on the left hand side. I think he is well known as well as what he stands for, which is, imho, less than an open, honest and impartial. Yes, by all means let's let both sides be read.

[martin II]

In June of 1966, Carter was arrested on suspicion of being involved in a triple murder at the Lafayette Grill in downtown Paterson. Although an eyewitness injured in the shooting said that Carter was not involved in the crime, he was convicted of it and sentenced to life in prison. He continued to maintain his innocence, however. He won a retrial on the charges in 1976, but he and his alleged accomplice, John Artis, were again convicted and Carter resentenced to life.

Carter and his supporters continued to fight the conviction, accusing the Paterson police of a racist conspiracy against Carter. Finally, in 1985, Carter was freed when an appellate judge ruled that he had not received a fair trial. This time, prosecutors chose not to try Carter a third time, and he has been free ever since.

http://www.biographybase.com/biography/Carter_Rubin.html

[martin II]

"Carter's boxing career was going down the tubes in 1966. In May - one month before the murders - the "Ring" magazine reported that Carter had plunged to No. 9 in the rankings. Carter's record for 1965-66 was a dismal 7-7-1."

and sometimes people outlive evidence and witnesses and, like orenthal, spend enough money to walk free. carter wasn't found not guilty -- he wasn't acquitted -- he was found guilty of murder twice -- twice -- his case was overturned because a technicality. he could have been retried but wasn't.

weezer
What technically do you speak of??

[William Anthony]

weezer
What technically do you speak of??

I am sure she didn't mean that the violation of a citizen's Constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights was a technicality,

[martin II]

then we should let them weigh both sides don't you think?

http://www.graphicwitness.com/carter/

Is this link from a blog by this guy?

It seems to be a opinion of a person that thinks Carter was guilty.The apellate court toss the convictions and the prosecutors decided the apellates
reasons would not allow them to be successful if they charged him again.
So the system worked for Carter and for all of us.imo

[martin II]

I am sure she didn't mean that the violation of a citizen's Constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights was a technicality,

I am not sure what she means that is why i asked her to inform us about the technicality she says was the reason the apellate court tossed the convictions. Maby she knows something we don't
imo

[martin II]

weezer
can you tell us who Cal Deal is and why his opinions should be considered??

[weezer]

you do agree that he was a boxer before the murders RIGHT?

and a thug since his first assault at age 14. your point?

[martin II]

Thanks and I understand. My point is that 13 years later there is still so much argument about the Simpson trials. Honestly, Simpson's conduct helps to keep some of it alive. However, even before his episodes, people were outraged and would not let the subject drop. They seemed to have let Kennedy's drop.

William
OJ = continued arguments

Ted = moved on

[martin II]

and a thug since his first assault at age 14. your point?

I believe you posted that Carter was not a boxer when trhe murders happened.MY post says he was.unless i am wrong and you were correct.
martinII

[William Anthony]

I am not sure what she means that is why i asked her to inform us about the technicality she says was the reason the apellate court tossed the convictions. Maby she knows something we don't
imo

Maybe.

[William Anthony]

William
OJ = continued arguments

Ted = moved on

There does seem to be some inequality, :).

[William Anthony]

Here is a link to the denial of the new trial and the reasons why. It makes for some interesting reading.

http://www.graphicwitness.com/carter/pdfs/74_12_10_Larner-decision.pdf

[martin II]

Here is a link to the denial of the new trial and the reasons why. It makes for some interesting reading.

http://www.graphicwitness.com/carter/pdfs/74_12_10_Larner-decision.pdf

So le got the witness to lie on the stand against Carter and he was convicted on false le generated testimony.Does not look like a technocality to me.It looks like a crime commited by a witness.

[William Anthony]

So le got the witness to lie on the stand against Carter and he was convicted on false le generated testimony.Does not look like a technocality to me.It looks like a crime commited by a witness.

What are the words for that? Oh yes, perjury, obstruction of justice, false confinement, abuse of process and suborning perjury come to mind .

[weezer]

I believe you posted that Carter was not a boxer when trhe murders happened.MY post says he was.unless i am wrong and you were correct.
martinII

no martin, I never said carter wasn't a boxer when he committed the murders -- I said he wasn't an athlete.

[weezer]

What are the words for that? Oh yes, perjury, obstruction of justice, false confinement, abuse of process and suborning perjury come to mind .

ahh yes -- another psychopath framed by LE. :eek:

[William Anthony]

no martin, I never said carter wasn't a boxer when he committed the murders -- I said he wasn't an athlete.

I think there are quite a few boxers that might want to show you they are athletes. :)

[William Anthony]

ahh yes -- another psychopath framed by LE. :eek:

No, just a few people who think that violating a person's Constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights in search of victory is merely a technicality.

[martin II]

no martin, I never said carter wasn't a boxer when he committed the murders -- I said he wasn't an athlete.

I am not sure about
'when he commited the murders" but i am sure boxers are athletes.imo
martin II

[martin II]

no martin, I never said carter wasn't a boxer when he committed the murders -- I said he wasn't an athlete.

The Internaitonal Olympics Commitee considers boxers athletes. do you agree?

[William Anthony]

I have been searching but cannot find anything on point about the right of a property owner to use force to retrieve his property. I would appreciate any assistance that can be given.

[William Anthony]

I must apologize if I posted anything on California law on this thread in regard to the charges. I was in school and distracted. After my last post and while I was searching, I realized that the crimes took place in Nevada. I apologize if I posted anything about California's Penal Code. Here is Nevada's.

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec380

[William Anthony]

Here is a link that states that under Nevada Law intent is not an element of the crime. However it goes on to make another interesting point. I cannot copy both, so I will post the link and then the quote.

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:GUoSxj4V-vgJ:www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/B165445.DOC+intent+an+element+of+robbery+under+nev ada+law&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

[William Anthony]

The portion of the case that I feel may be relevant.

"Nevada law does not require a robber to act with a specific intent to permanently deprive the victim of his or her property. (Hickson v. State (1982) 640 P.2d 921, 922; Litteral v. State (Nev. 1981) 634 P.2d 1226, 1227-1229.)"

If the property did not belong to those from which it was taken, there can be no robbery, imho. Therefore, ownership will be a key issue in the trial, imho.

[martin II]

The portion of the case that I feel may be relevant.

"Nevada law does not require a robber to act with a specific intent to permanently deprive the victim of his or her property. (Hickson v. State (1982) 640 P.2d 921, 922; Litteral v. State (Nev. 1981) 634 P.2d 1226, 1227-1229.)"

If the property did not belong to those from which it was taken, there can be no robbery, imho. Therefore, ownership will be a key issue in the trial, imho.

It was reported at the hearing that the two sellers did not have canceled checks or receipts showing they had purchased the goods they were attempting to sell. If the goods were passed to them by Mike Gilbert then he has to show purchase proof. If not then i would think the goods would have been owned by OJ SIMPSON.imo

[William Anthony]

I agree with your point. Even if you consider the verdict in the civil trial, the property could not have belonged to those in the room. Therefore, by the wording in the ruling in the case I posted, there can be no robbery. No robbery, no kidnapping.

[William Anthony]

It was reported at the hearing that the two sellers did not have canceled checks or receipts showing they had purchased the goods they were attempting to sell. If the goods were passed to them by Mike Gilbert then he has to show purchase proof. If not then i would think the goods would have been owned by OJ SIMPSON.imo

I think that fairness dictates that Simpson should be allowed to plead guilty to trespassing and the whole thing put on the back burner.

[martin II]

I agree with your point. Even if you consider the verdict in the civil trial, the property could not have belonged to those in the room. Therefore, by the wording in the ruling in the case I posted, there can be no robbery. No robbery, no kidnapping.

oj is clearly heard on the tapes saying 'I ONLY WANT MY STUFF" There does not seem to be any intent to take stuff that was not his. I also believe he was heard to say'GIVE HIM HIS CELL PHONE BACK'imo

[William Anthony]

oj is clearly heard on the tapes saying 'I ONLY WANT MY STUFF" There does not seem to be any intent to take stuff that was not his. I also believe he was heard to say'GIVE HIM HIS CELL PHONE BACK'imo

yes, that would seem to negate the concept of general intent, should the court decide that is an element of the crime that the prosecution needs to prove. I have an continue to look for what Nevada has to say on general intent.

[William Anthony]

oj is clearly heard on the tapes saying 'I ONLY WANT MY STUFF" There does not seem to be any intent to take stuff that was not his. I also believe he was heard to say'GIVE HIM HIS CELL PHONE BACK'imo

Here is a discussion on specific and general intent. I would say that the state will have a hard burden, imho.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=nv&vol=121NevAdvOpNo86&invol=2

[William Anthony]

I was sorry to hear of Senator Kennedy's illness. I hope that he has a complete and full recovery and his family is my thoughts and payers.

[martin II]

I was sorry to hear of Senator Kennedy's illness. I hope that he has a complete and full recovery and his family is my thoughts and payers.

Hopefully he can recover quickly.I prayed for him when i heard the news.

[martin II]

yes, that would seem to negate the concept of general intent, should the court decide that is an element of the crime that the prosecution needs to prove. I have an continue to look for what Nevada has to say on general intent.

Tape
OJ: "you stole my stuff" Fromong: "no oj i did not steal it Mike stole it" oj: "I only want my stuff" OJ; "Give him his cell back"

Oj did not leave the room with ANY item in his hands. Back at ojs hotel it was discovered that the others had taken 1-2 items that did not belove to oj
and OJ told the white guy to return them to Fromong.This guy agreed to do so but did not return them as he had ideas that he could sell them for himself. imo

Where does oj show intent to rob anyone in the hotel room?

[tv]

I agree with your point. Even if you consider the verdict in the civil trial, the property could not have belonged to those in the room. Therefore, by the wording in the ruling in the case I posted, there can be no robbery. No robbery, no kidnapping.I'm not sure if I agree about no robbery, no kidnapping. A kidnapping can occur even if there is no robbery. OJ Simpson saying not to let anyone leave the room sounds like an unlawful detention to me.

[William Anthony]

I'm not sure if I agree about no robbery, no kidnapping. A kidnapping can occur even if there is no robbery. OJ Simpson saying not to let anyone leave the room sounds like an unlawful detention to me.

Here is what the law says.

NRS 200.310 Degrees.

1. A person who willfully seizes, confines, inveigles, entices, decoys, abducts, conceals, kidnaps or carries away a person by any means whatsoever with the intent to hold or detain, or who holds or detains, the person for ransom, or reward, or for the purpose of committing sexual assault, extortion or robbery upon or from the person, or for the purpose of killing the person or inflicting substantial bodily harm upon him, or to exact from relatives, friends, or any other person any money or valuable thing for the return or disposition of the kidnapped person, and a person who leads, takes, entices, or carries away or detains any minor with the intent to keep, imprison, or confine him from his parents, guardians, or any other person having lawful custody of the minor, or with the intent to hold the minor to unlawful service, or perpetrate upon the person of the minor any unlawful act is guilty of kidnapping in the first degree which is a category A felony.

2. A person who willfully and without authority of law seizes, inveigles, takes, carries away or kidnaps another person with the intent to keep the person secretly imprisoned within the State, or for the purpose of conveying the person out of the State without authority of law, or in any manner held to service or detained against his will, is guilty of kidnapping in the second degree which is a category B felony.

[1:165:1947; 1943 NCL § 10612.05]—(NRS A 1959, 20; 1979, 39; 1987, 495; 1995, 1184)

[tv]

Here is what the law says.

NRS 200.310 Degrees.

1. A person who willfully seizes, confines, inveigles, entices, decoys, abducts, conceals, kidnaps or carries away a person by any means whatsoever with the intent to hold or detain, or who holds or detains, the person for ransom, or reward, or for the purpose of committing sexual assault, extortion or robbery upon or from the person, or for the purpose of killing the person or inflicting substantial bodily harm upon him, or to exact from relatives, friends, or any other person any money or valuable thing for the return or disposition of the kidnapped person, and a person who leads, takes, entices, or carries away or detains any minor with the intent to keep, imprison, or confine him from his parents, guardians, or any other person having lawful custody of the minor, or with the intent to hold the minor to unlawful service, or perpetrate upon the person of the minor any unlawful act is guilty of kidnapping in the first degree which is a category A felony.

2. A person who willfully and without authority of law seizes, inveigles, takes, carries away or kidnaps another person with the intent to keep the person secretly imprisoned within the State, or for the purpose of conveying the person out of the State without authority of law, or in any manner held to service or detained against his will, is guilty of kidnapping in the second degree which is a category B felony.

[1:165:1947; 1943 NCL § 10612.05]—(NRS A 1959, 20; 1979, 39; 1987, 495; 1995, 1184)So you're saying as long as there is no other purpose except to detain then there is no crime?

[William Anthony]

So you're saying as long as there is no other purpose except to detain then there is no crime?

No, I am saying robbery, which must be proven, is an element of felony A kidnapping. Felony B requires prove that Simpson did not have the authority of law to retrieve his property. That is why I think ownership will be the key element.

[William Anthony]

If you see someone taking your coat from a coat rack that is located in the corner of a room and you tell them to stop and block them from going around you and a fight ensues after which you get your coat, did you kidnap the would-be thieve, or will the law look at mitigating circumstances?

[tv]

No, I am saying robbery, which must be proven, is an element of felony A kidnapping. Felony B requires prove that Simpson did not have the authority of law to retrieve his property. That is why I think ownership will be the key element.

Then I repeat -- you're saying unless there was a robbery there is no kidnapping? If my neighbor comes to visit and I don't let her leave I've committed no crime? Hard to believe.

[William Anthony]

Then I repeat -- you're saying unless there was a robbery there is no kidnapping? If my neighbor comes to visit and I don't let her leave I've committed no crime? Hard to believe.

You have not committed a felony A kidnapping. If your neighbor was stealing your property, then you might not have committed a felony B kidnapping, depending on the circumstances, imho. These were not innocent people who were visiting Simpson and they were prevented from leaving.

[tv]

You have not committed a felony A kidnapping. If your neighbor was stealing your property, then you might not have committed a felony B kidnapping, depending on the circumstances, imho. These were not innocent people who were visiting Simpson and they were prevented from leaving.I guess we'll see how it plays out in September. I'm having a hard time focusing on what you're trying to say because I'm under the influence of cold medicine but I'll check back in later when it wears off. Sorry about that. :(

[martin II]

Then I repeat -- you're saying unless there was a robbery there is no kidnapping? If my neighbor comes to visit and I don't let her leave I've committed no crime? Hard to believe.

If your neighbor put your neckless in her pocket(a crime) and attempeted to leave(a crime) and you saw it,you could refuse to allow her to leave, could take it back and push her out the door.Your intent was to prevent your property from illegally leaving your house.

[martin II]

I guess we'll see how it plays out in September. I'm having a hard time focusing on what you're trying to say because I'm under the influence of cold medicine but I'll check back in later when it wears off. Sorry about that. :(

It seems to me that if the two sellers cannot prove ownership of the items then they were guilty of posessions of stolen goods,attempting to sell stolen goods and even selling goods without a city license in a place not rented for that purpose. hahaha

[martin II]

So you're saying as long as there is no other purpose except to detain then there is no crime?

i also believe the law requires for the Kidnapped to be moved from the original place for kidnapping to take place.

[martin II]

I'm not sure if I agree about no robbery, no kidnapping. A kidnapping can occur even if there is no robbery. OJ Simpson saying not to let anyone leave the room sounds like an unlawful detention to me.

No one asked to leave the room.
Oj said " Nobody leaves the room" Did HE do anything to prevent anyone from leaving? Did he put his hands on anyone? use force? He said "Give me my s***/stuff" 'You stole my stuff "'thats mine, thats mine" etc
other people took the goods out of the room. not oj.
Was his intent to ROB the two people of his goods?
He never said GIVE ME YOUR STUFF.

[weezer]

No one asked to leave the room.
Oj said " Nobody leaves the room" Did HE do anything to prevent anyone from leaving? Did he put his hands on anyone? use force? He said "Give me my s***/stuff" 'You stole my stuff "'thats mine, thats mine" etc
other people took the goods out of the room. not oj.
Was his intent to ROB the two people of his goods?
He never said GIVE ME YOUR STUFF.

I think coming into the room (not his) with guns (whether or not he was holding one) and screaming "take everything" - 'take it all' -- 'nobody leaves this room' -- is going to be a hard sell that it wasn't armed robbery.

As far as it being his 'sh*t' -- I think he's going to have to prove that it was his 'sh*t'. Personally, I think either all or the majority of the 'sh*t' wasn't his but the Goldmans and Brown Estate.

[weezer]

i also believe the law requires for the Kidnapped to be moved from the original place for kidnapping to take place.

william posted the requirements and I believe you're wrong.

[weezer]

If your neighbor put your neckless in her pocket(a crime) and attempeted to leave(a crime) and you saw it,you could refuse to allow her to leave, could take it back and push her out the door.Your intent was to prevent your property from illegally leaving your house.

LOL, if you do that, you can be charged with assault. Even if it is your 'neckless' in your house.

[weezer]

It seems to me that if the two sellers cannot prove ownership of the items then they were guilty of posessions of stolen goods,attempting to sell stolen goods and even selling goods without a city license in a place not rented for that purpose. hahaha

hmmm -- wouldn't you think it would be orenthal that has to prove the 'sh*t' was his?

[martin II]

hmmm -- wouldn't you think it would be orenthal that has to prove the 'sh*t' was his?

Absolutely not.

If le had caught those two with that stuff in the back of their car before they carried it into that hotel room and they had no bill of sale or cancelled checks to prove ownership,they would have been in the police station instead of that hotel room.

[weezer]

Absolutely not.

If le had caught those two with that stuff in the back of their car before they carried it into that hotel room and they had no bill of sale or cancelled checks to prove ownership,they would have been in the police station instead of that hotel room.

oh martin -- that's ridiculous.

[martin II]

I think coming into the room (not his) with guns (whether or not he was holding one) and screaming "take everything" - 'take it all' -- 'nobody leaves this room' -- is going to be a hard sell that it wasn't armed robbery.

As far as it being his 'sh*t' -- I think he's going to have to prove that it was his 'sh*t'. Personally, I think either all or the majority of the 'sh*t' wasn't his but the Goldmans and Brown Estate.

I have posted this before but will do so again.
Fred asked the judge in ca to give him all of the stuff recovered by le in vagas,The judge ruled that fred would have to bring each item to his court
and the judge would then decide what to do with it. Fred was not able to do that as vegas kept the goods for trial.When fred asked for that watch,that same judge had oj to send the watch to him for the judges decision. The judge ruled that the watch was not what fred had claimed it was and ordered that the watch be returned to oj.

I am not aware that this ca judge awarded fred or NBS Estate any of the vegas goods. If you are, please post that decision.imo

[weezer]

I was sorry to hear of Senator Kennedy's illness. I hope that he has a complete and full recovery and his family is my thoughts and payers.

oh please. . .

[weezer]

I have posted this before but will do so again.
Fred asked the judge in ca to give him all of the stuff recovered by le in vagas,The judge ruled that fred would have to bring each item to his court
and the judge would then decide what to do with it. Fred was not able to do that as vegas kept the goods for trial.When fred asked for that watch,that same judge had oj to send the watch to him for the judges decision. The judge ruled that the watch was not what fred had claimed it was and ordered that the watch be returned to oj.

I am not aware that this ca judge awarded fred or NBS Estate any of the vegas goods. If you are, please post that decision.imo

and did orenthal get to take the 'sh*t' home?

[weezer]

Hopefully he can recover quickly.I prayed for him when i heard the news.

I bet you did --

[martin II]

oh martin -- that's ridiculous.

I assume as far as you are concerned.hahaha

[martin II]

and did orenthal get to take the 'sh*t' home?

If you can post a judges decison giving those goods to fred, i stand corrected
if not then i stand by my post.:cool:

[martin II]

and did orenthal get to take the 'sh*t' home?

no one did as le held it for evidence for the trial. You should know that.

[weezer]

no one did as le held it for evidence for the trial. You should know that.

that is what I know. I assumed you didn't since you were regaling the fact that Mr. Goldman or the Brown Estate didn't.

[martin II]

I bet you did --

Yep and the good news is that he did not suffer a stroke and in awake and talking to his family members.

[weezer]

I assume as far as you are concerned.hahaha

me and most reasonable people. hahahahaha

[martin II]

that is what I know. I assumed you didn't since you were regaling the fact that Mr. Goldman or the Brown Estate didn't.

Can you post proof that those goods belonged to fred?

[weezer]

Yep and the good news is that he did not suffer a stroke and in awake and talking to his family members.

so you and william can continue to talk about how he should have gone to jail. LOL

[weezer]

Can you post proof that those goods belonged to fred?

what are you in such a bunch about. I'm not the one posting who the owner was. Remember? it was you. can you post proof that those goods belonged to orenthal?

[martin II]

what are you in such a bunch about. I'm not the one posting who the owner was. Remember? it was you. can you post proof that those goods belonged to orenthal?

You posted that the goods belonged to fred and NBS Estate. I just asked for a judges decision to that effect. Not up to playing your games today.:seeya:

[martin II]

so you and william can continue to talk about how he should have gone to jail. LOL

Weezer
Try to get your facts straight before making a false claim.

[weezer]

You posted that the goods belonged to fred and NBS Estate. I just asked for a judges decision to that effect. Not up to playing your games today.:seeya:

again with the distortions. I said, "I, personally believe" --

I'm not up to doing stupid tonight. :seeya: :seeya: :seeya:

[weezer]

Weezer
Try to get your facts straight before making a false claim.

my apologies martin -- I was wrong to include you in that.

[martin II]

Hi. My comp is really playing up tonight. I think I saw someone post on Senator Kennedy. I pray that he is all right. It's a 'seizure' not a stroke. Can someone explain the difference. He is 75 after all.

Bye

Joseph Bell
Because you asked here is a link to ted Kennedy.
Hope there are no complaints

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/05/18/sen_kennedy_is_hospitalized_after_suffering_a_seiz ure/

[William Anthony]

LOL, if you do that, you can be charged with assault. Even if it is your 'neckless' in your house.

You can be charged with it but that does not mean that the charges will stick or that you will be found guilty and it depends on the laws of the state.

[William Anthony]

hmmm -- wouldn't you think it would be orenthal that has to prove the 'sh*t' was his?

No, the state has the burden of proof. However, who knows since it's Simpson.

[William Anthony]

oh please. . .

Believe it or not.

[William Anthony]

so you and william can continue to talk about how he should have gone to jail. LOL

Please show me where I posted that Senator Kennedy should have gone to jail.

[martin II]

Please show me where I posted that Senator Kennedy should have gone to jail.

I looked and could not find it. Maby weezer found it??

[William Anthony]

I looked and could not find it. Maby weezer found it??

Maybe it is in the same place as that technicality of which she spoke.:)

[tv]

Because you asked here is a link to ted Kennedy.
Hope there are no complaints

Hi. Why would there be any complaints? Thanks for the link.:)Good question -- why would there be any complaints? :confused:

[martin II]

Good question -- why would there be any complaints? :confused:

Some may have considered the link about Senators Kennedy's condition as slightly ot and complained, especially if they are don't approve of his politics.imo

[martin II]

Maybe it is in the same place as that technicality of which she spoke.:)

No response as yet.:confused:

[weezer]

No response as yet.:confused:

what 'no response'? I didn't think one was needed. When I read the 'stuff' on Carter, it was obvious that he was a triple murderer that walked free.

[weezer]

I looked and could not find it. Maby weezer found it??

I refuse to respond to the baiting -- you guys are something else! :no:

[martin II]

what 'no response'? I didn't think one was needed. When I read the 'stuff' on Carter, it was obvious that he was a triple murderer that walked free.

I think the subject was the posters request on post #2226 not Carter .imo

[William Anthony]

I refuse to respond to the baiting -- you guys are something else! :no:

You made the claim that I said Kennedy should go to jail. You stated it as fact. Out of respect for this community, I ask you to post where I said that. Martin checked and posted he did not find it. It is something else to post something that is untrue about a poster, imho. It is not baiting when a poster asks you to support what you say as fact, it is within the rules, as I understand them. If you find where I said it, I will say that I was mistaken, out of respect for the community.

[tv]

You made the claim that I said Kennedy should go to jail. You stated it as fact. Out of respect for this community, I ask you to post where I said that. Martin checked and posted he did not find it. It is something else to post something that is untrue about a poster, imho. It is not baiting when a poster asks you to support what you say as fact, it is within the rules, as I understand them. If you find where I said it, I will say that I was mistaken, out of respect for the community.Oh, for bob's sake, if you didn't say it then you didn't say it. You've made your point and now it's time to let it go.

[William Anthony]

Oh, for bob's sake, if you didn't say it then you didn't say it. You've made your point and now it's time to let it go.

I responded to another's poster's response to clarify the situation. I am sure that you do not feel that it is proper for another poster to post false information to the community about what another poster said. Do you?

[weezer]

I responded to another's poster's response to clarify the situation. I am sure that you do not feel that it is proper for another poster to post false information to the community about what another poster said. Do you?

okay let's get this over with. I am not backing down on my statement that you thought kennedy should do jail time -- that was the tone of your posts when you compared him to orenthal.

are you saying that anyone charged with manslaughter should not do time?

[martin II]

okay let's get this over with. I am not backing down on my statement that you thought kennedy should do jail time -- that was the tone of your posts when you compared him to orenthal.

are you saying that anyone charged with manslaughter should not do time?

The claim you made against William was not true.imo

[martin II]

okay let's get this over with. I am not backing down on my statement that you thought kennedy should do jail time -- that was the tone of your posts when you compared him to orenthal.

are you saying that anyone charged with manslaughter should not do time?

You cannot know what he THOUGHT only what he did or DID NOT POST.

[martin II]

Oh, for bob's sake, if you didn't say it then you didn't say it. You've made your point and now it's time to let it go.

TV
For Mary's sake , all it takes is a apology by weezer that she made a wrong claim against William. imo

[weezer]

TV
For Mary's sake , all it takes is a apology by weezer that she made a wrong claim against William. imo

ain't happening ---- you just as well to move on.

[William Anthony]

ain't happening ---- you just as well to move on.

I expected that you would not. I think the community can make up their own mind on the issue.

[tv]

TV
For Mary's sake , all it takes is a apology by weezer that she made a wrong claim against William. imoFor bob and Mary's sake, if we all got every apology on this board that we think we're entitled to get all any of us would do is sit around and wait for apologies.

[William Anthony]

For bob and Mary's sake, if we all got every apology on this board that we think we're entitled to get all any of us would do is sit around and wait for apologies.

I had made my statement that I did not expect one and would leave it to the community to judge. I want this community to be different from some of the others, in that I believe posting should be done with politeness, courtesy, civility, respect, absent name calling, rudeness and based in equality. I think that we should all want this.

P. S. without false accusations.

[weezer]

I had made my statement that I did not expect one and would leave it to the community to judge. I want this community to be different from some of the others, in that I believe posting should be done with politeness, courtesy, civility, respect, absent name calling, rudeness and based in equality. I think that we should all want this.

P. S. without false accusations.

can we also post under multiple nics? :tongue:

[William Anthony]

can we also post under multiple nics? :tongue:

Yes, and that would hold true for all members of this community and should be enforced equally.

[tv]

Yes, and that would hold true for all members of this community and should be enforced equally.I thought posting under multiple nics was against the rules? I think that would fall under the heading of being rude, impolite and uncivil to the rest of the community.

[weezer]

I thought posting under multiple nics was against the rules? I think that would fall under the heading of being rude, impolite and uncivil to the rest of the community.

well now -- let's consider the split personality poster -- he deserves to be heard too. . . .he deserves to be heard too. . .he deserves to be heard too. . .

[William Anthony]

I thought posting under multiple nics was against the rules? I think that would fall under the heading of being rude, impolite and uncivil to the rest of the community.

Agreed and should be equally enforced. I have been disciplined for my infractions. I cannot say the same for others.

[William Anthony]

well now -- let's consider the split personality poster -- he deserves to be heard too. . . .he deserves to be heard too. . .he deserves to be heard too. . .

Are you alright? Should I have said allright, smile?

[William Anthony]

It is the inequality in how laws/rules are enforced that may have led to the cheering of the verdict, imho.

[tv]

Agreed and should be equally enforced. I have been disciplined for my infractions. I cannot say the same for others.I've received two infractions on this board for being uncivil so you can say the same for me.

[William Anthony]

I've received two infractions on this board for being uncivil so you can say the same for me.

Only two. I would say that you are doing good.:)

[weezer]

I've received two infractions on this board for being uncivil so you can say the same for me.

I believe most of us have received infractions -- so guess we're all victims of the injustice of inequality on this board.

[William Anthony]

I believe most of us have received infractions -- so guess we're all victims of the injustice of inequality on this board.

I think you are aware of what I speak, more so than some others. :) I believe we are now straying off topic.

[weezer]

I think you are aware of what I speak, more so than some others. :) I believe we are now straying off topic.

actually, I don't. :confused: