Issues In The Criminal Trial

[martin II]

"DISPATCHER: You want, you feel safe hanging up?
NICOLE: Well, you're right
DISPATCHER: You want to wait til the police get there?
NICOLE: Yeah."

and I think the most chilling of all:

"DISPATCHER: Just a moment. Does he have any weapons?
NICOLE: I don't know. He went home and he came back. The kids are up there sleeping and I don't want anything to happen."

oj never came close to nicole and did not lay a finger on her.le came,talked to oj and nicole. decided it was nothing for them to do as no physical contact was made. oj went home and nicole continued to do what ever she was doing before she had called oj and asked him to come to her house so she could explain why she had a party at the house that included drug addicta and prostitutes with his children in the house.imo

[tv]

It was obvious that Nicole was in fear for her life and for the children. It's also obvious that she had been down this road before and that's why she was so scared. Some posters on this board seem to think this anger was justified. This kind of rage is never acceptable.

Simpson himself had a reputation for drug use and we won't even go into his sexual escapades so Nicole doesn't deserve to be judged by him. Sexual activity and drugs in front of the children doesn't compare to carving up their mother and leaving her to be found when they woke up.

Thanks for posting that weezer.

[martin II]

It was obvious that Nicole was in fear for her life and for the children. It's also obvious that she had been down this road before and that's why she was so scared. Some posters on this board seem to think this anger was justified. This kind of rage is never acceptable.

Simpson himself had a reputation for drug use and we won't even go into his sexual escapades so Nicole doesn't deserve to be judged by him. Sexual activity and drugs in front of the children doesn't compare to carving up their mother and leaving her to be found when they woke up.

Thanks for posting that weezer.

oj just did not like the idea of nicole having that party with those people in the house with his children present and he went there to tell nicole that.He went home and she called him and asked him to return.
Remember it was a woman that attended that party that told oj about the party that caused him to go to nicole in the first plae.imo

He did not lay a finger on her which i assume is why le just told him to leave and he did.

[weezer]

*Snipped*". . .explain why she had a party at the house that included drug addicta and prostitutes with his children in the house."

on the night that they were butchered by orenthal james simpson, Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown had no drugs in their system. On the night orenthal james simpson murdered Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown, orenthal james simpson did have drugs in his system.

before the jury toured orenthal's home, the defense team removed a picture from his bedside of his naked girlfriend.

besides, we both know that that is not what he was screaming and ranting about don't we?

[martin II]

It was obvious that Nicole was in fear for her life and for the children. It's also obvious that she had been down this road before and that's why she was so scared. Some posters on this board seem to think this anger was justified. This kind of rage is never acceptable.

Simpson himself had a reputation for drug use and we won't even go into his sexual escapades so Nicole doesn't deserve to be judged by him. Sexual activity and drugs in front of the children doesn't compare to carving up their mother and leaving her to be found when they woke up.

Thanks for posting that weezer.

tv
i assume that since you have talked about ojs drug use it is fair game to talk about others drug use.

[weezer]

oj just did not like the idea of nicole having that party with those people in the house with his children present and he went there to tell nicole that.He went home and she called him and asked him to return.
Remember it was a woman that attended that party that told oj about the party that caused him to go to nicole in the first plae.imo

He did not lay a finger on her which i assume is why le just told him to leave and he did.

orenthal didn't like the idea of Nicole having a life that didn't include him.

orenthal said she told him to come back. Nicole said: ". . .he left and came back. . ." Since we know orenthal to be a proven liar, I'm inclined to believe Nicole. I believe this incident showed -- one more time -- an out of control, enraged, and dangerous orenthal.

a woman told him? then why was he screaming like a girl about reading it?

orenthal got the same treatment that time that he'd gotten all of the other times --

[martin II]

*Snipped*

on the night that they were butchered by orenthal james simpson, Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown had no drugs in their system. On the night orenthal james simpson murdered Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown, orenthal james simpson did have drugs in his system.

before the jury toured orenthal's home, the defense team removed a picture from his bedside of his naked girlfriend.

besides, we both know that that is not what he was screaming and ranting about don't we?

Oj was tested for drugs and the resultrs were that he had TRACES OF MARIJUANA IN HIS SYSTEM.

Prior to the jury comming to ojs house a naked picture of paula BARBERI is supposed to have been removed from a table in his bedroom. This means what other than a picture was supposed to have been removed.

You and i must accept the le report and Katos testimony that oj was upset and screeming and why Oj came to nicoles house.

All of this means oj did what. Several months later decide to go kill nIcole??
hahahaha

[weezer]

tv
i assume that since you have talked about ojs drug use it is fair game to talk about others drug use.

hey, all's fair just as long as you can back it up with blood tests as proof.

[martin II]

orenthal didn't like the idea of Nicole having a life that didn't include him.

orenthal said she told him to come back. Nicole said: ". . .he left and came back. . ." Since we know orenthal to be a proven liar, I'm inclined to believe Nicole. I believe this incident showed -- one more time -- an out of control, enraged, and dangerous orenthal.

a woman told him? then why was he screaming like a girl about reading it?

orenthal got the same treatment that time that he'd gotten all of the other times --

you do seem to have a lot of opinions not backed by testimony or facts.

[martin II]

hey, all's fair just as long as you can back it up with blood tests as proof.

Close friends testimony will be ok for me.i thank you.

[weezer]

Oj was tested for drugs and the resultrs were that he had TRACES OF MARIJUANA IN HIS SYSTEM.

Prior to the jury comming to ojs house a naked picture of paula BARBERI is supposed to have been removed from a table in his bedroom. This means what other than a picture was supposed to have been removed.

You and i must accept the le report and Katos testimony that oj was upset and screeming and why Oj came to nicoles house.

All of this means oj did what. Several months later decide to go kill nIcole??
hahahaha

last I heard, marijuana is a drg! AND, it was found in his system. No drugs in Ron's or Nicole's systems. Just orenthal.

you are right to wonder about what the defense removed from orenthal's bedroom. Lord only knows. Drugs? Weapons?

I take Nicole's word for why orenthal was there: "NICOLE: I don't want to stay on the line. He's going to beat the (expletive) out of me."

and yes, it does show that not only was there a history of fear for her safety when it comes to orenthal but when you put the other evidence with it, it proves she had every right to be.

I'm still wondering why you found your post funny.

[martin II]

Right now i am focusing on a posters post of testimony that shows how weak the prosecutions witnesses/case was. I will deal with your opinions and other STUFF when i have a lot of spare time.:cool:

[martin II]

hey, all's fair just as long as you can back it up with blood tests as proof.

Maby in the meantime you may be able to understand the differance between
TRACES OF MARIJUANA AND DRUGS. I realize you have a biased interest in making it sound more that it actually was.:cool:

[socaldiva]

Maby in the meantime you may be able to understand the differance between
TRACES OF MARIJUANA AND DRUGS. I realize you have a biased interest in making it sound more that it actually was.:cool:


Gee, do you mean like when you try to portray Ron Goldman & Nicole Brown as drug addicts, even though there were ZERO drugs in their systems at autopsy???;)

[weezer]

you do seem to have a lot of opinions not backed by testimony or facts.

what part of my post isn't backed by testimony or facts?

[martin II]

last I heard, marijuana is a drg! AND, it was found in his system. No drugs in Ron's or Nicole's systems. Just orenthal.

you are right to wonder about what the defense removed from orenthal's bedroom. Lord only knows. Drugs? Weapons?

I take Nicole's word for why orenthal was there: "NICOLE: I don't want to stay on the line. He's going to beat the (expletive) out of me."

and yes, it does show that not only was there a history of fear for her safety when it comes to orenthal but when you put the other evidence with it, it proves she had every right to be.

I'm still wondering why you found your post funny.

Because of how you post your opinions as fact and expect people to believe it.hahaha

[weezer]

Close friends testimony will be ok for me.i thank you.

really? is it going to be the same close friend that you call a liar about everything else? LOL

[socaldiva]

Right now i am focusing on a posters post of testimony that shows how weak the prosecutions witnesses/case was. I will deal with your opinions and other STUFF when i have a lot of spare time.:cool:

For cryin' out loud Martin, you're here 24/7. When don't you have spare time? :confused:

[weezer]

Maby in the meantime you may be able to understand the differance between
TRACES OF MARIJUANA AND DRUGS. I realize you have a biased interest in making it sound more that it actually was.:cool:

"Marijuana and Mental Health
A number of studies have shown an association between chronic marijuana use and increased rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and schizophrenia. Some of these studies have shown age at first use to be a factor, where early use is a marker of vulnerability to later problems. However, at this time, it not clear whether marijuana use causes mental problems, exacerbates them, or is used in attempt to self-medicate symptoms already in existence. Chronic marijuana use, especially in a very young person, may also be a marker of risk for mental illnesses, including addiction, stemming from genetic or environmental vulnerabilities, such as early exposure to stress or violence. At the present time, the strongest evidence links marijuana use and schizophrenia and/or related disorders6. High doses of marijuana can produce an acute psychotic reaction, and research suggests that in vulnerable individuals, marijuana use may be a factor that increases risk for the disease."

thanks for questioning this martin -- I would never have read this without your post spurring me on.

[weezer]

Because of how you post your opinions as fact and expect people to believe it.hahaha

what part of my post wasn't fact? hahahaha

[weezer]

Right now i am focusing on a posters post of testimony that shows how weak the prosecutions witnesses/case was. I will deal with your opinions and other STUFF when i have a lot of spare time.:cool:

For cryin' out loud Martin, you're here 24/7. When don't you have spare time? :confused:

LOL -- hey diva. good to see you posting.

[martin II]

what part of my post isn't backed by testimony or facts?

weezer
as i have stated i must spend my time responding to post that i believe add something of value to the discussion.:seeya:

[weezer]

weezer
as i have stated i must spend my time responding to post that i believe add something of value to the discussion.:seeya:

you mean like your idiotic posting on australia or was there something even more valuable to the simpson criminal trial discussion?

[martin II]

"Marijuana and Mental Health
A number of studies have shown an association between chronic marijuana use and increased rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and schizophrenia. Some of these studies have shown age at first use to be a factor, where early use is a marker of vulnerability to later problems. However, at this time, it not clear whether marijuana use causes mental problems, exacerbates them, or is used in attempt to self-medicate symptoms already in existence. Chronic marijuana use, especially in a very young person, may also be a marker of risk for mental illnesses, including addiction, stemming from genetic or environmental vulnerabilities, such as early exposure to stress or violence. At the present time, the strongest evidence links marijuana use and schizophrenia and/or related disorders6. High doses of marijuana can produce an acute psychotic reaction, and research suggests that in vulnerable individuals, marijuana use may be a factor that increases risk for the disease."

thanks for questioning this martin -- I would never have read this without your post spurring me on.

traces of marijuana in ones system could mean that the person could have smoked one joint as long as several month before the test. If one smoked on the day of the test it would INDICATE a POSITIVE RESULTS FOR MARIJUANA NOT TRACES. :seeya:

[martin II]

you mean like your idiotic posting on australia or was there something even more valuable to the simpson criminal trial discussion?

What you call idiotic usually has value for others.But what can i say but SORRY.:cool:

[weezer]

traces of marijuana in ones system could mean that the person could have smoked one joint as long as several month before the test. If one smoked on the day of the test it would INDICATE a POSITIVE RESULTS FOR MARIJUANA NOT TRACES. :seeya:

you obviously know more about the drug than I do -- I found the part "High doses of marijuana can produce an acute psychotic reaction" to be the most interesting. I mean, if someone wanted to make a defense for orenthal I guess that could be one. As far as I can tell, the majority feel that he's psychotic. ;)

[socaldiva]

you obviously know more about the drug than I do -- I found the part "High doses of marijuana can produce an acute psychotic reaction" to be the most interesting. I mean, if someone wanted to make a defense for orenthal I guess that could be one. As far as I can tell, the majority feel that he's psychotic. ;)

If I were a Simpson supporter I would prefer to have the drug use as an explanation for his odd behavior, better than being organically odd :D

Hi ya Weezer, good to see you too :seeya:

[weezer]

The seventh prosecution witness.

"RECROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. COCHRAN:

Q: AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE WITH NO CRIMINAL CHARGES FILED REGARDING THIS INCIDENT, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S INCORRECT.

Q: THERE WERE CRIMINAL CHARGES FILED?

A: I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE FILED. I COMPLETED A CRIME REPORT REGARDING TRESPASSING.

Q: YOU NEVER WENT TO COURT ON THIS CASE?

A: THAT'S RIGHT.

Q: YOU NEVER HAD TO TESTIFY?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AS FAR AS YOU KNOW MR. SIMPSON NEVER WENT TO COURT ON THIS CASE?

A: AS FAR AS I KNOW.

Q: WITH REGARD TO THAT, THIS TIME YOU SPENT THERE, MR. SIMPSON HAD LEFT THE SCENE BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY LEFT, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU AND YOUR PARTNER STAYED THERE FOR A PERIOD AFTER THAT; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ESCALATION. AFTER YOU LEFT, MAYBE AROUND 11:30 THAT EVENING, YOU RECEIVED NO FURTHER CALLS OR DID NOT HAVE TO RESPOND TO THE GRETNA GREEN RESIDENCE THAT EVENING; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT IS CORRECT. "

One whale of a domestic abuse case, thus far.:)

yep -- one whale of a domestic abuse case:

"DISPATCHER: You want, you feel safe hanging up?
NICOLE: Well, you're right
DISPATCHER: You want to wait til the police get there?
NICOLE: Yeah."

and I think the most chilling of all:

"DISPATCHER: Just a moment. Does he have any weapons?
NICOLE: I don't know. He went home and he came back. The kids are up there sleeping and I don't want anything to happen."

"NICOLE: Then he came and he practically knocked my upstairs door down but he pounded it and he screamed and hollered and I tried to get him out of the bedroom because the kids are sleeping in there."

[socaldiva]

yep -- one whale of a domestic abuse case:

"DISPATCHER: You want, you feel safe hanging up?
NICOLE: Well, you're right
DISPATCHER: You want to wait til the police get there?
NICOLE: Yeah."

and I think the most chilling of all:

"DISPATCHER: Just a moment. Does he have any weapons?
NICOLE: I don't know. He went home and he came back. The kids are up there sleeping and I don't want anything to happen.""NICOLE: Then he came and he practically knocked my upstairs door down but he pounded it and he screamed and hollered and I tried to get him out of the bedroom because the kids are sleeping in there."

It proves to me that he had no concern for the sleeping children on this occasion or when he slaughtered their poor Mother. So sad....

[weezer]

It proves to me that he had no concern for the sleeping children on this occasion or when he slaughtered their poor Mother. So sad....

it is sad -- and he's a sad example of a human being.

[socaldiva]

it is sad -- and he's a sad example of a human being.

I agree. Sad for the children, but Simpson is a pathetic excuse for a human being. He was afforded opportunities that others can only dream of & he still screwed it all up. What a jerk.

[tv]

*Snipped*

on the night that they were butchered by orenthal james simpson, Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown had no drugs in their system. On the night orenthal james simpson murdered Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown, orenthal james simpson did have drugs in his system.

before the jury toured orenthal's home, the defense team removed a picture from his bedside of his naked girlfriend.
besides, we both know that that is not what he was screaming and ranting about don't we?
Are we supposed to believe that his small children never entered his bedroom and saw the picture of a naked Paula Barbieri? Riiiight.

[tv]

Right now i am focusing on a posters post of testimony that shows how weak the prosecutions witnesses/case was. I will deal with your opinions and other STUFF when i have a lot of spare time.:cool:

For cryin' out loud Martin, you're here 24/7. When don't you have spare time? :confused:Hi Diva!! It's always great to see you! :beer:

[tv]

If I were a Simpson supporter I would prefer to have the drug use as an explanation for his odd behavior, better than being organically odd :D

Hi ya Weezer, good to see you too :seeya:Organically odd -- good one!!

[socaldiva]

[QUOTE=socaldiva;9105647]Hi Diva!! It's always great to see you! :beer:


Ah, thanks. Good to see you too sweetie! :seeya:

[weezer]

Are we supposed to believe that his small children never entered his bedroom and saw the picture of a naked Paula Barbieri? Riiiight.

or that his small children were never there when he did his drugs or had women in his bed? riiiiiiiight!

[martin II]

you obviously know more about the drug than I do -- I found the part "High doses of marijuana can produce an acute psychotic reaction" to be the most interesting. I mean, if someone wanted to make a defense for orenthal I guess that could be one. As far as I can tell, the majority feel that he's psychotic. ;)

As far as i can tell you have been able to tell us that oj wore womens undies,
That Nicole was a angel,That oj was pigeon toed (with out one ounce of proof) That Furhman was just kidding around on the tapes,that Cochran was a second rate lawyer and a first class lier,that traces of marijuana equals a phychotic individual and drug addict. that oj because of a phone call from Paula Barbera decided not to harm Paula but kill Nicole. Because you believe the jury members were Democrats they voted not guilty. The list goes on and one. So when you say'AS FAR AS YOU CAN TELL" you seem to be only telling your opinions to those that are interested.cool: :seeya:
martin II

[socaldiva]

*snip*
That oj was pigeon toed (with out one ounce of proof)

Uh, read about Simpson's childhood. The little creep had rickets. Or are you calling his Mama a liar? :tongue:

[tv]

martin, I've been a member here over a year and I've NEVER seen you say one thing about OJ Simpson that portrays him as anything but a saint. You need to get real before you accuse others of painting a false picture.

As far as the jury being democrats -- that was a part of the demographics of the jury that was released. Weezer explained that to you but you chose to ignore it and continue to make a big deal out of it. Slowhand explained why the political affiliation of the jurors was included. Once again, you chose to ignore.

[weezer]

As far as i can tell you have been able to tell us that oj wore womens undies,
That Nicole was a angel,That oj was pigeon toed (with out one ounce of proof) That Furhman was just kidding around on the tapes,that Cochran was a second rate lawyer and a first class lier,that traces of marijuana equals a phychotic individual and drug addict. that oj because of a phone call from Paula Barbera decided not to harm Paula but kill Nicole. Because you believe the jury members were Democrats they voted not guilty. The list goes on and one. So when you say'AS FAR AS YOU CAN TELL" you seem to be only telling your opinions to those that are interested.cool: :seeya:
martin II

I've simply been pointing out facts martin. the undies were in orenthal's washing machine. orenthal was/is pigeon-toed. Fuhrman was helping to write a screenplay (gosh, I hope you don't think all the shows and plays are real!). cochran was a shyster lawyer who got rich off of the backs of people who alledgedly suffered-- did I say he was a 'lier'? hmmm, I know I posted he was an abuser but I don't remember calling him a 'lier'. orenthal did have drugs in his system the night he butchered Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown -- I thought the drug excuse could possibly be an explantion for his psychotic behavior. I didn't post that paula's phone call drove orenthal to anything -- personally, I believe it simply offered him the oportunity to do what he did. I posted a link on the criminal jury -- if you find fault with it, so be it. But no, I don't believe because they were democrats they voted not guilty. I've always been very clear as to why I believe they voted not guilty. And yes, the list can go on and 'one'! :seeya:

[martin II]

Are we supposed to believe that his small children never entered his bedroom and saw the picture of a naked Paula Barbieri? Riiiight.

Bet they had seen their mother naked before or at least in a bikini in that pool. There has been no conversation that the picture was not artictically done so what is the problem.I doubt Paula would take or oj would have displayed a vulger picture of her. Paula had quite a frame you must know.
Is there something wrong with the female body.:shrug:

[tv]

Bet they had seen their mother naked before or at least in a bikini in that pool. There has been no conversation that the picture was not artictically done so what is the problem.I doubt Paula would take or oj would have displayed a vulger picture of her. Paula had quite a frame you must know.
Is there something wrong with the female body.:shrug:

martin, you forgot to include IMO. All this stuff is purely fantasy that you've made up because you want to believe it. hahaha

I don't really care about Paula's 'frame'. A nude picture is a nude picture.

[martin II]

I've simply been pointing out facts martin. the undies were in orenthal's washing machine. orenthal was/is pigeon-toed. Fuhrman was helping to write a screenplay (gosh, I hope you don't think all the shows and plays are real!). cochran was a shyster lawyer who got rich off of the backs of people who alledgedly suffered-- did I say he was a 'lier'? hmmm, I know I posted he was an abuser but I don't remember calling him a 'lier'. orenthal did have drugs in his system the night he butchered Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown -- I thought the drug excuse could possibly be an explantion for his psychotic behavior. I didn't post that paula's phone call drove orenthal to anything -- personally, I believe it simply offered him the oportunity to do what he did. I posted a link on the criminal jury -- if you find fault with it, so be it. But no, I don't believe because they were democrats they voted not guilty. I've always been very clear as to why I believe they voted not guilty. And yes, the list can go on and 'one'! :seeya:


the jury of black women were ignorant ,uneducated, biased, racist and ignored or did not pay attention for 9 months of testinmony.I got that.

[martin II]

martin, you forgot to include IMO. All this stuff is purely fantasy that you've made up because you want to believe it. hahaha

I don't really care about Paula's 'frame'. A nude picture is a nude picture.

Well since you are oposed to nude women pictures or paingtings maby you should go to your local museum and start a protest as there are many there.or get them to ban children.

[weezer]

the jury of black women were ignorant ,uneducated, biased, racist and ignored or did not pay attention for 9 months of testinmony.I got that.

don't forget the former black panther!

[martin II]

don't forget the former black panther!

thats the r***** part.

[weezer]

Well since you are oposed to nude women pictures or paingtings maby you should go to your local museum and start a protest as there are many there.or get them to ban children.

great come-back martin! NOT :tongue:

[martin II]

martin, you forgot to include IMO. All this stuff is purely fantasy that you've made up because you want to believe it. hahaha

I don't really care about Paula's 'frame'. A nude picture is a nude picture.

tv
if you have a link to the picture or you have seen it to say it was not artistically done, help us out.imo

[weezer]

thats the r***** part.

really? so you were confused about whether or not he was a woman?

"
Originally Posted by martin II
". . .the jury of black women. . ."

[tv]

thats the r***** part.Are you saying the former black panther was racist or that the name Black Panther is racist? I don't get what you're trying to say.

[martin II]

great come-back martin! NOT :tongue:

weezer
i cannot help you if you have a negative opinion of a picture of a womans body. maby you should also go to your local musium.:cool:

[martin II]

Are you saying the former black panther was racist or that the name Black Panther is racist? I don't get what you're trying to say.

no you are

[tv]

tv
if you have a link to the picture or you have seen it to say it was not artistically done, help us out.imo

You're the one claiming ti was artistic so I'll wait for you to supply the link. The only thing I've ever heard or read is that it was a nekkid picture of her.

[weezer]

tv
if you have a link to the picture or you have seen it to say it was not artistically done, help us out.imo

a picture of a naked person is a picture of a naked person. I'm only guessing here, but I bet tv's opinion of 'artistically done' wouldn't be the same as yours. LOL :D

[tv]

no you areI said the black power salute by the juror was racially motivated. Big difference.

[martin II]

really? so you were confused about whether or not he was a woman?

"
Originally Posted by martin II
". . .the jury of black women. . ."

i think that when you say oj wore ladies undies you have run out of thoughts
and do what you do. twist and twist and twist.

[martin II]

I said the black power salute by the juror was racially motivated. Big difference.

From what you know.or think you know.

[weezer]

weezer
i cannot help you if you have a negative opinion of a picture of a womans body. maby you should also go to your local musium.:cool:

I don't believe we have a local 'musium' here unless you meant 'museum'. surprisingly, I don't have a negative opinion of a woman's body -- I do have a negative opinion of old men who sit around and try to get someone else to supply links to them. ;)

[martin II]

a picture of a naked person is a picture of a naked person. I'm only guessing here, but I bet tv's opinion of 'artistically done' wouldn't be the same as yours. LOL :D

Well i must confess i love women.but i am not sure tv has seen the picture to be able to tell how it was done but i am sure your opinion without having seen it would be nagative.Jealousy may be the cause as Paula had a internationally recognized FINE FRAME.
HAHAHA

[tv]

a picture of a naked person is a picture of a naked person. I'm only guessing here, but I bet tv's opinion of 'artistically done' wouldn't be the same as yours. LOL :DI'm sure you're right on this one, weezer. :D

[William Anthony]

It was obvious that Nicole was in fear for her life and for the children. It's also obvious that she had been down this road before and that's why she was so scared. Some posters on this board seem to think this anger was justified. This kind of rage is never acceptable.

Simpson himself had a reputation for drug use and we won't even go into his sexual escapades so Nicole doesn't deserve to be judged by him. Sexual activity and drugs in front of the children doesn't compare to carving up their mother and leaving her to be found when they woke up.

Thanks for posting that weezer.

There has not been any jury that said Simpson carved anyone up. Yes, he did not hit her. It was not her state of mind that was on trial. The prosecution failed to prove that he became enraged and murdered anyone.

[weezer]

Well i must confess i love women.but i am not sure tv has seen the picture to be able to tell how it was done but i am sure your opinion without having seen it would be nagative.Jealousy may be the cause as Paula had a internationally recognized FINE FRAME.
HAHAHA

so I've heard -- now let me think -- who exactly said that -- oh yeah -- the guy she dumped orenthal for. ;)

[tv]

Well i must confess i love women.but i am not sure tv has seen the picture to be able to tell how it was done but i am sure your opinion without having seen it would be nagative.Jealousy may be the cause as Paula had a internationally recognized FINE FRAME.
HAHAHATv has not seen the picture and neither have you. You're the only one trying to characterize it as being anything but a picture of a naked woman. martin, don't even bother with the jealousy thing. It's not working.

[martin II]

I don't believe we have a local 'musium' here unless you meant 'museum'. surprisingly, I don't have a negative opinion of a woman's body -- I do have a negative opinion of old men who sit around and try to get someone else to supply links to them. ;)

I don't consider my self to be old. not yet but i have passed 18.someone should give you the link so your opinion can be corrected. Or you could find the link for your self so you could maby WISH. i don't know.But since Paula was employed as a model i assume she was a cut above the rest.How is that.

[weezer]

There has not been any jury that said Simpson carved anyone up. Yes, he did not hit her. It was not her state of mind that was on trial. The prosecution failed to prove that he became enraged and murdered anyone.

ehhhh - wrong! a civil jury said orenthal james simpson 'carved up' Ron Goldman. your delicacy in describing that is noted.

you mean -- 'yes, he did not hit her' -- that time!

the prosecution didn't fail to prove orenthal james simpson murdered Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown EXCEPT to a few and we know who and why that is.

[William Anthony]

you mean like your idiotic posting on australia or was there something even more valuable to the simpson criminal trial discussion?

Surely, you are not suggesting that Mr. Bell's post was idiotic that stated the effects the trial had on Black Australians?

[martin II]

Tv has not seen the picture and neither have you. You're the only one trying to characterize it as being anything but a picture of a naked woman. martin, don't even bother with the jealousy thing. It's not working.

That comment was not directed at you. it was general.

[martin II]

Tv has not seen the picture and neither have you. You're the only one trying to characterize it as being anything but a picture of a naked woman. martin, don't even bother with the jealousy thing. It's not working.

That comment was not directed at you. it was general.hahaha

[William Anthony]

yep -- one whale of a domestic abuse case:

"DISPATCHER: You want, you feel safe hanging up?
NICOLE: Well, you're right
DISPATCHER: You want to wait til the police get there?
NICOLE: Yeah."

and I think the most chilling of all:

"DISPATCHER: Just a moment. Does he have any weapons?
NICOLE: I don't know. He went home and he came back. The kids are up there sleeping and I don't want anything to happen."

"NICOLE: Then he came and he practically knocked my upstairs door down but he pounded it and he screamed and hollered and I tried to get him out of the bedroom because the kids are sleeping in there."

He was at the most verbally abusive.

[tv]

That comment was not directed at you. it was general.

That comment was not directed at you. it was general.hahaha

So which is it? Funny or not funny?

[martin II]

so I've heard -- now let me think -- who exactly said that -- oh yeah -- the guy she dumped orenthal for. ;)

The modeling industry that paid her to take pictrures said that. see what happens when you try to think.

[William Anthony]

Are you saying the former black panther was racist or that the name Black Panther is racist? I don't get what you're trying to say.

I think I got what he was trying to say. I think that some Whites, who think that Blacks do not have the right to stand up for equal rights and empowerment, are the ones that could be considered racists. If I am wrong, Martin, please, correct me?

[William Anthony]

I don't believe we have a local 'musium' here unless you meant 'museum'. surprisingly, I don't have a negative opinion of a woman's body -- I do have a negative opinion of old men who sit around and try to get someone else to supply links to them. ;)

I am not old but I am waiting on the link to the pigeon toed shoe prints? I have tried repeatedly, without success, to find it.

[martin II]

I think I got what he was trying to say. I think that some Whites, who think that Blacks do not have the right to stand up for equal rights and empowerment, are the ones that could be considered racists. If I am wrong, Martin, please, correct me?

William
you got it right.

[weezer]

He was at the most verbally abusive.

you think? I believe you've understated it just a bit! ;)

"DISPATCHER: What's the problem there?
NICOLE: My ex-husband has just broken into my house and he's ranting and raving outside the front yard."

"NICOLE: My door. He broke the whole back door in.
DISPATCHER : And then he left and he came back?
NICOLE: Then he came and he practically knocked my upstairs door down but he pounded it and he screamed and hollered and I tried to get him out of the bedroom because the kids are sleeping in there.
DISPATCHER: Um-hum. OK.
NICOLE: And then he wanted somebody's phone number and I gave him my phone book or I put my phone book down to write down the phone number that he wanted and then he took my phone book with all my stuff in it."

"NICOLE: Would you just please, O.J., O.J., O.J., O.J., could you please (inaudible) Please leave.
SIMPSON: I'm leaving with my two (expletive) fists is when I'm leaving. You ain't got to worry about me any more."

[William Anthony]

so I've heard -- now let me think -- who exactly said that -- oh yeah -- the guy she dumped orenthal for. ;)

Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. Better to be the recipient of a fine frame than a fine frame up.l

[martin II]

So which is it? Funny or not funny?


always funny
it is hard for me to believe you have problems with womens naked bodies.gees
do you not like oranges also.

[weezer]

I think I got what he was trying to say. I think that some Whites, who think that Blacks do not have the right to stand up for equal rights and empowerment, are the ones that could be considered racists. If I am wrong, Martin, please, correct me?

man -- it always comes back to that for you doesn't it! you and martin are now going to post your 'I'm a victim' stuff -- right?

[William Anthony]

you think? I believe you've understated it just a bit! ;)

"DISPATCHER: What's the problem there?
NICOLE: My ex-husband has just broken into my house and he's ranting and raving outside the front yard."

"NICOLE: My door. He broke the whole back door in.
DISPATCHER : And then he left and he came back?
NICOLE: Then he came and he practically knocked my upstairs door down but he pounded it and he screamed and hollered and I tried to get him out of the bedroom because the kids are sleeping in there.
DISPATCHER: Um-hum. OK.
NICOLE: And then he wanted somebody's phone number and I gave him my phone book or I put my phone book down to write down the phone number that he wanted and then he took my phone book with all my stuff in it."

Where is the physical abuse? Why was he not arrested? There was some mention that the back door had been broken previously or at least partially broken.

[martin II]

Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. Better to be the recipient of a fine frame than a fine frame up.l

hahahaha:punch:

[William Anthony]

man -- it always comes back to that for you doesn't it! you and martin are now going to post your 'I'm a victim' stuff -- right?

I was not the one who mentioned the salute or the juror who gave it or accused the juror who gave the salute of being racially motivated. I find it funny that the victimizer complains when a victim complains. Its like the rapist saying she wore that short dress with the low cut top and now she's complaining that I raped her.

[weezer]

Where is the physical abuse? Why was he not arrested? There was some mention that the back door had been broken previously or at least partially broken.

"(The dispatcher puts out a domestic violence call for any patrol car to respond to the address at Gretna Green. A short time later, Nicole Simpson called back.
NICOLE: Could you get somebody over here now, to ... Gretna Green. He's back. Please?
DISPATCHER: What does he look like?
NICOLE: He's O.J. Simpson. I think you know his record. Could you just send somebody over here?
DISPATCHER: What is he doing there?
NICOLE: He just drove up again. (She begins to cry) Could you just send somebody over?"

who did you hear the door was already broken from? orenthal? HAHAHAHAHA

[martin II]

you think? I believe you've understated it just a bit! ;)

"DISPATCHER: What's the problem there?
NICOLE: My ex-husband has just broken into my house and he's ranting and raving outside the front yard."

"NICOLE: My door. He broke the whole back door in.
DISPATCHER : And then he left and he came back?
NICOLE: Then he came and he practically knocked my upstairs door down but he pounded it and he screamed and hollered and I tried to get him out of the bedroom because the kids are sleeping in there.
DISPATCHER: Um-hum. OK.
NICOLE: And then he wanted somebody's phone number and I gave him my phone book or I put my phone book down to write down the phone number that he wanted and then he took my phone book with all my stuff in it."

"NICOLE: Would you just please, O.J., O.J., O.J., O.J., could you please (inaudible) Please leave.
SIMPSON: I'm leaving with my two (expletive) fists is when I'm leaving. You ain't got to worry about me any more."

Sounds like he just quit Nicole by his last statement.

[William Anthony]

"(The dispatcher puts out a domestic violence call for any patrol car to respond to the address at Gretna Green. A short time later, Nicole Simpson called back.
NICOLE: Could you get somebody over here now, to ... Gretna Green. He's back. Please?
DISPATCHER: What does he look like?
NICOLE: He's O.J. Simpson. I think you know his record. Could you just send somebody over here?
DISPATCHER: What is he doing there?
NICOLE: He just drove up again. (She begins to cry) Could you just send somebody over?"

who did you hear the door was already broken from? orenthal? HAHAHAHAHA

All you need to do is read the transcripts. ;) :cool: Was she talking about his football record, or do you think she meant everyone involved with LE knew about his prior arrest?

[martin II]

"(The dispatcher puts out a domestic violence call for any patrol car to respond to the address at Gretna Green. A short time later, Nicole Simpson called back.
NICOLE: Could you get somebody over here now, to ... Gretna Green. He's back. Please?
DISPATCHER: What does he look like?
NICOLE: He's O.J. Simpson. I think you know his record. Could you just send somebody over here?
DISPATCHER: What is he doing there?
NICOLE: He just drove up again. (She begins to cry) Could you just send somebody over?"

who did you hear the door was already broken from? orenthal? HAHAHAHAHA


oj did not touch nicole and the coppers understood that and that is why he was not arrested. obviously nicole did not make a complaint.maby because she felt guilty for having that kind of party with the children in the house.
After all she asked him to come back. it was a non issue as far as the cops were concerned.

[weezer]

I was not the one who mentioned the salute or the juror who gave it or accused the juror who gave the salute of being racially motivated. I find it funny that the victimizer complains when a victim complains. Its like the rapist saying she wore that short dress with the low cut top and now she's complaining that I raped her.

sometimes your posts make me feel like I need to wash my hands -- this is one of them. :cuss:

[William Anthony]

sometimes your posts make me feel like I need to wash my hands -- this is one of them. :cuss:

Isn't that what Pontious Pilot said before they persecuted Jesus? I take that to mean that you find no fault with Martin and my posts. Thanks. Wink, cool.

[martin II]

man -- it always comes back to that for you doesn't it! you and martin are now going to post your 'I'm a victim' stuff -- right?

And you and tv will continue to ignore the lie that Mazzola told about those bindels and call The Furhman a great copper. Not to mention the fool MARTZ and the fired glove nonexpert.

[William Anthony]

I find it strange that some can post and call others racists/racially biased/racially prejudiced but when the discussion turns to race those same posters claim they are being victimized and do not want to discuss it. It is similar to saying it's so because I said it's so.

[weezer]

I find it strange that some can post and call others racists/racially biased/racially prejudiced but when the discussion turns to race those same posters claim they are being victimized and do not want to discuss it. It is similar to saying it's so because I said it's so.

no one is trying not to talk about the problems of race in america and posters who want to discuss that have boards to go to. for you to continually and relentlessly try to turn this board into 'I'm a victim 'cause I'm black' discussion board is wrong.

no one knew the race of the perpetrator when they saw the red blood at Bundy and/or Rockingham.

[tv]

And you and tv will continue to ignore the lie that Mazzola told about those bindels and call The Furhman a great copper. Not to mention the fool MARTZ and the fired glove nonexpert.martin, I don't call members of LE coppers. You won't hear that from me.

[tv]

always funny
it is hard for me to believe you have problems with womens naked bodies.gees
do you not like oranges also.Enough of your speculation on what I have a problem with. You criticized Nicole for having sex on her couch so you must have a problem with people having sex. Hard to believe but your feeling about it speaks for itself.

I don't think I even want to know what you meant by the oranges comment.

[tv]

I find it strange that some can post and call others racists/racially biased/racially prejudiced but when the discussion turns to race those same posters claim they are being victimized and do not want to discuss it. It is similar to saying it's so because I said it's so.

I don't see any reason to keep hitting us over the head about race. Wasn't it Simpson himself who said "I'm not black, I'm OJ"? I'll answer that -- yes it was!

[socaldiva]

Sounds like he just quit Nicole by his last statement.

That's what you got out of "I've leaving with my two (expletive) fists". WOW! Most would understand that he's threatening her with more violence....

[William Anthony]

I don't see any reason to keep hitting us over the head about race. Wasn't it Simpson himself who said "I'm not black, I'm OJ"? I'll answer that -- yes it was!

Allow me to answer posts ## 3408 and 3411 in one post? Both of You make race and issue and then do not want to discuss it. It was posted what VB said that Simpson did not know how to be Black (paraphrasing). That is a racist comment. What does it mean to be Black? How would a White man know what a Black man should be? The answer is obvious, imho. VB was saying that Simpson took a right of entitlement by marrying a blond, blue-eyed, statuesque White female and living in an upscale White neighborhood that theretofore belonged to White men. The only good thing about what VB said is that he spoke for the majority of White Americans, who only chose to think but not say it, imho. Simpson has the right to think of himself as he chose. I have the right to think of him as a Black man. I nor VB have the right to suggest where he or any other American could/should live or who they can marry or how they should spend their money based on the color of the person's skin.

[tv]

Not discussing Vincent Bugliosi with you.

[William Anthony]

no one is trying not to talk about the problems of race in america and posters who want to discuss that have boards to go to. for you to continually and relentlessly try to turn this board into 'I'm a victim 'cause I'm black' discussion board is wrong.

no one knew the race of the perpetrator when they saw the red blood at Bundy and/or Rockingham.

I had to respond. If you don't want to discuss it on this thread, then stop making comments or posting comments of others that bring the subject of race to this thread. However, with that said it is impossible to believe that race was not an issue in the trial, which you have asserted was one of the causes of the verdict. If you just want to slur the jury and are not able to support those slurs, then, perhaps, you should start that thread.

[William Anthony]

Not discussing Vincent Bugliosi with you.

Then, with all due respect, stop posting VB's comments or say the portions, if any, of his comments that you disagree with.

[tv]

That's what you got out of "I've leaving with my two (expletive) fists". WOW! Most would understand that he's threatening her with more violence....

You know martin thinks Simpson does no wrong so I'm sure that's what he got out of it. Go figure. :shrug:

[William Anthony]

You know martin thinks Simpson does no wrong so I'm sure that's what he got out of it. Go figure. :shrug:

I did not hear Simpson say he was going to leave his fists on her face or any other part of her body. I think that would be a threat.

[socaldiva]

You know martin thinks Simpson does no wrong so I'm sure that's what he got out of it. Go figure. :shrug:

I know. I just wonder about the Simpson supporters. If they idolize him, what do they consider bad behavior? :confused:

[tv]

Then, with all due respect, stop posting VB's comments or say the portions, if any, of his comments that you disagree with.I haven't posted about Vincent Bugliosi since I asked martin to stop mentioning him to me. I didn't get the OJ quote from him if that's what your're talking about. You just don't have a reasonable response to him saying something like that. After all, if OJ Simpson himself doesn't think he's black who am I to disagree?

[tv]

I know. I just wonder about the Simpson supporters. If they idolize him, what do they consider bad behavior? :confused:So far everything he has ever done, no matter how disgusting, has been condoned on this forum. I am afraid to even think about what would be considered bad behavior by them. :eek:

[tv]

I did not hear Simpson say he was going to leave his fists on her face or any other part of her body. I think that would be a threat.

Get real, William.

[William Anthony]

So far everything he has ever done, no matter how disgusting, has been condoned on this forum. I am afraid to even think about what would be considered bad behavior by them. :eek:

Making posts and not wanting to defend them. ;) :cool:

[William Anthony]

Get real, William.

It could have been his way of saying I wanted to beat you but I will show control and leave. Everything is not black and white (pun intended).:)

[tv]

Making posts and not wanting to defend them. ;) :cool:You mean like saying evidence was planted and not being able to back it up? Okay, I get it. :rolleyes:

[tv]

It could have been his way of saying I wanted to beat you but I will show control and leave. Everything is not black and white (pun intended).:)

Are you saying that it was okay if he only wanted to beat her but didn't?

[martin II]

Enough of your speculation on what I have a problem with. You criticized Nicole for having sex on her couch so you must have a problem with people having sex. Hard to believe but your feeling about it speaks for itself.

I don't think I even want to know what you meant by the oranges comment.

i have no problem with nicoles bobble head activity just think she should have been in the garage or someplace where her children could not walk in the room and observe her.imo

[martin II]

So far everything he has ever done, no matter how disgusting, has been condoned on this forum. I am afraid to even think about what would be considered bad behavior by them. :eek:

I think he had a right to inform nicole that having drugs and prostitutes partying in the house where his kids were was good advice for niciole and he had a right to be pissed about her activity with the kids there.

[martin II]

You mean like saying evidence was planted and not being able to back it up? Okay, I get it. :rolleyes:

The Socks The SOCKS THE SOCKS

[martin II]

I haven't posted about Vincent Bugliosi since I asked martin to stop mentioning him to me. I didn't get the OJ quote from him if that's what your're talking about. You just don't have a reasonable response to him saying something like that. After all, if OJ Simpson himself doesn't think he's black who am I to disagree?

I don't blame you, I would toss him under the bus also. It is odd that you only tossed him after his racist comments were made known on the thread as i believe you had stated you read his book.
His racist comments were like a little secret.

[martin II]

no one is trying not to talk about the problems of race in america and posters who want to discuss that have boards to go to. for you to continually and relentlessly try to turn this board into 'I'm a victim 'cause I'm black' discussion board is wrong.

no one knew the race of the perpetrator when they saw the red blood at Bundy and/or Rockingham.

Vanhatter,lang and The furhman thought they knew but the jury said they were wrong.

[martin II]

I haven't posted about Vincent Bugliosi since I asked martin to stop mentioning him to me. I didn't get the OJ quote from him if that's what your're talking about. You just don't have a reasonable response to him saying something like that. After all, if OJ Simpson himself doesn't think he's black who am I to disagree?

tv
i always took that oj comment two ways.
1. White advertising people say i am not just black but i am a cross over
advertising person accepted as white in the American rental car market.
2. They say i am not black so i am not black (tongue in cheek) :rolleyes:

At NBC oj faced racism just like many other past black football players that were refused the cushy jobs of announcer that were only allowed to do sideline commentary.

As long as he was shaving his face daily, the mirror told him who he was just as Dardens mirror told him who he was.:cool:

[martin II]

Are you saying that it was okay if he only wanted to beat her but didn't?


OJ stood in the back yard screaming and talking to Kato.He walked up to that broken door(which I believe Kato said was already broken) then went back to the yard talking to Kato. If he cam there with the intent to harm Nicole he had planty of opportunity to do so before the coppers came.

He did not touch her and did not say he was going to harm her.The coppers came and found him in the back yard with Kato.They talked to him and to Nicole. She did not make a complaint As there was no physical contact. The coppers, in order to defuse the situation told oj to leave and he did.END OF STORY.

[William Anthony]

You mean like saying evidence was planted and not being able to back it up? Okay, I get it. :rolleyes:

The defense not only backed it up by providing evidence of motive, means and opportunity, they also got the racist detective, MF, as shown by direct evidence, to commit perjury. Unlike the defense, I was speaking of some posters tendencies.

[martin II]

William
A certain poster had posted that she had read vb book and suggested that i should do the same in order to be informed on what he wrote. I assumed that she meant that his book contained valuable information about the trial and vb thoughts about everyone involved.
However there was no mention of vb racist comments in his book about oj by this poster. Another poster informed us of vb racist comments and now we are told i don't want to talk about vb.:shrug:

martin II

[William Anthony]

Are you saying that it was okay if he only wanted to beat her but didn't?

I am saying he was able to control himself, despite any desire he may have had. The fact is he did not beat her on this occasion, which, IIRC, was after he had been arrested, plead no contest and gone to anger management classes.

[William Anthony]

I don't blame you, I would toss him under the bus also. It is odd that you only tossed him after his racist comments were made known on the thread as i believe you had stated you read his book.
His racist comments were like a little secret.

This is the poster's post.

limakey, thanks for letting me know he didn't write for Vanity Fair. I knew that Dominick Dunne did and I just ASSUMED that martin was correct that Mr. Bugliosi did also. VB did not say that OJ Simpson wasn't really black. He was making the point that he had become a part of the white community in any possible way that he could. I don't defend everything that VB says or does. I thought his book on the trial was excellent. I disagree with his politics, religious views and other things. There are some people on this forum that refuse to admit that the magnificent Johnnie Cochran or OJ Simpson possess any flaws at all. It's just not realistic.

I have not seen this poster specifically say that she disagrees with VB's social views.

[William Anthony]

tv
i always took that oj comment two ways.
1. White advertising people say i am not just black but i am a cross over
advertising person accepted as white in the American rental car market.
2. They say i am not black so i am not black (tongue in cheek) :rolleyes:

At NBC oj faced racism just like many other past black football players that were refused the cushy jobs of announcer that were only allowed to do sideline commentary.

As long as he was shaving his face daily, the mirror told him who he was just as Dardens mirror told him who he was.:cool:

"When you've got what you want in the struggle for life
And the world makes you King for a day
Just go to the mirror and look at yourself
and see what that man has to say."

[William Anthony]

Get real, William.

I am as real as real can get.:) Are you Australian? There seems to be an infusion of telling me to get.:)

[martin II]

This is the poster's post.



I have not seen this poster specifically say that she disagrees with VB's social views.

WIlliam

Maby vb racist social views were a little secret not worth mentioning.:)
I believe vb social vews influenced his comments about the trial especially his negative comments about the defense.His negative comments about the prosecution i believe were grounded in his belief that he should have been prosecuting the case. He like others had a trarget market and he wrote what he thought they wanted to hear.Especially the part about Oj living white.The intellectual journalistic community rejected his coments on that and other issues in his book. :cool:

[martin II]

"When you've got what you want in the struggle for life
And the world makes you King for a day
Just go to the mirror and look at yourself
and see what that man has to say."

William
I remember when the first Hertz commercials hit tv,the talk in the black commuity was that WOW they let oj do commercials that have been reserved only for white guys. Or maby Hertz now believes they need to see blacks rental cars.
The media take was that the Advertising community had found that oj could sell product across color lines because of his celebrity status, football history
and medium skin color.
They made him king for a day and called him everything but black. But oj stilled shaved everyday and knew it was just a money making game. He knew who his mother was and where he war born. He knew what color his kids were and i believe in the heat of some arguments nicole told him also.imo

[William Anthony]

William
I remember when the first Hertz commercials hit tv,the talk in the black commuity was that WOW they let oj do commercials that have been reserved only for white guys. Or maby Hertz now believes they need to see blacks rental cars.
The media take was that the Advertising community had found that oj could sell product across color lines because of his celebrity status, football history
and medium skin color.
They made him king for a day and called him everything but black. But oj stilled shaved everyday and knew it was just a money making game. He knew who his mother was and where he war born. He knew what color his kids were and i believe in the heat of some arguments nicole told him also.imo

I am almost certain that, if he momentarily forgot his race, he was reminded by Americans of both races. I am sure he was reminded when he saw the picture on the magazine cover.

[tv]

I don't blame you, I would toss him under the bus also. It is odd that you only tossed him after his racist comments were made known on the thread as i believe you had stated you read his book.
His racist comments were like a little secret.

I've told you repeatedly to read the book for yourself and see what he meant. You are like a puppet reciting the lines that are given to you. The book makes some excellent points worthy of discussion but you're too closed minded to discuss them. I'm throwing you and William and your childish comments under the bus not Vincent Bugliosi. martin, I've asked you several times to let this go. What will get you to respect my request?

You and William keep ranting about honest discussion in America about race. This kind of crap is the reason it so often can't be discussed.

[tv]

I think he had a right to inform nicole that having drugs and prostitutes partying in the house where his kids were was good advice for niciole and he had a right to be pissed about her activity with the kids there.
Give it a break, martin. He wasn't all that moral if he kept a picture of his naked girlfriend on display in his bedroom. He just didn't want Nicole to have a life.

[tv]

i have no problem with nicoles bobble head activity just think she should have been in the garage or someplace where her children could not walk in the room and observe her.imomartin, this comment was unnecesary.

[William Anthony]

I've told you repeatedly to read the book for yourself and see what he meant. You are like a puppet reciting the lines that are given to you. The book makes some excellent points worthy of discussion but you're too closed minded to discuss them. I'm throwing you and William and your childish comments under the bus not Vincent Bugliosi. martin, I've asked you several times to let this go. What will get you to respect my request?

You and William keep ranting about honest discussion in America about race. This kind of crap is the reason it so often can't be discussed.

With all due respect, there is no need to read the book, when you give a person a line that they can puppet-like recite, to make the decision that the book would not interest them. You included VB's comments on Simpson being black, when Martin and I in our alleged puppet-like recitation of that comment, you closed your mind, imho, and refused to discuss the issue. You said VB made excellent points and posted the aforementioned comment of his. I would think that your posting of it meant you thought it was an excellent point. If not, then why did you post it? Why are you unwilling to honestly discuss this excellent point of his?

[tv]

With all due respect, there is no need to read the book, when you give a person a line that they can puppet-like recite, to make the decision that the book would not interest them. You included VB's comments on Simpson being black, when Martin and I in our alleged puppet-like recitation of that comment, you closed your mind, imho, and refused to discuss the issue. You said VB made excellent points and posted the aforementioned comment of his. I would think that your posting of it meant you thought it was an excellent point. If not, then why did you post it? Why are you unwilling to honestly discuss this excellent point of his?

If you and martin want to discuss Vincent Bugliosi and his book that's your right but don't include me in your discussions. The reason I no longer want to discuss his opinions is because instead of taking what I say seriously and engaging in discussion all you do is act like a couple of hyenas running around in a circle laughing. It's impossible to have an honest discussion when some of the participants are acting like that. The only discussion you and martin want to have about race is the one where the other person says "You must be right because you're black and have been victimized for hundreds of years". That's not a discussion I'll be taking part in. I don't even know what 'aforementioned' comment you're talking about and don't care.

[William Anthony]

If you and martin want to discuss Vincent Bugliosi and his book that's your right but don't include me in your discussions. The reason I no longer want to discuss his opinions is because instead of taking what I say seriously and engaging in discussion all you do is act like a couple of hyenas running around in a circle laughing. It's impossible to have an honest discussion when some of the participants are acting like that. The only discussion you and martin want to have about race is the one where the other person says "You must be right because you're black and have been victimized for hundreds of years". That's not a discussion I'll be taking part in. I don't even know what 'aforementioned' comment you're talking about and don't care.

I do not know how you can feign a lack of knowledge of the comment when you have posted about it. Imho, this is simply a way for you to avoid defending the comment.

[tv]

I do not know how you can feign a lack of knowledge of the comment when you have posted about it. Imho, this is simply a way for you to avoid defending the comment.I'm not feigning knowledge of anything. I don't have to defend comments made by someone else. If you want to know more about anything that Vincent Bugliosi said then do your own research.

[tv]

I do not know how you can feign a lack of knowledge of the comment when you have posted about it. Imho, this is simply a way for you to avoid defending the comment.Is this the only comment you can make? You and martin really think you've scored points with this Bugliosi BS and the funny thing is you really have no idea what you're talking about.

[martin II]

Give it a break, martin. He wasn't all that moral if he kept a picture of his naked girlfriend on display in his bedroom. He just didn't want Nicole to have a life.

if his girlfriend approved of the picture, and it was in ojs house not yours, what is your problem.

[martin II]

I'm not feigning knowledge of anything. I don't have to defend comments made by someone else. If you want to know more about anything that Vincent Bugliosi said then do your own research.

But you bragged about how informative the vb book was.

[tv]

But you bragged about how informative the vb book was.

I didn't brag about anything. I was posting on this forum and used his book as a source just as I've used the transcripts and other books and articles. I'm not going to discuss his book with you anymore so this conversation is going nowhere. Why are you having a hard time understanding that?

[martin II]

martin, this comment was unnecesary.

Nicole should have chosen a location away from where the kids were to have sex with this guy. Suppose the kids had just walked from their room into the living room and saw her. What would she have said. Oj saw her and he just turned and walked away.imo

[tv]

if his girlfriend approved of the picture, and it was in ojs house not yours, what is your problem.

Not my problem, but Johnnie Cochran must have had a problem. He had it replaced with a picture of Simpson's mother before the jury visited the house. Looks like you're asking the wrong person.

[martin II]

If you and martin want to discuss Vincent Bugliosi and his book that's your right but don't include me in your discussions. The reason I no longer want to discuss his opinions is because instead of taking what I say seriously and engaging in discussion all you do is act like a couple of hyenas running around in a circle laughing. It's impossible to have an honest discussion when some of the participants are acting like that. The only discussion you and martin want to have about race is the one where the other person says "You must be right because you're black and have been victimized for hundreds of years". That's not a discussion I'll be taking part in. I don't even know what 'aforementioned' comment you're talking about and don't care.

i remember someone posting vb ten reasons oj was guilty in his opinion. that was discussed and comments made.

[weezer]

Nicole should have chosen a location away from where the kids were to have sex with this guy. Suppose the kids had just walked from their room into the living room and saw her. What would she have said. Oj saw her and he just turned and walked away.imo

yep -- better to wake sleeping babies to cursing, threatening, demeaning and abusing their mother. your hero.

[tv]

i remember someone posting vb ten reasons oj was guilty in his opinion. that was discussed and comments made.

Wasn't me.

[martin II]

It was suggested by a vb support person that i read his book. Having seen him and read other reviews of his book, I had no intention of reading anything this old fool wrote. But i am wondering why this poster after having read the book with the r***** comments included, only spoke of his comments about the defense and the prosecution and not his racist comments about oj.

I guess depanding on ones orientation, r***** comments can be ignored/ overlooked when other opinion of the author supports ones views. :cool:
martin II

[martin II]

Not my problem, but Johnnie Cochran must have had a problem. He had it replaced with a picture of Simpson's mother before the jury visited the house. Looks like you're asking the wrong person.

You are the one stating strong objection to a picture of a fine fram woman in in another persons house. I am sure Cochran thought these christain church going black women would rather see a picture of ojs mother than Paula. See how smart he was.
:cool:

[weezer]

It was suggested by a vb support person that i read his book. Having seen him and read other reviews of his book, I had no intention of reading anything this old fool wrote. But i am wondering why this poster after having read the book with the r***** comments included, only spoke of his comments about the defense and the prosecution and not his racist comments about oj.

I guess depanding on ones orientation, r***** comments can be ignored/ overlooked when other opinion of the author supports ones views. :cool:
martin II

So far, you and william consider the VB comment as r***** -- only you two. hmmm. I'm beginning to think that the VB book may be a bit beyond your level.

I guess 'depanding' on 'ones' oreientation, everything is r*****. I believe that is the struggle you and william are having. you are both r***** and no one wants to argue race on this board.

now, how about we drop this crap and get back to the orenthal james simpson double murder discussion? or, if we can't resolve this here and now, maybe we can ask the moderator to step in and view some of the outrageous posts. :cool:

[tv]

You are the one stating strong objection to a picture of a fine fram woman in in another persons house. I am sure Cochran thought these christain church going black women would rather see a picture of ojs mother than Paula. See how smart he was.
:cool:I'm also Christian church going. Why is okay for them to disapprove but not me? Let's just lay the cards on the table -- not only was the picture of a nude woman it was of a white woman and that's why it was removed. It wasn't the only picture of a white person that was removed.

I think it's funny that you say it's Orenthal's business if he has a picture of his nude girlfriend in his bedroom but it's your business if Nicole had sex in her own house. You're the king of the double standard.

[tv]

So far, you and william consider the VB comment as r***** -- only you two. hmmm. I'm beginning to think that the VB book may be a bit beyond your level.

I guess 'depanding' on 'ones' oreientation, everything is r*****. I believe that is the struggle you and william are having. you are both r***** and no one wants to argue race on this board.

now, how about we drop this crap and get back to the orenthal james simpson double murder discussion? or, if we can't resolve this here and now, maybe we can ask the moderator to step in and view some of the outrageous posts. :cool:

Thanks weezer. :beer:

[weezer]

*Snipped*You are the one stating strong objection to a picture of a fine fram woman in in another persons house. I am sure Cochran thought these christain church going black women would rather see a picture of ojs mother than Paula. See how smart he was.
:cool:

don't forget shyster and abuser in that description of that *ahem* smart man. ;)

[socaldiva]

Is this the only comment you can make? You and martin really think you've scored points with this Bugliosi BS and the funny thing is you really have no idea what you're talking about.

Nothing like not reading a book & posturing to argue it's contents. Hysterical.

[tv]

Nothing like not reading a book & posturing to argue it's contents. Hysterical.I still don't even know what they've taken offense at. Of course with them it could be any innocent comment that they've blown completely out of proportion.

[martin II]

Give it a break, martin. He wasn't all that moral if he kept a picture of his naked girlfriend on display in his bedroom. He just didn't want Nicole to have a life.

tv
Dont you think the bedroom was a better place than the foyer.There is no reason for you to believe Paula would have taken some kind of vulgar picture and given it to oj for his night stand. So i see no reason for your complaint.
Did you go to your local museum and complain about all the famous naked womens pictures that must be there?

[socaldiva]

*snip*i have no problem with nicoles ******(activity just think she should have been in the garage or someplace where her children could not walk in the room and observe her.imo

I have edited your vile post, as I won't repeat your rubbish.

Why weren't you concerned when Orenthal was televised getting lap dances for all the world to see? Don't say the children were grown, as you were still arguing that they needed be be supported via slasher conventions. Why weren't you concerned about Sydney & Justin when Orenthal publicly mocked the murders with his imaginery knife?

[socaldiva]

I still don't even know what they've taken offense at. Of course with them it could be any innocent comment that they've blown completely out of proportion.

Some posters are famous for going on & on about something they refuse to identify. Very childish.

[weezer]

tv
Dont you think the bedroom was a better place than the foyer.There is no reason for you to believe Paula would have taken some kind of vulgar picture and given it to oj for his night stand. So i see no reason for your complaint.
Did you go to your local museum and complain about all the famous naked womens pictures that must be there?

ahh -- I see you are now going to 'museums' -- that's a start. speaking of famous, I 'googled' paula's name and nothing came up except her connection to the murderer. I guess the saying is true: fame is fleeting.

martin, how would you know if the picture was vulgar or not? the criminal defense thought it was vulgar enough to remove it before the jury could see it. that says it all for me. :rolleyes:

[martin II]

I'm also Christian church going. Why is okay for them to disapprove but not me? Let's just lay the cards on the table -- not only was the picture of a nude woman it was of a white woman and that's why it was removed. It wasn't the only picture of a white person that was removed.

I think it's funny that you say it's Orenthal's business if he has a picture of his nude girlfriend in his bedroom but it's your business if Nicole had sex in her own house. You're the king of the double standard.

Nicole had a right to have sex anyplace she desired. My only comment was she possibly should have considered that her children could have easily walked in on her on that living room sofa. Now if you believe that would not have presented some kind of 'SITUATION ' for her. ok.

[tv]

I have edited your vile post, as I won't repeat your rubbish.

Why weren't you concerned when Orenthal was televised getting lap dances for all the world to see? Don't say the children were grown, as you were still arguing that they needed be be supported via slasher conventions. Why weren't you concerned about Sydney & Justin when Orenthal publicly mocked the murders with his imaginery knife?

Let's not forget what he was saying during the lap dance -- "I love my life. Isn't life wonderful? Thank you, Jesus!"

How disgusting when Ron and Nicole are lying cold in their graves because he brutally murdered them. It's obscene.:mad:

[weezer]

Nicole had a right to have sex anyplace she desired. My only comment was she possibly should have considered that her children could have easily walked in on her on that living room sofa. Now if you believe that would not have presented some kind of 'SITUATION ' for her. ok.

just one more example of orenthal's stalking of Nicole.

ahh but here's the rub martin -- the children didn't wake up and, you know, if he hadn't been a peeping tom that night and had not gone pshyco over it, no one would have ever known what Nicole was doing inside her own home.

[martin II]

ahh -- I see you are now going to 'museums' -- that's a start. speaking of famous, I 'googled' paula's name and nothing came up except her connection to the murderer. I guess the saying is true: fame is fleeting.

martin, how would you know if the picture was vulgar or not? the criminal defense thought it was vulgar enough to remove it before the jury could see it. that says it all for me. :rolleyes:

weezer

i am sure you, without seeing the picture, would say it was vulgar. No doubt about that at all. imo

[martin II]

One juror, Anise Aschenbach, a 61-year-old white woman, said last week in a telephone interview broadcast on ABC News that she had first voted to convict Mr. Simpson, but switched because "most of the evidence was DNA evidence and that's what was so shaky."

[weezer]

weezer

i am sure you, without seeing the picture, would say it was vulgar. No doubt about that at all. imo

I didn't say it was vulgar -- I said the criminal defense must have thought the criminal jury would perceive it as vulgar or they wouldn't have removed it.

[socaldiva]

One juror, Anise Aschenbach, a 61-year-old white woman, said last week in a telephone interview broadcast on ABC News that she had first voted to convict Mr. Simpson, but switched because "most of the evidence was DNA evidence and that's what was so shaky."

Of course she's going to defend her actions. What do you expect her to say, "I was an idiot"?

[socaldiva]

just one more example of orenthal's stalking of Nicole.

ahh but here's the rub martin -- the children didn't wake up and, you know, if he hadn't been a peeping tom that night and had not gone pshyco over it, no one would have ever known what Nicole was doing inside her own home.

Yeah, the peeping tom was worried about the children waking up & seeing Nicole on the sofa, but didn't worry about those children waking up while he was slaughtering their Mother. Bottom line, he wasn't worried about the children, he was using it as an excuse to berate her for having sex with another man. imo.

[weezer]

One juror, Anise Aschenbach, a 61-year-old white woman, said last week in a telephone interview broadcast on ABC News that she had first voted to convict Mr. Simpson, but switched because "most of the evidence was DNA evidence and that's what was so shaky."

I heard she had been intimidated by the other jurors. hmmm

[martin II]

just one more example of orenthal's stalking of Nicole.

ahh but here's the rub martin -- the children didn't wake up and, you know, if he hadn't been a peeping tom that night and had not gone pshyco over it, no one would have ever known what Nicole was doing inside her own home.

The thing is you don't know if the childern woke up or not.

[martin II]

I heard she had been intimidated by the other jurors. hmmm

Well since you said you heard it, i can ignore your comment.

[weezer]

The thing is you don't know if the childern woke up or not.

sure I do -- they didn't.

[weezer]

Well since you said you heard it, i can ignore your comment.

feel better?

[socaldiva]

Well since you said you heard it, i can ignore your comment.

Why, because it doesn't support your fantasy version of things?

[tv]

martin, it didn't escape my notice that you wanted the discussion off of the lap dance, mocking the murders and the defense removing Paula Barbier's picture so you changed the subject to the white juror changing her opinion. I'm sure she knows now she made a huge mistake but she was outnumbered in that deliberation room. IMO, it was probably a hostile environment to a couple of the jurors.

[socaldiva]

Crickets. I hear crickets :D

[tv]

I've always thought the sound of crickets is very peaceful. :)

[socaldiva]

I've always thought the sound of crickets is very peaceful. :)

True....I'll take crickets over noise any day of the week :tongue:

[martin II]

martin, it didn't escape my notice that you wanted the discussion off of the lap dance, mocking the murders and the defense removing Paula Barbier's picture so you changed the subject to the white juror changing her opinion. I'm sure she knows now she made a huge mistake but she was outnumbered in that deliberation room. IMO, it was probably a hostile environment to a couple of the jurors.

I don't mind discussing any of it. I must have missed the lap dance post, But know many men like them and there are many many adult women willing and able to give them. Some have said it is liberating for some women that do this work both personally and fiancial. I have no problem with either party.

I hope you are not about to inform me that there is something wrong with lap dancing but you may concerning your distaste for a naked womans picture.

I posted the jurors comments because i ran across it in my saved documents and thought some may need to read her comments.

The juror spoke about her fellings in the jury deliberations after the trial and i did not see any comment by her that there was a hostile enviroment that caused her to change her opinion. In another link that i read the jury members commented that they worked well togeather.

As a matter of fact they all focused on A Parks testimony early on which is why they requested a readback of his testimony. They continued to discuss him and found that they were all in agreement and this included the juror mentioned above.So hostility is something you may have created in your mind.

she specifically said it was the shakey DNA evidence that caused her to vote not guilty. I accept her comments as your opinions are in conflict with what she said.:cool:

[socaldiva]

*snip*
many men like them and there are many many adult women willing and able to give them.

The same can be said of the activity that you fault Nicole for ;)

[tv]

Diva, it's only considered bad behavior if Nicole does it. Everyone else has a free pass. ;)

[martin II]

I've told you repeatedly to read the book for yourself and see what he meant. You are like a puppet reciting the lines that are given to you. The book makes some excellent points worthy of discussion but you're too closed minded to discuss them. I'm throwing you and William and your childish comments under the bus not Vincent Bugliosi. martin, I've asked you several times to let this go. What will get you to respect my request?

You and William keep ranting about honest discussion in America about race. This kind of crap is the reason it so often can't be discussed.

I told you about vb racist comments all by my self and you have not condemed his racist rantings all by your self.

[martin II]

Diva, it's only considered bad behavior if Nicole does it. Everyone else has a free pass. ;)

not true.
There were many other screw ups. i have listed some before. Fay who some love was off the hook and out of control.

[William Anthony]

I'm not feigning knowledge of anything. I don't have to defend comments made by someone else. If you want to know more about anything that Vincent Bugliosi said then do your own research.

If you point to a comment that someone else made and do not say that you agree with it, then the logical presumption is that you do agree. If you post something that supports what you agree with, you should be willing to discuss and defend it. Of course, you have the privilege to not discuss it but I think you forfeit your right to complain when others discuss it.

[William Anthony]

Is this the only comment you can make? You and martin really think you've scored points with this Bugliosi BS and the funny thing is you really have no idea what you're talking about.

I know what we are talking about and I truly believe you do.

[William Anthony]

So far, you and william consider the VB comment as r***** -- only you two. hmmm. I'm beginning to think that the VB book may be a bit beyond your level.

I guess 'depanding' on 'ones' oreientation, everything is r*****. I believe that is the struggle you and william are having. you are both r***** and no one wants to argue race on this board.

now, how about we drop this crap and get back to the orenthal james simpson double murder discussion? or, if we can't resolve this here and now, maybe we can ask the moderator to step in and view some of the outrageous posts. :cool:

I think that anyone that doesn't condemn VB's statement is r*****. I do not think the moderator should be happy at you calling, as a fact, posters r*****.

[William Anthony]

I'm also Christian church going. Why is okay for them to disapprove but not me? Let's just lay the cards on the table -- not only was the picture of a nude woman it was of a white woman and that's why it was removed. It wasn't the only picture of a white person that was removed.

I think it's funny that you say it's Orenthal's business if he has a picture of his nude girlfriend in his bedroom but it's your business if Nicole had sex in her own house. You're the king of the double standard.

You claim not to want to discuss race but post this. I thought Nicole, the mother of his children, was White.

[weezer]

I think that anyone that doesn't condemn VB's statement is r*****. I do not think the moderator should be happy at you calling, as a fact, posters r*****.

william, for you to interpret VB's statement as racist is ludicrous.

[William Anthony]

I still don't even know what they've taken offense at. Of course with them it could be any innocent comment that they've blown completely out of proportion.

Why is it that everything that is negative that some White people says, such as MF and VB, is innocent or irrelevant to you?

[William Anthony]

Let's not forget what he was saying during the lap dance -- "I love my life. Isn't life wonderful? Thank you, Jesus!"

How disgusting when Ron and Nicole are lying cold in their graves because he brutally murdered them. It's obscene.:mad:

Simpson has not been found guilty of murdering anyone. Oh, I forgot that make-shift court, the court of public opinion.

[weezer]

Simpson has not been found guilty of murdering anyone. Oh, I forgot that make-shift court, the court of public opinion.

don't forget the real search for justice -- the civil trial. ;)

[William Anthony]

william, for you to interpret VB's statement as racist is ludicrous.

That's the way I interpret it. Do you think I should say that because a female dresses in men's clothing and is not married with children, that she is not a woman? I think that would be a ludicrous statement by me.

[martin II]

Why is it that everything that is negative that some White people says, such as MF and VB, is innocent or irrelevant to you?

That is what i would like to now. The furhman makes some historical racist comments and he was just kidding. VB make racist comments about oj and it is just a innocent verbal typo.
martin II

[William Anthony]

don't forget the real search for justice -- the civil trial. ;)

The real search for the truth was the criminal trial as to the charge of murder. It is one thing for the make-shift court to believe Simpson committed murder but the truth is he was proven not guilty.

[martin II]

william, for you to interpret VB's statement as racist is ludicrous.

VB comments are in black and white but i can undrstand how you would not see them as racist.:cuss:

[weezer]

VB's comments were NOT racist and for the two of you to continue to whine about it is stupid. :punch: :seeya: :seeya:

[martin II]

don't forget the real search for justice -- the civil trial. ;)

You mean the lets set this up so we make sure we get him court.

[William Anthony]

VB's comments were NOT racist and for the two of you to continue to whine about it is stupid. :punch: :seeya: :seeya:

I thought that I should let you know that any attempt to get me to respond in a negative way by the use of the words ludicrous and stupid in order to get the discussion banned will not work, imho. I think we have shown that we are able to discuss race, religion and politics in a civil and cordial manner. However, for some reason some do not want to, even though they believe race was a factor in the verdict, when it comes to this case. If you can only respond using those words then I think you have chosen the correct course of action. :seeya: :seeya: :seeya: :cool:

[martin II]

VB's comments were NOT racist and for the two of you to continue to whine about it is stupid. :punch: :seeya: :seeya:

you have just injected name calling into the discussion. why is that?

[William Anthony]

VB comments are in black and white but i can undrstand how you would not see them as racist.:cuss:

Martin, we are not allowed to see the comments as r*****, because we know who is said to be right. :)

[socaldiva]

VB's comments were NOT racist and for the two of you to continue to whine about it is stupid. :punch: :seeya: :seeya:

:beer: :beer: :beer:

Gee, it seems that some here think Orenthal is okay & V.B. isn't & this is based on a book that they haven't read. Hysterical.

[tv]

diva and weezer, this whole discussion is ludicrous. I've told the VB haters that I don't want to discuss him and yet they keep hammering me to comment on why I don't think his comment was racist. I have never read one racist word written by Mr. Bugliosi. They are puppets with a knee-jerk reaction to anything taken out of context that relates to race. These are the two guys that want to have an open discussion about race. Riiiight. :D

[tv]

you have just injected name calling into the discussion. why is that?

Not nearly as bad as you describing a sex act. Besides, she's right.

[William Anthony]

diva and weezer, this whole discussion is ludicrous. I've told the VB haters that I don't want to discuss him and yet they keep hammering me to comment on why I don't think his comment was racist. I have never read one racist word written by Mr. Bugliosi. They are puppets with a knee-jerk reaction to anything taken out of context that relates to race. These are the two guys that want to have an open discussion about race. Riiiight. :D

Name calling and personal attacks are not permitted by the rules, imho.

[William Anthony]

As I have said Simpson engaged in verbal abuse and physical abuse. MF engaged in verbal abuse and physical abuse. VB engaged in verbal abuse. I just heard two former renown female prosecutors, Peirro, and Kimberly G-Newsome, ridicule MF on Geraldo about MF's theory that the female marine found in the motel room was not murdered. It seems they do not believe he is the great detective others seem to think he is. Perhaps, MF harbors another bias, a devotion to male marines.

I also saw on CNN that a West Indian paid a hit-man to murder his Black daughter-in-law. This is related to the magazine cover picture of Simpson. CNN exposed that West Indian females are advertised as fair skin, because they believe that in America it the perception is that it is best to be as close to Whiteas possible in America's class hierarchy. The son testified that his father had his wife, the father's daughter-in-law, who recently gave birth, killed, because the father was ashamed. Thus, more evidence that the darkened picture of Simpson gave a negative impression to many Americans of different ethnic backgrounds and, imho, was an attempt for him not to receive a fair trial.

[tv]

I think that anyone that doesn't condemn VB's statement is r*****. I do not think the moderator should be happy at you calling, as a fact, posters r*****.Thank you calling me a racist. :seeya:

[William Anthony]

Thank you calling me a racist. :seeya:

Not quite correct. As you see by my post I said that I think and I did not say they were. However, you did call me and another poster, puppets. Let me also say that the part of the post you quoted was made in response to a poster that called Martin and me r******.

[tv]

Not quite correct. As you see by my post I said that I think and I did not say they were. However, you did call me and another poster, puppets.
Don't try to slide out of it now. You called not only me but several posters racist by this comment. How about this? I think you and martin are puppets. Does that make it acceptable for you?

[William Anthony]

Don't try to slide out out it now. You called not only me but several posters racist by this comment. How about this? I think you and martin are puppets. Does that make it acceptable for you?

Yes, because you did not state it as a fact or call us names in so doing. With that said, I am willing to accept your apology for your original post.

[William Anthony]

Thank you calling me a racist. :seeya:

Would you like to thank the poster, who called me and Martin r******?:)

[tv]

Yes, because you did not state it as a fact or call us names in so doing. With that said, I am willing to accept your apology for your original post.Too bad I'm not willing to give it.

[William Anthony]

Too bad I'm not willing to give it.

I really did not expect that you would. With that said, :cool: . How about the thanks to the poster that called Martin and me r*****?

[tv]

I really did not expect that you would. With that said, :cool: . How about the thanks to the poster that called Martin and me r*****?

To be truthful with you, William, I tried for a long time not to believe you were biased against white people but the longer I've been on this board the more apparent it is that you are. No conversation takes place that you don't condense it down to racial components, anything that has been done or said by the Simpson camp is okay because of the hundreds of years of victimization that you never stop talking about. You claim to want an open discussion about race but when someone has some excellent starting points on this discussion in a book that they've writtien automatically they're racist. You attempt to bully and harrass me into condemning Mr. Bugliosi's remarks when there is nothing racist about them. Throwing the typical ploy of white guilt on me isn't going to work. I know who and what I am and I have done nothing to apologize for. Put on your big boy pants and live with it.

[William Anthony]

Originally Posted by fbgweezer View Post
So far, you and william consider the VB comment as r***** -- only you two. hmmm. I'm beginning to think that the VB book may be a bit beyond your level.

I guess 'depanding' on 'ones' oreientation, everything is r*****. I believe that is the struggle you and william are having. you are both r***** and no one wants to argue race on this board.

now, how about we drop this crap and get back to the orenthal james simpson double murder discussion? or, if we can't resolve this here and now, maybe we can ask the moderator to step in and view some of the outrageous posts.

Thanks for calling Martin and me r*****. :cool:

[William Anthony]

To be truthful with you, William, I tried for a long time not to believe you were biased against white people but the longer I've been on this board the more apparent it is that you are. No conversation takes place that you don't condense it down to racial components, anything that has been done or said by the Simpson camp is okay because of the hundreds of years of victimization that you never stop talking about. You claim to want an open discussion about race but when someone has some excellent starting points on this discussion in a book that they've writtien automatically they're racist. You attempt to bully and harrass me into condemning Mr. Bugliosi's remarks when there is nothing racist about them. Throwing the typical ploy of white guilt on me isn't going to work. I know who and what I am and I have done nothing to apologize for. Put on your big boy pants and live with it.

Now, I think that we have reached a level on which we can begin an open and honest discussion. I have had on my big boy pants, as you call them, for a long time. You want to point to the juror's statement and the black power salute to accuse Blacks of being racist. However, as I have previously stated you and others excuse the comments of others as irrelevant or state that they are not racist. I do believe that you are a white woman, which, is not meant in any disrespectful manner, but, as such, you cannot know what a Black male feels when he hears those comments. I have said many times on this board that I want equality for all, regardless of race, gender or any other different characteristics. This is true whether you believe it or not. I chose the law, because I see the law as he vehicle to change things that I believe need changing as it relates to equality. I have lived with prejudice, discrimination and racism all my life. I have been fortunate enough to form relationships with many people of many different races. The relationships were not based on the color of their skin but who they are. I had a father wise enough to tell me that I am as good as any man and better than none. That is the way I have chosen to live my life.

When people make comments about the jury and will not accept the verdict and call the vile, reprehensible, despicable, imho, remarks of the likes MF irrelevant or say that a Black man, who falls in love or marrys someone from a different race, lives in a neighborhood that is predominately White with his White wife (a place that she might feel more comfortable living in), choses to raise their children in that neighborhood, and choses to spend his money wherever he choses, is in some manner not being Black and this remark is attributed to a White man, I find it offensive and racists as a Black man. I point to America's history of its treatment toward the Black race and those whites, whether by choice or financial reasons, live in predominately Black neighborhoods or close proximity thereto, to show why those people feel differently about the issues in the trial than others who have not had the same experience.

I am not a victim and never have been. I live my life as I choose, because I believe it belongs only to God and me. Those who have a problem with the way I live have the problem, because I am doing what I want to do. I very seldom judge people, which I have been criticized for, because people cannot understand why I associate with certain people. I say that Jesus was no respecter of persons and neither am I. I say there but by the grace of God go I. I don't make victims of anyone, nor will I permit anyone to make me a victim. If you feel that you are a victim by my questioning your posts or pointing to America's history, it is only, because I want you to discuss what makes you feel the way you feel and to consider how others might feel, without calling them derogatory names or criticizing their statements without considering where they are coming from. I considered where VB was coming from and it is the height of hypocrisy for him to say that Simpson was not Black. What he could not say is that Simpson did not live Black, because in America there should not be a difference between how Blacks and Whites live, imho, or who they marry.

I am trying to promote a discussion so that I can understand and know the best way to go about effecting a change. I offer one perspective and I am open to another. If you open a jug of water, don't let it sit and get stale. Let's drink of it so it can nourish our souls.

[tv]

William, your comments are very eloquent but the fact remains you tried to harrass me into condemning remarks that are not racist and that you are not even truly knowledgable about. You're always talking about the black experience but what about the white experience? It's a no-win situation because you always fall back on hundreds of years of oppression. However, I don't intend to whine about it. I intend to stop responding to posts about race. I've asked martin and I'll ask you: what rights do I have as an American citizen that you don't have? martin never answered me. Something tells me the list is very short, in fact; non-existent.

I hope you're able to effect a change if that's what you feel is your calling. I'm not sure this forum is going to be instrumental in those efforts. This forum is about OJ Simpson and the murders of Ron and Nicole, the trials and the ongoing escapades of Simpson.

[martin II]

William, your comments are very eloquent but the fact remains you tried to harrass me into condemning remarks that are not racist and that you are not even truly knowledgable about. You're always talking about the black experience but what about the white experience? It's a no-win situation because you always fall back on hundreds of years of oppression. However, I don't intend to whine about it. I intend to stop responding to posts about race. I've asked martin and I'll ask you: what rights do I have as an American citizen that you don't have? martin never answered me. Something tells me the list is very short, in fact; non-existent.

I hope you're able to effect a change if that's what you feel is your calling. I'm not sure this forum is going to be instrumental in those efforts. This forum is about OJ Simpson and the murders of Ron and Nicole, the trials and the ongoing escapades of Simpson.

If you don't want to talk about race stop calling the jury racist and don't post about authors that make racist comment in their work and please don't suggest that i read a book with racist comments in them.
thanks
martinII

[William Anthony]

William, your comments are very eloquent but the fact remains you tried to harrass me into condemning remarks that are not racist and that you are not even truly knowledgable about. You're always talking about the black experience but what about the white experience? It's a no-win situation because you always fall back on hundreds of years of oppression. However, I don't intend to whine about it. I intend to stop responding to posts about race. I've asked martin and I'll ask you: what rights do I have as an American citizen that you don't have? martin never answered me. Something tells me the list is very short, in fact; non-existent.

I hope you're able to effect a change if that's what you feel is your calling. I'm not sure this forum is going to be instrumental in those efforts. This forum is about OJ Simpson and the murders of Ron and Nicole, the trials and the ongoing escapades of Simpson.

First, I did not try to harass you into condemning the statement. I am asking why you do not consider the statement racist. second, tell me about the White experience, so that I can understand as it relates to forming conclusions about the Simpson trial. Let me begin with the first right that I think Whites have (and at this point, I will say White men) that Blacks don't.

On that issue, let me say that I don't believe Blacks and women ever had equal rights, if you will allow me to briefly explain. I see them as privileges that the law gave them, such as voting. If the law can give you privileges, it can take them away, imho. With that said, the White man had the right to vote. Now that you understand what I am saying on rights and privileges, let me say that rights and/or privileges are not equal until they are equally applied. Let's begin with the right or privilege to earn money through employment. I will speak personally and generally. A Black employee and a White employee may have the same or similar disputes with their White Supervisor. The Black employee is more likely to be terminated, because he is seen to be militant, crazy, or a trouble-maker, while the White employee is seen to be upset or having a bad day. I do not consider this an uncommon experience. How does this relate to the Simpson trial? Blacks and some Whites are forced to live in lower income neighborhoods because of lack or little income, due to the type of jobs they get and the ones they have been terminated from. This in no way excludes other causes that place them in those neighborhoods. However, I am addressing the equality of the job situation as it relates to the jurors in the Simpson trial, because it may help to explain their lack of trust of authority figures. I have begun to share with you the Black experience as it relates to the jury. Please, share with me the White feelings as it relates to that issue?

[William Anthony]

William, your comments are very eloquent but the fact remains you tried to harrass me into condemning remarks that are not racist and that you are not even truly knowledgable about. You're always talking about the black experience but what about the white experience? It's a no-win situation because you always fall back on hundreds of years of oppression. However, I don't intend to whine about it. I intend to stop responding to posts about race. I've asked martin and I'll ask you: what rights do I have as an American citizen that you don't have? martin never answered me. Something tells me the list is very short, in fact; non-existent.

I hope you're able to effect a change if that's what you feel is your calling. I'm not sure this forum is going to be instrumental in those efforts. This forum is about OJ Simpson and the murders of Ron and Nicole, the trials and the ongoing escapades of Simpson.

As it relates to the job termination and the possible perspective of jurors toward authority figures, I would remind you of a policy that the courts used to determine whether there was evidence of discrimination by employers. That policy was called the last hired and first fired (as it related to Black employees). I think that you may find this link informative and may help you understand that the jury was not biased, but were considering the evidence from their particular perspectives.

http://france.usembassy.gov/root/pdfs/afroamericans.pdf

[Kate Sachel]

I'm struggling after reading these pages this morning to understand why the history and current population of Australia means anything in determining how this trial may have touched people residing there.

Do you have to be black or mistreated by law enforcement to feel the effect? Is that what was being said? If so, I'm truly disheartened and it may just be time for me to step away from this forum if we have truly gotten to a place where race, rather than human emotion, is all anything boils down to anymore.

Kate

[William Anthony]

I'm struggling after reading these pages this morning to understand why the history and current population of Australia means anything in determining how this trial may have touched people residing there.

Do you have to be black or mistreated by law enforcement to feel the effect? Is that what was being said? If so, I'm truly disheartened and it may just be time for me to step away from this forum if we have truly gotten to a place where race, rather than human emotion, is all anything boils down to anymore.

Kate

A very excellent point, which is why I initially asked Mr. Bell to explain how the case affected Black Australians, since he limited his comment to that specific class. Should it be effected?

[Kate Sachel]

A very excellent point, which is why I initially asked Mr. Bell to explain how the case affected Black Australians, since he limited his comment to that specific class. Should it be effected?

Mr. Bell's original comment was this:

"Martin. I am an Australian. Born bred and proud to be. However Simpson is a topic I will continue to discuss. I don't drink VB. If that's the only idea you have of us then maybe we need to discuss Simpson way more. Because I don't think you appreciate what happens in the US affects us all. I happened to be in LA when all the madness about his trial began. I walked past where he would be tried and there were these huge bleachers and TV and satellite dishes. That spiked my interest in him. I knew nothing about him before that."

And then martin responded with this:

"Maby you should have stayed for the trial to be more informed.
The Oj trial effected Austrilians how.How did that HUGH Aussie black population respond to the verdict."

As you can see, it was martin that sparked the discussion in the direction of blacks in Australia. Mr. Bell originally only stated that it "affects us all".

Kate

[William Anthony]

Mr. Bell's original comment was this:

"Martin. I am an Australian. Born bred and proud to be. However Simpson is a topic I will continue to discuss. I don't drink VB. If that's the only idea you have of us then maybe we need to discuss Simpson way more. Because I don't think you appreciate what happens in the US affects us all. I happened to be in LA when all the madness about his trial began. I walked past where he would be tried and there were these huge bleachers and TV and satellite dishes. That spiked my interest in him. I knew nothing about him before that."

And then martin responded with this:

"Maby you should have stayed for the trial to be more informed.
The Oj trial effected Austrilians how.How did that HUGH Aussie black population respond to the verdict."

As you can see, it was martin that sparked the discussion in the direction of blacks in Australia. Mr. Bell originally only stated that it "affects us all".

Kate

I have done a quick search and it appears that you are correct, again, to my dismay. :) With that said, I believe I owe my Bell an apology. Consider this my apology, Mr. Bell.

[William Anthony]

I have just heard that the female military person, who was found dead in the hotel, Megan Tuma (I believe) is being ruled a homicide, despite MF's claims that it would be ruled a suicide. It appears he is not as great a detective as he and some think he is. The female prosecutors warned him that he was off track and did not know what he was talking about. I must give more consideration to MF's desire for greatness to be a motivating factor in planting evidence, and the possibility that he planted evidence in this case.

[martin II]

I have done a quick search and it appears that you are correct, again, to my dismay. :) With that said, I believe I owe my Bell an apology. Consider this my apology, Mr. Bell.

wiliam
When Mr Bell said had become interested in the trial and then that it effected 'US ALL' he began by saying he was AUSSIE. I took his "it effected us all' comment to mean Australians, his countrymen.I asked how it effected black there as that was my interest. His comments describing Somalian africans as running down some road killing people with large knifes is what directed my attention to African Blacks he said were in his country.Maby when he returns to the thread he will give a answer to my quesiton.:cool:

[tv]

First, I did not try to harass you into condemning the statement. I am asking why you do not consider the statement racist. second, tell me about the White experience, so that I can understand as it relates to forming conclusions about the Simpson trial. Let me begin with the first right that I think Whites have (and at this point, I will say White men) that Blacks don't.

On that issue, let me say that I don't believe Blacks and women ever had equal rights, if you will allow me to briefly explain. I see them as privileges that the law gave them, such as voting. If the law can give you privileges, it can take them away, imho. With that said, the White man had the right to vote. Now that you understand what I am saying on rights and privileges, let me say that rights and/or privileges are not equal until they are equally applied. Let's begin with the right or privilege to earn money through employment. I will speak personally and generally. A Black employee and a White employee may have the same or similar disputes with their White Supervisor. The Black employee is more likely to be terminated, because he is seen to be militant, crazy, or a trouble-maker, while the White employee is seen to be upset or having a bad day. I do not consider this an uncommon experience. How does this relate to the Simpson trial? Blacks and some Whites are forced to live in lower income neighborhoods because of lack or little income, due to the type of jobs they get and the ones they have been terminated from. This in no way excludes other causes that place them in those neighborhoods. However, I am addressing the equality of the job situation as it relates to the jurors in the Simpson trial, because it may help to explain their lack of trust of authority figures. I have begun to share with you the Black experience as it relates to the jury. Please, share with me the White feelings as it relates to that issue?

I shouldn't have asked you the question about what rights whites have that blacks don't because I'm not going to discuss race with you. It was more of a rhetorical question because I already know that the answer is that I don't have a single right that you do not have. This country is made up of all types of people in all colors and socio-economic backgrounds -- industrious, lazy, honest, dishonest etc. I see now that you feel the jurors were treated with inequality regarding employment so they decided to render a not-guilty verdict. Okay.

[William Anthony]

I shouldn't have asked you the question about what rights whites have that blacks don't because I'm not going to discuss race with you. It was more of a rhetorical question because I already know that the answer is that I don't have a single right that you do not have. This country is made up of all types of people in all colors and socio-economic backgrounds -- industrious, lazy, honest, dishonest etc. I see now that you feel the jurors were treated with inequality regarding employment so they decided to render a not-guilty verdict. Okay.

With all due respect, it was more than a rhetorical question. The idea that we have the same privileges does not terminate the discussion. The crucial point is how are those privileges enforced. You over simplify the point, with all due respect. A juror is not asked to forget their experiences when they are selected for jury duty. They are asked to listen to ALL the evidence, give weight and credibility to the evidence. My point is that they may have been more receptive to the defense's presentation of the evidence, because they have had negative experiences with authority figures, including LE and on Jobs, while others, who may not have been accustomed to those experiences may not have been as receptive. We were just beginning the discussion and I used the job situation as an example of distrust of authority and where it may have started.

You still have not given me a perspective as to how Whites, who do not have the same experiences of the jury, may have viewed the evidence. I would not and have not called the jury that found Simpson liable for Ronald Goldman's wrongful death, ignorant, uneducated or biased. A poster posted some of their statements and I did say that they might have been confused when they said they found him liable for murder. I think there confusion can be attributed to the judge's statement and rulings. I am interested in knowing why you give LE the benefit of the doubt on so many issues.

[martin II]

I shouldn't have asked you the question about what rights whites have that blacks don't because I'm not going to discuss race with you. It was more of a rhetorical question because I already know that the answer is that I don't have a single right that you do not have. This country is made up of all types of people in all colors and socio-economic backgrounds -- industrious, lazy, honest, dishonest etc. I see now that you feel the jurors were treated with inequality regarding employment so they decided to render a not-guilty verdict. Okay.

I think we are fortunate that not all whites and others view this situation as you seem to.Complicated situations are rarely solved by simple minded answers But thanks for your reply.:cool:

[William Anthony]

wiliam
When Mr Bell said had become interested in the trial and then that it effected 'US ALL' he began by saying he was AUSSIE. I took his "it effected us all' comment to mean Australians, his countrymen.I asked how it effected black there as that was my interest. His comments describing Somalian africans as running down some road killing people with large knifes is what directed my attention to African Blacks he said were in his country.Maby when he returns to the thread he will give a answer to my quesiton.:cool:

I understand you point, Martin. However, I did think that Mr. Bell originally said it affected the Australian Black population. I understand that the trial affected a huge number of people wold wide. I think a universal effect was shock and outrage at the brutal double murders, followed by disbelief and amazement over who was charged with the crimes. It is from this point that I think the commonality of sentiments dissolved.

[tv]

I think we are fortunate that not all whites and others view this situation as you seem to.Complicated situations are rarely solved by simple minded answers But thanks for your reply.:cool:

No need to thank me for the reply because I wasn't replying to you.

[weezer]

With all due respect, it was more than a rhetorical question. The idea that we have the same privileges does not terminate the discussion. The crucial point is how are those privileges enforced. You over simplify the point, with all due respect. A juror is not asked to forget their experiences when they are selected for jury duty. They are asked to listen to ALL the evidence, give weight and credibility to the evidence. My point is that they may have been more receptive to the defense's presentation of the evidence, because they have had negative experiences with authority figures, including LE and on Jobs, while others, who may not have been accustomed to those experiences may not have been as receptive. We were just beginning the discussion and I used the job situation as an example of distrust of authority and where it may have started.

You still have not given me a perspective as to how Whites, who do not have the same experiences of the jury, may have viewed the evidence. I would not and have not called the jury that found Simpson liable for Ronald Goldman's wrongful death, ignorant, uneducated or biased. A poster posted some of their statements and I did say that they might have been confused when they said they found him liable for murder. I think there confusion can be attributed to the judge's statement and rulings. I am interested in knowing why you give LE the benefit of the doubt on so many issues.

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

[martin II]

No need to thank me for the reply because I wasn't replying to you.

I believe you deserve thanks for that type post.hahaha

[William Anthony]

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

You brought the subject of race to this forum when you called the jury biased and pointed to the black power salute and applauded the statement of the juror that we take care of our own. With ALL DUE RESPECT, how about you take back your comments and say you did not mean what you posted so that we can drop the subject?

With ALL DUE RESPECT, the only one, who is putting on a victim show, are those, imho, who feel that they can post anything they want out of some distorted sense of entitlement and feel they do not have to support there posts when asked about them. They feel victimized, imho, because of their unwillingness and, in some cases, for example when asked for a link in regard to pigeon-toed shoe prints,
inability to support their posts and want to change the discussion they started.

[weezer]

You brought the subject of race to this forum when you called the jury biased and pointed to the black power salute. With ALL DUE RESPECT, how about you take back your comments and say you did not mean what you posted so that we can drop the subject?

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

[William Anthony]

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

How about you tell us why you called the jury ignorant, uneducated and racially biased? How about you tell me why you called Martin and me r*****. If you knew me, you would not call me that.

[martin II]

I understand you point, Martin. However, I did think that Mr. Bell originally said it affected the Australian Black population. I understand that the trial affected a huge number of people wold wide. I think a universal effect was shock and outrage at the brutal double murders, followed by disbelief and amazement over who was charged with the crimes. It is from this point that I think the commonality of sentiments dissolved.

William
Upon review this is the post by bell that caused me ask about the blacks
in his country that he claims live there. His characterization of a whole country of people and the whole of "BLACK AFRICA" as the "place where they chase people down the road with hatchets" is why i asked about blacks in his country.PS Somalia is a east African muslim country.


Bells post.
There are many people from Somalia who have come to where I live. You know, Somalia. Africa. Where they chase people down the roads with hatchets. Black Africa. You've heard of that place?

[William Anthony]

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

How about you tell me why you and some others feel they are entitled not to apologize?

[William Anthony]

William
Upon review this is the post by bell that caused me ask about the blacks
in his country that he claims live there. His characterization of a whole country of people and the whole of "BLACK AFRICA" as the "place where they chase people down the road with hatchets" is why i asked about blacks in his country.PS Somalia is a east African muslim country.


Bells post.
There are many people from Somalia who have come to where I live. You know, Somalia. Africa. Where they chase people down the roads with hatchets. Black Africa. You've heard of that place?

Martin,

I did not mean to dismiss posts that I think are rude. I simply was raised to apologize when I am wrong. I spent 28 moths in Texas stationed at Fort Sam Houston and Fort Hood, which was my entire length of service to America. This tenure in Texas did not obviate the values my parent's instilled in me.

[William Anthony]

With all due respect, it was more than a rhetorical question. The idea that we have the same privileges does not terminate the discussion. The crucial point is how are those privileges enforced. You over simplify the point, with all due respect. A juror is not asked to forget their experiences when they are selected for jury duty. They are asked to listen to ALL the evidence, give weight and credibility to the evidence. My point is that they may have been more receptive to the defense's presentation of the evidence, because they have had negative experiences with authority figures, including LE and on Jobs, while others, who may not have been accustomed to those experiences may not have been as receptive. We were just beginning the discussion and I used the job situation as an example of distrust of authority and where it may have started.

You still have not given me a perspective as to how Whites, who do not have the same experiences of the jury, may have viewed the evidence. I would not and have not called the jury that found Simpson liable for Ronald Goldman's wrongful death, ignorant, uneducated or biased. A poster posted some of their statements and I did say that they might have been confused when they said they found him liable for murder. I think there confusion can be attributed to the judge's statement and rulings. I am interested in knowing why you give LE the benefit of the doubt on so many issues.

correction-I think their confusion can be attributed to the judge's statement and rulings

[martin II]

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

'BOYS'
That sounds like an old white man or woman down south addressing two adult black men in the 1950s

[weezer]

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

[martin II]

Martin,

I did not mean to dismiss posts that I think are rude. I simply was raised to apologize when I am wrong. I spent 28 moths in Texas stationed at Fort Sam Houston and Fort Hood, which was my entire length of service to America. This tenure in Texas did not obviate the values my parent's instilled in me.

my grandson is at Ft Hood after two tours in Iraq.

[SlowHandSam]

'BOYS'
That sounds like an old white man or woman down south addressing two adult black men in the 1950s

for God's sake. It isn't ALWAYS about race.

It's a SOUTHERN saying that we use.

Will you drop the race BS already?

[weezer]

my grandson is at Ft Hood after two tours in Iraq.

:patriot: I salute your grandson and thank him for his service. I also have -- and had -- family members there.

[SlowHandSam]

Harrison seeks legal advice from Lewis, Simpson
Marvin’s just looking for a little help from Ray and O.J.

PHILADELPHIA, PA — Under investigation regarding his involvement in a Philadelphia shooting, Indianapolis Colts‘ wide receiver Marvin Harrison is not taking any chances.

An anonymous source close to the Pro Bowler told SSNN that in the past few days Harrison has made several phone calls to current and former NFL players who successfully navigated murder investigations – including Ray Lewis and O.J. Simpson.

“The murder weapon was Marvin’s own gun,” the source said. “And he had gotten into an altercation with the victim at the bar [Harrison] owns. On top of that, the shooting occurred outside a car wash Harrison owns. Looks pretty damning, right?

“Of course, you need to keep in mind that he’s a football player; and in this country, all football players are presumed innocent until proven they have enough money to buy an acquittal. That’s where Lewis and Simpson come in.”

Lewis pled down to probation for his involvement in a double murder following a Super Bowl party in 2000; and Simpson, of course, was tried and acquitted in the double murder of his ex-wife and her alleged lover.

“He’s just been reaching out, seeing what the legal process is all about for football players faced with overwhelming evidence,” the source went on. “Because the shooting victim survived, both Ray and O.J. could only offer limited advice. Ray actually said, ‘You should have made sure he was dead,’ and Simpson told Harrison, ‘Only I am above law.’ Which is pretty ridiculous given his current predicament. I guess he’s only above the law when it comes to double murder.”

Reportedly Harrison has been exploring other ways of getting out of an attempted murder indictment, such as claiming that aliens from Jupiter forged the gun ownership documents, or asserting that one of Philadelphia Eagles head coach Andy Reid’s sons did it.

http://www.serioussportsnewsnetwork.com/2008/06/harrison-seeks-legal-advice-from-lewis-simpson.html


Hmm, seems oj's arrogance is in full force ... as expected.

Can you only imagine that your legacy is to be sought after for advice on how to beat a murder charge? Mmm mmm mmm.

[William Anthony]

'BOYS'
That sounds like an old white man or woman down south addressing two adult black men in the 1950s

When I stepped off the plane in Dallas, Texas and went to the gift shop, the lady behind the counter asked me and another Black GI what she could get us boys. The other GI got angry. I smiled and asked her how she knew our last names. I found San Antonio to be one of the prettiest cities I have ever been in. However, as much as I liked it, I have never wanted to return due to my 28 month tenure and the things I experienced during that tenure. Before anyone gets the wrong idea, because of the odd length of time I was in the service, I will assure them that I got an Honorable Discharge. In fact, it was an incident that a Major did to me and my reaction to his treatment that got me the 8 month drop. Suffice it to say that, when the Colonel asked what happened and I explained, my orders were immediately cut, because I do not think the Army wanted to enter into that court battle. They first thought they would court martial me but, when witnesses of both races and various ranks stepped forward to say that the Major initiated the altercation it was soon dropped. On the plane home, I laughed, because the Major lost all the way round. I heard he got demoted, not sure. He was originally from Texas.

[William Anthony]

for God's sake. It isn't ALWAYS about race.

It's a SOUTHERN saying that we use.

Will you drop the race BS already?

What we? Do you have a mouse in your pocket? I have stayed in Texas, Virginia, W. Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, Florida and been to Louisiana. I have yet to have one Black native from those states to refer to me as a boy. I am now on the east coast and did have a supervisor refer to a Black employee in his forties, who works a lot of overtime, as a good old boy.

[William Anthony]

Hmm, seems oj's arrogance is in full force ... as expected.

Can you only imagine that your legacy is to be sought after for advice on how to beat a murder charge? Mmm mmm mmm.

He must not have had Robert Blake's phone number.

[weezer]

how about you boys take your "I'm a victim" show to some other board? This is off topic and tiresome.

[SlowHandSam]

What we? Do you have a mouse in your pocket? I have stayed in Texas, Virginia, W. Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, Florida and been to Louisiana. I have yet to have one Black native from those states to refer to me as a boy. I am now on the east coast and did have a supervisor refer to a Black employee in his forties, who works a lot of overtime, as a good old boy.

The "we" refers to me and all those that I know who are Southern.

Just because you may have "stayed" here, doesn't make you one of us. :no: :rolleyes: You may not understand our vernacular, but just because you are unable to understand, doesn't mean that everything we say is racist.

So, I'll join weezer and ask that you boys take the victim talk elsewhere.

I'd like to go back to reading about oj.

[William Anthony]

for God's sake. It isn't ALWAYS about race.

It's a SOUTHERN saying that we use.

Will you drop the race BS already?

You are correct. I worked for a furniture factory in Altavista, Virginia and the day I got hired I met my foreman. While he was taking me to my workstation, he reviewed my application. He said I see here you have 14 years of education and asked if I flunked twice. I started to get angry but told him I had two years of college. He responded, we don't get people here with that much education. I knew that he had not been sarcastic. My job was unloading trucks. The whole crew was Black except for the White guy that took inventory. I was told that he could not count. I asked him how much 20 plus 20 plus 20 was he responded 40. I asked him how much he would have, if he had 3 20 dollar bills. He responded 60 dollars. I do not think my foreman was racist. I think that he had to assign people as he did. I had talks with him and found him to be a fair person.

[William Anthony]

The "we" refers to me and all those that I know who are Southern.

Just because you may have "stayed" here, doesn't make you one of us. :no: :rolleyes: You may not understand our vernacular, but just because you are unable to understand, doesn't mean that everything we say is racist.

So, I'll join weezer and ask that you boys take the victim talk elsewhere.

I'd like to go back to reading about oj.

No, I am not one of you and proud to be from where I am from and away from where I have been. I thought you were reading about Marvin Harrison. You made the comment about boys being what we say. I think it was an A and B conversation.

I think I understand by your statement that just some of the things that You (we) say are racist.

"You may not understand our vernacular, but just because you are unable to understand, doesn't mean that everything we say is racist." quote SlowHandSam.

[SlowHandSam]

No, I am not one of you and proud to be from where I am from and away from where I have been. I thought you were reading about Marvin Harrison. You made the comment about boys being what we say. I think it was an A and B conversation.

I think I understand by your statement that just some of the things that You (we) say are racist.

"You may not understand our vernacular, but just because you are unable to understand, doesn't mean that everything we say is racist." quote SlowHandSam.

the day that you don't respond to posts not directed at you, I'll do the same.

Thanks.

[tv]

The "we" refers to me and all those that I know who are Southern.

Just because you may have "stayed" here, doesn't make you one of us. :no: :rolleyes: You may not understand our vernacular, but just because you are unable to understand, doesn't mean that everything we say is racist.

So, I'll join weezer and ask that you boys take the victim talk elsewhere.

I'd like to go back to reading about oj.

I'm Virginia born and bred and the term 'boy' is a commonly used word to refer to almost any man regardless of age. So I join weezer and you in hoping the boys take the victim talk elsewhere.

[SlowHandSam]

No, I am not one of you and proud to be from where I am from and away from where I have been. I thought you were reading about Marvin Harrison. You made the comment about boys being what we say. I think it was an A and B conversation.

I think I understand by your statement that just some of the things that You (we) say are racist.

"You may not understand our vernacular, but just because you are unable to understand, doesn't mean that everything we say is racist." quote SlowHandSam.

I never said that I do or do not say anything, everything, some things, many things, few things are racist. Twist away William, twist away.

the day that you don't respond to posts not directed at you, I'll do the same.

Thanks.

[William Anthony]

I never said that I do or do not say anything, everything, some things, many things, few things are racist. Twist away William, twist away.

the day that you don't respond to posts not directed at you, I'll do the same.

Thanks.

There is nothing to twist. It was simply your statement. Didn't I quote it exactly? I never meant that you should not have responded, but, once you do you open yourself up to responsibility for what you post, imho.

[William Anthony]

I'm Virginia born and bred and the term 'boy' is a commonly used word to refer to almost any man regardless of age. So I join weezer and you in hoping the boys take the victim talk elsewhere.

My father was born in Virginia. I have lived and worked there. I have relatives that live there. I still have not met a Black Virginian that refers to anyone adult as a boy.

[tv]

My father was born in Virginia. I have lived and worked there. I have relatives that live there. I still have not met a Black Virginian that refers to anyone adult as a boy.Your point?