Verdict is in

[Kate Sachel]

I just think it was going a bit too far. Doesn't kidnapping come with a life sentence? For what, trying to get what was rightfully his. Granted he went about it the wrong way, but the charges were so pumped up.

No, kidnapping does not come with a life sentence.

If you were a victim of false imprisonment, I doubt that you would consider kidnapping charges against the individual who kept you imprisoned against your will to be pumped up. If you would consider them to be, then certainly correct me on that.

Kate

[WarmNCozy]

We are all supposed to be one another's peers, and I don't believe that a jury that ends up being all black, all white, all hispanic, etc equates into not being a jury of peers.

I have sat in on many trials, and watched all white juries convict a white defendant, and watched all black juries convict a black defendant.

Kate

I don't mean to be argumentive but you either didn't read the definition in my post or disregarded the following:

Jury selection may include no process which excludes those of a particular race or intentionally narrows the spectrum of possible jurors. It does not mean that women are to be tried by women, Asians by Asians, or African Americans by African Americans.

[William Anthony]

I'm not certain that we have fully clarified it.

I was taken aback by your postings as well, which is what prompted me to take a moment to go back and thoroughly review the previous postings.

Kate

I accept your representation that we were not on the same page. My post were based on what I could find that the prosecution said in regard to the reasons for exclusion and the Batson challenge. I think you were making general statements about how one could perceive certain jurors. I think we actually did have a misunderstanding.

[Kate Sachel]

I guess that fairness equates to convictions. I was just kidding-trying to lighten the mood.:)

Simply pointing out that juries made up of the same race, and that race matching the defendants race, do have the capability to hand down convictions where they feel that a case has been proven. A jury does not have to be diverse in color in order to be unbiased.

Kate

[Kate Sachel]

I don't mean to be argumentive but you either didn't read the definition in my post or disregarded the following:

Jury selection may include no process which excludes those of a particular race or intentionally narrows the spectrum of possible jurors. It does not mean that women are to be tried by women, Asians by Asians, or African Americans by African Americans.


Allow me to make this crystal clear. What the definition is saying is that the selection may not allow a process that purposely excludes people of a particular race or intentionally (key word) narrows the spectrum.

If the jury selection is done following the legal standards, and that jury happens to end up being all of the same race it is legal and acceptable and still considered a jury of peers.

Kate

[Kate Sachel]

I accept your representation that we were not on the same page. My post were based on what I could find that the prosecution said in regard to the reasons for exclusion and the Batson challenge. I think you were making general statements about how one could perceive certain jurors. I think we actually did have a misunderstanding.

We are in agreement.

Kate

[William Anthony]

No, kidnapping does not come with a life sentence.

If you were a victim of false imprisonment, I doubt that you would consider kidnapping charges against the individual who kept you imprisoned against your will to be pumped up. If you would consider them to be, then certainly correct me on that.

Kate

I think that the above situation is entirely different than what happened in that room and only amounted to kidnapping by the wording of the Nevada statute. I guess anyone, who commits armed robbery, is guilty of kidnapping in Nevada. I would like to see some statistics on how many were charged. I know that if someone pulled a weapon on me and robbed me, I would not stay there by my own will.

[William Anthony]

Simply pointing out that juries made up of the same race, and that race matching the defendants race, do have the capability to hand down convictions where they feel that a case has been proven. A jury does not have to be diverse in color in order to be unbiased.

Kate

Would it not be fair if an all White jury acquitted a White defendant or an all Black jury acquitted a Black defendant? I understand what you are saying but you know there are those, who without considering the evidence would question the verdict, given the above scenarios.

[weezer]

Allow me to make this crystal clear. What the definition is saying is that the selection may not allow a process that purposely excludes people of a particular race or intentionally (key word) narrows the spectrum.

If the jury selection is done following the legal standards, and that jury happens to end up being all of the same race it is legal and acceptable and still considered a jury of peers.

Kate

thanks Kate for the explanation

[Kate Sachel]

Would it not be fair if an all White jury acquitted a White defendant or an all Black jury acquitted a Black defendant? I understand what you are saying but you know there are those, who without considering the evidence would question the verdict, given the above scenarios.

I understand your point, but my example is based on the common theme that blacks will let blacks skate by and whites will let whites skate by.

I'm simply pointing out that, while that may be something that has occurred, I have seen it several times in action where that proves not to be the case.

Kate

[WarmNCozy]

Allow me to make this crystal clear. What the definition is saying is that the selection may not allow a process that purposely excludes people of a particular race or intentionally (key word) narrows the spectrum.

If the jury selection is done following the legal standards, and that jury happens to end up being all of the same race it is legal and acceptable and still considered a jury of peers.

Kate

But they did deliberately exclude two black women. I felt from the beginning, that the jury was not made up of a broad spectrum of the population. JMO

[Kate Sachel]

I think that the above situation is entirely different than what happened in that room and only amounted to kidnapping by the wording of the Nevada statute. I guess anyone, who commits armed robbery, is guilty of kidnapping in Nevada. I would like to see some statistics on how many were charged. I know that if someone pulled a weapon on me and robbed me, I would not stay there by my own will.

How is that different? Remove the location and picture yourself or a loved one being held in a room at gunpoint. Would you honestly not want the greatest of charges that could legally be brought against your assailant to be brought? If not, why not?

Kate

[WarmNCozy]

No, kidnapping does not come with a life sentence.

If you were a victim of false imprisonment, I doubt that you would consider kidnapping charges against the individual who kept you imprisoned against your will to be pumped up. If you would consider them to be, then certainly correct me on that.

Kate

I don't believe that was the case in this situation. They all could have run off, I would.

[weezer]

soooooooo, to meet your standard, they jurors didn't have to be 12 NFL football players who beat their wives, stole cable, were charged with road rage, wrote a book about how they killed their ex-wife, didn't pay their bills, and had been accused of murdering two people? they just had to be Black. okay.

[Kate Sachel]

But they did deliberately exclude two black women. I felt from the beginning, that the jury was not made up of a broad spectrum of the population. JMO

Do you know that they deliberately removed two black women because of their race? If you do, then you are privy to information that the rest of us are not because none of us knows yet the full extent behind why those women were removed.

Kate

[Kate Sachel]

I don't believe that was the case in this situation. They all could have run off, I would.

You would run off if a gun was being pointed at you? Interesting; if that ever happens I certainly hope you do not get shot.

Kate

[William Anthony]

I understand your point, but my example is based on the common theme that blacks will let blacks skate by and whites will let whites skate by.

I'm simply pointing out that, while that may be something that has occurred, I have seen it several times in action where that proves not to be the case.

Kate

That theme is a stereotypical image prompted by fear of retaliation rather than by understanding, imho. On another topic, as to the jury of peers, I think that the definition posted should be the standard, which means no process be it intentional or otherwise that excludes a potential juror because of race. When I think about that I think that peremptory challenges should be disallowed. I believe your post was correct as to the status of the law on the issue. I think that both sides should be required to state a cause in order to dismiss a juror.

[WarmNCozy]

soooooooo, to meet your standard, they jurors didn't have to be 12 NFL football players who beat their wives, stole cable, were charged with road rage, wrote a book about how they killed their ex-wife, didn't pay their bills, and had been accused of murdering two people? they just had to be Black. okay.

Where are you coming up with this from my posts?

One's peers should include a broad spectrum of the population, particularly of race, nation origin and gender.


I think that speaks for itself.

[martin II]

Would it not be fair if an all White jury acquitted a White defendant or an all Black jury acquitted a Black defendant? I understand what you are saying but you know there are those, who without considering the evidence would question the verdict, given the above scenarios.

I was surprised that Aspertation was not considered as far as Kidnapping is concerned.

[WarmNCozy]

You would run off if a gun was being pointed at you? Interesting; if that ever happens I certainly hope you do not get shot.

Kate

Did OJ point a gun at anyone?

[William Anthony]

How is that different? Remove the location and picture yourself or a loved one being held in a room at gunpoint. Would you honestly not want the greatest of charges that could legally be brought against your assailant to be brought? If not, why not?

Kate

Your original post was to false imprisonment. What I would want is that all, who have been charged with armed robbery, are charged with kidnapping or all are not. I know for a fact, which WNC caused me to rethink, if I was going after my property stolen by thieves, I would have taken a gun.

[Kate Sachel]

That theme is a stereotypical image prompted by fear of retaliation rather than by understanding, imho. On another topic, as to the jury of peers, I think that the definition posted should be the standard, which means no process be it intentional or otherwise that excludes a potential juror because of race. When I think about that I think that peremptory challenges should be disallowed. I believe your post was correct as to the status of the law on the issue. I think that both sides should be required to state a cause in order to dismiss a juror.

I wholly agree that peremptory challenges should be abolished.

Kate

[WarmNCozy]

I was surprised that Aspertation was not considered as far as Kidnapping is concerned.Exactly!

Snipped from definition of kidnapping: A majority of jurisdictions in the United States retain the "asportation" element for kidnapping, where the victim must be confined in a bounded area against their will and moved. Any amount of movement will suffice for the requirement, even if it is moving the abductee to a house next door

[Kate Sachel]

Your original post was to false imprisonment. What I would want is that all, who have been charged with armed robbery, are charged with kidnapping or all are not. I know for a fact, which WNC caused me to rethink, if I was going after my property stolen by thieves, I would have taken a gun.

Yes my original post was to false imprisonment because in some states,
Kate

[William Anthony]

Where are you coming up with this from my posts?

One's peers should include a broad spectrum of the population, particularly of race, nation origin and gender.


I think that speaks for itself.

Glad to see you chose to stick around?

[WarmNCozy]

Do you know that they deliberately removed two black women because of their race? If you do, then you are privy to information that the rest of us are not because none of us knows yet the full extent behind why those women were removed.

Kate

I never said they were removed because of their RACE!

And I think in the weeks and months to come, we will know the full extent of why they were removed.

[William Anthony]

Yes my original post was to false imprisonment because in some states, including Nevada, false imprisonment is kidnapping.

Kate

I understood that but my point was that the situations were different. They were confined during the commission of a crime, which allowed the charge. I just would like to make sure that all, who committed a crime and confined someone were charged with kidnapping.

[WarmNCozy]

I understood that but my point was that the situations were different. They were confined during the commission of a crime, which allowed the charge. I just would like to make sure that all, who committed a crime and confined someone were charged with kidnapping.

Me too! They walked and OJ is doing the time for the whole lot of them.

[William Anthony]

I wholly agree that peremptory challenges should be abolished.

Kate

Twice in one day!:)

[WarmNCozy]

You would run off if a gun was being pointed at you? Interesting; if that ever happens I certainly hope you do not get shot.

Kate
Maybe I would only get shot in the leg! But I'd be outta there, that is for sure!

[William Anthony]

I was surprised that Aspertation was not considered as far as Kidnapping is concerned.

Under the Nevada statute that was not an element. If it had of been then, he may have had a defense, if he was the one that said, no one move. :)

[William Anthony]

Me too! They walked and OJ is doing the time for the whole lot of them.

I wonder if this is a first.

[Kate Sachel]

I never said they were removed because of their RACE!

And I think in the weeks and months to come, we will know the full extent of why they were removed.

I'm honestly not sure how else to explain this to you.

You claimed that I didn't read your definition, and then I pointed out to you that you clearly weren't understanding the very definition that you posted and I attempted to clarify it for you by saying that the definition means that one cannot purposely remove a juror based on their race. You then came back and said that they DID remove two black women, which seemed to indicate that you still were not understanding the fact that two black women can indeed be removed, it just cannot be done based upon the fact that they are black. Since you pointed out that two black women were removed as though it supported some argument you were attempting to make, I then came back and asked you if you know that they were removed because of race which would be one of the only ways they legally should not have been removed.

Kate

[William Anthony]

Maybe I would only get shot in the leg! But I'd be outta there, that is for sure!

Let's hope you never face that situation. Six in one hand, half a dozen in another.

[Kate Sachel]

Me too! They walked and OJ is doing the time for the whole lot of them.

That's quite a long stretch.

Kate

[William Anthony]

That's quite a long stretch.

Kate

Glad to see you posting more so that the law is being discussed in regard to a trial. Yes, they stretched those legs and tongues as they got a good walk.:)

[Kate Sachel]

Maybe I would only get shot in the leg! But I'd be outta there, that is for sure!

If you ended up with a gunshot wound to the head or chest I doubt you would "be outta there".

Regardless, based on the fact that you could technically choose to risk your life and run means that your assailant shouldn't have proper charges placed against him?

By all means, let's begin handing that defense out.

Kate

[WarmNCozy]

I'm honestly not sure how else to explain this to you.

You claimed that I didn't read your definition, and then I pointed out to you that you clearly weren't understanding the very definition that you posted and I attempted to clarify it for you by saying that the definition means that one cannot purposely remove a juror based on their race. You then came back and said that they DID remove two black women, which seemed to indicate that you still were not understanding the fact that two black women can indeed be removed, it just cannot be done based upon the fact that they are black. Since you pointed out that two black women were removed as though it supported some argument you were attempting to make, I then came back and asked you if you know that they were removed because of race which would be one of the only ways they legally should not have been removed.

Kate

Wow! Your post was so confusing, I don't know how to but will try in my very simplistic way.

I said two black women were removed. That is all I said. I don't consider an all white jury to be "broad spectrum of the population" legal as it may be.

I would have preferred a more diverse group of people, but who am I? JMO

[Kate Sachel]

Glad to see you posting more so that the law is being discussed in regard to a trial. Yes, they stretched those legs and tongues as they got a good walk.:)

You yourself made the statment that you don't know the statistics as far as who has been charged and who has walked. Are you suddenly pretending to know now?

Kate

[WarmNCozy]

If you ended up with a gunshot wound to the head or chest I doubt you would "be outta there".

Regardless, based on the fact that you could technically choose to risk your life and run means that your assailant shouldn't have proper charges placed against him?

By all means, let's begin handing that defense out.

Kate

I'd be in a much better place, that's for sure!

And let's call a spade a spade, who are the crooks here?

[Kate Sachel]

Wow! Your post was so confusing, I don't know how to but will try in my very simplistic way.

I said two black women were removed. That is all I said. I don't consider an all white jury to be "broad spectrum of the populaiton" legal as it may be.

I would have preferred a more diverse group of people, but who am I? JMO

I'm sorry that you are unable to understand my post.

Is color the only thing that makes a group diverse in your eyes?

Kate

[William Anthony]

I'm honestly not sure how else to explain this to you.

You claimed that I didn't read your definition, and then I pointed out to you that you clearly weren't understanding the very definition that you posted and I attempted to clarify it for you by saying that the definition means that one cannot purposely remove a juror based on their race. You then came back and said that they DID remove two black women, which seemed to indicate that you still were not understanding the fact that two black women can indeed be removed, it just cannot be done based upon the fact that they are black. Since you pointed out that two black women were removed as though it supported some argument you were attempting to make, I then came back and asked you if you know that they were removed because of race which would be one of the only ways they legally should not have been removed.

Kate

The definition was ambiguous, imho. The sentence that it should reflect a broad spectrum is what I think is confusing. From that sentence one can interpret it to mean the jury pool or it could be linked back to any process. I don't think that was the legal definition but it may reflect a moral one.

[Kate Sachel]

I'd be in a much better place, that's for sure!

And let's call a spade a spade, who are the crooks here?

I'm fairly certain that we are aware that the entire lot of the people involved in that Vegas heist are crooks, if that is what you are referring to.

Kate

[WarmNCozy]

I'm sorry that you are unable to understand my post.

Is color the only thing that makes a group diverse in your eyes?

Kate

No, color is not the only thing! It's just one of the things!

[Kate Sachel]

The definition was ambiguous, imho. The sentence that it should reflect a broad spectrum is what I think is confusing. From that sentence one can interpret it to mean the jury pool or it could be linked back to any process. I don't think that was the legal definition but it may reflect a moral one.

I'm leaving shortly to catch a plane to Boston. I may try to log back on later tonight, but more than likely won't be able to make it on until tomorrow morning.

Have a wonderful evening!

Kate

[William Anthony]

You yourself made the statment that you don't know the statistics as far as who has been charged and who has walked. Are you suddenly pretending to know now?

Kate

No, I was speaking of the strictly of the cohorts. Weren't they granted immunity? If not, I hope they are not housed in the same penitentiary. Those guards will have to be on constant vigil.

[William Anthony]

I'm leaving shortly to catch a plane to Boston. I may try to log back on later tonight, but more than likely won't be able to make it on until tomorrow morning.

Have a wonderful evening!

Kate

Have a good trip.

[martin II]

Exactly!

Snipped from definition of kidnapping: A majority of jurisdictions in the United States retain the "asportation" element for kidnapping, where the victim must be confined in a bounded area against their will and moved. Any amount of movement will suffice for the requirement, even if it is moving the abductee to a house next door

Thats it.

No one asked to leave either.

[William Anthony]

Thats it.

No one asked to leave either.

Careful martin,

I hear footsteps approaching.:)

[William Anthony]

Thats it.

No one asked to leave either.

Too late. :)

[martin II]

No, I was speaking of the strictly of the cohorts. Weren't they granted immunity? If not, I hope they are not housed in the same penitentiary. Those guards will have to be on constant vigil.

I think all can be sentenced by the judge or given probation, i beleive she will give all probation and oj 2-3 life sentances. Then she can write her book and quit that job.

[William Anthony]

Let's just remember what the jury found Simpson guilty of.

I don't think anyone is denying what he was found guilty of. I think there is some sentiment that the prosecution overcharged and that his and Stewart's procedural due process rights may have been violated.

[weezer]

Thats it.

No one asked to leave either.

oh heck -- I bet victims of crime didn't know all you had to do was ask to leave! shucks -- you really need to get this info out like on crime stoppers or something. :rolleyes:

[William Anthony]

I think all can be sentenced by the judge or given probation, i beleive she will give all probation and oj 2-3 life sentances. Then she can write her book and quit that job.

Do you know if they were charged with kidnapping?

[William Anthony]

I told you I heard footsteps, martin. :)

[martin II]

Do you know if they were charged with kidnapping?

Not sure but will look to see.

I think strongly that all the original charges against the others were just the prosecution yelling at them so they could understand what the prosecution wanted them to testify to against their target.OJ SIMPSON

[martin II]

I told you I heard footsteps, martin. :)

I heard them and i am waiting.

[martin II]

oh heck -- I bet victims of crime didn't know all you had to do was ask to leave! shucks -- you really need to get this info out like on crime stoppers or something. :rolleyes:

If Fumong had not been such a bully he could have said take the stuff i am leaving. If he had been in line for some physical action it would have happened.

[weezer]

If Fumong had not been such a bully he could have said take the stuff i am leaving. If he had been in line for some physical action it would have happened.

your post is nonsense -- makes no sense whatsoever. :shrug:

[WarmNCozy]

I'm leaving shortly to catch a plane to Boston. I may try to log back on later tonight, but more than likely won't be able to make it on until tomorrow morning.

Have a wonderful evening!

Kate

You have a safe trip and wonderful evening also!

[WarmNCozy]

I'm fairly certain that we are aware that the entire lot of the people involved in that Vegas heist are crooks, if that is what you are referring to.

Kate

Absolutely! The jury based their verdict on the tape! Isn't that entrapment? And that guy went free! What is his culpability in this whole fiasco, because that is exactly what I think about the whole case! A fiasco!

[martin II]

I don't think anyone is denying what he was found guilty of. I think there is some sentiment that the prosecution overcharged and that his and Stewart's procedural due process rights may have been violated.

I guesss we should be prepared for racist comments again.

[William Anthony]

I guesss we should be prepared for racist comments again.

Let's hope not. I hope that poster has learned his lesson.

[WarmNCozy]

I wonder if this is a first.

I'm not sure I understand, but I am going to assume that OJ was framed by the Mafia in the Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman case, by paying the price and they went free as described in the Wagner papers. Is that what you meant?

[William Anthony]

Absolutely! The jury based their verdict on the tape! Isn't that entrapment? And that guy went free! What is his culpability in this whole fiasco, because that is exactly what I think about the whole case! A fiasco!

I don't think he can be charged with entrapment, because he was not working for the police but I will look it up.

[WarmNCozy]

your post is nonsense -- makes no sense whatsoever. :shrug:

I totally disagree with your post. Martin makes a very good point!

[William Anthony]

I totally disagree with your post. Martin makes a very good point!

Careful, I hear footsteps approaching.

[martin II]

your post is nonsense -- makes no sense whatsoever. :shrug:

Riccio testified that fumong and beadsley were trying to push the goods to to oj when that fool mcclinton pulled out the gun for no reason.If he had not pulled the gun the case would not have been about armed robbery and maby not kidnapping. There was no problem before that. Just yelling and besdsley confseeing "mike it it oj".
As far as kidnapping is concerned there was no aspertation.imo

[martin II]

Me too! They walked and OJ is doing the time for the whole lot of them.


Correct
I don't think there are any kitchen sinks left in los vegas, The prosecution tossed them all at oj.

[deicer]

The charges were so trumped up it was a joke. As far as the kidnapping charge against O.J. he was in a room for 6 minutes, had no gun, and was on the phone afterwords setting up a way to return what didnt belong to him.
So in Nevada any theft, robbery stick-up or however you want to term it, is basically a kidnapping. How many of the tens of thousands of hold ups in Nevada has the perp been charged with kidnapping? These jurors should be ashamed. In all likelyhood, and Im not being racial here, but if there was just 1 black juror, they probably are hung. Not for sure, but there would have been a great chance of it.

[WarmNCozy]

your post is nonsense -- makes no sense whatsoever. :shrug:

If Fumong had not been such a bully he could have said take the stuff i am leaving. If he had been in line for some physical action it would have happened.

Your tolerance as well as William's is to be held in high esteem by me for even tolerating his posts. I think for me, Ignore is a wonderful option! He makes no sense to me!

[William Anthony]

Your tolerance as well as William's is to be held in high esteem by me for even tolerating his posts. I think for me, Ignore is a wonderful option! He makes no sense to me!

Thank you very much, thank you so much, thank you very much-getting ready for the debate. smile. :)

[William Anthony]

The charges were so trumped up it was a joke. As far as the kidnapping charge against O.J. he was in a room for 6 minutes, had no gun, and was on the phone afterwords setting up a way to return what didnt belong to him.
So in Nevada any theft, robbery stick-up or however you want to term it, is basically a kidnapping. How many of the tens of thousands of hold ups in Nevada has the perp been charged with kidnapping? These jurors should be ashamed. In all likelyhood, and Im not being racial here, but if there was just 1 black juror, they probably are hung. Not for sure, but there would have been a great chance of it.

I think that the evidence as it was admitted would have caused the same verdict despite the racial composition of the jury.

[Redmama]

I'm sure not everybody agrees, but many of the things that OJ was hiding/giving away/however you want to look at it, he was doing in order to keep the items or their monetery value away from the Goldman's.

I think it is very inronic that the very steps he took to hide these items - caused him to be jailed trying to get hem back. Reminds me of the saying what goes around, comes around.

[WarmNCozy]

I'm sure not everybody agrees, but many of the things that OJ was hiding/giving away/however you want to look at it, he was doing in order to keep the items or their monetery value away from the Goldman's.

I think it is very inronic that the very steps he took to hide these items - caused him to be jailed trying to get hem back. Reminds me of the saying what goes around, comes around.

I think OJ took too many hits to the head in his Football years and has done a lot of stupid things, but I do not think the Goldman's new found gold mine was amongst them.

[Redmama]

I think OJ took too many hits to the head in his Football years and has done a lot of stupid things, but I do not think the Goldman's new found gold mine was amongst them.

I really don't feel that either a goldmind or money is what they are or have been looking for, but they have achieved exactly what they were trying to achieve.

[martin II]

I'm sure not everybody agrees, but many of the things that OJ was hiding/giving away/however you want to look at it, he was doing in order to keep the items or their monetery value away from the Goldman's.

I think it is very inronic that the very steps he took to hide these items - caused him to be jailed trying to get hem back. Reminds me of the saying what goes around, comes around.

Redmama
Were any of the items brought to the room in vegas on the list of items to be collected by the sheriff that came to rockingham?

[Redmama]

Redmama
Were any of the items brought to the room in vegas on the list of items to be collected by the sheriff that came to rockingham?

I have no idea - I'm assuming you may know that they were not. My point was that the pressure from the Goldmans had a lot of effect on the way OJ was forced to run his life..

[William Anthony]

I'm sure not everybody agrees, but many of the things that OJ was hiding/giving away/however you want to look at it, he was doing in order to keep the items or their monetery value away from the Goldman's.

I think it is very inronic that the very steps he took to hide these items - caused him to be jailed trying to get hem back. Reminds me of the saying what goes around, comes around.

That's the rumor (another of my favorite lines from Tombstone). I do not think ownership of the property has been established or that he was in fact hiding them from the Goldmans. He may well have been or he might have been trying to avoid a seizure and confiscation of things that were not part of the order and the financial cost and time of going to court trying to get them back.

[martin II]

I really don't feel that either a goldmind or money is what they are or have been looking for, but they have achieved exactly what they were trying to achieve.

After the criminal trial verdict fred said his efforts were not about money .he only wanted justice. He got that at the civil trial when oj was found liable.
For the last 13 years he has hired lawyers to chase ojs money at the same time saying it is not about money.
He should stop telling the American public it is not about money and just say i want a larger house and more cash in the bank and allow the american public to continue to support him or not. Which may put a end to his tv appearances. imo

[William Anthony]

Off topic. but given the dismal projection for our economy, is anyone going to watch the debate or do you feel that politicians lie more than lawyers?

[William Anthony]

I left the door open, :).

[martin II]

I have no idea - I'm assuming you may know that they were not. My point was that the pressure from the Goldmans had a lot of effect on the way OJ was forced to run his life..

The items in the hotel room oj was seeking were personal family items.The list that the civil court gave to the sheriff did not contain personal items.
They were after items that had a commercial value and the sheriff collected and sold more than $400,000 of items and the money went to the goldmans and the browns. Fred put forth the idea that he should have received more than half of this money and the browns less than half.

In this current case many have assumed wrongly that the goods in the hotel
belonged to fred however when fred asked the Ca jusdge to give him the
item from the hotel the judge ruled no and instructed freds lawyers that they would have to brring each item before him and he would decide it he would rule whether fred could have each item. The proof of this is also in how he ruled on that Rolex watch which he returned to oj.

[martin II]

I have no idea - I'm assuming you may know that they were not. My point was that the pressure from the Goldmans had a lot of effect on the way OJ was forced to run his life..

Oj made $1,000,000 from that book and fred did not have a clue.

It seems to me that it is fred that has had to alter his life chasing oj for money. Oj seems to have been doing quite well before the verdict in vegas.

[William Anthony]

I have really enjoyed the discussions today and like the amount of civility that was displayed. Thanks for not walking through the door, although I an able to take a joke. I guess you are all too nice. Besides, I didn't get a chance to come back. Have a good night, all.

[martin II]

Off topic. but given the dismal projection for our economy, is anyone going to watch the debate or do you feel that politicians lie more than lawyers?

I am waiting with a group with popcorn for the last grasp.hahahaha

[Redmama]

Off topic. but given the dismal projection for our economy, is anyone going to watch the debate or do you feel that politicians lie more than lawyers?

Not I, I've said how I feel about debates, although I'll get plenty of hours to discuss with my hubby!

[Redmama]

The items in the hotel room oj was seeking were personal family items.The list that the civil court gave to the sheriff did not contain personal items.
They were after items that had a commercial value and the sheriff collected and sold more than $400,000 of items and the money went to the goldmans and the browns. Fred put forth the idea that he should have received more than half of this money and the browns less than half.

In this current case many have assumed wrongly that the goods in the hotel
belonged to fred however when fred asked the Ca jusdge to give him the
item from the hotel the judge ruled no and instructed freds lawyers that they would have to brring each item before him and he would decide it he would rule whether fred could have each item. The proof of this is also in how he ruled on that Rolex watch which he returned to oj.

In my opinion, it is not money the Goldmans want.

[Redmama]

Oj made $1,000,000 from that book and fred did not have a clue.

It seems to me that it is fred that has had to alter his life chasing oj for money. Oj seems to have been doing quite well before the verdict in vegas.

You are right, Fred did not have e clue. The That Makes OJ un upright citizen.

If I were someone like Fred, and it was my daughter that was dead, I would choose to make Oj's life uncomfortable - as I humanly possibly could do - going after the anything including some money, is just a way to be sure my child is not forgotten by me or anybody else. Might not be evreryones way with dealing with it, but I know my baby would be the first one giving her MaMa a high five once i see her again.

[weezer]

I totally disagree with your post. Martin makes a very good point!

then maybe you can help me out and tell me what the post said?

[weezer]

Oj made $1,000,000 from that book and fred did not have a clue.

that's right -- and that means what to you? that we should be surprised he has no honor? no principles? I'm not surprised. orenthal has lived his life exactly as most of us thought he would -- a thug, thief, batterer, and now a convicted felon.

*Snipped* ". . .Oj seems to have been doing quite well before the verdict in vegas."

then I guess orenthal has learned that all good things come to an end. karma, karma, karma.

[tv]

I think all can be sentenced by the judge or given probation, i beleive she will give all probation and oj 2-3 life sentances. Then she can write her book and quit that job.
I wondered how long it would take you to start bashing the judge and it didn't take as long as I thought it would.

[tv]

You are right, Fred did not have e clue. The That Makes OJ un upright citizen.

If I were someone like Fred, and it was my daughter that was dead, I would choose to make Oj's life uncomfortable - as I humanly possibly could do - going after the anything including some money, is just a way to be sure my child is not forgotten by me or anybody else. Might not be evreryones way with dealing with it, but I know my baby would be the first one giving her MaMa a high five once i see her again.

I'm with you, Redmama.

I don't understand why some people think it's okay for OJ Simpson to seek justice in getting back his stuff but criticize Fred Goldman for wanting justice for his son. It really makes no sense to me.

[tv]

then maybe you can help me out and tell me what the post said?Yes, I'd like someone to explain to me how Furmong and Beardsley pushing the goods towards Simpson makes Fromong a bully. Maybe martin has a different definition of what a bully is than I do?

[deicer]

I did not see all of Yale Galanter's closing arguements, but I do not remember him using the term reasonable doubt much. There was so much reasonable doubt here that I would have used it in every other sentense in closing. I know NOTHING would have made any difference with this jury as their minds were obviously made up before the trial started though.

I do have a question though. Was C.J. Stewart at that "planning" meeting before the incident? (I wont call it a robbery) Almost all of Scotto's testimony was timelines for his day of wedding prep with Stewart driving. (from 2 pm to 7 pm I believe) yet I believe someone else suggested he was at the meeting. Anyone???

[martin II]

Yes, I'd like someone to explain to me how Furmong and Beardsley pushing the goods towards Simpson makes Fromong a bully. Maybe martin has a different definition of what a bully is than I do?

According to Riccio Fumong was the one of the two thiefs using his mouth the most which may have caused mcclinton to make the mistake of drawing that gun out.

[William Anthony]

I'm with you, Redmama.

I don't understand why some people think it's okay for OJ Simpson to seek justice in getting back his stuff but criticize Fred Goldman for wanting justice for his son. It really makes no sense to me.

This is in no manner meant to defend Simpson's conduct but there is one noticeable difference. Mr. Goldman has received legal assistance and acceptable support from others in his quest, while Simpson did not receive assistance, either from federal LE or local and, subsequently, received assistance from those who were accstomed to working outside the law.

[martin II]

I did not see all of Yale Galanter's closing arguements, but I do not remember him using the term reasonable doubt much. There was so much reasonable doubt here that I would have used it in every other sentense in closing. I know NOTHING would have made any difference with this jury as their minds were obviously made up before the trial started though.

I do have a question though. Was C.J. Stewart at that "planning" meeting before the incident? (I wont call it a robbery) Almost all of Scotto's testimony was timelines for his day of wedding prep with Stewart driving. (from 2 pm to 7 pm I believe) yet I believe someone else suggested he was at the meeting. Anyone???

Stewarts lawyer made the same point.i think he was driving until about 7 pm.

I still don't agree that Riccio was able to hold out his tape to get off for being a part of the conspiracy.Le should have demanded the tape. I think that Stewart was charged just so oj would not be the only one as all the others were let go.But it will be up to the judge to give sentances to some of them so we will see what she does.

[martin II]

I'm with you, Redmama.

I don't understand why some people think it's okay for OJ Simpson to seek justice in getting back his stuff but criticize Fred Goldman for wanting justice for his son. It really makes no sense to me.

Fred received justice for his son in the civil trial.

[martin II]

In my opinion, it is not money the Goldmans want.

For 13 years fred has hired lawyers to go after money. He went after and got the rights to sell that book and did publishe it for sale for money for himself.
I agree that the book deal was not a good deal for him because others took most of the money and left him with very little, but his efforts in court and otherwise was to get money. At least that is what his lawyer that testified said.

[WarmNCozy]

Off topic. but given the dismal projection for our economy, is anyone going to watch the debate or do you feel that politicians lie more than lawyers?
Aren't most politicians lawyers? I think a person's track record stands on its own. And no, I have not watched the debates.

[William Anthony]

Aren't most politicians lawyers? I think a person's track record stands on its own. And no, I have not watched the debates.

Quite a few. I think I see a compliment in there or hope I do. I guess its good that I am in school and haven't learned the skill to tell a well thought out lie. Maybe that qualifies me for a politician.

[martin II]

then maybe you can help me out and tell me what the post said?

I will answer

Fumong and Beadsley did not ask to leave. Riccio stated that both were pushing the stuff to oj for him to take which oj was in agreement, Mcclinton for some reason, Riccio thought there was no reason, pulled out his gun that HE had decided to bring and everything went south from that point.

[tv]

According to Riccio Fumong was the one of the two thiefs using his mouth the most which may have caused mcclinton to make the mistake of drawing that gun out.

Sooo, Fromong, MADE McClinton take out the gun because he was "using his mouth"? It's the victim's fault? hahaha

[tv]

Fred received justice for his son in the civil trial.

Until the judgment is paid he hasn't received justice but at least during the civil trial OJ Simpson was proven to be a liar and a killer.

[tv]

This is in no manner meant to defend Simpson's conduct but there is one noticeable difference. Mr. Goldman has received legal assistance and acceptable support from others in his quest, while Simpson did not receive assistance, either from federal LE or local and, subsequently, received assistance from those who were accstomed to working outside the law.

If Simpson had called 911 that day or filed a civil judgment to recover his stuff things could have been handled legally. He chose not to do that.

[Redmama]

For 13 years fred has hired lawyers to go after money. He went after and got the rights to sell that book and did publishe it for sale for money for himself.
I agree that the book deal was not a good deal for him because others took most of the money and left him with very little, but his efforts in court and otherwise was to get money. At least that is what his lawyer that testified said.

I believe even if OJ were to get millions from OJ, he would not stop. His whole point is taking OJ's livelyhood away. It would be very difficult to live watching someone like OJ living a normal life, while his son is dead, and he believes it was at OJ's hands. Goldman got nothing from the Civil trial - it is up to him to decide when he is over it.

[tv]

I believe even if OJ were to get millions from OJ, he would not stop. His whole point is taking OJ's livelyhood away. It would be very difficult to live watching someone like OJ living a normal life, while his son is dead, and he believes it was at OJ's hands. Goldman got nothing from the Civil trial - it is up to him to decide when he is over it.Excellent post, Redmama. :)

[WarmNCozy]

Quite a few. I think I see a compliment in there or hope I do. I guess its good that I am in school and haven't learned the skill to tell a well thought out lie. Maybe that qualifies me for a politician.


Au contraire, it would make you a great Statesman, which we certainly could use a lot more of.

[WarmNCozy]

Until the judgment is paid he hasn't received justice but at least during the civil trial OJ Simpson was proven to be a liar and a killer.

Now how do you suppose he will pay that judgment from jail?

[tv]

Now how do you suppose he will pay that judgment from jail?

Just because he's in jail doesn't mean he won't still be getting his $26,000 a month pension. Besides, I'm sure he'll find a way to make money in jail. He made 2 million signing memorabilia when he was in jail awaiting the criminal trial.

[WarmNCozy]

Just because he's in jail doesn't mean he won't still be getting his $26,000 a month pension. Besides, I'm sure he'll find a way to make money in jail. He made 2 million signing memorabilia when he was in jail awaiting the criminal trial.

That pension cannot be touched as I understand it. He also has a family to support.

[tv]

That pension cannot be touched as I understand it. He also has a family to support.

His children are adults. Soon the two younger ones will be out of college and self-sufficient. Just think of the money he'll save on playing golf. ;)

[martin II]

Just because he's in jail doesn't mean he won't still be getting his $26,000 a month pension. Besides, I'm sure he'll find a way to make money in jail. He made 2 million signing memorabilia when he was in jail awaiting the criminal trial.

Fred knows the pension is out of reach.
Previously oj was in jail and not convicted. i doubt the prison will allow him to set up a business in the jail for convicted felons.They cannot even have cell phones.

Actually i think fred has two objectives for his actions.
1. to get money
2. to continue to try to be a tv celebrity for more money.
I think he knows this money will not bring his son back but it may fatten his bank acount.

Not every person that has lost a child has been as successful or tried to be as successful as fred in his efforts for a life long tv career selling the story of his sons death.imo

[tv]

Fred knows the pension is out of reach.
Previously oj was in jail and not convicted. i doubt the prison will allow him to set up a business in the jail for convicted felons.They cannot even have cell phones.

Actually i think fred has two objectives for his actions.
1. to get money
2. to continue to try to be a tv celebrity for more money.
I think he knows this money will not bring his son back but it may fatten his bank acount.

Not every person that has lost a child has been as successful or tried to be as successful as fred in his efforts for a life long tv career selling the story of his sons death.imo

Of course they can't have cell phones. That would be dumb.

If you're as in the know as you seem to be about prisons you'll know that many things can be done in prison. There's no shortage of drugs, alcohol, weapons and scams. It's my feeling that he may get a light sentence but if not he'll find a way to prosper and be a popular guy in jail.

[William Anthony]

Au contraire, it would make you a great Statesman, which we certainly could use a lot more of.

Thank you.

[William Anthony]

If Simpson had called 911 that day or filed a civil judgment to recover his stuff things could have been handled legally. He chose not to do that.

Wishful thinking as the locals had told Riccio they wanted nothing to do with Simpson. By the time the civil judgment would have happened, the goods would have been sold and never to have been found again, imho.

[WarmNCozy]

Fred knows the pension is out of reach.
Previously oj was in jail and not convicted. i doubt the prison will allow him to set up a business in the jail for convicted felons.They cannot even have cell phones.

Actually i think fred has two objectives for his actions.
1. to get money
2. to continue to try to be a tv celebrity for more money.
I think he knows this money will not bring his son back but it may fatten his bank acount.

Not every person that has lost a child has been as successful or tried to be as successful as fred in his efforts for a life long tv career selling the story of his sons death.imo

OJ was found not guilty in the Criminal Trial and I trully believe him to be innocent. Then along comes the Civil Trial and he is found guilty and has to pay an enormous sum.

If I were OJ and knew in my heart of hearts that I had nothing to do with those murders, I'd be pretty bitter. Someone killed Nicole and Ron and they are still out there. JMHO

[William Anthony]

OJ was found not guilty in the Criminal Trial and I trully believe him to be innocent. Then along comes the Civil Trial and he is found guilty and has to pay an enormous sum.

If I were OJ and knew in my heart of hearts that I had nothing to do with those murders, I'd be pretty bitter. Someone killed Nicole and Ron and they are still out there. JMHO

I don't know iif he is innocent or not but I hope the case is still open and that they have not stopped investigating, because of a belief that the guilty got away.

[tv]

William, aren't you going to tell WarmNCozy that he was NOT found guilty in the civil trial? Aren't you going to educate her about the correct terminology as you have the rest of us?

[WarmNCozy]

His children are adults. Soon the two younger ones will be out of college and self-sufficient. Just think of the money he'll save on playing golf. ;)

Really, self-sufficient you say! How about Graduate School, first home, help starting a business? Grown children in my opinion are never quite self-sufficient and need help from their parents at certain times.

[Redmama]

OJ was found not guilty in the Criminal Trial and I trully believe him to be innocent. Then along comes the Civil Trial and he is found guilty and has to pay an enormous sum.

If I were OJ and knew in my heart of hearts that I had nothing to do with those murders, I'd be pretty bitter. Someone killed Nicole and Ron and they are still out there. JMHO

I totally get that - I would be bitter too. If I were Fred and knew that OJ killed my son, I would also be bitter. There is just no good answer here.

[William Anthony]

William, aren't you going to tell WarmNCozy that he was NOT found guilty in the civil trial? Aren't you going to educate her about the correct terminology as you have the rest of us?

I truly missed it but, if you insist. The verdict meant that Simpson was found liable for causing the wrongful death of Mr. Ronald Goldman and malicious battery with oppression on Ms. Nicole Brown Simpson. Thank you for bringing it to my attention as I would not want there to be a mistake as to what the civil verdict meant.

[WarmNCozy]

William, aren't you going to tell WarmNCozy that he was NOT found guilty in the civil trial? Aren't you going to educate her about the correct terminology as you have the rest of us?

I stand corrected. He was found liable. But doesn't that really mean they think him quilty?

[martin II]

Of course they can't have cell phones. That would be dumb.

If you're as in the know as you seem to be about prisons you'll know that many things can be done in prison. There's no shortage of drugs, alcohol, weapons and scams. It's my feeling that he may get a light sentence but if not he'll find a way to prosper and be a popular guy in jail.

If oj gets a light sentance that will be good for him but life is not light as far as i am concerned.

If he is assigned to one of these white collar jails as some other real criminals are assigned to he may be able to do what you think he will do but i think he will be put is a hard prison in isolation to guarantee that he receives the max punishment.

I see no one prospering in a hard jail. After all one cannot go to the food pantry to get something as simple as some cookies and milk when the urge to have some hits.

The others in the group will have a difficult time if they get jail time. Especially mcclinton.

[tv]

I truly missed it but, if you insist. The verdict meant that Simpson was found liable for causing the wrongful death of Mr. Ronald Goldman and malicious battery with oppression on Ms. Nicole Brown Simpson. Thank you for bringing it to my attention as I would not want there to be a mistake as to what the civil verdict meant.

Thank you, William. I knew you wouldn't want to show any inequality toward your fellow posters. It wouldn't be very statesmanlike. :)

[martin II]

I truly missed it but, if you insist. The verdict meant that Simpson was found liable for causing the wrongful death of Mr. Ronald Goldman and malicious battery with oppression on Ms. Nicole Brown Simpson. Thank you for bringing it to my attention as I would not want there to be a mistake as to what the civil verdict meant.

william

See how much love tv has for you.hahahaha

[martin II]

Wishful thinking as the locals had told Riccio they wanted nothing to do with Simpson. By the time the civil judgment would have happened, the goods would have been sold and never to have been found again, imho.

Oj really had no other choice if he wanted his stuff.

[WarmNCozy]

Thank you, William. I knew you wouldn't want to show any inequality toward your fellow posters. It wouldn't be very statesmanlike. :)

Thank you TV! I needed a good laugh today! http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff305/CozyNWarm/Funny/funnypuppy.jpg

[WarmNCozy]

Of course they can't have cell phones. That would be dumb.

If you're as in the know as you seem to be about prisons you'll know that many things can be done in prison. There's no shortage of drugs, alcohol, weapons and scams. It's my feeling that he may get a light sentence but if not he'll find a way to prosper and be a popular guy in jail.

Let's face it, the man has charisma, so why wouldn't he be popular in prison. He's popular out of prison.

[WarmNCozy]

I totally get that - I would be bitter too. If I were Fred and knew that OJ killed my son, I would also be bitter. There is just no good answer here.

You're right about not having a good answer here. How would Fred know OJ killed his son? On the other hand, OJ knows!

[Redmama]

Let's face it, the man has charisma, so why wouldn't he be popular in prison. He's popular out of prison.

The man has asolutely NO charisma in my book - the company he keeps doesn't help my feelings towards him either. Everything he does, boarders or falls over the line of legal, that also makes me not think of him in a very good light. He is just not someone that I can look in the eye and believe. He has not been popular out of prison, unless being kicked out of estblishments indicates popularity.

[WarmNCozy]

The man has asolutely NO charisma in my book - the company he keeps doesn't help my feelings towards him either. Everything he does, boarders or falls over the line of legal, that also makes me not think of him in a very good light. He is just not someone that I can look in the eye and believe. He has not been popular out of prison, unless being kicked out of estblishments indicates popularity.

I have to agree that some of his "companions" are on the seedy side.

[martin II]

You're right about not having a good answer here. How would Fred know OJ killed his son? On the other hand, OJ knows!

Wow

What a good point. Fred can only think he knows.

[William Anthony]

Thank you TV! I needed a good laugh today! http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff305/CozyNWarm/Funny/funnypuppy.jpg

Equality is one of the things I strive for and feel passionate about and would never want you to feel that I have treated you unequally or left you out.:) I love the doggie picture.

[William Anthony]

Wow

What a good point. Fred can only think he knows.

I second that emotion.

[William Anthony]

william

See how much love tv has for you.hahahaha

What the world needs now is love sweet love, that's the only thing that there is too little of (besides money). Think she can send me some money?

[William Anthony]

I stand corrected. He was found liable. But doesn't that really mean they think him quilty?

Most of America does but that isn't what it means.

[Redmama]

I second that emotion.

Fred Knows.

[William Anthony]

Thank you, William. I knew you wouldn't want to show any inequality toward your fellow posters. It wouldn't be very statesmanlike. :)

Thank you for your understanding. It behooves all of us to treat each other equally. Being considered statesmanlike is an appreciated form of flattery but will not get you a sucker. :)

[weezer]

Just because he's in jail doesn't mean he won't still be getting his $26,000 a month pension. Besides, I'm sure he'll find a way to make money in jail. He made 2 million signing memorabilia when he was in jail awaiting the criminal trial.

LOL -- I can't wait to watch this circus. . . .arnelle moving christy out. . . .arnelle moving mama in. . . .arnelle moving into the master bedroom. . . .LOL. . . .oh yeah. . . gonna be fun.

[martin II]

I believe even if OJ were to get millions from OJ, he would not stop. His whole point is taking OJ's livelyhood away. It would be very difficult to live watching someone like OJ living a normal life, while his son is dead, and he believes it was at OJ's hands. Goldman got nothing from the Civil trial - it is up to him to decide when he is over it.

Consider this.

"Vengeance is mine said the lord"

[martin II]

Fred Knows.

Fred did not witness the murders so he cannot possibly KNOW.

[martin II]

LOL -- I can't wait to watch this circus. . . .arnelle moving christy out. . . .arnelle moving mama in. . . .arnelle moving into the master bedroom. . . .LOL. . . .oh yeah. . . gonna be fun.

Another silly post.

[Redmama]

Fred did not witness the murders so he cannot possibly KNOW.

Nobody witnessed the murders, as far as we've been told. Parents just know.

[Redmama]

Consider this.

"Vengeance is mine said the lord"

Considerr this:

To each their own.

[weezer]

karma, karma, karma -- woo-hoo

[WarmNCozy]

Nobody witnessed the murders, as far as we've been told. Parents just know.:no:

Parents just know, huh? I lost a daughter to suicide 9 months ago, I was with her on her last weekend on earth and spoke to her every day the next week. I didn't even know they had guns in the house! So don't tell me parents just know! I had not a clue and still don't.

[Redmama]

:no:

Parents just know, huh? I lost a daughter to suicide 9 months ago, I was with her on her last weekend on earth and spoke to her every day the next week. I didn't even know they had guns in the house! So don't tell me parents just know! I had not a clue and still don't.

I actually followed all of your supporters during that very terrible time in your life. I am very sorry about your daughter. It is something I can not pretend to understand. I've thought of you often since that time.

What I meant in that statement was that Fred lived through all of the investigations, trials etc. and has a lot more information than we do. As a result of anyone in that position, most come to a certain conclusion, and I believe he has.

[WarmNCozy]

I actually followed all of your supporters during that very terrible time in your life. I am very sorry about your daughter. It is something I can not pretend to understand. I've thought of you often since that time.

What I meant in that statement was that Fred lived through all of the investigations, trials etc. and has a lot more information than we do. As a result of anyone in that position, most come to a certain conclusion, and I believe he has.

I feel very sorry for the Browns and Goldmans but they can never be sure it was OJ who commited this horrific crime. Have you read the following:
http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/OJ.htm

When the original verdict was read I cried because I thought OJ guilty, then I read Wagner and Son and am convinced this to be the truth.

Thank you for your condolences.

[Redmama]

I feel very sorry for the Browns and Goldmans but they can never be sure it was OJ who commited this horrific crime. Have you read the following:
http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/OJ.htm

When the original verdict was read I cryed because I thought OJ guilty, then I read Wagner and Son and am convinced this to be the truth.

Thank you for your condolences.

I actuallly have read none of the books on OJ. I watched much of the trials. I guess that is what makes this world go round and gives us the opporunity to discuss subjects like this - everyone comes to their own conclusions.

[WarmNCozy]

I actuallly have read none of the books on OJ. I watched much of the trials. I guess that is what makes this world go round and gives us the opporunity to discuss subjects like this - everyone comes to their own conclusions.

Exactly!

[martin II]

Nobody witnessed the murders, as far as we've been told. Parents just know.

How is it that a parent that did not witness the murders KNOW. How does that happen?

[Redmama]

How is it that a parent that did not witness the murders KNOW. How does that happen?

I explained above.

[weezer]

I actuallly have read none of the books on OJ. I watched much of the trials. I guess that is what makes this world go round and gives us the opporunity to discuss subjects like this - everyone comes to their own conclusions.

I'm with you Red -- not one of us had more interest in identifying the murderer than the Goldmans and the Browns. After all of the investigations/evidence, both families believe that orenthal james simpson murderered their children. That's enough for me.

[martin II]

I actually followed all of your supporters during that very terrible time in your life. I am very sorry about your daughter. It is something I can not pretend to understand. I've thought of you often since that time.

What I meant in that statement was that Fred lived through all of the investigations, trials etc. and has a lot more information than we do. As a result of anyone in that position, most come to a certain conclusion, and I believe he has.

I don't think that fred had more info on the trial than anyone else that watched it.
not more than the prosecution or the defense which was discussed in open court.The transcript have been read by many here and discussed.
There are some that have been very critical of the prosecutrion and believe that is where freds anger should have been directed.

[deicer]

I feel sentensing will be stiff. O.J. will die in prison.
In my area, just south of Chicago, there are crooks doing many things much worse than O.J. did. Ive read of sooo many violent acts and the perps are getting slaps on the wrist and he will die in prison for spending 6 minutes, unarmed, in a hotel room to get his own stuff. Amazing.....

[weezer]

How is it that a parent that did not witness the murders KNOW. How does that happen?

I'm sure you agree that the families were privy to much more of the evidence then we could ever be. I'm sure you agree that the families are much more likely to understand the victims and the perpetrator than we could ever. And no matter how many hours we watched the trial, our comprehension and understanding of the people, circumstances, evidence and testimony in this trial could never equal the families. Wouldn't you agree?

[William Anthony]

It seems it does not take much to satisfy some, or should I say one.

[weezer]

SNIPPED** ". . .I don't think that fred had more info on the trial than anyone else that watched it. . ."

please tell me you did not post this! Good Gawd!

[WarmNCozy]

How is it that a parent that did not witness the murders KNOW. How does that happen?

I explained above.

I actually followed all of your supporters during that very terrible time in your life. I am very sorry about your daughter. It is something I can not pretend to understand. I've thought of you often since that time.

What I meant in that statement was that Fred lived through all of the investigations, trials etc. and has a lot more information than we do. As a result of anyone in that position, most come to a certain conclusion, and I believe he has.

I feel very sorry for the Browns and Goldmans but they can never be sure it was OJ who commited this horrific crime. Have you read the following:
http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/OJ.htm

When the original verdict was read I cried because I thought OJ guilty, then I read Wagner and Son and am convinced this to be the truth.

Thank you for your condolences.

I don't think that fred had more info on the trial than anyone else that watched it.
not more than the prosecution or the defense which was discussed in open court.The transcript have been read by many here and discussed.
There are some that have been very critical of the prosecutrion and believe that is where freds anger should have been directed.

Until I received word from the coroners office, I believed someone murdered my daughter, that she would never commit suicide, and where would she get a gun?

OJ knows if he committed the crime. Who did this, only God knows! Ron Goldman wants to believe OJ did it.

[WarmNCozy]

I feel sentensing will be stiff. O.J. will die in prison.
In my area, just south of Chicago, there are crooks doing many things much worse than O.J. did. Ive read of sooo many violent acts and the perps are getting slaps on the wrist and he will die in prison for spending 6 minutes, unarmed, in a hotel room to get his own stuff. Amazing.....
How many die per day at the hands of the various mafias? Are they in jail?

[weezer]

Until I received word from the coroners office, I believed someone murdered my daughter, that she would never commit suicide, and where would she get a gun?

OJ knows if he committed the crime. Who did this, only God knows! Ron Goldman wants to believe OJ did it.

Ron Goldman is dead so he actually did know who killed him. Fred Goldman, the father of Ron and Kim Goldman the sister of Ron as well as The Browns, the parents and sisters of Nicole Brown all believe orenthal james simpson is the murderer. Now, you may think that someone watching it on television or some guy writing a fantasy book has more insight into the victims and the perpetrator than the families but I, for one, believe you are wrong.

[William Anthony]

I think because of the traumatic loss that family members endure and the trauma to the family of the accused, they may be easily swayed by the opinions or views of those, who they perceive as helping them. I think that a person not so close emotionally, who takes an objective view of all the evidence, watches the demeanor of the witnesses and evaluates their testimony, plus is privy to the transcripts and has the time to study them is more likely to reach an unbiased conclusion. Wouldn't you agree?

[Redmama]

I don't think that fred had more info on the trial than anyone else that watched it.
not more than the prosecution or the defense which was discussed in open court.The transcript have been read by many here and discussed.
There are some that have been very critical of the prosecutrion and believe that is where freds anger should have been directed.

Regarding your last statement - you are right "some" have been critical and "some" might believe that his anger is misdirected. It is his anger and it is his right to do with it what he wants. If I didn't take a step in any direction without absolute knowledge, I would never leave my bed.

[Redmama]

I think because of the traumatic loss that family members endure and the trauma to the family of the accused, they may be easily swayed by the opinions or views of those, who they perceive as helping them. I think that a person not so close emotionally, who takes an objective view of all the evidence, watches the demeanor of the witnesses and evaluates their testimony, plus is privy to the transcripts and has the time to study them is more likely to reach an unbiased conclusion. Wouldn't you agree?

I would agree, although the reality is that the person actually in the situation would not be helped emotionally by the unbiased opion. People do things, sometimes just to survive, when attempting to live through a situation. There are thousands of reactions, none more right than the next.

[William Anthony]

Regarding your last statement - you are right "some" have been critical and "some" might believe that his anger is misdirected. It is his anger and it is his right to do with it what he wants. If I didn't take a step in any direction without absolute knowledge, I would never leave my bed.

Have you read the Oddessy? Remember the cyclops. Misguided anger may cause you to lose the prize.

[Redmama]

Have you read the Oddessy? Remember the cyclops. Misguided anger may cause you to lose the prize.

I got the booby prize long ago!

[William Anthony]

I got the booby prize long ago!

Perhaps, my statement was not artfully stated, since someone seems to take offense. What I meant was that anger is not good, unless someone uses it for good. I did not mean to offend you in anyway and that was just my lazy way of saying something. I did not read it until I was forced to. If I had to voluntarily read it, it wouldn't be read. I really don't care if the other person is offended and I will not let a one-eyed creature capture me. :) I think you knew that I was not trying to be offensive. I do care that you understand what I was trying to say.

[William Anthony]

Odyssey. Has William ever read it?

Hello Joe,

Can I call you that? Anticipation and preparation. :)

[martin II]

Regarding your last statement - you are right "some" have been critical and "some" might believe that his anger is misdirected. It is his anger and it is his right to do with it what he wants. If I didn't take a step in any direction without absolute knowledge, I would never leave my bed.

A simplyfied analogy in my opinion. Fred spending 13 years asking for public help and reminding people that his son was killed by someone is not the same
as you deciding to put your feet on the floor.:cool:

[weezer]

Odyssey. Has William ever read it?

may I share this excellent wisdom I received lately: those who don't take the bait, live longer. some posters on this board are not worth the aggravation and/or frustration and the 'ignore' option is an exceptional tool. ;)

[weezer]

A simplyfied analogy in my opinion. Fred spending 13 years asking for public help and reminding people that his son was killed by someone is not the same
as you deciding to put your feet on the floor.:cool:

yep -- I feel the same way about 200 years of looking for 40 acres and a mule but you know, what's important to one person is not necessarily important to someone else. of course, I would think that if this was your child we were talking about, your opinion and/or attitude would take a whole different tone. of course, that's just my opinion.

[William Anthony]

Thanks. However, well intended, I know that a poster criticized another poster for using the ignore option, as he considered it extremely rude. Sometimes what we think is wisdom goes ignored (pun intended). Anticipation and preparation. :)

[William Anthony]

Is two days too much to ask for?

[martin II]

please tell me you did not post this! Good Gawd!

I did and believe that fred looked at the case through biased eyes.

martin.

[martin II]

yep -- I feel the same way about 200 years of looking for 40 acres and a mule but you know, what's important to one person is not necessarily important to someone else. of course, I would think that if this was your child we were talking about, your opinion and/or attitude would take a whole different tone. of course, that's just my opinion.

Is your post a effort to start a discussion on slavery again??

[William Anthony]

Is your post a effort to start a discussion on slavery again??

Those who do not take the bait live longer.

[Redmama]

Perhaps, my statement was not artfully stated, since someone seems to take offense. What I meant was that anger is not good, unless someone uses it for good. I did not mean to offend you in anyway and that was just my lazy way of saying something. I did not read it until I was forced to. If I had to voluntarily read it, it wouldn't be read. I really don't care if the other person is offended and I will not let a one-eyed creature capture me. :) I think you knew that I was not trying to be offensive. I do care that you understand what I was trying to say.

Oh no - It takes a lot to offend me - and that did not. I do understand what you are trying to say - the reason I am not offended though, gave me a really interesting thought. Depending on what "side" you are on, it is easy to point a finger and say how someone should react. I've only watched Fred Goldman on anything in the last year or so. I had read about him on these boards and heard about him through the trial - but never really had heard his side. I feel that he sounds very genuine. I would probably see him different if I though OJ was innocent...who knows - but that did give me something to think about.

[William Anthony]

Oh no - It takes a lot to offend me - and that did not. I do understand what you are trying to say - the reason I am not offended though, gave me a really interesting thought. Depending on what "side" you are on, it is easy to point a finger and say how someone should react. I've only watched Fred Goldman on anything in the last year or so. I had read about him on these boards and heard about him through the trial - but never really had heard his side. I feel that he sounds very genuine. I would probably see him different if I though OJ was innocent...who knows - but that did give me something to think about.

I am truly glad that you did not take offense where none was meant. I do not know whether Simpson is innocent of the murders or not and have not concerned myself with trying to prove it one way or another. I think his actions toward the damage award and the Goldman's actions toward him display mutual hatred. I think that is what is eating both of them up. If Simpson is innocent or guilty, then his hatred has been misguided. If Mr. Goldman receives that damage award or watches Simpson spend the rest of his life in jail and does not let go of his hatred, then it had been misguided. Of course, all of this is just my opinion.

[Redmama]

yep -- I feel the same way about 200 years of looking for 40 acres and a mule but you know, what's important to one person is not necessarily important to someone else. of course, I would think that if this was your child we were talking about, your opinion and/or attitude would take a whole different tone. of course, that's just my opinion.

I'm SO with you on that!!

[William Anthony]

I'm SO with you on that!!

Does that include the 40 acres and a mule? If so, then I think that some clarification is needed. I am interested in the forty acres but not the mule. To me the 40 acres and a mule symbolize a promise of equality. It is the promise that is my quest. I will feel my better once that promise has been fulfilled. I do not think that Mr. Goldman will feel much better once his promise of money has been fulfilled. Why am I interested in the 40 acres? Perhaps, this will explain.

http://www.sciway.net/hist/chicora/slavery18-2.html

[Redmama]

I am truly glad that you did not take offense where none was meant. I do not know whether Simpson is innocent of the murders or not and have not concerned myself with trying to prove it one way or another. I think his actions toward the damage award and the Goldman's actions toward him display mutual hatred. I think that is what is eating both of them up. If Simpson is innocent or guilty, then his hatred has been misguided. If Mr. Goldman receives that damage award or watches Simpson spend the rest of his life in jail and does not let go of his hatred, then it had been misguided. Of course, all of this is just my opinion.

Your hatred comments are right on, in my opinion. I hope that if I were in either position, I would deal with the situation differently. Fortunately, I've never been there, so I can't say what is right or wrong. In the same way, I can't tell others how they should react.

[Redmama]

Does that include the 40 acres and a mule? If so, then I think that some clarification is needed. I am interested in the forty acres but not the mule. To me the 40 acres and a mule symbolize a promise of equality. It is the promise that is my quest. I will feel my better once that promise has been fulfilled. I do not think that Mr. Goldman will feel much better once his promise of money has been fulfilled. Why am I interested in the 40 acres? Perhaps, this will explain.

http://www.sciway.net/hist/chicora/slavery18-2.html

I was not in any way shape or form going there with that. It is not included in the way I think at all. I am a decedent of farmers from Indiana - I grew up with sayings like that- the thoughts you are accusing me of NEVER crossed my mind. If I would have thought for even one second that you would have taken it that way, I would not have responded - it was not the point I was trying to make.

[William Anthony]

Your hatred comments are right on, in my opinion. I hope that if I were in either position, I would deal with the situation differently. Fortunately, I've never been there, so I can't say what is right or wrong. In the same way, I can't tell others how they should react.

I guess my posts are not as clear as they should be. They were not meant to tell anyone how they should act. I think that all of us know that hatred is an unproductive and unhealthy emotion. Think of how your body feels when you see someone you hate. Studies have shown that hugging an touching even pets is healthy.

[Redmama]

I guess my posts are not as clear as they should be. They were not meant to tell anyone how they should act. I think that all of us know that hatred is an unproductive and unhealthy emotion. Think of how your body feels when you see someone you hate. Studies have shown that hugging an touching even pets is healthy.

I was meaning the waste of energy on hatret.

Animals don't work with me - I can't even get near them - don't know why - I've tried...I'm grateful for all those animal lovers out there though!!

[William Anthony]

I was not in any way shape or form going there with that. It is not included in the way I think at all. I am a decedent of farmers from Indiana - I grew up with sayings like that- the thoughts you are accusing me of NEVER crossed my mind. If I would have thought for even one second that you would have taken it that way, I would not have responded - it was not the point I was trying to make.

I was not accusing you, nor did I believe that of you. I simply wanted you to clarify. You have and I believe you. I know the motivation of some and I do not believe that you share those emotions. I am sorry if you thought I was accusing you and I was not. I only added the remainder to explain to some and it was not meant for those who would not be (being kind) so insensitive to express such thoughts.

[William Anthony]

I was meaning the waste of energy on hatret.

Animals don't work with me - I can't even get near them - don't know why - I've tried...I'm grateful for all those animal lovers out there though!!

My dogs get on my nerves and I am sure I get on theirs. However, I would be lost without them-probably drunk.

[Redmama]

I was not accusing you, nor did I believe that of you. I simply wanted you to clarify. You have and I believe you. I know the motivation of some and I do not believe that you share those emotions. I am sorry if you thought I was accusing you and I was not. I only added the remainder to explain to some and it was not meant for those who would not be (being kind) so insensitive to express such thoughts.

Thank you.

[William Anthony]

Thank you.

You are quite welcome.

[WarmNCozy]

Have you read the Oddessy? Remember the cyclops. Misguided anger may cause you to lose the prize.

And the adventures of Ulysses which we had to translate from Latin!

How about "Pride goeth before the fall."

[William Anthony]

And the adventures of Ulysses which we had to translate from Latin!

How about "Pride goeth before the fall."

I had to read three Greek tragedies-fortunately in English-unfortunately I had to read them. :)

Have read it in the Bible, I think and try to live by it.

[Redmama]

My dogs get on my nerves and I am sure I get on theirs. However, I would be lost without them-probably drunk.

Maybe this will be trying to make a point that makes no sense...but in my head it is EXACTLY what we are talking about. Everybody thinks differently. When I said I don't do animals, the actual truth is that I hate them...and I go out of my way not to use that word but trying to explain how you feel while typing is difficult...I can't touch them even...I tell myself it is crazy to feel that way and try, but I just can't. I had my husbands dog for about 8 months...until she died...I thought about it everyday on my way home - I new it didn't make sense but I hated every minute - but true love it must have been for me to deal with it!!

My point here is that you can't change how someone feels. But we all have to AT LEAST try when it comes to people - and if we can't get over it - then as humans, we need to at least be nice and leave it be -

If the least of my issues is that I can't touch a dog...then that is ok.

[martin II]

I was meaning the waste of energy on hatret.

Animals don't work with me - I can't even get near them - don't know why - I've tried...I'm grateful for all those animal lovers out there though!!

Hatred does use up energy and can cause one to be in a state of stress which as we know can cause ones heart to stop pumping.

The 40 acres and mule comments indicates that someone may not be feeling that well. imo

I love dogs.

[William Anthony]

Maybe this will be trying to make a point that makes no sense...but in my head it is EXACTLY what we are talking about. Everybody thinks differently. When I said I don't do animals, the actual truth is that I hate them...and I go out of my way not to use that word but trying to explain how you feel while typing is difficult...I can't touch them even...I tell myself it is crazy to feel that way and try, but I just can't. I had my husbands dog for about 8 months...until she died...I thought about it everyday on my way home - I new it didn't make sense but I hated every minute - but true love it must have been for me to deal with it!!

My point here is that you can't change how someone feels. But we all have to AT LEAST try when it comes to people - and if we can't get over it - then as humans, we need to at least be nice and leave it be -

If the least of my issues is that I can't touch a dog...then that is ok.


It makes perfect sense to me-love overcomes hatred.

[Redmama]

It makes perfect sense to me-love overcomes hatred.

And to understand means to be understood.

[William Anthony]

And to understand means to be understood.

I understood when you said what you meant for me to understand. Understand? :)

[Redmama]

I understood when you said what you meant for me to understand. Understand? :)

Got it - LOL - too funny - now what were we tallking about?:D

[Redmama]

I'm literally watching Dr. Phil interview some of the jury...

[William Anthony]

Got it - LOL - too funny - now what were we tallking about?:D

Pets, dogs, love, hate, mules, land and the debate.:)

[William Anthony]

Hatred does use up energy and can cause one to be in a state of stress which as we know can cause ones heart to stop pumping.

The 40 acres and mule comments indicates that someone may not be feeling that well. imo

I love dogs.

I figured you loved dogs and, you are alright in my book. :)

[William Anthony]

And the adventures of Ulysses which we had to translate from Latin!

How about "Pride goeth before the fall."

Whose the author? Is it like the others?

[Redmama]

Part of the Dr. Phil interview

500 people filled out these questionnaires, they chose us so for them to tie in that there were too many women on the jury or we weren't the right color is really insulting. We had to actually go back and define what is robbery, what is a deadly weapon, but once we had our definitions we were solid. Everything was based off the recordings. Every piece of evidence we found was strictly off the recordings and the evidence.

I'll try to keep up with some further, but it has been a long day - I'll keep it recorded if anyone has some specific questions...

[Redmama]

One of the jurors said something that helped make his decision was the video surveillance that showed the two men with their jackets buttoned up and then on the way out with their jackets unbuttoned - proof that they had pulled something out.

[WarmNCozy]

Maybe this will be trying to make a point that makes no sense...but in my head it is EXACTLY what we are talking about. Everybody thinks differently. When I said I don't do animals, the actual truth is that I hate them...and I go out of my way not to use that word but trying to explain how you feel while typing is difficult...I can't touch them even...I tell myself it is crazy to feel that way and try, but I just can't. I had my husbands dog for about 8 months...until she died...I thought about it everyday on my way home - I new it didn't make sense but I hated every minute - but true love it must have been for me to deal with it!!

My point here is that you can't change how someone feels. But we all have to AT LEAST try when it comes to people - and if we can't get over it - then as humans, we need to at least be nice and leave it be -

If the least of my issues is that I can't touch a dog...then that is ok.

My daughter spent her entire 37 years on earth trying to save the worlds' animals from abuse and mistreatment. She love animals more than people. They had no agenda! Just wanted to love and be loved.

[Redmama]

My daughter spent her entire 37 years on earth trying to save the worlds' animals from abuse and mistreatment. She love animals more than people. They had no agenda! Just wanted to love and be loved.


I'm with you. I wish I could have that love for animals actually. I have heard they are great for anxiety - which I suffer from. I give money to rescue them, I just don't want one in my house.

[WarmNCozy]

I had to read three Greek tragedies-fortunately in English-unfortunately I had to read them. :)

Have read it in the Bible, I think and try to live by it.
Hans Christian Anderson, The Grimms Brothers, Aesop's Fables, Bulfinch's Mythology which I own and still have and from time to time read!

[WarmNCozy]

I'm with you. I wish I could have that love for animals actually. I have heard they are great for anxiety - which I suffer from. I give money to rescue them, I just don't want one in my house.

Good for you! At least you are doing something to help their suffering. And God Bless You for that!

[WarmNCozy]

Whose the author? Is it like the others?

Yes! It is the Roman version of Homer's The Odyssey, Ulysses being Odyssey in Greek.

[WarmNCozy]

Hatred does use up energy and can cause one to be in a state of stress which as we know can cause ones heart to stop pumping.

The 40 acres and mule comments indicates that someone may not be feeling that well. imo

I love dogs.

Hatred uses up all the good in us that is human, and if directed towards another human has no affect on them. They suffer not at all. The one who hates gets eaten emotionally from this useless emotion.

[WarmNCozy]

Part of the Dr. Phil interview

500 people filled out these questionnaires, they chose us so for them to tie in that there were too many women on the jury or we weren't the right color is really insulting. We had to actually go back and define what is robbery, what is a deadly weapon, but once we had our definitions we were solid. Everything was based off the recordings. Every piece of evidence we found was strictly off the recordings and the evidence.

I'll try to keep up with some further, but it has been a long day - I'll keep it recorded if anyone has some specific questions...

I think the general public has a right to see those questionnaires!

[WarmNCozy]

One of the jurors said something that helped make his decision was the video surveillance that showed the two men with their jackets buttoned up and then on the way out with their jackets unbuttoned - proof that they had pulled something out.

But did OJ? And did he know of their agenda?

[Redmama]

Good for you! At least you are doing something to help their suffering. And God Bless You for that!

I seriously do try - thank you,

[Redmama]

I think the general public has a right to see those questionnaires!


I agree - are they not?

[WarmNCozy]

Got it - LOL - too funny - now what were we tallking about?:D

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff305/CozyNWarm/Funny/doglaugh.gif

[WarmNCozy]

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff305/CozyNWarm/Funny/doglaugh.gifWe need spell check on here! I meant cracking up! Don't know what craking up is?

[Redmama]

But did OJ? And did he know of their agenda?

Very good question - I do have to say that after seeing that video again, they did look out of place - I know people that always wear suits - wonder if this was the case -

[WarmNCozy]

Does that include the 40 acres and a mule? If so, then I think that some clarification is needed. I am interested in the forty acres but not the mule. To me the 40 acres and a mule symbolize a promise of equality. It is the promise that is my quest. I will feel my better once that promise has been fulfilled. I do not think that Mr. Goldman will feel much better once his promise of money has been fulfilled. Why am I interested in the 40 acres? Perhaps, this will explain.

http://www.sciway.net/hist/chicora/slavery18-2.html

It is late (for me usually in bed at 8 and read until I fall asleep) and I'm going to get into my cozy bed and start to reread David McCullough's John Adams, which I have read every year at least once since I acquired the book in 2001. Even before Lincoln, Adams was in my opinion the best patriot and knew the true meaning of "all men are created equal" even though the author of that sentence owned slaves and wrote a paper on the inferiority of blacks whom he used on his plantation to make him a rich man, Thomas Jefferson and then there was Washington who also owned slaves! And few know the work and lengths to which John Adams went to secure finances for the revolution taking along his son John Quincy Adams. I'll go into it further in the morning when I am refreshed! But I think important to the 40 acres and a mule remark!

[weezer]

I was not in any way shape or form going there with that. It is not included in the way I think at all. I am a decedent of farmers from Indiana - I grew up with sayings like that- the thoughts you are accusing me of NEVER crossed my mind. If I would have thought for even one second that you would have taken it that way, I would not have responded - it was not the point I was trying to make.

Red, please believe me when I tell you that my point was not intended to start trouble. It wasn't the point anyone was trying to make. :shrug:

[WarmNCozy]

One of the jurors said something that helped make his decision was the video surveillance that showed the two men with their jackets buttoned up and then on the way out with their jackets unbuttoned - proof that they had pulled something out.

Well, was it OJ? And if it wasn't why is OJ in jail and these two men free!

[martin II]

One of the jurors said something that helped make his decision was the video surveillance that showed the two men with their jackets buttoned up and then on the way out with their jackets unbuttoned - proof that they had pulled something out.

I constantly open and button my jacket in the course of a day. There is no pattern. If i put my hand in my trouser pocket i will unbutton. Stand up botton.

I think that if the two men were putting items into pillow cases/boxes and carrying them out their jackets would be unbuttoned.
I think it is proof that they unbuttoned their jackets.

[martin II]

Well, was it OJ? And if it wasn't why is OJ in jail and these two men free!

Oj had on a blue tee shirt no jacket.

Mcclinton and Alexander had on jackets but both admitted to pulling out guns.
So the open jackets were already admitted to. So they knew who pulled something out.
So oj got convicted based on two other men had open jackets as they left.

[martin II]

Red, please believe me when I tell you that my point was not intended to start trouble. It wasn't the point anyone was trying to make. :shrug:

weezer

Your 40 acres and a mule comment was made to prove what point.

[weezer]

I constantly open and button my jacket in the course of a day. There is no pattern. If i put my hand in my trouser pocket i will unbutton. Stand up botton.

I think that if the two men were putting items into pillow cases/boxes and carrying them out their jackets would be unbuttoned.
I think it is proof that they unbuttoned their jackets.

and since everyone BUT orenthal said two of them had guns pulled in the room, I think it is proof that they unbuttoned their jackets to pull their guns out.

[martin II]

I think the general public has a right to see those questionnaires!

The judge refused. Even the blank ones.

[tv]

weezer

Your 40 acres and a mule comment was made to prove what point.

We've discussed this at length in the past as to how it relates to Fred Goldman and the derogatory things you say about him. Are you saying you don't remember?

[weezer]

weezer

Your 40 acres and a mule comment was made to prove what point.

that when someone feels they have been wronged, there is no limit to time or passion that person feels.

[martin II]

and since everyone BUT orenthal said two of them had guns pulled in the room, I think it is proof that they unbuttoned their jackets to pull their guns out.

Would that be opinion and not a fact discussed as testimony.I don't remember any testimony about open or closed coats.

[weezer]

Would that be opinion and not a fact discussed as testimony.I don't remember any testimony about open or closed coats.

really? then I must have responded to your post about your opinion on the open coats. hmmmm

[tv]

william

See how much love tv has for you.hahahaha

martin, I love you just as much as I love William. ;)

[martin II]

that when someone feels they have been wronged, there is no limit to time or passion that person feels.

Have you seen lately, people going on tv asking for 40 acres and a mule.
That is about a cruel joke played on ex slaves.gees

[martin II]

martin, I love you just as much as I love William. ;)

And i love you also.

[tv]

And i love you also.

Thank you. :)

[martin II]

really? then I must have responded to your post about your opinion on the open coats. hmmmm

I thought the jury was to discussonly testimony only.

[martin II]

We've discussed this at length in the past as to how it relates to Fred Goldman and the derogatory things you say about him. Are you saying you don't remember?

Well no
I don't remember discussing 40 acres and a mule as it relates to fred.

[tv]

Well no
I don't remember discussing 40 acres and a mule as it relates to fred.

I'd rather not dredge it all up but it was along the lines of what weezer said.

[weezer]

Have you seen lately, people going on tv asking for 40 acres and a mule.
That is about a cruel joke played on ex slaves.gees

my post was an analogy --

analogy
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source -
a·nal·o·gy /əˈnælədʒi/ Pronunciation Key -
–noun, plural -gies. 1. a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump.
2. similarity or comparability: I see no analogy between your problem and mine.
3. Biology. an analogous relationship.
4. Linguistics. a. the process by which words or phrases are created or re-formed according to existing patterns in the language, as when shoon was re-formed as shoes, when -ize is added to nouns like winter to form verbs, or when a child says foots for feet.
b. a form resulting from such a process.

5. Logic. a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in other respects.

—Synonyms 1. comparison, likeness, resemblance, similitude, affinity. 2.

[weezer]

I thought the jury was to discussonly testimony only.

and evidence -- the tapes were evidence.

[martin II]

and since everyone BUT orenthal said two of them had guns pulled in the room, I think it is proof that they unbuttoned their jackets to pull their guns out.

I think it is proof that they unbuttoned their jackets to carry boxes.

[martin II]

and evidence -- the tapes were evidence.

If the issue of open or closed jackets were not testified to it may be that the jury manufactured evidence while looking at the tapes.imo

[martin II]

my post was an analogy --

analogy
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source -
a·nal·o·gy /əˈnælədʒi/ Pronunciation Key -
–noun, plural -gies. 1. a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump.
2. similarity or comparability: I see no analogy between your problem and mine.
3. Biology. an analogous relationship.
4. Linguistics. a. the process by which words or phrases are created or re-formed according to existing patterns in the language, as when shoon was re-formed as shoes, when -ize is added to nouns like winter to form verbs, or when a child says foots for feet.
b. a form resulting from such a process.

5. Logic. a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in other respects.

—Synonyms 1. comparison, likeness, resemblance, similitude, affinity. 2.

So a promise to ex slaves has something to do with fred asking for money?:shrug:

[weezer]

I think it is proof that they unbuttoned their jackets to carry boxes.

well then I suppose 'your think' and 'my think' are equal and neither make a hill of beans to the outcome. ;)

[weezer]

So a promise to ex slaves has something to do with fred asking for money?:shrug:

no -- but the analogy has everything to do with YOUR thoughts and opinions on Mr. Goldman's feelings about the murderer of his son and what he is willing to do and for how long he's willing to do it.

[socaldiva]

If the issue of open or closed jackets were not testified to it may be that the jury manufactured evidence while looking at the tapes.imo

"The jury manufactured evidence"? What a hoot. You must think that Orenthal is the unluckiest man on earth. Never does anything wrong, but is constantly in court in different states for major violations of various & sundry laws :tongue:

[weezer]

If the issue of open or closed jackets were not testified to it may be that the jury manufactured evidence while looking at the tapes.imo

I don't want to be rude but your arguments about the jury are weak.

[martin II]

I'd rather not dredge it all up but it was along the lines of what weezer said.

I remember 40 acres and a mule being discussed when slavery was the subject as it related to reperations to blacks for slavery.Which is the time you stated you would not pay one penny of your money for reperations.
I find no connections to freds tv celebrity, fund raising and court battles for money based on the death of his son to 40 acres and a mule.imo

[tv]

I remember 40 acres and a mule being discussed when slavery was the subject as it related to reperations to blacks for slavery.Which is the time you stated you would not pay one penny of your money for reperations.
I find no connections to freds tv celebrity, fund raising and court battles for money based on the death of his son to 40 acres and a mule.imo

I'm not getting into this with you again.

[weezer]

"The jury manufactured evidence"? What a hoot. You must think that Orenthal is the unluckiest man on earth. Never does anything wrong, but is constantly in court in different states for major violations of various & sundry laws :tongue:

hey you! now you have to admit it is sad how the world is out to get orenthal. I mean -- I was going to say except arnelle but then there was the altercation where she/he bonked his head.

[Redmama]

During this interview, Riccio put a completely different spin on why OJ did not contact the FBI or the police himself, than what I heard on trial. Riccio said that he didn't know much about the Goldman's, just that OJ called them the Gold diggers and had an alot of resentment towards them. Just a comment – he would entirely want his day in Court. R. {D Phil then asks about about a specific page of his book - page 167 - which and then asks if the Goldman's pressure on him kept him from going to the police and the FBI. Riccio said no - Riccio was then asked (By Dr. Phil) if he - had gone to the police or FBI that the situation would have been led down this path (asked if he would in hindsight by Dr. Phil) , would have contacted them himself, would things have turned out differently. Riccio then stated that OJ believed that they might not been able to recover the money if they notified them beforehand. Riccio stated that he was not intending to cash in at this point - for the tape -said he didn't record it to hurt OJ - he stated that he had been recording OJ since 2004.. Riccio says that this page (pg 167) wasn't about pressure. It was just business as usual. He also said that it was the Furmahs (Sp?) that had gone, cut off the lock and moved the items to Las Vegas.

The comment that Riccio made about whether the Goldman's pressure had/had not had anything to do with his crimes that the Goldman's were trying to fight/Riccio said no. Dr. Phil then restated the question and said that it sounded like pressure to him. Riccio stated that pressure too a alot of emotion connected to it. Riccio admitted to recording statements but that he had been recording OJ since 2004. Alexander admitted that it was OJ that asked for guns to be in the room.

Alexander said that it would not be a major story without guns. Major story = major money.

Racicot said that OJ himself callws himawld a self organized sting operation. Riccio went long with it. He said it was OJ's idea. Too many trying to sell the tabloids.

I don't know whether this is fact but this guy gives me the hebee jeebees -ha - anybody with me? Okay to clear this up - Riccio gives me the hevee jeebees = Alexander seems to be totally credible.

[martin II]

During this interview, Riccio put a completely different spin on why OJ did not contact the FBI or the police himself, than what I heard on trial. Riccio said that he didn't know much about the Goldman's, just that OJ called them the Gold diggers and had an alot of resentment towards them. Just a comment – he would entirely want his day in Court. R. {D Phil then asks about about a specific page of his book - page 167 - which and then asks if the Goldman's pressure on him kept him from going to the police and the FBI. Riccio said no - Riccio was then asked (By Dr. Phil) if he - had gone to the police or FBI that the situation would have been led down this path (asked if he would in hindsight by Dr. Phil) , would have contacted them himself, would things have turned out differently. Riccio then stated that OJ believed that they might not been able to recover the money if they notified them beforehand. Riccio stated that he was not intending to cash in at this point - for the tape -said he didn't record it to hurt OJ - he stated that he had been recording OJ since 2004.. Riccio says that this page (pg 167) wasn't about pressure. It was just business as usual. He also said that it was the Furmahs (Sp?) that had gone, cut off the lock and moved the items to Las Vegas.

The comment that Riccio made about whether the Goldman's pressure had/had not had anything to do with his crimes that the Goldman's were trying to fight/Riccio said no. Dr. Phil then restated the question and said that it sounded like pressure to him. Riccio stated that pressure too a alot of emotion connected to it. Riccio admitted to recording statements but that he had been recording OJ since 2004. Alexander admitted that it was OJ that asked for guns to be in the room.

Alexander said that it would not be a major story without guns. Major story = major money.

Racicot said that OJ himself callws himawld a self organized sting operation. Riccio went long with it. He said it was OJ's idea. Too many trying to sell the tabloids.

I don't know whether this is fact but this guy gives me the hebee jeebees -ha - anybody with me? Okay to clear this up - Riccio gives me the hevee jeebees = Alexander seems to be totally credible.

In his testimony in the vegas trial Riccio said that it was his idea to go to fbi and le to ask for assistance because he wanted to make sure everything was legal and that he requested and got ojs approval to go to these agancies.
Oj did not know who had his stuff or where it was until the 13th when Beadasley told him and Fumong showe up with the stuff.

Alexander first went to le to talk about a deal after he was caught at the airport attempting to flee vegas. He decided he did not like the deal so he and mcclinton went to Scotto and demanded that scotto and oj give them $50,000 and they would not testify or slant their testimony in the trial in favor of oj. Scotto and oj said no way.Alexander then went back to le and agreed to testify for the prosecution against oj. Mcclinton called Scotto back and threatened physical harm if the money was not paid.Scotto taped this
demand and played the tape on the phone to le detective. Le said they would call him back and he thought they would take some action against mcclinton, but le never called him back and did nothing with this evidence against mcclinton and Alexander.

At trial defense lawyer informed mcclinton that he had met with le 2-3 times
before his plea and that it was not till after he got his plea that he said oj asked him to bring a gun.When asked why he said he forgot.

In the hearing Alexander admitted that if oj had given him the money he would have testified in favor of oj.
imo

Riccio rented the hotel room and brought everyone togeather for the sale.He then taped everyone so as to sell his story for money and make tv appearances for money.imo