View Full Version : Simpson, co-defendant face 18 years at sentencing
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:21 PM
It's hard to believe we disagree sometimes. :eek:
And with hostility, being polite. :)
Okay, so those on television need to get two real jobs. :)Are you trying to say that you don't consider television as a real job?
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:23 PM
Are you trying to say that you don't consider television as a real job?
Are you saying that Mr. Goldman has three real jobs? :)
martin II
12-06-2008, 09:23 PM
I have said that hatred is a useless emotion and it seems to distort the truth. Simpson may be a lot of things but he did help people out, his family, Kato and the Browns for example. Unless he lived in the same home and dormotory as Simpson, then I think he is not capable of making those statements.
Fred has successfully manipulated some public opinion and sympathy for his son being killed by someone and turned it into a mini business venture or celebrity status of some sort. He does not know any more about who killed that boy than anyone else.
OJ being in jail may put a end to his free money grab and maby fox may loose interest in his begging.But then a guy like Geraldo needs a guy like fred.The evil words of hatred that come from his mouth can only come from a fool or a person destined to live in hell and it is no ones fault but fred.
imo
Same old soup just a different day. :)Exactly again. :)
Are you saying that Mr. Goldman has three real jobs? :)No, William.
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:27 PM
Exactly again. :)
I think the hatred on both sides is getting old. Can we agree? :)
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:28 PM
No, William.
Alrighty then.:)
I think the hatred on both sides is getting old. Can we agree? :) If you're talking about Simpson and Goldman I'll just say that they are the one who have to put an end to it.
martin II
12-06-2008, 09:37 PM
even so it seems goldman is on tv once every 2 weeks calling out simpson
Fred just wants a bigger house and a couple more cars off the back of his dead son. There are many people that have lost family members but few have acted as fred does.
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:39 PM
If you're talking about Simpson and Goldman I'll just say that they are the one who have to put an end to it.
No, I was talking more about the hatred caused by disagreements with a verdict and caused by connections to people, I believe, are unknown to the posters on this board. I think that our opinions have divided some of us in ways that should not have occurred. I think that there are some, who relish the divide. I think that some hatred is incurable, as with Simpson and Mr. Goldman.
No, I was talking more about the hatred caused by disagreements with a verdict and caused by connections to people, I believe, are unknown to the posters on this board. I think that our opinions have divided some of us in ways that should not have occurred. I think that there are some, who relish the divide. I think that some hatred is incurable, as with Simpson and Mr. Goldman.Would you like to say who among us relishes the divide?
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:44 PM
Would you like to say who among us relishes the divide?
Not my place and how's that for diplomacy. It's above my pay grade :)
Not my place and how's that for diplomacy. :)
Very diplomatic. :beer:
utl768
12-06-2008, 09:48 PM
everyone in the news media relishes the divide in this case
ppl like geraldo, greta, and half of the news anchors in this world have a show because of the murder trial
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:48 PM
Very diplomatic. :beer:
I'll bet you thought you had me, didn't you? Are you wearing blue? :)
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:49 PM
everyone in the news media relishes the divide in this case
ppl like geraldo, greta, and half of the news anchors in this world have a show because of the murder trial
I agree with that.
William Anthony
12-06-2008, 09:58 PM
Time out. It's Geraldo time.
I'll bet you thought you had me, didn't you? Are you wearing blue? :)
Now, how did you guess? :rolleyes:
utl768
12-06-2008, 10:21 PM
notice how once the lawyer said that simpsons kidnapping could get overturned based on precedent did he rush to a break.
OJ Simpson confirmed what I've always thought -- all the stuff removed from his house was removed at his request. It's always been about keeping it from the Goldmans. This time his greed landed him in prison. Also, I don't know why Beardsley puts all the blame on Riccio. Beardsley is the one that called 911.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 06:10 AM
OJ Simpson confirmed what I've always thought -- all the stuff removed from his house was removed at his request. It's always been about keeping it from the Goldmans. This time his greed landed him in prison. Also, I don't know why Beardsley puts all the blame on Riccio. Beardsley is the one that called 911.
I saw the program as another of Geraldo's hypes. I have always said that Simpson should have paid the damages. However, let us proceed on the assumption that he hid it from the Goldmans and take MG's statement that Simpson had not talked to him in 14 years into consideration. Aside from the fact that the numbers do not add up, what makes MG think that Simpson could have given him permission to sell the property? Yes, Beardsley's gut reaction was to call 911, not knowing until later that Riccio could have set them all up. I don't think any of them graduated at the top of their class. MY first question would have been how did Simpson know where we were.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 06:17 AM
notice how once the lawyer said that simpsons kidnapping could get overturned based on precedent did he rush to a break.
I think both lawyers said that there was a good chance that it would be overturned. I am a little concerned about Galantar's statements, trying to patronize the judge and the prosecution, and how they might be interpreted on appeal. I understood why he did it but he should have known that it is impossible to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 06:32 AM
I saw Riccio as a person full of self-hatred over his deeds and wanting to lash out at Beardsley. I saw Beardsley as someone not wanting to engage in the name calling and placing the blame where he thought it lay-MG and Riccio, although he claimed he never said Mike took it. This did not mean he didn't think it.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 06:37 AM
Additionally, since Simpson moved to Florida shortly after the verdict and he was in jail for a year awaiting trial and for the length of the trial and made several trips out of town, how could he as he claimed have driven by Garcetti's house every day, yelling obscenities?
I think it was just Simpson playing for the camera, although he may have been telling the truth, but he wasn't in a court of law under oath.
martin II
12-07-2008, 06:50 AM
I saw the program as another of Geraldo's hypes. I have always said that Simpson should have paid the damages. However, let us proceed on the assumption that he hid it from the Goldmans and take MG's statement that Simpson had not talked to him in 14 years into consideration. Aside from the fact that the numbers do not add up, what makes MG think that Simpson could have given him permission to sell the property? Yes, Beardsley's gut reaction was to call 911, not knowing until later that Riccio could have set them all up. I don't think any of them graduated at the top of their class. MY first question would have been how did Simpson know where we were.
Before the criminal trial OJ was signing jerseys and pictures weekly and MG was selling them and making a living. It is reported that this was happening when oj was in jail. At some point stuff was missing from ojs trophy room.Fumong and Beadsley said MIKE too the stuff and MGS free ride ended.
13 years later the goods show up in the hotel room and MG knowing oj is getting more negative press decides to write a book go on tv amd make a very wild unprovable charge that he acted a ojs medical adviser on how to expand his hands when the glove demostration was a decision made one day before it happened.
Now Geraldo, true to form concocks this tv program with MG and Fred simply to get into the current act.Rteing is the only game and Fred and MG don't seem to understand Geraldo is using them.
In a way fred has forced some americans to share in his long running GRIEF for not to do so is a moral sin agains his son Ron.People do so mostly because they feel sorry for him and because for some any effort against OJ
makes then feel good.This is based on hatred.
At some point this should stop.
martin II
12-07-2008, 06:54 AM
I think both lawyers said that there was a good chance that it would be overturned. I am a little concerned about Galantar's statements, trying to patronize the judge and the prosecution, and how they might be interpreted on appeal. I understood why he did it but he should have known that it is impossible to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.
I did not like Gallanters statement either.I wondered why he was doing that considering how Glass was making faces and shaking her head when the defense lawyers spoke.
martin II
12-07-2008, 06:57 AM
I agree with that.
Greta use to be very fair to Oj when she was on CNN.When she went to Fox that fairness went out of the window.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:05 AM
Before the criminal trial OJ was signing jerseys and pictures weekly and MG was selling them and making a living. It is reported that this was happening when oj was in jail. At some point stuff was missing from ojs trophy room.Fumong and Beadsley said MIKE too the stuff and MGS free ride ended.
13 years later the goods show up in the hotel room and MG knowing oj is getting more negative press decides to write a book go on tv amd make a very wild unprovable charge that he acted a ojs medical adviser on how to expand his hands when the glove demostration was a decision made one day before it happened.
Now Geraldo, true to form concocks this tv program with MG and Fred simply to get into the current act.Rteing is the only game and Fred and MG don't seem to understand Geraldo is using them.
In a way fred has forced some americans to share in his long running GRIEF for not to do so is a moral sin agains his son Ron.People do so mostly because they feel sorry for him and because for some any effort against OJ
makes then feel good.This is based on hatred.
At some point this should stop.
A very well articulated and thought out post. I understand. I gave it some thought last night and wondered why it was so hard for some to believe that Simpson may not have committed the murders. I thought that they mostly believed in the DNA evidence and that there would have to be a grand conspiracy. I thought about the fact that their perspective is different from those who have lived in other communities, where LE brandished and used guns and night-sticks not as protective devices but as means of torture and murder. They cannot believe that LE would lie but that was proven by the latest information on the FBI and the ballistic and ammunition information. Not many cases receive public attention, unless there is a camera present or the victim is well known. I don't think they realize the frequency with which LE misconduct occurs in some communities. I don't think they realized that the Rodney King verdict and video caused a riot not because it was Rodney King or that it was caught on video, although I will say that added to it, but because situations like that occur all to often in those communities and that was just a culmination, which showed how easily LE can get away with that type of conduct and have it justified in court. I agree that as long as there is hate, there will be no resolution.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:07 AM
I did not like Gallanters statement either.I wondered why he was doing that considering how Glass was making faces and shaking her head when the defense lawyers spoke.
I think he was trying to not have the resentment toward him rub off onto the sentencing but I agree with the commentators that said the judge had made up her mind before any of them spoke.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:10 AM
Greta use to be very fair to Oj when she was on CNN.When she went to Fox that fairness went out of the window.
Fox's motto should be conservative and more conservative. Ask tvdinner, :).
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:10 AM
I think both lawyers said that there was a good chance that it would be overturned. I am a little concerned about Galantar's statements, trying to patronize the judge and the prosecution, and how they might be interpreted on appeal. I understood why he did it but he should have known that it is impossible to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.
I wondered what happened to Aspertation as the Nevada Supreme Court had recognized it in another case.
Fox's motto should be conservative and more conservative. Ask tvdinner, :).Please don't ask martin to ask me anything. I have him on ignore but unfortunately I can't help but see when he's quoted.
If you think Fox is too conservative why don't you watch CNN instead of keeping it on Fox 24/7?
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:15 AM
I think he was trying to not have the resentment toward him rub off onto the sentencing but I agree with the commentators that said the judge had made up her mind before any of them spoke.
The washing post put up a picture of Glass, arms outward palms up and big frown on her face looking in the direction of the defense table Like she did so often during the trial.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:15 AM
I wondered what happened to Aspertation as the Nevada Supreme Court had recognized it in another case.
The lawyers on Geraldo said that the evidence was insufficient, according to the Nevada Court, in a case where people were moved from one room to another and tied up during a robbery, to prove kidnapping. If the law of precedent, res judicata and stare decisis is followed, then the kidnapping charge should be overturned. If that occurs, it may bolster the argument that they didn't receive fair trials.
I saw Riccio as a person full of self-hatred over his deeds and wanting to lash out at Beardsley. I saw Beardsley as someone not wanting to engage in the name calling and placing the blame where he thought it lay-MG and Riccio, although he claimed he never said Mike took it. This did not mean he didn't think it.Beardsley fell all over himself explaining himself to Mike Gilbert. It was painful to watch.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:17 AM
Please don't ask martin to ask me anything. I have him on ignore but unfortunately I can't help but see when he's quoted.
If you think Fox is too conservative why don't you watch CNN instead of keeping it on Fox 24/7?
I like to know how the opposition thinks. :)
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:18 AM
Please don't ask martin to ask me anything. I have him on ignore but unfortunately I can't help but see when he's quoted.
If you think Fox is too conservative why don't you watch CNN instead of keeping it on Fox 24/7?
I think most american understand that Fox is second to RL in presenting only the conservative view.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:18 AM
Beardsley fell all over himself explaining himself to Mike Gilbert. It was painful to watch.
I have to agree and think he wanted to ask, do you have anymore stolen stuff we can sell. The value increased after this conviction. :)
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:19 AM
I think most american understand that Fox is second to RL in presenting only the conservative view.
RL and SH are neck to neck, imho.
I saw the program as another of Geraldo's hypes. I have always said that Simpson should have paid the damages. However, let us proceed on the assumption that he hid it from the Goldmans and take MG's statement that Simpson had not talked to him in 14 years into consideration. Aside from the fact that the numbers do not add up, what makes MG think that Simpson could have given him permission to sell the property? Yes, Beardsley's gut reaction was to call 911, not knowing until later that Riccio could have set them all up. I don't think any of them graduated at the top of their class. MY first question would have been how did Simpson know where we were.
You're very good at changing the course of the discussion. OJ Simpson clearly stated that nothing was stolen from his house and that everything was removed with his permission. He came across very ugly in the clip. Keep making excuses for him but he's still sitting in the slammer.
I like to know how the opposition thinks. :)
Sorry you consider those with conservative views the opposition. You always promote yourself as a peacemaker.
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:23 AM
The lawyers on Geraldo said that the evidence was insufficient, according to the Nevada Court, in a case where people were moved from one room to another and tied up during a robbery, to prove kidnapping. If the law of precedent, res judicata and stare decisis is followed, then the kidnapping charge should be overturned. If that occurs, it may bolster the argument that they didn't receive fair trials.
Well why was it not presented as a defense.Did Glass prevent this argument by the defense? Aspertation did not take place in the Vegas trial.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:24 AM
You're very good at changing the course of the discussion. OJ Simpson clearly stated that nothing was stolen from his house and that everything was removed with his permission. He came across very ugly in the clip. Keep making excuses for him but he's still sitting in the slammer.
I am not changing the course of the discussion. Given that he gave them permission to take the stuff and hide it, does not mean that MG did not take it from hiding and sell it. I am not saying it was stolen from his house but stolen from him. I think MF came across very ugly on tape. I guess ugliness like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:24 AM
RL and SH are neck to neck, imho.
BO is trying to take it from both.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:26 AM
Well why was it not presented as a defense.Did Glass prevent this argument by the defense? Aspertation did not take place in the Vegas trial.
I am not sure whether she prevented it or not but, according to the lawyers on Geraldo, aspertation can occur and it does not rise to kidnapping.
I am not changing the course of the discussion. Given that he gave them permission to take the stuff and hide it, does not mean that MG did not take it from hiding and sell it. I am not saying it was stolen from his house but stolen from him. I think MF came across very ugly on tape. I guess ugliness like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
This discussion is not about Detective Fuhrman. You should take your own advice about the hatred thing. If you recall, in the tape, OJ said he didn't care what happened to the stuff as long as the Goldmans didn't get it. It was very ugly. Plus, he should have been thanking his lucky stars every day for escaping a double murder rap instead of cursing the DA.
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:27 AM
I am not changing the course of the discussion. Given that he gave them permission to take the stuff and hide it, does not mean that MG did not take it from hiding and sell it. I am not saying it was stolen from his house but stolen from him. I think MF came across very ugly on tape. I guess ugliness like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
MF was and is the king of ugly.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:28 AM
Sorry you consider those with conservative views the opposition. You always promote yourself as a peacemaker.
In order to make peace, you must understand the feelings of those that differ with yours and seek to make reconciliation. If you do not think there is opposition, then why have different political parties running on a ballot?
I am not sure whether she prevented it or not but, according to the lawyers on Geraldo, aspertation can occur and it does not rise to kidnapping.If asportation is an issue on appeal than good for him. I only want him to do time for the crimes he'd committed. Just seeing him whining to the judge was enough for me.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:32 AM
This discussion is not about Detective Fuhrman. You should take your own advice about the hatred thing. If you recall, in the tape, OJ said he didn't care what happened to the stuff as long as the Goldmans didn't get it. It was very ugly. Plus, he should have been thanking his lucky stars every day for escaping a double murder rap instead of cursing the DA.
I thought the discussion was about ugliness. I understand the reasons you feel the way you do. I am saying that he took the steps to avoid upholding the law, the same as MF did. I think they are both equally ugly, with the exception being that MF took an oath to serve and protect. I do not hate MF for the umpteenth time. I do think his and Simpson's conduct was ugly. I think there is enough ugliness to go around in these cases.
In order to make peace, you must understand the feelings of those that differ with yours and seek to make reconciliation. If you do not think there is opposition, then why have different political parties running on a ballot?There's a difference between opposition and enemies. I think you should just admit that you watch Fox because it's the best news station. :)
I thought the discussion was about ugliness. I understand the reasons you feel the way you do. I am saying that he took the steps to avoid upholding the law, the same as MF did. I think they are both equally ugly, with the exception being that MF took an oath to serve and protect. I do not hate MF for the umpteenth time. I do think his and Simpson's conduct was ugly. I think there is enough ugliness to go around in these cases.
I'm not going to argue about Mark Fuhrman. There's no point.
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:35 AM
I like to know how the opposition thinks. :)
In America most programs that have benefited all the public were put forth by Liberal democrats. Although conservaties americans have benefited as well, some how they had convienced some americans to believe that liberal was a dirty word. But Bo has changed that.:cool:
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:35 AM
If asportation is an issue on appeal than good for him. I only want him to do time for the crimes he'd committed. Just seeing him whining to the judge was enough for me.
Aspertation or asportation will tangentially be an issue, imho, but the crux is the argument that what happened in that room did not rise to the level of kidnapping, imho. I guess it was good to hear his side or the story in his own words.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:36 AM
There's a difference between opposition and enemies. I think you should just admit that you watch Fox because it's the best news station. :)
It is the best conservative news station I have ever watched. :)
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:38 AM
I'm not going to argue about Mark Fuhrman. There's no point.
Whose arguing. Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. :)
Aspertation or asportation will tangentially be an issue, imho, but the crux is the argument that what happened in that room did not rise to the level of kidnapping, imho. I guess it was good to hear his side or the story in his own words.Actually, I agree with you about the kidnapping even though I suppose him yelling that no one was to leave the room was technically kidnapping. Unfortunately, even though it shouldn't, I think the victims play into this for me. Whether it's right or not I'm not overly sympathetic to them.
Whose arguing. Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. :)If you're not arguing and I'm not arguing I guess we're not arguing. :)
It is the best conservative news station I have ever watched. :)That's okay, I won't make you say you like it. :) MSNBC is a train wreck and CNN is right behind it. My opinion only. :)
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:42 AM
There's a difference between opposition and enemies. I think you should just admit that you watch Fox because it's the best news station. :)
If one is looking for entertainment like the Simpsons or dancing with the stars, then fox is the one. If one is seeking factual reporting of events then fox is not the one. As long as William Ailes SP is ruinning fox it will be the station that targets the low end of the intelegent listners. imo
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:42 AM
Actually, I agree with you about the kidnapping even though I suppose him yelling that no one was to leave the room was technically kidnapping. Unfortunately, even though it shouldn't, I think the victims play into this for me. Whether it's right or not I'm not overly sympathetic to them.
I think we can agree on this. That is why I think that the circumstances of the crime may come into play on appeal. I do not know how lenient the appellate court will be, if at all, because of the guns.
I think we can agree on this. That is why I think that the circumstances of the crime may come into play on appeal. I do not know how lenient the appellate court will be, if at all, because of the guns.
Agreed. I think the guns are what sunk them from the start. I know you think it was bias but I have heard that Nevada is tough when guns are involved.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:48 AM
If one is looking for entertainment like the Simpsons or dancing with the stars, then fox is the one. If one is seeking factual reporting of events then fox is not the one. As long as William Ailes SP is ruinning fox it will be the station that targets the low end of the intelegent listners. imo
According to the Fox polls, McCain won all the debates. When I turned to the other channels, the President Elect won the last two.
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:49 AM
I think we can agree on this. That is why I think that the circumstances of the crime may come into play on appeal. I do not know how lenient the appellate court will be, if at all, because of the guns.
I don't think the appeals court will get into the issue of MCClinton and Alexander saying oj told them to bring guns even if the jury said they did not believe them.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:50 AM
Agreed. I think the guns are what sunk them from the start. I know you think it was bias but I have heard that Nevada is tough when guns are involved.
Not quite right. I think they should be stringent on guns. I think that bias may have come during the jury selection and the trial. I am not saying it did, but there is evidence that might support it did.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:53 AM
I don't think the appeals court will get into the issue of MCClinton and Alexander saying oj told them to bring guns even if the jury said they did not believe them.
What I am saying is that the appellate court may negate the sentencing on the kidnapping charge but let the others remain because of the guns. I think you are right. It doesn't matter who made the decision. The guns were there.
According to the Fox polls, McCain won all the debates. When I turned to the other channels, the President Elect won the last two.William, I've enjoyed the discussion this morning -- talk to you later. :seeya:
Not quite right. I think they should be stringent on guns. I think that bias may have come during the jury selection and the trial. I am not saying it did, but there is evidence that might support it did.
If there was true bias then it should come out -- I'm just not sure it happened.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:55 AM
If you're not arguing and I'm not arguing I guess we're not arguing. :)
Ah shucks. :)
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:56 AM
According to the Fox polls, McCain won all the debates. When I turned to the other channels, the President Elect won the last two.
Fox presents lies daily because they know who their target listener is and their biases.
In your example fox listeners would just accept the wrong poll info without checking with other major media to see if it was true.
Palin lived on fox complaining and attacking elitist educated northeastners and here she was taking five or six years in 5 different small little colleges to get undergraduate degree.imo
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:57 AM
If there was true bias then it should come out -- I'm just not sure it happened.
I think that it is hard to prove. That is why I can not say for sure that it did.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 07:58 AM
William, I've enjoyed the discussion this morning -- talk to you later. :seeya:
Likewise and look forward to your return.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 08:00 AM
Fox presents lies daily because they know who their target listener is and their biases.
In your example fox listeners would just accept the wrong poll info without checking with other major media to see if it was true.
Palin lived on fox complaining and attacking elitist educated northeastners and here she was taking five or six years in 5 different small little colleges to get undergraduate degree.imo
I think a lot of the candidates misspoke but I do think we can recognize code words when we hear them and that applies to both parties. The President Elect spoke the words that were most appealing to my ears.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 08:03 AM
That's okay, I won't make you say you like it. :) MSNBC is a train wreck and CNN is right behind it. My opinion only. :)
News like beauty..., :)
martin II
12-07-2008, 08:07 AM
A very well articulated and thought out post. I understand. I gave it some thought last night and wondered why it was so hard for some to believe that Simpson may not have committed the murders. I thought that they mostly believed in the DNA evidence and that there would have to be a grand conspiracy. I thought about the fact that their perspective is different from those who have lived in other communities, where LE brandished and used guns and night-sticks not as protective devices but as means of torture and murder. They cannot believe that LE would lie but that was proven by the latest information on the FBI and the ballistic and ammunition information. Not many cases receive public attention, unless there is a camera present or the victim is well known. I don't think they realize the frequency with which LE misconduct occurs in some communities. I don't think they realized that the Rodney King verdict and video caused a riot not because it was Rodney King or that it was caught on video, although I will say that added to it, but because situations like that occur all to often in those communities and that was just a culmination, which showed how easily LE can get away with that type of conduct and have it justified in court. I agree that as long as there is hate, there will be no resolution.
Two months ago where i am 4-5 cops stopped a latino guy in a subway station. He claimes they pulled his pants down and inserted a radio antena in his backside.He spent a week in the hospital where it was confirmed that he had been asaulted in the manner claimed. The police internal investigation cleared all the cops. Sharpton asked the DA to investigate and today a Grand Jury indicted all five cops. The police union had put out the claim that the hispanic guy was actually gay and had been injured in a sex act.
imo
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 08:30 AM
Two months ago where i am 4-5 cops stopped a latino guy in a subway station. He claimes they pulled his pants down and inserted a radio antena in his backside.He spent a week in the hospital where it was confirmed that he had been asaulted in the manner claimed. The police internal investigation cleared all the cops. Sharpton asked the DA to investigate and today a Grand Jury indicted all five cops. The police union had put out the claim that the hispanic guy was actually gay and had been injured in a sex act.
imo
Yes, unfortunately things like this happen all too often and it sometimes depends on the luck of the draw. I remember when I was much younger and weighed about 150 pounds and got into an argument with a White man, who disrespected my date. As I started toward him, he placed his hand in his pocket, threatening to shoot me, if I came closer. I saw the look in his eyes and knew he was telling a lie. When I took the next step I was rushed out of the bar and into the hands of the police, who were two Black officers. They told me to place my hands on the car and turn around while they frisked me. I complied. They then asked the White man what happened. I turned to ask them if they were going to frisk him, because he said he had a gun. The larger of the officers punched me and I punched back. As I started toward him I was struck with the baton on my head falling to the ground. Luckily, I fell so that my arms covered my face as they kicked me while I was on the ground. I was wearing a white safari jacket. The next morning I was taken before a judge. The judge asked me, if I had anything to say. I held up my safari jacket and asked what I looked like trying to start a fight with a grizzly bear. I do not know what the officer did that struck me with the baton but the judge started laughing and dismissed the case. The officer that struck me with the baton apologized outside the court room. They were both thrown off the force years later for other incidents. The one that punched me was thrown off for trying to run over fellow officers who were picketing in front of the police garage.
martin II
12-07-2008, 09:09 AM
Yes, unfortunately things like this happen all too often and it sometimes depends on the luck of the draw. I remember when I was much younger and weighed about 150 pounds and got into an argument with a White man, who disrespected my date. As I started toward him, he placed his hand in his pocket, threatening to shoot me, if I came closer. I saw the look in his eyes and knew he was telling a lie. When I took the next step I was rushed out of the bar and into the hands of the police, who were two Black officers. They told me to place my hands on the car and turn around while they frisked me. I complied. They then asked the White man what happened. I turned to ask them if they were going to frisk him, because he said he had a gun. The larger of the officers punched me and I punched back. As I started toward him I was struck with the baton on my head falling to the ground. Luckily, I fell so that my arms covered my face as they kicked me while I was on the ground. I was wearing a white safari jacket. The next morning I was taken before a judge. The judge asked me, if I had anything to say. I held up my safari jacket and asked what I looked like trying to start a fight with a grizzly bear. I do not know what the officer did that struck me with the baton but the judge started laughing and dismissed the case. The officer that struck me with the baton apologized outside the court room. They were both thrown off the force years later for other incidents. The one that punched me was thrown off for trying to run over fellow officers who were picketing in front of the police garage.
My story
As a young teacher outside of Atlanta i was driving home when some drunk white guys pulled up next to me and started tossing empty beer cans at me.
i drove faster to loose then but couldn't When i reached the outer ring of atlanta i saw a traffic cop so i pulled up to him and complained. The white guys got out of their car and came after me.the cop stood there as i ran around and behind him as they chased me. Finally he told me to get back in my car and get the hell away while he stood there talking and joking with the guys.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 09:12 AM
I am not sure that everyone understood my above post. The point is that I could have had a conviction of assault on an officer had I received a different judge. This is what happens all too often in some communities. I was lucky. Others were not. Some are killed. Some are assaulted and badly beaten. To ignore it or to minimize it only allows it to continue.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 09:19 AM
My story
As a young teacher outside of Atlanta i was driving home when some drunk white guys pulled up next to me and started tossing empty beer cans at me.
i drove faster to loose then but couldn't When i reached the outer ring of atlanta i saw a traffic cop so i pulled up to him and complained. The white guys got out of their car and came after me.the cop stood there as i ran around and behind him as they chased me. Finally he told me to get back in my car and get the hell away while he stood there talking and joking with the guys.
They had a story similar to that in the media. I mean a case. An elderly Black man was followed by a gang of Whites who were threatening him. He pulled into a gas station and they opened his door, tying to pull him out. He reached under his seat and puled out a baseball bat. The police arrived and the Black man was arrested. Unless these stories reach the media, they go largely overlooked and some do not understand what others live with, imho.
martin II
12-07-2008, 12:26 PM
They had a story similar to that in the media. I mean a case. An elderly Black man was followed by a gang of Whites who were threatening him. He pulled into a gas station and they opened his door, tying to pull him out. He reached under his seat and puled out a baseball bat. The police arrived and the Black man was arrested. Unless these stories reach the media, they go largely overlooked and some do not understand what others live with, imho.
People that live in sterile white communite have little abusive contact with the coppers and find abuse stories in other communities minorities impossible to believe about THEIR coppers. So at first examination of a event they usually take the side of THEIR coppers.
If nicole and ron had been black there would not have been such a trial of the sentry and after he had been found not guilty, that would have been the end of the story and there would not have amerrican support for a ftred.
I am not even sure the state of CA would have spent all the money they spent trying to convict oj if the victims had been black. imo
BOB was lurking earlier.
martin II
12-07-2008, 01:19 PM
i guess you saw the story last week of the FBI agent that was using the fbi computer crime files to give mafia types secrete info about cases.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 02:50 PM
People that live in sterile white communite have little abusive contact with the coppers and find abuse stories in other communities minorities impossible to believe about THEIR coppers. So at first examination of a event they usually take the side of THEIR coppers.
If nicole and ron had been black there would not have been such a trial of the sentry and after he had been found not guilty, that would have been the end of the story and there would not have amerrican support for a ftred.
I am not even sure the state of CA would have spent all the money they spent trying to convict oj if the victims had been black. imo
BOB was lurking earlier.
I think that it is more a matter of economics than race. I have come to understand but was surprised to see that sociologist had given a name to the phenomena that those who are systematically disenfranchised to include the effects of this disenfranchisement learn to operate outside the system. They refer to it as an informal system. This causes the police to act more harshly with members of that society as they are often met with disrespect and violence for the violence and disrespect other LE members have shown the community. In other communities there is a higher amount of reciprocal respect given, because there was no disenfranchisement. I think we all react based upon our experiences and it is just more difficult for those that have been respected to believe that LE would disrespect others and engage in corrupt actions.
I am getting to the point that I do not like to mention MF, because there is a feeling that I hate him. There is a willingness by some to accept that he was fictionalizing events, because they had a difficulty fathoming that LE could act in such a way and that other LE members would cover those type of actions up. Conversely, there is a feeling that his conduct was factual as that is a common experience for them. The reason that I say it is not entirely racial is that Whites, who live or visit certain communities, will likely be treated the same way and the common thought is that they are there to make a drug deal. What I hate is the divide that is caused, because we have not been able to look at the larger context, where race is merely a part of the inequality equation.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 03:04 PM
I think we have made some headway on the board, albeit hard fought at times. I think that, while we wait on the other sentences and the appeal, we have an opportunity to explain and understand different point of view. Without going into a political debate, I will point to the example of the discussion about Ms. Palin and Ms. Obama. I think that underlying the exchanges were feelings about posts in regard to Ms. Arnelle Simpson and others and Mr. Fred Goldman and others. However, underlying all those were our differences in experiences and how we viewed all the trials. Those who have been disenfranchised view the civil and the latest criminal trial with skepticism that justice was served. Those who have not felt disenfranchised view those trial with optimism and feel that justice was served. I think we can agree that the first criminal trial is viewed vice versa. I do not feel that our view of justice or the idea of justice, since the courts determine what rights we have, should depend on whether or not we feel disenfranchised or not. I think that justice should not depend on that and this offers us an excellent opportunity to discuss this and hopefully come to some understanding, reconciliation and resolution. Of Course, this is all just my opinion and hope.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 03:20 PM
Let me put it this way. I believe that if a jury that had been born and raised in Brentwood, composed of all Black men and Black women would have found Simpson guilty of double murder. I believe that an all Black jury listening to the armed robbery law, evidence and jury instructions would have found Simpson guilty.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 03:21 PM
Let me put it this way. I believe that if a jury that had been born and raised in Brentwood, composed of all Black men and Black women would have found Simpson guilty of double murder. I believe that an all Black jury, regardless of where they were born or raised, listening to the armed robbery law, evidence and jury instructions would have found Simpson guilty.
martin II
12-07-2008, 03:25 PM
I think that it is more a matter of economics than race. I have come to understand but was surprised to see that sociologist had given a name to the phenomena that those who are systematically disenfranchised to include the effects of this disenfranchisement learn to operate outside the system. They refer to it as an informal system. This causes the police to act more harshly with members of that society as they are often met with disrespect and violence for the violence and disrespect other LE members have shown the community. In other communities there is a higher amount of reciprocal respect given, because there was no disenfranchisement. I think we all react based upon our experiences and it is just more difficult for those that have been respected to believe that LE would disrespect others and engage in corrupt actions.
I am getting to the point that I do not like to mention MF, because there is a feeling that I hate him. There is a willingness by some to accept that he was fictionalizing events, because they had a difficulty fathoming that LE could act in such a way and that other LE members would cover those type of actions up. Conversely, there is a feeling that his conduct was factual as that is a common experience for them. The reason that I say it is not entirely racial is that Whites, who live or visit certain communities, will likely be treated the same way and the common thought is that they are there to make a drug deal. What I hate is the divide that is caused, because we have not been able to look at the larger context, where race is merely a part of the inequality equation.
What i have observed in that in some all white communities, the migration out by whites commences when 2-3 blacks purchase homes. This flight takes whites further from the cities to less populated areas even though the cost to commute to work is higher.
A common practice in some areas is that white cops on inner city payrolls,move to surrounding suburban comunities from where they come to
inner city neighborhoods, ride around in cars to police people and communities that they have no connection to, return to the precinct, take of the uniform and head home.
This situation causes much of the misunderstanding and abuse that takes place.
This disconneciton with the people they patrol caused one city council i know of to require new le hires to live in the city.
martin II
12-07-2008, 03:34 PM
Let me put it this way. I believe that if a jury that had been born and raised in Brentwood, composed of all Black men and Black women would have found Simpson guilty of double murder. I believe that an all Black jury listening to the armed robbery law, evidence and jury instructions would have found Simpson guilty.
I guess what you are saying is that wealthy people that have mostly positive contact with le would be inclined to accept the prosecutions claims as presented.
It may be that a all black jury in the vegas case may have been more inclined to look at the underlining circunstances and maby come to a different verdict on some of the charges.
martin II
12-07-2008, 03:48 PM
Example:
"No body leaves the room" would not have been enough for me to vote guilty on Kidnapping since no one was harmed, tied up or moved and no ranson was requested.
What i think is that it may not be regular or normal when a person walks into a fast food shop,pulls a gun and robs the cashier is caught and is charged with kidnapping. same is true with a regular bank robber. is he charged with kidnapping all the customers and bank employees in the bank during the robbery?
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 03:52 PM
What i have observed in that in some all white communities, the migration out by whites commences when 2-3 blacks purchase homes. This flight takes whites further from the cities to less populated areas even though the cost to commute to work is higher.
A common practice in some areas is that white cops on inner city payrolls,move to surrounding suburban comunities from where they come to
inner city neighborhoods, ride around in cars to police people and communities that they have no connection to, return to the precinct, take of the uniform and head home.
This situation causes much of the misunderstanding and abuse that takes place.
This disconneciton with the people they patrol caused one city council i know of to require new le hires to live in the city.
That disconnection also has economic roots. I know that where I live there is an annual employment city tax for those that work within the city and those that live outside the city but work in the city pay borough tax. There is a section in the downtown in the city that I reside in where the homeless gather during the day. They are renovating a former department store to make it into condominiums/apartments, and there has been a concerted effort to rid the homeless of their gathering place. I have mixed feeling about this. I understand the need to make the renters feel safe but I do not see any concern or remedies suggested for the homeless. It seems to me that it is out of sight out of mind.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 03:53 PM
I guess what you are saying is that wealthy people that have mostly positive contact with le would be inclined to accept the prosecutions claims as presented.
It may be that a all black jury in the vegas case may have been more inclined to look at the underlining circunstances and maby come to a different verdict on some of the charges.
I think that an all Black jury would have listened to the law and jury instructions and the evidence and came to the same verdict.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 03:57 PM
Example:
"No body leaves the room" would not have been enough for me to vote guilty on Kidnapping since no one was harmed, tied up or moved and no ranson was requested.
What i think is that it may not be regular or normal when a person walks into a fast food shop,pulls a gun and robs the cashier is caught and is charged with kidnapping. same is true with a regular bank robber. is he charged with kidnapping all the customers and bank employees in the bank during the robbery?
I understand what you are saying. However, the Nevada statute did not require that. However, based on reports of the lawyers on Geraldo, the courts now indicate that something more is required. No jury would have been privy to that precedent and were forced to follow the law and the instructions. I would have had a hard time convicting but based on the law, the instructions and the evidence, I would not have had a choice.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 04:05 PM
Example:
"No body leaves the room" would not have been enough for me to vote guilty on Kidnapping since no one was harmed, tied up or moved and no ranson was requested.
What i think is that it may not be regular or normal when a person walks into a fast food shop,pulls a gun and robs the cashier is caught and is charged with kidnapping. same is true with a regular bank robber. is he charged with kidnapping all the customers and bank employees in the bank during the robbery?
I remember that my alcohol abuse counselor told me that I was not assertive enough and went from passive to aggressive. She gave me an example, if someone is standing to close I should say, excuse me, you are invading my space. I burst out into laughter. She asked why I was laughing. I told her that the people I hung with would think I had gone crazy or that I had become a homosexual. I understand you point about nobody leave the room but that is from our experiences.
martin II
12-07-2008, 04:08 PM
That disconnection also has economic roots. I know that where I live there is an annual employment city tax for those that work within the city and those that live outside the city but work in the city pay borough tax. There is a section in the downtown in the city that I reside in where the homeless gather during the day. They are renovating a former department store to make it into condominiums/apartments, and there has been a concerted effort to rid the homeless of their gathering place. I have mixed feeling about this. I understand the need to make the renters feel safe but I do not see any concern or remedies suggested for the homeless. It seems to me that it is out of sight out of mind.
What you explained is happening in many places.
Take Atlanta for instance.up intil about 10 years ago Atlanta was home to five very large low income public housing projects all located very close to downtown. The city has demolished all of them and replaced tham with high end townhouses to accomodate the new well educated professional workers that need to be close to the downtown job market. No houseing has been made available for the displaced.
martin II
12-07-2008, 04:13 PM
I remember that my alcohol abuse counselor told me that I was not assertive enough and went from passive to aggressive. She gave me an example, if someone is standing to close I should say, excuse me, you are invading my space. I burst out into laughter. She asked why I was laughing. I told her that the people I hung with would think I had gone crazy or that I had become a homosexual. I understand you point about nobody leave the room but that is from our experiences.
Jurors are asked to bring their personal life experiences to the deliberations and use it in making a decision.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 04:21 PM
What you explained is happening in many places.
Take Atlanta for instance.up intil about 10 years ago Atlanta was home to five very large low income public housing projects all located very close to downtown. The city has demolished all of them and replaced tham with high end townhouses to accomodate the new well educated professional workers that need to be close to the downtown job market. No houseing has been made available for the displaced.
Yes, that is what I am trying to say. It is time that America makes a change for the better, imho.
William Anthony
12-07-2008, 04:26 PM
Jurors are asked to bring their personal life experiences to the deliberations and use it in making a decision.
That is what I am saying. It is the experiences that make the difference and I do believe that Blacks born and raised in Brentwood would have found Simpson guilty. They would not have had reasonable doubt that LE could have acted in that fashion. To you and I saying no one leaves the room is not that violent. Saying if you try to leave this room, I'll beat you to death or shoot the s*** out of you would signal the person meant business. However, to others, who have not had our experiences, the first statement was violent. As a matter of fact, we might tell them to get the h*** out of our way.
martin II
12-07-2008, 05:21 PM
That is what I am saying. It is the experiences that make the difference and I do believe that Blacks born and raised in Brentwood would have found Simpson guilty. They would not have had reasonable doubt that LE could have acted in that fashion. To you and I saying no one leaves the room is not that violent. Saying if you try to leave this room, I'll beat you to death or shoot the s*** out of you would signal the person meant business. However, to others, who have not had our experiences, the first statement was violent. As a matter of fact, we might tell them to get the h*** out of our way.
i agree
Some have had a big problem with oj yelling at the thieves looking to sell his goods as if his yelling was some kind of criminal behavior which made me wonder if some that complain about the yelling have never been exposed to people yelling when someone has made then angry. i am not sure if this is their true feeling or just more dislike for oj.
martin II
12-07-2008, 05:30 PM
Yes, that is what I am trying to say. It is time that America makes a change for the better, imho.
Hopefully with the new Democratic administration, there will be more concern
for housing for those that find themselves unable to particape in the economy
and less resources given to big business which is a hallmark of the administration that has wrecked the country.
martin II
12-07-2008, 07:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdZknvgrJws
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 12:33 AM
Well McClinton and Alexander could have said 'i don't care what oj asked me to do,bring guns, i am a adult and i am not going to bring guns.But they made this decision all on their own. I absolutely agree they all made their own choices. If you are insinuating some got off with immunity or lessers, that is what happens in conspiracy cases. It is typical, not unusual. But I was just commenting that there are some who seem to think because someone set him up and audiotapped that should give some kind of get out of jail free card and it does not work that way.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 12:37 AM
i agree
Some have had a big problem with oj yelling at the thieves looking to sell his goods as if his yelling was some kind of criminal behavior which made me wonder if some that complain about the yelling have never been exposed to people yelling when someone has made then angry. i am not sure if this is their true feeling or just more dislike for oj. It would not make a bit of difference if he whispered and begged kindly, there were guns folks, And you can't go into a room with guns and tell people they can't leave and take stuff, yours or not, it is just the law. I find it odd that so many are trying to make excuses for OJ they would not make for a private citizen. As a teenager I was a huge OJ fan, once he started beating the wife and then killed her, he reverted to a common thug for me. And if anyone says Aha you are biased. Yes I am , but it does not mean I do not understand the law. You can't take guns into a room like that, the yelling is beside the point.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 12:41 AM
Example:
"No body leaves the room" would not have been enough for me to vote guilty on Kidnapping since no one was harmed, tied up or moved and no ranson was requested.
What i think is that it may not be regular or normal when a person walks into a fast food shop,pulls a gun and robs the cashier is caught and is charged with kidnapping. same is true with a regular bank robber. is he charged with kidnapping all the customers and bank employees in the bank during the robbery? So uh Martin your theory is that those people remained in the room because what, because OJ was a great guy and they wanted to chat, because they were watching a tv program and did not want to miss the end or could it be that the guns had an effect on them remaining in the room. You completely have ignored the gun and show of force in your posts.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 02:36 AM
People that live in sterile white communite have little abusive contact with the coppers and find abuse stories in other communities minorities impossible to believe about THEIR coppers. So at first examination of a event they usually take the side of THEIR coppers.
If nicole and ron had been black there would not have been such a trial of the sentry and after he had been found not guilty, that would have been the end of the story and there would not have amerrican support for a ftred.
I am not even sure the state of CA would have spent all the money they spent trying to convict oj if the victims had been black. imo
BOB was lurking earlier. I think to insinuate if Nicole and Ron were black no one would have cared or it would not be a big deal is kind of racist. I am sorry but murder is murder and if you believe he did it, it would not matter to a lot of people what color the victims were. It always gets to me when white people are kind of lumped in as all noncaring to minorities as if we all think the same. That is racism in its own form. And to say CA would not even spent the money to try him is just bogus. Black victims of crimes have trials , are you not aware of this? I will say no more
I think to insinuate if Nicole and Ron were black no one would have cared or it would not be a big deal is kind of racist. I am sorry but murder is murder and if you believe he did it, it would not matter to a lot of people what color the victims were. It always gets to me when white people are kind of lumped in as all noncaring to minorities as if we all think the same. That is racism in its own form. And to say CA would not even spent the money to try him is just bogus. Black victims of crimes have trials , are you not aware of this? I will say no more
Thank you for an excellent post. :)
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 06:23 AM
It would not make a bit of difference if he whispered and begged kindly, there were guns folks, And you can't go into a room with guns and tell people they can't leave and take stuff, yours or not, it is just the law. I find it odd that so many are trying to make excuses for OJ they would not make for a private citizen. As a teenager I was a huge OJ fan, once he started beating the wife and then killed her, he reverted to a common thug for me. And if anyone says Aha you are biased. Yes I am , but it does not mean I do not understand the law. You can't take guns into a room like that, the yelling is beside the point.
That is the law in Nevada but not every place. There is a claim of right defense in some states, just not in Nevada. I know you understand that and that there is a claim of right defense to a charge of burglary in Nevada but not to robbery.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 06:35 AM
So uh Martin your theory is that those people remained in the room because what, because OJ was a great guy and they wanted to chat, because they were watching a tv program and did not want to miss the end or could it be that the guns had an effect on them remaining in the room. You completely have ignored the gun and show of force in your posts.
I think You misunderstood or either did not read all of the post on the subject. We were talking about the experiences of people from different communities and how they would have perceived the events. I am sure you realize that everyone that carries a gun is not ready to use it. Unfortunately, there were times in my life when guns were pulled on me and others. I can think of some who did not survive the ordeal. However, you learn to judge who is sincere. I was always afraid when LE pulled theirs. Granted that, if one reacts with force to the gun, it may go off. The point I am making is that If I was in the room, I would have had to judge for myself, looking into the eyes of those who held the guns, if they were intent on using them. Judging from, IIRC, Alexander's comment, which is all I can judge by, he may have used it, if they tried to walk out. However, even with precedent this does not amount to kidnapping according to some lawyers.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 06:38 AM
I think to insinuate if Nicole and Ron were black no one would have cared or it would not be a big deal is kind of racist. I am sorry but murder is murder and if you believe he did it, it would not matter to a lot of people what color the victims were. It always gets to me when white people are kind of lumped in as all noncaring to minorities as if we all think the same. That is racism in its own form. And to say CA would not even spent the money to try him is just bogus. Black victims of crimes have trials , are you not aware of this? I will say no more
I am happy to hear that you disagree with wind149's post. Unfortunately, if you look at America's history on sentencing based on the race of the victim, you will see that there is not an equality. The race of the victim, although never openly expressed, is expressed in the sentencing.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 06:52 AM
What you explained is happening in many places.
Take Atlanta for instance.up intil about 10 years ago Atlanta was home to five very large low income public housing projects all located very close to downtown. The city has demolished all of them and replaced tham with high end townhouses to accomodate the new well educated professional workers that need to be close to the downtown job market. No houseing has been made available for the displaced.
In the news, yesterday, was a report of a company closing its doors, Republican Door, and giving its employees 3 day notice. The employees refused to leave the plant. There is a law requiring the company to give 60 day notice before closing. President Elect spoke on the subject and he was on the employees side. I think the employees were republican and democrat of all races and various incomes, but they came together for a common purpose, which is what America needs to do so that all are protected, regardless of differences in experiences. There is no doubt that what Simpson did in Nevada was criminal under Nevada law. Despite our personal feelings about him, we should be asking whether or not his rights were violated, because tomorrow it may be ours.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 07:09 AM
So uh Martin your theory is that those people remained in the room because what, because OJ was a great guy and they wanted to chat, because they were watching a tv program and did not want to miss the end or could it be that the guns had an effect on them remaining in the room. You completely have ignored the gun and show of force in your posts.
Before anyone misunderstands my prior response to this post, I am not justifying the use of guns by an stretch of the imagination. What I was trying to say is that people, who choose a certain lifestyle, expect that guns will be pulled on them at some time. I would venture to say that this is not the first time that the bunch had had that experience. Seeing that they seem to indicate they never felt they were in danger of being shot, I suggest the only place where the brandishing of guns played a part was in the minds of those law abiding citizens that have never had that experience. Since criminal law is made to protect society, then there is ample reason to enforce the sentence. My point is trying to understand how those with different experiences could see the events somewhat differently.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 07:31 AM
Once upon a time in the early seventies, there was a man so full of bitterness and anger that he found his only solace in alcohol. On one of those frequent occasions, when he found himself in the downtown hotel, and one of the innkeepers tried to awaken him to move him to another room, because he was in with some very unsavory people, he cursed the innkeeper to the ends of the earth informing him that he knew all those people and they were not going to do him any harm. The next morning the innkeeper explained and the man felt ashamed. Some years later he came in contact with the innkeeper at that same hotel. The innkeeper asked him, if he had his high-blood pressure pills with him. The man looked at him strange, knowing that he did not have high blood pressure but said no. The innkeeper said call and arrange a ride and I'll have to let you go free of charge. As the man was riding away, his mother told him that the innkeeper had told her that her son was too nice a man to be where he was and to get help as he could relate. It was a commonality of experience, understanding and compassion that helped change the man's life and helped develop in him an appreciation for the rules that innkeepers live by and that some innkeepers do take those rules seriously, while knowing the quality of mercy. Much of the bitterness and anger started to dissipate.
martin II
12-08-2008, 07:54 AM
I think to insinuate if Nicole and Ron were black no one would have cared or it would not be a big deal is kind of racist. I am sorry but murder is murder and if you believe he did it, it would not matter to a lot of people what color the victims were. It always gets to me when white people are kind of lumped in as all noncaring to minorities as if we all think the same. That is racism in its own form. And to say CA would not even spent the money to try him is just bogus. Black victims of crimes have trials , are you not aware of this? I will say no more
MU8SHARK
A few weeks ago i posted a study by the Urban League and another huiman rights organization.
It reported:
"The harshest sentencing in american criminal courts occured when the victim
was white."
So you may want to research this isue before comming to the conclusion that my comments were racist.
I think your personal opinion does not jive with the facts.
Thanks.
martin II
12-08-2008, 08:13 AM
I think to insinuate if Nicole and Ron were black no one would have cared or it would not be a big deal is kind of racist. I am sorry but murder is murder and if you believe he did it, it would not matter to a lot of people what color the victims were. It always gets to me when white people are kind of lumped in as all noncaring to minorities as if we all think the same. That is racism in its own form. And to say CA would not even spent the money to try him is just bogus. Black victims of crimes have trials , are you not aware of this? I will say no more
Question;
Can you site any criminal murder trial where the victims were black and the media made it the trial of the centry where equal media , state and federal resources were allocated to get a conviction as was the case in the oj trial Where there was the public interest with hardened opinions about guilt.'
If you can please post it.
martin II
12-08-2008, 08:19 AM
I absolutely agree they all made their own choices. If you are insinuating some got off with immunity or lessers, that is what happens in conspiracy cases. It is typical, not unusual. But I was just commenting that there are some who seem to think because someone set him up and audiotapped that should give some kind of get out of jail free card and it does not work that way.
I am not saying that oj should get a get out of jail free card.I am saying that imo he was overcharged and the prosecution gave get out of jail cards to the others that gave conflicting testimony.Lies. If the jury found these testimonies unbelieveble why did the prosecution think there were so believable as to give those other people get out of jail free cards?
martin II
12-08-2008, 09:38 AM
In the news, yesterday, was a report of a company closing its doors, Republican Door, and giving its employees 3 day notice. The employees refused to leave the plant. There is a law requiring the company to give 60 day notice before closing. President Elect spoke on the subject and he was on the employees side. I think the employees were republican and democrat of all races and various incomes, but they came together for a common purpose, which is what America needs to do so that all are protected, regardless of differences in experiences. There is no doubt that what Simpson did in Nevada was criminal under Nevada law. Despite our personal feelings about him, we should be asking whether or not his rights were violated, because tomorrow it may be ours.
CHICAGO (AP) - The Rev. Jesse Jackson has begun meeting with the hundreds of workers occupying a Chicago factory that they say gave them just three days' notice before closing.
The workers say they won't leave the Republic Windows and Doors plant until they are assured that they'll receive their severance and vacation pay.
Jackson met with the workers Sunday morning. His Rainbow PUSH Coalition says he's trying to help get Republic's creditor, the Bank of America, to reinstate the company's line of credit and save around 300 jobs.
Union organizer Leah Fried says the window manufacturer can't pay its employees because the Bank of America won't let them.
The bank's said it isn't responsible for Republic's financial obligations to its employees.
Once upon a time in the early seventies, there was a man so full of bitterness and anger that he found his only solace in alcohol. On one of those frequent occasions, when he found himself in the downtown hotel, and one of the innkeepers tried to awaken him to move him to another room, because he was in with some very unsavory people, he cursed the innkeeper to the ends of the earth informing him that he knew all those people and they were not going to do him any harm. The next morning the innkeeper explained and the man felt ashamed. Some years later he came in contact with the innkeeper at that same hotel. The innkeeper asked him, if he had his high-blood pressure pills with him. The man looked at him strange, knowing that he did not have high blood pressure but said no. The innkeeper said call and arrange a ride and I'll have to let you go free of charge. As the man was riding away, his mother told him that the innkeeper had told her that her son was too nice a man to be where he was and to get help as he could relate. It was a commonality of experience, understanding and compassion that helped change the man's life and helped develop in him an appreciation for the rules that innkeepers live by and that some innkeepers do take those rules seriously, while knowing the quality of mercy. Much of the bitterness and anger started to dissipate.
The End.
martin II
12-08-2008, 10:18 AM
So uh Martin your theory is that those people remained in the room because what, because OJ was a great guy and they wanted to chat, because they were watching a tv program and did not want to miss the end or could it be that the guns had an effect on them remaining in the room. You completely have ignored the gun and show of force in your posts.
Nope
I if remember correctly on the tape i heard
oj and others came into the room
Oj started yelling you stole my stuff and nobody leaves the room.
Fumong or beadsley said no oj mike took it, Meaning his stuff.
Fumong said i will get mike on the phone
Oj says call him
there was other yelling by others to bag up the stuff etc. and Mcclinton and Alexander for some uncalled for reason pulled out the guns trying to be tough guys.
Riccio remained silent as he knew he was tapping.
Fumong said that is my phone etc
oj says give him his phong back.
everyone left.
It may not mean much to you but at no time did either victim say i want to leave or can i now leave.
It all seemed to be a confrontation over the goods, Fumong and beadsley realizing they had been caught with the stuff just decided to give it up without a fight or further argument.
martin II
12-08-2008, 10:22 AM
The End.
It sounds like the BEGINNING of undertanding to me.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 10:32 AM
The End.
I must agree with Martin. I was going to and will now say it was the start of the end of bitterness and anger. It was the beginning of the journey to everlasting love. :)
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 10:34 AM
CHICAGO (AP) - The Rev. Jesse Jackson has begun meeting with the hundreds of workers occupying a Chicago factory that they say gave them just three days' notice before closing.
The workers say they won't leave the Republic Windows and Doors plant until they are assured that they'll receive their severance and vacation pay.
Jackson met with the workers Sunday morning. His Rainbow PUSH Coalition says he's trying to help get Republic's creditor, the Bank of America, to reinstate the company's line of credit and save around 300 jobs.
Union organizer Leah Fried says the window manufacturer can't pay its employees because the Bank of America won't let them.
The bank's said it isn't responsible for Republic's financial obligations to its employees.
I am interested in finding out more about the Bank of America's involvement, whether it was to deny them a loan or some other action.
I must agree with Martin. I was going to and will now say it was the start of the end of bitterness and anger. It was the beginning of the journey to everlasting love. :)Because I am delightfully ignoring martin I have no idea what he said but I'm so happy about your journey to everlasting love. You are talking about yourself, correct?
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 10:43 AM
Because I am delightfully ignoring martin I have no idea what he said but I'm so happy about your journey to everlasting love. You are talking about yourself, correct?
I am not the only one at that location and there is always room for others. :)
I am not the only one at that location and there is always room for others. :)I'm glad you've arrived at your destination. :)
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 10:49 AM
I'm glad you've arrived at your destination. :)
Yes and trying to stay away from foreclosure. :)
martin II
12-08-2008, 10:54 AM
I am interested in finding out more about the Bank of America's involvement, whether it was to deny them a loan or some other action.
I think that any previous BA loan agreement with the window company would include union agreement and federal law. So if BA has frozen the loan disbursements to the company, that action may be in conflict with the law as far as advance layoff notice and the specific money to make payroll for the notice period.
All my opinion.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 10:57 AM
I think that any previous BA loan agreement with the window company would include union agreement and federal law. So if BA has frozen the loan disbursements to the company, that action may be in conflict with the law as far as advance layoff notice and the specific money to make payroll for the notice period.
All my opinion.
Should the event reach the court system, it would be an interesting exercise in vicarious liability, which I think the company is trying to put forth.
Yes and trying to stay away from foreclosure. :)
Good luck. :)
martin II
12-08-2008, 11:04 AM
William
If BA received any of the bank rescue funds given to banks by the feds, they may be accused on hoarding the money which the fed have warned all banks not to do.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 11:06 AM
Good luck. :)
It does become difficult at times but I will try to exercise caution with those who only look at things with one eye and those who trample asunder with bare feet. :)-just kidding, sort of.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 11:08 AM
William
If BA received any of the bank rescue funds given to banks by the feds, they may be accused on hoarding the money which the fed have warned all banks not to do.
Yes, I understand but have they violated any law by so doing.
martin II
12-08-2008, 11:09 AM
Should the event reach the court system, it would be an interesting exercise in vicarious liability, which I think the company is trying to put forth.
There is not much detail info available yet. But i am thinking that the company must have unfilled orders to their customers which they could turn into receivables if they had the payroll cash to complete these orders.
If the company has been meeting loan payments BA may have a problem reniging on the loan contract.
Lost of banks are holding back on agreements and using escape clauses to hold the cash.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 11:11 AM
There is not much detail info available yet. But i am thinking that the company must have unfilled orders to their customers which they could turn into receivables if they had the payroll cash to complete these orders.
If the company has been meeting loan payments BA may have a problem reniging on the loan contract.
Lost of banks are holding back on agreements and using escape clauses to hold the cash.
Yes, and it will be interesting to see what will happen.
martin II
12-08-2008, 11:15 AM
Yes, I understand but have they violated any law by so doing.
The rescue money was not a take the cash and do what you want with it.
It had specific bank requirements attatched as to what the money was to be used for.Such as make loans to qualified customers, businesses, so they can maintain employee levels for good business.
I don't think BA could make a loan agreement with the company and ignore the labor agreements that effect the companies ability to make repayments.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 11:17 AM
The rescue money was not a take the cash and do what you want with it.
It had specific bank requirements attatched as to what the money was to be used for.Such as make loans to qualified customers, businesses, so they can maintain employee levels for good business.
I don't think BA could make a loan agreement with the company and ignore the labor agreements that effect the companies ability to make repayments.
It was my understanding that there was very little oversight on the bailout money. I think we will have to see more.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 02:06 PM
I think You misunderstood or either did not read all of the post on the subject. We were talking about the experiences of people from different communities and how they would have perceived the events. I am sure you realize that everyone that carries a gun is not ready to use it. Unfortunately, there were times in my life when guns were pulled on me and others. I can think of some who did not survive the ordeal. However, you learn to judge who is sincere. I was always afraid when LE pulled theirs. Granted that, if one reacts with force to the gun, it may go off. The point I am making is that If I was in the room, I would have had to judge for myself, looking into the eyes of those who held the guns, if they were intent on using them. Judging from, IIRC, Alexander's comment, which is all I can judge by, he may have used it, if they tried to walk out. However, even with precedent this does not amount to kidnapping according to some lawyers. Dude this is just bizarre. Anyone in any community, black, white or green should have the right not to have a gun pulled on them and have stuff taken at gunpoint. Are we supposed to believe it is just best to try and evaluate if someone is going to use it or is sincere. Sounds like a way to lose your life all this guessing and wondering what neighborhood people are from! I guess I thought society was supposed to moving to all of us being treated with respect and dignity, not that one part of society based on their life experiences and race should try and deal with a gun toting fool on their own. They had every right to call the police and expect him to be charged. I am not sure about the kidnapping charge to tell you the truth, I am on the fence about that but under Nevada statutes,( which by the way he picked the worst state possible to act like a thug) the jury went by the book. It is not like in CA where celebrity impresses people.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 02:11 PM
Nope
I if remember correctly on the tape i heard
oj and others came into the room
Oj started yelling you stole my stuff and nobody leaves the room.
Fumong or beadsley said no oj mike took it, Meaning his stuff.
Fumong said i will get mike on the phone
Oj says call him
there was other yelling by others to bag up the stuff etc. and Mcclinton and Alexander for some uncalled for reason pulled out the guns trying to be tough guys.
Riccio remained silent as he knew he was tapping.
Fumong said that is my phone etc
oj says give him his phong back.
everyone left.
It may not mean much to you but at no time did either victim say i want to leave or can i now leave.
It all seemed to be a confrontation over the goods, Fumong and beadsley realizing they had been caught with the stuff just decided to give it up without a fight or further argument. If there had not been guns , there may have been no problem . You can't go into a room with guns period and tell people not to leave and hold them at gunpoint. Again guns, guns, guns got his ass in trouble. It does not matter who you are or where you are from you can't go in with guns blazing. It has been like for quite a while. Why don't you get this? You keep talking about the angry tone and how they kind of should of tried to figure out if he was sincere, not with guns.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 02:16 PM
I am not saying that oj should get a get out of jail free card.I am saying that imo he was overcharged and the prosecution gave get out of jail cards to the others that gave conflicting testimony.Lies. If the jury found these testimonies unbelieveble why did the prosecution think there were so believable as to give those other people get out of jail free cards? This is not unique to OJ's case , giving some immunity and lesser sentences. There were conspiracy charges and any time that happens and even when it does not, the DA usually tries to get defendants to roll over on each other. The first few to come forward usually get the best deal, it is usual standard operating procedure. Also because it was OJ's plan and OJ was the ringleader, they would naturally target him.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 02:20 PM
Question;
Can you site any criminal murder trial where the victims were black and the media made it the trial of the centry where equal media , state and federal resources were allocated to get a conviction as was the case in the oj trial Where there was the public interest with hardened opinions about guilt.'
If you can please post it. Celebrity trials are always more in the spotlight. The public interest came partly because of his celebrity. I guess I don't believe there was any big conspiracy to get him just because he was black. There were some pretty powerful circumstances, which I will not rehash that led people to believe he butchered two people. Guess what I think Phil Spector is guilty too and he got off because of his celebrity. I don't evaluate victims or defendants based on color. I was raised to look at people's character and OJ has none. Also there was huge public interest in the trial of the kidnapping and killing of the Lindbergh baby, it was the trial of its time, Bruno Hauptmann was white. The Manson trial was huge. Charlie Manson ... white. Sam Sheppard white. Every time period has its high profile trials.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 02:29 PM
MU8SHARK
A few weeks ago i posted a study by the Urban League and another huiman rights organization.
It reported:
"The harshest sentencing in american criminal courts occured when the victim
was white."
So you may want to research this isue before comming to the conclusion that my comments were racist.
I think your personal opinion does not jive with the facts.
Thanks.
Well your assertion that CA would not even charge OJ if he killed black victims and some of us white folks would not even care does not 'jive' with my personal beliefs. I still stand by my opinion your comments were somewhat narrow minded and I am being nice. Actually I was warned about popping over here. LOL. I can't actually speak for the Urban League or how cases are prosecuted. You made the comment people would not care if they were black victims, you said nothing about LE or prosecutors. Maybe they should of let it slide because he was OJ,eh? Come to think of it... they did
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 02:32 PM
Before anyone misunderstands my prior response to this post, I am not justifying the use of guns by an stretch of the imagination. What I was trying to say is that people, who choose a certain lifestyle, expect that guns will be pulled on them at some time. I would venture to say that this is not the first time that the bunch had had that experience. Seeing that they seem to indicate they never felt they were in danger of being shot, I suggest the only place where the brandishing of guns played a part was in the minds of those law abiding citizens that have never had that experience. Since criminal law is made to protect society, then there is ample reason to enforce the sentence. My point is trying to understand how those with different experiences could see the events somewhat differently. Unfortunately for OJ the jurors did not come at it from a sociological point of view, they just followed the law.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 02:57 PM
Dude this is just bizarre. Anyone in any community, black, white or green should have the right not to have a gun pulled on them and have stuff taken at gunpoint. Are we supposed to believe it is just best to try and evaluate if someone is going to use it or is sincere. Sounds like a way to lose your life all this guessing and wondering what neighborhood people are from! I guess I thought society was supposed to moving to all of us being treated with respect and dignity, not that one part of society based on their life experiences and race should try and deal with a gun toting fool on their own. They had every right to call the police and expect him to be charged. I am not sure about the kidnapping charge to tell you the truth, I am on the fence about that but under Nevada statutes,( which by the way he picked the worst state possible to act like a thug) the jury went by the book. It is not like in CA where celebrity impresses people.
I think you continue to misunderstand why there is a difference of opinion about some of the facts. You are wrong about what society was supposed to do. It was the law in many cases that made society give that dignity and respect. However, you misunderstood the import of my post and will see how you responded in the other.
martin II
12-08-2008, 02:59 PM
Well your assertion that CA would not even charge OJ if he killed black victims and some of us white folks would not even care does not 'jive' with my personal beliefs. I still stand by my opinion your comments were somewhat narrow minded and I am being nice. Actually I was warned about popping over here. LOL. I can't actually speak for the Urban League or how cases are prosecuted. You made the comment people would not care if they were black victims, you said nothing about LE or prosecutors. Maybe they should of let it slide because he was OJ,eh? Come to think of it... they did
if you care to you can read my post again before getting all bent out of shape.The report on criminal convictions were offered to educate you with some facts, if that is of no concern to you then so be it,and i will have less concern with what you don't know.
i made my comment based what i have seen backed by the Urban League report. it is ok if you base yours on your opinions.
imo
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 03:02 PM
Unfortunately for OJ the jurors did not come at it from a sociological point of view, they just followed the law.
Did you not read this?
"Since criminal law is made to protect society, then there is ample reason to enforce the sentence."
Perhaps, you need me to elaborate. The sentence was imposed after the verdict. I have maintained that the verdict was correct under Nevada law, the juy instructions and the evidence. Therefore, there is ample reason to enforce the sentence.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 03:11 PM
Well your assertion that CA would not even charge OJ if he killed black victims and some of us white folks would not even care does not 'jive' with my personal beliefs. I still stand by my opinion your comments were somewhat narrow minded and I am being nice. Actually I was warned about popping over here. LOL. I can't actually speak for the Urban League or how cases are prosecuted. You made the comment people would not care if they were black victims, you said nothing about LE or prosecutors. Maybe they should of let it slide because he was OJ,eh? Come to think of it... they did
I will try to be as polite as possible, since I want to encourage participation. Martin said, "some Whites". I am happy to hear that is not your personal belief. I am unhappy to hear that you have formed that belief without the benefit of research. It is commonly known in Black Communities, through observation and research, that a Black, who kills another Black, gets considerably less time than a Black, who kills a white. The fact that little concern was shown to this disparity or regard for it leads to the inevitable conclusion that it is of little significance. Just recently and thankfully, the Supreme Court addressed the difference in sentences imposed for the use of crack cocaine and cocaine. It was not until after crack became an epidemic to White communities did the Court address the issue, imho.
martin II
12-08-2008, 03:40 PM
Celebrity trials are always more in the spotlight. The public interest came partly because of his celebrity. I guess I don't believe there was any big conspiracy to get him just because he was black. There were some pretty powerful circumstances, which I will not rehash that led people to believe he butchered two people. Guess what I think Phil Spector is guilty too and he got off because of his celebrity. I don't evaluate victims or defendants based on color. I was raised to look at people's character and OJ has none. Also there was huge public interest in the trial of the kidnapping and killing of the Lindbergh baby, it was the trial of its time, Bruno Hauptmann was white. The Manson trial was huge. Charlie Manson ... white. Sam Sheppard white. Every time period has its high profile trials.
Your post supports the Urban Leagues report and my comments.All the victims you sopke of were white. The Lindbergh baby was taken away, Manson admitted he had Tate killed by his girls.
ALL OF YOUR VICTIMS WERE WHITE.
thanks.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 03:45 PM
Your post supports the Urban Leagues report and my comments.All the victims you sopke of were white. The Lindbergh baby was taken away, Manson admitted he had Tate killed by his girls.
ALL OF YOUR VICTIMS WERE WHITE.
thanks.
He forgot James Earl Ray or maybe he didn't. Let's not forget De La Beckwith.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 03:59 PM
I think to insinuate if Nicole and Ron were black no one would have cared or it would not be a big deal is kind of racist. I am sorry but murder is murder and if you believe he did it, it would not matter to a lot of people what color the victims were. It always gets to me when white people are kind of lumped in as all noncaring to minorities as if we all think the same. That is racism in its own form. And to say CA would not even spent the money to try him is just bogus. Black victims of crimes have trials , are you not aware of this? I will say no more
Here is some reading for your edification.
http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:s9eZh0S8v7wJ:www.law.uoregon.edu/org/olr/archives/81/81_Or_L_Rev_15.pdf+disparity+in+sentencing+on+Blac k+on+Black+killing+v.+Black+on+White&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us
martin II
12-08-2008, 04:03 PM
I will try to be as polite as possible, since I want to encourage participation. Martin said, "some Whites". I am happy to hear that is not your personal belief. I am unhappy to hear that you have formed that belief without the benefit of research. It is commonly known in Black Communities, through observation and research, that a Black, who kills another Black, gets considerably less time than a Black, who kills a white. The fact that little concern was shown to this disparity or regard for it leads to the inevitable conclusion that it is of little significance. Just recently and thankfully, the Supreme Court addressed the difference in sentences imposed for the use of crack cocaine and cocaine. It was not until after crack became an epidemic to White communities did the Court address the issue, imho.
Cocain has always been the preferance of white communities mainly because of cost. In most instasnces le does not allocate the drug manpower to surban
white communities as they do to black inner city communities which drives up the numbers in black communities while allowing the numbers in white surban communities to remain lower than what they are.
Why is that?
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 04:07 PM
Cocain has always been the preferance of white communities mainly because of cost. In most instasnces le does not allocate the drug manpower to surban
white communities as they do to black inner city communities which drives up the numbers in black communities while allowing the numbers in white surban communities to remain lower than what they are.
Why is that?
Economics, possibly? The more Blacks that are incarcerated the less that are in the job market. I don't want to start this debate but know when I post it it will. Maybe, they take care of their own. :) Sorry, I could not resist.
weezer
12-08-2008, 04:07 PM
Cocain has always been the preferance of white communities mainly because of cost. In most instasnces le does not allocate the drug manpower to surban
white communities as they do to black inner city communities which drives up the numbers in black communities while allowing the numbers in white surban communities to remain lower than what they are.
Why is that?
good grief martin, that post makes absolutely no sense.
weezer
12-08-2008, 04:08 PM
economics, possibly? The more blacks that are incarcerated the less that are in the job market. I don't want to start this debate but no when i post it it will. Maybe, they take care of their own. :)
lol --
martin II
12-08-2008, 04:55 PM
good grief martin, that post makes absolutely no sense.
If i had thought that you had the capicity to understand my post i would have made it dirrectly to you.
weezer
12-08-2008, 05:01 PM
If i had thought that you had the capicity to understand my post i would have made it dirrectly to you.
lol --
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 05:12 PM
"The study cites a 1987 Supreme Court case, McClesky v. Kemp, which found that race was a factor in three out of nine death penalty cases.
Robert Schuwerk, University of Houston Law professor and co-author of the "Handbook of Texas Lawyer and Judicial Ethics," said the study was categorized on nine levels. The three top-level cases are the most aggravated cases, followed by three middle levels and three lower levels.
Schuwerk said there was no significant difference on both the three highest- and lowest-level cases due to race.
"If you are on one of the three highest levels, it did not make a difference what the race was, the individual got the death penalty," Schuwerk said. "Race also did not matter in the three lower levels. The jury did not impose the death penalty in any of the lower cases."
Schuwerk said both the race of the victim and the race of the defendant played a major part in the middle category.
"This study showed this particular person [McClesky] was affected by racial bias," Schuwerk said. "But the Supreme Court did not believe it was sufficient claim to validate. The Supreme Court concluded race has to be a factor in each particular case."
martin II
12-08-2008, 05:22 PM
It was my understanding that there was very little oversight on the bailout money. I think we will have to see more.
The Gov today informed BA that the money they received was specifically to make bridge loans to companies like the window company and that he is calling on BA to make the loan.That is a lot of pressure on BA.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 05:29 PM
The Gov today informed BA that the money they received was specifically to make bridge loans to companies like the window company and that he is calling on BA to make the loan.That is a lot of pressure on BA.
Yes, and I anticipate a response somewhat along the lines of you loaned us the money on the condition that we would exercise sound business judgment. I don't think BA will take this to court due to America's troubling economy but I can see them making such a statement and then agreeing to loan the money.
martin II
12-08-2008, 05:59 PM
Yes, and I anticipate a response somewhat along the lines of you loaned us the money on the condition that we would exercise sound business judgment. I don't think BA will take this to court due to America's troubling economy but I can see them making such a statement and then agreeing to loan the money.
if the company has been making loan repayments on schedule BA must make the loan.
mu8shark
12-08-2008, 06:05 PM
I will try to be as polite as possible, since I want to encourage participation. Martin said, "some Whites". I am happy to hear that is not your personal belief. I am unhappy to hear that you have formed that belief without the benefit of research. It is commonly known in Black Communities, through observation and research, that a Black, who kills another Black, gets considerably less time than a Black, who kills a white. The fact that little concern was shown to this disparity or regard for it leads to the inevitable conclusion that it is of little significance. Just recently and thankfully, the Supreme Court addressed the difference in sentences imposed for the use of crack cocaine and cocaine. It was not until after crack became an epidemic to White communities did the Court address the issue, imho. You are missing my point entirely. I am aware of how sentencing goes and how it is doled out and it is often unfair.I am not uneducated. And I also not responsible for every criminal sentence in the US, but no matter, this is how reverse racism goes. If some white people are bigoted we are all made to feel guilty and or stupid. And it still does not make me want to go ahead and excuse anyone black or white for their illegal behavior. The law is not supposed to excuse a black celebrity because others were treated unfairly.However, I was responding to a post where it was stated 'people' would not care if OJ had killed black victims. I objected to this blanket statement as if all whites think like this. Anyways I am off to more tolerant and less bigoted pastures. I was warned as I said about this particular message board. still find it bizarre that there is this theory that really the jury should of excused him because in OJ world yelling and screaming and pointing guns is normal. It is just my opinion . He got his just desserts.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 07:29 PM
You are missing my point entirely. I am aware of how sentencing goes and how it is doled out and it is often unfair.I am not uneducated. And I also not responsible for every criminal sentence in the US, but no matter, this is how reverse racism goes. If some white people are bigoted we are all made to feel guilty and or stupid. And it still does not make me want to go ahead and excuse anyone black or white for their illegal behavior. The law is not supposed to excuse a black celebrity because others were treated unfairly.However, I was responding to a post where it was stated 'people' would not care if OJ had killed black victims. I objected to this blanket statement as if all whites think like this. Anyways I am off to more tolerant and less bigoted pastures. I was warned as I said about this particular message board. still find it bizarre that there is this theory that really the jury should of excused him because in OJ world yelling and screaming and pointing guns is normal. It is just my opinion . He got his just desserts.
I don't think Martin or I claimed that all Whites were racist or bigoted. I don't think you are uneducated. The fact is that the race of the victim and the defendant matters in the judicial system. Wind was the only poster, IIRC, who openly admitted that. No, the law should not excuse a Black celebrity because other were treated unfairly. The law should ensure that all have equal due process rights. There seem to be some that are upset that his due process rights were upheld in the murder trial and are against questioning the concept in the latest criminal trial. Martin made no blanket statement and, perhaps, you missed the qualifier. Perhaps, there is reason for Whites to feel ashamed. I don't know as I am not White. However, the stupidity (your words but I would use insensitive) occurs when Blacks are told to get over it and move on, when they try to explain their emotions and question why some remain silent on the issue. The point about the yelling and telling some one to remain in the room was in regard to how different life experiences cause people to see things differently. I am not saying that he is not guilty, nor that he did not deserve the sentence, only that there are things I question.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 07:30 PM
if the company has been making loan repayments on schedule BA must make the loan.
I am not certain about that but I do believe they will loan the money.
William Anthony
12-08-2008, 07:54 PM
You are missing my point entirely. I am aware of how sentencing goes and how it is doled out and it is often unfair.I am not uneducated. And I also not responsible for every criminal sentence in the US, but no matter, this is how reverse racism goes. If some white people are bigoted we are all made to feel guilty and or stupid. And it still does not make me want to go ahead and excuse anyone black or white for their illegal behavior. The law is not supposed to excuse a black celebrity because others were treated unfairly.However, I was responding to a post where it was stated 'people' would not care if OJ had killed black victims. I objected to this blanket statement as if all whites think like this. Anyways I am off to more tolerant and less bigoted pastures. I was warned as I said about this particular message board. still find it bizarre that there is this theory that really the jury should of excused him because in OJ world yelling and screaming and pointing guns is normal. It is just my opinion . He got his just desserts.
Old habits die hard. I will apologize, because, upon reflection, I saw an honesty in your post. Blacks do not want Whites to say that they are ashamed. I will speak for myself. I would like to hear is what happened to your people was wrong and the effects have been appalling to your culture and your community. Let's see if we can work together and correct the situation and ensure that this never happens again to any race. I hope you understand what I am trying to say. It is one thing to feel ashamed and quite another to attempt to correct those things that cause you to feel shame. Trust me I know. The hardest step of the 12 step program is to make amends.
martin II
12-08-2008, 08:11 PM
You are missing my point entirely. I am aware of how sentencing goes and how it is doled out and it is often unfair.I am not uneducated. And I also not responsible for every criminal sentence in the US, but no matter, this is how reverse racism goes. If some white people are bigoted we are all made to feel guilty and or stupid. And it still does not make me want to go ahead and excuse anyone black or white for their illegal behavior. The law is not supposed to excuse a black celebrity because others were treated unfairly.However, I was responding to a post where it was stated 'people' would not care if OJ had killed black victims. I objected to this blanket statement as if all whites think like this. Anyways I am off to more tolerant and less bigoted pastures. I was warned as I said about this particular message board. still find it bizarre that there is this theory that really the jury should of excused him because in OJ world yelling and screaming and pointing guns is normal. It is just my opinion . He got his just desserts.
All whites do not think the same and neither do all blacks. It was not my intentions to give you the impression that my statement about attention paid to white victims in cluded a biase by you or many other whites.
I was directing my comments to the criminal trials fact on the subject and see no reason for you to have any guilt feelings on the subject at all based on
bias expressed by some.
weezer
12-09-2008, 08:02 AM
snipped*snipped*I don't think Martin or I claimed that all Whites were racist or bigoted. . . .Martin made no blanket statement and, perhaps, you missed the qualifier. Perhaps, there is reason for Whites to feel ashamed. I don't know as I am not White. . .
:punch::no:
weezer
12-09-2008, 08:05 AM
You are missing my point entirely. I am aware of how sentencing goes and how it is doled out and it is often unfair.I am not uneducated. And I also not responsible for every criminal sentence in the US, but no matter, this is how reverse racism goes. If some white people are bigoted we are all made to feel guilty and or stupid. And it still does not make me want to go ahead and excuse anyone black or white for their illegal behavior. The law is not supposed to excuse a black celebrity because others were treated unfairly.However, I was responding to a post where it was stated 'people' would not care if OJ had killed black victims. I objected to this blanket statement as if all whites think like this. Anyways I am off to more tolerant and less bigoted pastures. I was warned as I said about this particular message board. still find it bizarre that there is this theory that really the jury should of excused him because in OJ world yelling and screaming and pointing guns is normal. It is just my opinion . He got his just desserts.
thank you for your time here and the excellent posts. you are right about this board -- unfortunately. . .
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 08:06 AM
snipped*snipped*
:punch::no:
I don't know why you of all people are throwing punches, when you speak so authoritatively on what Blacks should feel. At least I admit that I don't know what Whites should feel. ;):cool:
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 08:09 AM
thank you for your time here and the excellent posts. you are right about this board -- unfortunately. . .
There have been many excellent post but to those with which you disagree you choose to respond with vile, reprehensible, callous, rude and unthinking posts. I am happy to see that you are cordial to the ones you agree with. Perhaps, if you had responded to the others in the same way, there might be more participation on these threads. ;):cool:
weezer
12-09-2008, 08:10 AM
Old habits die hard. I will apologize, because, upon reflection, I saw an honesty in your post. Blacks do not want Whites to say that they are ashamed. I will speak for myself. I would like to hear is what happened to your people was wrong and the effects have been appalling to your culture and your community. Let's see if we can work together and correct the situation and ensure that this never happens again to any race. I hope you understand what I am trying to say. It is one thing to feel ashamed and quite another to attempt to correct those things that cause you to feel shame. Trust me I know. The hardest step of the 12 step program is to make amends.
your post reeks of self-pity as always.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 08:12 AM
your post reeks of self-pity as always.
Quite untrue. My post speaks of pity for those who can't make up their minds when allegedly their feelings on race changed. :);):cool:
I do thank you for posting my clarification and apology.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 08:16 AM
Martin,
Help me out here. I want to be accurate. It seems that a particular poster's feeling on race changed at least twice due to some things and I can't remember exactly when. I know you brought it to my attention once before. Well, don't worry. I guess I considered it unimportant, inconsistent and considered the source.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 08:18 AM
your post reeks of self-pity as always.
January 20th is fast approaching.
January 20th is fast approaching.
Why do you post this in such an ominous way? Do you know something the rest of us don't?
I don't think Martin or I claimed that all Whites were racist or bigoted. I don't think you are uneducated. The fact is that the race of the victim and the defendant matters in the judicial system. Wind was the only poster, IIRC, who openly admitted that. No, the law should not excuse a Black celebrity because other were treated unfairly. The law should ensure that all have equal due process rights. There seem to be some that are upset that his due process rights were upheld in the murder trial and are against questioning the concept in the latest criminal trial. Martin made no blanket statement and, perhaps, you missed the qualifier. Perhaps, there is reason for Whites to feel ashamed. I don't know as I am not White. However, the stupidity (your words but I would use insensitive) occurs when Blacks are told to get over it and move on, when they try to explain their emotions and question why some remain silent on the issue. The point about the yelling and telling some one to remain in the room was in regard to how different life experiences cause people to see things differently. I am not saying that he is not guilty, nor that he did not deserve the sentence, only that there are things I question.
Perhaps, there is reason for blacks to feel ashamed. I don't know as I am not black. :shrug:
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 08:59 AM
Why do you post this in such an ominous way? Do you know something the rest of us don't?
I don't think so. America has made a giant leap to cashing the check it wrote so long ago. I think that should be celebrated. I pity those who do not feel the same way.
I don't think so. America has made a giant leap to cashing the check it wrote so long ago. I think that should be celebrated. I pity those who do not feel the same way.I didn't vote to cash a check. Unfortunately, many people voted for Mr. Obama based on skin color alone. It is what it is.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 09:05 AM
Perhaps, there is reason for blacks to feel ashamed. I don't know as I am not black. :shrug:
I do agree. I can speak for myself. I am truly ashamed of the fact that so many of us brought into the propaganda that we were somehow lazy, inferior, ugly, shiftless and tried to assimilate, forgetting the core values of the Black community and did not instill within our children the tools to succeed, although I cannot say that my children are not successful as I was not one of those to buy into those concepts. I feel ashamed when I look at others and read and see the news of Black on Black crimes and murders, because I did not do enough to help others understand the effects of cultural alienation. In a way I did buy into it and did not assist my other fellow humans. That is my shame and that is what I am trying to change on this board. Thanks.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 09:07 AM
I didn't vote to cash a check. Unfortunately, many people voted for Mr. Obama based on skin color alone. It is what it is.
We are aware that you voted for McCain. The check I speak of is that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among them the right to be President. Why counteract tradition? For years, the only skin color you could vote for was White.
I do agree. I can speak for myself. I am truly ashamed of the fact that so many of us brought into the propaganda that we were somehow lazy, inferior, ugly, shiftless and tried to assimilate, forgetting the core values of the Black community and did not instill within our children the tools to succeed, although I cannot say that my children are not successful as I was not one of those to buy into those concepts. I feel ashamed when I look at others and read and see the news of Black on Black crimes and murders, because I did not do enough to help others understand the effects of cultural alienation. In a way I did buy into it and did not assist my other fellow humans. That is my shame and that is what I am trying to change on this board. Thanks.Good for you. It's what I call taking responsibility for your own life and I agree with it wholeheartedly.
We are aware that you voted for McCain. The check I speak of is that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among them the right to be President. Why counteract tradition? For years, the only skin color you could vote for was White.That's true but until this election no one was voted for based on skin color. I didn't say Mr. Obama didn't have the right to be president -- I just think it's unfortunate that some people voted for him because of skin color. I'm sure some people voted for Sen. McCain because of skin color also. So there you go.
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 09:49 AM
There have been many excellent post but to those with which you disagree you choose to respond with vile, reprehensible, callous, rude and unthinking posts. I am happy to see that you are cordial to the ones you agree with. Perhaps, if you had responded to the others in the same way, there might be more participation on these threads. ;):cool:
Really, you're going to put that on weezer? Let's not forget that I was right when I said it was you that drove Susie away-she came back on the board long enough to confirm that.
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 09:51 AM
Martin,
Help me out here. I want to be accurate. It seems that a particular poster's feeling on race changed at least twice due to some things and I can't remember exactly when. I know you brought it to my attention once before. Well, don't worry. I guess I considered it unimportant, inconsistent and considered the source.
If it's unimportant than why the he** are you bothering to bring it up?
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:04 AM
If it's unimportant than why the he** are you bothering to bring it up?
Let me try to address your above two posts in one. I will set the record straight. Susie claimed that my post was sarcastic and angry. I then told her it was not intended and apologized if she misunderstood. She then responded that she did not take my apology as sincere. That was her choice as it was her choice to leave. Fbgweezer, on the other hand, knowing that WNC's avatar was of particular significance as it was of her daughter who committed suicide, then placed several posts, including statistics on people who commit suicide in Florida in 2006, which was not relevant to anything concerning Simpson after WNC disagreed with some posts. WNC then commented on the post and left not the board but the community entirely. Fbgweezer, had never apologized to WNC, although I do believe she apologized privately to another poster whose loved one had recently committed suicide. she also made a post that indicated her post was meant for WNC. This is vile, reprehensible, callous and unthinking, imho.
I brought it up to explain to a poster that it was not self pity that I felt but pity for some who stupidly harbor archaic and stupid beliefs about race.
weezer
12-09-2008, 10:09 AM
Let me try to address your above two posts in one. I will set the record straight. Susie claimed that my post was sarcastic and angry. I then told her it was not intended and apologized if she misunderstood. She then responded that she did not take my apology as sincere. That was her choice as it was her choice to leave. Fbgweezer, on the other hand, knowing that WNC's avatar was of particular significance as it was of her daughter who committed suicide, then placed several posts, including statistics on people who commit suicide in Florida in 2006, which was not relevant to anything concerning Simpson after WNC disagreed with some posts. WNC then commented on the post and left not the board but the community entirely. Fbgweezer, had never apologized to WNC, although I do believe she apologized privately to another poster whose loved one had recently committed suicide. she also made a post that indicated her post was meant for WNC. This is vile, reprehensible, callous and unthinking, imho.
I brought it up to explain to a poster that it was not self pity that I felt but pity for some who stupidly harbor archaic and stupid beliefs about race.
and you sir, are a liar! :punch:
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:10 AM
That's true but until this election no one was voted for based on skin color. I didn't say Mr. Obama didn't have the right to be president -- I just think it's unfortunate that some people voted for him because of skin color. I'm sure some people voted for Sen. McCain because of skin color also. So there you go.
Until, Jesse Jackson or Ron Daniels ran, IIRC, the only way to vote was based on skin color and by that I mean that there was no choice.
Until, Jesse Jackson or Ron Daniels ran, IIRC, the only way to vote was based on skin color and by that I mean that there was no choice.
I don't consider skin color of a candidate a basis for choosing someone for a political position. Party affiliation, foreign policy, abortion, economics, track record etc., -- those are things on which to base a choice -- not skin color.
Let me try to address your above two posts in one. I will set the record straight. Susie claimed that my post was sarcastic and angry. I then told her it was not intended and apologized if she misunderstood. She then responded that she did not take my apology as sincere. That was her choice as it was her choice to leave. Fbgweezer, on the other hand, knowing that WNC's avatar was of particular significance as it was of her daughter who committed suicide, then placed several posts, including statistics on people who commit suicide in Florida in 2006, which was not relevant to anything concerning Simpson after WNC disagreed with some posts. WNC then commented on the post and left not the board but the community entirely. Fbgweezer, had never apologized to WNC, although I do believe she apologized privately to another poster whose loved one had recently committed suicide. she also made a post that indicated her post was meant for WNC. This is vile, reprehensible, callous and unthinking, imho.
I brought it up to explain to a poster that it was not self pity that I felt but pity for some who stupidly harbor archaic and stupid beliefs about race.
Do you feel better now, William? You've been wanting to throw the whole thing out on the board for quite some time.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:43 AM
I don't consider skin color of a candidate a basis for choosing someone for a political position. Party affiliation, foreign policy, abortion, economics, track record etc., -- those are things on which to base a choice -- not skin color.
Until recently the only ones running for President and speaking on those topics were White. Your choice of skin color was limited.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:44 AM
Do you feel better now, William? You've been wanting to throw the whole thing out on the board for quite some time.
It was placed on the board sometime ago.
Until recently the only ones running for President and speaking on those topics were White. Your choice of skin color was limited.Never mind. I see you don't get what I'm saying.
It was placed on the board sometime ago.
You've dredged it up and all it's doing is causing hard feelings. Between this and the constant Joseph Bell bashing it's getting hard to post.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:49 AM
You've dredged it up and all it's doing is causing hard feelings. Between this and the constant Joseph Bell bashing it's getting hard to post.
kaylieghjo made a post and I responded. As for what you don't know, his constant insults and adding no information and nothing of substance or value, imho, are hard for me to take. Perhaps, you should consider talking to him about that so that it will be easier for some to post.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:51 AM
Never mind. I see you don't get what I'm saying.
I think you understand what I am saying. :)
weezer
12-09-2008, 10:52 AM
kaylieghjo made a post and I responded. As for what you don't know, his constant insults and adding no information and nothing of substance or value, imho, are hard for me to take. Perhaps, you should consider talking to him about that so that it will be easier for some to post.
how about you allow other posters what you insist is due you -- their own opinion. :eek:
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:54 AM
how about you allow other posters what you insist is due you -- their own opinion. :eek:
I do not believe that the rules allow opinions to be rude, callous, insensitive, reprehensible, vile, racially insulting or name calling. Thanks.
kaylieghjo made a post and I responded. As for what you don't know, his constant insults and adding no information and nothing of substance value are hard for me to take. Perhaps, you should consider talking to him about that so that it will be easier for some to post.He started out here okay and then you and martin were hostile to him from the beginning. His posts are just as substantial as many of the off-topic posts that are posted here everyday such as Palin's clothing being discussed over and over. The insults aimed at him greatly outnumber the ones he posts. It's enough already.
I think you understand what I am saying. :)Not really. :)
weezer
12-09-2008, 10:57 AM
I do not believe that the rules allow opinions to be rude, callous, insensitive, reprehensible, vile, racially insulting or name calling. Thanks.
but that hasn't stopped you has it!
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:58 AM
He started out here okay and then you and martin were hostile to him from the beginning. His posts are just as substantial as many of the off-topic posts that are posted here everyday such as Palin's clothing being discussed over and over. The insults aimed at him greatly outnumber the ones he posts. It's enough already.
I believe your recitation of history is somewhat askew. I ignored him from the beginning but it was apparent he felt he could challenge me. He threw the first punch and, while I appreciate your wanting to defend him, I have not agreed that you should be the referee. I don't think he would appreciate being seen as having to hide behind a woman's skirt tails.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 10:59 AM
but that hasn't stopped you has it!
Have you forgotten that I reserved the right to respond in kind?
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:00 AM
Not really. :)
Ah come on now, yes, you do. :)
I believe your recitation of history is somewhat askew. I ignored him from the beginning but it was apparent he felt he could challenge me. He threw the first punch and, while I appreciate your wanting to defend him, I have not agreed that you should be the referee. I don't think he would appreciate being seen as having to hide behind a woman's skirt tails.
You have selective memory but I expected nothing less. I can recall several times when I defended you so you can get out from behind my skirt tails now.
Ah come on now, yes, you do. :)
The only thing I can get out of what you're saying is that you voted for Barack Obama because he's black. I really didn't want to believe that but if that's the case, okay. :)
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:22 AM
The only thing I can get out of what you're saying is that you voted for Barack Obama because he's black. I really didn't want to believe that but if that's the case, okay. :)
No, what I am saying is that for hundreds of years the only person that could be voted for for President was a White male. The skin color only mattered to Blacks, as regardless of who the White voted for they were voting for their own skin color. You know for a considerable amount of time that Blacks were not considered smart enough to be quaterbacks, let alone run a country.
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 11:27 AM
kaylieghjo made a post and I responded. As for what you don't know, his constant insults and adding no information and nothing of substance or value, imho, are hard for me to take. Perhaps, you should consider talking to him about that so that it will be easier for some to post.
And this is exactly how most people on this board feel about martin.
No, what I am saying is that for hundreds of years the only person that could be voted for for President was a White male. The skin color only mattered to Blacks, as regardless of who the White voted for they were voting for their own skin color. You know for a considerable amount of time that Blacks were not considered smart enough to be quaterbacks, let alone run a country.
I never thought of it as voting for someone of my own color and I didn't think that way this time either. I'm not going to address the rest of your post because I feel a debate on black/white history coming on and I'm not up for it today.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:30 AM
I never thought of it as voting for someone of my own color and I didn't think that way this time either. I'm not going to address the rest of your post because I feel a debate on black/white history coming on and I'm not up for it today.
No debate. You had no reason to consider it, whereas Blacks did. :)
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:31 AM
And this is exactly how most people on this board feel about martin.
Would you like for me to talk to Martin?
No debate. You had no reason to consider it, whereas Blacks did. :)I'll take your word for it. :)
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:33 AM
I'll take your word for it. :)
Wow, that has been a long time in the making. :)
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 11:34 AM
No, what I am saying is that for hundreds of years the only person that could be voted for for President was a White male. The skin color only mattered to Blacks, as regardless of who the White voted for they were voting for their own skin color. You know for a considerable amount of time that Blacks were not considered smart enough to be quaterbacks, let alone run a country.
So I was at work the day after the election and this guy who sits down the hall, a black man named Nick, starts talking to some of us about the election and says how excited he was to vote for a black man. Then he looks at me and says-in complete seriousness-"I don't even need to ask who you voted for cause I know it was McCain" and I said "why on earth would you assume that?" and he responds-again in all seriousness-"ain't no blonde haired blue eyed white woman gonna vote for a black man".
How freakin' offending is that! To presume that because of the color of my hair, eyes, my skin I somehow don't have it in me to just embrace people as people and vote for who I have faith in to do the job-which for the record is Obama who got my vote-and it just made my skin crawl.
My first response back to him was "yeah well, I voted for the white half of Obama". And then I lit into him.
Wow, that has been a long time in the making. :)It might be a once in a lifetime event. :)
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 11:37 AM
Would you like for me to talk to Martin?
Not at all because I don't think anyone or anything will change his bumbling ways. Just pointing out that the way you guys feel about Bell is the way most people feel about martin.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:40 AM
So I was at work the day after the election and this guy who sits down the hall, a black man named Nick, starts talking to some of us about the election and says how excited he was to vote for a black man. Then he looks at me and says-in complete seriousness-"I don't even need to ask who you voted for cause I know it was McCain" and I said "why on earth would you assume that?" and he responds-again in all seriousness-"ain't no blonde haired blue eyed white woman gonna vote for a black man".
How freakin' offending is that! To presume that because of the color of my hair, eyes, my skin I somehow don't have it in me to just embrace people as people and vote for who I have faith in to do the job-which for the record is Obama who got my vote-and it just made my skin crawl.
My first response back to him was "yeah well, I voted for the white half of Obama". And then I lit into him.
Good for you. Part of my sociology research paper deals with stereotypes and how they effect inequality. You think he is 50% White-I thought 40%-just kidding.:) I do think that you were right to stand up against the stereotype.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:41 AM
Not at all because I don't think anyone or anything will change his bumbling ways. Just pointing out that the way you guys feel about Bell is the way most people feel about martin.
I'll bet there are some that feel that way about me. :)
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:42 AM
It might be a once in a lifetime event. :)
Shall we make this day an annual celebration? :)
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 11:46 AM
I'll bet there are some that feel that way about me. :)
Undoubtedly:)
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:49 AM
Undoubtedly:)
Oh, if only they knew me-there would be no room for doubt. :) Seriously, they may be pleasantly surprised.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 11:52 AM
Undoubtedly:)
I told them before I was hard but fair. :)
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 12:24 PM
Good for you. Part of my sociology research paper deals with stereotypes and how they effect inequality. You think he is 50% White-I thought 40%-just kidding.:) I do think that you were right to stand up against the stereotype.
I know I was right-you should have seen the look on his face when I let him know that my kids are half black.
Kayleighjo
12-09-2008, 12:33 PM
I told them before I was hard but fair. :)
Too hard-turns people off-but so does my brash attitude.
William Anthony
12-09-2008, 01:14 PM
Too hard-turns people off-but so does my brash attitude.
Sometimes both are called for. :)
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 04:10 AM
You have selective memory but I expected nothing less. I can recall several times when I defended you so you can get out from behind my skirt tails now.
I missed this post. When did you defend me? I think you opposed my ban, IIRC, but you made up for that.:) I will remove myself at your request and leave that space for what you don't know, Joe and inform him that he could find no better place to seek protection. :)
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 04:17 AM
and you sir, are a liar! :punch:
I missed this one also. Those, who saw the posts, know who the liar is. I think this may be more vile than what you did originally. It's okay as I believe you feel ashamed or should, imho.
martin II
12-10-2008, 05:29 AM
I didn't vote to cash a check. Unfortunately, many people voted for Mr. Obama based on skin color alone. It is what it is.
As a midwestern labor leader told his members "Blacks have been voting for white candidates from the beginning.Now you don't want to vote for a black candidate"???
Whites have voted for whites but when blacks vote for a black candidate, something wrong???
BS
martin II
12-10-2008, 05:55 AM
I missed this post. When did you defend me? I think you opposed my ban, IIRC, but you made up for that.:) I will remove myself at your request and leave that space for what you don't know, Joe and inform him that he could find no better place to seek protection. :)
With the arrival of the bitter poster all civil discussion has gone into the tank.
Even the 'CIVIL' discussion between tv and william is gone.
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 06:59 AM
With the arrival of the bitter poster all civil discussion has gone into the tank.
Even the 'CIVIL' discussion between tv and william is gone.
I don't think they are gone yet and I will not let JB influence how I post to others-he does not have that much power. Tvdinner was just asking me to lighten up on him but he continues. I think she was telling me that she thought I should consider it enough and as usual she and I disagree but still civilly. :) I told the board that I admire her loyalty, even if I consider it faulty-I hear the fingers on the keyboard, telling me that my loyalty to you is faulty. :)
Kayleighjo
12-10-2008, 07:27 AM
I don't think they are gone yet and I will not let JB influence how I post to others-he does not have that much power. Tvdinner was just asking me to lighten up on him but he continues. I think she was telling me that she thought I should consider it enough and as usual she and I disagree but still civilly. :) I told the board that I admire her loyalty, even if I consider it faulty-I hear the fingers on the keyboard, telling me that my loyalty to you is faulty. :)
Oh come on William, did you really miss the fact that he was talking about me? :)
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 07:41 AM
Oh come on William, did you really miss the fact that he was talking about me? :)
I did not take it that way, since he said arrival and not return. I know of the feelings you and Martin have and I hope the two of you can get over them, because you are both my friends. You are both intelligent and offer substance to the board, imho.
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 07:53 AM
http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-general/20081209/OJ.Simpson/
"You've got to be kidding me!" Fromong exclaimed after Clark County District Judge (Judie-added) Jackie Glass sentenced McClinton to eight years' probation. She suspended a prison term of two to seven years."
martin II
12-10-2008, 07:58 AM
I did not take it that way, since he said arrival and not return. I know of the feelings you and Martin have and I hope the two of you can get over them, because you are both my friends. You are both intelligent and offer substance to the board, imho.
The bitter one arrived here and in her first post decided to call me a bunch of names. Which she has done in most of her post. Maby you need to create a pitty pot for her to sit on and maby some of her personal problems will cease to look like such a hugh train wreck which she brings here.imo
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 08:01 AM
Oh come on William, did you really miss the fact that he was talking about me? :)
I stand corrected.
Kayleighjo
12-10-2008, 08:58 AM
I stand corrected.
LOL! Told you so:)
Kayleighjo
12-10-2008, 09:00 AM
The bitter one arrived here and in her first post decided to call me a bunch of names. Which she has done in most of her post. Maby you need to create a pitty pot for her to sit on and maby some of her personal problems will cease to look like such a hugh train wreck which she brings here.imo
My my, you can't seem to get enough. Careful or it's gonna start to look like you reserve a whole ton of space in that small little brain of yours for thoughts about me. You ARE alot like O.J. though so maybe it's the blonde hair and white skin that keeps pulling you in.
martin II
12-10-2008, 09:23 AM
My my, you can't seem to get enough. Careful or it's gonna start to look like you reserve a whole ton of space in that small little brain of yours for thoughts about me. You ARE alot like O.J. though so maybe it's the blonde hair and white skin that keeps pulling you in.
I prefer chocolate colors.
"Once YOU went black you never went back"
martin II
12-10-2008, 09:26 AM
http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-general/20081209/OJ.Simpson/
"You've got to be kidding me!" Fromong exclaimed after Clark County District Judge (Judie-added) Jackie Glass sentenced McClinton to eight years' probation. She suspended a prison term of two to seven years."
Judge glass tossed Fumong out of the court room for that comment.She did not want to hear from a Victim raining on her parade.
Kayleighjo
12-10-2008, 09:27 AM
I prefer chocolate colors.
"Once YOU went black you never went back"
LOL, yes martin we are all really aware that you prefer chocolate colors and are racist against whites;)
martin II
12-10-2008, 09:35 AM
http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-general/20081209/OJ.Simpson/
"You've got to be kidding me!" Fromong exclaimed after Clark County District Judge (Judie-added) Jackie Glass sentenced McClinton to eight years' probation. She suspended a prison term of two to seven years."
Usually the judge ask for and allow victims to make a speech at sentencing giving their opinions on the sentence,However it seems that since these victims planned to speak on ojs behalf, the judge did not allow them to speak.
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 09:42 AM
Usually the judge ask for and allow victims to make a speech at sentencing giving their opinions on the sentence,However it seems that since these victims planned to speak on ojs behalf, the judge did not allow them to speak.
I don't know whether she prevented them or not. I can't remember.
weezer
12-10-2008, 09:47 AM
Usually the judge ask for and allow victims to make a speech at sentencing giving their opinions on the sentence,However it seems that since these victims planned to speak on ojs behalf, the judge did not allow them to speak.
I believe the victim(s) have to file a request to give an impact statement -- obviously fromong didn't do that.
martin II
12-10-2008, 11:15 AM
I don't know whether she prevented them or not. I can't remember.
After oj was sentenced it was reported that both would make a statement in favor of oj.
William Anthony
12-10-2008, 11:20 AM
After oj was sentenced it was reported that both would make a statement in favor of oj.
I know something was said about them during the sentencing hearing but do not recall what it was.
weezer
12-10-2008, 11:21 AM
Usually the judge ask for and allow victims to make a speech at sentencing giving their opinions on the sentence,However it seems that since these victims planned to speak on ojs behalf, the judge did not allow them to speak.
I found this:
". . .SENTENCING HEARING
At the sentencing, the judge considers information and recommendations in the pre-sentence report, testimony from witnesses (in some cases), arguments by the attorneys, and sentencing laws and guidelines. Based on this information, the judge pronounces a sentence.
The victim has the right to appear in court and may address the court at this time. A victim impact statement should be submitted before the sentencing so that the judge can consider it. . ." http://www.mynevadacounty.com/da/index.cfm?ccs=649
seems a little ambiguous to me as to the word 'should' but maybe each court has it's own rules?
I found this:
". . .SENTENCING HEARING
At the sentencing, the judge considers information and recommendations in the pre-sentence report, testimony from witnesses (in some cases), arguments by the attorneys, and sentencing laws and guidelines. Based on this information, the judge pronounces a sentence.
The victim has the right to appear in court and may address the court at this time. A victim impact statement should be submitted before the sentencing so that the judge can consider it. . ." http://www.mynevadacounty.com/da/index.cfm?ccs=649
seems a little ambiguous to me as to the word 'should' but maybe each court has it's own rules?I take it to mean if the victim wants the statement in it can't be a last minute thing...is that what you think it means?
weezer
12-10-2008, 11:45 AM
I take it to mean if the victim wants the statement in it can't be a last minute thing...is that what you think it means?
I would think that if a victim wants to speak at the sentencing, they would at least have to let someone within the system know before the sentencing.
I would think that if a victim wants to speak at the sentencing, they would at least have to let someone within the system know before the sentencing.That's what I would think or it would be too chaotic.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.