Emmitt Till was a 14 year old African American boy from Chicago and in 1955 he went down to Mississpi to stay with some family. He was killed brutally by a mob of whites who found out that he "whistled" at one of their wives at a neighborhood store.
His beating was SO severe that his face was unrecognizable - Moreover, he was most likely tortured before he was killed.
Here's the real point that I'm trying to make:
His killer ( the husband of the women Emmitt whistled at ) who was found NOT GUILTY by a all white jury gave a PAID interview on - NOW GET THIS - HOW HE DID IT.
How come no one talks about that? Now I'm not saying O.J. was innocent - but the same justice system found him to be so - and even though his book is out of very bad taste, he's not admitting anything. Why? Cause he was found NOT GUILTY! Emmitt Till's killer DID in fact admit it AND named others in the killing that weren't trialed.
He ( O.J.) will have to pay one way or another - but let's NOT FORGET the past.
2006-11-17 08:15:42 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
the US is not known for giving justice to blacks
2006-11-17 12:33:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I actually did hear of that, and think that the circumstances around the whole thing is disgusting and an abomination. The whole OJ thing is because he's "famous" (or was), and the whole media around the murder trial, the glove, the circumstances, the acquittal, then the wrongful death suit.... I think that the book is just a stunt for a washed-up person to still try to make his mark on the world any way possible, and at any cost. He was famous back in the days..... REALLY famous. And now that he's, again, washed up, he's doing what he's got to do so that he can be in the limelight.
When I was younger, I didn't think that he did it because I used to be all "black power" and crap when I was younger.... trying to hold the black man down.... the glove don't fit...... I was fourteen though when it happened. I have since grown up and am no longer naive to the whole thing..... to life in general, either. I think that OJ is basically admitting the whole thing, but he's using the term "hypothetically"
2006-11-17 08:35:08 · answer #2 · answered by Summer 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Um -- people do talk about Emmitt Till. His murder and the killers'' behavior sparked nationwide outrage, and his funeral was a major community and media event in Chicago. Ultimately, that's the reason you're raising his name now, as opposed to the thousands of other lynching victims of the Jim Crow era.
It's a bit of a stretch to conflate the Till case and O.J. case -- unfortunately, a garden-variety murder turned into a lurid media spectacle because there was a celebrity at the center of it. The Till case actually heightened awareness of the brutality that went along with the white supremacist rule of the South; the O.J. affair employed latter-day race baiting to take advantage of that tragic history with the sole aim of getting a rich man off the hook.
2006-11-17 08:28:40 · answer #3 · answered by dbrekkejr 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It has a lot to do with the fact that OJ was a famous athlete and actor (though a bad one at that). It does not mean that murder of Emmitt Till is any less heinous but society was very different back then. The reality of the age of CNN/Fox News is that there was 24 news coverage of OJ, his low speed police chase and his trial, it was in the front and center of the news for months. Yes, I agree Emmitt Till needs to be remembered but that happened a long time ago.
2006-11-17 08:25:52 · answer #4 · answered by i have no idea 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, what i think of approximately is the two lifeless human beings this guy killed and the State proved the killer became accountable in effortless terms to have the jury nullify the crime below the sorrowful false impression that springing a unfavorable killer became some variety of civil rights victory. Thats what i think of approximately.
2016-10-15 16:31:33 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would have to say, if some punk at the age of 14(and only someone begging to have their @ss kicked) would whistle at my wife, he WOULD get the beating of his life, be it 1955 or 2006.
2006-11-17 08:24:00 · answer #6 · answered by LovePinkPuffies 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
am sure the controvessy of the book is a marketing stunt
2006-11-17 08:18:16 · answer #7 · answered by The d 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Happened to long ago, and he wasn't famous
2006-11-17 08:17:08 · answer #8 · answered by Flower Girl 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
YOU'RE REALLY STRETCHING.....WHAT DOES ONE MURDERER HAVE TO DO WITH THE OTHER MURDERER?
2006-11-17 08:37:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋