2006-11-19 12:36:14 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
This is a perfect example of why people have to be willing to accept the decision of the courts.
If we keep retrying someone in the media, the person will be on trial for the rest of their life.
I personally felt there was enough evidence to proceed with a trial but OJ was found NOT GUILTY by a duly established jury of his peers. The prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Many people think the police blew the case by presenting evidence that appeared planted or tampered with.
Lighten up, it could be you on trial some day. Do you think it is right for the media to keep throwing guilty charges at you after you were found NOT GUILTY?
Our court system occasionally allows a guilty person to avoid prosecution due to lack of totally convincing evidence. That is better than sending an innocent person to prison.
So to protect the innocent we sometimes have to put up with the occasional criminal getting off scott free.
If OJ was guilty, one day he will do something that will reveal his true character and he will get caught. If I were him I couldn't stay in the US. All the bad publicity would really get to me. Some would say he is in denial, others say that proves he is innocent. He stays here to face the music.
Why is it illegal to use truth serum during interrogation????
2006-11-19 14:01:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Hello:
Well it no longer matters if anyone thinks he is innocent or guilty, because he will be forever considered in the eyes of the law - innocent. He can never be tried for the murders again in criminal court.
He could go on national tv and admit to everything, and there is nothing the police could do.
I personally believe that this latest media ploy "if i had done it, this is how it would have happened" is disgusting and incredibly disrespectful to the people who lost familly members. It's all a money ploy. He was ordered to pay, I believe $35 million, to the family members and has yet to pay a cent. He probably has no money left, because he can't get a job due to his negative media image.
And no, I don't think he was innocent. Innocent people don't run away from the police and lead them on a huge car chase.
I hope this helps, and good luck.
2006-11-19 14:26:47 · answer #2 · answered by Jeanne 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hi, Science proved that OJ is guilty. DNA does not lie. The trial was a circus and jurists were biased in OJ's favor. That is the reason he was acquitted. Why must we have to endure anymore of OJ's narcissistic behavior? Has anyone put any thought into what this must be doing emotionally to Nicole and Ron's families, not to mention what it is doing to his children. I feel like OJ, besides killing Ron and Nicole, has raped the justice system and now he is raping the public. Shame on Fox TV for airing such a show. Shame on book publishers for publishing such trash, and shame on the American public for watching this show or buying this book. I can't believe how low some people will stoop for a dollar. Let's put OJ where he belongs, into obscurity, which for a narcissist is worse than prison, and ban the book and TV show. Kim Goldman(Ron's sister) has a website you can go to and sign a petition that will be given to officials at Fox and Harper-Collins Publishers to urge them to not air the show or sell the book. The website is: http://dontpayoj.com
2006-11-19 15:11:52 · answer #3 · answered by sunshinesue_1999 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I never believed he was innocent.
I am also convinced that someone tried to "frame a guilty man" by planting evidence. The jury obviously believed that too, and Johnny Cochran rightfully exploited that belief.
The prosecution never laid out a reasonable theory of the case. It was as if they believed that the blood evidence alone would make this a slam-dunk case, and how the crime happened didn't matter. However, when the jury threw out the blood evidence because they believed that at least some was planted by "persons unknown" (police), the case fell apart.
The prosecution would've done well to pretend that there was no blood evidence, and prosecuted it as a traditional case based on circumstances, motive, etc.
2006-11-19 12:48:51 · answer #4 · answered by geek49203 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
God knows! He may have gotten away with it and now trying to get rich off of his new book and he will make a lot of money because of of this book. He has been found not guilty by a jury of his peers so he can write this book and tell all. And there is not a thing the courts can do! He can't be tried again. But he will have to answer to a higher court.
2006-11-19 12:49:28 · answer #5 · answered by Pamela V 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The jury found him Not Guilty. And remember...if the glove don't fit, you must acquit. The prosecution screwed up this case. Do I think he's guilty? Let's just say, "I wouldn't like to be his next door neighbor!!!"
2006-11-19 13:39:19 · answer #6 · answered by towhead 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No; never thought he was innocent 2 begin with
and as a matter of fact i think he is an idiot for that book he is writting, the one about how" if he killed his wife, this is how he would do it. "
2006-11-19 12:40:04 · answer #7 · answered by Steph 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I must correct one of the responders. the court did not say he was innocent. he was pronounced "not guilty". I believe there is a difference.
2006-11-19 12:55:08 · answer #8 · answered by babydoll 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What difference does it make what I think?
The more the media and the general public keeps this going the more attention he gets.
Let it go.
2006-11-19 12:39:43 · answer #9 · answered by daljack -a girl 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I deem OJ Guilty!
2006-11-19 12:41:01 · answer #10 · answered by God 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋