Community Chat

[Cakers3]

---

@bonnielu wrote:

I saw a quick statement about how the the families of the murdered victims will get millions from him.  The statement assumed he will try for some tv program or new kind of tv fame.  I doubt he will ever get out from under his financial burden. 

I totally don't understand how they won that one since he was not convicted of the murder he no doubt did. 

---

@bonnielu  Are you talking about the civil case?  Civil courts have far less requirements for proof of guilt-more of a preponderance of the evidence.  Plus evidence excluded in the criminal trial was allowed in the civil trial.  The number of jurors needed to find him guilty in the civil trial was only 9 out of 12.

Since his pension could not be touched in the civil case but there was a $$ award to the families, they might just yet receive something out of his other sources.  He has property income and royalties from his days in Hollywood although I believe one home went to foreclosure.

I just remember when he was going to civil court, carrying a box, and being asked what was in it he said "Money" and laughed.  Real piece of work, that one.

[sassenach1]

If he does get parole, I would not be surprised if he gets a reality TV show. Turns my stomach to think about it, but it would not surprise me.

[jackiejenny]

---

@goldensrbest wrote:

His life style has certainly gone downhill from what it once was.I can not but hope some day he gets what he really deserves,because as sure as the sun rises each day ,he killed two people,don't care what the jury decided!!!

---

I watched an interview from a female black juror on Simpson's murder trial. She opined that " she believed 90%" of the jury based their decision on PAY BACK....Rodney King.  

So, if she is correct, all of that money spent on that trial was a complete waste, not to mention the mountain of DNA evidence was ignored. 

I know jury trials are the American way and most attorneys say they work, but I am inclined to vehemently disagree. I think we would get more reasonable decisions if a judge decided the case. 

My personal feeling on the so called Dream Team was that they didn't "win" the case, but it was more the prosecution badly botched it. Many mistakes were made, but just to name one, it should have had a change of venue. I still can't believe Marcia Clark made such a huge error right off of the bat. 

[hckynut]

I am interested in anything OJ. I have the DVR set to record HLN and watching this proceeding. From things I have read and heard that OJ will probably be paroled, but it's just speculation. 

hckynut(john)

[newjersey]

@Teddie, starts at 12 noon eastern time on HLN.  

[RainCityWoman]

Despite how many may or may not feel about this man, you can't keep a man in prison indefinitely for the crime of which he WASN'T convicted. He's served his time for the other crime of which he was convicted, and that's why he's up for parole. 

[Teddie]

---

@newjersey wrote:

@Teddie, starts at 12 noon eastern time on HLN.  

---

Thank you, @newjersey.  I appreciate it.  I had to do a little searching around but figured it out. 

[Pearlee]

Every time these "pundit" commentators talk about O.J. now being 70 yrs old as a point in his favor for release (one even said,  seventy-year-olds are unlikely to commit crimes)

I think immediately how Ron and Nicole never got to be 70 yrs. old thanks to O.J.   I don't think either of them even made it to 40 yrs. old (and Ron was much younger than Nicole).  Being 70 yrs. old is not a great point to bring up in O.J.'s favor for release IMO.  I can just imagine what Fred  Goldman thinks when he hears that.

[WenGirl42]

His sentence was for 9-33 years, and he's served 9, so I would have no problem seeing him paroled for his convicted crime if that's the board's decision.  I wouldn't think he should get out early, but my understanding is that it's completely up to them at this point how many years past 9 he serves.  And they should make that decision the same way they always do, regardless of his celebrity or past.