PDA

View Full Version : OJ civil trial: 9 years later


Andrew..
Feb 11th, 2007, 03:38 AM
Nine years ago this month, OJ Simpson was found liable for the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Their families were awarded a total of $33.5 million, and to date, little of that has been paid. Adding insult to injury, Simpson was paid upfront for his now cancelled "If I Did It" book. He was reportedly paid something in the six figures, though the families of the victims have yet to see a dime of it.

Sad to see that nine years later, he's still gone unpunished. And nothing has changed.

tennislover
Feb 11th, 2007, 09:54 AM
:fiery:

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2007, 10:36 AM
An absolute disgrace.

drake3781
Feb 11th, 2007, 05:16 PM
He has not been imprisoned or forced to turn over much money, but

(a) everybody knows he is guilty, and

(b) he knows he is guilty.

Those two things together reduce the quality of his life a great deal.


Finally for those who believe there is any (reward or) punishment for our actions on earth after death, he will take that punishment as well.

Denise4925
Feb 11th, 2007, 05:45 PM
I thought twice about posting in this thread. But, I have to correct Drake in that everybody does not know he's guilty, nor does everybody think he's guilty. I can't speak for him, because I don't know what he knows.

The criminal court found him not guilty, because the prosecution could not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. In the civil trial, there was a preponderance of evidence level of proof. In other words, if you put the evidence of the plaintiff and the defendant on a scale, which evidence would tip the scale in their favor? There can be merely a slight difference in the weight of evidence.

There is also a difference in the type of evidence that is allowed in a criminal and civil trial. In a civil trial, a lot more prejudicial evidence is allowed to be presented than in a criminal trial. Prejudicial evidence can be evidence that is not a proven fact and can sway the jury in favor of whomever is presenting it, which would count in the weight of evidence put on the scale.

Since the civil trial was not televised, it would be difficult to determine his guilt or innocence based on the verdict. Especially since there was a lot of uproar from the criminal verdict from certain groups of people, and you can't tell me that that did not play a factor in the jury's decision in the civil trial.

To respond to the initial post, I say you can't squeeze blood from a turnip. If he doesn't have the money to pay the civil damages award, he can't pay it. If the plaintiffs believe that he has the money to pay the rest of the award their remedy would be to go back to court to enforce the original judgment, but apparently they are being advised by their attorneys that it would be futile, or maybe they just don't want to go through it. It's really up to them to seek remedy. It is unreasonable to think that OJ or anyone else for that matter would reduce themselves to poverty to pay a judgment they don't feel was right in the first place. :shrug:

Lord Nelson
Feb 11th, 2007, 08:11 PM
To respond to the initial post, I say you can't squeeze blood from a turnip. If he doesn't have the money to pay the civil damages award, he can't pay it. If the plaintiffs believe that he has the money to pay the rest of the award their remedy would be to go back to court to enforce the original judgment, but apparently they are being advised by their attorneys that it would be futile, or maybe they just don't want to go through it. It's really up to them to seek remedy. It is unreasonable to think that OJ or anyone else for that matter would reduce themselves to poverty to pay a judgment they don't feel was right in the first place. :shrug:

These civilans trials are a farce. Why do they exist if the verdict cannot be upholded. Granted OJ may not have the sum but the amount could always be reduced and if he cannot pay then his assets in California like house could have been seized. Now he was clever enough to sell his house in California and move to Florida. So California cannot do anything to him.

I actually don't know if OJ is innocent or guilty. I do see that Police and jusdicial system are determined to catch the higher fish and could use an means possible. Look at how many Police vans searched Michael Jackson's home despite the flimsy evidence. Were 10 vans needed to search his place? He is not a drug trafficker.

Since OJ trial is finished, OJ has not had any trouble with the law. Good for him. Atta boy OJ. :yeah:

Denise4925
Feb 11th, 2007, 10:17 PM
These civilans trials are a farce. Why do they exist if the verdict cannot be upholded. Granted OJ may not have the sum but the amount could always be reduced and if he canot pay then his assets in California like houese could have been seized. Now he was clever enough tos ell his house in California and move to florida. So California cannot do anything to him.

I actually don't know if OJ is innocent or guilty. I do see that Police and jusdicial system are determined to catch the higher fish and could use an means posisble. Look at how many Police vans searched Micheal Jackson's home despite the flimsy evidence. Were 10 vans needed to search his place? He is not a drug trafficker.

Since OJ trial is finished, OJ has not had any trouble with the law. Good for him. Atta boy OJ. :yeah:

Well, I believe they made him sell his home in Brentwood and they took a lot of his possessions, including his Heisman Trophy, but I really don't know what else. There was a trust fund for his children that they couldn't touch. So, that's it. :shrug:

meyerpl
Feb 11th, 2007, 10:39 PM
Actually, in the criminal trial the prosecution did prove O.J. Simpson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury just chose to rule otherwise. A word of advice if you're ever charged with a serious crime: if you're not guilty, opt for a trial by judge; if you're guilty, have a jury trial. The jury is always the wild card.

O.J. has recently said that he didn't actually write the confessional chapter in his recent, unpublished book. He went on to say he won't rest until he finds the person who did.

O.K.....Seriously, if two people hadn't been brutally murdered, the whole thing would be funny. In an interview O.J. did that was never broadcast to promote his book that was never published, when asked about details of the murder that aren't in the book, O.J. would sometimes answer, "I don't remember." Fuck!

O.J., you aren't a rocket scientist, but if you're going to maintain a facade of innocence, at least make something up! Don't say, "I don't remember"! You're supposed to be making the whole thing up, you knucklehead!!!

No, O.J. didn't kill his wife, he just beat the living shit out of her and threatened to kill her on a regular basis. Somebody else hacked her and another man to death in a crime of passion and spread O.J.'s DNA all over the crime scene. O.J. was simply riding around in the back of his Bronco with a gun to his head and 500 police following him around L.A. because he had a bunch of unpaid parking tickets.

dekker
Feb 11th, 2007, 10:56 PM
OJ is a scumbag.. plain and simple...

Let him rot in hell.

Steam
Feb 12th, 2007, 12:45 AM
To respond to the initial post, I say you can't squeeze blood from a turnip. If he doesn't have the money to pay the civil damages award, he can't pay it. If the plaintiffs believe that he has the money to pay the rest of the award their remedy would be to go back to court to enforce the original judgment, but apparently they are being advised by their attorneys that it would be futile, or maybe they just don't want to go through it. It's really up to them to seek remedy. It is unreasonable to think that OJ or anyone else for that matter would reduce themselves to poverty to pay a judgment they don't feel was right in the first place. :shrug:

No, you just can't squeeze blood from an NFL pension.

Throughout the initial trial, I chose to believe that OJ was innocent. No way could this man who I loved so much as Nordberg in the Naked Gun movies and on HBO in "1st and Ten" have done this. As time went on and I reviewed and reread everything did I finally realize that I was in fact, a fucking idiot. OJ did commit the murders, it was just that Dardin and Clark fucked up the case.

I love how OJ takes pride in fucking over Fred Goldman and the families. While I find Fred to be a little aggressive and annoying at times, I don't know how I would react if the man who killed my son and another person was allowed to roam around unharmed.

As far as OJ's hunt for the true killer goes, he is having even less luck than the LAPD in their search for Biggie Smalls' killer. Maybe one day OJ will share his notes and findings on the subject with someone so we can put this whole horrible ordeal behind us.