Blood money row as OJ 'admits' killings

[Welshcookie 17]

So if you're charged with a crime you didn't commit and found innocent, it's

never really over for you, is it? All it takes is some "new evidence" and you

can be tried over and over again...

No, thanks. I'd rather have a few scumbags walk free.

If the evidence against you mounts up? if 'new evidence' is being found enabling you to be tried time and time again, there is something wrong anyway...IMO if you are truely innocent of a crime what more can be found against you? justice should be allowed to prevail regardless of time....just as convicted criminals get the chance to appeal their cases.....

[mawilson 2,133]

So if you're charged with a crime you didn't commit and found innocent, it's

never really over for you, is it? All it takes is some "new evidence" and you

can be tried over and over again...

No, thanks. I'd rather have a few scumbags walk free.

If the evidence against you mounts up? if 'new evidence' is being found enabling you to be tried time and time again, there is something wrong anyway...IMO if you are truely innocent of a crime what more can be found against you? justice should be allowed to prevail regardless of time....just as convicted criminals get the chance to appeal their cases.....

You don't get it. It's not about whether or not you're innocent, it's about being

powerless against the possible abuse of state power. You trust today's justice

system not to mount hostile speculative prosecutions against you based on

insubstantial evidence, but what makes you so sure they'll "play nice"?

[desert_fox 32]

I wonder how he is doing on his search for the real killers.

They may not be able to try him again for murder, but they sure could for perjury if he ever admitted that he did it.

[boboroad 0]

DOUBLE JEOPARDY - Being tried twice for the same offense; prohibited by the 5th Amendmentto the U.S. Constitution. '[T]he Double Jeopardy Clause protects against three distinct abuses: [1] a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal; [2] a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction; and [3] multiple punishments for the same offense.' U.S. v. Halper, 490 U.S. 435, 440 (1989).

[peejay 327]

So if you're charged with a crime you didn't commit and found innocent, it's

never really over for you, is it? All it takes is some "new evidence" and you

can be tried over and over again...

No, thanks. I'd rather have a few scumbags walk free.

If the evidence against you mounts up? if 'new evidence' is being found enabling you to be tried time and time again, there is something wrong anyway...IMO if you are truely innocent of a crime what more can be found against you? justice should be allowed to prevail regardless of time....just as convicted criminals get the chance to appeal their cases.....

OJ proves that the rich aren't like you and I...they can buy enough high dollar lawyers to ensure they don't have to pay for their crimes. Oh well! Nobody said life was fair.

I hope the Goldmans and the Browns hound and legally harass OJ until he dies of old age. It couldn't happen to a more deserving creep. Unfortunately he cannot be tried twice in criminal court...even if he confessed today. The civil courts are the only legal recourse.

[MichelleandCraig 1]

They have 'clauses' for almost anything though...there wouldn't be anything wrong with trying someone again if definitive evidence came out though...such as someone slipping up and admitting it, etc... Craig & I were talking about this earlier, so I looked it up and in the UK the only offences you can be tried twice for are the very serious ones. It's my *opinion* thats what we need to do here too...the little petty things? whatever...but, for something as serious as murder, rape, etc. there should be some way to retry if the new evidence is strong enough. M.

[mawilson 2,133]

They have 'clauses' for almost anything though...there wouldn't be anything wrong with trying someone again if definitive evidence came out though...such as someone slipping up and admitting it, etc...

Not in the United States they don't.

Craig & I were talking about this earlier, so I looked it up and in the UK the only offences you can be tried twice for are the very serious ones.

True, the original proposal was to relax the Double Jeopardy principle in murder cases only,

but eventually ended up including "serious" crimes as well (such as rape, manslaughter and

armed robbery.)

It's my *opinion* thats what we need to do here too...the little petty things? whatever...but, for something as serious as murder, rape, etc. there should be some way to retry if the new evidence is strong enough. M.

No, no and no. The state already has way too much power (and too little accountability),

I don't think we should give them more.

[Krikit 1,166]

He's already been tried for this alleged crime and our courts said he didn't do it. Seriously you people need to get over it. He's innocent. Technically speaking.

I believe he was found guilty in the civil proceedings. Hence, the $33.5m judgement against him.

[mybackpages 0]

If OJ admited to the murders, this does not stop him from being charged with a crime under double jeoprdy. He simply can not be charged for the same charge he was found not guilty of in the first trial. For example if he was charged with first degree murder, they still could charge him with manslaughter, assult or some other crime. This is why prosecutors are careful about the wording of the charges they do seek.

[I'm Gone 60]

I hope the Goldmans and the Browns hound and legally harass OJ until he dies of old age. It couldn't happen to a more deserving creep. Unfortunately he cannot be tried twice in criminal court...even if he confessed today. The civil courts are the only legal recourse.

Well as much as I believe OJ did it and got away with murder, he was tried and found not guilty (not the same as innocent) and I think a civil suit for something like this is BS. As much as they probably hated to have their daughter murdered, there is no monitary loss to them or on going expense to them. The suits are nothing but harrassment and I don't think that should be allowed.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

“If this is true, that is blood money and it’s evil and disgusting,” said Denise Brown, the sister of Simpson’s former wife who has become a prominent campaigner against domestic violence. “Any company that actually pays him for this is just as bad as he is.”

Funny. Didn't they sue OJ for his money? Does that not make them as evil as him, too?

[ursy 0]

Get off the OJ story

I don't think he did it

I think the case just shows just how bias Many Americans are.

If he was white , would America continue to question it or would they accept the verdict.

Mmmmmmmmm

Edited October 23, 2006 by ursy

[I'm Gone 60]

Get off the OJ story

I don't think he did it

I think the case just shows just how bias Many Americans are.

If he was white , would America continue to question it or would they accept the verdict.

Mmmmmmmmm

If he was white would he have got off? Other than Klaus Von Bulow I can't think of a white guy that murdered his wife and got off.

Get off the OJ story

I don't think he did it

I think the case just shows just how bias Many Americans are.

If he was white , would America continue to question it or would they accept the verdict.

Mmmmmmmmm

If he was white would he have got off? Other than Klaus Von Bulow I can't think of a white guy that murdered his wife and got off.

Whoops he got off for attempted murder, so I don't know of one.

[pedroh 21]

lol trying to incriminate the brotha' again.. he didn't do it..

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

He's already been tried for this alleged crime and our courts said he didn't do it. Seriously you people need to get over it. He's innocent. Technically speaking.

I believe he was found guilty in the civil proceedings. Hence, the $33.5m judgement against him.

A civil trial can not find him guilty of any crimes. Only a criminal trial can do that.

Bottom line, per our system of justice, he is innocent of the criminal charges. Let it go, white people. Let it go.