Thursday, October 2, 2008 -- Verdict Watch

[naltia]

Doesn anyone know what Clarence "C.J." Stewart's occupation is? (The one he made his income from?) All I ever see written to describe him is a "former golfing buddy" of O.J. Simpson.

[RGG]

Doesn anyone know what Clarence "C.J." Stewart's occupation is? (The one he made his income from?) All I ever see written to describe him is a "former golfing buddy" of O.J. Simpson. Mortgage broker. He has been worried about being a defendant since this could cost him his license.

[warrkat]

Doctor this morning, so I'll probably miss the closings. Anybody have any ideas on how long the jury will take?

Last time he was on trial, I actually took a small tv to work with me so I could see the verdict.... VERY much against the rules of the place I worked at the time. It would have been worth getting fired, if I had seen the verdict I wanted to see.

[RGG]

Doctor this morning, so I'll probably miss the closings. Anybody have any ideas on how long the jury will take?

Last time he was on trial, I actually took a small tv to work with me so I could see the verdict.... VERY much against the rules of the place I worked at the time. It would have been worth getting fired, if I had seen the verdict I wanted to see.

I've not got the foggiest idea about the jury. They certainly have plenty to review and talk over. Not a job many folks would desire; and they have to do it for 2 people.

Someone on courttv mentioned that it's usually 1 hour for each day that the trial lasted. If that were true, it shouldn't take over 14-15 hrs.:shrug:

[AnnInOhio]

Doctor this morning, so I'll probably miss the closings. Anybody have any ideas on how long the jury will take?

Last time he was on trial, I actually took a small tv to work with me so I could see the verdict.... VERY much against the rules of the place I worked at the time. It would have been worth getting fired, if I had seen the verdict I wanted to see.

If I understood correctly, the jury doesn't have to be there til 10:15 today Las Vegas time. I think they're going to have jury instructions and THEN closing arguments, so hopefully you'll make it back in time.

[AnnInOhio]

What was the point of Stewart's cousin's testimony? To show Stewart maybe had some money (was a diamond level customer, paid his buffet bill, had an AmEx card)? I know everyone thinks she was a timeline witness to show Stewart wasn't in on any planning, but was there any evidence put on even saying Stewart was at the pool planning party? If there was, I missed it.

[AnnInOhio]

Which side prepared the transcript of that conversation. I was watching it this morning again on TruTV and the transcript shows OJ saying "yeah, it's the last time I bother, bother you uh, tonight. Uh, well I mean talk to you all for something and when you get into my room there's a pad in there."

Every time I've heard the tape I think at the bold part OJ is actually saying "we've talked to Yale for..." Has anybody else listened closely and heard it that way?

[JBL]

What was the point of Stewart's cousin's testimony? To show Stewart maybe had some money (was a diamond level customer, paid his buffet bill, had an AmEx card)? I know everyone thinks she was a timeline witness to show Stewart wasn't in on any planning, but was there any evidence put on even saying Stewart was at the pool planning party? If there was, I missed it.


IMO, I think since they thought they outta put a witness on - after all the other attorney's did. See we're attorney's too! BAH - waste of time

[JBL]

Which side prepared the transcript of that conversation. I was watching it this morning again on TruTV and the transcript shows OJ saying "yeah, it's the last time I bother, bother you uh, tonight. Uh, well I mean talk to you all for something and when you get into my room there's a pad in there."

Every time I've heard the tape I think at the bold part OJ is actually saying "we've talked to Yale for..." Has anybody else listened closely and heard it that way?

I'm lost on this part. It's my understanding Team OJ and Stewart fought to keep that transcript out. They won in part. Sooooo Grasso gets the idea to take the transcript and edit it to his version of events and what he gleened from it. Fair is Fair (I YI YI).

I don't have tru tv and I'm mixed up the dates that this occured on so I'm not sure what you were just watching and if that accounts for it.

[kennedy06]

After reading here last night about the mistrail fiasco, I went over to the legal edge and caught that minor fiasco in their clips! I felt sorry for the detective but I'll give it to J Glass she took care of that situation. This jury has to decide on how many counts and for 2 defendants. I don't envy them. JMO

[AnnInOhio]

I'm lost on this part. It's my understanding Team OJ and Stewart fought to keep that transcript out. They won in part. Sooooo Grasso gets the idea to take the transcript and edit it to his version of events and what he gleened from it. Fair is Fair (I YI YI).

I don't have tru tv and I'm mixed up the dates that this occured on so I'm not sure what you were just watching and if that accounts for it.

I listen online and record TruTV on my DVR synching the two so they run together (TruTV is a little ahead of the cnn online feed) so I can watch TruTV (w/TV sound muted) and listen to the feed. TruTV shows more shots of what's going on in the courtroom, and I can continue to listen to testimony when they cut to talking heads or for commercials. And of course I'm working and taking phone calls while I'm doing all my court watching. I've thought OJ was mentioning Yale each time I've heard that tape but hadn't looked closely at the transcript until this morning when they replayed it on TruTV.

Would make sense why the defense wouldn't want it clear that Yale knew OJ was talking with Beardsley from jail. Do you think the defense intentionally doctored the transcript?

[AnnInOhio]

After reading here last night about the mistrail fiasco, I went over to the legal edge and caught that minor fiasco in their clips! I felt sorry for the detective but I'll give it to J Glass she took care of that situation. This jury has to decide on how many counts and for 2 defendants. I don't envy them. JMO

I need to go check their video. It was after TruTV went off air and I realized after the fact that I wasn't recording the online feed. I didn't feel any sympathy for the detective; I think he intentionally added that unasked for blurb.

[AnnInOhio]

What was the point of Stewart's cousin's testimony? To show Stewart maybe had some money (was a diamond level customer, paid his buffet bill, had an AmEx card)? I know everyone thinks she was a timeline witness to show Stewart wasn't in on any planning, but was there any evidence put on even saying Stewart was at the pool planning party? If there was, I missed it.

I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Stewart is allegedly the voice on the pool party tapes talking about using his truck to haul the stuff.

[JBL]

I listen online and record TruTV on my DVR synching the two so they run together (TruTV is a little ahead of the cnn online feed) so I can watch TruTV (w/TV sound muted) and listen to the feed. TruTV shows more shots of what's going on in the courtroom, and I can continue to listen to testimony when they cut to talking heads or for commercials. And of course I'm working and taking phone calls while I'm doing all my court watching. I've thought OJ was mentioning Yale each time I've heard that tape but hadn't looked closely at the transcript until this morning when they replayed it on TruTV.

Would make sense why the defense wouldn't want it clear that Yale knew OJ was talking with Beardsley from jail. Do you think the defense intentionally doctored the transcript?

Intentionally doctored is such a harsh way to put it. LOL. I will concede that the "doctoring" has more to do with "muddying the waters" and they're pulling out their Synonyms and Antonyms Dictionary to throw them out there that it could be another word.

Det Caldwell and the Pros did to the best they could by ear and ALSO had the ability to call in the defendants for them to read and verify what they could on who was talking and was this what was said so they had a net.

Team OJ and Stewart only have the dictionary and their strategy.

[kellabeck]

Good morning!
What's the concensus on the strength of the prosecution's case?

[JBL]

Unless the legal definition of the charges changes - I believe the prosecution met there burden twice over.

The defendants that made a plea deal also believed there was enough evidence to convict them hence their pleas.

[RGG]

Good morning!
What's the concensus on the strength of the prosecution's case?
Personally, I'm holding out for the closing arguments to see what I hammer might have missed.

[AnnInOhio]

Personally, I'm holding out for the closing arguments to see what I hammer might have missed.

I'm holding out for the jury instructions to hear what the law is and how it is to be applied in Nevada.

[naltia]

Could someone tell me if I understand this correctly---C.J. Stewart was a golfing buddy of O.J.'s, but I believe it is described that they weren't necessarily catagorized as "friends".

If that is so, I don't really compute him spending a day of his time running the Scotto's around such as to the courthouse for the marriage license, the bakery, the flower shop, etch, AND throwing a $5-7,000. party for the Scotto's.

What's the rest of the story?

[JBL]

I need to go check their video. It was after TruTV went off air and I realized after the fact that I wasn't recording the online feed. I didn't feel any sympathy for the detective; I think he intentionally added that unasked for blurb.


IMO the good Detective thought he had a funny antedote of how he met up with Scotto in the hall. I have no sympathy for him either and although I don't think he did it on purpose to produce a mistrial he certainly didn't use usual professional approach.

He has been unshakeable up on the stand and has had that smirk on his face almost the entire time. He is very proud of he work he did type of smirk.

If you remember when it was pointed out that something was missing he turned extremely serious and that's what he came back to court with. He didn't have to do that but as I said he takes pride that he followed thru and presented all knowledge and evidence.

I think his patting himself on the back (which he did deserve) caused him to do something stupid.

[JBL]

Local time in Las Vegas, NV, United States is 8:01 AM, Thursday, Oct 02, 2008

2 1/2 hours to go!

[AnnInOhio]

IMO the good Detective thought he had a funny antedote of how he met up with Scotto in the hall. I have no sympathy for him either and although I don't think he did it on purpose to produce a mistrial he certainly didn't use usual professional approach.

He has been unshakeable up on the stand and has had that smirk on his face almost the entire time. He is very proud of he work he did type of smirk.

If you remember when it was pointed out that something was missing he turned extremely serious and that's what he came back to court with. He didn't have to do that but as I said he takes pride that he followed thru and presented all knowledge and evidence.

I think his patting himself on the back (which he did deserve) caused him to do something stupid.

I can't believe I'm going to say this to you, but kind of like Mark Fuhrman got a little defensive and let his ego get him in trouble in the first trial, eh?

[JONOTWO]

Please recall he was back to answer a juror's question about cell phone calls that he had not documented in a former time as a witness.

He also was replying to the prosecutor's question about why he had not re-interviewed Scotto when the remark in question was made.

So, while his remark may have been better left unsaid, all the conspiracy theories and jibes at his ''smirk'' are, to me, either made as bait, or from bias and/or ignorance.

[AnnInOhio]

Please recall he was back to answer a juror's question about cell phone calls that he had not documented in a former time as a witness.

He also was replying to the prosecutor's question about why he had not re-interviewed Scotto when the remark in question was made.

So, while his remark may have been better left unsaid, all the conspiracy theories and jibes at his ''smirk'' are, to me, either made as bait, or from bias and/or ignorance.

The prejudicial "addition" was not responsive to the question he was asked. He's a professional and knowing how to testify in court is part of his training. He knew, or certainly should have known, better.

[RayStar]

I have thought the judge was too quick to tell the lawyers no more questions. I think she cuts up both sides. Maybe it's just this case.

[RGG]

I heard Jamie say on "in Session" that Judge Glass "sometimes rules for prosecution and sometimes rules for us." Of course her bias has always been obvious.

I don't know - isn't she supposed to be objective?imo

Personally, I don't put much faith in Jamie. She gets to have her own view, as I have mine.

As most everyone here did, I watched this case, and saw Judge Glass overrule against the prosecution as well. When Galanter continually jumps up to object, which is certainly his duty to his client, you'll hear the Judge admonish him as well, it's just that Galanter doesn't
abide the decision as well as the prosecution seems to.

[AnnInOhio]

I heard Jamie say on "in Session" that Judge Glass "sometimes rules for prosecution and sometimes rules for us." Of course her bias has always been obvious.

I don't know - isn't she supposed to be objective?

imo

Well, her show is called "Best Defense", not "Most Objective" or "Most Factual"

[smhustoiii]

I also believe OJ is guilty of the charges! He believes he is above the law and can get by with anything! I hope this time he is found guilty and serves some significant time. I will be very unhappy if he walks again on the charges!!!

[Details]

Jaime is a former defense attorney, IIRC, and her show is about presenting the defense - not unbiased. It's a commentator show, not truely an anchor. Of course, she takes "bias" to a whole new level, IMO.

The only reason We are here is because it's OJ - with anyone else, this is an ordinary case. The plea deals are ordinary too, as articles have shown, Vegas has quite a prison overcrowding problem, and they try hard to work with lesser punishments for pleas. Getting the cronies to plead to get the mastermind is also a common thing. And from there - it's all about who chooses to plead or not.

The only thing unusual is how much evidence they have, how many tapes.

[RGG]

Well, her show is called "Best Defense", not "Most Objective" or "Most Factual"
TY for the reminder Ann - It's similar to being "fair and balanced", and both sides need equal footing!

[RGG]

The only reason We are here is because it's OJ - with anyone else, this is an ordinary case. The plea deals are ordinary too, as articles have shown, Vegas has quite a prison overcrowding problem, and they try hard to work with lesser punishments for pleas. Getting the cronies to plead to get the mastermind is also a common thing. And from there - it's all about who chooses to plead or not.

The only thing unusual is how much evidence they have, how many tapes.
That's not the reason I'm here, it's the only case they're covering now, and that I am able to view.

I never watched any of OJ's other trials, I worked and had too many irons in the fire back then.

If the Brian Nichols live-cam was better on the internet, I'd probably watch it, instead, since it is more of a local trial.

[AnnInOhio]

Good morning, noticed a lot of arguing on the board last night regarding those who think OJ is guilty until proven innocent, innocent until proven guilty, etc. Let's not kid anyone, the only reason we are here is that it is OJ on trial, the only reason this is being televised and streamed is that it involves OJ. Anyone else that did this would have probably pleaded to lesser charges, and the only reason that his compatriots have been able to plead to reduced charges, is that this involves OJ.
And probably the only reason he didn't plead to something less is that it is OJ.

It doesn't put our constitution in jeopardy, imo.

From watching and listening to all the testimony I feel he is guilty. So were all his friends and they are very lucky LE let them plead. Especially Riccio, he is just about the luckiest guy in this whole mess.

People can't help but feel that OJ is getting his just desserts, it's human nature after the murder trial fiasco.
Sorry, just had to vent, IMO only.

Shoot, I'm always glad to see TruTV cover ANY live trial. They are going on all over this country, so it irritates me when they constantly replay already concluded trials and "pretend" they're current. Hello - I always check the end of a book to see how it ends and I check to see how their non-live trials end long before they get there! This trial, above and beyond OJ, involves a lot of interesting legal issues. I agree that its televised and nationally covered because its OJ. Celebrity in America. It is what it is. But I disagree that the only reason OJ's compatriots were allowed to plead was because of OJ. In most cases, given the evidence available, it would have been plead out by ALL parties instead of going to trial if it wasn't OJ. It would be interesting to see a live trial where the parties are all represented by public defenders - now THAT would be an eye-opener for most TV court watchers!

[kennedy06]

Could someone tell me if I understand this correctly---C.J. Stewart was a golfing buddy of O.J.'s, but I believe it is described that they weren't necessarily catagorized as "friends".

If that is so, I don't really compute him spending a day of his time running the Scotto's around such as to the courthouse for the marriage license, the bakery, the flower shop, etch, AND throwing a $5-7,000. party for the Scotto's.

What's the rest of the story?

I don't know why but I just think there is more to the Scttos then we are learning. An awful lot of attention for a guy that owns an auto repair shop in another state. I'm not saying they aren't nice people or didn't deserve all this attention but.......! :shrug:


JMO

[AnnInOhio]

I don't know why but I just think there is more to the Scttos then we are learning. An awful lot of attention for a guy that owns an auto repair shop in another state. I'm not saying they aren't nice people or didn't deserve all this attention but.......! :shrug:


JMO

I wonder what the anticipated premise was going to be in the book Scotto was trying to shop about OJ!

[JBL]

IIRC it was supposed to be along the lines of: OJ and Me Good Guy - White cowboy hat - Goodtime Charlie - (there's that Charlie name again LOL). All Amercian fun guy.

Maybe he couldn't find enough get togethers that were legal to fill a book.

:shrug:

[JBL]

Could someone tell me if I understand this correctly---C.J. Stewart was a golfing buddy of O.J.'s, but I believe it is described that they weren't necessarily catagorized as "friends".

If that is so, I don't really compute him spending a day of his time running the Scotto's around such as to the courthouse for the marriage license, the bakery, the flower shop, etch, AND throwing a $5-7,000. party for the Scotto's.

What's the rest of the story?


It was my understanding that OJ called CJ because CJ lived in and knew Vegas (geographically). Arnelle Simpson was he wedding planner and plan she did with the exception that she didn't know Vegas and from ordering flowers to the bakery along with the court house for the licenses, everything was located on the opposite sides of town so CJ was asked to help get them there.

I bought that until the party that CJ threw. That was not a favor to someone that's something done for a personal friend. So I'll have to agree that there's something more there left out.

[AnnInOhio]

IIRC it was supposed to be along the lines of: OJ and Me Good Guy - White cowboy hat - Goodtime Charlie - (there's that Charlie name again LOL). All Amercian fun guy.

Maybe he couldn't find enough get togethers that were legal to fill a book.

:shrug:

Gee, couldn't find an editor who thought that would sell? You sure the working title wasn't "The Wiseguy and the Not-So-Wise Guy"?? "Dumb & Dumber" was already taken.

[Fallen Angel]

shouldn't they start soon?

[JBL]

Gee, couldn't find an editor who thought that would sell? You sure the working title wasn't "The Wiseguy and the Not-So-Wise Guy"?? "Dumb & Dumber" was already taken.

HA! You know those "Where are they now" exposes' . Nothing much to tell that hasn't been made available via court house public records.

He hasn't come to far has he.

[JBL]

shouldn't they start soon?

http://www.ktla.com/livevideo_channelb

Feeds up with the standby video going.

Sorry don't have the legaledge one, KTLA has been good to me although I know others have had problems with it.

[Kara]

It was my understanding that OJ called CJ because CJ lived in and knew Vegas (geographically). Arnelle Simpson was he wedding planner and plan she did with the exception that she didn't know Vegas and from ordering flowers to the bakery along with the court house for the licenses, everything was located on the opposite sides of town so CJ was asked to help get them there.

I bought that until the party that CJ threw. That was not a favor to someone that's something done for a personal friend. So I'll have to agree that there's something more there left out.
I'm pretty sure that CJ and OJ were simply acquaintances who occasionally golfed together. Scotto and CJ were the friends, not OJ/CJ.

[RGG]

I'm pretty sure that CJ and OJ were simply acquaintances who occasionally golfed together. Scotto and CJ were the friends, not OJ/CJ.

Clarence Stewart, 53: “C.J.”, of North Las Vegas, also golfed with Simpson when he visited.
Stewart’s lawyer, Robert Lucherini, described him as a mortgage broker, a family friend and a sort of “concierge” for Simpson on his Las Vegas trips. He has no criminal record.

No mention of Scotto's relationship, but that doesn't mean much, especially since CJ paid out big bucks for the party - just a lack of who's who.:)

[JBL]

I'm pretty sure that CJ and OJ were simply acquaintances who occasionally golfed together. Scotto and CJ were the friends, not OJ/CJ.

Well that would make more sense as far as the party goes but then that jail house phone call Simpson made to Arnelle - OJ states that maybe they can stay at CJ's (as he'll be gone turning himself in :eek: - is that weird or what. ) Some golf buddies.

[Details]

...But I disagree that the only reason OJ's compatriots were allowed to plead was because of OJ. In most cases, given the evidence available, it would have been plead out by ALL parties instead of going to trial if it wasn't OJ. It would be interesting to see a live trial where the parties are all represented by public defenders - now THAT would be an eye-opener for most TV court watchers!Yep. We had one trial recently, where it wasn't big names, and somehow got televised - it was funny how the attorneys - prosecutor and defense - were so much faster, less nit-picky, such a big difference.

And, of course, normally an extremely high percentage of people plead out. Because a plea deal makes all the possible charges go away, and drops the list down to just what is likely reasonable for the real crime.

[kate482000]

They are really running late today. . Wonder what the hold-up is?

[cherylt]

They are really running late today. . Wonder what the hold-up is?

I was just about to ask the same thing. They are almost 1 HOUR late....

TrvTV might be off the air by the time it starts..

[Details]

They are really running late today. . Wonder what the hold-up is?I'm thinking huge battles over jury instructions.

Many cases are won or lost over some faulty jury instruction. One little word that some stubborn or rational juror can read, lock up on, and it'll make all the difference.

[RGG]

Why didn't they ever get LD on the witness stand to hear what transpired between her, OJ and Beardsley?

[kate482000]

Why didn't they ever get LD on the witness stand to hear what transpired between her, OJ and Beardsley?

Good question..could she cite some kind of journalist confidentialty?

[RGG]

Good question..could she cite some kind of journalist confidentialty? You nailed it Kate - she probably wouldn't wish to do that. No, she would be citing too many confidential bits of information. Thanks lady.:)

[RGG]

Per legaledge:
"JUDGE JACKIE GLASSS, THE PROSECUTION AND THE DEFENSE ARE STILL WORKING TO FINALIZE JURY INSTRUCTIONS OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY AND OFF THE RECORD. TLE WILL GO LIVE AS SOON AS COURT RECONVENES ON THE RECORD."

[tashi]

KTLA live now

[kate482000]

You nailed it Kate - she probably wouldn't wish to do that. No, she would be citing too many confidential bits of information. Thanks lady.:)

YW just came on....I just heard the judge talking....

[RGG]

There will probably be a minimum of 6 objections from Galanter during the prosecutions delivery.:)

[RGG]

Judge Glass must have a bang-up team working in the background to clear up all the obstacles for the multi-attorneys. I'm impressed!

[Details]

As I understand it - the little bit that just happened was getting all the objections formally on the record, for the parts of the jury instructions where they couldn't agree. That's why it went so fast - they've already argued these things off the record, come to many agreements, debated the case law - so that last little segment was just making a formal record of the remaining objections so they can be used for appeals.


Half the case seems to be about setting up for the appeal - not just here, in many cases.

[Fallen Angel]

since they are starting so late will the jurors still get a lunch?

[RGG]

TYVM Details and Flere

Now, we're ready to goooooooooooo....nearly - there.

[RGG]

since they are starting so late will the jurors still get a lunch?

JG just said they'd get lunch - about 20 mins ago.

Probably after the jury instructions.

[janigirl]

Did I miss closings? I thought the jury was charged after closing:shrug:

[Details]

Nope. After this is lunch, then closings

[RGG]

MHO - counts 9 and 10 will be acquitted.


oh dear - maybe I will backtrack on my above statement. GULP!

[janigirl]

oic ty:seeya:

[Fallen Angel]

JG just said they'd get lunch - about 20 mins ago.

Probably after the jury instructions.

thank you i missed that part.

[warrkat]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:

[tashi]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:


Fantastic news warrcat!

You haven't missed anything...just reading jury instructions now

Lunch is next and then closing arguments...

[5swab5]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:

GREAT NEWS! :beer:

[Fallen Angel]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:

oh thank God i'm so glad to hear this wonderful news. :rose:

[kennedy06]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:


Thats wonderful news:)

I'm splitting 3 screens right now. I like being able to see those sitting and viewing all this in the courtroom when the camera shot shows them.

JMO

[RGG]

great news

i don't think we will have a verdict today, but i could be wrong.

No way today - the jurors have to go to lunch, then the lawyers (all of them) will give their closing arguments. I'm not sure the lawyers will be finished today either. Phew!

Anyway, by tomorrow the jury should end up in deliberation. Then on Oct 8th the court will be shut down again....I think it's the 8th, if not, then it's the 9th - so lets hope they jury is done before then.

[psbperu]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:

:rose:

Thank you Warrkat for sharing your good news. I am truly happy for you.

[RGG]

Hi, all.
O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:

The best news that came out of this tread yet Warrkat - and we're all pulling for you!!!!:beer::rose:

[kate482000]

Wonderful news warrkat.....

I think OJ is going down, I say guilty....lesser time for Stewart...

[Fallen Angel]

I wonder how long closings will take. i think the jurors MIGHT get the case today.

[Details]

OJ I predict jail time, 5-15 years. Stewart I'd give a pretty good chance of a NG - it's not impossible they'll find enough reasonable doubt he knew what OJ had planned in that room - I think I might well rule that way were I a juror. I might put one of the lesser charges as true though, because he didn't go to police, which suggests he had some type of knowledge, or was just plain crooked.

Closing arguments are usually relatively short. I think they'll get it today.

[cherylt]

FYI - I thought this was interesting, per Jack Ford, the following states allow it: (but not all jurisdictions w/in the state allow it)

Nevada
Arizona
Arkansas
Florida
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
North Carolina

Warrat - Congrats! I am so happy for you!! :beer:

[Fallen Angel]

OJ I predict jail time, 5-15 years. Stewart I'd give a pretty good chance of a NG - it's not impossible they'll find enough reasonable doubt he knew what OJ had planned in that room - I think I might well rule that way were I a juror. I might put one of the lesser charges as true though, because he didn't go to police, which suggests he had some type of knowledge, or was just plain crooked.

Closing arguments are usually relatively short. I think they'll get it today.

If OJ's found guilty will they take him into custody right then?

[AnnInOhio]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:

Wonderful news, Warrkat! I'm very happy for you, and appreciate you sharing with us.

[bearwds]

[QUOTE=warrkat

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread....
******************************************

Derail away. Great news. Not posting today on trial but just wanted to send my best wishes.


bearwds

[JBL]

Hi, all.
I just got back home...... no news? I thought they were going to start at the regular time, but if I'm reading correctly, they haven't started yet. Since I have dialup at home, will have to depend on y'all to keep me updated.

O/T.... I seriously don't want to derail this thread, but I'm so excited I have to share something; Found out this morning that my cancer is in remission (possibly gone, but definitely in remission), and I don't have to go back to the doctor until January!
Now if we can just get the right verdict in this trial, my day will be complete. :beer:

Oh Congratulations! That is the best news. Tx for sharing.

[Details]

Oh, and congrats Warcat! Wonderful news! You must be floating on air.

[VuDu2U2]

All in all I think the judge has done a heck of a job handling these attorneys and the case in general. I get a feeling Yale wants out of the whole OJ phenomenon and the Scotto undercurrent Yale has gotten into while pursuing his fame and fortune. You sleep in the bed you make and Yale doesn't want to sleep with the fishes. OJ is guilty.

[Kara]

I'm behind but just wanted to say that is great news for you! I hope it stays gone!!:rose:

And closings are underway....

[5swab5]

Good Grief!

Is anything happening yet? I am on dial-up, so I haven't a clue what is going on. What a long day.

TIA

Swabby

[RGG]

I know a few elderly people who watch the trials but don't have a computer. I feel so bad for them. :(
I love my computer and livestreams. :rose:
carry on...

No No No - my mother would have burned down all the internet lines. She was gung-ho on the Jonbenet Ramsey trial - I didn't follow it either since my mother was already the prosecutor, judge, detective and jury on that trial! LOL!

[RGG]

DA Rogers is interspersing his own words with still photos, video, and short bits of the taped recordings of the defendants. He's also using quoted statements from the original 6 but concentrating on the 2 defendants. A good presentation so far. No interruptions from the defense tables.

You're absolutely correct and I probably have to eat my words of Galanter objecting a LOT! :biggrin:

[RGG]

OJ isn't looking too dapper right now, but he doesn't actually look too perplexed either. Just eye-ball rolling, forehead exercises and such.

By now, I'd have passed out.:eek:

[Details]

Reviewing the law on each charge, what the law requires, what evidence shows that charge is established through the tapes. Kidnapping is particularly clear, and of course the tape is played where you can clearly hear OJ's orders, 3 times in a row, "Nobody Leaves this room".


And now going over how a belief of ownership is not a justification for robbery. We're a civilized society, we initiate lawsuits, file a complaint, call the police, we don't go in with guns.

[tashi]

Reviewing the law on each charge, what the law requires, what evidence shows that charge is established through the tapes. Kidnapping is particularly clear, and of course the tape is played where you can clearly hear OJ's orders, 3 times in a row, "Nobody Leaves this room".


And now going over how a belief of ownership is not a justification for robbery. We're a civilized society, we initiate lawsuits, file a complaint, call the police, we don't go in with guns.


Very effective closing argument by the prosecutor. IMO

[Details]

Very few objections are allowed during a closing argument. The jury is told nothing attorneys say is evidence, this is just a presentation representing the sides view of the evidence, but the law and evidence and testimony are the only things that the jury can take into account. So, objecting to a closing argument isn't much done. Sometimes they say it's over the top enough false to object - but it's much rarer than in witness testimony.

[Details]

It's always hysterical hearing them try to clean up that statement - whether it's "Those guys don't know who we are, do they", or the DA's attempt to get closer with "Those MFers don't' know who the F they are F ing with, do they"

Hmmm - Stewart hiding the stolen property - good consciousness of guilt there.

[Tubesworld]

Hi everyone. First trip to town for me. What could the defendant possibly be scribbling on his note pad?

[Details]

Hi everyone. First trip to town for me. What could the defendant possibly be scribbling on his note pad?Any counter-point, info for the lawyer, I didn't say that, I actually said this. By now, most of that is done, but he might have another idea or so left.

[5swab5]

OJ isn't looking too dapper right now, but he doesn't actually look too perplexed either. Just eye-ball rolling, forehead exercises and such.

By now, I'd have passed out.:eek:

Me Too!:biggrin:

A great BIG thanks to all that are supplying updates. You have no idea how much it is appreciated.

[Details]

thedarwinexception (link in the links thread) does a great overview every day too. You have to wait until the morning for it - but they've done a great, and sometimes entertaining job of recapping each day's events very clearly.

I read it every day to get the bits I miss. I've never seen them be inaccurate or miss much at all.

[Tubesworld]

Thanks Details. A closing argument is not evidence, yes?

[Details]

Thanks Details. A closing argument is not evidence, yes?Yes, exactly. A closing argument is no type of evidence at all, and the jury is always instructed, as these were, right before and often right after that this is not evidence.


It's an overview, a recap, from one side's view, and presents evidence - but only what is in the jury room is evidence. Witness testimony, admitted exhibits (like the tapes, but not the transcripts), and the jury instructions.

[Details]

Question:


If the previous criminal and civil trials were to be KEPT out of this trial, would the Defense be able to talk about those afore mentioned trials in their closing argument?

:confused:I'm not sure. I tend to think not. That probably is where the limit comes on closing arguments, bringing up prejudicial information that is not admissible.

[kennedy06]

I was wondering what he was writing also. I thought the the final chapter for his next book! JMO

[Tubesworld]

I would think the scribbling is not necessary. I'd hope my lawyer would have a convincing closing argument prepared, encompassing what I said/and or what I didn't say as to what is in evidence.

[psbperu]

Excellent closing argument, he is tying it all together.

[Details]

I would think the scribbling is not necessary. I'd hope my lawyer would have a convincing closing argument prepared, encompassing what I said/and or what I didn't say as to what is in evidence.A closing argument, for a good defense, should make sure it covers everything the prosecutor said, counter everything relevant about it. So, the prepared closing argument for the defense may need a little tweak or so. And of course, the defendant should be able to have input into their defense.

[Tubesworld]

The GUILTY superimposed over the two photographs made me chuckle.

[Details]

Thanks Details.

I think not too.

Can you just imagine the defense using previous trials in closing though?

"Ladies and Gentleman of the jury. Do NOT convict OJ Simpson in THIS trial, because he got away with MURDERING two innocent people"

:chicken:Interesting idea. I don't know how much the defense is limited on that. The prosecution is always more limited than the defense, if the defendant wants to bring in the past, they often can do so when the prosecution cannot.

[Tubesworld]

This is a bit off topic. I used to live in Kendall. I google mapped my old address, then looked for Simpson's house. He lives only a mile or 2 from where I used to live. Glad I don't live in Kendall anymore! Did anyone want to know that?

[RGG]

To the tune of "this land is my land"

This stuff is my stuff
From my Heisman Trophy
To the suit that I wore
At a family murder
You'll never catch me
Doing an Illegal
This land was made, it's just for me!

[CamV]

I don't know if any of you saw the first Binion trial where David Roger was the leading prosecutor. His closing arguments were done in the same way...no motion pictures, but video and audio. He won that case.
However, the case was retried, Roger wasn't the prosecutor (although the two who were did a fine job), and the jury reversed the guilty of murder charges.

[Details]

If the defense does use that type of scenario in the closing, could the Pros. come back and have the last word in regard to that statement?

Would it actually open the door on that information?I don't think so, because there's no law that having previously committed a murder is any type of exacerbating factor in a robbery or kidnapping. It's irrelevant. If the defense were to do that (not sure if they can, doubt they would), I suspect the prosecutor can come back with - this case is about this event, nothing else, and the facts prove the case on this event, nothing else.

[RGG]

This is a bit off topic. I used to live in Kendall. I google mapped my old address, then looked for Simpson's house. He lives only a mile or 2 from where I used to live. Glad I don't live in Kendall anymore! Did anyone want to know that?

I think it was yesterday (or day before?) I posted his address, and everything that was on the public records. Aren't you the fancy one...much of that is a very nice! I lived down in Naranja and then in Florida City.

[Tubesworld]

I think it was yesterday (or day before?) I posted his address, and everything that was on the public records. Aren't you the fancy one...much of that is a very nice! I lived down in Naranja and then in Florida City.
__________________

I don't know about how special I am, lol. This was in 1985. The Don Shula Expressway wasn't there. Kendall sure has grown though.

[Details]

Eeek! All the jurors are going to mutate into Judge Glass. Will there be enough robes and flower vases for them all? Will they all surge out and beat the attorneys to a pulp?

[RGG]

If OJ was only getting his own stuff, why did he say on the audio that the thugs could do whatever they wanted with it? Or is my head being unscrewed about now?:confused:

[tashi]

"It was a recovery, not a robbery."

"No value to anyone but Mr. Simpson"...Are you kidding me??

I don't think Fromong would agree with that statement.

[Details]

"It was a recovery, not a robbery."

"No value to anyone but Mr. Simpson"...Are you kidding me??

I don't think Fromong would agree with that statement.Irrelevant either way. I can't go in with guns and thugs to recover a stolen candy wrapper if I find it personally valuable.


Now he's contradicting himself - if it's of no value, then why is Beardsly trying to sell?

[RGG]

I think it was yesterday (or day before?) I posted his address, and everything that was on the public records. Aren't you the fancy one...much of that is a very nice! I lived down in Naranja and then in Florida City.
__________________

I don't know about how special I am, lol. This was in 1985. The Don Shula Expressway wasn't there. Kendall sure has grown though.

hahaha- well Tubesworld - my life back in FL was 1962-4.:)

[cherylt]

I should have known Yale was going to start off with "poor OJ - "they" were out to get him.: WAAAH, Yale!hammer

[Tubesworld]

Galantner is reaching with the photos stolen from the defendant's wall! How pathetic.

[psbperu]

I honestly don't think that Galanter can paint a good face on this evidence against OJ.

There is no way you can get around the guns & holding people against their will.

[JBL]

The golf courses OJ was looking on for the Killers - were these the same golf courses used to search for his stolen pictures?

[Tubesworld]

Daggone, video of the defendants going into the hotel.Damaging audio. In the hotel room with weapons. I think if I were amongst them in the roomn, I too would be guilty of armed burglary

[kennedy06]

He has said alot of words but really nothing so far in my eyes to show OJ is innocent, so far. JMO

[Details]

"items stolen off the walls" of poor OJ's home. Rogers making note: Ask the jury if they think most people would call the police if stuff was stolen right off their walls. OJ didn't.Nice one. Hope he does that. And Yale was mixing items there - the personal photos - that were never ever present in the hotel room nor in Fromong's possession, and the other memorabilia from Gilbert.

[psbperu]

Gee Yale....I thought local law enforcement told Simpson that it was a civil matter & that he had to file a civil complaint about his "stuff".

[Tubesworld]

Nice one. Hope he does that. And Yale was mixing items there - the personal photos - that were never ever present in the hotel room nor in Fromong's possession, and the other memorabilia from Gilbert.
Wow! A defense closing argument can contain items not in evidence?

[RGG]

Oh pity OJ _ at the pool he was nearly smashed with liquor!

[cherylt]

"items stolen off the walls" of poor OJ's home. Rogers making note: Ask the jury if they think most people would call the police if stuff was stolen right off their walls. OJ didn't.

Exactly! I would feel violated that someone broke in & took my stuff. That actually happened to our childhood home, someone brook in, took some stuff and the POLICE were called right then (included in which an item very personal, a ring my dead father gave to my mom that was being saved for me.)

[Details]

Wow! A defense closing argument can contain items not in evidence?Yep.

So far, it's a nice collection of half-truths. As when he claims Fromong knew OJ would never sell this stuff. Fromong's actual answer was that OJ would never sell this stuff himself, he'd give it to others to sell for him. And Fromong said the stuff was both heirloom and memorabilia. Not that it was not memorabilia. The two categories are not exclusive.

[Tubesworld]

Is the co-defendant's lawyer going to give a closing argument as well?

[Details]

Is the co-defendant's lawyer going to give a closing argument as well?Oh yes. They each have their own separate cases and interests.

[RGG]

Is the co-defendant's lawyer going to give a closing argument as well?

I doubt it. - oops sorry - YES - CJ's lawyer will HAVE to do a closing for his client.

[CatBallou]

Galanter is forgetting to mention that all of that stuff with the exception of personal photos belong to Mr. Goldman!! hammer

[Tubesworld]

Thanks Details. The state's closing was in regards to both defendants. The co-defendant could not afford Galantner?

[RGG]

My goodness - looking at the serene look on OJ's face - he's feeling the love from his attorney and even starting to believe this story!

[Details]

Now he's going into the sob story, OJ sees his stuff on the bed, life work of an athlete. Good jury nullification material, trying to make them think of it as if they'd do the same thing, it's not a crime.

I notice he doesn't use tapes nor transcripts - and no surprise because he's not using the exact words, varying them just a little to fit his case better.

[JBL]

Mementos for a job well done. This is not memorbilia.

What room does that personal memento called the HEISMAN TROPHY
stay in again???????

[Details]

Thanks Details. The state's closing was in regards to both defendants. The co-defendant could not afford Galantner?It would be a huge conflict of interest for him to represent both defendants. Stewart's best defense is to say OJ planned the whole thing and he didn't know. OJ's best defense is to say others made his sting concept go south, he didn't plan a robbery. They are two defendants with two completely different defenses.

Because it was a small room OJ couldn't have known? Yale is pushing the bounds of credibility with a black-is-white line like that. A smaller room means he'll be seeing more of what goes on, McClinton cannot be in a separate section of the room, he's right there, a bed away.

[cherylt]

Now Yale is just lying! There were no "personal" mementos - no family photos there!

Supposedly Riccio told him there really were going to be photos there too... IIRC...

[5swab5]

So far, Galanter's presentation is verbal and he is walking back and forth in front of the Jury. He is expressive and animated; uses his hands a lot when he doesn't have them in his pocket. Looks very relaxed and only once in a while returns to the lecturn to check his notes.

Up till now there are no accompanying visual aids.

I think that it is going to be pretty hard for the jurors to get around the fact that some of OJ's boys have plead guilty, if even to a lesser charge. Even those thugs knew that they were in the wrong.

Galanter may end up being sorry that he kept stressing what deals they got.

MOO

Swabby

[JBL]

Stoooopid does not make a criminal :shrug:

Good Grief Yale.

[psbperu]

Believe me if there were guns & I was in the room, I know where my center of attention would be.

Nice try Yale.

[Tubesworld]

It would be a legal 'conflict of interest' for Galanter to represent both co-defendants because at times their defense is in conflict.
Remember, Stewart's three (3) defense attorneys have tried unceasingly to separate their client from Simpson's trial.

Oooops. I forgot about when Stewart's attys were railing for severage.

[Tubesworld]

Believe me if there were guns & I was in the room, I know where my center of attention would be.

Nice try Yale.

Hahahahah. Likewise!

[psbperu]

It is almost like Yale Galanter has come undone...saying would you let this guy babysit your children?

Hey Yale...do you think anyone would let OJ Simpson babysit their children.

This is some defense by Galanter & so full of holes, pathetic.

Yale: your client hangs with thugs...and apparently you do too.

[Tubesworld]

Sociopaths videotape themselves while commiting a crime.

[Tubesworld]

He didn't know anything about it??? This is not good. Not good at all.

[Details]

Sociopaths videotape themselves while commiting a crime.Sociopaths - and criminals who want to be sure they've got something to prove what they did and did NOT do - and normal people who don't realize a crime is in the works, who think it's a simple sting.

[5swab5]

It is almost like Yale Galanter has come undone...saying would you let this guy babysit your children?

Hey Yale...do you think anyone would let OJ Simpson babysit their children.

This is some defense by Galanter & so full of holes, pathetic.

Yale: your client hangs with thugs...and apparently you do too.

No Kidding!

A whole litter of losers.

IMO

Swabby

[CamV]

Sociopaths videotape themselves while commiting a crime.

Absolutely, Tube. There recently was a case in Nevada where a man video taped himself sexually assaulting a 3-year-old girl. Not too smart!!

[JBL]

Good old Yale doing what he does best. Muddying the waters confusing the jurors.

Where's his power point of the charges and how everything the OJ Gang did doesn't meet the burden.

Where on any tape does OJ ever mention is "dead mother" "dead child"?

He doesn't. Not one word. OJ however does mention $100,000.00 worth of MY MEMORABILIA!

[JBL]

Back to Riccio - Yale claims Riccio says this was not a crime. What Yale leaves out is that Riccio said this was not a crime UNTIL THE GUNS CAME OUT!

[Details]

Back to Riccio - Yale claims Riccio says this was not a crime. What Yale leaves out is that Riccio said this was not a crime UNTIL THE GUNS CAME OUT!He loves the half truths. Give part of the answer, hope the jury doesn't remember the full answer.

[CamV]

Good old Yale doing what he does best. Muddying the waters confusing the jurors.

Where's his power point of the charges and how everything the OJ Gang did doesn't meet the burden.

Where on any tape does OJ ever mention is "dead mother" "dead child"?

He doesn't. Not one word. OJ however does mention $100,000.00 worth of MY MEMORABILIA!

Hopefully the jury is too smart for Yale. BTW, If I were on that jury now, I'd have to block my ear(s) because of his yelling at me. I have sensitive ears.

[Tubesworld]

Is there any testimony or video of the defendant totting the booty from the hotel?

[RGG]

The thugs thought it would be a good idea to get stuff on OJ because
1. they could care less about his butt
2. they were doing a favor for OJ and that's all
3. - CYA first
4. help the brother get his "stuff" 2nd,
5. have a good laugh over drinks later.

Those dealers wouldn't worry about the guys robbing them in the room; they'd be too afraid of what might happen to them if they squealed on OJ and the posse.

Now - QUESTION.....was the the story of the concealed weapon permit substantiated, either on tape, or by another thug? (CRS poster child here.)

[Details]

Yuck - I don't want to hear about aphrodesiacs!

Yale - that is not what his testimony was - nor is that the exact words. He never said he would sway or lean his testimony. He said the case could go either way. He said he could help. And he said that what he meant by that is that with a good lawyer, he'd be a codefendant like Stewart, and not testifying at all.

[RGG]

I wonder how much $ Galanter paid for his rug.:tongue: Durn! Is it really a rug???? (I'm always the last to notice stuff like that).

[Details]

Is there any testimony or video of the defendant totting the booty from the hotel?Yep, a line of guys carrying the booty. OJ, as he was laughing about, not having to carry anything.

[Tubesworld]

Yuck - I don't want to hear about aphrodesiacs!
I thought I didn't hear right myself! Did he say money and liberty are aphrodesiacs for the sort of law he practices??

[JBL]

Well this is Yale at his finest. The State should realize this and it's up to the State to unmuddy the water that Yales splashing around.

Now the Alexander help. Scotto testified on the stand he told Alexander to call me if you need some help. He called and wallah another tape.

Did he set Alexander up? Scotto did a lot of spewing about Alexander being the first one to roll.

Everyone is dirty here and again no honor among thieves.

[Details]

I thought I didn't hear right myself! Did he say money and liberty are aphrodesiacs for the sort of law he practices??He did. Yuck!

[RGG]

Yuck - I don't want to hear about aphrodesiacs!
Yale - that is not what his testimony was - nor is that the exact words. He never said he would sway or lean his testimony. He said the case could go either way. He said he could help. And he said that what he meant by that is that with a good lawyer, he'd be a codefendant like Stewart, and not testifying at all.

Excellent Details - now, can you do ESP to the minds of the jurors and remind them of that???

[5swab5]

Hopefully the jury is too smart for Yale. BTW, If I were on that jury now, I'd have to block my ear(s) because of his yelling at me. I have sensitive ears.

Too bad the jurors don't get to quiz Galanter after his rendition of the events.

I have to believe that ONE of those 12 has the correct info in their notes.

I hope.

I Pray.

MOO

Swabby

[Tubesworld]

The LVPD transcription lab is a sess pool of contamination!

[Details]

Excellent Details - now, can you do ESP to the minds of the jurors and remind them of that???No worries - they've been paying closer attention than I have - I'm sure one or more of them remember all of these little points as well as I do.

And I don't even have notes. They do.

[RGG]

The LVPD transcription lab is a sess pool of contamination!
So does that mean we've all listened to crap and OJ really is innocent?

[5swab5]

"A whole litter of losers."

Love it! Mind if I borrow it in the future?

:lol:


LOL

Be my guest.

[RGG]

"words" "just words" - I recently heard another man say that! Hmmmm

[Details]

So does that mean we've all listened to crap and OJ really is innocent?Of course. Pay no attention to your own lying ears. Pay no attention to the fact that the clear sections of the tapes easily prove the case, pay no attention to the triviality of most of the defense corrections to the transcripts - there were errors, so we must pretend everything is wrong, even what we can hear.

[Tubesworld]

If the tapes are unclear, then my client's been smeared. Therefore, you must aquit.

[cherylt]

I thought I didn't hear right myself! Did he say money and liberty are aphrodesiacs for the sort of law he practices??

A very ODD choice of words, to say the very least! :)

[RGG]

The LVPD transcription lab is a sess pool of contamination! If the tapes are unclear, then my client's been smeared. Therefore, you must acquit.

Dang - you're confusing me! LOL

[cherylt]

Of course. Pay no attention to your own lying ears. Pay no attention to the fact that the clear sections of the tapes easily prove the case, pay no attention to the triviality of most of the defense corrections to the transcripts - there were errors, so we must pretend everything is wrong, even what we can hear.

Exactly. You can not believe your OWN eyes and your OWN ears! :rolleyes:

[JBL]

True Hypocracy! Some of OJ's testimony at road rage case:

"Finally, Rifkin just cut to the chase. "Do you think you're a good liar?" she asked.

"I could be pretty convincing if I wanted to be," replied Simpson after some thought.

"Especially if your life depended on it?"

"Well, I've never been in that position."



http://www.courttv.com/trials/ojroad...02301_ctv.html

[psbperu]

If the tapes are unclear, then my client's been smeared. Therefore, you must aquit.



Plus: it is OJ saying "tell the truth, tell the truth". I bet Yale keeps repeating that phrase...

[RGG]

Hypocrisy? So is finding the actual murder of Nicole and Ron and not stopping until you find the person responsible. The person MUST be on a golf course somewhere in America!

[Tubesworld]

Sheesh, it's 3:41 Nevada time. They want to take another break?

[JBL]

I can't listen to his spin and muddying the waters anymore.


:seeya:

Will wait out the verdict

[cherylt]

I can't listen to his spin and muddying the waters anymore.


:seeya:

Will wait out the verdict

Ah, c'mon don't leave. He has to be done, eventually. Doesn't he? Doesn't he? :)

[psbperu]

Ohhh I have such sympathy for OJ since his friends tried to make money off him.

C'mon Yale a crime was committed, it is as simple as that. OJ got lucky no one got an itchy trigger finger during the robbery.

Does OJ have any "real" friends?

[Tubesworld]

Well, you know how many people drink from a bottle of water all their waking hours, right?
:chicken:

They should take care of their biological functions off the clock, lol.

[cherylt]

Ohhh I have such sympathy for OJ since his friends tried to make money off him.

C'mon Yale a crime was committed, it is as simple as that. OJ got lucky no one got an itchy trigger finger during the robbery.

Does OJ have any "real" friends?

According to Jamie F, Scotto is a "real" friend! :rolleyes:

[cherylt]

I think I zoned out for a moment. What was the objection about and was it sustained?

[RGG]

Said he had to stop due to the need to spend his money supporting the children. Nicole's sister says they can barely pull 25% of the expenses out of him for Sidney's college expenses.. That's pretty sad. Didn't Sidney get/apply for any scholarship?

[CamV]

I think I just heard Galanter say that the crux of this case is [U]what OJ's motive of his actions were.[U] Does that give the pros a chance to bring in OJ's trying to hide his money, etc., from the Goldman's? Thoughts??

[L J]

I heard Jamie say on "in Session" that Judge Glass "sometimes rules for prosecution and sometimes rules for us." Of course her bias has always been obvious.

I don't know - isn't she supposed to be objective?

imo

I think you are right Jamie is very bias!
J M

[MedicMatz]

I think you are right Jamie is very bias!
J M

LOL... of course Jamie is biased. Her show is "The Best Defense" it is intentionally biased toward the defenses case.

[Tubesworld]

I would think the money Simpson pays for lawyers would put a nice dent into university tuition.

[5swab5]

According to Jamie F, Scotto is a "real" friend! :rolleyes:


She should know, she never met a criminal she didn't like.:biggrin:

IMO

[Details]

That's pretty sad. Didn't Sidney get/apply for any scholarship?I doubt she could qualify. No way on financial need, because that's based on your parent's income, and OJ's football retierement, untouchable by any judgement, OJ's house - also considered for most grants, it's all far, far, far in excess of something that would qualify.


Ewww, yuck, trying to use some flowery quote to say it's ok to steal if something is the product of your labor. Even if you lost it due to a judgment to repay something far more precious you stole from another.

[JBL]

Oh brother: Galanter's grandstanding has been just sickening. Became a little more plausible when his squeaky indignation lessed. He started out sputtering to the Jury, "...you have been taking excrupilous notes." Excrupilous? No that's not a word either...

I was going to wait until the end but his flub-ups are too many to keep up with....

ITA! I had to shut the feed down. I heard the testimony and now for Yale to interpret what I saw them say first hand is plain insulting as he took it way out of context. He's telling a story. The story of Poor Ol OJ, poor Ol targeted OJ. He's telling things that weren't admissable in court such as who is the true owner of the property. Why is Yale allowed to insist it's Simpsons and insist Simpsons been searching for years yet never filed a report.

This is our justice system at it's worst. A big game.

[Tubesworld]

LOL... of course Jamie is biased. Her show is "The Best Defense" it is intentionally biased toward the defenses case.

That Jami Floyd makes my teeth itch.

[Tubesworld]

Can you get some heat? Is that criminal intent. And by the way, look menacing.

[RGG]

What a lie! "ppl who commit crimes do not immediately call the police!"

OMG - that turned me off against him right then!

[cherylt]

She should know, she never met a criminal she didn't like.:biggrin:

IMO

ROFL :lol: If she had her way, there would be an awful lot of innocent criminals walking the streets right along side her. God forbid she or someone she loves ever becomes the victim of some crime - would she truly remain steadfast in "innocent until guilty"?

[Tubesworld]

That was one weak closing argument by Galantner. Anyone have a guess as to how long the jury will deliberate? Me thinks less than eight hours.

[cherylt]

Poor Yale: those Joe Montana posters were the sacred cornerstone: the foundation of OJ's life. THis nonsense ain't gonna fly: the jury should feel insulted at this point

Insulted, jumpy & ringing ears. Really, I think Yale's closing would have been a lot more effective if he sounded more grounded. IMO, stress IMO, I think his tone was annoying but he really did make some good points. But if I were on the jury, I would feel like I was being yelled at & would be saying in my head "chill out man-you're making me nervous."

[Fallen Angel]

That was one weak closing argument by Galantner. Anyone have a guess as to how long the jury will deliberate? Me thinks less than eight hours.

me thinks about 5 to 6
i bet ya this time next year Yale will be writing a book while OJ's sitting in jail ;)

[legalmania]

I think I zoned out for a moment. What was the objection about and was it sustained?

Hey cherylt,

Did anybody answer you question? if not the judge said he was getting a little beyond the scope of things. Carry On

[Details]

I just keep hearing the other half to the half truths he kept using - and the one outright falsehood. He said one witness said he'd slant, alter his testimony for money. That witness never ever said that - not on the stand, not on the tapes - he said the trial could go either way, he said he could help with that - and when asked he said he meant by that that with an attorney, he'd be a codefendant, and thus not testifying at all. But he never ever said once that he'd slant his testimony.

As good of a closing, other than that yelly style, as was really possible in a case where the facts are totally against him.

[Tubesworld]

I had to leave for a few.

So next is Stewart's lawyer and they are just taking a short break now?

Any replies are appreciated.
Yes, I believe it's just a short break.

[cherylt]

me thinks about 5 to 6
i bet ya this time next year Yale will be writing a book while OJ's sitting in jail ;)

Well, if we go by Vinnie P's theory: 1 day for every week of trial that may bring us up to 2 - 3 days for deliberations... I think a day or too. I think the jury will not make a rash decision and will go by each count, mothodically.

[cherylt]

Hey cherylt,

Did anybody answer you question? if not the judge said he was getting a little beyond the scope of things. Carry On

Hey LM! nope, no answer till now. Thanks! I was wondering where you were...

[Tubesworld]

I just keep hearing the other half to the half truths he kept using - and the one outright falsehood. He said one witness said he'd slant, alter his testimony for money. That witness never ever said that - not on the stand, not on the tapes - he said the trial could go either way, he said he could help with that - and when asked he said he meant by that that with an attorney, he'd be a codefendant, and thus not testifying at all. But he never ever said once that he'd slant his testimony.

As good of a closing, other than that yelly style, as was really possible in a case where the facts are totally against him.
I suppose that was the best he could do, considering what damaging evidence he was facing? Simpson should have made a bee line to the trough, wile there was still some pristine water available.

[5swab5]

Hey cherylt,

Did anybody answer you question? if not the judge said he was getting a little beyond the scope of things. Carry On

Thank You!
I was wondering too.

[GentleBreeze]

LOL... of course Jamie is biased. Her show is "The Best Defense" it is intentionally biased toward the defenses case.

While Jamie upsets me at times...I think she gets a bum wrap. She was hired to bring forward the defense's side of the case. That is her job and what Tru-TV expects her to do. IS has to have balance or at least try to appear that they do, so with others being more Prosecution oriented, Jamie has been chosen to take the side of the defense case because of her first hand experience being a defense attorney.

No one would have expected Nancy Grace to ever side on the issues with the defendant's POV when she was a Prosecutor and maintained that persona throughout her career with CTV.

What aggravates me sometime is Jamie pushes the race issue too often even though I do understand at times where she is coming from since we have seen so many minorities exonerated for crimes, they spent many years, even decades in prison, for things they did not do.

The only ones I know that had an ability to give both sides a fair shake is Jack Ford but he has been both Prosecutor and Defense Attorney. Vinnie and James Curtis.

It makes it a hard crowd for Jamie to work when 85-90 per cent of the viewers are usually pro Prosecution from beginning to end.

imoo

[Fallen Angel]

Well, if we go by Vinnie P's theory: 1 day for every week of trial that may bring us up to 2 - 3 days for deliberations... I think a day or too. I think the jury will not make a rash decision and will go by each count, mothodically.

oh in most cases i agree with that but not with this case.

[legalmania]

I doubt she could qualify. No way on financial need, because that's based on your parent's income, and O's football retirement, untouchable by any judgement, OJ's house - also considered for most grants, it's all far, far, far in excess of something that would qualify.


Eww, yuck, trying to use some flowery quote to say it's ok to steal if something is the product of your labor. Even if you lost it due to a judgment to repay something far more precious you stole from another.

You earn a scholarship, and your reward is money.

[cherylt]

I suppose that was the best he could do, considering what damaging evidence he was facing? Simpson should have made a bee line to the trough, wile there was still some pristine water available.

:lol::lol: ROFLMAO! "pristine water" love that!

[Tubesworld]

How charming, Bryson's low tech approach, graphite and papyrus exhibit on the easel for the jury.

[Details]

You earn a scholarship it has nothing and your reward is money.Many scholarships do have "need" criteria. But my assumption was that the poster was also talking about the many other methods of getting money from college - and they also nearly all have "need" criteria. I remember this quite well from my college some time ago, from my sisters. My mom makes nothing like $400,000 a year, nor does she have a luxurious house - she had 4 girls on a plain office job - but we were still too well off, largely because of the house (assumption was you only got money after you'd put a second mortgage on your house to pay for college and still didn't have enough) for all scholarships and grants and other programs that help with college costs.

[5swab5]

Good Grief!

How much longer is the jury going to be held hostage?

Doesn't the Honorable Judge know that Survivor comes on at 8PM, EDT? :biggrin:

[legalmania]

Well, if we go by Vinnie P's theory: 1 day for every week of trial that may bring us up to 2 - 3 days for deliberations... I think a day or too. I think the jury will not make a rash decision and will go by each count, mothodically.

That's the way they are supposed to do it anyway, lets hope they do, it would make it a lot easier on them.

[Tubesworld]

Good Grief!

How much longer is the jury going to be held hostage?

Doesn't the Honorable Judge know that Survivor comes on at 8PM, EDT? :biggrin:
Hahahahahah!

[psbperu]

If the closing arguments & State's rebuttal are done by this evening...I think we might have a verdict late tomorrow afternoon.

Cut & dry case in my opinion. We'll see what the opinion of the jury is & on that I won;t be taking any bets.:biggrin:

[Details]

Blame "Messenger Riccio" just will not cut it! Move on.Blame Riccio is a bad defense. Blame OJ, much better. He could make a good case that OJ never let him know it would be a robbery. Or at least a better case. Better than pretending the testimony of one guy who didn't know him and thus didn't remember what he did and did not do, is the sole testimony around Stewart in the case.

I doubt he'll be long.

[5swab5]

(respectfully snipped)The only ones I know that had an ability to give both sides a fair shake is Jack Ford but he has been both Prosecutor and Defense Attorney. Vinnie and James Curtis.

It makes it a hard crowd for Jamie to work when 85-90 per cent of the viewers are usually pro Prosecution from beginning to end.

imoo


What ever happened to Vinnie? I LOVES me some Vinnie.:)

[RGG]

Good Grief!

How much longer is the jury going to be held hostage?

Doesn't the Honorable Judge know that Survivor comes on at 8PM, EDT? :biggrin:

Yes - and Animal Planet - oooh - nevermind, we're watching it already!:eek:

[Details]

Oh, this is looooooow. Blame the drugs. A very low dose of a normal drug. Every normal person has little variances in their memory, every person in this trial has told subtly different stories on little points. Oh - and I just realized - this is an extremely dumb line to take. Because there is a nurse on the jury. They'll know that is a low dose, and exactly how much it can, and cannot alter your memory.

And what's with the nickname? This guy is really annoying. "Messenger" - what does he think he's implying? Ah - there it is at last - a silly little saying is his whole point.


The tapes - authentication doesn't matter - not without a studio able to create multi-layered conversations, OJ's voice, and everyone else's voice, in layered conversations.

[5swab5]

oh in most cases i agree with that but not with this case.

I hope you are right. It's about time that OJ finds out that he isn't ten feet tall and bulletproof.

MOO
Swabby

[legalmania]

Many scholarships do have "need" criteria. But my assumption was that the poster was also talking about the many other methods of getting money from college - and they also nearly all have "need" criteria. I remember this quite well from my college some time ago, from my sisters. My mom makes nothing like $400,000 a year, nor does she have a luxurious house - she had 4 girls on a plain office job - but we were still too well off, largely because of the house (assumption was you only got money after you'd put a second mortgage on your house to pay for college and still didn't have enough) for all scholarships and grants and other programs that help with college costs.

Once you turn eighteen your parents are no longer responsible for your financial responsibilities. It doesn't matter if your parents are Bill Gates or John Doe you are responsible for all your bills. If your parents want to pay for your collage that's great but if not you have to apply for a loan.

[tashi]

Blame "Messenger Riccio" just will not cut it! Move on.


He's now moved on to messenger Fromong...

[RGG]

Betcha that was a lie by Riccio! He turned the room key and they all piled in - gangland style - remember, Riccio had to pretend he wasn't aware that OJ was going to be there....Riccio wasn't "setting them up!"

[kellabeck]

Is the prosecution giving a rebuttal and then there's the charge by the judge. Is this supposed to carry over to tomorrow??

[Tubesworld]

This poor guy is stuck on the messenger bit. It's not gonna fly.

[RGG]

Is the prosecution giving a rebuttal and then there's the charge by the judge. Is this supposed to carry over to tomorrow??

I think the Judge will try to keep everyone there (lawyers and jurors) until they are done and then tomorrow start the "clock".

[RGG]

WOW - they spared no expense on making that sign, huh?:shrug:

[cherylt]

Did you see the pic of Fromong he choose? Geez, can you be more insulting to the alleged "victim" and then go on about his Oxycontin use which is low and taken only as instructed. Obvious trick pic to make Fromong look less like a victim of any kind...

[Details]

Once you turn eighteen your parents are no longer responsible for your financial responsibilities. It doesn't matter if your parents are Bill Gates or John Doe you are responsible for all your bills. If your parents want to pay for your collage that's great but if not you have to apply for a loan.That was not my experience. I had no money, little job, but every form I filled out wanted my parents income.

[CamV]

About oxycontin...In my experience with prescribed drugs, after taking them for awhile, their immediate side effects (such as dizziness, sleepiness, etc.) disappear. After a minor surgery, I took one oxycontin and couldn't stay awake. I didn't take anymore. A friend recently had a very major surgery and was on oxycontin for a couple months, and she could play cards with us, converse, and remember very well.

[psbperu]

By now the Jury's eyes should be glazing over, this guy is putting me to sleep.

[CamV]

By now the Jury's eyes should be glazing over, this guy is putting me to sleep.

I think he's going to go on for awhile. After all, he's on stage now.
Did he ever explain why he's using the word "messenger?"

[Tubesworld]

By now the Jury's eyes should be glazing over, this guy is putting me to sleep.

Thanks for the reminder! I almost forgot about the debate this evening.

[tashi]

I think he's going to go on for awhile. After all, he's on stage now.
Did he ever explain why he's using the word "messenger?"

He said if you can't trust the messenger, you can't trust the message...lame IMO

[RGG]

About oxycontin...In my experience with prescribed drugs, after taking them for awhile, their immediate side effects (such as dizziness, sleepiness, etc.) disappear. After a minor surgery, I took one oxycontin and couldn't stay awake. I didn't take anymore. A friend recently had a very major surgery and was on oxycontin for a couple months, and she could play cards with us, converse, and remember very well.

My ex has rheumatoid arthritis and takes 4 a day - however, he takes 10-12 per day and is still awake. At one point in my life I took Valium for an ulcer for about 6 wks. It helped the ulcer and I stopped the pill and the dr. asked if I felt I needed more. Nope! It just depends on your body chemistry. (IMHO)

[5swab5]

How charming, Bryson's low tech approach, graphite and papyrus exhibit on the easel for the jury.

:)
I can not wait to see this!

I hope IS doesn't let me down in the morning.

[RGG]

He said if you can't trust the messenger, you can't trust the message...lame IMO Mr. Stewart got what he paid for. Is this a $5 per hr lawyer?

[cherylt]

Anyone else have sound problems? My audio has been "wiggy" throughout all of Bryson's closing and believe it or not, I didn't want to miss it. I think I can tell he is a lot less obnoxious, but I'm not hearing much content... Guess I'll have to look at legaledge later & watch the video then...

[RGG]

Poor ole Cashmore - they should leave him out. He's so pathetic and in need of a good job and true friend, of which, none of this troop is.

[RGG]

Anyone else have sound problems? My audio has been "wiggy" throughout all of Bryson's closing and believe it or not, I didn't want to miss it. I think I can tell he is a lot less obnoxious, but I'm not hearing much content... Guess I'll have to look at legaledge later & watch the video then...

I'm using legaledge and everything is fine on it.
http://www.thelegaledge.com/index.php?livecover

[psbperu]

Thanks for the reminder! I almost forgot about the debate this evening.


I know this is O/T but I may not watch due to "the cringe factor".

I want a nickel for each time this lawyer says "remember" or "remember that".

Lordy now we are on commonsense.

[Tubesworld]

Mr. Stewart got what he paid for. Is this a $5 per hr lawyer?

He looks like an ex con.

[legalmania]

That was not my experience. I had no money, little job, but every form I filled out wanted my parents income.

It wasn't that way with me I got the loan all by my lonesome, and had to pay it back all by my lonesome.

[RGG]

He looks like an ex con.

I thought Bryson was an ex-con?

[psbperu]

Bwahahaha...now he is getting his messenger;s mixed up.:lol:

[legalmania]

Poor ole Cashmore - they should leave him out. He's so pathetic and in need of a good job and true friend, of which, none of this troop is.

Then maybe he can pay back the people he embezzled money from.

[Details]

It wasn't that way with me I got the loan all by my lonesome, and had to pay it back all by my lonesome.Since when have we been discussing loans? It was scholarships. And I mentioned grants - but loans?

[Tubesworld]

I thought Bryson was an ex-con?

Is he? I don't know. It was just my first impression of him when I first saw him.

[RGG]

Bryson's key words are 1)sense 2)messenger

[cherylt]

Once you turn eighteen your parents are no longer responsible for your financial responsibilities. It doesn't matter if your parents are Bill Gates or John Doe you are responsible for all your bills. If your parents want to pay for your collage that's great but if not you have to apply for a loan.

You're right about that, except for Paris Hilton & Nicole Ritchie...etc. They still think they should be supported forever! :)

[CamV]

I know this is O/T but I may not watch due to "the cringe factor".

I want a nickel for each time this lawyer says "remember" or "remember that".

Lordy now we are on commonsense.


And it's worse when he says "member" instead of "remember."