Bashing the O.J. jury

#1 10-06-2008, 11:35 AM

These defence lawyers so blatenly bashing this jury, cause things didn't go their way , is the very reason people have such hatred for defence attorneys... how dare they say this jury or any american could not seperate his murder trial from this !! if this is the case, we may as well shut down all jury's ...I think O.J. should have been convicted in his murder trial and I watched this trial and never thought about that once, I'm intelligent enough to know all that was to be decided here was if going into a motel room with guns, forcing people against the wall , removing things, even if they belong to you, is wrong, in any state.....his own words convicted him " don't let any one out of this room" and "you didn't pull the piece out in the hall did ya " was all they needed to prove kidnapping and robbery......if he can't get a fair trial anywhere, should he just be allowed to do whatever he wants and we ignore it " cause he can't get a fair trial ?! seems to me he has a ready excuse for the next idiot move he makes.......I was actually sad to hear that his final years he will be rotting in prison, it's sad to me for anyone to waste their life like that over a few hours and a bad decision, but, O.J. made that decision... he could have went to that wedding, went home and a very nice life ... he chose not to !!!!

#2 10-06-2008, 12:09 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432946,00.html

#3 10-06-2008, 12:11 PM

Judging from their decision time and less than impressive performance at their press conference, I cannot give this jury a lot of credit for thorough examination of the case. They've uncovered dialogue in the tapes that neither prosecution nor defense experts could? Despite convicting him on a gazillion counts, they'd be satisfied if OJ walked out of jail today? The bald guy chomping on his gum was particularly annoying. Wonder which one will publish first?

DebinNv · #4 10-06-2008, 12:15 PM

I agree with the jury's verdict.
Simpson did this to himself -- his own words from that tape is what got him convicted.

Blaming and bashing the jury for following the law, and using the evidence they were given is just plain wrong!

#5 10-06-2008, 12:20 PM

so you would've preferred they came out smiling at him and then said he was guilty !! as far as their " courage " they has the " courage " to uphold the laws of the state of nevada..... that's what the trial was about .....

nsm · #6 10-06-2008, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hinkleyman

CHEERS TO THE JURY FOR FOLLOWING THE LETTER OF THE LAW

wonder what are the chances that we could get the same jury for the Spector trial.??

#7 10-06-2008, 12:28 PM

IMO, if they can look the Press in the face, they should be able to look the Defendant in the face.

#8 10-06-2008, 12:28 PM

What specifically bothers me about the statement that the jurors made regarding the fact that they "heard things on the tape that neither side did" is that they didn't come to an agreement until they played it six or seven times and ALL of them heard the same thing. This tells me that a few of them may have said "he said x, do you hear that?" and then they played it over and over until all of them "heard" it. Talk about the power of suggestion!

JMO!

#9 10-06-2008, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErinC1973

What specifically bothers me about the statement that the jurors made regarding the fact that they "heard things on the tape that neither side did" is that they didn't come to an agreement until they played it six or seven times and ALL of them heard the same thing. This tells me that a few of them may have said "he said x, do you hear that?" and then they played it over and over until all of them "heard" it. Talk about the power of suggestion!

JMO!

TOTALLY AGREE. And ALL within a few hours versus the YEAR the experts had.

#10 10-06-2008, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErinC1973

What specifically bothers me about the statement that the jurors made regarding the fact that they "heard things on the tape that neither side did" is that they didn't come to an agreement until they played it six or seven times and ALL of them heard the same thing. This tells me that a few of them may have said "he said x, do you hear that?" and then they played it over and over until all of them "heard" it. Talk about the power of suggestion!

JMO!

That IS troublesome, I agree with you. There was enough on the tapes, though, to convict. (imo) I had trouble understanding the words said because I was at work and had to keep the volume low, but my understanding is that they had headphones. They couldn't take their transcripts into the deliberation room, and I'm not real clear on the reasons for that.... seems to me it would be better that way, rather than depending on what someone else thinks they hear.

DebinNv · #11 10-06-2008, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErinC1973

What specifically bothers me about the statement that the jurors made regarding the fact that they "heard things on the tape that neither side did" is that they didn't come to an agreement until they played it six or seven times and ALL of them heard the same thing. This tells me that a few of them may have said "he said x, do you hear that?" and then they played it over and over until all of them "heard" it. Talk about the power of suggestion!

JMO!

Especially, the part where Simpson says --you didn't take your piece out in the hallway -- I can't recall it verbatum.
I heard that loud and clear during the trial. that was powerfully suggestive!

His own words on that tape got him a convicted.

MOO

MOO

psbperu · #12 10-06-2008, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DebinNv

Especially, the part where Simpson says --you didn't take your piece out in the hallway -- I can't recall it verbatum.
I heard that loud and clear during the trial. that was powerfully suggestive!

His own words on that tape got him a convicted.

MOO

MOO

Why do some jurors seem to want their "15 minutes of fame"?

Why can't they just go gracefully into the goodnight & not say anything.

"Oh look, I'm on tv"

Details · #13 10-06-2008, 01:06 PM

They were a courageous jury. I'm sure they knew, just as we do, that coming in guilty might cost them some slander at the least, but possibly far worse. Lots of strong emotions, one nutjob out there who feels strongly enough to go hurt those who they percieve as hurting their race, and they could be assaulted or worse.

They deliberated on the facts. And they did precisely what the defense insisted on - did not use the transcripts as evidence, but only what they could hear on the tapes themselves.

Jurors should not have to listen to themselves being slammed as a racist jury without response. And it is a good thing to hear what went on in the jury room. I always love it when a jury comes out and speaks.

psbperu · #14 10-06-2008, 01:06 PM

Watched Galanter with Jamie today:

Whine, whine, whine! You lost Yale, suck it up & acknowledge exactly why you lost....your client did the crime.

And the example DeGrasso gave about if OJ went into the bank across the street with a weapon & duct-taped the customers etc. is ridiculous.

There were guns in the room! People were held against their will.
And believe me if someone pulled a gun on me in a situation like that I am not going to say "put the gun away". Are these lawyers for real.

Shells2 · #15 10-06-2008, 01:11 PM

Of course they are going to whine... their meal ticket is sitting behind bars. Let 'em whine, who cares, it just makes them look ridiculous IMO.

( and a slander suit against them would be hilarious!! I would take offense to the suggestion that I was racist if I were a jury member)

Tracian · #16 10-06-2008, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psbperu

Why do some jurors seem to want their "15 minutes of fame"?

Why can't they just go gracefully into the goodnight & not say anything.

"Oh look, I'm on tv"

I guess that if the Defense attorneys would not accuse the jurors of not doing their job correctly maybe they would.

I really have to shake my head. 13 years ago, after a nine month trial, the jury came back in roughly 3-4 hours---This trial was 13 days, and the jurors came back in 13 hours, and they are being criticized for not taking enough time.

Amazing.

#17 10-06-2008, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psbperu

Why do some jurors seem to want their "15 minutes of fame"?

Why can't they just go gracefully into the goodnight & not say anything.

"Oh look, I'm on tv"

Exactly. I think the conscientious jurors did their duty, packed their stuff and went on with their lives. The ones who did the press conference were ill-equipped for it, so they've already failed in their quest for fame.

DebinNv · #18 10-06-2008, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psbperu

Why do some jurors seem to want their "15 minutes of fame"?

Why can't they just go gracefully into the goodnight & not say anything.

"Oh look, I'm on tv"

I think it's a catch 22, if they didn't speak all the TH's would have speculated as to why they didn't.

If they do speak they are criticized.

What should you do as a juror?

MOO

rainbo · #19 10-06-2008, 01:20 PM

Good God, Jami Floyd, Yale Galanter and Gabe Grasso really NEED TO GIVE IT A FRIGGIN' BREAK already! I'm so disgusted with them all. If the jury had acquitted OJ SIMPSON/Stewart, they'd be so relieved that the justice system worked, that the jury considered all and found the prosecution theory implausible. They didn't get their way, and now they are trying to pick out all the reasons why the jury was wrong/biased/racially driven/etc. It didn't go OJ's way this time; accept it, get over it and move on. I really abhor Jami Floyd and her bleeding heart rhetoric. This is the idiot that thought Michael Jackson was innocent, too.

Mandysmom · #20 10-06-2008, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citygirl

Some can put any spin on it that they want..cryin in your beer doesn't effect the outcome tho..

HE'S GONE..DONE..TOAST..YESTERDAY'S NEWS..

Yes, and I couldn't be happier. Made my day that the old thug got convicted on this one.

Heyes · #21 10-06-2008, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainbo

Good God, Jami Floyd, Yale Galanter and Gabe Grasso really NEED TO GIVE IT A FRIGGIN' BREAK already! I'm so disgusted with them all. If the jury had acquitted OJ SIMPSON/Stewart, they'd be so relieved that the justice system worked, that the jury considered all and found the prosecution theory implausible. They didn't get their way, and now they are trying to pick out all the reasons why the jury was wrong/biased/racially driven/etc. It didn't go OJ's way this time; accept it, get over it and move on. I really abhor Jami Floyd and her bleeding heart rhetoric. This is the idiot that thought Michael Jackson was innocent, too.

Poor Yale is going to have a tough time moving on, imo, his only client is locked up.
Grasso is getting his time for whining with Jamie now. I love it!
waaaa waaaaa waaaaa.
Too bad
so sad.

Cait48 · #22 10-06-2008, 01:28 PM

i think OJ lost because he did do the crime...and they proved it with the tapes! ALSO i do truly believe that people are finally fed up with OJ and his nonsense and arrogance. AND how could the jury ignore the taped info from within the room itself?

so i for one, am thrilled that justice has been done FINALLY!!

to bad a surveillance camera wasn't on, at the walkway leading to the house outside at Nicole and Ron's murder scene.

i hope he goes to the big house for a long time.

and yeah, Maricopa county and that big bad wolf Sheriff out there, don't put up with no baloney! although OJ now is being kept in solitary for 'his' protection! seems we need protection from HIM!

sleep in a tent and NO coffee?? ooooohhh nooooo! that's how it is in Maricopa County!

question: why was the 'VERDICT REACHED IN OJ CASE' thread locked? on the breaking news board?

rainbo · #23 10-06-2008, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Searching

Justice? The two people that were actually carrying weapons will walk away. One when originally arrested was latter released on his OR. The other admits to fraud when securing a drivers license by use of an alias.

This case was all about payback. What a shame.JMO

Those jurors said that they didn't even take the testimony of the witnesses into account because they didn't believe them. They took the words of OJ SIMPSON on the tape, and convicted him based on his own actions and his CLEARLY SPOKEN words. Good on the 'gun carriers' to know that they were going to be convicted and taking their just dues ahead of time. Any idiot knows that if you're guilty, you take a plea to avoid a conviction.

DebinNv · #24 10-06-2008, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Searching

Justice? The two people that were actually carrying weapons will walk away. One when originally arrested was latter released on his OR. The other admits to fraud when securing a drivers license by use of an alias.

This case was all about payback. What a shame.JMO

I thought I heard this morning on IS that the jury didn't give any weight to the testimony of the witnesses. Just the tape. I could be wrong tho.

rainbo · #25 10-06-2008, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cait48

i think OJ lost because he did do the crime...and they proved it with the tapes! ALSO i do truly believe that people are finally fed up with OJ and his nonsense and arrogance. AND how could the jury ignore the taped info from within the room itself?

so i for one, am thrilled that justice has been done FINALLY!!

to bad a surveillance camera wasn't on, at the walkway leading to the house outside at Nicole and Ron's murder scene.

i hope he goes to the big house for a long time.

and yeah, Maricopa county and that big bad wolf Sheriff out there, don't put up with no baloney! although OJ now is being kept in solitary for 'his' protection! seems we need protection from HIM!

sleep in a tent and NO coffee?? ooooohhh nooooo! that's how it is in Maricopa County!

question: why was the 'VERDICT REACHED IN OJ CASE' thread locked? on the breaking news board?

Maricopa County? Isn't that in Arizona? OJ is in Nevada in Clark County. Joe Arpaio is the Sheriff in Arizona. What am I missing here?

psbperu · #26 10-06-2008, 01:41 PM

Because of this trial I went & looked for photos of the crime scene with Ron Goldman & Nicole Simpson. There was one photo posted that I had never seen before.

I hope Fred Goldman has never looked at the picture of his son in the walkway it is truly horrific as is Nicole's.

I have this feeling that he did see it.

rainbo · #27 10-06-2008, 01:42 PM

Let's hope Fred Goldman gets a wonderful birthday present on December 6th. The sentencing is December 5th. What a great day that will be.

Another one that needs to shut up.....Tom Scotto. What an idiot.

caphill · #28 10-06-2008, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Details

They were a courageous jury. I'm sure they knew, just as we do, that coming in guilty might cost them some slander at the least, but possibly far worse. Lots of strong emotions, one nutjob out there who feels strongly enough to go hurt those who they percieve as hurting their race, and they could be assaulted or worse.

They deliberated on the facts. And they did precisely what the defense insisted on - did not use the transcripts as evidence, but only what they could hear on the tapes themselves.

Jurors should not have to listen to themselves being slammed as a racist jury without response. And it is a good thing to hear what went on in the jury room. I always love it when a jury comes out and speaks.

If would have taken courage for this jury to find him not guilty. After the jurors in the murder trial rendered their verdict, they to this day are vilified. The murder trials jurors are called racist and ignorant .

How do you feel about the jury in the murder trial being slammed as a racist jury? Do you only have respect for a jury if they render a verdict to your likening?

psbperu · #29 10-06-2008, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DebinNv

I think it's a catch 22, if they didn't speak all the TH's would have speculated as to why they didn't.

If they do speak they are criticized.

What should you do as a juror?

MOO

It is far easier to be criticized for not talking...who cares about the TH's. Why open a can of worms?

My opinion is that jurors should keep quiet & not discuss deliberations of the jury.

Cait48 · #30 10-06-2008, 01:46 PM

Rainbo, yes Maricopa is in Arizona. i was making reference to another post about Joe and i wasn't clear enough, sorry!

Quinton04 · #31 10-06-2008, 01:55 PM

I'm so sick of Jami Floyd that I just turn the channel when she comes on to whine and bash the jury and the legal process. The defense lawyers are so full of it that they are making morons of themselves going on and on about the jury not having any blacks on it. My hope is that all the appeals are knocked down so fast that their heads will spin.

Heyes · #32 10-06-2008, 02:01 PM

Scotto is on with Jamie now...whine, cry, boo hoo.
I'm loving this!
Orenthal has caused more pain to more people. Glad he's locked up and can't hurt anyone anymore!
Bye Bye

Tracian · #33 10-06-2008, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caphill

If would have taken courage for this jury to find him not guilty. After the jurors in the murder trial rendered their verdict, they to this day are vilified. The murder trials jurors are called racist and ignorant .

How do you feel about the jury in the murder trial being slammed as a racist jury? Do you only have respect for a jury if they render a verdict to your likening?

The jury in the murder trial heard 9 months of testimony, and took three hours to come back with an acquittal; yet this jury is being slammed by defense attorneys for taking 13 hours after a 13 day trial.

The jury in the murder trial had a juror that flashed the 'black power' sign to OJ once the verdict was read.

I have to agree on one point. If OJ was never found responsible for the deaths of Ron and Nicole, tried to cheat the Goldmans out of the merchandise, he would never have attempted to sneakly take the stuff back, and would not be in the position he is in now.

Heyes · #34 10-06-2008, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tracian

The jury in the murder trial heard 9 months of testimony, and took three hours to come back with an acquittal; yet this jury is being slammed by defense attorneys for taking 13 hours after a 13 day trial.

The jury in the murder trial had a juror that flashed the 'black power' sign to OJ once the verdict was read.

I have to agree on one point. If OJ was never found responsible for the deaths of Ron and Nicole, tried to cheat the Goldmans out of the merchandise, he would never have attempted to sneakly take the stuff back, and would not be in the position he is in now.

Yup!
Well Done Goldmans!
This was a giant game and the Goldmans played it well. Who knew that the decisions they made years ago would result in Orenthal's going down today. It worked like a charm Orental has spent the last 10 years hiding assets and now look at the results.
Gotta love it!
IMO

JConnolly · #35 10-06-2008, 02:10 PM

My post may be O/T for this thread. I'm posting anyway to reply with my opinion to some of the other posts here... specifically the one(s) that intimate OJ was found guilty of the murders of Ron & Nicole in THIS trial. That is so false.

While many are of that mind-set, so what? Don't forget that he was found LIABLE for their deaths in the civil trial. That jury got it right. IMO, and other's opinions too, the aquittal in his criminal trial was brought forth due to many reasons... poor prosecution, Rodney King fall-out, etc., etc. I truly believe *that* jury was under enormous pressure to give a verdict that would prevent another riot.

OJs actions over the years have proven him to be less than stellar when it comes to abiding by the law. Can anyone dispute that??

The trial/conviction in Las Vegas FINALLY spoke for JUSTICE. You can't say that they convicted him of the murders, he was not on trial for them this time. He's already been found accountable! Thank God there were 12 people who could listen to the evidence of OJs latest escapade and deliver a proper verdict. OJ is indeed guilty of the charges brought against him.

To those OJ fans who refuse to believe he is nothing but a thug who thinks his own s#it don't stink and can live above the law: What is it about this former great football player that you all find so darned fascinating??

caphill · #36 10-06-2008, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DebinNv

Especially, the part where Simpson says --you didn't take your piece out in the hallway -- I can't recall it verbatum.
I heard that loud and clear during the trial. that was powerfully suggestive!

His own words on that tape got him a convicted.

MOO

MOO

Which tape did you clearly hear him say that?

Details · #37 10-06-2008, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caphill

If would have taken courage for this jury to find him not guilty. After the jurors in the murder trial rendered their verdict, they to this day are vilified. The murder trials jurors are called racist and ignorant .

How do you feel about the jury in the murder trial being slammed as a racist jury? Do you only have respect for a jury if they render a verdict to your likening?

Yep, they're called racist and ignorant - and to my point of view those terms are accurate. A 9 month trial, not even 4 hours of deliberation, and outright admissions they were not going to find him guilty, outright admissions from some of those jurors that they changed their vote because they were afraid of going against the majority.

I have respect for a jury that deserves respect - one that, no matter what verdict they arrive at, looks to the evidence and rules based on what they see there. Whether that's the Peterson jury deciding SP didn't have an intent to kill Connor, or a Blake jury coming back NG, or whatever else.

This jury did that - fitting almost perfectly into the usual standard of deliberations - 1 hour per day of trial. And their ruling is unpopular with people who - as was shown in this trial - tend to be thugs - OJ friends and groupies. It's true for almost any trial where you convict a criminal who has criminal friends - and it's true in this one. They talked of a hit on Alexander - wonder if there's any talk today of a hit on a juror?

Maranatha · #38 10-06-2008, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hinkleyman

His 15 minutes were up a yr ago. He should shut up already. Bet ya he'll be writing a book to make money of this case.

in my opinion

He could call it "If I Didn't Do It".

marabeth · #39 10-06-2008, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DebinNv

I agree with the jury's verdict.
Simpson did this to himself -- his own words from that tape is what got him convicted.

Blaming and bashing the jury for following the law, and using the evidence they were given is just plain wrong!

The only way OJ could have been found not guilty would have been if the jury ignored the tapes , the evidence and the law...

Lyndawitha"Y · #40 10-06-2008, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marabeth

The only way OJ could have been found not guilty would have been if the jury ignored the tapes , the evidence and the law...

The jury had the benefit of listening to those tapes..over and over again using headphones..something none of us had..and yet I did hear OJ ask to see McClinton's Weapon permit, then followed by."Youre coming with me"...Defense tried to spin it..but it comes down to common sense..he asked McClinton to come along and bring that concealed weapon!! And it was that weapon that raised all the counts to felonies..Plain and simple..

LMS