OJ Simpson is dead

#7
#7
I know the sentencing judge said otherwise, but I always felt that he was being punished for what people thought he got away with and not for what he was actually convicted of. I hope that he gets the chance to breathe free air again before he passes from this life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
VolunteerHillbilly said:
I know the sentencing judge said otherwise, but I always felt that he was being punished for what people thought he got away with and not for what he was actually convicted of. I hope that he gets the chance to breathe free air again before he passes from this life.
Click to expand...

He was found guilty of some very serious offenses and served a prison sentence in line with the Nevada guidelines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9
#9
05_never_again said:
He was found guilty of some very serious offenses and served a prison sentence in line with the Nevada guidelines.
Click to expand...
First offender with nobody hurt and mitigating circumstances like trying to take back their own stuff that they believed to be stolen would not ordinarily get 33 years. State court judges face reelection and most of them want to be reelected.
 
#10
#10
VolunteerHillbilly said:
First offender with nobody hurt and mitigating circumstances like trying to take back their own stuff that they believed to be stolen would not ordinarily get 33 years. State court judges face reelection and most of them want to be reelected.
Click to expand...

He didn't get 33; he got 9 to 33. I don't think a 9 year sentence for what he was found guilty of is excessive.

OJ's "I was just trying to take my stuff back" argument is questionable at best and another guy in the posse OJ recruited to come to the hotel threatened someone with a gun. He might have honestly believed that those items belonged to him, but that doesn't mean what he did was OK.

Has it ever been determined if the items were stolen from him or not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
VolunteerHillbilly said:
I know the sentencing judge said otherwise, but I always felt that he was being punished for what people thought he got away with and not for what he was actually convicted of. I hope that he gets the chance to breathe free air again before he passes from this life.
Click to expand...

Thought he got away with? You think he's innocent?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#12
#12
05_never_again said:
He didn't get 33; he got 9 to 33. I don't think a 9 year sentence for what he was found guilty of is excessive.
Click to expand...

The charges themselves were rather excessive. OJ should be spending the rest of his natural life behind bars because he murdered two people, so I'm not terribly bothered by his excessive sentence. But, in fairness, that's not how the justice system is supposed to work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#13
#13
bamawriter said:
The charges themselves were rather excessive. OJ should be spending the rest of his natural life behind bars because he murdered two people, so I'm not terribly bothered by his excessive sentence. But, in fairness, that's not how the justice system is supposed to work.
Click to expand...

Why do you think they were excessive? OJ was the ringleader of a posse who barged into a hotel room, armed, and held people there against their will (kidnapping) while they took items that didn't belong to them (armed robbery).

I suppose the case is complicated a bit by the fact that they didn't harm anyone (or even intend to harm anyone) and there apparently is some debate as to whom the memorabilia actually belonged to. What should he have been charged with instead?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
Anyone with a brain (that excludes the jurors on the original double murder trial) knows that the NV sentence/charges were excessive and that NV was punishing OJ for getting away with murder.

Hopefully he will spend this time looking for the killers of Ronald and Nicole....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#15
#15
BigOrangeMojo said:
Anyone with a brain (that excludes the jurors on the original double murder trial) knows that the NV sentence/charges were excessive and that NV was punishing OJ for getting away with murder.

Hopefully he will spend this time looking for the killers of Ronald and Nicole....
Click to expand...

Doesn't need to look too far, does he have a mirror?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#17
#17
VolunteerHillbilly said:
First offender with nobody hurt and mitigating circumstances like trying to take back their own stuff that they believed to be stolen would not ordinarily get 33 years. State court judges face reelection and most of them want to be reelected.
Click to expand...

For a first time offender, armed robbery (aggravated robbery in TN) carries 8-12 years at 85% eligibility date in TN, which means no probation and no parole. That is for one count, and that is the law that judges have to follow. There is no getting around it. I believe OJ was found guilty of 12 counts of various crimes, so that number would probably go up in this state as well. He still might be incarcerated if he were in TN.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
BigOrangeMojo said:
Anyone with a brain (that excludes the jurors on the original double murder trial) knows that the NV sentence/charges were excessive and that NV was punishing OJ for getting away with murder.

Hopefully he will spend this time looking for the killers of Ronald and Nicole....
Click to expand...

Dude, he already looked on pretty much every golf course in America, what more do you want?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#19
#19
BigOrangeMojo said:
Anyone with a brain (that excludes the jurors on the original double murder trial) knows that the NV sentence/charges were excessive and that NV was punishing OJ for getting away with murder.
Click to expand...

Why exactly were the charges excessive? What else do you call walking into a hotel room with a gun, telling people they can't leave, and taking stuff that doesn't belong to you?

As far as the sentence, he was sentenced in line with the state guidelines and he just got the earliest possible parole. That doesn't seem excessive either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#20
#20
05_never_again said:
Why do you think they were excessive? OJ was the ringleader of a posse who barged into a hotel room, armed, and held people there against their will (kidnapping) while they took items that didn't belong to them (armed robbery).

I suppose the case is complicated a bit by the fact that they didn't harm anyone (or even intend to harm anyone) and there apparently is some debate as to whom the memorabilia actually belonged to. What should he have been charged with instead?
Click to expand...

The assault and kidnapping charges are extreme in my view. They didn't restrain the victims nor (if memory serves) overtly threaten them. But for the phrase "Don't let anybody leave," the kidnapping would have been impossible to try. One of the victims claimed that he was threatened with the gun, but that threat wasn't audible on the recording, so the assault is rather difficult to try.

Also, the group were allowed, voluntarily, into the hotel room, and the victims openly acknowledged that the items were taken from Simpson. So felony robbery is rather extreme. I think coercion with a deadly weapon would have been an appropriate charge and was, in fact, an alternative charge before the DA went after kidnapping.

None of this is to say that Simpson didn't commit a crime, nor that the DA or judge acted inappropriately. It just raises the question in my mind: "If OJ hadn't have gotten away with murder, would he have faced these changes or been given this sentence?"
 
Last edited:
#21
#21
05_never_again said:
Why exactly were the charges excessive? What else do you call walking into a hotel room with a gun, telling people they can't leave, and taking stuff that doesn't belong to you?

As far as the sentence, he was sentenced in line with the state guidelines and he just got the earliest possible parole. That doesn't seem excessive either.
Click to expand...

First of all, there was debate on whether the stuff belonged to him. Second, the entire incident at the hotel lasted approximately 5 mins so the felony kidnapping was excessive there. Third, even the guys that were robbed admit that battery did not occur. Fourth, a lot of legal issues clouded the cases on OJ's acoomplices.

OJ is a murderer and he deserved jail time for this robbery; however, for this case ONLY, the time that he served was appropriate. 33 years (potentially) would have been excessive.
 
#22
#22
bamawriter said:
It just raises the question in my mind: "If OJ hadn't have gotten away with murder, would he have faced these changes or been given this sentence?"
Click to expand...

Probably not, but I'd say he got treated like a regular John Doe, instead of OJ Simpson, because he previously was on trial for double murder.

If he was pre-murder OJ Simpson with a great public image, he probably pleads guilty to a lesser charge and gets credit for time served, or something similar.
 
#24
#24
people are upset that he could have POTENTIALLY served 33 year maximum at the same time he was getting out at the MINIMUM of 9?
 
#25
#25
LouderVol said:
people are upset that he could have POTENTIALLY served 33 year maximum at the same time he was getting out at the MINIMUM of 9?
Click to expand...

There was never a chance he was going to serve the max. It was essentially a 9-year sentence provided he was a good prisoner. I remember at the time of his conviction legal commentators saying there was a great chance he'd make parole after 9.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top