Is OJ Simpson the stupidest fucker ever???

you actually thought he had half a brain?

ummmmm yup .....whats meant to be , is bound to happen i guess...

When you take Vicodin does this happen to you?

I need to take a shit... But I already took 2 shits already.... Not wet shits... I am talking this stuff is packing it up like a regular stool and telling me it has a warrant and I need to come down to the bathroom and clear up some loose ends...

BRB

you need to eat more beans

a beef and bean burrito from Del Taco would do the trick

I hope you are right.

BRB

He thought he was immune ad found out he was not.

Was he set up for it? I have not followed the case that much but it seems they had a lotof video evidence in a hotel room.

oh shit wait what

Recorded sound, not video.

yes, probably

whenever i see him in the news i ask myself how can somebody THAT stupid.. he got away already and then he does shit like that

Shit shit shit, too much shit in a few hours... hehehe

Did he do it? yes. Did the LAPD fuck up and try to frame him anyways when it wasn't necessary? yes. OJ's lack of conviction is all on the LAPD's head. In the end the OJ trial focused attention on the incompetant and corrupt LAPD and it's crime lab and has been cleaned up so while a murderer got set free many more innocent people were saved from going to prison. Because when you send an innoncent person to jail for murder rape whatever that bad enough, but what' even worse is the REAL criminal is still out there in the streets.

uh that's stupid as hell if you are innocent you should NEVER be in jail that's the way our system is supposed to work.

Ummm... So you're saying it is better to put innocent people in prison than having a real criminal out on the streets? All I can say is, WOW.

The world is full of criminals, far more than are sitting in prison right now. I love how these people arm chair quarter back the justice system and always seem to know better than a judge and the 12 jury members responsible for carrying that justice out. It is always guilty until proven innocent right? Oh wait, it is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

I can tell you one thing, it was a red letter day for the failure in the judicial system when a man found innocent of murder charges can be found guilty of that very same murder in a civil court.

As for what I think? Did he do it? I don't know, thats what the court system is for and if they said he was innocent I will take their word for it.

He had it made...His kids are grown, he has a pension from the NFL....all he had to do was leave the country and he could be on a beach fucking all the white hoes he wanted...

Ummm... how do you arrive at that conclusion from what GatorB said? Looks to me like he's saying something completely different than what you think he said.

Not according to cops, many of whom believe that once they've been given the warrant from the judge and made the arrest the person is guilty. The rest (fair trial, jury deliberation, etc) is just a formality. I've witnessed this attitude in cops first-hand.

Agreed, but you just contradicted yourself. In on breath you decry armchair quarterbacking of the judicial system and in the next you point out that that same judicial system is in fact fallible. Which is it? Maybe there are reasons why people second-guess the outcome of trials?

That's quite a naive position to take, especially in light of the fallibility you mentioned above of the same system you now say you'll take the word of without question.


As for OJ all I'm going to say is you can take the man out of the ghetto, but you....

If it weren't for the LA Riots(Rodney King bullshit) he would have already been 12 years into his life sentence -- not playing golf and being a dick.

Early morning posting, misinterpreted.


Well I used to be an officer and when we got our warrants it was to pick up a SUSPECT. A suspect is just that until a court proves otherwise. The so called "rest" is not a formality and every one deserves their day in court and I am sure if you found yourself there you would hope it was more than just a formality.


Umm... How can a contradict myself when I believe in the system working properly and it fails to do so? Any monkey with one brain cell can see how fucked up it is when a higher court of law makes one decision and a lower court disregards that and makes it own. The system contradicted itself not I.


Ask any truly innocent person who has been drug through the legal system for a crime they did not commit and were finally found innocent. I think they very much want people taking the word of the court without question.

I can relate. My mind doesn't start firing on all cylinders until about midway into my 2nd coffee.



You would be one of the few exceptions to what I said then. Yes, I was once a direct witness to an officer wagging his finger in the face of an accused, and when challenged as to his attitude his reply was that it was good enough for him that the JP signed the warrant, that was all he needed to know that the person was guilty. (yes, a JP, not even a real judge signed that warrant).

So being a former officer yourself surely you're not going to sit there and tell me you never had occasion to know some fellow officers who had a different outlook on "justice" than yourself.



That in itself is a contradiction, no? But your earlier post pretty much states that you A) think those who "armchair quarterback the system" shouldn't be doing so, and B) that you basically blindly have faith in the system and take the judgements of courts at their word. Yet in the same post you say the system can at times be wrong. You sersiously don't see a conflict there? I do.

I think maybe a little armchair quarterbacking is exactly what any justice system needs. Of course it carries much more weight when it's done by people who at least make an attempt to gather all the facts of whatever case/judgement they are critiqueing.

Indeed. But that's just one scenario. What about all those cases where someone who definitely without a doubt commited a serious crime yet got off on a technicality?



In that sense, yes. But in the grand sceme of things how often does that happen? There are other percentages of the greater pie that comprise the guilty who somehow weasel their way out of it or their lawyer finds a loophole or their lawyer gets them off because one of the investigators forgot to glove up or WHATEVER.

All I'm saying is that having 100% blind faith in the system probably isn't the wisest way to think, and there is evidence pointed out in this very thread that backs me up on that. People DID question the outcome of the first OJ trial, and for damn good reason. Now he's going to jail for something else he did since then. In 5 or 8 years or whatever, once he's back out I wonder what other kind of crap he's going to pull on society. Any guess?

And this years 2009 Stupidest Fucker Award Goes to.

OJJJJJJJ SIMMPPPPPPSONNNN!!!!

YAAAY OJ

you can take the nigga out the hood but not the hood outta the nigga.

it is just how it goes, they are raised differently and it will NEVER change it is in their blood.

LOL

had a debate this weekend with some friends. my friends argument was "lets say OJ truly was innocent...why should he have to walk on eggshells and 'avoid trouble' if he didn't do anything wrong?" (he was playing devils advocate).

we all agreed that whether he was innocent or guilty in the past, the fact that he was the defendant in probably the countries most highly publicized murder trial should at least have taught his ass that he better not even get caught in a traffic violation. you don't see Phil Spector running around with guns and slapping hoes. also agreed that because of this fact, OJ must not be right in the head.

so, yes, OJ is a stupid fuck