O.J. 15 Gets years in Jail

Biggins

Delighted to see that O.J. has just gotten 2 minutes ago 15 years in jail.
Sentenced at 6.17pm Irish time.
Watching it live O.J. didn't look too happy.


Counts 1 to 10
1 1 year
2 48 months
3 48 months
4 120 Months
5 15 years
6 15 Years
7 180 months
8 180 months
9 72 months
10 72 months

All terms are to run concurrent.
(He served 64 days so far)
He's in for 6 years before he can even apply for parole.

It was great to see the criminal live being sentenced.
It made me think... why don't we have cameras in our court rooms for most cases?
I understand that for family cases, this should not be the case but in others shouldn't we actually be allowed to see the criminal more often than not!

Time Magazine

Better late than never.

ShooterSF

Biggins wrote: »

Delighted to see that O.J. has just gotten 2 minutes ago xx years in jail.
Sentenced at 6.17pm Irish time.
Watching it live O.J. didn't look too happy.


Counts 1 to 10
1 1 year
2 48 months
3 48 months
4 120 Months
5 15 years
6 15 Years
7 180 months
8 180 months
9 72 months
10 72 months

All terms are to run concurrent.
(He served 64 days so far)

It was great to see the criminal live being sentenced.
It made me think... why don't we have cameras in our court rooms for most cases?
I understand that for family cases, this should not be the case but in others shouldn't we actually be allowed to see the criminal more often than not!

God no. People don't actually get the whole innocent till proven guilty thing and even if the person (not criminal) was found not guilty people would still assume he did something. Then this innocent person who's case was televised and whose face is now well known would unfairly be treated as a criminal by Joe public.

Biggins

Good point.

He was shown live however AFTER he was found guilty.
Could we not do the same?

After the convicted criminals that have been found guilty, come back to plead for a lower prison term length, could we then see their guilty faces?

jhegarty

did he get credit on time served for last time ?

Sharpshooter

Fresh OJ for the inmates.

Morlar

About bloody time.

ShooterSF

Morlar wrote: »

About bloody time.

Jeez it only happened last year. How fast do think they can get through cases?

Guy:Incognito

Whats the difference between 15 years and 180 months?

Jimbo

He would have got that sentance for murder in this country.

He has got his comuppance

magick

not long enough, but given its something

jhegarty

Stekelly wrote: »

Whats the difference between 15 years and 180 months?

One sounds more that other.

I just haven't worked out which does yet.

themadchef

Pity he didn't get more.


Televising high profile cases like this would give people notoriety. Some people crave attention, it might make people go one step further just for the fame.

Jimbo

Stekelly wrote: »

Whats the difference between 15 years and 180 months?

The spelling?

nyarlothothep

15 months has two digits whereas 180 months has 3.

Sharpshooter

Of course there will be the usual appeal by the Lawyers
of OJ , but surely that would be a waste of time .
Justice has caught up with him at last and l hope it stays that way.

humanji

Biggins wrote: »

Good point.

He was shown live however AFTER he was found guilty.
Could we not do the same?

After the convicted criminals that have been found guilty, come back to plead for a lower prison term length, could we then see their guilty faces?

That could turn out fairly badly if someone won an appeal. They'd be innocent, but people will still have seen there faces on papers proclaiming them to be killers or rapist etc. (just trying to cover myself for when they find the bodies...eh, I mean if they find the bodies...eh, I mean if there were bodies to find...)

seanybiker

fair rough sentence for what he done. He will be out in a few years . Then he will sell his story to some movie maker and make tonnes of money from it all.

Biggins

The judge stated quite clearly that she was sentencing him based solely on the fact that everything he did, was premeditated, recorded from phone and camera from start to finish, that he brought guns, he terrorised and kidnapped and knew at later stages (recorded phone calls) that he knew he had to get rid of the gun evidence.

Possibility of appeal - extremely slim to say the least, by all accounts and independent assessments.
Can't say I'm not delighted.

Biggins

seanybiker wrote: »

fair rough sentence for what he done. He will be out in a few years . Then he will sell his story to some movie maker and make tonnes of money from it all.

Any money he makes will directly go to the parents and family of the girl he was found guilty of denying her rights of.
- He escaped the murder charge so the family of the murdered girl brought an independent charge of rights denial - when they won, they were awarded millions. He refused to pay or wouldn't pay so he was chased, sued and lost. Subsequently - ANYTHING - he makes, goes to them till the millions in the fines, are paid off.

Thats why he even lost his rights to the book he wrote "If I Did It!" and those book rights were given to the murdered girls family.

b0bsquish

Goddamnit now I cant say "Free like OJ, did it and got away with it"

seanybiker

Biggins wrote: »

Any money he makes will directly go to the parents and family of the girl he was found guilty of denying her rights of.
- He escaped the murder charge so the family of the murdered girl brought an independent charge of rights denial - when they won, they were awarded millions. He refused to pay or wouldn't pay so he was chased, sued and lost. Subsequently - ANYTHING - he makes, goes to them till the millions in the fines, are paid off.

Thats why he even lost his rights to the book he wrote "If I Did It!" and those book rights were given to the murdered girls family.

Oh right i didnt know that

Sharpshooter

Biggins wrote: »

The judge stated quite clearly that she was sentencing him based solely on the fact that everything he did, was premeditated, recorded from phone and camera from start to finish, that he brought guns, he terrorised and kidnapped and knew at later stages (recorded phone calls) that he knew he had to get rid of the gun evidence.

Possibility of appeal - extremely slim to say the least, by all accounts and independent assessments.
Can't say I'm not delighted.

Before sentencing he told the Judge he " was sorry " and "confused" and admitted he had been stupid.
Thank God , she saw him as the exact opposite .
lt most certainly wasn't a confused person that organized all that.

Hagar

He was always going to go to gaol for something.

shenanigans1982

sharpshooterH wrote: »

lt most certainly wasn't a confused person that organized all that.

You need to remember this is the same guy that got stuck under a bus and got his afro caught in a doorway.

tolosenc

15 years is a bit harsh for what was essetially an armed robbery, no?

Sharpshooter

obl wrote: »

15 years is a bit harsh for what was essetially an armed robbery, no?

Depends how you look at it , l think he got away with murder.

shotgun mike

Now now, he was found not guilty of murder by the most fair and transparent legal system in the world.

peanuthead

Biggins wrote: »

It made me think... why don't we have cameras in our court rooms for most cases?
I understand that for family cases, this should not be the case but in others shouldn't we actually be allowed to see the criminal more often than not!

It shouldn't be allowed at all, I personally think it's disgraceful. If not for the privacy of the criminal, for the privacy of his/her family. I think its sad and typically American that this would be broadcast for all to see on television, and is a reminder of how nosey and obsessed we all are with everyone elses business. Why not go the whole hog and have Dr Phil as the guest judge.

Jimbo

shotgun mike wrote: »

Now now, he was found not guilty of murder by the most fair and transparent legal system in the world.

Judge Judy?

Biggins

obl wrote: »

15 years is a bit harsh for what was essetially an armed robbery, no?

With a group of fellow armed men, threatening others there, kidnapping one - hell NO.

Besides the non-chargeable aspects of then holing a party for a successful(!) robbery, rubbing and insulting the parents of the girl he denied right to (he killed!), telling them to f**k off when it came to collecting what a previous court had awarded them. He told them also he was going back to playing his golf and told them to sod off repeatedly by phone calls and outside the courts as they were (successfully as it turned out) suing him.

As for the TV aspect - justice must be seen to be done and not just done behind closed doors.

Those robbed, raped and murdered, they and their family should get the right to see exposed, those that have been found guilty of such heinous crimes.
(...but that's just my way of looking at it)

OctavarIan

sharpshooterH wrote: »

Depends how you look at it , l think he got away with murder.

Fcuking hell, that case is long over and has nothing to do with the one he has been jailed for.

FX Meister

Did you see it happen live or did you see it on the news or something?

Biggins wrote: »

Delighted to see that O.J. has just gotten 2 minutes ago 15 years in jail.
Sentenced at 6.17pm Irish time.
Watching it live O.J. didn't look too happy.


Counts 1 to 10
1 1 year
2 48 months
3 48 months
4 120 Months
5 15 years
6 15 Years
7 180 months
8 180 months
9 72 months
10 72 months

All terms are to run concurrent.
(He served 64 days so far)
He's in for 6 years before he can even apply for parole.

It was great to see the criminal live being sentenced.
It made me think... why don't we have cameras in our court rooms for most cases?
I understand that for family cases, this should not be the case but in others shouldn't we actually be allowed to see the criminal more often than not!

Jimbo

OctavarIan wrote: »

Fcuking hell, that case is long over and has nothing to do with the one he has been jailed for.

He was subsequently found guilty in a civil trial. He did get away with murder.

Jimbo

FX Meister wrote: »

Did you see it happen live or did you see it on the news or something?

It was broadcast live on Sky News

peanuthead

OctavarIan wrote: »

Fcuking hell, that case is long over and has nothing to do with the one he has been jailed for.

Yeah, nothin'. Right.

Biggins

OctavarIan wrote: »

Fcuking hell, that case is long over and has nothing to do with the one he has been jailed for.

Actually no. There is a connection.

The items that O.J. was trying to rob was items that were awarded to the family of the murdered girl - items they were selling in order to gain back some of the money that O.J. refused to give to them.

O.J. decided he didn't want the family to get either those items or the monetary value of them.
...so he armed his gang, strode into a room, locked doors and terrorised stall sellers, kidnapped one...

The_Minister

Biggins wrote: »

It was great to see the criminal live being sentenced.
It made me think... why don't we have cameras in our court rooms for most cases?

Because we don't want to turn our justice system into a tasteless circus.

Black Swan

OJ exceeds shelf life.

Holsten

15 years.. hate that.

Acid_Violet

I thought the judge was pretty good, she'd spunk, ripped him apart after he told his X-factor sob story. It still confuses me, and horrifies me, that he was BOTH acquitted and convicted of murdering Brown and Goldman. Such is the US legal system, one could say......

Biggins

Acid_Violet wrote: »

...It still confuses me, and horrifies me, that he was BOTH acquitted and convicted of murdering Brown and Goldman. Such is the US legal system, one could say......

Actually, under European human rights rules, we can do the same. I think there was a case or two of this also in Britain alone if memory serves me right.

Acid_Violet

Biggins wrote: »

Actually, under European human rights rules, we can do the same. I think there was a case or two of this also in Britain alone if memory serves me right.

Don't think I expressed myself right, I mean more that a person may be found guilty by a civil trial (which, afaik, bears in this case as much weight as a criminal murder trial) yet not suffer a criminal sentence.

AckwelFoley

Biggins wrote: »

Delighted to see that O.J. has just gotten 2 minutes ago 15 years in jail.
Sentenced at 6.17pm Irish time.
Watching it live O.J. didn't look too happy.


Counts 1 to 10
1 1 year
2 48 months
3 48 months
4 120 Months
5 15 years
6 15 Years
7 180 months
8 180 months
9 72 months
10 72 months

All terms are to run concurrent.
(He served 64 days so far)
He's in for 6 years before he can even apply for parole.

It was great to see the criminal live being sentenced.
It made me think... why don't we have cameras in our court rooms for most cases?
I understand that for family cases, this should not be the case but in others shouldn't we actually be allowed to see the criminal more often than not!

'if the glove dont fit you must aquit'

ShooterSF

Acid_Violet wrote: »

Don't think I expressed myself right, I mean more that a person may be found guilty by a civil trial (which, afaik, bears in this case as much weight as a criminal murder trial) yet not suffer a criminal sentence.

Quite simple. Unlike a criminal case where there can be no reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty a civil case just needs the evidence to favour the plaintiff. In other words its easier to loose a civil case.

Acid_Violet

Just come across the DNA evidence in the murder case that apparently wasn't strong enough. I know nothing about the law but based on common sense....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson_murder_case#Evidence

papajimsmooth

But with O.J in jail who will find the real killer?

hussey

Apparently when he couldn't remember where he was the night of the murder, the police told him to concentrate

/I'll get my hat

arybvtcw0eolkf

hussey wrote: »

Apparently when he couldn't remember where he was the night of the murder, the police told him to concentrate

/I'll get my hat

You got that off his website WWW forward SLASH forward SLASH...

Waiting I'm right behind you..

arybvtcw0eolkf

Acid_Violet wrote: »

Just come across the DNA evidence in the murder case that apparently wasn't strong enough. I know nothing about the law but based on common sense....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson_murder_case#Evidence

Wahts de National Dyslexic Association do got wit dis?.

xbox36016

yesssssss he is going to jeil about time yessss