Actually, because of our double jeapordy laws "Not Guilty" does mean "Innocent". He can never be tried again, even if we find a smoking gun. Also, in AMERICA, you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. I take it as "innocent" meaning "he didn't do it." "Innocent" is not a legal term, "innocent" is a informal English word. While he may be found "Not Guilty," that doesn't mean he didn't do it. And, you are correct, in America's court system, you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. It doesn't necessarily apply to each American's thoughts, and why should it? People will believe what they want to about a person's innocence or guilt, and that's great, and it does matter. If people accepted what the court decided, no one would have reason to discover wrongful convictions. It also works the other way, although yes, as you pointed to, they can't be convicted of a crime once they're acquitted due to double jeopardy laws. And I'm not mad at O.J., and not mad at our justice system. I never even thought I was mad in that comment. Just clarifying what sickleguy said.
If according to the US criminal system, one is: Innocent until proven guilty. Then, not found guilty. Therefore, innocent. Logical (I wish I could use the logic symbols). Of course, he is also responsible for those deaths, according to the civil court. Everybody is right!
He can never be tried again, even if we find a smoking gun. The only thing inaccurate about that statement is all of it. New evidence can be reason for a new trial.
New evidence can be a reason for a new trial if one was found guilty the first time around. The 5th Amendment prohibits a person from being tried for the same crime twice.
The only thing inaccurate about that statement is all of it. New evidence can be reason for a new trial. You must live in Canada. In America, once you've been found "not guilty" (as you all seem to prefer) you cannot be tried again for the same crime.
Wasn't this thread about a restaurant owner refusing to serve OJ? I must be confused.
Wasn't this thread about a restaurant owner refusing to serve OJ? I must be confused. Someone wanted Orange Juice and couldn't get it? Now that's a crime!
In America, once you've been found "not guilty" (as you all seem to prefer) you cannot be tried again for the same crime. I'm no constitutional expert, but I believe this is correct. Once a judgment has been rendered, the double jeopardy provision applies.
The only thing inaccurate about that statement is all of it. New evidence can be reason for a new trial. You must live in Canada. In America, once you've been found "not guilty" (as you all seem to prefer) you cannot be tried again for the same crime. Canada has the same provision, and I'd really recommend that Americans don't try and badmouth other nations' legal proceedings. *cough*habeas corpus*cough*
Why Ruby kicking OJ out of his restaurant is newsworthy, well that brings me back to my original point. There's no doubt that race was a huge issue in that trial. That's just one reason it received so much attention, more than Blake or Spector. If Blake or Spector came into my business, I doubt I'd recognize them. OJ, because of the popularity of the trial and his own fame, would be recognized by almost anyone. So if you're saying Ruby kicked OJ out because he's black, I don't think you have much to back that up. Chances are he kicked him out for the very reason he gave. It's not like not wanting to serve someone you believe murdered two people is such a stretch. Legal or not, that's another question. once you've been found "not guilty" (as you all seem to prefer) We don't prefer it. That's our judicial system. So if you want to be correct, it's "not guilty". Wasn't this thread about a restaurant owner refusing to serve OJ? I must be confused. posted by brainofdtrain Yes, it is. Let's drop the debate on guilty vs. not guilty vs. innocent and leave that topic to lawfilter.
Jeff Ruby you made a great play! I concur with Tom Archdeacon - Simpson is an affront to the human race. Simpson's trial was covered by TV and the evidence was so overwhelming against him that any unbiased person could easily conclude that Simpson murdered two people. Simpson benefited from a racist jury that included a former Black Panther then had the audacity to say he would find the real killer - as if the entire human race was a bunch of morons. Some things never change, as Archdeacon pointed out, Simpson remains as arrogant as ever. Still there are people that are so enamored by athletes that they want to admire and associate with them regardless of character and conduct. However, it is gratifying to see that some people like Mr. Ruby, who previously admired Simpson, do not dismiss his egregious conduct. They are so repulsed by what Simpson did to others and disgusted by a legal system that failed to hold him accountable. Simpson should not be in the general population. Jeff Ruby did the right thing - for himself and his customers.
Simpson's trial was covered by TV and the evidence was so overwhelming against him that any unbiased person could easily conclude that Simpson murdered two people. If the evidence was "so overwhelming", why is he still walking free? According to the court of law, he was found not guilty of murder. People may not agree with it but in the eyes of the law, the man is innocent (not guilty = innocent). Jeff Ruby did the right thing - for himself and his customers. Why is that? Was OJ going to attack Jeff Ruby and his customers? OJ has no bearings in any of our lives but people still feel the need to hate him because he was found not guilty by the court of law. I am no OJ apologist but keep in mind, does anyone really think that OJ cares what the public thinks of him? I could've sworn that if someone was on trial and found either guilty or not guilty, that was pretty much it. Like I said on my earlier post, this is Jeff Ruby's restaurant and he can do whatever he wants.
I guess we will never know, who really committed those murders. The man was found, not guilty, innocent, whatever one it was. If he did it, you can thank the LA cops for screwing things up. Nicoles family should have sued them for being MF'ing idiots. But because they didn't find him guilty, the guy has a right to live his life and go where the hell he wants and shouldn't have been kicked out of anywhere. People are convicted of crimes everyday of shit they didn't do, just think it could happen to anyone of us. Just be in the wrong place at the wrong time, I know I wouldn't want to be condemned of a crime I didn't commit.
I know I wouldn't want to be condemned of a crime I didn't commit. Or a crime you were found not guilty of.
I like OJ the athlete, not OJ the person. But I still think a person refusing to serve another individual, when that person isn't causing any particular problem, is a poor practice. There are a lot of low-lifes walking freely through the streets of the city I live in, and they are still allowed to go into stores, purchase food, etc. Just because OJ had a ridiculous amount of media coverage on his case, he's treated differently? People waste their emotions on OJ, when they should be more outraged at the legal system if they feel so strongly about his (OJs) guilt. Would Ruby also refuse to serve any members of Simpson's jury? His legal team (the ones still living)? The incompetent police force? Where does it end? It is good, though, that Simpson and his group left the establishment in a dignified manner.
It stated on CNN that Ruby recieved a standing ovation by all of the paytrons in his establishment that afternoon.
It stated on CNN that Ruby recieved a standing ovation by all of the paytrons in his establishment that afternoon. Question. Did you read the link? The reason I ask is because that was in the story as well. Ruby said some 50 people in the private room where Simpson had been seated "stood up and applauded me" when Simpson left.
Innocent in the eyes of the law is different from innocent. He is definitely the former, probably not the latter. And not to stray too far, but how cool is the name "Archdeacon"?
Innocent in the eyes of the law is different from innocent I'm sorry but...what?!!? Not to go off topic but Ray Lewis was also charged with murder and was found not guilty by the court of law. So are you implying that because in the eyes of the law he was found not guilty, he's not innocent? Either way, both men are walking free and can go anywhere they want to. That is unless Jeff Ruby owns the establishment.
Someone please close this thread? It's not even sports related anymore and quite honestly, it's troll bait.
Someone please close this thread? It's not even sports related anymore and quite honestly, it's troll bait. It wasn't really sports-related in the first place. Just because it has to do with a former running back and a guy who owns a restaurant in the city the Kentucky Derby is held, it never had anything to do with sports. Every OJ thread in history morphs into some "Innocent vs. Guilty" argument. I guess this one was supposed to be a combination of that, plus slaps on the back for some high-morality restaurant owner. Get over the OJ verdict, people. There are (unfortunately) many, MANY murders in the U.S. and a great deal of them go unsolved (meaning, consequently, killers are walking free). There's plenty of outrage to go around, not just towards OJ. His just took place in our living rooms and all over our ridiculous media.
His just took place in our living rooms and all over our ridiculous media. And no matter what, people will always have an opinion about this subject regardless whether they think it's right or wrong.
OJ is bad, mmm-'kay? Yeah. Don't invite him over to your house for dinner. It's the right thing to do. Also - maybe not give him too much publicity. He seems to, you know, profit from it. Other than that, not much to discuss, except that for many people, this is the only exposure they've ever had to trial law (cuz it was on TV) and they are ill-positioned to make too many judgements. Often, from what I'm told, if you do not have: a) A witness b) A murder weapon you don't get: c) A conviction So everyone take one of them there chill pills about fucking OJ. At this point, if you give a shit, you're the only one to blame.
Little pronoun trouble there, I think.
