Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
NO, actually the DA team was incompetent. They asked questions they did not know the answer to already. And it blew up in their face. They allowed suspicion to build in the Jury about the motives and reasoning of key Prosecution witnesses and did not address them.
They did not answer key questions like why did the police lie to a judge twice the night of the murder, why did the police lie to OJ's daughter the night of the murder, why did the police not follow strict accountability on evidence, etc etc etc.
Ok .. the DA was incompetent. Even an incompetent DA should have been able to secure a conviction ... you don't think Shapiro, Johnny C, and F. Lee Baily had something to do with it?
If the evidence was overwhelming, which it was not, no. Of course they had something to do with it. BUT a competent DA team would have addressed the obvious issues and cleared them up so the claim that the cops set him up would not have flown at all. A competent DA team would NOT have trotted out those gloves without having first had him try it on outside of the Court room. A competent DA team would have aggressively addressed the claims Furman was a racist ( who happened to have a personal relationship with OJ). They would have found a way to dampen the abject stupidity of Furman's partner carrying OJ's blood around for a whole day.
That DA team was like a deer caught in headlights.
i understand your point, look at the scott peterson trialOk .. the DA was incompetent. Even an incompetent DA should have been able to secure a conviction ... you don't think Shapiro, Johnny C, and F. Lee Baily had something to do with it?
If the evidence was overwhelming, which it was not, no. Of course they had something to do with it. BUT a competent DA team would have addressed the obvious issues and cleared them up so the claim that the cops set him up would not have flown at all. A competent DA team would NOT have trotted out those gloves without having first had him try it on outside of the Court room. A competent DA team would have aggressively addressed the claims Furman was a racist ( who happened to have a personal relationship with OJ). They would have found a way to dampen the abject stupidity of Furman's partner carrying OJ's blood around for a whole day.
That DA team was like a deer caught in headlights.
But would that or really anything to do with the trial have been the case if OJ was just a regular everyday guy on trial for murder with a regular everyday defense team? Personally, I think not.
I know ... the DA was overmatched by OJ's lawyers ...
The DA would not have been overmatched by Oranthal James "regular guy's" lawyers.
I'm not sure overmatched is the word I would use but that's just me. It seems there may have been larger considerations concerning the potential outcome of that trial.
You might be surprised, I've seen a fair number very good public defenders. Stereotyping can be extremely funny when that is it's intention, when not, well you know what I mean.
I have had a few um ... run ins with the law. I find that the affordable lawyers are a lot less competent than the higher priced attorneys. I know that in my town your best chance to beat a charge or get it seriously reduced is to cough up the cash and get the local high-priced guy, Jack Atwood, to defend you. While I am sure I would be surprised by the ability of some public defenders and low rent attorneys, I would feel much more comfortable with my chance having the all-star panel that OJ had on my side over some scrubs from the minor leagues.
I'm not sure overmatched is the word I would use but that's just me. It seems there may have been larger considerations concerning the potential outcome of that trial.
You might be surprised, I've seen a fair number very good public defenders. Stereotyping can be extremely funny when that is it's intention, when not, well you know what I mean.
I have had a few um ... run ins with the law. I find that the affordable lawyers are a lot less competent than the higher priced attorneys. I know that in my town your best chance to beat a charge or get it seriously reduced is to cough up the cash and get the local high-priced guy, Jack Atwood, to defend you. While I am sure I would be surprised by the ability of some public defenders and low rent attorneys, I would feel much more comfortable with my chance having the all-star panel that OJ had on my side over some scrubs from the minor leagues.
Not arguing that point, now or ever. Just pointing out that you were generally over simplifying when you made the statement I first responded to.
And all but one of my experiences in court has been as a witness for the prosecution.
i understand your point, look at the scott peterson trialIf the evidence was overwhelming, which it was not, no. Of course they had something to do with it. BUT a competent DA team would have addressed the obvious issues and cleared them up so the claim that the cops set him up would not have flown at all. A competent DA team would NOT have trotted out those gloves without having first had him try it on outside of the Court room. A competent DA team would have aggressively addressed the claims Furman was a racist ( who happened to have a personal relationship with OJ). They would have found a way to dampen the abject stupidity of Furman's partner carrying OJ's blood around for a whole day.
That DA team was like a deer caught in headlights.
But would that or really anything to do with the trial have been the case if OJ was just a regular everyday guy on trial for murder with a regular everyday defense team? Personally, I think not.
/can-o-worms
I have had a few um ... run ins with the law. I find that the affordable lawyers are a lot less competent than the higher priced attorneys. I know that in my town your best chance to beat a charge or get it seriously reduced is to cough up the cash and get the local high-priced guy, Jack Atwood, to defend you. While I am sure I would be surprised by the ability of some public defenders and low rent attorneys, I would feel much more comfortable with my chance having the all-star panel that OJ had on my side over some scrubs from the minor leagues.
Not arguing that point, now or ever. Just pointing out that you were generally over simplifying when you made the statement I first responded to.
And all but one of my experiences in court has been as a witness for the prosecution.
I agree that I was generalizing with my first statement.
We did not Invade Iraq because of Osama Bin Laden.
Did you read the story at the OP link?This was quite some time ago and I remember arguing the same issue on another board.
The officer acted stupidly and immorally without a doubt. He was warned that she was a frightened girl who probably didn't have a bomb. However, she entered a clearly marked do not enter zone, where orders are to shoot anyone who enters these areas. Many suicide bombers infiltrate through these areas and kill many Israeli civilians. It is not unheard of for Palestinian children to be suicide bombers. The child had a bag and entered a clearly marked do not enter zone. Prodigal or no prodigal a soldier still should make a moral decision. If he didn't want to confront her for fear of being blown up. Then he could have easily fired warning shots near her causing her to scurry back from the direction she came in.
Not guilty. The Israeli captain who emptied his rifle into a Palestinain schoolgirl | World news | The GuardianA recording of radio exchanges between Capt R and his troops obtained by Israeli television revealed that from the beginning soldiers identified Iman as a child.
In the recording, a soldier in a watchtower radioed a colleague in the army post's operations room and describes Iman as "a little girl" who was "scared to death". After soldiers first opened fire, she dropped her schoolbag which was then hit by several bullets establishing that it did not contain explosive. At that point she was no longer carrying the bag and, the tape revealed, was heading away from the army post when she was shot.
but, would this have happened at all if Hamas hadn't used children as suicide bombers in the past?Did you read the story at the OP link?This was quite some time ago and I remember arguing the same issue on another board.
The officer acted stupidly and immorally without a doubt. He was warned that she was a frightened girl who probably didn't have a bomb. However, she entered a clearly marked do not enter zone, where orders are to shoot anyone who enters these areas. Many suicide bombers infiltrate through these areas and kill many Israeli civilians. It is not unheard of for Palestinian children to be suicide bombers. The child had a bag and entered a clearly marked do not enter zone. Prodigal or no prodigal a soldier still should make a moral decision. If he didn't want to confront her for fear of being blown up. Then he could have easily fired warning shots near her causing her to scurry back from the direction she came in.
Not guilty. The Israeli captain who emptied his rifle into a Palestinain schoolgirl | World news | The GuardianA recording of radio exchanges between Capt R and his troops obtained by Israeli television revealed that from the beginning soldiers identified Iman as a child.
In the recording, a soldier in a watchtower radioed a colleague in the army post's operations room and describes Iman as "a little girl" who was "scared to death". After soldiers first opened fire, she dropped her schoolbag which was then hit by several bullets establishing that it did not contain explosive. At that point she was no longer carrying the bag and, the tape revealed, was heading away from the army post when she was shot.
Not guilty. The Israeli captain who emptied his rifle into a Palestinain schoolgirl | World news | The Guardian
An Israeli army officer who fired the entire magazine of his automatic rifle into a 13-year-old Palestinian girl and then said he would have done the same even if she had been three years old was acquitted on all charges by a military court yesterday.
I hope this guy gets tortured to death when the revolt comes and irsael is taken back
That is a 5 yo story memorialized for the slogan "confirm the kill".
A 5 year old story?
Poor little bluboi .
I agree but we've got to keep that hate alive, that way more and more people, innocent and otherwise, can be killed to satisfy the lust for vengeance and (supposed) justice.A 5 year old story?
Poor little bluboi .
Poor little Iyman
Iman Darweesh Al Hams - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Oh snap I forgot Rachael Corrie!
http://www.glenhavenfire.org/Portals/0/images/pancakes.jpg
a 13 year old child. Please, make sure you cry louder when crying about the next 13 year old jewish kid's death.
I'm sure it will be "different" then.
I don't hate Israel but this is disgusting and we should not embrace ourselves so much with ANY Country and should be as neutral as possible;imho.
