Serial killer claims to have killed Nicole Brown Simpson

[Quantum Windbag]

Criminal profiler Anthony Meoli, who exchanged dozens of letters with Glen Rogers and visited him on death row, said Rogers explained to him that O.J. Simpson had hired him to break into his ex-wife's condo to steal diamond earrings he had given her.
"Glen told me that O.J.'s instructions were that 'You may have to kill the bitch,'" Meoli said. "Those were his exact words."

Documentary: Serial killer, not O.J., killed Simpson and Brown - CNN.com

Ya right... the FBI and every police force in the country is looking for every serial killer alive but OJ just runs out and hires one just like that.

What are the chances?

The guy got his name in the paper, and it will keep conspiracy nuts happy for decades, what more can you ask for?

 

[konradv]

Some people just don't get it.

The 5th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States says "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Do you see anything in there about it being unless the issues are such that you actually understand them? In fact, do you see anything in there about it being unless there is a mistrial?

Didn't think so. SCOTUS has basically ruled that the Constitution doesn't say what it says, and they have carved out so many exceptions to the rule against trying someone twice that prosecutors can actually charge you with a crime you were found not guilty of simply by changing the jurisdiction from state to federal. The simple fact is that OJ was never tried for conspiracy to commit murder, so he can be tried for it if the LA Districat Attorney decides to do so.

No, I don't. You're basing this analysis on your own prejudices against the system. I'm basing mine on some knowledge and what I've heard. The bottom line is, we're both not lawyers and I'd like to hear from one. Your snarkiness isn't in any way a substitute for actual knowledge.

My prejudices against the system have nothing to do with the fact that conspiracy to commit burglary and murder are two different crimes. The fact that you don't get that is what makes this so pathetically hilarious.

I made no statement about "conspiracy to commit burglary". It would be "conspiracy to commit murder", as the "you might have to kill the bitch" quote attests. The only thing I find hilarious is how you manage to twist the facts in just about every thread you join. Why are you running away or trying to get us to forget that you not only cited a court case that wasn't on-point, you can't seem to understand that the publicity from the first trial would likely trigger double jeopardy should a second be considered?

 

[konradv]

Criminal profiler Anthony Meoli, who exchanged dozens of letters with Glen Rogers and visited him on death row, said Rogers explained to him that O.J. Simpson had hired him to break into his ex-wife's condo to steal diamond earrings he had given her.
"Glen told me that O.J.'s instructions were that 'You may have to kill the bitch,'" Meoli said. "Those were his exact words."

Documentary: Serial killer, not O.J., killed Simpson and Brown - CNN.com

Ya right... the FBI and every police force in the country is looking for every serial killer alive but OJ just runs out and hires one just like that.

What are the chances?

I agree. I think this guy is out to get his 15 minutes and possibly a trip to CA for a trial to extend the last days he has left.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, I don't. You're basing this analysis on your own prejudices against the system. I'm basing mine on some knowledge and what I've heard. The bottom line is, we're both not lawyers and I'd like to hear from one. Your snarkiness isn't in any way a substitute for actual knowledge.

My prejudices against the system have nothing to do with the fact that conspiracy to commit burglary and murder are two different crimes. The fact that you don't get that is what makes this so pathetically hilarious.

I made no statement about "conspiracy to commit burglary". It would be "conspiracy to commit murder", as the "you might have to kill the bitch" quote attests. The only thing I find hilarious is how you manage to twist the facts in just about every thread you join. Why are you running away or trying to get us to forget that you not only cited a court case that wasn't on-point, you can't seem to understand that the publicity from the first trial would likely trigger double jeopardy should a second be considered?

Damn, you really are stupid. The article you posted said that he was hired to break into her condo and steal some diamond earrings. Can you explain how that is not conspiracy to commit burglary?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

My prejudices against the system have nothing to do with the fact that conspiracy to commit burglary and murder are two different crimes. The fact that you don't get that is what makes this so pathetically hilarious.

I made no statement about "conspiracy to commit burglary". It would be "conspiracy to commit murder", as the "you might have to kill the bitch" quote attests. The only thing I find hilarious is how you manage to twist the facts in just about every thread you join. Why are you running away or trying to get us to forget that you not only cited a court case that wasn't on-point, you can't seem to understand that the publicity from the first trial would likely trigger double jeopardy should a second be considered?

Damn, you really are stupid. The article you posted said that he was hired to break into her condo and steal some diamond earrings. Can you explain how that is not conspiracy to commit burglary?

His credibility is shot and there is no corroboration of his claim, no charges will occur5. Unless the Prosecution wants to get owned again.

 

[konradv]

My prejudices against the system have nothing to do with the fact that conspiracy to commit burglary and murder are two different crimes. The fact that you don't get that is what makes this so pathetically hilarious.

I made no statement about "conspiracy to commit burglary". It would be "conspiracy to commit murder", as the "you might have to kill the bitch" quote attests. The only thing I find hilarious is how you manage to twist the facts in just about every thread you join. Why are you running away or trying to get us to forget that you not only cited a court case that wasn't on-point, you can't seem to understand that the publicity from the first trial would likely trigger double jeopardy should a second be considered?

Damn, you really are stupid. The article you posted said that he was hired to break into her condo and steal some diamond earrings. Can you explain how that is not conspiracy to commit burglary?

I didn't say it wasn't. I was commenting on the possible murder for hire scenario. Why do you always have to muddy the waters with irrelevancies? This was solely about the murder and OJs possible culpability in a renewed murder trial. As usual, you jump around in your arguments so much, you make discussing anything a chore. OK, we charge him with burglary too, so what?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I made no statement about "conspiracy to commit burglary". It would be "conspiracy to commit murder", as the "you might have to kill the bitch" quote attests. The only thing I find hilarious is how you manage to twist the facts in just about every thread you join. Why are you running away or trying to get us to forget that you not only cited a court case that wasn't on-point, you can't seem to understand that the publicity from the first trial would likely trigger double jeopardy should a second be considered?

Damn, you really are stupid. The article you posted said that he was hired to break into her condo and steal some diamond earrings. Can you explain how that is not conspiracy to commit burglary?

I didn't say it wasn't. I was commenting on the possible murder for hire scenario. Why do you always have to muddy the waters with irrelevancies? This was solely about the murder and OJs possible culpability in a renewed murder trial. As usual, you jump around in your arguments so much, you make discussing anything a chore. OK, we charge him with burglary too, so what?

He said he was hired to steal earrings, not kill her. If we believe his story OJ said it might be necessary to kill her, but he did not hire him to kill her. You are creating a conspiracy on top of a lie.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

OJ did it.

Jesus fucking Christ are you really this gullible?

 

[konradv]

Damn, you really are stupid. The article you posted said that he was hired to break into her condo and steal some diamond earrings. Can you explain how that is not conspiracy to commit burglary?

I didn't say it wasn't. I was commenting on the possible murder for hire scenario. Why do you always have to muddy the waters with irrelevancies? This was solely about the murder and OJs possible culpability in a renewed murder trial. As usual, you jump around in your arguments so much, you make discussing anything a chore. OK, we charge him with burglary too, so what?

He said he was hired to steal earrings, not kill her. If we believe his story OJ said it might be necessary to kill her, but he did not hire him to kill her. You are creating a conspiracy on top of a lie.

"You may have to kill her" pretty much says it all. I don't think there'd be much hairsplitting, given what happened. What's the lie I told? You're rather free with the word. Apparently it means anyone that challenges your ideas. Get some help. You're delusions are getting the better of you. You aren't as smart as you think you are. Just arrogant and ultimately boring.

 

[konradv]

OJ did it.

Jesus fucking Christ are you really this gullible?

It would be nice if you quoted something, so we'd know who you were talking about or doesn't it really matter? You wanted to say what you wanted to and will say it, regardless. That's narcissism, buddy. If you bothered to read the thread, you'd know it wasn't me, so who?

 

[freedombecki]

Or a few more days of life, since he's already on death row in Florida and would probably love to be extradited to CA for a trial.

Death row? I thought he was just implicated in a complex burglary and got 15 years or some such.

I was talking about the serial killer, not OJ.

Sorry, konradv. I was in holiday mode, not serial killer mode. My bad.

How sad people choose to kill other people instead of working on helping each other out.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If they could corroborate the story OJ could be charged with conspiracy to rob and conspiracy to murder. Even though he has already been found innocent of murder. These two charges are different and do not constitute double jeopardy.

BUT with no corroboration the claim goes no where. Just because he says it does not make it true nor able to be charged. They must have corroboration.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I didn't say it wasn't. I was commenting on the possible murder for hire scenario. Why do you always have to muddy the waters with irrelevancies? This was solely about the murder and OJs possible culpability in a renewed murder trial. As usual, you jump around in your arguments so much, you make discussing anything a chore. OK, we charge him with burglary too, so what?

He said he was hired to steal earrings, not kill her. If we believe his story OJ said it might be necessary to kill her, but he did not hire him to kill her. You are creating a conspiracy on top of a lie.

"You may have to kill her" pretty much says it all. I don't think there'd be much hairsplitting, given what happened. What's the lie I told? You're rather free with the word. Apparently it means anyone that challenges your ideas. Get some help. You're delusions are getting the better of you. You aren't as smart as you think you are. Just arrogant and ultimately boring.

Fine, you are a conspiracy nut.

 

[konradv]

He said he was hired to steal earrings, not kill her. If we believe his story OJ said it might be necessary to kill her, but he did not hire him to kill her. You are creating a conspiracy on top of a lie.

"You may have to kill her" pretty much says it all. I don't think there'd be much hairsplitting, given what happened. What's the lie I told? You're rather free with the word. Apparently it means anyone that challenges your ideas. Get some help. You're delusions are getting the better of you. You aren't as smart as you think you are. Just arrogant and ultimately boring.

Fine, you are a conspiracy nut.

Do you bother to read threads or do you just make them up in your head as you go along? Get some help, this can't be healthy. You apparently live in a world that has very little relation to the one that the rest of us occupy.

 

[konradv]

If they could corroborate the story OJ could be charged with conspiracy to rob and conspiracy to murder. Even though he has already been found innocent of murder. These two charges are different and do not constitute double jeopardy.

BUT with no corroboration the claim goes no where. Just because he says it does not make it true nor able to be charged. They must have corroboration.

I would agree they're different charges, but feel that the overwhelming publicity of the first trial would force a ruling of double-jeopardy.