LOL, you watch too many Rockford re-runs Joe.
Death penalty is rarely, if ever, sought in the killing of a spouse or former spouse. Additionally, I may be wrong here, but Simpson did not have a criminal record of much if anything so that also plays into it. Most all death penalty cases are for career criminals.
No matter what Gil Garcetti did in that case someone that gets their information from Entertainment Tonight like you would be upset. I believe it was Ira Reiner who was DA before him out there and I would bet big $$$ he would not have sought the death penalty either in that case.
Again, stick to the hammer.
Actually, Simpson also killed a kid named Ron Goldman, who was only there returning Nicole's sunglasses. True he was only a poor kid working for minimum wage, but he deserved justice, too.
He brought a knife with him, that proves premeditation.
I mean, Jesus, man, I figured that out, without the expertise you claim to have.
Sorry, the only reasons he the DP got taken off the table was he was rich, he was a celebrity, and yeah, it was only a couple years after the King riots, so there were racial considerations.
Turning your ex-wife into Pez dispenser is the kind of vicious crime we need a DP for.
But only if the system if fair and equitable. Two words that make plutocrat apologists like yourself cringe like a vampire in front of a crucifix.
"If the system is fair and equitable"
YOU are the one that is going to determine what is "fair and equitable"?
If you have some facts to show us what determines "fair and equitable" then pound the facts on that . If you have some case law on what is "fair and equitable" then pound the case law on that.
But I would bet big $$$ that you will just keep doing as you have been doing over and over and over again with NO facts and NO case law to pound or argue.
Just keep pounding the table Joe as that is all you are left with and all you ever do.
Last edited: