The juice is loose..........

[jltrent]

O.J. Simpson granted parole after nearly 9 years in prison

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/oj- ... li=BBnb7Kz

O.J. Simpson was granted parole Thursday after more than eight years in prison for a Las Vegas hotel heist, successfully making his case in a nationally televised hearing that reflected America's enduring fascination with the former football star.

Simpson, 70, could be a free man as early as Oct. 1. By then, he will have served the minimum of his nine-to-33-year armed-robbery sentence for a bungled attempt to snatch sports memorabilia and other mementos he claimed had been stolen from him.

He got the four votes he needed from the parole commissioners who heard his case. In agreeing to release him, they cited his lack of a prior conviction, the low risk he might commit another crime, his community support and his release plans.

During the more than hour-long hearing, Simpson forcefully insisted — as he has all along — that he was only trying to retrieve items that belonged to him and never meant to hurt anyone. He said he never pointed a gun at anyone nor made any threats during the crime.

"I've done my time. I've done it as well and respectfully as I think anybody can," he said.

Inmate No. 1027820 made his plea for freedom in a stark hearing room at the Lovelock Correctional Center in rural Nevada as four parole commissioners in Carson City, a two-hour drive away, questioned him via video.

Simpson, gray-haired but looking trimmer than he has in recent years, walked briskly into the hearing room dressed in jeans, a light-blue prison-issue shirt and sneakers. He laughed at one point as the parole board chairwoman mistakenly gave his age as 90.

 

[torogmc81]

"In agreeing to release him, they cited his lack of a prior conviction, the low risk he might commit another crime, his community support and his release plans."

I just had to laugh when I read this part. SMH. Crowded Jails, that's all they had to say

 

[torogmc81]

Well, it only took a few minutes for the jokes to start .......

"I can't believe Khloe Kardashian's dad is getting out of prison."

Haha, I had to reference these ignorant, idiotic false idols, but that is funny

 

[ALACOWMAN]

who didn't see that coming, guess they didn't want a riot on their hands....

 

[TexasBred]

I don't ahve a problem with it. He served the time making him eligible. Board approved...send him down the road.

 

[callmefence]

Well, it only took a few minutes for the jokes to start .......

"I can't believe Khloe Kardashian's dad is getting out of prison."

Haha, I had to reference these ignorant, idiotic false idols, but that is funny

Oj Simpson is kin to the Kardashians??

 

[Ol' 243]

Well, it only took a few minutes for the jokes to start .......

"I can't believe Khloe Kardashian's dad is getting out of prison."

Haha, I had to reference these ignorant, idiotic false idols, but that is funny

Oj Simpson is kin to the Kardashians??

***** please.

 

[Son of Butch]

I don't have a problem with it. He served the time making him eligible. Board approved...send him down the road.

33 years ain't what it use to be, most states minimum of 1/3 of the sentence needs to be served before eligible for
parole. I was a bit surprised that being found guilty of a double murder in a Civil trial can't be used in determining character in parole decisions, because he was acquitted in the criminal trial. I heard O.J. is homeless as his mansion was sold to pay legal fees and all he has to live on is his judgment proof $25,000 per month pension.

 

[Ol' 243]

I got no problem with parole on this sheit, but they should have hung the sumbeitch in 1993.

 

[M-5]

Ford is bringing the bronco back this year ......coincidence ........I don't think so.

 

[A.J.]

Based on his previous track record I'd bet he'll do something dumb to violate and will be back in some day.

 

[callmefence]

Well, it only took a few minutes for the jokes to start .......

"I can't believe Khloe Kardashian's dad is getting out of prison."

Haha, I had to reference these ignorant, idiotic false idols, but that is funny

Oj Simpson is kin to the Kardashians??

***** please.

That just raises more questions..does ***** mean the same thing as sheit??

 

[TexasBred]

I don't have a problem with it. He served the time making him eligible. Board approved...send him down the road.

33 years ain't what it use to be, most states minimum of 1/3 of the sentence needs to be served before eligible for
parole. I was a bit surprised that being found guilty of a double murder in a Civil trial can't be used in determining character in parole decisions, because he was acquitted in the criminal trial. I heard O.J. is homeless as his mansion was sold to pay legal fees and all he has to live on is his judgment proof $25,000 per month pension.

I have no idea how it works. Only that he apparently was "eligible" and was granted parole. I would think anything having to do with "prior" accusations of which he was acquitted could not be used especially in simply considering parole. It wasn't a retrial.

 

[M-5]

he did the minimum and by all accounts did more time for the crime he was charged with and some speculate the time was inflated because of the crime he was not convicted of. If you watched the hearing you know that it is just a matter of time before he is back in because in his mind "hes a good guy " and has "never done anything wrong" . I would not be surprised if goldmans father don't just kill him. he is still keeping his promise to haunt him until he dies. he is 76 and I Expect him to just say F'It and take OJ out.

 

[Son of Butch]

I don't have a problem with it. He served the time making him eligible. Board approved...send him down the road.

33 years ain't what it use to be, most states minimum of 1/3 of the sentence needs to be served before eligible for
parole. I was a bit surprised that being found guilty of a double murder in a Civil trial can't be used in determining character in parole decisions, because he was acquitted in the criminal trial. I heard O.J. is homeless as his mansion was sold to pay legal fees and all he has to live on is his judgment proof $25,000 per month pension.

I have no idea how it works. Only that he apparently was "eligible" and was granted parole. I would think anything having to do with "prior" accusations of which he was acquitted could not be used especially in simply considering parole. It wasn't a retrial.

A Civil trial guilty verdict is not an accusation... it is a fact.

Fred Goldman was not allowed to be at the hearing or speak to the parole board, but friends and family of O.J. were.
The Goldman family were indirect victims of the robbery as the items in question had previously been illegally put into hiding to evade selling them to pay the court ordered judgment. To think that a case of Pete Rose autographed baseballs had sentimental value to O.J. was really reaching for excuses for him not pay the Goldman family any of the judgment they had won.

Fred Goldman has a place in trivia history as the answer to:
Who is the only Jew to have won a Heisman Trophy?

 

[TexasBred]

SOB the "accusation" I referred to was the CRIMINAL case. Take a deep breath and read it again. The civil case was just that. Simpson could NOT be tried twice for the same crime as that's double jeopardy.

According to The Wall Street Journal, in a criminal trial, the jury must unanimously find the defendant guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" in order to convict. However, the same burden of proof does not exist in civil cases, which merely require what's referred to as a "preponderance of evidence." According to Cornell University Law School, that "preponderance of evidence" means that at least "50 percent of the evidence points to something," rather than requiring a unanimous decision.

Furthermore, the specific charge of alleged first degree murder that was brought against Simpson in criminal court required proof of being "deliberate and premeditated" according to the definition in The Law Dictionary. On the other hand, according to law book publishing company Nolo, the charge of wrongful death brought in civil court only requires proof that "[the defendant's] intentional and unlawful conduct resulted in the victims' deaths."

 

[Jogeephus]

Fred Goldman has a place in trivia history as the answer to:
Who is the only Jew to have won a Heisman Trophy?

That's good! :lol2: :lol2: :clap: :clap:

 

[dun]

SOB the "accusation" I referred to was the CRIMINAL case. Take a deep breath and read it again. The civil case was just that. Simpson could NOT be tried twice for the same crime as that's double jeopardy.

According to The Wall Street Journal, in a criminal trial, the jury must unanimously find the defendant guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" in order to convict. However, the same burden of proof does not exist in civil cases, which merely require what's referred to as a "preponderance of evidence." According to Cornell University Law School, that "preponderance of evidence" means that at least "50 percent of the evidence points to something," rather than requiring a unanimous decision.

Furthermore, the specific charge of alleged first degree murder that was brought against Simpson in criminal court required proof of being "deliberate and premeditated" according to the definition in The Law Dictionary. On the other hand, according to law book publishing company Nolo, the charge of wrongful death brought in civil court only requires proof that "[the defendant's] intentional and unlawful conduct resulted in the victims' deaths."

The whole standard of proof of guilt is much lower for a civil judgement, most people lose sight of that.

 

[farmerjan]

Agree or not for other "matters", he is being paroled in accordance with the crime that he was convicted of and the sentence that was imposed on him. He will be watched more closely just because of his "celebrity status " and if he screws up, he writes his epitaph Hope he has the sense to just fade into oblivion......

 

[sstterry]

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt means: that the evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty and that it is beyond dispute that any reasonable alternative is possible. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no Reasonable Doubt is possible from the evidence presented.

Civil Burden is only a Preponderance of the Evidence: more than 50% of the evidence points to something.