Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (142770)	2/19/2002 3:13:14 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577025

But you have no right to publicize it, and materially harm OJ with your thoughts. Bull. I can say publicly all day long that I don't care what the jury said, he's guilty. And he can't do a damned thing about it. And I can do the same thing with Bill Clinton. That's not correct; you can be sued for libel especially in the case of OJ where the courts found him innocent.

To: i-node who wrote (142770)	2/20/2002 1:08:02 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577025

David Re.... Legally, it must be determined a murder occurs before a defendant can be tried for the murder. You can't try a person for a crime that hasn't been committed.<<<<<<<<< The person is charged or alleged to have committed a murder, but it doesn't go on his record as committing a murder until he is found guilty. ,,,, Until one is convicted in a court of law, legally the rape didn't occur...... Nonsense; legally, the rape occurred, but no one has been convicted of it.<<<< I think we are talking about two different definitions of the word legally. I am referring to what would be in court records, or how the court records that act. In Juanita's case, there was no court case, as there was no charge bought, so there was no official determination of rape. For OJ, he was found innocent in the criminal case, so OJ is not listed as the murderer; so that murder is listed as unsolved. You are talking about the act itself, and whether it would be rape, and according to Junita's version it was. In OJ's case, there is no doubt 2 murders occured, but legally,OJ didn't do them. There was no reasonable doubt; OJ was acquitted by jury nullification. <<<<<<<<< Jury nullification???? Where did you come up with that? Provide a link. Jury nullification is where a jury believes the person did the crime, but shouldn't be punished for it; such as a spouse mercy killing a fatally ill mate. There were no such extenuating circumstances here. And your simply wrong. Of the twelve Jurors, there was not just one, but I believe 4 or 5 who voted not quilty. In fact, in polls, 2/3 of the black community of LA county felt that OJ was framed by the police. 8 of the 12 jurors were black or mixed. La Police had a history of fixing trials and the dream team played on the jury's prejudices. Bull. I can say publicly all day long that I don't care what the jury said, he's guilty. And he can't do a damned thing about it. And I can do the same thing with Bill Clinton. <<<<<< You can say it, but if OJ Simpson were to hear of it, and felt you had enough money to your name, he could sue you for libel and get it. Being a no-name with no money has its advantages.