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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (17020)	12/3/1998 6:44:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

No, the word stupid wasn't in that post. Yes, he may have been 'referring to the phenomenon of "jury nullification"' I'd wager he thinks the jury was stupid to engage in that phenomena in this case. I gather from this post that you think the jury was stupid too. I agree. Just thought it was strange the Smaltz got so many other convictions, Tyson pled out and Espy walked. Weird. But then it was a DC jury. JLA Were you expressing satisfaction with the quality of the DC jury pool in this post? I think not, but feel free to correct me. Meanwhile, the creative Vaughn OJ file from today. The net expenditure of $6-8 million was very very very well spent, the OJ-style verdict notwithstanding. So be it. And OJ was innocent. He and his accomplices admitted everything before it got to a jury. Tell me, Gore, did you agree with the OJ decision? Yes, OJ redux. An OJ verdict, as you well know. Also, the net cost was $6 million, not $17 million. Money well spent! Have some guts, alias Dipy. Was OJ innocent???????????? Did you think OJ was innocent? Do you think Bill was expressing admiration for both the OJ jury and the Espy jury in these posts, or do you think he was disparaging their intelligence? I feel comfortable with my interpretation.