Dec. 5, 2008 - O.J. Gets His Due
by norcald503 on Oct 5, 2008 12:14 PM PDT
9 comments
As Fox noted, on December 5, 2008, O.J. will be sentenced for his role in an armed robbery at a Las Vegas casino/hotel. Since Fox asked, attached to this post is a poll.
O.J. faces a term anywhere between 15 years to life. I'm not at all familar with Nevada sentencing law, so if anyone out there has any information to share, by all means, please do so.
That said, vote away.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
1 recs |
9 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I choose None of the Above...
although a law student friend of mine from UNLV said Nevada’s system of appeals is not convict friendly, I think he’ll get off on appeals or get the minimum which is 6 years.
by BruinTechie on Oct 5, 2008 5:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That's the ultimate outcome...
…the question just asks what you think the sentence the court will hand down on Dec. 5 will be. O.J.’s chances on appeal might be a poll I throw up later (following his sentencing).
by norcald503 on Oct 5, 2008 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The minimum sentence is not set in stone....
the oft cited minimums are only judge guidelines. Judges in Nevada also have wide berth in determining sentences taking into account factors such as age and severity of crime. He’s old and nobody got hurt (too much).
by BruinTechie on Oct 6, 2008 2:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting knowledge...
…because I know in California (and for certain charges in the federal courts) there are set minimum terms that a judge cannot go under.
But if Nevada allows judges such wide discretion, one would assume that also means the court can consider aggravating factors, such as O.J.’s role in a double murder, his liability for wrongful death, his well-documented attempts to skate on his civil judgment, and that litle run in with Florida authorities regarding stolen cable.
To me, it looks like a pattern of disregard for the law, born of a weak-sauce acquittal for two murders that he clearly committed.
Hopefully the court sees it that way too.
by norcald503 on Oct 6, 2008 6:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
Dude,
I understand the whole anti-OJ issue, but other than feel sorry for the guy and occasionally laugh at his stupidity, why issue more bad juju on the guy? He’s gonna pay for everything eventually. Karma, heaven, hell, New Jersey… whatever you happen to believe in…
by impaulv on Oct 6, 2008 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because there are laws...
…and there is justice.
O.J. broke the law. He committed multiple felonies. He was convicted by a jury of his peers.
He deserves every day of every year given to him. He displays a callous disregard for the law and for our ordered society. His pattern of behavior shows him to be a man who believes his wealth, his fame, and yes, his acquittal puts him above the law.
No one is above the law and it’s time he pays for his crime(s).
O.J. Simpson offends me not just because he is a trOJan, but because he is a criminal. If what he does didn’t bother me, I’d clearly not be the right man for my job.
by norcald503 on Oct 6, 2008 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's going to be 13
(although it should be 21-25)
Why 13?
Convicted 13 years to the day he was acquitted for murder.
Committed burglary/kidnapping on September 13
Jury deliberated for 13 hours
Trial lasted 13 days
You just can’t make this stuff up. Unbelievable.
by godblesstyus95 on Oct 7, 2008 9:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
