Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 1949337)

Many of the people that have been cleared were initially convicted because "the evidence was there." There's always room for human error.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949340)

I agree with "you get what you pay for"...most of the time, but you know as well as I do, if it was you or me being chased by a million police cars on the freeway, doing 30 mph, you know they wouldn't have let us drive until we decided to stop. But because it was OJ, it was handled differently. That's Bullcrap and you know it!

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949340)

I agree with "you get what you pay for"...most of the time, but you know as well as I do, if it was you or me being chased by a million police cars on the freeway, doing 30 mph, you know they wouldn't have let us drive until we decided to stop. But because it was OJ, it was handled differently. That's Bullcrap and you know it!

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949342)

True. But wasn't there a guy who was in prison for like 20 years or something, and they just released him this year? He said DNA testing helped him. I think it happened in Cleveland. To my knowledge, the technology wasn't around back then.

Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 1949343)

I was young when this trial was going on, so I don't remember all the details. IIRC, though, if disabling the vehicle puts people at risk, they're not going to do it.

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito (Post 1949344)

Actually they would have done the same. IF somebody refuses to stop, what would they do? I don't believe he was treated any differently because of his fame. I do agree that there are cases where people are treated differently that I hate, but it's not as common as you are implying.

Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 1949345)

Right. So if he wasn't put on death row, an innocent man would have been executed.

Sure, our technology is advanced these days, but 1) there's always room for human error and 2) there is inevitably going to be better technology that's released that will make the "air-tight" methods of today obsolete.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949358)

What about the guy who murdered his two year old?

Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 1949343)

I was young when this trial was going on, so I don't remember all the details. IIRC, though, if disabling the vehicle puts people at risk, they're not going to do it.

Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 1949362)

Are you back on the original topic?

What if (big what if) it's discovered that his confession was a result of coercion? Again, an innocent man will have been executed.

Originally Posted by agzg (Post 1949365)

I don't get how someone disagrees with due process, though. I mean... that's not "just" law - it's the Constitution.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949180)

Wow, another piece of garbage protected by America's crappy justice system. $$$$$$$

eta: and he'll even get an attorney to represent him in court, even though the evidence is there that he did this to that child. More money wasted on garbage. And I'm sure he'll be able to plead something stupid. Only in America where the criminal is protected.:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949333)

The part I don't agree with is how the punishment isn't equal. If you have money (like OJ) you can get away with murder. I wasn't trying to degrade the law, MC. I just don't agree with it all. Some of it, but not all of it, and there's nothing wrong with my frustration towards that. I appreciate you explaining it to me and I wasn't debating with you, because this is what you do for a living, it's just that I don't agree with the way a lot of it is handled. That's all I'm saying. I wasn't trying to offend you. Honestly, I wasn't.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949336)

THIS.
It's so frustrating. A two year old! I'm sorry, but I wish they would do away with him, now. Today.

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito (Post 1949379)

This. Due Process is part of the law of the land. CG do you have any idea of the types of abuses in the English justice system that led to the Due Process Clause being added?

Originally Posted by ThetaDancer (Post 1949382)

I don't understand how this incident is comparable to the OJ incident.



So do you disagree with due process? Why? Not why do you disagree with the money or the plea bargains (as you wrote earlier), but why do you disagree with the principle of due process?

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949384)

I agree with due process. After MC explained it to me why it's important, I agreed with him. However, there are still some things I don't agree with. What I don't agree with is the way death row is handled in "some" cases. And I don't agree with how the rich vs the poor are treated. I also don't agree with parole (depending on the crime).

Again, what do you think would happen to you if you were in MJ's shoes? Do you think you would've gotten off?

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1949384)

I agree with due process. After MC explained it to me why it's important, I agreed with him. However, there are still some things I don't agree with. What I don't agree with is the way death row is handled in "some" cases. And I don't agree with how the rich vs the poor are treated. I also don't agree with parole (depending on the crime).

Again, what do you think would happen to you if you were in MJ's shoes? Do you think you would've gotten off?