Man Kills 2 Year Old Step-Daughter Over Crying During The World Cup

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

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

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.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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!

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.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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!

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.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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.

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.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

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.

I was 11 when it happened, and I remember most of it. I agree with you to an extent. But knight_shadow, if it were you, how long do you think your trial would have lasted? Do you think you would've gotten the same treatment OJ received?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

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.

I disagree. If you're famous, and you have money, you get better treatment, and more likely than not, you get off, and that's part of what's so frustrating, to me. Though I don't believe MJ molested those children, if that you were you, even if you didn't do it, you'd be in prison.

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

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.

What about the guy who murdered his two year old?

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

What about the guy who murdered his two year old?

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.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

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.

That chase was on a freeway, IIRC. They weren't going to disable the car because it could have caused harm to other vehicles/passengers.

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

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

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.

That makes sense, and I really can't respond to that. But, I still think he did it.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by agzg

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

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?

[ThetaDancer]

I'm not really connecting the dots here.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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.

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

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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

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?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

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?

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?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by ThetaDancer

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?

It's not related to OJ's case. I just brought that up as an ex of how the treatment isn't the same. Plus, I think it about money a lot of times.

I don't disagree with due process. I just don't see the point for death row in some cases.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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?

Honestly I don't know. BUT that is the nature of jury of one's peers. I'm sure his fame influenced the jury somehow, but there is nothing that can be done about that. And what do you dislike about death row? It is just an expansion of Due Process. Death is rather permanent, so they are of course going to be ultra sure the person deserves death and in fact committed the crime.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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?

Who would be the person deciding whether or not "those" cases required due process? That's why everyone -- including criminals -- is protected by the same rights.

And the MJ case is a whole different can of worms -- not even gonna touch on that one.