Obviously, we were all young when the first OJ Simpson trial happened, so I didn't follow it closely. I don't have an opinion on whether or not he did it, but my view is that if he didn't do it, who did? Simpson having killed his wife and her friend is the only logical answer I can think of. The courtroom is an interesting thing; when you think something's going to go one way, it completely flips and goes the other way. I did mock trial last year, and it was so difficult! It helped me narrow down career choices though, now I know I can NEVER be a lawyer. Ever. Here's a link to the article I read: http://news.aol.com/article/simpson-found-guilty-on-all-charges/199173
Saturday, October 4, 2008
OJ Simpson Found Guilty?
Yes, you read that correctly. The famously-acquitted ex football player was found guilty not of murder, but of robbing two people at gunpoint. Simpson was charged with twelve counts and was convicted of all of them. I think it's kind of ironic that this would happen. After being proved innocent of murder, THIS is what Simpson gets put in jail for. If you already had such a close call, why would you even think of doing something like that? Any little crime would get him put away.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree, if not Simpson, who? Also it could be karma coming back to haunt him. He perhaps got away with murder, but didn't get away with this. Hey, karma, that has something to do with Buddhism. Hooray! Connection! If OJ was a Buddhist, I believe he would be a cigarate bud that was smoked and is now on the ground, getting constantly stepped on. I'll have to consult Buddah about that one.
I also find this announcement shocking, but not because I think that OJ didn't commit the robbery, but because he placed himself in such a tight situation. I would think that after having such a close call with jail already, he would be super careful not to come into contact wtih the law again. I know that jurors are supposed to not be biased, but honestly, after his famous trial, who doesn't know about OJ Simpson?! Most people I know are angry that he was found not guilty when all of the evidence pointed to him. I think the public would want justice and that would influene the jurors. Not saying that OJ is guilty of killing his wife and her friend, but when a juror was asked why OJ was found not guilty and the juror replied that if the DNA evidence was thrown out, there wasn't much of a case against Simpson, most people would be pretty angry that OJ got off. I think that the court was sending a message that being a celebrity does not make one above the law, and that is a very good thing in my opinion.
Make no mistake, this case was about OJ and the incidence in Nevada. It was not about OJ and the murders he was suspected of earlier. No, he got what he deserved, but that doesn't mean it's karma. This is only in response to his newest crime. This doesn't make up for the fact that he killed people (technically he was declared innocent...). I just think people feel that OJ has finally gotten what he deserves.
This trial has always fascinated me. It is very surprising that OJ would even consider committing a crime, you think we would know that he already being closely watched. This post made me want to find out more information about the trial. When I looked into it I also came to the conclusion that if he didn't do it who would it be? If it wasn't OJ, It is weird to think that someone could have gotten away with the murder after all these years.
Post a Comment