Which is a crock IMO. It's still double jeopardy, just by another name.
And no, I don't think OJ is innocent. But once declared so, it should apply in all aspects.
Just my humble two cents.
And no, I don't think OJ is innocent. But once declared so, it should apply in all aspects.
Just my humble two cents.
Holy smokes. I hadn't seen anything about this until just now when I watched the video.
That is seriously disturbing... how much was his bail? My thought is she didn't want him jumping, it was going to cost her an arm and a leg, I assume, if he was up on Murder 2 charges.
That is incredible...
That is seriously disturbing... how much was his bail? My thought is she didn't want him jumping, it was going to cost her an arm and a leg, I assume, if he was up on Murder 2 charges.
That is incredible...
I just had another thought.... a scary one.
How possible is it that this D.A. who presented this case with ONLY the option of a first-degree murder conviction knew damn good and well what he was doing, and that the jury wouldn't be able to convict based on that? That they COULD convict on a lesser charge, but he chose to keep that option from them because no one really cares that this guy is dead? I mean, was he up for second-degree murder charges or not? I thought I had read that, but the article only says burglary. My thought is that he was a repeat offender ("I'm not going back to jail," he said) and the D.A.'s office doesn't give a good ******* he's dead, they work with this bail agent all the time, they have a good relationship, they help each other out all the time, and maybe the D.A. was giving her a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge," trial, knowing he had to charge her with something, but also knowing he couldn't make first-degree murder stick, so he gives the jury a case they can't convict on. She walks, he gets to say, "Hey, man, I tried, right?" and everyone goes home except the dead guy. No skin off their nose, he won't be breaking the law anymore, she's probably done as a bail bondsman, and life goes on.
Scary thought.
How possible is it that this D.A. who presented this case with ONLY the option of a first-degree murder conviction knew damn good and well what he was doing, and that the jury wouldn't be able to convict based on that? That they COULD convict on a lesser charge, but he chose to keep that option from them because no one really cares that this guy is dead? I mean, was he up for second-degree murder charges or not? I thought I had read that, but the article only says burglary. My thought is that he was a repeat offender ("I'm not going back to jail," he said) and the D.A.'s office doesn't give a good ******* he's dead, they work with this bail agent all the time, they have a good relationship, they help each other out all the time, and maybe the D.A. was giving her a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge," trial, knowing he had to charge her with something, but also knowing he couldn't make first-degree murder stick, so he gives the jury a case they can't convict on. She walks, he gets to say, "Hey, man, I tried, right?" and everyone goes home except the dead guy. No skin off their nose, he won't be breaking the law anymore, she's probably done as a bail bondsman, and life goes on.
Scary thought.
I wish there was more video footage to see what happened from another angle, but I didn’t see anything in that video to justify deadly force. She was clearly agitated when he started resisting. If she knew he was coming in, she could have had the PD waiting outside.
How old was the kid? I saw that when he stood up, he had cuffs in his hand. Was she going to train him to join the business? Probably the farthest thing from his mind now.
How old was the kid? I saw that when he stood up, he had cuffs in his hand. Was she going to train him to join the business? Probably the farthest thing from his mind now.
She would have been acquitted for killing a minority as opposed to a white guy?
I haven't seen any public figures giving speeches or being outraged about this.
After watching the video, I was pretty pissed about how it went down. That was just wrong. But....by this time next week nobody will be thinking about it.
That's some top notch kook conspiracy theorizing.!
Not sure if I'll buy all that but I bet some sort of rascality is afoot.
True, we do accept injustice more gracefully/lazily
Similar threads
