Lucky...

The murder trial Simpson went through was so highly publicized that we would have been hard pressed to find 12 people that had not heard of it. Therefore, in this case, it is fair that he was tried by 12 Americans who are imperfect humans that may or may not have an opinion on his past actions or perceived actions. I am not sure what color has to do with this. A man in this context is a man, not a black man or a white man, whether the defendant or a juror. I don't get this continuos use of, "imperfect." Is that a regurgitation of McCain's election speech? As far as finding anyone not aware of OJ's murder acquittal, agreed. But to stack the jury with 12 whites and pretend it wasn't fixed by using 2 black alternates is sooooooooooooooo obvious. Again, not defending OJ, society is better off, just saying the system was bent to get a fast conviction. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>...that may or may not have an opinion on his past actions or perceived actions. Oh no, at least 5 said they disagreed with his 95 acquittal. Make no misunderstanding. If you are ever tried for a crime and you feel the justice system is unfair, just look at this case. >>>>>>>>>>>>I am not sure what color has to do with this. That's becuase you have no or little experience/education with the justice system. Again, picture yourself in Georgia in a highly black area, charged with a crime by a black cop, go to trial with a black judge and all-black jury. I understanhd you can't fathom that, nor can I, but try to. Sooooooooo many SCOTUS cases have been based about that very issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_trial The US COnst took a hit too: The right was expanded with the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states in part, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed." With 5 of the 12 saying they disagreed with his acquittal, how can that be impartial. In all rights the state should not have had the right to try OJ until they could assemble such a jury, which I'm sure will be a major component to the appeal. You may have heard me say what a joke teh US Const is in this forum. This is why. If followed it would be great, but even under its inception the authors went home to their slaves. It's typical American political fluff, fodder for the nationalists. Aside from everyone's dislike for OJ, which is certainly justified, you cannot honestly take the rendering of teh 6th above and saying the jury was fair and impartial. Simply calling them imperfect would get you expelled from any law school, but probably works in an internet forum. This is very interesting and true: http://www.crfc.org/americanjury/jury_peers.html The Sixth Amendment simply guarantees the right to "a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed." Some of the most significant decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court controlling jury composition, moreover, have been based not on the Sixth Amendment but on the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection of the laws. " I bet a ton of cases refering to the living constitution (case law) involve race and jury composition. In fact: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batson_v._Kentucky In a 7–2 decision authored by Justice Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr. the court ruled in favor of the petitioner. The case overruled Swain v. Alabama by lowering the burden of proof that a defendant must show in order to make a prima facie case (which does not require proof or reasoning) of purposeful discrimination. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=476&invol=79

The murder trial Simpson went through was so highly publicized that we would have been hard pressed to find 12 people that had not heard of it. Therefore, in this case, it is fair that he was tried by 12 Americans who are imperfect humans that may or may not have an opinion on his past actions or perceived actions. I am not sure what color has to do with this. A man in this context is a man, not a black man or a white man, whether the defendant or a juror. Volumes of SCOTUS cases have to do with race, jury compilations and the sort. The 1972 Furhman V Georgia has to do with racial inequalities and teh death penalty, so much that a 4-year moratorium was used to rethink the process. I realize your justice education/experience is probably limited, not meant as an insult, but if you had more you would understand the issues behind race and the entire justice system. With that said, OJ is a murderous POS and I feel no sympathy for him, but when we "bend" the rules to bag him, then "bending" the rules become acceptable. Ends justifies the means is scary and is what drove Salem and other eras in world history. An all white jury today is an atrocity. Black Americans represent 13% of pur population, with a 12-person jury, 1.56 should have been black to be a fair representation. If you were on trial for the same crimes against black people, would you be ok looking up and seeing 12 black jurors? We can pretend race has no variance on US justice, but that has been historically impeached.

http://people.howstuffworks.com/vote-tampering.htm The Diebold machine issue is nothing new, first I've read of how it works so easily. Fortunately, as we know, the Republicans never cheat on elections, so there is no concern

It's pretty much anti-Women's movement to be anti-choice. There's pretty much no getting around that. Oh yea, how could I forget that little detail

That's why the women's lib movement (like NOW) is not about women's rights, it's about political alignment. Gov. Palin's ascent is everything positive: city council, mayor, governor, VP candidate...while being a mother and wife. The women's lib movement just doesn't like that she's a conservative. Period. In that regard, yes. But in the regard she was an academic underachiever and used her beauty to further her, nah, not what the movement wants. Hillary is an example of furthering her goals via other than beauty, Palin is just a high grade Lewinsky.

There is a house up on a hill near mine with a GIANT lighted sign Yes on 8..... I can't believe people would go to the extent of paying for a giant sign on their property. Oh lordy.... the shame.... what if their daughter or son came home and confessed to being gay. I suppose they also believe the child can be brainwashed into believing they are hetero. sorry rant over... I'm a NO on Prop 8. g I can't believe people would speak out so vehemently against homosexuality and then tap toes in bathrooms trollling for cock. Tho protests too loudly all over the place, sometimes the louder - the more gay (if there is a measure of gayness).

Well, I think that having Palin in office would be a step backwards for women's rights, so I'll help other women by voting for Obama. Not that I believe in hell anyway. Oh, and it's good to see that, while the rest of the country is having a financial crisis, Sarah can still afford to get her daily Starbucks. Seriously, Hillary would be astep forward for women, Palin the cheerleader-supermodel-soccermom represents everything the woman's lib movement abhore.

Yea, but per diem rules require an away from home relationship. You must be 50 miles away and on a temporary assignment; being a governor is not a temporary assignment. If they pursue this, she will have to fire someone else to cover it up. From Troopergate to IRSgate.....the hits just keep-a-commin. Juneau is only accessible by aircraft or boat (which is the case for most of the state for that matter). She also worked in Anchorage, 600 miles away and Alaska's biggest city. Being governor is not a temporary assignment, but the work locations could be construed that way. As with mist IRS issues, it's complicated and convoluted, but my understanding was that it must be only for temp assignments and be 50 miles away, which teh 2nd is satisfied, but the former hardly qualifies. Guess we need a personal tax specialist to answer that one. The practice of billing for staying at home seems to be unusual. Many officials said it would not be allowed in their states, including California, Pennsylvania and South Carolina, as well as other jurisdictions. On the federal level, officials said members of Congress do not get per diem allowances for routine home visits. I didn't think it was a state issue, maybe it is. “If all of a sudden you’re collecting per diems for more than half a year, we would redesignate your official station as that place,” Mr. Tompkins said. Yea, this is kinda what I was thinking. If you're somewhere for 4/5 of the year, that somewhere sould be considered your home. So I guess she considers the governor's mansion her home and that place where the first dude and her 5 kids live as an away motel temporary residence. It may be legal by some narrow margin, but it really stinks like tax evasion or fraud to her home state.

Not to mention that this mess was done long before the Dems took Congress in 06, the housing bust was starting then. As well, the Dems in congress have overridden how many of Bush's Vetos? like 4 I think? That is performance. It's tought o do anything with a turd like Bush in there, but they are trying. For example, your illustrious chief wanted 120B for Halliburton, but the Dems made him give the troops educations as they returned from war, something he initially vetoed. Yea, Repubs love the troops, huh?

- 9/11 - Katrina - massive tax cuts for rich - going from Clinton's last year 33B debt increase to >500B per year average increase for 8 years straight. Did I miss a few disaster? Yea...peachy.

Yea, but receiving per diem when you're not qualified and not having a legitimate business and claiming it is like claiming your pets as dependents. The vet just gave us an estimate of almost $1,000 for teeth-cleaning and extractions under general anesthesia for our dog. I wish I was under general anesthesia. Goddam right my pet is a dependent. Give it a try...tell me how it works out

So what do ya think, will it be lower on Jan 20? Other than Hoover, has that ever happened?

Yea, but receiving per diem when you're not qualified and not having a legitimate business and claiming it is like claiming your pets as dependents.

Yea, but per diem rules require an away from home relationship. You must be 50 miles away and on a temporary assignment; being a governor is not a temporary assignment. If they pursue this, she will have to fire someone else to cover it up. From Troopergate to IRSgate.....the hits just keep-a-commin.

You're in America.... welcome to the fun and so-called US Const.

You're in America.... welcome to the fun and so-called US Const.

Damn shame they've sequestered the ol' fucker from the general prison population for his own safety. Which creates a problem for Nevada, maybe they shoulda thought of that before they stacked the jury with whitey. They may have fixed themselves a problem. Society is better of w/o OJ, but to jail the freak for another 20-30 years won't be cheap.

Yeah he wants all the pretty white women too Nah, he's just happy when he can take a dump w/o laxitives.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>and a mentally challenged candidate. Old crusty can't send an email and you claim Biden is mentally challenged?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sarah-Palin-Full-Face-Adult-Latex-Mask-for-Costume_W0QQitemZ200258958986QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item200258958986&_trkparms=72%3A1207%7C39%3A1%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C240%3A1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

5 of the 12 jurors diaagreed with the 95 acquittal. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081005/ap_on_re_us/oj_simpson_jurors_4

Moderator: Would you like to respond to Biden's comments on McCain? Palin: No thank you, but I would like to...... And... Could I give a shout-out to the 3rd grade class that heelped me prepare for this debate. God damn that was funny....

Point is, all jury members knew of the 95 murders and most/all thought he did it. All white jury of his peers???? Yea. Leno was saying they were having a hard time assembling a jury of his peers; a panel of 12 people who had gotten away with a do8ble murder! This case stinks of the NY John Gotti case big time. If we rely on the ends justifying the means and ignore procedural guarantees because we know the outcome before the trial starts, we will soon use that same process on innocent people- happens all the time. As many people have commented, how could he be so stupid to fall into that set up, which it totally was, only question is how deep did it go? Either way, he bought into it all, he can't help himself.

This was a stupid move by a man who literaly thought he could get away with anything. There is a good possibility since he is already 61 years old. Cool, make his sentence long enough that the shortest amount he'd have to serve as a minimum will still outlast his sorry ass life. Remember, he will only serve the longest one, kidnapping, as the rest should be concurrent.

Fuck the KY, I hope he takes it dry, and at least 10" Damn right. He had the lawyers back then, but two of them (Cochran and Shapiro) are dead now. Glad he didn't skate off this one. Punk ass motherfucker. Are they saying he could get life for this? Furthermore, they may not have been licensed to practive law in Nevada and I don't know if Cali ans Nevada have reciprocity agreements.