In Session: Sidebar  « Back to Blog Main
January 17, 2008
Posted: 12:32 PM ET

NEW YORK – Some commentators have made much of Judge Glass’ strong words to O.J. Simpson in court yesterday, but clearly only one thing mattered to O.J.: getting out of jail, which he did, after the brief tongue-lashing. He’s free again, as he will be until trial.

ALT TEXT

O.J. Simpson sits in court with attorney Yale Galanter.

How could the judge find he violated a condition of bail and yet spring him? Because he’s entitled to bail in this non-capital case. The judge did all that she could do: gave him a stern warning, raised the bail, required him to pay 15% of the new $250,000 amount.

O.J.’s friends – he’s always got entourage – came up with the money, and he’s home free, again.

As one of the few people who actually read O.J.’s 2007 book,” If I Did It,” I cannot help thinking of his vivid description of his long, tortured relationship with Nicole Brown Simpson, his explanation of he did it WHY he did it (hypothetically) — that skirt was too short for his taste on the last day of her life — and HOW he did it (hypothetically) — driving home via a different route than everyone thought.

In my view, the only interpretation of his book is that he is now a confessed double murderer, and yet no jail can hold him. He’s a master at playing the system.

Lisa Bloom, In Session anchor

Filed under: Lisa Bloom • O.J. Simpson


Share this on:
NANCIE   January 17th, 2008 1:00 pm ET

HOW WONDERFUL TO AT LAST SEE A JUDGE WHO WILL NOT PUT UP WITH THE”MASTER’S” IGNORANCE AND ARROGANCE! I CANNOT WAIT FOR THIS TRIAL…THIS IS ONE I WON’T MISS. I HOPE THE BROWNS AND THE GOLDMANS GOT A SMALL BIT OF SATISFACTION OUT OF THE TONGUE-LASHING THE MEDIA-WHORE GOT AT THE HEARING,

Janet Dahlstrom   January 17th, 2008 4:26 pm ET

O.J. should never have been re-arrested because of that phone call. Everyone is out to get him. All of his so called friends have betrayed him. I am absolutely sure he will never get a fair trial. I do believe this Judge and prosecution are going to make him pay for what most people believe he got away with.

O.J. had a fair trial and the jury accquitted him.

Please give it up!!! Leave O.J. alone. He does not deserve what is happening to him now.

bob   January 17th, 2008 6:43 pm ET

Lisa Bloom wrong as usual about the friends of OJ bailing him out. I think Inside Edition is looking for reporters who like to gossip.

annelouise   January 17th, 2008 10:03 pm ET

Leave him alone?! You and about 5 other people believe that. I normally don’t believe in capital punishment, but in this case, FRY HIS ASS. At the very least, he’ll end up in jail where someone can really take care of him. I am so sick of stupid people saying leave him alone, boo hoo. Do your homework and read up on the case.

Beth   January 18th, 2008 9:12 am ET

Thank you Annlouise. For once I am glad to see someone else believes like I do. I do believe that O.J. got away with a double murder and I am finally glad to see a Judge not backing down just because O.J. is considered “famous”. Famous, yeah, for killing two people and actually getting away with it.

Dean (from Canada)   January 18th, 2008 10:02 am ET

Americans are an interesting lot. You and your media elevate people to iconic statuses and spend countless hours analyzing every minute aspect of their lives. I submit that this is why OJ was found innocent in his first trial. The media fanfare, cameras in the court room and the entire circus that surrounded the trial would undoubtedly have put undue pressure on the prosecutors, defense team, judges and the jury. Maybe without all of this, he would have been found guilty. Americans and this insane obsession with celebrities could indirectly be the contributing factor that let a murderer go free.

That being said, once he was found innocent, you continue to badger him and obsess over him. Your legal system set him free. Why not spend the same amount of time that you obsess over celebrities and instead spend it on ensuring that your legal system is set up to provide fair and accurate trials that let innocent people go free, and keeps guilty people behind bars?

OJ should have been found guilty of murder - no reasonable human being in their right mind could rightfully argue otherwise (and I am serious about this, if you think he is innocent, you do not have the mental capacity to rationally analyze a situation and successfully draw conclusions from it). It will never happen, but why don’t you just let the legal system do it’s job in OJ’s current case? No, instead you will have judges making decisions worrying that they will be scrutinized, their lives analyzed and their pasts uncovered.

I think that there are too many of you affecting the balance of the legal scales through your obsessions.

Pam   January 18th, 2008 12:03 pm ET

Wow, I’m so amazed at some of the comments! Are there really people out there who believe OJ is innocent?!!! What planet do they live on?? I know we can’t retry OJ for the double murder he got away with (but don’t forget), OJ was found to be responsible in a civil trial. Let’s just hope that he gets what he deserves this time.

John   January 18th, 2008 10:29 pm ET

I watched the original trial from beginning to end. I’ve also read many fine synopses of the trial. Here’s the bottom line:
The police botched the case from the start. VanAtter lied and got caught. Furhman was STUPID and got caught. Cross ignored her pro bono high powered jury consultant ( STUPID ) and got caught. Darden let Cochran goad him into the glove bit ( STUPID ) and got caught.
The Forensics people were proven incompetent and were backed up by a garbage dump referred to as a lab ( STUPID ) and got caught.
H#@l, Darden couldn’t even keep his Declaration of Independence separate from his Constitution….and got caught.
Witnesses denied, under oath, that their statements as related to the prosecution by police interrogators were NOT what they said. One even challenged Darden to ‘listen to the tapes with me.’ When Darden asked if he, the witness, had taped the conversation ( a violation of California law ) the witness replied, ‘No. Your officer was taping it’. The ‘line’ was beeping during the interview.
Any trial is a chess match. Against O.J.’s ‘Dream Team’ of 8 the State of California had over 200 Prosecutors arrayed. All you can say here is 200 stupid people can’t over come 8 smart people.
Did O. J. kill Ron and Nicole? I don’t know. In that instance the Constitution DEMANDS, if there is reasonable doubt, the jury must acquit.

Georgia   January 19th, 2008 4:07 am ET

I cannot believe that anyone in this day and age thinks that OJ is not only being picked on but, that since he was acquitted, we should all embrace him as before!
My God!
Thankfully we have the court of public opinion and that certainly has made OJ pay whereas the legal system failed. It failed because the jury had another agenda outside of justice
OJ’s DNA was at the scene of the crime and they jury willfully chose to ignore that fact.
Over and over again OJ has showed his disdain for society’s laws. Not only does he openly flaunt them but he is aided and abetted by some.
The judge in this case did not scold OJ. Not at all. I listened and saw her as she so called “scolded” OJ. She knew she was being taped. She walked a fine line almost, it seemed by her body language, she was almost begging him to behave.
Watch it on the internet and you will see she is asking the man to comply. Almost saying please, please comply by her body language, facial expressions, etc.
Poor OJ. Yeah, right.
One can only hope that one day justice is done. Sadly it has not been and OJ walks among us, a free man, thumbing his nose at everyone and everything.

John   January 19th, 2008 3:07 pm ET

Instead of ignoring O.J.’s blood on the back gate, the jury HEARD that the sample collected contained EDTA, a preservative the body does not make. The blood was a ‘plant’.

Rae   January 23rd, 2008 9:37 am ET

I feel that it is a bit naive to believe that there is vigilante justice. I mean OJ DID go to someone’s hotel room in an attempt to remove items that he claimed were his and stolen from him. If that was the case, call the cops and don’t be an idiot and go with a possee of yahoos with a gun! That is a no brainer, if OJ stopped being STUPID and getting himself into these messes, he would not be “harassed”.

Do I believe that OJ killed Ron and Nicole, absolutely! Do I think that the DA in that trial was extremely outmatched, yes! But in the end, since I was NOT in that jury, I must accept what the jury said! Am I obsessed with OJ because I think he got away with a double murder, NO, I only think about him when he does something stupid and criminal which the media brings to everyone’s attention, and then just like a dream I forget about him again, and I think everyone else should too stop giving him the limelight already!

heismen   January 23rd, 2008 7:09 pm ET

YOU CANT TACKLE OJ

Paco   January 24th, 2008 7:13 am ET

Some commentators need to make less of every turn OJ Simpson makes and more of the deaths of American troops and Iraqi citizens in Iraq.

Ann Landers   May 22nd, 2008 12:32 pm ET

I beleive the reason that O.J. friends turn on him is that they
have seen how easy it is to make $$$ off him…
writing a book, gettin on tv etc!!

Leave Your Comment


 

Comments are moderated by CNN, in accordance with the CNN Comment Policy, and may not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.


subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Sidebar takes you behind the scenes of the day's legal headlines with breaking news and in-depth analysis from In Session's anchors and correspondents.

Contributors
Ashleigh Banfield
Co-anchor of the daily trial program Banfield and Ford: Courtside
Ashleigh Banfield
Jack Ford
A former prosecutor and co-anchor of the daily trial program Banfield & Ford: Courtside
Jack Ford
Lisa Bloom
Anchor of the daily trial program Lisa Bloom: Open Court
Lisa Bloom
Jami Floyd
Former defense attorney and anchor of her own daily program Jami Floyd: Best Defense
Jami Floyd
Fred Graham
Senior Editor Fred Graham covers legal news in Washington, D.C.
Fred Graham
Jean Casarez
Attorney Jean Casarez covers trials around the country
Jean Casarez
Beth Karas
Former prosecutor Beth Karas covers trials around the country
Beth Karas
Categories
CNN Comment Policy: CNN encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. Please note that CNN makes reasonable efforts to review all comments prior to posting and CNN may edit comments for clarity or to keep out questionable or off-topic material. All comments should be relevant to the post and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNN the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying information via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNN Privacy Statement.
Home  |  World  |  U.S.  |  Politics  |  Crime  |  Entertainment  |  Health  |  Tech  |  Travel  |  Living  |  Business  |  Sports  |  Time.com
Podcasts  |  Blogs  |  CNN Mobile  |  Preferences  |  Email Alerts  |  CNN Radio  |  CNN Shop  |  Site Map
© 2008 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress.com