OJ was found guilty in civil court and I do believe he’s guilty because the evidence, which would be more than sufficient to convict most individuals, proves that he is guilty. I chalk up the “not guilty” to other factors that have nothing to do with the evidence. The evidence is solid. OJ is guilty.

I’m not that fond of our judicial system. I don’t want innnocent people going to jail but I do want those guilty of a crime to be found guilty, sentenced fairly, and go to jail, if that is appropriate. I hope at some point a system will be found so that this is what happens.

Jami Floyd - you might be right about everyone’s right to a fair trial. However, in the civil case O.J. was found guilty and was to have handed over quite a bit of money to the Goldman family, which never materialized. What happens in this case where he was found guilty of murdering his wife and he tried to escape the legal system by not giving the victim’s family some recompence?
And believe me, Mr. Floyd, much of the public had an idea that O.J. was guilty even in the criminal trial; however, the prosecution failed to win over the jurors. Mr. Simpson had a “dream team” the size of a small army, so it was no wonder that they won. Wasn’t it his own wife who said in her diary that O.J. would kill and get away with it? Well, he sure did it in many peoples’ minds and he’ll have to live with it the rest of his life!
Kim Cooney

Jami, I agree one hundred percent with you, most of the times I do. Well said.

(Guilty Or Not Guilty) That is the question? But I have to agree with you Jami,we may not all agree with how the system is run but its the best we have and until we find another one better,we all have the rights of the one we have. And thats my last word.

Terry (Novi,Mi)

When I heard the information about the medication to make OJ’s hand swell, it hit me. It’s possible that he’s guilty. You can’t have a second fair trial if you were guilty and got away with murder! The only defense for OJ would be for someone to come forward and admit to the murders. Short of this, does it really matter what anyone thinks about OJ? If you have a problem with the way he is treated, just think about Nicole and Ron? How can anyone ask us to put this out of our mind?

There’s a big difference between “Not Guilty” and “Innocent.” Just because we as Americans have the right to a fair trial, it does not mean that the public cannot judge for itself after hearing the evidence. OJ was found “Not Guilty” for murdering his wife and Ron Goldman by a jury, but that does not mean that we, the public, have to agree with that verdict after watching the trial. Public shunning/ostracizing of an arrogant person that some of us feel got away with a heinous crime is the only punishment he will ever receive. He’s a glaring example of how the justice system failed, not succeeded.

His high paid lawyers will try and do their thing again….I wonder if he’ll have enough money this time to pay everybody off. He murdered the first time and now we find out that he had is swollen hand up fixed to make the glove not fit…this is sounding like a bad record. What the heck is next, He’s a bad dream, his final words will be….that wasn’t me on, that was my BAD twin.

I agree that the presumption of innocence is something that makes this country great, but you could have picked a better story to illustrate that point.

You said that you can believe that OJ is innocent here. Did you catch the clip of him saying that he had simply conducted a “military style raid” like that was an acceptable thing for him to do? You also said that we “may even think he was guilty in that other case all those years ago”. Are you serious? You should review the evidence. I think it was pretty obvious that he is guilty. Just because he wasn’t convicted does not mean he did not do it.

Again, I agree that everyone should be presumed innocent, but this was a bad example.

Going after your stolen property i think doesn`t make OJ a criminal,the only wrong thinkg was taking the law into his hands.Feel sorry for him cause he will now be sentence for the past crime that most believe he comitted

If we’re going to talk about freedom - the rich people have it. That’s why OJ got away with murder in the first place. Especially under the Californa-crooked court system which has proved time and time again why it’s no good. Thus my point which is: don’t compare a rich celebrity’s freedom to my freedom. They are not the same.

Karma is what bit him on the back this time - thank goodness for it.

Let me get this right, it’s okay for another person to be cleared of murders and move on and live his life after the jury deliberates, right?
So why is it that O.J. is always gonna be guilty if the courts of the land set him free as an innocent man, is he not innocent? I mean under the laws he is, right? Im tired of every time you hear about O.J. you always hear how he got away with murder. Thousands get away with it, and when the gavel hits a verdict of not guilty it ends there. Rather he did it or not, who are we to play not only judge of the land, but judge as if we were GOD ourselves! just look at all the over turned verdicts for those who were prosecuted falsely and were only cleared by DNA. weren’t they guilty even when innocent, and nobody listened to them, circumstancial facts made us all beleive they were guilty. once again justice blind eyes rears its ugly head… they were innocent, maybe O.J. is innocent too. We may never know, bt GOD does, and he will get O.J. if he’s the murderer.

While I agree with your assessment of the letter of law pertaining to the Constitutional right to a presumption of innocence, last I read there were at least 400 prospective jurors to be screened and sifted through. How the law should work, and how the law was intended to work is a far cry from how the law does work. There are greater odds of winning the Powerball lottery twice than there are of finding a completely impartial jury in an O.J. Simpson trial. The Judge would have to order a change of venue to Mbutu, Tanzania to locate twelve individuals with no preconception of Orenthal James Simpson.

Yeah and he’ll walk away free just like the last time. As for this country with innocent until proven guilty, its about how much money you have and who you are. Also which state you live in and how much money the state has to keep someone in prison. I read case files and I see pretty much the same senerios and I am appalled for some who have committed the same crime and how the states vary on penalties. A man can kill his pregnant 8.5 month girlfriend and leave her out in the woods to rot for nine days and only get life. But in another state a woman and her unborn fetus are found months later in the lake and he gets the death penalty. So being where Mr. Simpson is he’ll walk away free again. Just as the first trail, He had the MONEY to pay the JURY!!!!!!

The presumption of innocence is about our country and what it stands for.And if you have a lot of money this is true.

he is guilty. he got away with it the first time and he is going to get away with it again and he knows it. We all stand aside and give him all the rights in the world and the victims rights are ripped out in front of them.

The presumption of innocence until proven guilty by a court of law is merely for a court of law. Actual guilt or innocence occurs at the time of the act and the legal system will never substitute for fact, common sense and/or common knowledge.
That presumption (guilt or innocence) is strictly for legal recourse and consequence. It is only the constraint of legal/law officials and is the citizen’s right against the actions of the legal system -not a citizen’s right against the opinion and judgement(s) of other citizens (unless it’s 12 jurors -but in that case, admonish the media for saturating/pre-empting the public/jury on the facts of the case(s)).
I am not stymied in my presumptions about Simpson’s guilt or innocence, nor do I have to be. So I do not get the “yellow caution flag” about “taking away Simpson’s right to a fair trial” being presented here. If this was a forum for other lawyers and legal officials strictly/primarily -fine, preach to the choir.
But, the general readership is not employed/paid to uphold the law … it’s solely a moral duty for us, and we maintain and uphold it -sometimes (like in the case of Simson) even despite the law/legal system, it’s technicalities, faults and loopholes.
Sometimes you just gotta appreciate not being a lawyer *wink*.

After OJ goes free he can always write a book about it. ‘Another Crime Committed No Punishment.’ or ‘Celebrity, Commit Crimes Without Punishment’
Some people take our Justice system for granted, knowing what they can get by with by thier status, wealth or celebrity.
Our courtrooms are becoming stages for personal gain and recognition. Are justices being served? We may need to rethink our system to help speak for those who have been wronged. Many Americans stay out out of the courtrooms because they do not place themselves in the need to be prosecuted.

I didn’t see anyone take away his right to a fair trial, ever. In my opinion, the whole country lost when they found him not guilty. We no longer have a justice system that works.

Its not about liking OJ Simpson its about not liking the very bad things he has done. We the american people may never get to punish him but one day his maker will.

Yes, I do believe he is NOT GUILTY. Only O.J. can get mixed up with ruthless people. I watched the entire case of O.J. several years ago, and didn’t miss a beat. (Thank God for commercials - spots!) The defense at that time just absolutely devoured the prosecution! DNA through the jury so much that I believe they were introduced to a whole new life.

Brenda
Manchester, NH

In the Naveed Haq case, why would Mr. Haq say God directed him? As a Muslim, he would attribute guidance to Allah. No one seems to have picked up on this–am I being a nit-picker?

Shawnee, Walled Lake, MI

OJ Simpson is above everyone…GUILTY SHOULD BE THE VERDICT.

liz

Should we then presume that Haq is not guilty or presume him insane at the time of the shootings and let the state prove he was sane.