On Freedom of Speech

: Why did OJ lose his civil case, if he was innocent?


because it was a civil case.Anyway SAS....ROdney King was cuffed and on the ground and not moving when they started to beat him.No one deserves that.Thent eh cops had the nerve to pass it off that Rodney King was raped by some homosexuals and that explains his injuries.Then you have the media always reporting crimes that black males do.There is a lot of mess and to say im suppose to feel symphony for a white male like yourself is idiotic.Plain and simple i have it harsher than you do.

Quote:

---

why was the police planting evidence to try and make him guilty.

---

Yeaaah... they didn't give any evidence of planting, either. :rolleyes2

Quote:

---

Do you honestly believe a 50 year old man with arthritis could chase down a young man in his 20's. Who was also an anthlete and physically fit. lets be real.

---

Nicole had both of the arteries in her throat severed, from behind, and Goldman was pinned in a corner, facing an enraged, knife-weilding ex-football player. Neither of them had a chance. BTW, Goldmans aorta was punctured. He was down in no time.

Quote:

---

because it was a civil case.

---

And that explains the verdict...how?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordblazer

because it was a civil case.Anyway SAS....ROdney King was cuffed and on the ground and not moving when they started to beat him.No one deserves that.Thent eh cops had the nerve to pass it off that Rodney King was raped by some homosexuals and that explains his injuries.Then you have the media always reporting crimes that black males do.There is a lot of mess and to say im suppose to feel symphony for a white male like yourself is idiotic.Plain and simple i have it harsher than you do.

---

Um...what? You're supposed to feel symphony for me? Sorry, I'm not big on symphonies. Or operas, either.

Being a civil case--explain how that makes a difference, would you? Since you must know so much more about our court systems than I do, even though I had considered and studied up on going into a career in law.

When the cops started to beat Rodney King, he was not on the ground in handcuffs. When they finished, he was. You still fail to mention the 100+ mph chase through residential areas, or the dozens of laws that he had broken, or that he was so hopped up on PCP that three shots from a tazer had no affect on him (PCP makes a man nearly invincible, or at least think/act like it), or the fact that he was already a FELON and violating his parole in the first place. Is that enough to warrant a beating, maybe not. But it is enough to excuse the officers (to an extent) for the way they acted. Quite frankly, if I had to chase this guy down, I'd probably beat the hell out of him too, no matter who it was. And I sure as hell wouldn't say "oh sorry man, I didn't realize you're white, just don't do it again and I'll give you a warning". If the Pope was driving that car, he'd have gotten a nightstick to his head.

You can go ahead and keep thinking that the whole of America is all against the black man if you want to.

And DarkLadyNyara--thanks for backing up the facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Um...what? You're supposed to feel symphony for me? Sorry, I'm not big on symphonies. Or operas, either.

Being a civil case--explain how that makes a difference, would you? Since you must know so much more about our court systems than I do, even though I had considered and studied up on going into a career in law.

When the cops started to beat Rodney King, he was not on the ground in handcuffs. When they finished, he was. You still fail to mention the 100+ mph chase through residential areas, or the dozens of laws that he had broken, or that he was so hopped up on PCP that three shots from a tazer had no affect on him (PCP makes a man nearly invincible, or at least think/act like it), or the fact that he was already a FELON and violating his parole in the first place. Is that enough to warrant a beating, maybe not. But it is enough to excuse the officers (to an extent) for the way they acted. Quite frankly, if I had to chase this guy down, I'd probably beat the hell out of him too, no matter who it was. And I sure as hell wouldn't say "oh sorry man, I didn't realize you're white, just don't do it again and I'll give you a warning". If the Pope was driving that car, he'd have gotten a nightstick to his head.

You can go ahead and keep thinking that the whole of America is all against the black man if you want to.

And DarkLadyNyara--thanks for backing up the facts.

---

it being a civil case meant that hima nd his lawyers half assed it.If it was a criminal case they would've done more to try to win which they did.Thus it went to civil case in which since he is rich.Really doesn't matter.If he loses oh well if he winss yippie. thats what I meant now just shut itand change the subject and no i don't want oyu to feel symphony for me you neo-conservative.

Another thing is Rodney King was'NT FIGHTING BACK!!! thats called police brutallity.I don't think the whole america is against a black males but hey think whatever the hell you want to mainly because your slanting oyur facts a bit and youand that other guy "sound"like you have all the facts straighten up but really you don't.A 100 MPH chase through a neiborhood does not constitute a beating once you give up and start complying to the police demands.Rodney ing didn't assualt them and the fact the cops did have the nerve to try to cover it up was pathetic.

Worse has happened.Like a hispanic family was aving a little gathering. A neibor started to see a bunch of cops pull up and he got a video tape.Filmed what the cops did to that whole family.They got them out into the front law and just started to beat them one by one. There is corrupting in the USA and you don't want to see it because you don't have to deal with corruption.Your a white male thus you goto jail when you have actually done something 99.9% of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Why do you refuse to believe that the world isn't out to get black people? Like I said, you can subscibe to the idea that everybody in the justice system (and jury members) is a racist and wants to just put a bunch of black people in prison, but when you pull your head out from under the rock, you may see the truth.

---

I never said the world was out to get black people. all i said was that this country is still a very racist place to live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Out of the cops that beat up Rodney King, none of them were convicted and sentenced to a jail term, no. But it went on their records. Out of all the guys that stomped Reginald Denny, ONE went to trial. And none of the cops were "punished" because Rodney King deserved it! Rodney King had a reason to be beat, and not just the color of his skin like Reginald Denny.

---

no man deserves to get beat. I even said that the black people that beat up reginald where wrong. Rodney may have been in the wrong. But he didnt deserve to get beat, those officers broke the law. Yet, they were held above the law for some reason. why was that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

OJ didn't have to chase Ron much. He was trying to defend Nicole, so he came to OJ not too far from where she was. So is it really so hard to believe that an athletic 45-year-old ex-NFL star could stab an athletic 20-year-old? Or, what, he would only be able to do it if he was white? (By the way, OJ kept in shape, like most pro athletes do when they retire.) And how do I know how they were killed? Because I paid attention to the trial, and that's what the trial showed. He subdued her, confronted/killed him, and then came back and finished her off. The evidence was plain and simple, to anybody that didn't care what color he was.

---

Dont give me that. According to your profile, you and i are about the same age, are you trying to tell me that, when you were 9 years old, you were following this case?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Ah--so you don't think the whole world hates black people, only the whole country, one of the most tolerant countries on the planet? And yes, there are places where white people are discriminated against. I've been through some of the bad parts of Chicago and Atlanta, trust me, there are plenty of people who hate white people out there. (That probably doesn't sound right to you because you didn't use decent spelling or grammar. If you used a dictionary, it might look better.)

---

See, this one just shows how childish you really are. Never once have i insulted your intelligence during the course of this whole debate. So what if my spelling is bad at 3am if you understood it enough to reply, then what was the point of commenting.

anyway, I didnt say there arent black people that dont like white people. But, this is your country. There is hardly anywhere that you cant go that isnt acceptant of your race. Also tollerant my ass. this country wasnt so tolerant when it enslaved an entire race for 400 years, Stole a whole country from the natives, raped and and killed its women and children. Your problem is not being able to see that america isnt all its cracked up to be. This only the land of the free when your color is right, and you bank account is right. Not to say that this isnt the land of opportunity, but its far from perfect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

I'm starting to understand it more clearly. You don't give a damn if a black person commits a crime, because everybody in America is racist against black people anyway, and they'd find some black guy to take the fall. But if a white guy commits a crime--especially, Heaven forbid, against a black person--then off with his balls. It reflects a lot of shame upon yourself--and anybody who agrees with you, whatever color they may be--to say that you don't care that somebody who slaughtered two innocent people is out on the streets still because he's black. Your mother must be so proud of you...unless she was the one who taught you to be racist.

---

This is the second time you've insulted me. Why must you result to childish insults? Be a man, and debate like a real man would do.

How does believing that i live in a country where for the most part, my people are not accepted like we should be. Or that our school systems dont get the same type of money from the government that the white school systems get. or that when we go to court the cards are usually stacked agaisnt us. how does that make me a racist. Hell ive experienced all of these i talk about. Can you honestly say you know what it's like to feel like you gotta fight extra hard for the same acceptance that other folks are granted sicne birth all because of your skin color. I live and work in a place where I gotta get past all the preconsieved notions about me because of the skin im in. Black people for the most part arent even awarded the same opportunities that other people are and its a shame. So when i openly talk about how bad it is for us, it makes me a racist? I dont think so. You cant just erase 500years of oppression. not from the hearts and minds of black people, and not from the hearts and minds of white people. Its still there and its gonna take more than just 100 or so years to get on fair grounds.

As for the OJ thing, sorry if someone getting killed doesnt affect me. I grew up in an enviorment with that type of violence. It didnt affect me, it doesnt affect me, i dont care. plain and simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

EDIT: Why did OJ lose his civil case, if he was innocent?

---

Cause the rules for winning a cilvil case and a criminal case are differnt.

let me make an assuption, you think Kobe Bryant raped that girl dont you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

EDIT: Why did OJ lose his civil case, if he was innocent?

---

In a federal case, u must be proven guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt. In a civil case however it just has to be 51% probable that ur at fault. Which is less than they need to arrest and charge u in a federal case i bet. Thus its alot easier for the plantiff to win, than a prosecutor.

(*Hang with me in these next 2 sections they have a point.*)

The DNA was left negelgently in the sun for 3 days by an investigator. The photo of the investigator with blood all over his show tracking it everywhere throughout the crime scene. The investigator who made the comment "When theres no evidence, its the job of a good cop to create evidence.", or something to that same degree. Plus the HOURS of tapes of that same investigator making multiple racist comments.

You cant possibly NOT have a doubt in your mind over the persons innocents or guilt. Thus though i think he did it, i would not be convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that he committed a crime and obligated as a juror to aquit him of the charges. Im just trying to explain WHY he was aquitted, in the federal case, but it was possible to lose the civil case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane

In a federal case, u must be proven guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt. In a civil case however it just has to be 51% probable that ur at fault. Which is less than they need to arrest and charge u in a federal case i bet. Thus its alot easier for the plantiff to win, than a prosecutor.

(*Hang with me in these next 2 sections they have a point.*)

The DNA was left negelgently in the sun for 3 days by an investigator. The photo of the investigator with blood all over his show tracking it everywhere throughout the crime scene. The investigator who made the comment "When theres no evidence, its the job of a good cop to create evidence.", or something to that same degree. Plus the HOURS of tapes of that same investigator making multiple racist comments.

You cant possibly NOT have a doubt in your mind over the persons innocents or guilt. Thus though i think he did it, i would not be convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that he committed a crime and obligated as a juror to aquit him of the charges. Im just trying to explain WHY he was aquitted, in the federal case, but it was possible to lose the civil case.

---

thanks for putting that out there. i was gonna let him debate me on that one, but you went ahead and clear it up for me. Like i said in my post ealier, the rules for winning a civil case is differnt than winning a criminal case.

It's not "beyond the shadow of a doubt", because, like you said, there will always be some doubt. How do we know that aliens didn't come down from their planet, murder two innocent people, and then plant all the evidence to make it look like OJ did it before they left? How do we know it wasn't the one-armed man?

It's proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Meaning, there's no other reasonable way to explain it. Which, for most people, this case was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. To not think OJ is guilty would be unreasonable.

I'll add more later, just wanted to get that out there for now.

By the way. Don't make assumptions. You know what happens when you assume things right? I don't think Kobe Bryant raped that girl--you know why? Because I listened to the evidence. See what happens when you actually pay attention to the evidence in a case? I didn't think OJ was guilty either, until I saw all the evidence against him. But no, I don't think Kobe raped her, I think she had sex quite willingly with Kobe and then cried rape. He may have cheated on his wife, but he didn't rape that girl. (Hey, d'you see that? I said a black guy was innocent. Pay attention here.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

It's not "beyond the shadow of a doubt", because, like you said, there will always be some doubt. How do we know that aliens didn't come down from their planet, murder two innocent people, and then plant all the evidence to make it look like OJ did it before they left? How do we know it wasn't the one-armed man?

It's proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Meaning, there's no other reasonable way to explain it. Which, for most people, this case was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. To not think OJ is guilty would be unreasonable.

I'll add more later, just wanted to get that out there for now.

By the way. Don't make assumptions. You know what happens when you assume things right? I don't think Kobe Bryant raped that girl--you know why? Because I listened to the evidence. See what happens when you actually pay attention to the evidence in a case? I didn't think OJ was guilty either, until I saw all the evidence against him. But no, I don't think Kobe raped her, I think she had sex quite willingly with Kobe and then cried rape. He may have cheated on his wife, but he didn't rape that girl. (Hey, d'you see that? I said a black guy was innocent. Pay attention here.)

---

im jsut gonna end this silly debate between us two. We could argue about these things all day, and neither one of us is gonna budge an inch from our beliefs, we have both obviously led to completely different lives which causes us to view the country we live in two different ways.



to post on topic for once. We need freedom of speach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

It's not "beyond the shadow of a doubt", because, like you said, there will always be some doubt.

It's proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

---

True. That particular point is withdrawn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

I am certian it was this thread, but in many small towns, racism, amazingly enough, is not all that prominent. We got a black fella in our school just a bit ago.. and well he was brought to almost instant popularity cause he happened to be good at a particular sport. Another black fella several years ago was also fairly popular du to the fact that that he was funny.

Anyways, I know very well my school would discriminate against someon.. but it would be for thier interests/tastes and actions and not race.

It is obvious however that some areas of the US have some really extreme racism.. Disgusting really.. My teacher when he was stationed in the south how many years ago had a black buddy. This black buddy was not allowed to be served in several dinners, due to the fact that the owners would fire the waitresses for feeding a black person... Really disgusting.

---

do these black fella's have names.BEcuase if they dont i wouldnt wanna goto your school to be known as the black fellow.

LordBlazer if it really came down to it, I could ask my freinds if they remember the guys names. I don't generally associate out of my age group at school.. and I don't even socialize within my age group often. I much prefer to go out and talk with adults. Thus I don't know the guy. I know one Had Dreadlocks... and the funny one had his hair tied into a pig tail.

Anyways Mr. Dreadlocks had great basketball talent, and Mr. Pigtail was just fun to be around. And we do have several Mexican Americans here. They are actually some of the most popular kids.

I will tell you right now I sometimes can't recall my own name or birthdate. So you actually expect me to remember a name that is quite a bit dated(any more then a month is dated for me), particually considering I didn't associate. And Mr. Pigtail had a weird name I never pronounced right anyways, teased me about it actually. We won a model stock car tourney together once actually. But for the life of me I can't remember his name. Weasly is the closest I am getting, but I recall that Weasly was white.. not to mention a bully.

And before calling me racist. I am a wrestler. Wrestler and Basketball players naturally don't get along here. Our school is poor and can only adequetly fund one sport, can you guess which gets funded?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

LordBlazer if it really came down to it, I could ask my freinds if they remember the guys names. I don't generally associate out of my age group at school.. and I don't even socialize within my age group often. I much prefer to go out and talk with adults. Thus I don't know the guy. I know one Had Dreadlocks... and the funny one had his hair tied into a pig tail.

Anyways Mr. Dreadlocks had great basketball talent, and Mr. Pigtail was just fun to be around. And we do have several Mexican Americans here. They are actually some of the most popular kids.

I will tell you right now I sometimes can't recall my own name or birthdate. So you actually expect me to remember a name that is quite a bit dated(any more then a month is dated for me), particually considering I didn't associate. And Mr. Pigtail had a weird name I never pronounced right anyways, teased me about it actually. We won a model stock car tourney together once actually. But for the life of me I can't remember his name. Weasly is the closest I am getting, but I recall that Weasly was white.. not to mention a bully.

And before calling me racist. I am a wrestler. Wrestler and Basketball players naturally don't get along here. Our school is poor and can only adequetly fund one sport, can you guess which gets funded?

---

I never called you a racist.Yep people are too immature to debate.I'm not posting here anymore.(this particular thread that is)

He never said you did call him a racist. He was just expecting it, because it seems that anything deemed disrespectful towards a black person means that the person who made the comment is a "racist" in today's society--just like somebody who doesn't agree with homosexuality is called "homophobic", somebody who doesn't like their wife working would be "chauvanistic", etc. And he made a preemptive rebuttle to the comment that you quite possibly would have made. I'm sure he didn't mean any offense by it.

The better part of the post was focused on your comment of being the "black fellow". This happens. In my graduating class, there were only two black people, and if somebody didn't know their name, they would be referred to as "the black guy" or "that black girl"...well, the girl was often called many different things, but most people liked the guy. Also, we had less than 60 in our graduating class, so it was odd for people to not know names, but I came into the class as a Junior so I didn't know anybody...and that's how those two particular people were described to me. "H.L. is the black guy", and "(whatever the hell her name was) is the black girl". In fact, now that I think about it, I don't remember any other black people in high school when I was a senior, save those two and one more that came into our class but didn't graduate. Anyway. The point is, when you're the only one of a specific group, you are labeled--and that's not necessarily a bad thing. I moved up here (Wisconsin) from Georgia, and immediately people either knew me as "the new guy" or "the Georgian", seeing as I was not only the only new guy that year, but the only guy that was from Georgia.

Hmmm. ShunNakamura, I always thought you were a lady. Sorry 'bout that.

Thought I was a LADY?! WTH... why does that always happen.. It happens when I meet someone new in person and it happens online!!!!

Ah well, guess I am used to it by now.

And yes I was using the Pre-emptive rebuttle as just that. And it wasn't directed straight at LordBlazer, but rather to anyone who read it and started to think that.

And LordBlazer before throwing out the immature comment. Remember, when righting a essay(which in debates each post could almost be considered an essay) you must predict the oppositions response and cancel it out. Therefor I predicted a response I commonly see(not neccesarily saying YOU would think that, but I cover my bases) and then blocked it.

Simple analogy: If you see someone moving in a certian way in wrestling you can predict what they would do.. now you may be wrong(as it appears I was here) but if you just stand there.. well you ain't gonna win the match.