Subject:
|
Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Oct 2002 21:52:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
889 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In my view the prosecution botched handling the case. I believe based on gut
> feel (but not the evidence as presented, note the distinction) that OJ did
> it. But they didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore the
> jury returned the correct verdict.
Yeah, they botched the case alright...
Frankly, I don't know who did this double homicide -- nor does anyone else
as aptly pointed out by Larry. O.J. looks good for it, but I can't see why
a person of his apparent means would do something like this himself when he
could easily hire others to do it for him. I have to admit that the fact
the gloves fit him so poorly was somewhat shocking -- I have had several
pairs of leather gloves over the years and never had any of them shrink like
that when they got wet.
Plus, and this is purely from personal opinion/knowledge, the police have
been known to frame people and fabricate evidence to make the world seem
orderly rather than chaotic to the communities they protect. It happens. I
know it. They may have done this to O.J. because he made a good prime
suspect. When bad things go down in good neighborhoods they like to
ACTUALLY catch the person(s) responsible. And sadly, seeming guilty and
being guilty are sometimes two different things.
O.J. at least seemed guilty.
Maybe O.J. IS a homicidal nutjob. What he may have gained by slaying these
two people is anyone's guess...the losses he has realized in terms of hugely
negative PR, the cost of the criminal trial, the judgment in the civil
suit, would have to outweigh any possible up side I would have thought.
Guilty or not, the man will be vilified for the rest of his life.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
| (...) I'm not sure I agree here. A bit of logic might help. If I assert: (-> == implies ) A -> B and B -> C and C -> D are all true , and thus A -> D is true and provide facts or evidence FAB in support of A -> B FBC in support of B -> C FCD in (...) (22 years ago, 2-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
