Re: [Bulk] Re: Death penalty

I didn't say lawyers had anything to do with acquittal in OJ.  But they had 
everything to do with him not being charged with the aggravated circumstances 
element that would have made him subject to the death penalty.  


There were no legitimate problems with the DA's case.  He killed his ex and Ron 
Goldman, and he wasn't found innocent; he just wasn't found guilty.  There is a 
difference.

MIke f.  




________________________________
From: Karl <[email protected]>
To: DADL (off topic) <[email protected]>
Sent: Mon, November 15, 2010 1:24:20 PM
Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] [Bulk] Re: Death penalty


While I understand the argument that more money buys better lawyers, in OJ’s 
case, I don’t think the lawyers were the hinge issue. 

 
That said, the OJ verdict was in theory how the system was supposed to work.  A 
jury of his peers acquitted him.  Maybe we disagree with the result, but the 
system should err on the side of innocence, and there was actually some 
legitimate problems in the DA’s case.
 
 
 
From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
David Straight
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 5:10 AM
To: DADL (off topic)
Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] [Bulk] Re: Death penalty
 

>A wrongful acquittal is an argument against the death penalty?  
>Mike F.
> 
>No, just an example of how inept our system is, and how the difference 
>between "guilty" and "not guilty" seems to be more related to money than whether 
>one committed the crime.
>DAve  
>
>
>
>
>-- dadl-ot mailing list
>http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
>http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot