I hope you're right!

You could be right...even if not killed while in, he's not a young man.

I saw a disturbingly stupid woman. I quote her out of context: "Unfortunately, I can't ignore the behavior (of Simpson during the commission of the crimes)......"

WTF? Why would she want to ignore his behavior? Isn't that the reason she's presiding?


The context was her explaining how she would respect her jury's verdict and not bring the past acts "of thirteen years ago" into any prejudicial function of her job as "a judge of 6 years." Yeah, right. She could have probably given us the exact amount of months and days since the events of "thirteen years ago."

I have no respect for Judge Jackie Glass, but the job is done.

Her sentencing was laced with so many "concurrent" that it was tough to follow. But, I was the "60 to 180 with 12 to 72 consecutive" that added up to a minimum of 6 years. At least AFA I can figure.


The max added up to 21 years if I heard the consecutive part correctly.

That seems unnecessarily harsh...

Actually it seemed to me that the Judge did a pretty good job. She certainly issued a fair verdict and did a helluva lot better job than Judge Ito did back in 1994. She didn't let it turn into a circus and kept things on point.

With regards to her comment about "ignoring his behavior", I think that was directed at one of the lawyers' statements suggesting that the defendant's history spoke more to his character than the immediate issue (a lawyer tactic - diversion). She didn't buy it.

You know, it's occasionally okay to not be quite so cynical and negative towards people when it's warranted. Not everyone deserves the grouchy attitude. I think she tried to do the best job she could and it shows.

Someone has kidnapped POP and hijacked his account!

Her job is not an easy one nor is it an insignificant responsibility, I think she did a good job under the circumstances.

I didn't say she was a Rhodes scholar, she got the job done and it would seem that while an appeal is likely, she seems to have minimized the potential success for that and dealt fairly in the situation.

LOL!

The problem is most times people DO act stupidly and deserve to be called out on it. In this case the Judge does not. She did her job well. I believe in calling it like I see it, not in getting overly consumed with negativity and criticism. If I come off that way sometimes, it's just a reflection of what I observe.

Jeff, did you listen to her every word? That comment was so buried in her monologue about how she is such a good professional who respects the judicial system even saying, "I am the system." It was down in the middle of all this and that about juries, courts and all the business about not being there to bring up the past (which she handily did twice). Now, if she was referring to one of the others in the court room, she made that rather obscure.


edit: You're calling it as you see it? So am I brother.
Nevertheless, her diatribe against Simpson was old news. Bush league AFAIC and I'm no fan of OJ. I think this woman has handled too many petty misdemeanor cases and was thrown into ring all of a sudden.

Seems like that happen to Ito as well.

I'm sure the TV cameras weren't helpful. IIRC, the TV was not allowed during the trial. Ito's, yes, and that was a mistake that I think a lot of judges have learned from.

Edit: You're calling it as you see it? So am I brother

By stating she could not ignore Simpson's prior criminal activity and the judicial outcome, I believe she was stating that justice was breached, and that he was ultimately guilty of murder. I'm not certain, though. I'd have to hear her conclusion once more. I was too enthralled with how she was sucking on that straw from the Big Gulp she had beside her.

Ito was star struck as was everyone else working the case. By this time, 13 yrs. later, Simpson comes off as just a "hood," and Glass treated him accordingly.

The interesting question is if this crime and trial occurred in L.A., would the outcome have been the same as in Las Vegas?

The only stupid in that courtroom today were the two idiots in the blue suits.

Stupid and ignorant!

I like how his co-defendant left Simpson out to dry.

During his speech, the co-defendant's attorney said "My client isn't a murderer!" LOL.

Who going to look for the real killers, now?

Seems to me at least one other person heard what I heard.

Yes widgeon, the blue suits were plenty stupid and now will pay for that stupidity. But, their acts were really beyond being stupid. Maybe I should substitute a better and more accurate word for Jackie Glass. It's not like I don't appreciate what she does for a living.

But, I stand by my word for what she said until I come up with a better word to describe her. What she said, and what David may have also heard, was stupid. I believe she contradicted herself.

I wonder, though, if you did hear correctly, and it's interpreted as having influence on her sentencing, could there be a mistrial?

The trial is over, this was only sentencing and she covered the bases to try and minimize the success of an appeal.

Well, I'm no lawyer and don't play one on TV. But, this was a court appearance for sentencing. I understand a verdict and sentencing can both be appealed. In fact, at the close of the session, Glass denied 2 motions, so the wiggle has already started. However, I don't think what she says during the sentencing phase will have anything to do with the actual trial.

But, if I understand what you might be saying, the defense lawyers will be working to tie today's comments to previous ones made by Glass. Judges must be used to that by now. At least the seasoned ones should be. If they find any consistency, the whole thing could go up in smoke.

However, weren't deliberations only a short period? I mean, there's no chance these cats can get out of this on a second go round, so what's the point? Where is Simpson getting enough money to pay for defense anyway?

You know, she stumbled pretty badly reading the sentences almost as if she didn't prepare them. She sure didn't rehearse them.

'Never argue with an Idiot....They'll drag you down to their level!'

That probably applies to me. Or as one guy put it here a few years ago, "I don't get in a stink fight with a skunk." :D

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just didn't see any connection w/ my comment on moxie and your reference to stupidity. I'm done with that. (I'm here for fun and entertainment, not an internet fistfight)

Seems the potential for appeal is going to be based on the fact that there were no African Americans on the original jury. Perhaps Sharpton will get involved now, talk about stupid.