All white jury to hear O.J. Simpson trial

You forgot the part that its was supposed to be a jury of his peers.

 

How many double-murdering, kidnapping, Heisman-winning Hall of Famers are out there that he could consider peers?

 

How many accused double-murdering, kidnapping, Heisman-winning Hall of Famers are out there? There's O.J. and no one else.
But seriously, I've had always had a problem with that jury of your peers line. I don't and won't get racial about it but there are many minorities in jail on phoney charges because they were convicted by "a jury of your peers."

 

You should write that story. It'd get you a Pulitzer.

 

?

 

You couldn't make that post up if you tried. Fan-tastic.

 

What's so fan-tastic about the post?

 

Amendment 6 - In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law,...

Would someone point out where in the Constitution of the United States of America the accused is entitled to a jury of his peers. And then would someone define the term 'peer' is the legal sense as it pertains to jury service.

I sincerely hope that Orenthal J Simpson is as guilty of the crime for which he was convicted as he was not guilty of the crime for which he was acquitted.

 

OJ was guilty the first time and not guilty the second, IMO.
Just goes to show how fucked up our legal system works.

 

Why does it take more than two months to sentence someone? I have never been able to figure that out.

 

My take on the first OJ trial: He almost certainly did the crime, but a mugging-for-the-cameras judge, an incompetent prosecutor and the best defense team money could buy all combined to create enough reasonable doubt that a jury which was already pre-disposed toward acquital could legitimately do so with a reasonably clear conscience.

Now, on this latest deal, I could be wrong, but I believe they had this crime on security video, or maybe surveillance tape. If that's the case, then it should have been cut-and-dried, regardless of who was or was not on the jury.

 

I don't think I have the quote correctly but I believe the judge said after the verdict was read something like "Time out". WTF?