• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

O.J. Simpson granted parole

Reply with the year you think O. J. Simpson will next be arrested for committing a violent crime

A GAF tag of your choice for the first 3 people who pick the correct year.

I'll pick the morbid route and say something happens and he dies before he commits another violent crime. Or dies in the attempt of said crime.
 
I don't know why, but I couldn't help but think of the Cape Feare episode of The Simpsons, where Sideshow Bob is granted parole.


I don't have a guess for the tag challenge yet.
 
Reply with the year you think O. J. Simpson will next be arrested for committing a violent crime

A GAF tag of your choice for the first 3 people who pick the correct year.

Since everything else appears to be taken, I'm going to take the double wildcard and say dead in 5 years WHILE committing a violent crime!
 
What makes people think that he does not stand a chance to become a good person?
How does a killer redeem themselves? Its not like OJ grew up ganbanging, where death is an accepted risk, and killed a rival. He murdered his ex-wife after years of physical abuse, along with Ron Goldman. He's irredeemable IMO. He has no remorse and is narcissistic as hell. Those two got killed because his dumbass can't get over himself.
 

fireflame

Member
How does a killer redeem themselves? Its not like OJ grew up ganbanging, where death is an accepted risk, and killed a rival. He murdered his ex-wife after years of physical abuse, along with Ron Goldman. He's irredeemable IMO. He has no remorse and is narcissistic as hell. Those two got killed because his dumbass can't get over himself.

What feels bizzare to me is how can you be acquitted from penal charges but yet guilty for civil charges? The murder happens or does not happen, but why two opposite verdicts?
 
Reply with the year you think O. J. Simpson will next be arrested for committing a violent crime

A GAF tag of your choice for the first 3 people who pick the correct year.

Am I allowed to pick a tag if he isn't arrested in the next 5 years?

If so: Never.

He's 70 years old now. Anyone thinking he's going to commit another crime must not know any 70 year old people.
 

siddx

Magnificent Eager Mighty Brilliantly Erect Registereduser
If he is smart be will lay low till he dies of old age but judging by some of the stories about him, he is crazier than a shit house rat and will try to barge back into the spotlight.
 
What feels bizzare to me is how can you be acquitted from penal charges but yet guilty for civil charges? The murder happens or does not happen, but why two opposite verdicts?
The US has two different standards for criminal and civil verdicts. For criminal charges the jury has to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. For civil suits the standard is lower and is the preponderance of the evidence i.e. the defendant probably did it.
 
He doesn't stand a chance to become a good person.

He's embraced his bad boy killer persona. That's his celebrity. People actually love him. But its an undergound, subversive kinda love. But thats what it is. He doesn't fight it. That's what he is.

Read his own words. He literally admitted and detailed what he did. And what he did is just bone chilling. You cannot be forgiven after you do that.
 

Pandy

Member
We're just ascending numbers now to hit the closest possible year that hasn't been claimed yet, aren't we?

2026
 

MechaX

Member
What feels bizzare to me is how can you be acquitted from penal charges but yet guilty for civil charges? The murder happens or does not happen, but why two opposite verdicts?

Basically think of it this way; in the criminal trial, the state failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that OJ did it. The state did some big time fuckery in the case, and "if the glove don't fit" made jurors think "yeah that's a good point, how would OJ even do that with those gloves." That was the jury having doubts that was reasonable based on the information shown at trial. This, with reasonable doubt, they could not find him guilty.

In the civil trial, the plaintiffs had to show that OJ wrongfully contributed to their deaths by a preponderance of the evidence. That only means "we need to show that more likely than not, OJ did it." It could be "51% Chance OJ did it," and that would still be more likely than not.
 
Top Bottom