• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should OJ get a new trial

Should OJ get a new trial

  • yes OJ deserves a new trial

    Votes: 2 18.2%

  • no new trial, rot in prison OJ

    Votes: 9 81.8%
  • Total voters
    11
sawyerloggingon

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,697
Reaction score
5,704
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
OJ got away with murder and IMO is right where he belongs but legally speaking he may have a point. He claims his lawyer never told him he was offered a plea deal and if this is true he not only deserves a new trial but he should be set free for time served that corresponds to whatever the plea deal was.


"Simpson says that Galanter knew ahead of time about his plan to retrieve what he thought were personal mementoes from two sports memorabilia dealers at a casino hotel room in September 2007.
Simpson also said his lawyer never told him a plea deal was on the table.
Galanter was paid nearly $700,000 for Simpson's defense but had a personal interest in preventing himself from being identified as a witness to the crimes and misled Simpson so much that the former football star deserves a new trial, "

O.J. Simpson wants a new trial, claiming his lawyer had a conflict of interest - San Jose Mercury News
 
The conflict of interest sounds like BS. OJ could have hired a different lawyer if he had so desired. As for the plea deal, it is a matter of whether the guy admits it or it can be proven objectively. If so, then yes he should get a new trial; if no, then not. If it comes down to OJ's word versus his, then the flakey conflict claim goes against OJ's crediability even without all that other crap from his past.
 
Fisher said:
The conflict of interest sounds like BS. OJ could have hired a different lawyer if he had so desired. As for the plea deal, it is a matter of whether the guy admits it or it can be proven objectively. If so, then yes he should get a new trial; if no, then not. If it comes down to OJ's word versus his, then the flakey conflict claim goes against OJ's crediability even without all that other crap from his past.
Click to expand...

I don't know how this stuff works but it seems like if OJ was offered a plea deal there would be some record of him turning it down if he did so. I can't imagine a lawyer would have the power to turn it down without something in writing from the defendant but I could be wrong.
 
I vote "let him rot".

That said, I am biased. I believe he got away with murder, and I also believe that he was guilty of the kidnapping/armed robber charge a few years ago. So yeah, I believe that he should spend every possible minute behind bars, which means... unfortunately... only 5 more years until he's eligible for parole.

However... and it's a big one... if there was a legitimate plea deal offer that was not brought to him, that could give him a new trial. Also, if his attorney knew that the "robbery" was planned in advance and either advised OJ it was okay or neglected to advise OJ his ass would be toast, that could also give him a new trial.

I want him to rot for the next 5+ years. I'm just not terribly certain he will. :(
 
sawyerloggingon said:
OJ got away with murder and IMO is right where he belongs but legally speaking he may have a point. He claims his lawyer never told him he was offered a plea deal and if this is true he not only deserves a new trial but he should be set free for time served that corresponds to whatever the plea deal was.


"Simpson says that Galanter knew ahead of time about his plan to retrieve what he thought were personal mementoes from two sports memorabilia dealers at a casino hotel room in September 2007.
Simpson also said his lawyer never told him a plea deal was on the table.
Galanter was paid nearly $700,000 for Simpson's defense but had a personal interest in preventing himself from being identified as a witness to the crimes and misled Simpson so much that the former football star deserves a new trial, "

O.J. Simpson wants a new trial, claiming his lawyer had a conflict of interest - San Jose Mercury News
Click to expand...
OJ should kill himself.
 
The evidence was pretty clear and if he gets a new trial, he'll just be convicted again. Now, he's trying the "I wasn't there" defense which ain't gonna fly.

He probably lives like a king in prison anyway. A real hero - murders his female and gets away with it.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I don't know how this stuff works but it seems like if OJ was offered a plea deal there would be some record of him turning it down if he did so. I can't imagine a lawyer would have the power to turn it down without something in writing from the defendant but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

I've never had one in writing. The court is advised as part of the guilty plea if there is a deal so the judge can tell the guy he is under no obligation to accept the terms of the plea. The judge will almost always go with terms though as a motion of the prosecution.
 
Fisher said:
I've never had one in writing. The court is advised as part of the guilty plea if there is a deal so the judge can tell the guy he is under no obligation to accept the terms of the plea. The judge will almost always go with terms though as a motion of the prosecution.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine a case like this not being offered a plea bargain? It seems like that is SOP these days.
 
specklebang said:
The evidence was pretty clear and if he gets a new trial, he'll just be convicted again. Now, he's trying the "I wasn't there" defense which ain't gonna fly.

He probably lives like a king in prison anyway. A real hero - murders his female and gets away with it.
Click to expand...

He doesn't look like he's missed many meals in prison that's for sure.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Can you imagine a case like this not being offered a plea bargain? It seems like that is SOP these days.
Click to expand...

In my city, yes. In LV, no. I distrust convicted defendants blaming their lawyer unless they have objective proof like a letter saying "The reason I never told you about the plea bargain was X" or the lawyer admits it. In a he said-she said, I would always side with the person not sitting in the pen I think.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
OJ got away with murder and IMO is right where he belongs but legally speaking he may have a point. He claims his lawyer never told him he was offered a plea deal and if this is true he not only deserves a new trial but he should be set free for time served that corresponds to whatever the plea deal was.

"Simpson says that Galanter knew ahead of time about his plan to retrieve what he thought were personal mementoes from two sports memorabilia dealers at a casino hotel room in September 2007.
Simpson also said his lawyer never told him a plea deal was on the table.
Galanter was paid nearly $700,000 for Simpson's defense but had a personal interest in preventing himself from being identified as a witness to the crimes and misled Simpson so much that the former football star deserves a new trial, "

O.J. Simpson wants a new trial, claiming his lawyer had a conflict of interest - San Jose Mercury News
Click to expand...

Karma's a bitch.
 
He has spent more than enough time in prision for the crimes he was found guilty of. I wouldn't give him a new trial, but let him out. The sentence he received was about revenge for not getting him for murder and should have never happened.
 
MaggieD said:
Karma's a bitch.
Click to expand...

go to bed with dogs
wake up with fleas

oj hired a crook as his attorney
he did this to himself

maggie is spot on
 
IF he was given a plea deal and not told about it, then he should be released assuming it met the time served requirement. I care more about the integrity of the system as a whole than any particular case.

On a personal note, though, I won’t be losing any sleep worrying about this.
 
Sarcogito said:
IF he was given a plea deal and not told about it, then he should be released assuming it met the time served requirement. I care more about the integrity of the system as a whole than any particular case.

On a personal note, though, I won’t be losing any sleep worrying about this.
Click to expand...

Pretty much mirrors my feelings on this.
 
Sarcogito said:
IF he was given a plea deal and not told about it, then he should be released assuming it met the time served requirement. I care more about the integrity of the system as a whole than any particular case.

On a personal note, though, I won’t be losing any sleep worrying about this.
Click to expand...

It's way too easy for a convicted felon to say, "My attorney didn't tell me about a plea deal!!!" (Followed by wah-wah-wah.)

If OJ Simpson, through his new attorney, can prove in a court of law that he wasn't told about any plea deal . . . if that attorney is disbarred and given jail time . . . then and only then should he either be given a new trial or allowed to take the deal that was offered.

Why disbarred and jail time?
Don't worry, kid, I'm going to do something here that will assure you get off with a much lighter sentence. The worse sentence you're going to get is the plea deal. We'll refuse the plea, take our chances with the trial, and, if your sentence is worse than your plea deal? You can say I never told you about it.
Click to expand...
 
I think he needs a new trial in order to have his sentence extended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom