The Ledge - OJ didnt do this either (riiiiiiight!)

The Ledge (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/index.php)

- Chit Chat (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/forumdisplay.php?f=9)

- - OJ didnt do this either (riiiiiiight!) (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=33962)

OJ didnt do this either (riiiiiiight!)

Quote:

Simpson named suspect in armed robbery

By KATHLEEN HENNESSEY and LINDA DEUTSCH, Associated Press Writers 6 minutes ago

LAS VEGAS - O.J. Simpson says he only went into a casino hotel room to retrieve memorabilia that he felt was stolen from him. But police are investigating it as an armed robbery and named the fallen football star as a suspect Friday in yet another surprising chapter to his legal saga.
ADVERTISEMENT

In an interview with The Associated Press, Simpson insisted there were no guns involved and he only went to the room at the Palace Station casino to retrieve stolen mementos that included his Hall of Fame certificate and a picture of the running back with J. Edgar Hoover.

"It's stolen stuff that's mine. Nobody was roughed up," Simpson told the AP.

Las Vegas Metro Police Capt. James Dillon said the confrontation was reported as an armed robbery involving guns. But he said no weapons had been recovered and stressed that the investigation was in its "infancy."

Simpson was questioned by police immediately after the incident late Thursday and a formal interview was being arranged, Dillon said. No charges had been filed and no one was in custody.

Simpson said auction house owner Tom Riccio called him several weeks ago to say some collectors "have a lot of your stuff and they don't want anyone to know they are selling it."

Simpson, who was in Las Vegas for a friend's wedding, said he arranged to meet Riccio at the hotel. Riccio had set up a meeting with collectors under the guise that he had a private collector interested in buying Simpson's items.

"We walked into the room," Simpson said in the telephone interview. "I'm the last one to go in and when they see me, it's all 'Oh God.'"

Simpson said he was accompanied by several men he met at a wedding cocktail party, and they took the collectibles.

Simpson said he wasn't sure where the items were taken.

Dillon said some of the items had been recovered. He did not specify which collectibles were located.

A message left for Riccio was not immediately returned.

Police spokesman Jose Montoya said when officers talked to Simpson, he "made the comment that he believed the memorabilia was his. We're getting conflicting stories from the two sides."

One of the collectors in the room was Alfred Beardsley, a real estate agent and longtime collector of Simpson memorabilia, some of which he has been ordered to turn over as part of the Goldman's lawsuit.

"I'm OK. I'm shaken up," Beardsley told the AP by phone, but wouldn't comment further, citing the police investigation.

Bruce Fromong, a collector who testified at Simpson's civil trial, said he was in the room when Simpson barged in with other men.

"Him and some of his guys come busting through the door," Fromong told the celebrity gossip site TMZ.com. "They came in with guns, hollering and screaming."

Fromong, who reportedly tried to sell the suit Simpson wore when he was acquitted of murder, described him as a former close friend and said he couldn't explain the behavior.

"O.J.'s in enough trouble. For him to come and do this kind of thing, I don't know what's wrong with O.J. This is stupidity."

Simpson is considered a suspect in the case, Montoya said. He was released after he and several associates were questioned, and he remained in Las Vegas.

"We don't believe he's going anywhere," Montoya said.

The Las Vegas district attorney's office will decide whether to pursue charges in the casino case.

The Heisman Trophy winner, ex-NFL star and actor lives near Miami and has been a tabloid staple since his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ron Goldman were killed in 1994. Simpson was acquitted of murder charges, but a jury later held him liable for the killings in a wrongful death lawsuit.

Simpson has had to auction off his sports collectibles, including his Heisman Trophy, to pay some of the $33.5 million judgment awarded in the civil trial.

On Thursday, the Goldman family published a book about the killings that Simpson had written under the title, "If I Did It," about how he would have committed the crime had he actually done it. After a deal for Simpson to publish it fell through, a federal bankruptcy judge awarded the book's rights to the Goldman family, who retitled it "If I Did It: The Confessions of the Killer."

Fred Goldman, Ron's Goldman's father, said he was stunned by the news from Las Vegas.

"I'm overwhelmed and amazed," Fred Goldman told the AP. "If it turns out as it is currently being played, I think this shows more of who he is. He is proving over and over and over again that he thinks he can do anything and get away with it."

Goldman's lawyer, David Cook, said he would seek a court order on Tuesday to get whatever items Simpson took in Las Vegas.

The Palace Station, an aging property just west of the Las Vegas Strip, is one of several Station Casinos-owned resorts that cater to locals. The 1,000-room hotel-casino, with a 21-story tower and adjacent buildings, opened in 1976.

A company spokeswoman did not immediately return a call for comment.

Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press.

he didnt do it I tell ya! :lol:

BREAKING NEWS
NBC News and news services

LAS VEGAS - Las Vegas police arrested O.J. Simpson on Sunday in connection with an alleged armed robbery of sports memorabilia, NBC News reported.

The arrest of the former football star followed questioning Sunday morning. Simpson has said the items, reportedly stolen from a hotel room earlier in the week, belonged to him, and police questioned him earlier in their investigation.

Another suspect was also arrested before Simpson. The man, detained Saturday night, was arrested on two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon, two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a deadly weapon, police Lt. Clint Nichols said. Two firearms were seized.

He was not identified. Nichols said police were seeking other suspects.

“There may be as many as five outstanding (suspects),” he said, confirming that Simpson was among those five.

Police executed two search warrants early Sunday morning on private residences, Nichols said. The weapons and other evidence were seized at the first location.

“It was evidence of a crime that was committed,” Nichols said. “And I believe we recovered some clothing that the individual was wearing in the commission of the robbery.”

The man is accused of being among a group of people that went to the room of memorabilia dealers at the Palace Station casino-hotel on Thursday and seized items. Simpson has said the items belonged to him, and police have questioned him once in their investigation.

'It just becomes a story about O.J.'
Simpson told The Associated Press on Saturday that he did he did not even consider calling the police to help reclaim personal items he believed were stolen from him, because he has found the police unresponsive when he needed help ever since his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, were killed in 1994.

Another suspect was also arrested before Simpson. The man, detained Saturday night, was arrested on two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon, two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a deadly weapon, police Lt. Clint Nichols said. Two firearms were seized.

“The police, since my trouble, have not worked out for me,” he said, noting that whenever he has called the police “It just becomes a story about O.J.”

“I’m at the point where I don’t rely on the police and this is not a police issue anyway,” he said, expressing hope that it will soon be resolved.

Simpson, 60, said he was just trying to retrieve memorabilia, particularly photos of his wife and children. There were no guns and no break-in, he said.

As police try to determine what happened in the hotel room, they must unravel the contorted relationships between the erstwhile athlete and a cadre of collectors that has profited from his infamy since the slayings of his ex-wife and Goldman. He was acquitted of murder in 1995, but was found liable for their deaths in a civil case.

that man is so pathetic. I'll just leave it at that.

Perhaps we'll get a "Leave OJ ALONE" video. He'll be out on bail in a New York minute.

Maybe he will come out with "There were different tracks on the bottom of my shoes" - line again?! LOLOLOL:shrug:

OJ is being charged with multiple (!!) felonies!!

Quote:

LAS VEGAS - O.J. Simpson was arrested Sunday and faces multiple felony charges in an alleged armed robbery of collectors involving the former football great's sports memorabilia, authorities said.
ADVERTISEMENT

Simpson was arrested shortly after 11 a.m., Capt. James Dillon said.

The charges against Simpson will include robbery with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a firearm, all felonies, Dillon said. More charges could be brought against him, he said.

Simpson was being held at Las Vegas police offices pending the arrival of his lawyer, who was expected later Sunday, Dillon said.

"He was very cooperative, there were no issues," Dillon said.

At least one other person has been arrested and police said Sunday that as many as six people could be arrested in connection with the alleged armed robbery that occurred in a room inside the Palace Station casino-hotel on Thursday.

Simpson, 60, has said he and other people with him were retrieving items that belonged to him. Simpson has said there were no guns involved and that he went to the room at the casino only to get stolen mementos that included his Hall of Fame certificate and a picture of the running back with J. Edgar Hoover.

Simpson told The Associated Press on Saturday that he did not call the police to help reclaim the items because he has found the police unresponsive to him ever since his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, were killed in 1994.

"The police, since my trouble, have not worked out for me," he said, noting that whenever he has called the police "It just becomes a story about O.J."

The Heisman Trophy winner, ex-NFL star and actor lives near Miami and has been a tabloid staple since his ex-wife and Goldman were killed in 1994. Simpson was acquitted of murder charges, but a jury later held him liable for the killings in a wrongful death lawsuit.

Police said two firearms and other evidence were seized at a private residence early Sunday.

Walter Alexander, 46, of Arizona, was arrested Saturday night on two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon, two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary with a deadly weapon.

He was released without bail on Saturday night, Dillon said.

Besides the two firearms, police said they seized other evidence during early morning searches of two residences, Lt. Clint Nichols said.

"It was evidence of a crime that was committed," Nichols said. "And I believe we recovered some clothing that the individual was wearing in the commission of the robbery."

Simpson said auction house owner Tom Riccio called him several weeks ago to say some collectors were selling some of his items. Riccio set up a meeting with collectors under the guise that he had a private collector interested in buying Simpson's items.

Simpson said he was accompanied by several men he met at a wedding cocktail party, and they took the collectibles.

Alfred Beardsley, one of the sports memorabilia collectors involved in the alleged robbery, has said he wants the case dropped and that he's "on O.J.'s side."

laff out loud funny :nod:

borowitzreport

Quote:

O.J. Authors “If I Robbed Them”
New Book Explores Hypothetical Armed Robbery

Just days after being arrested for armed robbery of sports memorabilia, former football great O.J. Simpson announced today that he was the author of a new book entitled, “If I Robbed Them.”

Speaking at a press conference in Las Vegas, Mr. Simpson described his latest literary venture, which he called “an attempt to get inside the mind of someone who would commit armed robbery of sports memorabilia.”

“Personally, participating in armed robbery of sports memorabilia is something that I would never do,” Mr. Simpson said. “That’s what made writing this book such a challenge, imagination-wise.”

Legal experts questioned the wisdom of Mr. Simpson’s decision to author this latest tome, since the publication of a book about a hypothetical incident of armed robbery of sports memorabilia could potentially make a jury suspect that Mr. Simpson himself had participated in such a crime, should his case someday go to trial.

But the former Heisman trophy winner’s new book received a vigorous defense from its publisher, Judith Regan, who said she came out of retirement to publish Mr. Simpson’s latest effort.

Sitting by Mr. Simpson’s side at the press conference, Ms. Regan said that readers of “If I Robbed Them” would recognize the “honesty and forthrightness that have become synonymous with O.J. Simpson.”

“I’ve been a publisher for a long time, and I’ve never encountered an author as truthful as O.J.,” she said. “Well, maybe James Frey.”

Elsewhere, one week after the New England Patriots stole signals from the New York Jets, Patriots coach Bill Belichick was still unable to explain why anyone would want to steal signals from the Jets.

seeing him cuffed on the news gave me such pleasure~ i was reading mark furhman's (*sp) book on the oj murders & i had to stop, i was so angry at his obvious guilt & the investigation that let him off, talk about travesty:distress:~

I read Marcia Clark's book on the trial, as far as Im concerned, the L.A. DA's office was unfairly criticized as botching the prosecution, when in reality, the outcome of the case was pretty much decided when the defense was able to get that change of venue granted. OJ should have been tried by his ACTUAL peers (ie, the Beverly Hills crowd) not his hand-picked "race card" jurors IMO. That whole trial was a travesty.

for another editorial on that topic, go here
or just read it here!

Quote:

New O.J. book does nothing for his cause

(If he didn't do it, he probably wouldn't have written it)

September 17, 2007
BY RICHARD ROEPER Sun-Times Columnist
While O.J. Simpson was participating in a "sting operation," posing for laugh-it up photos and getting arrested in Las Vegas over the weekend, his non-confessional confessional was rocketing to No. 1 on the Amazon.com best-seller list.
Ha, the joke's on him.

Wait, maybe it's on us.

The book is titled If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer, but the "If" is in tiny letters embedded in the "I," so from even a short distance, the title appears to be:

I DID IT: Confessions of the Killer

With Exclusive Commentary "He Did It" by the Goldman Family

So what we have is a book written by O.J. Simpson and a ghostwriter in which he offers a hypothetical scenario for how he would have murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. (We also get commentary from the Goldman family.) Ninety percent of the proceeds go to the Goldmans and 10 percent is available to the Browns -- but the Browns don't want the "blood money" and wish the book had never been published.

In the meantime, "the real killers" remain at large. For the 13th year.

Immoral to buy it?
There's been a lot of talk about the ethics of publishing this book, and the morals of buying it.
Barnes & Noble initially said it wouldn't stock copies of the book in stores but they'd be selling it online, which seemed like a pretty wobbly stance in the first place. Then they said they would be stocking it -- because they were getting a lot of customer requests.

Guess it wasn't much of an ethical issue in the first place. They changed their minds, because they had visions of customers bypassing Barnes & Noble and going to Borders to buy the book.

Some independent booksellers said they wouldn't stock the book. I wonder if they refuse to sell other books about murder and terrorism and crime and other ugly realities of life.

Granted, we're delving into new territory when a murder suspect who was found not guilty offers up an utterly believable chain of events that would make him guilty -- but there are a lot of books that exploit tragedy.

I just don't get why so many people find this particular book so morally reprehensible. In fact, it could be argued that the publication of If I Did It is a victory of sorts for those who believe Simpson is a double murderer.

Partial vindication
Here we have a book with a confession, albeit a fictional one. There's nothing that paints Simpson in any kind of positive light. The proceeds go to the Goldmans.
What's wrong with that?

If Simpson thought this book would help his cause, he's sorely mistaken. Describing his life and his relationship with Nicole, he comes across as narcissistic, mean-spirited and in denial.

Then there's the chapter titled "The Night in Question," in which Simpson details a hypothetical version of the night Nicole and Ron were murdered.

Ticked off at Nicole and intending to frighten her, Simpson and his friend "Charlie" arrive at her condo with a knife. He encounters Ron Goldman, who's returning eyeglasses Nicole had left at the restaurant where Goldman works.

A confrontation ensues, with Nicole coming at O.J., losing her balance and hitting her head against the stoop.

Goldman takes a defensive stance -- and the next thing Simpson remembers, he's standing there covered in blood.

"I know what happened but I can't exactly tell you how. . . . I again looked down at my blood-soaked clothes, and noticed the knife in my hand. . . . I wondered how I had gotten blood all over the knife."

Simpson goes on to detail his return to his Brentwood home, the trip to Chicago, his plans for what to say when questioned by the police, etc. It all rings true.

It seems entirely possible that in the real world, Simpson went to the condo with confrontation, but not murder, in mind. That things went from bad to worse. That he blacked out the memory from the worst moments of his rage. And that this whole exercise is some sort of psychologically twisted attempt to confess without confessing.

What seems impossible is a man writing a fictional confession to the murder of two people, including the mother of his children, when he had nothing to do with the killings and was falsely accused of the murders.

That would be sick. Not as sick as actually committing the crimes, but deeply, disturbingly, frighteningly sick.

The jury didn't have OJ try on those gloves.
The jury didn't bring Mark Furman as it's witness and have him lie under oath.

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckymcnix (Post 720936)

The jury didn't have OJ try on those gloves.
The jury didn't bring Mark Furman as it's witness and have him lie under oath.

That "glove" demonstration was the most blatant bit of theatre in the whole mistrial.

What did Fuhrman "lie" about?

Regardless, the prosecution could have proved its case 10 times over and that jury would STILL have found him innocent. FACT.

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl (Post 720941)

That "glove" demonstration was the most blatant bit of theatre in the whole mistrial.

What did Fuhrman "lie" about?

Regardless, the prosecution could have proved its case 10 times over and that jury would STILL have found him innocent. FACT.

This is true. It was payback for Rodney King verdict.

Furman lied about having used negative racial lanquage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl (Post 720941)

That "glove" demonstration was the most blatant bit of theatre in the whole mistrial..

and yet the prosecution wasn't smart enough to realize that asking him to try them on would be a mistake. Anyone can make gloves look like they don't fit especially with an extra latex glove on. I am just refuting your original point that the prosecution was unjustly criticized. This combined with furman's lies was enough to trigger some folks "reasonable doubt" threshold and both were presented by the prosecution not the defense. I don't agree with these juror's conclusions but i can see their line of thinking that led them there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl (Post 720941)

What did Fuhrman "lie" about?.

Using racial slurs to begin with.
Many of these jurors don't trust the police to begin with, so why would you put up a cop that is so easily made to look shady? a bad decision.

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl (Post 720941)

Regardless, the prosecution could have proved its case 10 times over and that jury would STILL have found him innocent. FACT.

you can not call that a fact. I am sorry. The fact is the prosecution made many mistakes that contributed to the innocent verdict.

A sound prosecution certainly had a chance at getting a guilty verdict. The jurors could have been presented with a cohesive prosecution instead of the one they were presented.

Though i do think that the Judge allowed some things to happen that made the prosecutor's job very difficult, I believe it was their case to lose.
I have read Marcia's book as well as furman's, Darden's, shapiro's etc etc . . .just so you know that i am not just winging this.
It is their job to REACH the jury no matter who comprises that jury, not just the beverly hill type juries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWS (Post 720947)

This is true. It was payback for Rodney King verdict.

Furman lied about having used negative racial lanquage.

Well I certainly believe the city was bubbling with racial tension, but i still believe the jury could have been reached if the truth were presented in a better fashion. Though once again I feel the need to state that Judge Ito bears much of the responsibility for the verdict as well.

Quote:

Furman lied about having used negative racial lanquage.

Oh, ok. I wasnt sure if buckymcnix meant something a bit more substantial, but apparently not :shrug:

Fuhrman's use of racial slurs had no factual bearing on the case and was brought up solely to prejudice the jury and further solidify their intent to exonerate OJ. (as if there was ever any doubt). That doesnt excuse Ron's poor judgement, and Im not suggesting as much either.

edited to add:

Quote:

I am just refuting your original point that the prosecution was unjustly criticized. This combined with furman's lies was enough to trigger some folks "reasonable doubt" threshold and both were presented by the prosecution not the defense. I don't agree with these juror's conclusions but i can see their line of thinking that led them there.

I say again, that verdict was pre-destined the minute OJ managed to get a change of venue. The jury dynamics drastically changed once the case was moved to a different part of L.A. The majority of that jury was black. NO WAY were they going to convict OJ, even if evidence was stacked to the ceiling. OJ lived in Beverly Hills, associated with high society, and was generally seen as a status seeker all around. So, all of a sudden, he remembers he's BLACK when he's charged with a double homicide? I think he knew he would have been convicted and manipulated the system to avoid justice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl (Post 720952)

Fuhrman's use of racial slurs had no factual bearing on the case .

of course it did.
he was presented as someone who found a key piece of evidence.
he was also proven to be lying under oath.
why do you think that that shouldn't taint the other things he said or a juror's overall impression of his testimony?

Both prosecution and defense try to shake the credibility of the opposing side's witnesses. It is nothing new.