O.J Simpson - Did he do it?

[daniel f aleman]

Hey Mark, you hit the big nail right on the head with that question. There is a longstanding arguement in the US as to whether a civil case should be brought against one after one has been aquited in criminal court, for the same crime, using the same evidence. Relatedly, there is a debate as to whether an individual can be charged in Federal criminal court for the same crime as one was charged in state criminal court - double jeopardy being the question...

As is so much concerning American judicial system, the rules change due to political situations and the current needs of the people. One enters the US legal system with complete dread, as much of it is corrupt by its very nature to be used capricously...

 

[do it easy]

(putting hand up to ask a dumb question...)

not being that familiar with the American judicial system, can someone explain in "American law for dummies" terms the difference between a criminal and civil suit is and how if he is found not guilty under the first that he can go through another trial for the same crime?

If you can make me understand that, I will explain the rules of cricket to you...

I'm not a lawyer, but the way I look at it, in a criminal suit, the plaintiffs are the federales or state governments, while in a civil suit, the plaintiffs are regular joes, corporations, non-government entities, etc. So the difference boils down to whom is coming after you and what they can do when they catch you.

As I pointed out earlier, there is a different standard for the burden of proof between criminal and civil cases, so it is possible for someone to be acquitted of the criminal charges, but found guilty of the civil charges. Whether or not this constitutes double jeopardy or not is another question, although criminal penalties tend to be more severe (imprisonment, death, and worse) than civil penalties (fines, slaps on the wrist, etc.).

 

[Charlie99]

not being that familiar with the American judicial system, can someone explain in "American law for dummies" terms the difference between a criminal and civil suit is and how if he is found not guilty under the first that he can go through another trial for the same crime?

It's not another trial for the same crime. I'm pretty sure that the UK and all of the commonwealth states have a similar dual system of criminal courts for crimes and civil courts to handle such things as contract disagreements, and liability suits.

A criminal prosecution is the state charging a person with a crime. Conviction can lead to loss of freedom. The standards of evidence and the burden of proof get stacked in favor of the defendant. The burden of proof is commonly expressed as "beyond reasonable doubt".

A civil suit is a legal action between two parties. In the case of OJ, the other parties were such entities as the estate of Nicole Brown, Nicole's parents, someone representing the Simpson children, and the parents of the guy that was also killed. A civil suit cannot result in incarceration. The rules of evidence and the burden of proof is not as stringent as for a criminal prosecution.

The state of California didn't meet the full burden of proof in the criminal trial on the charge of murder. The defense was able to cause the jurors to have some doubt as to whether or not he had committed the crime of murder. "Pretty sure", or "I think he did" isn't enough to put someone into prison. It has to be "I'm totally convinced" sort of level of certainty.

OTOH, in the civil suit, they just had to get the jurors up to the level of "I'm pretty certain that he did. Certain enough that he owes the family monetary compensation". He was not being tried again for murder. The family was suiing OJ for harming them via the wrongful death of Nicole Simpson and the waiter.

 

[DiverBeth]

I think OJ is innocent. I'm sure he's innocent of something. As far as killing Nicole and Ron he did the deed.

 

[CrabCake]

This is why I drink V8. Cause OJ will kill ya.

 

[Hemlon]

This is why I drink V8. Cause OJ will kill ya.

 

[parrottheaddiver]

didn't he just write a book about it...hmmm....:w-t-f:

 

[wardric]

He cannot be guilty, he was too funny in the Naked Gun movies

 

[Elevatorguy2]

Before I continue try to read what I write with an open mind.
I don’t think I’m crazy as an earlier post would suggest. I am a Canadian WASP who would rather dive than do just about anything else.
Did OJ do it?
This is a question that has got me in trouble from time to time.
I honestly don’t believe that he was the killer or one of the killers or he was even at the crime scene that night.
Let’s set emotion aside and look at a summary of what I understand to be the facts.
The prosecution will have us believe that OJ went to the house, began a fight with his wife, attacked her and began to stab her repeatedly; Mr. Goldman either comes out of the house or was ahead of Ms. Simpson joins into the fight and is also stabbed repeatedly. OJ then leaves by car back to his house, arrives home and leaves for the airport approximately 45 minutes later.
Taking into consideration that this is more or less of what happened my difficulty with the prosecutions case is as follows.
If you have ever viewed the crime scene photos as I have you will see that it is truly a horrific image. There is blood splattered literally everywhere. Up and down the side walk, on the grass, on the fence and even on the front step of the house. The victims are also covered in blood.
It’s my opinion that anyone who was involved in this crime would have also been covered in blood.
The trouble I have or the questions that nobody has been able to answer for me was how if OJ did do it get cleaned up so fast without leaving even the slightest trace of blood anywhere? Not in his car, on his body, clothes, not in his home, bedroom, bathroom, laundry room or any where else. The police used every test and all the latest technology to find blood or at least the smallest of traces of it and were unsuccessful. They went so far as to rip out the drain pipes to look and yet did not find anything. They looked in his car and found nothing.
If you look at the time that the murders were committed to the time he was picked up to go to the airport I submit that it would have been impossible to clean up, hide or destroy every single fiber of evidence with out letting something slip by. I just don’t think OJ would be that smart, that fast or that meticulous to do such a thing.

 

[wardric]

It's a conspiracy, man!!!!