Um, you missed my sarcasm.

Nicole and Ron didn’t die by accident. they were murdered.

So if OJ is responsible, then he is a murderer.

Maybe not in the eyes of the criminal courts, but in every ratonal person’s eyes, yes.

not guilty doesn’t mean innocent.

I think A.W. is right…that’s not criminal conduct. I don’t think it will usually be appropriate to take civil liability into consideration when contemplating criminal charges.

No, see, that was just for wrongful death. so maybe OJ just negligently dropped a whole drawer full of knives on them… that’s the ticket!

Seriously, that is why I say we shouldn’t call him an alleged murderer. the jury found him responsible for her death; she was murdered; therefore he is a murderer.

I don’t believe his possible Murder of his wife was proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” in this case, and probably officially a decade ago…whatever you’re opinion may be.

The sentence was about what I thought…My prediction was here http://joshuetree.blogspot.com/2008/12/oj-is-heading-to-prison-this-time.html – I was off by a bit.

I don’t believe his possible Murder of his wife was proven “by a preponderance of the evidence” in this case, and probably officially a decade ago…whatever you’re opinion may be.

The sentence was about what I thought…My prediction was here http://joshuetree.blogspot.com/2008/12/oj-is-heading-to-prison-this-time.html – I was off by a bit.

I have to say your racialization of this is disappointing. You could make just as good a case that the real fault lines are between women and men on this topic as along racial lines. Or we can ignore all that and talk about the issues without racializing or genderizing the issues.

The man beat his wife, she divorced him and he eventually murdered her in a jealous rage. Only an inordinate awareness of color makes his acquittal anything but a tragedy. Feel free to argue that it is a necessary evil, but it is nonetheless an evil.

As for the argument that this demonstrates how good discretion is, um, hardly. strict guidelines might have told the judge that she was being too harsh or too soft. We will surely see people saying that she was too harsh, but without guidelines, what does this reflect but our own gut feelings about how much a person should be sentenced for this crime?

The judge gave him a minimum of nine years, so he will be serving nine years….I believe the minimum possible minimum sentence was 6 years by guidelines. So it was a bit stiff, but of course judges have some descretion…he got extra for their being a gun, and being violent….and I find it hard to believe, seeing as how the judge was acutely aware of it, that his past didn’t seep in somehow.

You may be right, but if I’m not mistaken, criminal law is particularly severe in Nevada, as are many of the judges. Perhaps someone with more intimate knowledge of such things could enlighten us.