circumstantial evidence, as in nothing hard. hehe hard

anyway. weve put in plenty of people on circumstantial evdience, just like this. going away thinking 'wow, that fuckin bastard is finally getting what he deserves' just to find out 10 years later that OOPS it wasnt him. DOH. 350 wrongful murder convictions the past century, 23 of which led to execution. .. thats a LOT. and again, mainly due to.. circumstantial evidence. nothing hard (eyewitnesses, surveilance tape etc)

which is why even if i were for the death penalty, i wouldnt have gone for it in this case. yes, the story is fucked. u want to cheat go ahead, doesnt mean u need to kill em, esp when there is a baby also. BUT like i said, circumstantial. theres always that bit of doubt.

and as for how far he fought.... he had geragos. come on. thats big shot right thur.

350 is an ant on an elephants ass compared to the number of people who have gotten off scott free.

Or an atom on the ass of that ant compared to the number of people murdered by a spouse.

year 2004 and we're still no further ahead.
Women are still prey. Children are still being killed by their parents.
i'm not talking a 3rd world country - i'm talking north america .. the shining example of progress and humanity.

99% of the time they have the right person. Building a waterproof case in the eyes of a jury is the hardest thing in the world. No matter how much evidence there is.

Unless I'm completely wrong and O.J WAS framed.

anyone want to buy some swampland in florida ?

big shot it may be, but if ya gotta fry when you are done, lol it dont mean shit. Im betting scott feels like he just went through the drive through, made his order, but forgot to check for completeness when he got home.

And while you present a good argument with regard to circumstantial evidence, I have the uncanny ability to still not give a shit. *grinz* <------------YES thats mine dammit lol

If anything, we were due one, after OJ getting off like he did I figure it makes us even now.

lol dont even bring in OJ. but ya, both cases.. circumstantail. except in the case of OJ the detectives, officers, proseuctoin FUCKED up royally. sloppy fuckin policework. but hey, at least it was in the case of a celebrity. had it have been a normal person, no one woulda gave 2 shits, that person woulda gotten away and probably committed more murders. at least with OJ everybody watchin him now. and with that case officers had to step their game up, reform procedures etc etc.

and......
350 wrongful murder convictions doesnt lie man....... not saying that hes innocent but hey ya never nkow!

*GRINZ* *GRINZ* *GRINZ* *GRINZ* MUAHHAHHAH!!!!!!!! :D :D

its one of those situations where ur screwed if u do and ur screwed if u dont. if were not killing innocent people, then we are freeing guilty people.

99% they have the right person, i WISH that was the case. i have it in my book somewhere, something if they have eyewitness who can give suspect description within 5 minutes chances of catching the perosn are 33%. goes down from there.

in this case, there was no eyewitness. again, all circumstantial. it was a very difficult case to prove and shit didnt it only take em like 3 days to deliberate (wel, after dismissing the 2). 3 fuckin days for murder? my dad did a case with MUCH MUCH more evidence than this, much bloodier, and they deilberated for 2 weeks. in peterson case, the judge even told the jury "if you can change your mind to come to a decision, do so"

now how fucked up is that? OK yes there has been a lot of money in this and how ever many months this went on, but thats no reason to thrown down a guilty verdict. IMO there was way too much media bullshit thrown into this. murder is typical, and usually happens between people who knows each other (relatives, friends), killin women, kids, whole families, etc etc. yet media went CRAZY over this one.

all the murder cases in the nation and they pay soo much attention to this one. look at all the resources allocated to this one trial, ud think this is the first time someones been killed in ca?