Posted on 05/08/2007 8:27:49 PM PDT by doesnt suffer fools gladly
O.J. Simpson thrown out of steakhouse Owner says he is sickened by the attention Simpson still receives LOUISVILLE, Ky. - The owner of an upscale steakhouse in Louisville said he asked O.J. Simpson to leave his restaurant the night before the Kentucky Derby because he is sickened by the attention Simpson still attracts. “I didn’t want to serve him because of my convictions of what he’s done to those families,” Jeff Ruby said in a telephone interview Tuesday. “The way he continues to torture the lives of those families ... with his behavior, attitude and conduct.” Simpson, an NFL Hall of Famer and Heisman Trophy winner, was found innocent in 1995 of killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Ron Goldman but was found liable in a civil trial that followed. Ruby — who owns restaurants in Cincinnati, Louisville and Belterra, Ind. — said Simpson, who was in town for the Derby on Saturday, came in with a group of about 12 Friday night and was seated at a table in the back.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Is that just a rivalry thing or did Peyton do something naughty?
Only one problem, he was never convicted.
Since when have you heard at any trial, “we find the defendant, innocent?”
The former. The guy's a friggen' choirboy.
Ahhhh, I see!
That was public transportation enforcing a racist tradition. This is a private business rejecting a judicial travesty.
I thought most were in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Good for him!
And you guessed wrong.
You will not find your cause popular.
Given the climate of today's electorate, when Al Gore, Hillary, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and others, are considered 'popular' I will be satisfied to be on the 'unpopular' side.
The double jeopardy protection was placed in the Constitution for the specific reason that the Founders saw an abuse of the English legal system.
You seem to believe that I am proposing an 'either or' situation. I am confident that better legal minds then mine or yours, could draft a provision that allows for a 'not proved' but prevents the abuses that may have occurred 250 years ago. Perhaps, the English have already done so as I am not an expert on English law.
However, a system that allows a murderer to go free, as did OJ, is a system with a glaring weakness. Even you should be able to admit that.
and a jury reaches determinations of fact.
You mean as they did in the OJ case?
You took my statement at face value, note the scare quotes around 'innocent'. I was using the word in the context of a statement made earlier by a poster, one who claimed OJ was innocent BECAUSE he was acquitted.
I was simply refuting the misinformation that he was spouting.
Not long after the Pats-Colts playoff game last January the chief NFL official admitted that the ref blew a pass interference call against the Pats (in the end zone)in the 3rd Quarter that gave the Colts a TD on the next play.Given that we lost by 4,that call could *very well* have cost us the game.
So,given the fact that I wouldn't recognize the ref who made that dastardly call and,therefore,wouldn't be able to ban him I'd hold Manning himself responsible!
I see ~LOL!
That's fine if you're posturing. If you want to change law or policy -- more so if you want to amend the Constitution -- you'll need votes.
I am confident that better legal minds then mine or yours, could draft a provision that allows for a 'not proved' but prevents the abuses that may have occurred 250 years ago.
I'm less confident. A "not proven" verdict is inherently open to abuse. Keep getting that verdict, and you can hold someone for life, dragging out the trials, without a conviction.
However, a system that allows a murderer to go free, as did OJ, is a system with a glaring weakness. Even you should be able to admit that.
It's imperfect. Show me a better one. The American legal system. be design, gives the defendant the benefit of the doubt -- and even with all that, the 200th wrongly-convicted murderer was recently freed through DNA testing.
The old maxim is that "interesting cases make bad law." OJ is the poster boy. I, like most folks, am unwilling to rethink two centuries of American jurisprudence because one killer with unlimited funds for his defense managed to slip the noose.
Gay State Conservative is probably a Patriots fan.
I'm guessing it's a jealousy thing.
ping
Read post #112 and you'll know that that's not the case.
Simpson's attorney, Yale Galanter, said the incident was about race, and he intended to pursue the matter and possibly go after the restaurant's liquor license.
"He screwed with the wrong guy, he really did," Galanter said by telephone Tuesday night.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.