OJ Simpson

Yeah well hopefully this IDIOT will have to pay something too! I'm no OJ fan be the owner's no hero in my book either! :x

 

He was found innocent, and people should treat him accordingly.
What I don't understand is why he stays in the states. If I were him, I would look for a place were I could live in peace without this kind of harassment.

 

NobleD,OJ is the real Staggerlee who had beaten the system. A White male in his position would had been served like Durst,Von Bulow,and Spector. Last Night I saw on Nancy Disgrace the motley crue of characters like Allred and their ilk making excuses on why OJ should had been turned away. OJ did not make noise or complain he left the place without insident. His lawyer should sue that owner and I hope he wins.

 

Wow people hold on to this OJ thing but lest we forget Emmit Till. Shit OJ beat their system and was found innocent.

 

The sad news is the WW who started the Emmett Till thing will never be indicted.

 

Man, who needs a court system. Lets hire you to solve every case. Besides, you can read anyones "guilt" on their face. Why should we spend millions on the legal system when we have you.

The fact is OJ was found innocent. NOBODY was there when the murders happened. Except the dead victims obviously.

Please, what's the difference between OJ and the Ramsey family? Those parents killed that little girl as well.

 

In the News. The OJ thing.

The fact of the matter as has been stated, is that Simpson was found innocent. Now, can someone correct me if I am wrong here, but I'm not sure Oj's lawyer is going to be able to prove that this refusal of service was racially motivated.From what I heard, didn't Michael Jordan come in later on to the Steakhouse?That's what FOX radio reported, anyway.
The "right to refuse service to anyone," has always been a little tricky for me to understand.This steakhouse is supposed to be prestigious, but is it a private club like setting?If it's a private club, I think he has the right to serve or not, but if it were say, McDonald's, I thought under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title 2(Public Accomodation), would prohibit this.
I personally am of the opinion that Simpson was at least partially culpable for the double murders in 1994, but I wasn't there so I don't know-and it's funny how "other"people can walk into this guy's place and get their "eats" on. This owner isn't a "hero" of any sort, he just didn't want to serve Simpson.
I am not a honk for Oj Simpson, but brothers, don't you think that at least privately the fact that Oj had some fly white women with him even AFTER getting off for double murder, might have made this owner even angrier? I mean cmon, check him with that cigar and check the honeys-don't front.

 

Re: In the News. The OJ thing.

One thing I can say for that IDIOT OJ is that he does keep some fine white ladies around him. Also that other IDIOT that owned the restaurant may have had a porblem with that because I heard he's not that friendly with regular black folks but of course will tolerate a rich bro like MJ!

Another thing is I heard he closed for the weekend or something to that effect to avoid being sued. :shock: Is that correct or not because if you have liquor and/or food licenses then you are subject to certian laws pertaining to the public and can be fined for various violations.

 

it's just my opinion Soul Brotha. i honestly don't care if he was found innocent or not. if Scott Peterson was found innocent, i'd still think the same thing about him. we all know the court system is flawed. look at all the variables in play. he was abusive in the past. his wife was cheating on him with another man. his wife and lover were both killed. 2+2=4 in my book. there will never be any hard core proof of the fact. however, i believe that the notion of committing murder is an insane notion to any normal thinking man, but it isn't such an insane notion to a man that has an abusive history, and a man who discovers that his wife is cheating on him with someone else. anyway, i can be entitled to my opinion can't i?? :roll:

 

it's just my opinion. i honestly don't care if he was found innocent or not. if Scott Peterson was found innocent, i'd still think the same thing about him. we all know the court system is flawed. obviously i wasn't there, but i personally tend to look at all of the variables in play. he was abusive in the past. his wife was cheating on him with another man. his wife and lover were both killed. 2+2=4 in my book. there's also no hardcore proof that Barry Bonds has taken steroids, but "in my own opinion" i don't think there's any way that he "hasn't" taken steroids. there will never be any hard core proof of the fact. i know that a lot of people are going to totally disagree with me on these things, but i'm entitled to my own opinion aren't i?? :roll:

 

Very good point.

 

So the owner is going temporarly close his place to avoid the trouble he had caused. I thought he would continue to open since he was a "hero". That guy was on Hannity and Colmes last night and no suprising any other show like Retardo this weekend. Anyway,I hope OJ gets some dough out of it soon.

 

Cool. I understand. But it seems like you're making your opinion look like facts. Like you said 2+2 is 4. Same goes for the Ramsey family. Here's a guy who spent millions on security camera's, but turn it off on the night of the murder. Both parents had different stories of what they did that night. Both parents got a lawyer when the pressure is on. They're just as guilty as OJ.

But I bet you anything you wouldn't have a problem serving them. I fail to see why you mentioned OJ's history, which could be used to your favour to show he is capable of doing something like this. But what about other guys without a violent history, yet they were found innocent but still get treated like criminals?

Jackson, Kobe,etc?

I also feel the same way as you about OJ. But I wouldn't disagree to serve him. We have a right to our opinions. But our opinions sometimes are not FACTS. The FACTS is he is innocent. Live with the fact like most people. That's all I'm saying.

 

Of course my opinions aren't facts. I'll be the first one to tell you that. I guess i just have a different way of looking at things. Like i said, i like to look at all of the variables in play, a persons history, etc...before making a statement like that. It's just my opinion that there's one thing in the world that would absolutely make any normal man want to commit murder, and that's a wife who cheats. So even though the man was found innocent, i just find it too hard to believe that his wife and lover were killed by some random act of violence. I've tried, but i just can't buy that. You know what, now that i think about it though, i think you're right. I would serve him. But not because he was proven innocent. His being proven innocent doesn't mean a whole lot in my eyes. I would serve him because it's the right thing to do. I can dislike him all i want, but if i'm running an establishment, i should never refuse to serve anyone who isn't causing trouble. So yeah, i retrack that statement, and when i think about it, i guess i would go ahead and serve him.

 

Bad news,he won't sue. If I was him I would.

 

OJ was found guilty in civil court...if he sues and receives a settlement, shouldn't the goldman family get that money...they have not been able to cash in on anything from OJ because all of his money is protected...maybe the restaurant owner should just write a check to the goldman family and call it a day...in fact everyone that thinks that OJ is gulity should get out their checkbooks and start lining this families pockets...what better way to make a statement...it would make national news...

 

In the News/OJ and the restaurant.

Interesting point of view, lipstick.I wonder why people who feel that strongly about it don't just start up some kind of a foundation for the Goldman's or something?Maybe that's better than posing as a hero by refusing to serve OJ Simpson............

 

Wedlock wrote

I kinda disagree, it's not about money to pay off for a daughter or son lost, it's about sending a sign of support to them. I think OJ brought in onto himself with the latest stunt, the "What IF I did it" book he tried to get published. He is trying to profit from the tragedy, how low is that?
I must comment on the fact that OJ left quiet, that is very surprising and I respect that.

 

In the News/OJ and the restaurant.

Well, OJ and the book is pretty brutal, agreed.I was speaking more to the fact that this restaurant owner isn't any sort of "hero" in my book for expressing his dislike for him.
He spun it into an appearance on Hannity, etc. I'm sure he's refused lesser known individuals service before at that place, but it didn't parlay into radio appearances..........

 

Agreed, he is no hero in my book either. As far as this making the news, that's just how it is these days. Anything that could remotely cause some sort of uproar will be published, spun around 5 times and presented from the angle least sensible to all. It's business and the media has to make a story last as long as possible while keeping the interest up.