Paris goes Back to Jail

[Cal&Ken]

I didn't follow it that closely during the trial, but I never heard much evidence other than her testimony to that effect. I was watching the news about it a lot when it first happened - when she took her girls and disappeared. It sure didn't sound like self defense then!

Didn't she shoot him in the back while he was in bed? Hmmm ... self defense????

[Dirtydawg]

Didn't she shoot him in the back while he was in bed? Hmmm ... self defense????

From what all I've been reading lately, that's what it sounds like. When the murder initially happened, all the reports had her shooting him in the back, but didn't mention that he had been lying in the bed. I thought that maybe he had just hit her or something and turned around looking for a bat or something when she shot him. This is way different.

[JuBru]

she got off LIGHT (understatement of the century)... pure and simple... i hope they absolutely refuse to give her her kids back and make her have no visitation rights.

there was no evidence of abuse and only her word. the obvious mindset was "he must have done something for such a nice woman to do something so horrible"...

and yes, shot in the back. in the bed.

[DogtorEvil]

:bigcry:

[Abominable Gorilla]

Anytime someone unarmed is shot in the back by a civilian, it should be a crime. Even in the event someone is attacking someone else, if they aren't armed you should have to make them address you (which I recall was specified in the concealed carry class).

If he was beating her, she should have left him. The only justified case of self defense is if the death occurred during the abuse. After the abuse, killing is not "self defense" because there are retreat opportunities.

If what I've read is true, justice has not been served. He deserved to be punished, but not killed.

[markay714]

If what I've read is true, justice has not been served. He deserved to be punished, but not killed.

Maybe I missed something, but the "abuse" was more along the lines of making her dress up in high heals and similar type stuff - more the "mental" abuse kind of thing. I didn't hear anything that would warrant anything but possibly a divorce if it wasn't to her liking. Obviously I missed any testimony that would lead jurors let her off, but he just didn't even seem like a bad guy. Perhaps he was just a little more sympathetic character to me when he was shot in bed as he slept.

[Cal&Ken]

I guess you have to wonder too IF there really was abuse. There is no cooberating evidence in this case including from the 9 year old daughter. You would think that someone would have seen something- it is hard to hide the fact that you are a jerk all the time. I have a hard time feeling sorry for her at this point- what she did was stupid. She should have left him - there are people all over that would have helped her get out with her children. I don't understand the ruling.

Now the Paris ruling has me dying laughing. I wonder if this will make her realise she is NOT above the law- unless she kills someone- and then OJ already showed us that the rich with a good attorney can walk.

[Abominable Gorilla]

Now the Paris ruling has me dying laughing. I wonder if this will make her realise she is NOT above the law- unless she kills someone- and then OJ already showed us that the rich with a good attorney can walk.

This is a particularly hilarious situation for our friend Paris. But, do you think OJ's money is what got him off? It would have been hard for me to vote guilty in that situation given how the case was handled by the police. When there is significant reason to believe some of the evidence was doctored, it's hard to keep from having reasonable doubt.

[Cal&Ken]

This is a particularly hilarious situation for our friend Paris. But, do you think OJ's money is what got him off? It would have been hard for me to vote guilty in that situation given how the case was handled by the police. When there is significant reason to believe some of the evidence was doctored, it's hard to keep from having reasonable doubt.

There is and was no reasonable doubt in my mind. In the "real world" the case would have been a slam dunk- and yes, he is guilty.

[markay714]

This is a particularly hilarious situation for our friend Paris. But, do you think OJ's money is what got him off? It would have been hard for me to vote guilty in that situation given how the case was handled by the police. When there is significant reason to believe some of the evidence was doctored, it's hard to keep from having reasonable doubt.

How old were you when the OJ trial was going on? Very few people don't think he did it - maybe the jury (who wanted to write books and maybe 100 more people worldwide - not saying that's how many thought he should get off).

[Abominable Gorilla]

How old were you when the OJ trial was going on? Very few people don't think he did it - maybe the jury (who wanted to write books and maybe 100 more people worldwide - not saying that's how many thought he should get off).

I'm not saying that he didn't do it. I think he did. But, I'm willing to concede that there is SOME doubt since the evidence was tampered with. Because there is some doubt, even a very small amount, the jury would have to say "not guilty." According to Alan Dershowitz, there were jurors who felt he was guilty, but voted "ng" for that reason.

What I meant to say earlier though wasn't a statement of "he was" or "he was not" guilty. I just meant I don't think his money got the "not guilty" as much as the botched job with the evidence.

[Dirtydawg]

I'm not saying that he didn't do it. I think he did. But, I'm willing to concede that there is SOME doubt since the evidence was tampered with. Because there is some doubt, even a very small amount, the jury would have to say "not guilty." According to Alan Dershowitz, there were jurors who felt he was guilty, but voted "ng" for that reason.

What I meant to say earlier though wasn't a statement of "he was" or "he was not" guilty. I just meant I don't think his money got the "not guilty" as much as the botched job with the evidence.

I agree with you. Shouldn't you come up with a new name?

[Abominable Gorilla]

I agree with you. Shouldn't you come up with a new name?

A new name?

...and the award for non-sequitor of the year goes to...

[Soonerdawg]