O.J. Simpson, up for parole, should never be set free?

O. J. Simpson, one of the most heinous and depraved killers in modern American history, is up for parole consideration.

If the Nevada Parole Board has a conscience, it will never set him free. He is a threat to society and will always be so.

Simpson was found guilty in 2008 of armed robbery, kidnapping and 10 other charges after he and his friends, brandishing guns, stormed into a Las Vegas hotel room to steal sports memorabilia. The former football star’s lawyers argued that their client was simply retrieving his own property. The jury didn’t buy it for one minute. He was sentenced to 33 years, but eligible for parole after nine years.

The crimes were a consistent pattern of conduct for Simpson. When he gets angry, he resorts to violence and lawlessness. He will do it again if he is allowed to walk out of the Lovelock Correctional Center. He is a ticking time bomb. Freedom will allow the fuse to be set again.

Simpson has a long and frightening record of violence: beating his wife, cutting his ex-wife’s throat and nearly decapitating her, stabbing Goldman more than 30 times, then later committing armed robbery and kidnapping.

Simpson is an inherent danger to society and it is too risky to let him walk free.

The acquittal of O. J. Simpson did immeasurable damage to America’s faith in our system of justice. But trial by jury is an imperfect system. Sometimes guilty people go free.

For this very reason, the Nevada parole board should refuse to permit a proven killer to walk free again.
What say you?

(this is a long article, here is a link to the page)

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/07/17/o-j-simpson-up-for-parole-should-never-be-set-free.html

Gregg Jarrett
By Gregg Jarrett
Published July 17, 2017
Fox News

Now Playing

Is OJ Simpson a risk to public safety?

O. J. Simpson, one of the most heinous and depraved killers in modern American history, is up for parole consideration.

If the Nevada Parole Board has a conscience, it will never set him free. He is a threat to society and will always be so.

Simpson was found guilty in 2008 of armed robbery, kidnapping and 10 other charges after he and his friends, brandishing guns, stormed into a Las Vegas hotel room to steal sports memorabilia. The former football star’s lawyers argued that their client was simply retrieving his own property. The jury didn’t buy it for one minute. He was sentenced to 33 years, but eligible for parole after nine years.

The crimes were a consistent pattern of conduct for Simpson. When he gets angry, he resorts to violence and lawlessness. He will do it again if he is allowed to walk out of the Lovelock Correctional Center. He is a ticking time bomb. Freedom will allow the fuse to be set again.

Parole Considerations

The Nevada parole guidelines identify more than a dozen factors for board members to consider. For example, the board wants to know whether Simpson has a clean record in prison or has been disciplined. Has he completed recommended educational courses and treatment? Has he refrained from gang activity, drugs and alcohol?

His score will be calculated in a mathematical formula. Most inmates with a good score are paroled. While Simpson should score well, the severity of his Nevada crimes weighs against him. Armed robbery and kidnapping under the threat of bullets are extremely serious crimes. So, parole is not an easy touchdown for the Hall of Famer. There are reports that he is worried. He should be.

The parole board can consider prior convictions in determining whether Simpson might be a recidivist criminal. He was convicted of beating his wife in 1989, so that may be examined. However, since he was acquitted in his famous double murder trial in Los Angeles in 1995, it does not technically count as a prior offense.

Nevertheless, there is another way the parole board could apply the double murder against Simpson, even though he was found “not guilty.” Under the provision entitled “aggravating factors,” board members can consider the following:

“… other information… that concerns the Board that the inmate may be a risk to public safety if released on parole.”

In other words, the board is entitled to conclude that releasing Simpson would pose a threat to society because of his established propensity for violence. The decision can be based on reliable information and evidence such as court proceedings and judgments.

Indeed, the parole board could take judicial notice of the verdict in 1997 by a civil jury in the wrongful death case brought by the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. The jury unanimously found that Simpson committed the brutal killings, awarding the plaintiffs $8.5 million in compensatory damages and $25 million in punitive damages.

On this basis alone the Nevada board members should deny Simpson parole.

Simpson has a long and frightening record of violence: beating his wife, cutting his ex-wife’s throat and nearly decapitating her, stabbing Goldman more than 30 times, then later committing armed robbery and kidnapping.

Simpson is an inherent danger to society and it is too risky to let him walk free.

Evidence Simpson Is a Killer

As a lawyer, I have tried cases. As a reporter, I have covered hundreds of trials. From the courtroom, I saw all of the evidence presented in Simpson’s 1995 murder trial. I can say without hesitation that I have never witnessed such compelling and overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Simpson’s blood was dripping away from the crime scene. Sophisticated DNA testing proved conclusively that the blood dropped at the murder scene belonged only to O. J. Simpson. The chance that it was someone else’s DNA was one out of 170 million. He had fresh cuts all over his hand.

The blood of both victims and Simpson was spattered and smeared throughout the interior of his Ford Bronco. Limo driver Allan Park testified he observed a man he believed to be Simpson entering his home shortly after the murders. Fresh drops of Simpson’s blood were found on the driveway and foyer of his home. Nicole’s blood was found on Simpson’s socks in his bedroom, and his own blood was found on the same socks.

Simpson normally wore size 12 shoes, and bloody shoe prints matching that very size were found leading away from the bodies. The bloody companion to the glove ripped off at the murder scene was found on Simpson’s property. A receipt showed Nicole bought the same gloves for her husband.

Another receipt showed Simpson bought a 12-inch knife six weeks before the murders, and a replica of the knife proved to be a precise match to the wounds on the victims. Hair with the same characteristics as Simpson’s was found on Goldman’s shirt and on the knit cap worn by the killer and left at the crime scene.

All of this evidence and much more is a part of the official court record which may be considered by the parole board if it has any desire to examine the truth of whether Simpson is a killer who is fully capable of killing again. And he knows he got away with it, thanks to arrogant and inept prosecutors, a seemingly incompetent judge, and gullible jurors who were dazzled, if not confused, by Simpson’s so-called “dream team” of clever lawyers.
Evidence.

The notion that all of the evidence was planted in an elaborate scheme to frame Simpson was ludicrous. The criminal jury was fooled, but not the civil jury. And the parole board in Nevada should not be fooled either. The board members have a duty to protect society and an obligation to examine the evidence against a killer who wants his freedom.

If the parole board does not have the time or willingness to study all of the evidence presented in the civil trial, it should simply turn to Simpson’s sworn testimony. Unable to invoke his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination in a civil trial, he was forced to take the witness stand. Simpson melted under cross-examination, erasing any doubt about his guilt.

The acquittal of O. J. Simpson did immeasurable damage to America’s faith in our system of justice. But trial by jury is an imperfect system. Sometimes guilty people go free.

For this very reason, the Nevada parole board should refuse to permit a proven killer to walk free again.

Not sure about who wrote this... But first of all he was not found guilty on the murders of his ex wife and b/f.. So as soon as I seen that this whole article was worthless...and I quit reading..

Ohh and as far as him getting parole, lets see he has done 9 years and this is over robbery and burglary no more then that.. And when you look a it sure he could have snapped after loosing all his stuff and got pissed and wanted it back.. Did it belong to him anymore no.. therefore he was charged for it and doing the time..

Regardless what they want to do they can not use a case that many thinks he is guilty for but not charged for and it can not be used as far as his parole either..

If he has been a model prisoner he will get parole~~it is his right within the system..

He was found guilty of wrongful death in the civil trial and pretty much
lost everything financially. The murder trial was very long and the jurors were wore down. They came back with a quick verdict.

he will get out on his good behavior...
and will get to keep his F -Ball benefits... so I heard ...

Do anybody suddenly, just protect their throats???

Man, I did.
Keep him in prison...

Oj was innocent...his son, the chef, who was preparing a dinner for the Browns and was stood up, and is skilled with a knife...that's another story.

TxsGal3333 is completely right.

While I personally still believe that Simpson is a murderer, as far as the legal system is concerned, he is an armed robber. There are plenty of people who I wish were either still in jail, or had been prosecuted and jailed but were not. But I support the rule of law, above catering to my own emotions about it all.

I would firmly oppose anyone deciding to keep Simpson in jail because they want to think they are making him pay for a crime he was NOT convicted of, because opening the door to that kind of behavior leads directly to an end to American liberty altogether.

To me it's another weird event in judicial history. He's innocent yet
everyone knows he dam well killed them. His story may not be over.

everyone doesn't know. Especially if they lived in California or had history with corrupt policemen and shady forensics labs, like the one who held on to blood instead of taking it in,,,and the one who made racist comments about his interracial relationship,,or the blood found on socks that went all the way through though he allegedly wore them during the attack,,,,etc


far too much reasonable doubt to KNOW anything,

and even if he had, he is now 70 years old, that was almost half a lifetime ago and if he has been doing what he is asked, he should have the same option for parole as anyone else,,,

Well, true not everyone but everyone has their own opinion. It was a
gruesome, bloody murder committed by a sick killer. Maybe over time
the truth will be known.

Humm as I stated above he got his due process and will be paroled....

Again he has never been found guilty in Federal Court for the Murders regardless what many may think he is still considered innocent on those charges... And those charges can not be used against him.....

Unless he decides to admit he did it on his death bed we will never know for a fact if he did it or not... since it was not proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he did do them...

And broke he is not as some think he gets $25,000 a month from his NFL Pension and no one can touch that not even the Civil case that was won.....

So I'm divided on this issue. In theory , since OJ was only convicted of robbery, I believe he is entitled to parole.

That said, I question the basis upon which people are either charged of a crime or acquitted. It seems to me that so many criminals are acquitted on the grounds of reasonable doubt, but aren't many or most of the cases out there, punctuated with reasonable doubt?

In so many cases, there are no witnesses to the crime , and somehow even when there is video footage clearly depicting a crime, so much credence is given to the precipitating factors that might have led to the actual crime that the crime is often overshadowed by conjecture.

Is the fact that someone is acquitted a clear reflection of the accused person's innocence? Or is it a reflection of the lawyers expertise, or sometimes the police department's craftiness in hiding or manipulating evidence to cultivate reasonable doubt in a jury?

The bigger question for me is :- how can the law enforcement and justice system be revamped with new checks and balances that aren't so heavily weighted in favor of people in society with money, fame, and power ?

I'm afraid to turn the TV on.

The juice will be loose.

A bit like "Game of Thrones" & "Walking Dead".

Don't care. Not watching.

great question, yet, I doubt there is a way to make the justice system function seperately from the society and culture it exists within

which is a culture and society that is created for the favor of people with money, fame, and power,,,,,

I don't think there is any definitive way to balance the justice system, so that money doesn't matter.

It isn't just pessimism making me say that, it's simple, dry logic. Our system of justice isn't and can't be based on absolute certain knowledge. Because it must be based on reasoning and investigation and a certain amount of faith in authority and in the system itself (in people, in other words), that has the obvious inevitable result, that the people who are most adroit at using those skills, are going to succeed most often. And since our system rewards those who accomplish the most (or seem to) with more money, the natural result will be that money makes a difference in how much justice you can get.

Or avoid, as the case may be.

And make no mistake, in places where money has been removed from the equation, all that has happened is that whatever other measure of power, has taken it's place.

What we have to do instead, is to do our best to allow for adjustments to the process, and take as much care as possible in writing laws, so as to minimize the effect of money and power as much as we can.

We? Dont worry our finest already have all the laws, bills, regulations, loopholes in their favor. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$