| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (52)

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
not cool..

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:29PM hvnlysoldr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I thought something screwy was going on with my mouse. Firefox and Adblock didn't so well. I'll try No Script.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:30PM hvnlysoldr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sorry. Wrong reply.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The Boogie ad that is running on this page is terribly annoying. As soon as it gets to the interactive part, my cursor starts blinking uncontrollably. I thought it might be an issue with my computer, but it's happening on both the desktop and the laptop. Is anyone else having this problem?

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:19PM imadogg said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My cursor is acting all crazy too, after I come to Joystiq I knew that for sure, I guess you pinpointed it to that damn Boogie ad.

DAMN YOU Boogie!


Btw even though OJ is a murderer this is just dumb...
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:25PM chrisgrant said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The Boogie ad! We've been trying to trace down the error. I'll have the folks responsible for that sorta thing check it out.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
1: FireFox
2: AdBlock
3: NoScript

.. i havent seen an ad in months. Although, I just gotta find a way to block that ad in the top right hand corner... its like a game.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:44PM megapenguinx said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's the same on Wiifanboy....
and Firefox doesnt seem to be helping...
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"If the glove don't fit, you must acquit"
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:40PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
He's a murderer, everyone knows it.

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:56PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I don't know who killed who, but I do know that OJ was found innocent of murder. And I do know that if we lose faith in the judicial system, we throw hundreds of years of progress down the shitter.

As far as him having to turn over assets, I'm just glad to know that at least one family of outraged Caucasians can use OJ as a meal ticket for as long as he lives.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:14PM Mr Khan said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The defense did put on a convincing case in the criminal trial, however the way he has acted since all but confirms his guilt. "If I Did It," Anyone?
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 11:01PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I don't know how old you are or how closely you followed the trial, but being found "innocent" by a jury engaging in blatant jury nullification and ignoring evidence that was apparently too complicated for them to comprehend. The prosecution was feeble and badly organized, but the defense was pretty lame, also (claiming that OJ was too feeble to have done it, despite having recently produced a workout video, anybody?). The defense was also helped by a publicity-hungry, ineffective judge. Anybody without a racial chip on their shoulder can look at the evidence and realize it's a pretty fucking strong case, glove or not. OJ's fucking blood was at the crime scene, for fuck's sake, and he just "coincidentally" cut himself in the bathroom that night (though his story changed on this point, also, if you payed attention).

Nobody with half a fucking brain believes OJ didn't commit double murder that night.

And OJ was found RESPONSIBLE for the murders in civil case, which is what this story is about. OJ, that fucking asshole, has to pay the families of the murdered people because the evidence was there.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Further evidence that the American judicial system is a joke.
It's hard to comprehend that I can be acquitted of a crime yet still have to pay for the damages of said crime.

It's also interesting to know that $33.5M is the price for a human life.

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:16PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Civil court has different criteria for the burden of proof. Read up on it.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:21PM Mabui said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The price of.. two human lives.. so 16.5 million ish..
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So the burden of proof can't keep you from prison, but can make you pay the damages.

So what you are saying is"

OJ didn't kill 2 people, but he might as well have?
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So the burden of proof can keep you from prison, but can make you pay the damages.

So what you are saying is:

OJ didn't kill 2 people, but he might as well have?

*FIXED*
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:40PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Its really not hard to comprehend at all if you have a basic understanding of our legal system. Its called burden of proof. It takes a higher burden to put someone in jail then it does to make them pay money. It makes complete sense. The real joke here is your lack of comprehension.
And let's just clear this up right now, you are never found innocent in a criminal trial. It's guilty or not guilty, which is a huge difference if you put the time into thinking about it.
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 10:42AM Crono141 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Nevermind that judge Ito barred critical evidence for the prosecution in the criminal trial that was allowed in the civil wrongful death trial.

OJ is guilty, the jury of his peers weren't allowed to see all the evidence. Not to mention the defense turned the case from "This man didn't kill 2 people" to "This man is black, and the criminal investigator is a racist, therefore you must acquit, because this is a case of white guy going after the black guy".

There were interviews with the OJ criminal jury after the trial was over, where they were shown some of the evidence they weren't allowed to see during the trial, and every one of them said if they had known all the evidence, they would have convicted.

OJ is guilty, and he spends all his time looking for the "real killers" out on the golf course.
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 10:49AM Crono141 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nevermind that judge Ito barred critical evidence for the prosecution in the criminal trial that was allowed in the civil wrongful death trial.

OJ is guilty, the jury of his peers weren't allowed to see all the evidence. Not to mention the defense turned the case from "This man didn't kill 2 people" to "This man is black, and the criminal investigator is a racist, therefore you must acquit, because this is a case of white guy going after the black guy".

There were interviews with the OJ criminal jury after the trial was over, where they were shown some of the evidence they weren't allowed to see during the trial, and every one of them said if they had known all the evidence, they would have convicted.

OJ is guilty, and he spends all his time looking for the "real killers" out on the golf course.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:42PM megapenguinx said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Is it me or are people getting stupider?

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Well 'stupider' isn't a word, so I'd say "yea".
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 10:08PM megapenguinx said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Actually it is
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Stupider
but thank you for proving my point
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 8:10AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
http://en.allexperts.com/q/General-Writing-Grammar-680/Stupid-Stupider.htm

In an ironic twist, using "stupider" makes you look stupid. congrats.
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 3:30PM megapenguinx said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Touche.
Eh I'll stick with stupider since (for some reason)
more stupid sounds muddled.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:43PM Macroy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The first thing that popped into my head when I read the post title:

"My Goldmans, let me show you them"

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:56PM DonaldMick said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
High five, fellow Mudkip lieker.

And let's not forget, ANY money that OJ makes from now until he ponies up that $33.5 million goes to the Goldmans. If he wins the Mega Millions tonight, he loses whatever pays that debt off right away (and I lose what's left of my faith in humanity).
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 7:05AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Teh post of teh day!
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 8:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
That man is a genius... god bless his soul

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:17PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Its odd that he never paid that back

You would think, as a former god of the NFL, $33.5 million should've been paid (i know they don't make that much in one contract, but he lost this Civil case years ago)

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:32PM hvnlysoldr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
He had to pay his lawyers, their lawyers, court costs, and he had squandered or hidden a lot of his money.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Im surprised 2k signed him in the first place; yes, he was good.. he also in all certainty killed two human beings.. at least they didnt put him on the cover.

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"I don't know who killed who, but I do know that OJ was found innocent of murder."

He was not found "innocent" of anything. He was found "not guilty". There is a major difference between the two. We don't have a system whereby innocence needs to be proven; only guilt. And all a "not guilty" verdict says is that guilt was not proven; it does not say anything about innocence.

He *was* found legally responsible for the murders in a civil trial, which only requires a preponderence of evidence. The preponderence of evidence in this case points to him being guilty, and that's how he was found in the civil trial. He was ordered to pay I believe $19 million, and he hasn't paid a dime so far despite raking in big bucks for his aborted book deal (you know, the one where he confessed), his weird inspirational tapes and whatever other stuff he's doing. The man is not poor. What he is is a deadbeat who refuses to abide by a court order, and probably also a murderer.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 12:27AM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
You're wrong, man. "Innocent" and "not guilty", in the case of a legal decision, is synonymous.

in·no·cent - adjective
free from legal or specific wrong; guiltless: innocent of the crime.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/innocent

You can get on your soap box and claim that "innocent" and "not guilty" are different all day long, but I'd advise you to seek a better understanding of the English language.

I don't think OJ is innocent of the crimes he was accused of, but I do know for a fact that he was found innocent in a court of law. You really can't argue with the facts.
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 9:55AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The criminal law differentiates between "innocent" and "not guilty." If they were synonymous, they would just SAY "innocent" when referring to someone who is "not guilty." "Not guilty" means that the case wasn't strong enough to prove someone's guilty. Getting away scot-free doesn't mean you are necessarily innocent as many people are acquitted who shouldn't have been. Hence, the distinction.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 9:42PM Kaemon said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Reading this over at Kotaku just annoyed me. So many idiots there! Seriously, every says he is 'innocent' no. No. He was found not guilty, which means sure, he might have done it, but not EVERYONE thinks he did. And with the bias the Jury had towards him its no wonder he got it.
He OBVIOUSLY was the one to do it. It was easier to actually get him to pay up SOMETHING out of criminal court so thats why he was tried there, and he was found guilty. Sure that means he doesn't do time in jail for it, but he still has to pay for it. 1/2 times being found guilty is enough for me.
Plus with the whole "How I did it" crap, obviously thats just him writing out what he actually DID in order to make his consciouses feel better.
No one should feel sorry for him, He's a murder that just got off because of a crap bias jury and now lives off free money that he gets that can't be taken away from him.

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 10:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I honestly don't know if OJ did it or not.

Part of me thinks hes innocent and that this is racism at its worst.

Plus the gloves didn't fit....lol.

But this family is beyond pathetic. They don't deserve a dime. And tehy're the worst kind of hypocrites since they blocked his book and now want to write their own book.

Idiots.

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 11:28PM Kaemon said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh wow, they should feel bad, he killed two people and now wants to write about about HOW HE KILLED THEM and they stop it. They want to ruin his life, NO DUH. He is a killer. His life should be ruined. He shouldn't have a life. He should be dead.
And the whole glove not fitting thing is stupid. I wear gloves way to small for my hand all the time if I REALLY need to get something done...

I'm sure he would put killing under that.

And I say go ahead, let them write a book, about how horrible this man is and what he has done. But they aren't going to make it a mockery of their children's lives.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 10:15PM hvnlysoldr said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
This is Chewbacca. He lives on the planet Endor.

Posted: Aug 7th 2007 11:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Amazing OJ is still walking the streets.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 10:35AM horngreen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
He was not found innocent he was found not guilty which simply means reasonable doubt was shown to the jurors. There is actually a difference. He was found liable in the civil suit and must pay so PAY UP YA MURDERING PIECE O SHIT! I guess the jury didn't understand DNA, I'm not surprised since they are idiots.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 1:59AM BananaBoat said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I agree with the guy that got -'d into obscurity. It's a joke that you can be found innocent of a crime, yet have to pay for the crime. OJ, if you are reading this, and I know you are, STOP MAKING MONEY. It's all going to the Goldmans. Although you don't deserve the money, the Goldmans don't either. It's best you just quit altogether before the Goldmans are the new Gold's if you know what I'm saying. Although, if you did do it, no amount of gloves not fitting, and wage garnishing, will save you from the fiery pits of Hel- This message brought to you by OJ Simpson's new book, "If I did it"!! Please go out and buy a copy to support the Goldmans! Thank you!

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 2:58AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Anyone defending OJ and/or dissing the Goldman's is dumb as shit. OJ was found liable for the death's of Ron and Nicole. He was ordered to pay and has not paid a dime. The Goldman's have EVERY right to seize any and all assets this man has. Anyone with half a brain knows OJ is a murderer. Fawazr, Matt B, Rare Hare, ForceUnleashed, and BananaBoat, please go curl up and die somewhere.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 3:31AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm starting to get sick of reading comments. Why must everyone be assholes? It's as if talking nicely isn't sufficient in making people feel like their argument is strong enough..they need to add that extra dickness to manlify it. Jesus Christ people, if you think your point of view is the correct point of view, why can't you just justify your opinion and leave it at that. Oh and, just so i can get this off my chest..

"It takes a higher burden to put someone in jail then it does to make them pay money. It makes complete sense."

How does that make complete sense? It might make sense for the sake of the legal system, but theoretically speaking, if you're not found guilty in one court, you shouldn't be found guilty in another court for the same thing, unless there's a flaw in the system... I mean shit, either he did it, or he didn't. There's no such thing as committing murder, but not committing it to the extent of needing to go to jail for it. Just like how there's no such thing as not committing murder but being close enough to have to pay for it.

I'm just thinking about it on a personal level, if i was ever found not guilty for a murder case, and then they tell me to pay millions for what i just got found not guilty for, i would be like "wtf, this is ridiculous".

And those of you who think you're genius's in the field of law, please restrain from calling me out on not knowing what i'm talking about, because I really don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to the specifics of the judicial system. I'm just using common sense... So i'd rather not hear it, this is my opinion...so..leave it alone.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 5:21AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Uh, actually, Civil and Criminal court are two different court types, and by your arguement a person could not be tried in criminal court if the civil court through the case out (which is what happens at times) or vice versa. The system is complex, and from a layman's point of view it can seem almost overcomplicated to the point of absurdity. But, rest assured, it is only this way so that people can be tried fairly. The fact is, a person cannot be tried more then once in a criminal court for the same offense, which is why he was SUED for the deaths. In a another country, he would've been retried until a jury was found to convict him. In the case of the civil trial, he was found to be responsible (in other words, he PROBABLY did it). Since the two courts are separate, this could be done - and it is why it WAS done. I actually don't feel bad for OJ - he acted like an ass during the trial, the jury was all confused over what dna was, and the prosecution was dumb as bricks. So, in essence, the only reason why he is NOT in jail is because the system IS flawed. So, partially, you got it correct! =)
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 9:43AM JustinVincible said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thanks for running the story Alexander. Personally I think the Goldmans should be mad at 2K more than O.J., but it's easier to just sue the man you've been suing for an easy win than start a case against a company you'd probably lose to.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 12:01PM Altairio said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Those gloves look like they fit just fine.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 12:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That just sounds like the Goldman's are trying to rob "innocent" people of their money.

Posted: Aug 8th 2007 12:10PM easo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Anyone defending OJ and/or dissing the Goldman's is dumb as shit."

I'm not dumb as shit, but the Goldman family is acting awfully hyprocrital. First they got the publisher to drop support for the book, and that ok. OJ should have never wrote the book in the first place, and as Americans they have a right to protest what ever they like. Then they sued OJ for the rights to the book and found a new publisher to re distribute the book as a confession, and this is what I dont agree with. If the material was too obscene and hurtful for him to put on the market, why is the exact same material ok when its labeled as a confession? Becasue these pieces of shit know that the maximum amount of money they can make from the sale of the book is limited by the amount of money that OJ owes them. However if they get the rights to the book and sell it themselves, they could easily double or triple the money they would recieve.
So in my opinion, oj simpson deserves nothing, but these bottom feeders deserve even less.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW