Piling On OJ

Does this sound a bit like a setup to you? It sure does to me.

All of a sudden there’s no longer a worldwide “sub-prime” financial crisis. North Korea, Iran and Syria are not quite so pressing. The talk about global warming is cool. And even Brittany has somewhat disappeared.


Because it’s now all abut OJ. So here’s my take on the OJ “thing”.

The media are full of beans. OJ should be nothing more than perverse entertainment, just like Brittany, Paris and Lindsay. Not one of whom are worth any effort to write or talk about.

But in this OJ case, there is something very important to write about that supercedes OJ.

In their obsession to see him arrested, view his holding cell, listen to the very incriminating audiotape, and speculate how much time he’ll get for this crime – the media are forgetting three things. And it is those three things that are worth writing about.

1 – Maybe he’s really innocent and was doing just as he said he was doing; recovering items that were stolen from him.

2 – Maybe he was setup from the get-go by people who had a vested interest in seeing him taken down.

3 – Since he’s already been found guilty by EVERY person in the entire world, including and especially the media, where is he ever going to get a fair trial?

We should take a look at two very important legal issues that impacted immediately upon OJ’s arrest.

1 – OJ was forced to do the “perp-walk” with his hands cuffed behind his back, which is generally reserved for real bad actors. Not only that, the media was allowed to cover each and every humiliating step OJ took on his way to jail. Where is the fairness or blind justice in that?

2 – Why would the judge not grant OJ bail? Where was he afraid OJ might flee to? People who have been arrested for far more egregious crimes receive bail. Even OJ’s co-conspirators have been released on their own recognizance without having to ante-up a penny’s bail.

Don’t misunderstand that what I’m writing is a defense for OJ. It is not.

It is a defense for the honest rule of law. What I am seeing is OJ being treated like public enemy number one for a crime that might not even be a crime.

He is being pushed up against the wall because the authorities are playing gotcha for the Brown/Goldman murders OJ was found not guilty of committing by a jury of his peers 13 years ago.

He might have indeed committed those murders, but whether he did or he did not, is irrelevant to what he is accused of doing now.

When I hear the tape of OJ yelling at the sellers of his personal memorabilia, telling them to get up against the wall and not to leave the room, I also hear a heated discussion between men who know each other.

To me, what I hear, is a loud argument between acquaintances who are very much in disagreement over property they both feel they own. I don’t hear a robbery.

I also have to wonder why one of the OJ co-conspirators, in fact, the guy who initiated all of this a couple of weeks in advance of the incident, would show up with a concealed tape recorder to an armed robber he is personally involved in, and then make the tape available for all to hear on the Internet?

Does this sound a bit like a setup to you? It sure does to me.

OJ is probably the monster most level headed individuals believe him to be. But that does not make it right for the full weight of the judicial system to pile on. He should be treated like any other person under the same circumstances regardless of what happened 13 years ago.

And by the way – do you think it should mean something that the so-called victims of this crime do not want to press charges?

What ever happened to due process?

As far as the media is concerned, they’ve already gone beyond the presumption of innocence, and are already in the sentencing phase even before opening arguments.

Due process and blind justice are two of the important issues in this story surrounding OJ. The third, is the feeding frenzy of a very improper media. This has become far less about OJ and a suspected crime, then it is about a very flawed legal system.

Recommended Non-Restrictive
Free Speech Social Media:
Share This Editorial

One Comment

Comments are closed.