Guest Andrea Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Re: O.J. Simpson \"confession\" [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I hate the double-jeopardy system we have. I think if someone gets off and then confesses he should be locked up! [/ QUOTE ] Someone getting off when they are guilty happens very rarely. I am a Criminal Justice major and talked to one of my professors who is very distinguished in the field and he said the same thing I did. It happens very rarely and if they changed the law, 1)it wouldn't get put into effect or 2) it would be abused and the process of going through a trial would become the punishment. OJ got off and it is horrible, I think most people agree that he is guilty, but he is in the EXTREME minority. This is terrible, but we can't go changing a law that is right MOST of the time and I stress most as nothing is perfect. [/ QUOTE ] I'm sorry, but I have to disagree here. That law CAN BE CHANGED and be successful. Think about it. It can be amended so that if after a person is found NOT guilty , THEN he or she "confesses" or there is overwhelming DNA evidence or something like video footage that is found........THEN that person can be re-tried or just sent right on to prison or the death chamber. SOMETHING can be changed about that. Then we wouldn't have crap like OJ is doing right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doughboy1956 Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Re: O.J. Simpson \"confession\" [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I hate the double-jeopardy system we have. I think if someone gets off and then confesses he should be locked up! [/ QUOTE ] Someone getting off when they are guilty happens very rarely. I am a Criminal Justice major and talked to one of my professors who is very distinguished in the field and he said the same thing I did. It happens very rarely and if they changed the law, 1)it wouldn't get put into effect or 2) it would be abused and the process of going through a trial would become the punishment. OJ got off and it is horrible, I think most people agree that he is guilty, but he is in the EXTREME minority. This is terrible, but we can't go changing a law that is right MOST of the time and I stress most as nothing is perfect. [/ QUOTE ] I'm sorry, but I have to disagree here. That law CAN BE CHANGED and be successful. Think about it. It can be amended so that if after a person is found NOT guilty , THEN he or she "confesses" or there is overwhelming DNA evidence or something like video footage that is found........THEN that person can be re-tried or just sent right on to prison or the death chamber. SOMETHING can be changed about that. Then we wouldn't have crap like OJ is doing right now. [/ QUOTE ] AMEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowtech_archer07 Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Re: O.J. Simpson \"confession\" But you can't change the law for one person. It won't work if you change it. I hate to see OJ get off and then do this, it really sucks, but changing the law won't help. Like I said before it will be used arbitrarily and it will be used to the sytem's advantage to punish people. For example, You get charged with battery and your found not guilty. Then the system keeps coming back at you and chargin gyou with battery numerous times and you have to pay court costs and attorney fees. I'm sure nobody wants this, I know I don't. Changing the law will not help. As much as I HATE to see OJ get off, changing the law won't help. Sorry, just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doughboy1956 Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Re: O.J. Simpson \"confession\" [ QUOTE ] But you can't change the law for one person. It won't work if you change it. I hate to see OJ get off and then do this, it really sucks, but changing the law won't help. Like I said before it will be used arbitrarily and it will be used to the sytem's advantage to punish people. For example, You get charged with battery and your found not guilty. Then the system keeps coming back at you and chargin gyou with battery numerous times and you have to pay court costs and attorney fees. I'm sure nobody wants this, I know I don't. Changing the law will not help. As much as I HATE to see OJ get off, changing the law won't help. Sorry, just my opinion. [/ QUOTE ] Sorry, the following is just my opinion. I disagree with you and its not only for the OJ case but it should be possible to quash acquittals in murder trials if....... 1.new evidence makes the prosecution case "substantially stronger" the new evidence could not have been gained earlier, even if the authorities had acted with "due diligence" 2.the sentence for the crime would be at least ten years 4.a conviction was almost a certainty 5.a re-trial was in the interests of justice Getting away with it: the dream of criminals. For centuries, one of the underpinning principles of law has been that if you are tried and found not guilty, then not guilty you shall remain. In other words, if you get away with it, you get away with it. A simple concept, known to eight centuries of lawyers as the law against double jeopardy. In practice all it means is that the authorities get one chance to prove your guilt - even if later developments make it obvious you are as guilty as sin. A law which prevents defendants being tried twice for the same crime is expected to be scrapped in murder cases in England and Wales. The move to change the so-called "double jeopardy" rule, recommended by the McPherson inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence, is also backed in a Law Commission report. It says it should be possible to quash acquittals in murder trials where there is "reliable and compelling new evidence of guilt". There is a simple fix that will get around all the (justified) fears over doing away with double jeopardy - allow a "Not Proven" verdict as in Scotland. It is used rarely, but would seem to satisfy everybody's wants. A retrial is allowed if the judge is satisfied that it is justified, and the principle of double jeopardy is still followed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted November 18, 2006 Report Share Posted November 18, 2006 Re: O.J. Simpson \"confession\" [ QUOTE ] I hate the double-jeopardy system we have. I think if someone gets off and then confesses he should be locked up! [/ QUOTE ] Have to agree with Norm here. Think given the arrogant nature by which this book has come out, they should find a way to retry him on some other charge related to the murders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horst Posted November 18, 2006 Report Share Posted November 18, 2006 Re: O.J. Simpson \"confession\" Ive got agree with PSE here.Changing the law would be a bad idea.If you were allowed to be tried multilpe times for the same crime a prosecutor could string it out untill he got a sympathetic jury that would convict a person.It would probably result in a lot more innocent peopole being locked up on little evidence. As far as confessions, DNA, video, they have all the time in the world to obtain these things before they ever bring charges against someone.Its thier job to make sure they have enough solid evidence to get a conviction before hauling someone into court.if they dont they shouldnt attempt to prosecute them untill they find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.