Shuffle your feet forward sheeple.

” Hey I didnt rape her, We had sex before ” I did have sex with the woman but not on that night…”

Its a shot in the dark but, eh…

The only thing an acquittal of someone who appears to be guilty of sin after a trial proves is that all it takes is one close minded idiot to allow a guilty person to walk among us instead of being locked up where he/she belongs.

Because one bottle is all it takes!

I plead the fif!!

One, two, three, four, fif!!!!

With Cox stating he didn’t have sex with her sort of makes it hard to go the “it was consentual” route. They could go the JFK route and use the “magic sperm” explanation.

As for the hot sauce; who said this picture is from the courtroom? Probably taken during lunch. Funny though.

Jesus – compromise, its all good, people.

I would agree with that statement if not for the circumstances on how the DNA evidence was acquired. The blood found at O J’s house had been proven to obtain some type of preservative that is normally used when collecting blood samples so that the sample will not coagulate.

That evidence was found on a lone sock in the middle of an immaculate bedroom and on a sample that was taken from a gate entering his premises. Did O J kill his ex and her “friend” very brutally; jump in the triple white Bronco; precede to drive home; take a sample of blood and inject the anti-coagulate into said sample; apply sample to gate and sock; and place sock in the middle of an extremely clean bedroom.

I can believe it, especially since the top four senior investigating officers at the crime scene had left the bodies still exposed at the crime scene to go to O J’s house just to inform him of his ex wife’s demise while scaling the perimeter wall (according to the detectives testimony) without authorization and somehow the racist detective finds a blood soaked glove on the property. That same detective was taped stating that he has planted evidence in previous cases.

Sounds like an iron-clad case to me.

1. Jurors are strangers. Sometimes they need to get acquainted before deliberating seriously.

2. In a serious crime you seek certainty which can require patience. When I was on a jury, I didn’t speak until I read or handled every exhibit in the evidence box.

.

Could you hop over to HBT and relay this message to all of guys crying about the Ryan Braun decision? Yes, I think he’s guilty, but they don’t seem to understand that the rule of law is what makes our country so great. Sometimes it fails, but it largely protects us all and is the basis of our rights and freedoms!

That’s weird.

As for O.J., there was enough evidence but he had great lawyers. And alot of DNA/forensic evidence wasn’t allowed to be shown during that case. But O.J. probably did do it.

For Casey Anthony, that was the perfect example of creating reasonable doubt. Her whole family was inconsistent on the witness stand (except her brother), the meter reader’s testimony was suspect, and the prosecutors did not prove that it was a murder (Just b/c she partied doesn’t mean she killed her child). Maybe she wasn’t completely innocent, but she wasn’t entirely guilty.