O.J. Simpson Suspected in Armed Robbery - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-22-2007, 01:30 AM   #76
Blue Crack Overdose
Get me off the internetz!
Carek1230's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: wishing I was somewhere else....
Posts: 108,445
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Does anyone else here imagine Johnnie Cochran doing flip flops in his grave over this latest of OJ's ridiculous life? He is one of very few who know the truth about OJ.

Carek1230 is offline  
Old 10-06-2007, 05:26 AM   #77
Blue Crack Addict
MsMofoGone's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Where is not important...
Posts: 26,716
Local Time: 01:19 AM

Here's the latest ...

O.J.'s Rolex a Fake, Ordered Returned
By Associated Press
Fri Oct 5, 6:09 PM

SANTA MONICA, Calif. - O.J. Simpson is getting his fake Rolex watch back. The timepiece, seized earlier this week by attorneys for Fred Goldman, was ordered returned to the former football star after it was determined to be a knockoff made in China.

Goldman has won a multimillion-dollar wrongful death judgment against Simpson, but the watch has so little value it falls under an exemption in the judgment excluding jewelry worth less than $6,075.

Goldman lawyer David Cook said his client will comply with Friday's order by Superior Court Judge Gerald Rosenberg.

"While we are clearly disappointed with the outcome, this tells us that collecting on this judgment, against this guy, is really tough," Cook said.

Cook had hoped the watch might be worth as much as $22,000, but an appraisal from San Francisco jeweler Shreve & Co. concluded it was worth only about $100. Simpson had told his lawyer, Ronald Slates, he paid $125 for it.

Cook told Rosenberg he had a buyer willing to pay as much as $10,000 for the watch because it was Simpson's. But Slates argued that didn't mean Simpson was obligated to let Cook sell his watch, and the judge agreed.

Had he agreed to let Cook try to sell the watch, Slates said, Cook might have tried to go after other Simpson possessions of little value, claiming he could also sell them at a huge markup.

"We don't want to create a precedent where they can do that and we're forever faced with it," Slates said.

Simpson was acquitted in a criminal trial of the 1994 murders of Goldman's son, Ron Goldman, and Simpson's ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson. After their families sued him for wrongful death, a civil court jury found him liable for the killings and ordered that he pay $33.5 million.

Most of that judgment remains unpaid, although Fred Goldman recently won the rights to Simpson's book, "If I Did It." The ghostwritten account of how Simpson could have committed the murders is a New York Times best-seller.

MsMofoGone is offline  
Old 10-16-2007, 04:05 AM   #78
Blue Crack Addict
MsMofoGone's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Where is not important...
Posts: 26,716
Local Time: 01:19 AM
The drama continues with more testimonials in court.

Deals in O.J. Case Could Cut Both Ways
By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP Special Correspondent
Mon Oct 15, 7:56 PM

LOS ANGELES - Two men who cut plea deals Monday in a Las Vegas heist that authorities say O.J. Simpson masterminded could hamper the former football star's defense, but the men's dubious backgrounds could give prosecutors problems.

The question will be whether prosecutors can build a strong enough case against Simpson on the words of his cohorts or whether the testimony will be eroded through contradictions and cross-examination targeting the unsavory background of his co-defendants.

"It's a defense lawyer's dream to cross-examine these witnesses," said Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a former federal prosecutor. "You can put someone up before a firing squad and the squad members can start shooting at each other."

At this point, prosecutors appear to have the upper hand. Two of Simpson's co-defendants, one a former friend, agreed to testify against him in return for drastically reduced charges.

"It's always a prosecutor's strategy to go after the little fish to get to the big fish," said lawyer Edward Miley, who represents defendant Charles Cashmore. "In this, it seems to be that O.J. Simpson is the big fish."

A lawyer for Walter Alexander, a former golf buddy of Simpson's who plans to testify against him, said he hasn't been in trouble in a decade.

But he and Cashmore have histories of run-ins with the law.

Cashmore, 40, who said he will plead guilty to being an accessory to robbery, was charged with felony theft in a 1996 embezzlement case in Provo, Utah, pleaded guilty and bargained the charge to a misdemeanor and probation.

Alexander, 46, said he will plead guilty to conspiracy to commit robbery. He was arrested in Los Angeles in 1987 for kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon, but the charges were dismissed because a witness refused to identify the culprit, court records show.

Charges against Simpson and three others include kidnapping, armed robbery, assault, burglary and conspiracy. A preliminary hearing for them is scheduled Nov. 8 and 9.

Cashmore and Alexander waived their right to a preliminary hearing.

Their brushes with the law will be fodder for cross-examination, as will their roles in the Sept. 13 confrontation in a Las Vegas hotel room where Simpson has said he went to retrieve items that belonged to him from a group of memorabilia peddlers.

Simpson's Las Vegas attorney, Gabriel Grasso, said he wasn't surprised that some of Simpson's co-defendants are getting reduced charges to testify against the athlete-turned-actor.

"I never thought this would be anything but an O.J. case and only O.J.," he said.

Grasso said he expects the prosecution to argue that, "In a den of thieves, you have thieves as witnesses." But he stressed, "That does not include O.J."

Some of the other men in the room had felony convictions, including Tom Riccio, the man who set up the meeting and taped it but was granted immunity and not charged. He is expected to be a key witness.

Prosecutor David Roger has not outlined his strategy and declined comment on it outside court Monday.

Defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr., who represented acquitted defendants Michael Jackson and Robert Blake in cases that turned on witness credibility, said the move by co-defendants to plead out and testify to save themselves shows the prosecution's motive is to get Simpson.

"This might feed into the idea of a setup," he said. "They set him up in the hotel room and tape recorded it and now they're setting him up in court."

Simpson's celebrity and the fact that many feel he was wrongly acquitted in 1995 of murdering his wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman, could weigh heavily against him and may emerge as the dominant theme in the case.

"All the others are getting a good deal and Simpson, the one without a conviction, doesn't? It's all about who he is," Mesereau said. "They probably wouldn't have brought charges if it wasn't for who he was."

Defense attorney Harland Braun, another of Blake's original attorneys, said the critical factor is whether Simpson knew anyone in the group had a gun and whether he intended for anyone to use a gun that night.

Simpson told The Associated Press he saw no guns.

"The underlying fact is he was trying to get back property he thought was his," Braun said. "He could say he was yelling at them to give him his property and didn't see any guns. It's an unusual case."

MsMofoGone is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com