home

O.J.'s Bond Set at $125,000

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 10:40:37 AM EST
Tags: O.J. Simpson (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

[Via live tv] The judge has set O.J. Simpson's bail at $125,000. There was no legal battle, the defense and D.A. agreed on the amount. He can post it in cash or using a bail bondsman.

O.J. can return to Florida, he must surrender his passport and he can't have any contact with witnesses.

My view: an appropriate result.

Most bizarre moment: Watching former O.J. prosecutor and current entertainment reporter Marcia Clark leave the courthouse. Talk about flashbacks.

< Restoring Habeas Vote This Morning | Bill To Restore Habeas Defeated >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    O.J.'s Bond Set at $125,000 | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I have three words for the person who set his (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by sailmaker on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 01:13:50 PM EST
    bail and gave him freedom to move about the country: White Ford Bronco.

    he was driving home (none / 0) (#16)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 05:26:49 PM EST
    in his white ford bronco.

    Parent
    No offense, J, but God that's funny. (none / 0) (#17)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 05:54:22 PM EST
    He was heading south on the freeway. His home was miles to the north. He'd been living in LA for many, many years. He knew his way around just fine.

    He knew the sh*t was hitting the fan and he tried to get away. Not a particularly logical decision, but, then again, he'd let his emotions get the better of him a couple times just a few hours previously as well.

    Sometimes those leettle pills'll do that to a guy, or so they say...

    Parent

    Agreed upon bail amt. seems low. (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 11:04:22 AM EST
    wonder what the bail schedule called for.

    Concur with you - appropriate result (none / 0) (#2)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 11:08:28 AM EST
    Not that he was leaving the country anyway, with the Goldmans stalking his assets....

    Reading the complaint, it seemed the cops were more interested in making sure they "got" OJ - so they could have that scalp hanging from their coup-stick (or belt - take your pick) - and in making something stick than with really digging out the facts.

    My opinion:  smells too much like OJ was set up and "worked" by acquaintances into the rampaging state the "tape" alleges to show.

    My second opinion:  while I agree a judgment creditor is wholly entitled to recover on the judgment they got in a civil case, I think the Goldmans' behavior has gotten progressively bad and vindictive and they are squandering the goodwill and sympathy they'd had.  Beating up on OJ in public fora and badmouthing him will not bring Ron Goldman or Nicole Brown Simpson back to life.  One can collect on a judgment without being odious about it.

    I agree (none / 0) (#3)
    by HeadScratcher on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 11:24:35 AM EST
    I hate it when people have their loved ones murdered and the killer gets off and then they seek civil damages and then the murderer doesn't pay them that. I hate it when the families of victims act like they lost something valuable while the killer gets to play golf and vacation and spend time with his loved ones. I hate it when that happens!

    Parent
    Just ignore the Goldmans... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 11:45:24 AM EST
    ...if you don't like them.  Everything they have ever done or said is completely understandable.  If they'd hired a hitman to kill OJ, then you'd have a point.  Short of that, I'm ever amazed at the folks who believe they could lose a child in that manner and not have the rest of your life deeply affected and changed in ways PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T EXPERIENCED IT cannot comprehend.  

    When I was 14, a foster kid we'd sponsored got stabbed to death in his apartment.  We all knew who did it, but he got off because of a literal lack of evidence.  I remember attending the open casket funeral for this 19 year-old kid.  I really didn't know him well at all, but I just lost it seeing him that casket, broke down, ran out into the street crying.  Now that I have a seven year-old, trust me, were anything similar to happen to him, I cannot say I would be able to overcome my anger and need for vengeance.  I might very well go further than Fred Goldman and try to kill the guy with my bare hands.

    Goldman's behavior is only bad and vindictive if you believe OJ not deserving of it.  In a case THIS anomalous, sorry, you get the anomalous result afterward.  

    Parent

    I will admit (none / 0) (#4)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 11:37:57 AM EST
    that no one with the execption of a couple of defense lawyers came out of this case with any esteem in my eyes. I think (in addition to it being OJ) the cast of characters almost universal lack of redeeming qualities and abundance of unattractive ones  is a primary reason why the case so captured the public attention. The thing is this case was sui generis in just about every way imaginable and yet has become considered by lay people as emblematic of the deficiencies of our justice system.

     

    which defense lawyers came out of the (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 11:41:33 AM EST
    initial homicide case with any esteem in your eyes?    Are you including Nicole Simpson, her children, and Ron Goldman in the "cast of characters"?  

    Parent
    I thought Scheck came out really well, (none / 0) (#7)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 12:24:30 PM EST
    and did a great service for using DNA evidence.  Also, in what turned out to be pretty much his swan-song (before being disbarred), F. Lee Bailey's cross-examination breaking the cop's lies about using the "n" word - and knocking a big hole in his credibility - was one for the textbooks.

    As to this:

    the cast of characters almost universal lack of redeeming qualities and abundance of unattractive ones  is a primary reason why the case so captured the public attention. The thing is this case was sui generis in just about every way imaginable and yet has become considered by lay people as emblematic of the deficiencies of our justice system.

    You nailed it.

    Kato.
    Marcia Clark - more concerned with publicity than actually trying her case.
    The LA Cops - caught lying and then making a career out of their police experience.
    Whoever it was on the prosecution team who decided it would be a good idea to have OJ try on the gloves before the jury - never ask a question whose answer you don't already know is lesson one of law school and that lawyer was sleeping when that one was taught.
    Lance Ito - who either did the judiciary a world of disservice, or was too weak to control his courtroom in the first place.

    Eeesh.  The list goes on.


    Parent

    I've never understood why whether the detective (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 12:56:20 PM EST
    ever used the "n" word previously was in anyway relevant to the Simpson homicide case.  

    Parent
    Bias (none / 0) (#10)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 01:06:28 PM EST
      one is allowed to cross examine a witness concerning matters tending to show bias as it is probative in determining credibility.

      The INCREDIBLY stupid thing was putting him on the stand to deny his racism when the defense had publicly announced they were going to establish he's  a racist (I read about in Vanity Fair months prior to the trial). if he had just said yes I have used the word n----, it would have been somewhat useful as impeachment but getting caught so defiantly and brazenly committing perjury about it was completely destructive of credibility.

       First, they should never have put him on the stand. What did he really add positively for the prosecution that couldn't have been done by other witnesses beyond establish chain of custody for the glove that didn't fit? If they decided he was vital then the prosecutors needed to pre-empt the defense cross examination by getting him to come clean about his prejudice. By appearing to vouch for the lies of their star witness the prosecution also destroyed their credibility and gave jurors reason to distrust and doubt all of the state's evidence. (If they tried to conceal the truth about Fuhram  isn't it reasonable to doubt their integrity and veracity generally?)

    Parent

    Again - a lot of that was the fault (none / 0) (#12)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 01:16:21 PM EST
    of Marcia Clark being more interested in her own publicity than in actually trying her case.

    IIRC, another thing I noted at the time was that the prosecution was not prepared philosophically for a defendant who would not roll over but would actually try their case - the proseution seemed so accustomed to throwing a charge at a guy and then Doin' the Monty Hall and getting a plea that the idea of proper preparation and thinking things (like the detective and his racism) through and gaming it out was totally alien to them.

    Parent

    I think Scheck, Cochran and Bailey (none / 0) (#8)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 12:56:03 PM EST
     came out deserving praise for a job well done (regardless of what you might think about the objective they were hired to achieve).

      I wasn't including the victims in the cast of characters because they were already dead when we learned about the case and while some unattractive innuendo was tossed around about them even if you believe it all it would not in any way lessen the wrong of murdering them.

      Of course, I was not talking about the children. I was talking about the cops, the main witnesses, the prosecutors, the judge, the media parasites, and yes  the families of the victims who just seemed like very unattractive people.

    Parent

    OJ made bail (none / 0) (#13)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 03:32:22 PM EST
    and left custody a few minutes after his hearing.
    His attorney says he will not permit any interviews of OJ.

    Anyone else (none / 0) (#14)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 03:55:35 PM EST
    think the way the O.J case played out was significantly influenced by the Rodney King incident?

    Parent
    I do think that if (none / 0) (#15)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Sep 19, 2007 at 04:07:46 PM EST
     the King affair had not occurred venue and jury selection might have been handled differently.

      i don't think the incomprehensible incompetence of the way the case was tried by the prosecution was affected. Would a different jury have convicted after the same trial. We'll never know.

      I will say I can't fault the jury for finding reasonable doubt.

    O.J.'s Bond Set at $125,000 | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment