Our country's means of punishing people is often very disturbing.
Those of you who know me don't need a caveat, but here it is anyway: I believe OJ Simpson is a sociopath and psychopathic murderer.
OJ's acquittal from the murders of Nicole and Ron are a black mark on this country's history; the literal apex of political correctness in American society. It was a moment that ripped the clothes off the emperor, and forced black people to make a choice: side with facts and logic, or turn a blind eye to justice and judge a man by the color of his skin.
Most black people failed.
Fast forward 14+ years however, and we've got a remarkable change: it's hard to find anyone who admits they once said OJ was innocent! It's like talking to elderly Germans:
It vass a teddible time - every haus hett a Nazi flag but ours.
It's good we're all on the same page nowadays, because it makes it much easier to cope when we can share our disgust over shit like OJ's leaked manuscript of If I Did It.
Nicole moaned, regaining consciousness. She stirred on the ground and opened her eyes and looked at me, but it didn't seem like anything was registering...I put my left hand to my heart and my shirt felt strangely wet. I looked down at myself. For several moments, I couldn't get my mind around what I was seeing. The whole front of me was covered in blood...
He's a helluva guy.
Now all this being said, I'm very much at odds over his sentencing this past Friday. I'm glad he's going to jail, but the process heightens my distaste for how our country chooses to conduct this kind of business.
Do you really think that there's any possible way that a judge can just disregard OJ's past? It's like when a judge on Law and Order says "Objection sustained; Members of the jury, you are requested to ignore that bit about the plaintiff's elephant-sized genitalia."
It's like - yeah fuckin right; They're humans - how the fuck are they gonna disregard some shit like that? Just delete it from their Hard Drives like a bunch of walking ipods?
So why do we pretend they can, and have rules that depend on their ability to?
Doesn't 33 years seems like a very long time for someone to serve for committing an armed robbery? And he will serve 33 years – he'll die in prison – because every person on every parole board will always think of him murdering two people in cold blood and deny him parole forever.
I'm glad that will happen to him, but I don't like the underhanded method our country uses to make it happen.
Why do we have these laws if we're not going to abide by them? Why have an on-paper standard and then another de-facto standard that the folks in the system just kind of follow when they've decided what should happen to someone and then make that thing happen regardless of what our legal standards are.
Another perfect example of this is prison rape. Everybody in our country knows that rape is a way of life in prison, and that it doesn't happen by accident. Prisons are run via a tremendous amount of corruption – guards on payroll, guards selling drugs, guards letting certain inmates "have a bitch," and a whole unconscionable system of sex as violence and a tool of underworld justice.
Why is this tolerated by society? It's because people know in general that criminals are bad, and that in general criminals should be punished, and so anything bad that happens to them during a prison sentence is fair game because it's abstractly part of the punishment.
This is ad-hoc justice and it's uncivilized. We need to hold ourselves to a higher standard even when our visceral emotions tell us not to – that's the whole point of laws and due process. Without it, we've got anarchy, and not in a cool Sex Pistols way. If we don't hold government accountable for following their own laws, then we set a precedent for them being able to do whatever the fuck they want. Know why that's bad?
One other problem with sentencing OJ to 33 years: we're taking him off the hunt at the worst possible time; He was this close to finding Nicole's real killer.
33 comments:
US prison system = deeply messed up. I wish I had a better solution-- gulag? Best I can come up with. Is OJ getting squeezed (haw) because of earlier criminal escape & civil conviction? Um, yeah. Is that Wrong (tm)? Hell yeah. Do I mind? Whatever. It isn't like he's getting sentenced for jaywalking.
What I want to know are the race/color statistics for sentencing this same kind of crime if you ain't famous or rich?
Fuck, Blognigger! You have finally posted something that I can disagree with. Don't hate me for breaking rank though (besides I've been labeled a "blatant agreer" by the comment-razzi).
[Please note: While the Blognigger was pretty serious and measured like Blogrock Oniggma, I'm going all wildcard like George W. Bush-nigger]
Here goes:
1. I fucking LOVE that OJ got the long arm of the law pendulum of karma Fred Goldman smackdown. I happened to come across this Super Bowl of sentencing live on Friday. That was a demonstration of my sweet karma. The camera was locked on OJ the entire time and he was scared like the bitch-ass 'ho he is. Loved it so much.
Love how it happened. Would have loved it if he got it for shoplifting ChapStick from 7-11.
What, he was going to pull this move and not get pinned? OJ Simpson locked himself up for the rest of his ass-raped life. That's on him, not The Man.
2. Sure that was a fucked-up legal roundhouse kick to Juice's solar plexus but, what, didn't Scarface Capone get locked up for income tax evasion. Law ain't nothing new. You use the condom you brought.
3. As a black man who happened to be newly dating a white woman during OJs killing spree and comedy trial, OJ fucking my shit up. So it was and always be personal. Bitch all asking me not to kill her. What?! Fuck you OJ! Fucked that shit with Sally up forever. Had to break off before she started calling the po-po about how I'm going to kill her....
4. Of course he killed them (and Fred Goldman called that verdict "a long time coming."). Fuck the law, us peasants want Frankenstein's monster else we wouldn't have been parading around pitchforks and torches. Just us. Hello Israel, eye for and eye. Goldman totally wrote this screenplay. No notes or nothing.
5. Check it, Blognigger. I'll quote me from Friday:
"You missed the move. Maybe OJ has it all figured out and maybe, just maybe, he's going undercover to catch the real killer who, as it happens, is already in prison.
Maybe it's a genius Prison Break meets MacGyver plan/action adventure escapade."
6. Now, to close this circle. If George W. Bush, the 43rd white president of the United States of America wanted to really fuck with Barack Obama's America (Barack, the 44th white president), Bush would pardon OJ.
7. Lastly, don't argue that there is not justice for OJ, he got 64 days of time served.
Anyway, my brother, don't hate me for disagreeing with you. Like Rodney "Martin Luther" King once said, "Can't we just agree that we disagree."
no, no, no... you MUST remember and understand that OJ's situation is an extreme and RARE one. Of course people cannot be impartial, it is the job of the lawyer to swing them both ways. As well, that is why they screen for jury members, to make sure they have a decent group of people. It isn't perfect but come on, there are so many fail safes to try and perfect the system.
As for prison, yah it's fucked up. NO ONE wants to be a guard, it is fucking dangerous and difficult and they get paid nearly nathan for their work, which usually involves getting shot at by needles with the AIDS and rickets on it.
If nothing else works I say we just try a judge dredd system for a while. Who would be Stallone?
haha, nice one ty
Listen, a) You don't really get the props for disagreeing with me because this is a very easy one to disagree with me on.
b) unfortunately for you, we don't really disagree that much:
I am psyched as hell that OJ is going to jail. love it, like i said - he should rot.
My problem is just the whole wink-wink shit. I don't like the government doing that, because then they can wink wink YOUR ass too when they want to and douches like me and ty will just be all "oh well, he's guilty a somethin!"
:)
awesome fucking headline. very brilliant.
Blog,
I hear you, baby and I totally agree with your concern.
Trust me, I am so liberal (not to be confused with PC, mopetards) I drive myself crazy. I'm all law and order and justice and equality and fairness and I distrust the government and the police like nobody's business,
But....
...OJ? Really. Nigga should have been imprisoned for just being embarrassing...to carbon!
Gitmo is the ultimate wink-wink, right? Top of the pinnacle. If the system has your number--or if somebody within the system has it, fucked you are. Nothing new; Lynchmob 4 Lyfe.
Oh shit, we agree again. BFF! I'm sohomo.
Your question about why we have this legal double standard seems to answer itself. The bureaucratically self-contradictory nature of our legal system is why there are regular miscarriages of justice. To put this in perspective ask yourself, if you believe O.J. was guilty, how different was his initial acquittal from the “hung” juries of Byron De La Beckwith in the Medgar Evers trials? In both cases it was the local social mores of the time (“niggers are sub-human and thus reside below our legal system” versus “wealthy celebrities in LA are gods who reside above our legal system”), not the evidence that got the defendants off. But once the citizenry realizes that someone is getting away with the murder of a real person (it evidently took them a little longer to realize this in the Evers case), they are rarely content to let it rest until they get their reassurance that we don’t accommodate that sort of thing. As such they need a system that will allow for violations of the spirit of the constitutional protection against double jeopardy in order to provide law abiding citizens with the vengeance they crave. Essentially, we have a double standard because we have yet to come up with an effective single standard.
damn anon, well put.
BN:
As I've said in past posts, I am a lawyer, and I can tell you that you've hit on one of the fundamentally difficult issues that plagues the entire judicial system.
Basically, the legal system is, at best, a reflection of the people that it governs. That means that since we are imperfect, the legal system is imperfect.
There are many, many code words in legal statutes. Words which make sense in common English, but which have very different definitions in law. Words burden, duress and even knowledge are examples.
In this regard, the the most common code word is "reasonable". It is basically means "what ever the judge or jury thinks is right" based on determining what is done by normal people. But, "normal people" is not objective, it is both subjective and regional. So the owrd of law allows for a range of decisions based on circumstances, not a bright line test of right and wrong.
Also, remember that laws are created by a committee of state or federal legislators who are bought and paid for by special interests. Common sense is rarely the primary concern.
Bottom line is that the law is designed to allow for our own flaws to leak through into the determination process. So there is no double standard, just a reflection of our own split standards.
Its all very Utopian, to aspire to equal and fair justice, but even with that goal, what is truly fair? Who sets the middle standard point? We do, we all do. We grant authority to judges, but ultimately hold them back by providing for a right to trial by jury. The system can't be fair to all, but it tries its best. The problem is that there is no way to be totally objective, or else you end up with the "zero tolerance" nonsense which is objective, but puts people in jail for 5 years for carrying pocket lint that is infused with cocaine dust.
Bottom line is that the legal system has an image problem. Too many people expect perfection at all times. But unless you want some twilight zone distopia where computers put people in jail, this appears to be the best we can do.
@ Anon 10:03
I get your point - the double standard is a built in fail-safe that protects against the fact that sometimes society is retarded/prejudiced/bureaucratic and so if justice is not served the first time around we can always get you on the come back.
Still doesn't justify shit in my opinion.
Who says that the come back will be any less corrupt than the initial sentencing?
A second opportunity at justice is also a second opportunity at injustice. For every O.J. there's probably 10 people living a Kafka story where they've been fucked on the come back.
On a micro level the O.J. verdict is satisfying for all cause he deserved it. But what did the law have to give up on a macro level to make that happen? What standards were disregarded/sidstepped?
I think you always have to respect the macro level shit in situations like this.
Anyone looking for "justice" in this world has only karma to rely on and that is spotty at best. Remember Pol Pot died of old age and Mugabe still runs a country! Instead of talking about changing the justice system which will never happen without a full blown revolution (and we're all WAY to big a bunch of pussies for that), just stay as far away of the justice system as you can. Keep your passport next to your gun and maybe you can shoot your way to another country when the black vans come for you. In fact I'm looking to move closer to Canadia so I can just hopscotch on over when the time comes.
Knickerbocker,
You seem to be discouraging the pursuit of the Utopia of “equal and fair justice” as a quixotic quest. But since change is inevitable if you are not aspiring for Utopia, how do you avoid Dystopia?
This system is hardly the best we can do, it is merely the best we've been able to do to this point.
Anon 11:49
While I agree with you in my heart, in my head I am simply unable to believe that it is possible to create a perfect utopia which makes everyone happy.
There are always people who are going to be on the losing end of the 'social contract'. Conflict and competition are built into our DNA.
The legal system can't be better, because we are not hard wired to be 100% altruistic. We are all selfish and/or lazy to some degree and eventually, there is always some crisis which upsets the status quo, and allows for more radical concepts to become common.
And truly, is there even an objective 'perfection'? Sure, we try to make things better, but whose concept of 'better' is truly best?
Ya, its all very philosophical. But, IMHO, philosophy classrooms are the only place that a Utopia merits rational discussion. The rest of us are stuck living in this beautiful and brutal word.
It's a system that's way more fair than absolute rules and absolute sentancing.
Every crime and every situation is different and you can't make a rule across the board to encompass every thing. You have to leave it open to human judgement that's why they're called judges.
It sucks if you're a victim of predjudice but on the flip side a man with a wife and two kids who gets a lesser sentance for his first time offense is the benefit of a system like this.
Or a murdering psychopath like OJ gets a longer sentance.
You have to leave the criminal process open to human judgement. As flawed as it is we have one of the best legal systems in the world.
The prison rape thing has long bothered me. Not only is it tolerated, but Americans see assraping as part of justice.
American simps and waterheads gleefully watch To Catch A Predator and clap their potato-chip crumbed hands in delight when another total loser gets taken to jail, delighting in the prospect of said loser being forcibly penetrated in the ass. Serves him right, etc.
That said, sex offenders, like it or not, have very low recidivism rates. Those who are punished for Grand Theft Auto edge out sex criminals, but overall, sex criminals seldom re-offend. Which also sucks, because while that means Chris Matthews is an even more pathetic hack shithead, it also might mean that the long dong of justice is actually having some positive effect.
Still. Until we (the reasonable people) are OK with literally sentencing people to repeated assrapings, it shouldn't be vocally, vehemently condoned by idiots everywhere.
Yeah Canada...where the Prime Minister just dissolved the Parliament so he could hold on to power because they had united to get rid of him. Canada where this site could be prosecuted for inflammatory and insulting language. Good fucking luck with Canada man, the only reason they seem nice is because no one pays attention.
read this article and see if it's worth reacting to. you're loud and intelligent and i want to hear what you have to say.
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=971
Alex - no on re-offends MORE often than sex offenders - especially pedos. your just wrong.
and generally speaking - locking up niggers for many years is a an American pastime:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,463410,00.html
Wrong, Tommy. You've been watching TV too much.
Recidivism by Criminal Offense:
http://www.roarforfreedom.org/summary/Alaska-07_recidivism_summary.pdf
"Sexual offenders were the least likely to commit the same offense again."
(That one only pertains to Alaska.)
http://www.sgc.wa.gov/PUBS/Recidivism/Adult_Recidivism_FY07.pdf
(Again, this one only pertains to Washington state, but the rapos and pedos score lowest in repeat offenses.)
Back up your statement with facts or shut your piehole.
Tommy,
Pedos are more likely to re-offend than sex offenders. In that sense, my post was slightly disingenuous, as I said sex offenders while Chris Hansen fights for pedophile justice, brave "journalist" that he is. But usually sex offenders are lumped into the same category of whipping boys for simpleton politicians who want to sound tough on crime, and get their personal information plastered all over sheriffs' websites and all the rest of it.
That said, I googled "recidivism pedophiles," and the first results I got were links to places debunking the myth that pedophiles are incorrigible shits who need to be put on TV and humiliated by pillars of rectitude and integrity like Chris Hansen.
I was wrong about grand theft auto, though, according to the Wikipedia entry on recidivism. It suggests that car thieves will be car thieves no matter what.
Seriously, though, I don't doubt you can find numbers online to back up what you're saying. I can, too, though. Wikipedia and, according to the LA Times, the Justice Department http://tinyurl.com/6ca9rn seem to think otherwise.
Again, that's sex offenders, not pedophiles, but the links I found put pedophile recidivism well below the average recidivism rate.
Either way, I really don't want to sound like I really feel for the pedos. They suck shit and should be punished in a manner prescribed by law. Just not with rape, which is a crime, not a punishment.
The ex-con in me feels compelled to pipe in here.
I did two-and-a-half years in the Oregon correctional system, from county jails to minimum-security joints all the way up to nine months in a max facility with guard towers and serial killers and Bobby Beausoleil.
People are astonished and hardly ever believe me when I say that I didn't hear of ONE prison rape occurring during my bid. Not once.
I'd have no real motivation for telling you this. If I wanted to impress you, I'd say someone tried to rape me and I shanked him with a pork-chop bone.
But nope. It simply didn't happen there. Granted, this was Oregon—NOT the toughest state in the union. But still—we were dealing with the I-5 Killer and the Happy Face Killer and child murderers and tons and tons and tons of convicted rapists. Scores of lifers, too.
Prisoners got along better than any group I've ever encountered, which sort of makes sense when you consider they all wear the same uniform and share a common enemy—the "system." I'd see peckerwoods with WHITE on one bicep and PRIDE on the other playing poker in the yard with Crips and Bloods.
Still, the idea of rampant prison rape exists. An overwhelming percentage of sick, repressed, cowardly cocksuckers gloat over the idea that it's ubiquitous.
Why? Given my experience, I can only conclude it's the warped projection of a society which can't come to terms with the fact that locking humans in cages is sadistic, cruel, and criminal in itself. It's easier to pretend that cons are subhuman animals than to confront one's inner animal, eh?
A book published in the early 1970s called "Kind and Usual Punishment" cited some study which concluded that prison guards uniformly score higher on scales of social deviancy than inmates. Makes sense to me. Criminals simply are a little more "in-touch" with their innate cruelty and sadism. They don't depend on the Big Boys to do their dirty work for them. They aren't typically the type to hide behind screen names to talk shit, either.
these comments are ridiculous. o.j. needs to do some sheriff joe tent time. maricopa-style.
we fucking worry about criminal's rights more than the rights of our law-abiding citizens. only in fucking america.
this is how it's done:
http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=GetModule&mn=sheriff_bio
Thanks Jim Goad for bringing some cred and perspective into this discussion ("bid" + "peckerwood" = much cred, BTW).
Back to OJ (this is beginning to feel like an ACLU 12-step meeting):
Moving past the ass-raping (it's a shame, we agree), let's get one thing straight: If OJ gets anywhere near GenPop or even a taste of trusty freedom, he will be "tested" on a continuing basis.
He may not be sold for smokes (straights, shorts, hots), but somebody (perhaps a guard) will smack him in his motherfucking face every single day. He will be surprised, maybe even cry a little the first time. He'll whine to the guards who will laugh and call him a nigger-faggot-killer (and remind him that he killed his children's mother). The guards will direct him to shut the fuck up. And I doubt that he'll have the wherewithal to savagely beat the first rooster that comes at him.
He will eat much spit in his food.
The answer for his personal safety is solitary. But he'd be one of those crazies smearing shit all over the SCU after 30, no 21 days. Juice doesn't have the cognitive skill-set to life it alone. He's a people person.
He'll have to pay inmates (money on books) and guards (via lawyers) for a semblance of protection which will be madly abused. He's not going to Tommy Chong work camp. He's going to NDOC not UNLV.
Just sayin'....
JG: my friend I grew up with did 3 or 4 months in Rikers and then 1 1/2 in Dannemora (drug bullshit). He said that exact same thing as you. He's white too. He basically said, there's gangs, and fights and shit but it basically reflects the same shit you were fighting about outside. No one fucked with him really he said. Mostly he said it was really boring - he also went through opiate withdrawal cold turkey (pills and syrup) and said that was worse than anything anyone did. He said that if the homo shit happened, it was DL cuz he never saw it and def not some big Shawshank shower rape.
I never really believed him - and that's my boy. i figured he was just ashamed. shows how much maybe we all want to, for some reason, believe in this OZ thing. so what the fuck is wrong with me then?
"Given my experience, I can only conclude it's the warped projection of a society which can't come to terms with the fact that locking humans in cages is sadistic, cruel, and criminal in itself. It's easier to pretend that cons are subhuman animals than to confront one's inner animal, eh?"
That's pretty profound answer man. maybe your right. Now i feel like an ass. thanks Goad!
What's the word on beforeyouassinateobama.com? Is that idea dead (I mean...) or is it just coming along slowly?
nah, everyone told me i was a jerkoff so i let it go
Fuck that, B...do it...if not for the message, for the Adsense (Since you may or may not be in the need of a quick cash infusion.)
I mean, that's just how I see it, but I'm kind of a scumbag...so whatever.
Dear OJ,
Karma's a B****!
Sincerely,
a fellow USC alum
Dear BN,
As a black person, I can attest to the fact that 100% of black people do and did think that OJ was and is guilty. But I we wanted him to get off, just like we always want Michael Jackson to get off, and like we wanted R. Kelly and every other person from black pop culture to get off. Black folks know that the system usually works against us, so we say eff'em!
And when the book gets thrown at them, we just say, yeah well, he was guilty anyway...
The people who still love this guy are the blaq dudes in jail. His pooper isn't gonna be anyone's sleeping bag.
the criminal trial of orenthal james was a wonderful example of real life invading some folks fictional life. after watching many hours of "matlock", "the bold ones" and "perry mason", the idea that a criminal trial was about true guilt or innocence got placed in the public consciousness. it never has and probably never will be about if someone "did it", but will continue to be about can you prove that so and so did it. so, if he did it or didn't do it, isn't the true question...the question is can they prove that he did.
this is the same district attorney's office that somehow managed to lose the menendez brother's trial. (note: how open and shut can a case be?) they managed to fuck this case up too. i think there was a celebrity memo that went out saying that if you were famous/rich, you could kill someone in los angeles during the 90's, and there was no way you would get caught!
there are no saints and plenty of sinners in the world of orenthal, but he should have known: you were given "barbie" to have on your arm, and you "killed" her, you ain't gonna get away with that.
the long arm (in this case, 275 miles long) of the law will get your black ass...eventually maybe brother rosey can visit you and teach you needlepoint to pass the time.
Oj got off the first time from jury nullification as practiced by some brain dead middle aged ladies who didn't want to see another black man in prison. I glanced at the bullshit book they had co-ghosted for themselves to cash in on the only notoriety they'd get outside of Sunday bingo night. The New Yorker had a huge article on jury nullification a few years back - the gist is fuck the facts, I'm allergic to sending young colored fellas to jail.
I dunno that we as a country collectively did this to OJ as comeuppance, but the hangover from the Harvey's Bristol Cream Acquittal party have faded like MJ's skin color over the years. No one gives a shit and OJ probably deserves it - so fuck it.
I think you're right on about the attitude and the reaction to this shit, but it don't rank with the Scottsboro Boys or Amadou Diallo and such. Merkins is a bloodthirsty, spiteful bunch - modellng theyselves more on Travis Bickle than Atticus Finch. Most likely in inverse proportion to how stone cold they are IRL. Everyone's an internet tough guy and to hell with the nuances.
That said, no one - me included - is gonna lose a second of REM if the Juice catches some in-house Dahmer style justice from some Pruno-addled lifer.
good points all around ad i love your closing zinger.
Post a Comment