Itowwwned

I wonder if Japanese women's prisons have tentacles instead of manacles...

Wasn't it an unqualified jury that let O.J. get away with it? It's like blaming Bush for all of our country's problems: yeah he's the President, but he was voted in by us (collective). So who's to blame?

Huh?

Judge Lance Ito is considered an expert and to this day is an accomplished judge and contributor to jurisprudence. Of the many mistakes pointed out about the progression of the Simpson trial, few if any were found to be those of Ito's.

skinink: Wasn't it an unqualified jury that let O.J. get away with it? It's like blaming Bush for all of our country's problems: yeah he's the President, but he was voted in by us (collective). So who's to blame?

Allow me to point you to the popular vote

/Florida is to blame

Pretty sure this has already been taken care of....

Jurists, you say?

Common citizens? Wisdom?
Is this some kind of a joke?

What could we possibly gain by doing this?

Entrusting our judicial system
to a mindless, emotional mob
of irrational mouth-breathers?

Nonsense! There is only room
for two in this court: Me,
and the law!

Keep the riff-raff out!
Out, I say!

huntercr: Pretty sure this has already been taken care of....

You'd be amazed how fast the justice system would work if it didn't have to worry about due process.

/I loathe that anime
//I loathe that manga

In the U.S., the current (2008) salary for the Chief Justice is $217,400 per year, while Associate Justices make $208,100. The 9 U.S. Supreme Court Justices are paid a combined salary of $ 1,882,200 per year. According to Slate.com, in 2005 Judge Judy's yearly salary was $ 25,000,000. Strange.

Nice job subby. *golf clap*

And thanks, Harryjr, but I'm sure that will be gone soon.

Ms. Swan? What did the perpetrator look like?

He looka like a man.

The only thing I can see going for Japanese girls is that unlike their american brethren, they don't average as overweight. Come on lads, pick a girl that knows how to do a lunge.

Manic_Repressive Don't Judge Me!!!

Who am Ito judge?

Random and unqualified? Juries - hell. Welcome to the Democrat Party Presidential ticket.

We do things big in the USA.

You mean unqualified prosecuting attorneys there subby.

skinink: Wasn't it an unqualified jury that let O.J. get away with it? It's like blaming Bush for all of our country's problems: yeah he's the President, but he was voted in by us (collective). So who's to blame?

Bush.

/Was that a trick question?

Disapproves.

harryjr

Oh, my dear lord... I'll be in my pod.

Japan hasn't had juries for a long time. The Japanese government decided it was about time they started it up again.

The citizens the article talks about will be taking on the factfinding role of the judge- in other words, they will be members of the jury. Professional judges will still be determining the legal issues.

Slightly more informative article here: Link

Ehh, it's not the judicial branch that needs unqualified citizens, but the legislative branch.

It's what I call a "Drafted Congress" where a significant part of the legislative branch is drafted from the american public, which would (insert own opinion about rookies) would prevail.

We already do that. It's called a jury.

It wasn't so much Judge Ito (though he helped) or the jury (they were no dumber or smarter than any other jury empaneled) it was the astonishingly incompetent performance of the DA's office that got OJ Simpson his acquittal, plus two very good DNA lawyers who were able to confuse the jury about the then-new science of DNA analysis.

We tend to forget after 10,000 years of CSI that DNA was a fairly new way to convict someone of murder in 1995, and it was still very confusing to most lay juries. Newfield and Scheck talked rings around the jury and the prosecutors' experts until the jury basically tossed out the DNA evidence and made their decision on the other evidence.

That and the fact that Darden and Clark farked up nearly every way possible for a prosecutor to do so and still remain conscious. See Vincent Bugliosi's furious book "Outrage" for a brilliant analysis of how they did it.

Gyrfalcon: It wasn't so much Judge Ito (though he helped) or the jury (they were no dumber or smarter than any other jury empaneled) it was the astonishingly incompetent performance of the DA's office that got OJ Simpson his acquittal, plus two very good DNA lawyers who were able to confuse the jury about the then-new science of DNA analysis.

We tend to forget after 10,000 years of CSI that DNA was a fairly new way to convict someone of murder in 1995, and it was still very confusing to most lay juries. Newfield and Scheck talked rings around the jury and the prosecutors' experts until the jury basically tossed out the DNA evidence and made their decision on the other evidence.

That and the fact that Darden and Clark farked up nearly every way possible for a prosecutor to do so and still remain conscious. See Vincent Bugliosi's furious book "Outrage" for a brilliant analysis of how they did it.



________________________________________


You are very much mistaken about it not being the jury. It most certainly was. What you are forgetting is that is was a mostly black jury from Los Angeles. You know, that place where they say the LAPD is just the biggest and best armed gang (and not without reason. E.G. Rodney King). They have a very different perception of the police from the average Caucasian. Think of all the videos of police abuse that have been showing up here on FARK, then think about the fact that they have been complaining about this problem since time out of mind. Once you have factored in the juror's bias concerning the police, you have to add in the fact that the detective Mark Furman was revealed to be a bigoted creep during the trial. With all that I would have been tempted to vote not guilty

/I think OJ is guilty as sin
//still think the incompetent prosecution & the bigoted detective justify a not guilty verdict - the standard is beyond a shadow of a doubt & Mark Furman alone is a shadow of a doubt

With just the OJ trial?

/try every major legal case from 1990 to present...

Had a clever way of staying off jury duty...



/yeah, hotlinked

Interesting. It sounds almost like a hybrid of a judge and a jury, rather than anything else: three professional judges and six of these "lay judges" making the decision together. I'm not really sure what I think of that right now, but it certainly looks interesting.

Ahh the OJ case... the Prosecution's biggest mistake, and they made quite a few, was allowing a Jury of uneducated morons to get seated...

It was really unbelievable to me they let through an entire jury with no advanced education...

The defense could have told them blatantly false information regarding the science of DNA and forensics and those idiots would have lapped it up...

I was in High School and understood the details of how DNA evidence works... enough so to understand that the prosecution had enough evidence to easily convict OJ...

You know, when I was in 5th grade all the kids in my schools were assembled around all available televisions in anticipation of the verdict in O.J.'s trial. (Yeah seriously what the fark. That's not a suitable curricular activity, I don't think.) When it was announced that he was "not guilty" every child in the room, excepting myself of course, and even some of the adults stood up and began to clap and cheer. What the fark is that?! They were so obsessed with and so revered and apotheosized athletes that they ignored all evidence and reason and concluded that O.J. must have been free of all culpability and so cheered when "justice was served" and he was pronounced not-guilty.

Perhaps this puts my wet-blanketing in the Olympics thread into perspective. I farking hate athletics and people who enjoy them.

/In my view freepers/fascists/republicans/christians/neocons/laissez faire capitalists are not at all far removed in terms of respectability and intelligence from people who passionately enjoy sports; in fact, I'm sure there is significant overlap between the two groups. I mean, what group of people, other than christian tards, is stupid enough to exult at the exoneration of O.J.? If the glove do's be fittin' then you must be's convictin'!

Mark Fuhrman is why O.J. got off. Not just because he's racist, but because of how dirty he was, and how he admitted to that in the tapes. Stuff like fabricating evidence, torturing suspects into confessions, assaulting suspects' families, etc. He talks about how he would have murdered a cop-killer suspect instead of taking him in had he been the officer who cornered the suspect.

He's the officer who found every major piece of evidence, and some of those were suspicious, like the bloody sock, which has an abnormal pattern to the blood, as well as potentially having an anticoagulant in the blood, suggesting that the blood was added from a vial taken from the victim. And while police say that OJ's blood at the scene was from a cut on his hand, the glove he was allegedly wearing over that hand doesn't have the cut in it, nor his blood on the inside. Lastly, the matching glove to the bloody glove has no blood at all on it, not even trace amounts that would be left if you washed it.

Overall, the fact that all the critical evidence was found by a racist, crooked cop who admitted to being willing to plant evidence, and who was caught perjuring himself on the stand, was the nail in the coffin for the prosecution. If you can't trust the police to be impartial and professional during evidence collection, and if you cast doubt on the reliability of the evidence, you open up reasonable doubt in the case.

Had the LAPD cracked down on corruption in its police department, and had Fuhrman been fired years ago for being dirty, maybe they'd have convicted O.J. As it stands, if you can prove the cop who is at the center of the whole case is dirty as hell, it casts doubt on anything he finds.