three legal questions about OJ - Jeff L perhaps??

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al</b><p>#1 Based upon the video in last night's Geraldo report where OJ appears to readily admit that he had items removed from his posession, not stolen...can the Goldman family have that tape subpoenaed (whatever the legal term may be) to force the items to be given to them to help satisfy the $33m judgment they received in civil court against OJ? There was a gentleman on the program, who's name escapes me at the moment, but he admits he has the stuff. And, should Mr. Goldman predecease OJ, does the Goldman family hold legal claim for all time against OJ and his heirs to collect the $33m?<br><br>#2 When OJ comes up for parole in 2017, can the parole board compel, force or extract information from OJ as to his possible off-shore accounts as OJ alleged in last night's Geraldo report? Say he has stashed $10m offshore and the parole board says pony up the coin and we'll consider parole, thus giving the Goldman's the $10m?<br><br>#3 Can the parole board use this video as &quot;evidence&quot; of OJs actions. Part of the video was (as I understood it) to deceive the court system on his recent charges, but I cannot pinpoint the actions...Geraldo eluded to this in the narrative. Has OJ in fact shot himself in the foot big time by knowingly allowing this taping of his actions? They looked pretty damning to me.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Al

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcyclebeck</b><p>Parole boards don't give early parole to people who they believe are hiding money to avoid court ordered obligation. They give early parole to people who they believe are genuinely remorseful, have fulfilled their obligations, kept their noses clean and will follow the law on the outside. Even with the latter good citizen inmates, earliest parole isn't a right and boards often don't grant it to them. The parole board doesn't have to prove guilt or let the person out. His guilt has already been proven.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p><br><br>#2 When OJ comes up for parole in 2017, can the parole board compel, force or extract information from OJ as to his possible off-shore accounts as OJ alleged in last night's Geraldo report? Say he has stashed $10m offshore and the parole board says pony up the coin and we'll consider parole, thus giving the Goldman's the $10m? <br><br><b>I didn't seet he show - Seriously, did OJ really say (or indicate) he had $10M in off shore accounts?</b> <br><br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Civil law isn't my specialty (Adam, feel free to chime in) but I suspect that the Goldman's can go after any information they want to satisfy the judgment. The guy that is holding OJ's stuff would probably be deposed and if indeed it can be shown that the material is OJ's than it would go to the Goldman's. And that judgment survives anyone's death I believe.<br><br>The parole board is not a prosecutorial body. They can certainly ask him any questions they'd like but they can't force OJ to do anything. That being said, they can certainly deny him parole if they feel he is being evasive or not accepting responsibility for his criminal activity. As for the making of the tape at this time, I don't think OJ can incrementally shoot himself in the foot anymore. Parole boards are notoriously capricious and in high-profile situations it is very difficult to get a fair shake in my experience. OJ should not expect to be getting out in nine years.<br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>In other words, the 18th century dentist's chair is for ornamentation not fact finding.<br><br>At an English university (Cambridge?), a wealthy man donated an enormous sum of money to one of their departments or schools, with the condition that he be present at the first administrative meeting of every year. Long after his death and per the agreement, his bones would be wheeled in.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al</b><p>Ted C<br><br>No, he didn't say he had $10m in offshore accounts, I just used that as an example. BUT, he certainly displayed the attributes of one that would do such a thing, and I would say the viewer would easily have been led to that conclusion by OJ's comments and &quot;who me??&quot; about offshore accounts. <br><br>I am beyond mind-boggled that OJ allowed such a taping to occur. He was driving an SUV and the person in the passenger's seat was video taping the conversation. OJ made it crystal clear that his efforts to deceive, or not have any items of value were in fact to avoid having the Goldman's get anything. <br><br>And, yes, one person that was on live last night did in fact say he took the items from OJ's home some 14 years ago and has them in his posession. I think the guy was associated with OJ in some fashion, perhaps in a managerial capacity. Sorry, I just can't recal his name.<br><br>I do agree with Jeff (and thanks for the response Jeff), that OJ is not gonna see a golf course for a long, long time, if ever. The mere presentation of this video I think to any parole board is gonna keep him locked up for a very long time. Surely the Goldman family will ensure this takes place, if not the Brown family.<br><br>Hard to believe he could have apparently pled this thing down to about 2 years. His industrial strength arrogance wouldn't allow him to do such a thing...after all, &quot;I'm OJ Simpson&quot;. As Don Meredith used to say on MNF, &quot;turn out the lights, the party's over&quot;.