LAS VEGAS (AP) — O.J. Simpson was under investigation Friday in an alleged armed robbery at a casino hotel room involving sports memorabilia, but the former football star denied breaking into the room or carrying a weapon. Simpson told The Associated Press he went to the room to get memorabilia that was stolen from him. The incident was reported as an “armed robbery” involving firearms, Las Vegas Metro Police Capt. James Dillon told a press conference.
“The victim stated that one of the suspects involved in the robbery was O.J. Simpson,” he said. “We have reported from the victim that there were weapons involved,” Dillon said, but he added that no firearms had been recovered and he stressed that the investigation was in its “infancy.”
Simpson told the AP there was no armed robbery and no guns were involved. Simpson said he was conducting a sting operation to collect his belongings when he was led to the room at the Palace Station casino. Police said he was a suspect in a break-in at the hotel.
| Uh-oh here we go again. Simpson doesn’t have much credibility. |
| Update: Simpson was arrested Sunday. |
#28, Cinaedh
If the government seizes your property and you recover it, it’s theft or something worse than theft, depending on the size of the book they want to throw at you.
Life is a bitch sometimes.
#32 – Fusillamente
“If you caught someone leaving your home with your lawnmower does not mean you must prove ownership.”
Ever heard the phrase “possession is 9/10 of the law”? That’s just what it means.
First, let’s be clear on this – OJ did not grab this guy in the act of removing OJ’s possessions from OJ’s property, no, OJ went, with thug friends, to this guy’s hotel room and tried to strong-arm him. Quite a different scenario.
Here’s how it works when there’s a dispute over ownership. In the absence of all other evidence, the person in possession is presumed to be in rightful possession. Or as it is put more succinctly in the Dictionary of English Law,
If OJ cannot show that the stuff was in fact taken from him unlawfully, then he has no claim, and therefore the stuff is the other guy’s. AND if that is the case, OJ can be held criminally accountable for attempting to steal what is legally the other guy’s property.
“In a case like this, having Simpson’s baby pictures requires a little more explanation then other, more ordinary objects.”
Again, I quote Mr. Boz Scaggs: “I wonder who put those ideas in your head, boy.”
The nature of the property at issue is utterly irrelevant to the law. It or they is or are simply abstract objects. Baby pictures, Heisman trophy, bloody knife, his friggin’ tonsils in a jar of formaldehyde with his signature on it – it’s all the same, as long as the property is not contraband. OJ still has the same burden of proving that they were stolen. If not, then no matter what the items are, they must be presumed to be the property of the party in possession.
“There is also the claim that these items were being sold surreptitiously instead of on the open market.”
Huh? You sayin’ that because the guy didn’t set up a card table in the lobby with the stuff on display, that there’s something underhanded going on? Nonsense. Millions of 100% honest, legal deals of every sort imaginable are made in hotel rooms around the world, every single day. Private sales are just that – private.
Couldn’t be all that surreptitious, since OJ found out about it…
Johnny the C and Fleeb did not ‘demonstrate’, they suggested, through innuendo and misleading implication, that things weren’t on the up-and-up. If Fuhrman, who was a damn good cop, despite the relentless hypocritical character assassination, indeed dropped the glove behind the Rockingham house in order to connect OJ to the crime scene on Bundy, he certainly did it to insure that something tied OJ physically to the crime he obviously committed, so he wouldn’t get away with it. Contrary to what those professional deceivers hoodwinked the jury into buying, whether the glove was planted or not had exactly zero impact on the fact that OJ was factually guilty.
Not a smart move, in retrospect, but I’ll tell you that if I had been in Fuhrman’s place, knowing for a certainty that OJ slaughtered those two innocent people, I would’ve done whatever I could to connect him to the crime scene myself. A relatively small untruth committed in the service of exposing an important truth. I have no problem with that.
Anyway, go get one of your own gloves, Fusatroid – and soak it in blood. Wait a few days and then tell me if you can get your hand into it. Bet you can’t. 😉
Well, well, another OJ drama. Let’s piece this puzzle together. OJ acquitted of killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in 1994. Ron Goldman’s father, Fred Goldman vows revenge and in a later civil trial proceeding the jury found Simpson liable for Ron Goldman’s wrongful death and awarded the Goldman family $33 million (USD) in damages. Later, following public outrage, OJ’s non-published book, “If I Did It” is pulled before release. However, the civil court awards the Goldman family rights to the unpublished book, and they, in what many see as a move crudely profiteering from Ron Goldman’s murder, they re-release the book as “If I Did It – Confessions of a Double Murderer.” Now, as the book just reached number one on the NYT best-sellers’ list, the Golmans’ bait OJ into an attempted armed robbery, surely with the help of the two men that accompanied OJ to the meeting who he had met only a short time before, raising questions as to whether the Goldman family will be investigated for their role.
Tell you what – you investigate, then come back here and debrief us. Deal?