The difference there is that if you ran that trial 60 times with different people involved in the process, he would have been convicted probably many many times.
It's the same situation, friendo: people who felt aggrieved for really their own community's faults blatantly ignore the facts and the law to get 'justice'.
You could rerun it a hundred times, and each time the jurors' feelings would triumph over facts and rule of law - because that's what matters to them, their feelings. This is really the only criticism anyone has ever had of Trump, that their feelings were hurt.
He's a piece of shit that loves to screw over contractors. He ran a fraud university, a fraud charity. He put his children in high places. He's golfed about 100 million into his own pocket. He lies all the time. He's a man child that would insult and call people childish names on twitter. He increased the deficit by an insane amount even before covid. He stopped reporting civ casualties from drone strikes and gave the CIA full authority to do therm without presidential approvals. He almost started WW3 with Iran. His tariffs were idiotic and paid by the American people. His wall was stupid. His rhetoric is incredibly divisive, us vs them in nearly every speech.
I could go on.
The only thing???
60 different courts threw out the cases for lack of standing or lack of evidence, or that they wanted something ridiculous as the resolution. You can't say they were all biased.
OJ was so innocent and non violent that he ended up in prison for 15 years for armed robbery and assault. Lmao that fucking idiot killed his wife and the whole country knows it, The fact that sports and movie and music stars or anyone with money gets away with literal murder is well known. Stop shilling for a piece of shit violent criminal. Oh wait that is what the whole blm leftist bullshit is a fucking shill piece for violent rapists and drug addicts.
Nine years, and he's already out. There was no assault when he tried to recover his stolen property, and no real robbery either, since it was his property. It was probably a staged robbery anyways so the LAPD could save face rather than admit they'd been duped by OJ and friends.
But there was still no substantial evidence. The cases failed because they were shitty lawyers, who had no idea what they were doing, and then tried to blame the "deep state" for stopping them.
Wether you think the cases failed due to shitty lawyers or purposeful stonewalling is up to interpretation. However, because none of the cases got to the point where evidence was presented in court, it is objectively incorrect to claim the cases failed because evidence was not substantial.
TIL a lack of evidence is a bullshit reason. Huh. I guess that's why you're a lawyer, and I'm not. My bad.
Courts let OJ go scot free. I guess you're still looking for the "real killer" since the courts said there was a lack of evidence.
The difference there is that if you ran that trial 60 times with different people involved in the process, he would have been convicted probably many many times.
It's the same situation, friendo: people who felt aggrieved for really their own community's faults blatantly ignore the facts and the law to get 'justice'.
You could rerun it a hundred times, and each time the jurors' feelings would triumph over facts and rule of law - because that's what matters to them, their feelings. This is really the only criticism anyone has ever had of Trump, that their feelings were hurt.
The ONLY criticism?
He's a piece of shit that loves to screw over contractors. He ran a fraud university, a fraud charity. He put his children in high places. He's golfed about 100 million into his own pocket. He lies all the time. He's a man child that would insult and call people childish names on twitter. He increased the deficit by an insane amount even before covid. He stopped reporting civ casualties from drone strikes and gave the CIA full authority to do therm without presidential approvals. He almost started WW3 with Iran. His tariffs were idiotic and paid by the American people. His wall was stupid. His rhetoric is incredibly divisive, us vs them in nearly every speech.
I could go on.
The only thing???
60 different courts threw out the cases for lack of standing or lack of evidence, or that they wanted something ridiculous as the resolution. You can't say they were all biased.
Yes, because OJ was innocent. Also, this is different, because there is actual evidence of the opposite of your claim.
OJ was so innocent and non violent that he ended up in prison for 15 years for armed robbery and assault. Lmao that fucking idiot killed his wife and the whole country knows it, The fact that sports and movie and music stars or anyone with money gets away with literal murder is well known. Stop shilling for a piece of shit violent criminal. Oh wait that is what the whole blm leftist bullshit is a fucking shill piece for violent rapists and drug addicts.
Nine years, and he's already out. There was no assault when he tried to recover his stolen property, and no real robbery either, since it was his property. It was probably a staged robbery anyways so the LAPD could save face rather than admit they'd been duped by OJ and friends.
Learn something today for a change.
https://youtu.be/Zq_kIKSe_XM
There were many reasons the cases were thrown out. None of them were for lack of evidence or unsubstantial evidence.
But there was still no substantial evidence. The cases failed because they were shitty lawyers, who had no idea what they were doing, and then tried to blame the "deep state" for stopping them.
Wether you think the cases failed due to shitty lawyers or purposeful stonewalling is up to interpretation. However, because none of the cases got to the point where evidence was presented in court, it is objectively incorrect to claim the cases failed because evidence was not substantial.
They've released all their "evidence" online, haven't they? From what I've seen, there's nothing substantial.
100,000 ballots were 'adjudicated' and the original ballots were destroyed.
There is zero way to confirm the authenticity of those 100,000 votes.
Where was that? Can't find anything about it.