[ Home | Contents | Search | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Paddy
Date: Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Time: 04:42:22 AM
Here’s a theory of sorts that I intended to post about a month ago. I’ve been a little hesitant to do so, because I’ve anticipated being laughed out of the discussion group for bringing it up. The prosecution (and Fuhrman) basically theorized that O.J. had had enough of Nicole and set out for her house armed with a knife, gloves, dark clothing and a knit cap with the mindset of either scaring (or threatening) her or actually assaulting or killing her. I think any of us would agree that a person who would act in such a manner either doesn’t think the law applies to him or doesn’t care about the law in any way at all. I think this aspect of the case has been overlooked. The person(s) who committed these murders certainly could be called heinous, monstrous, cowardly, callous, depraved – you name it. But what has been lost on many people is that the perpetrator broke the law, knew he was about to break the law, didn’t care that he was breaking the law, and took a huge gamble that he would be caught breaking the law. All of us have listed many great reasons why O.J. couldn’t have committed the murders. But many of them are subjective and can not be quantified. In other words, I can say “O.J. appeared totally at ease on the plane to Chicago”. But there is no completely objective statistical measurement to validate such a statement. I believe that given the necessary resources (such as, say, 500 Pat McKenna’s), there is potentially one totally objective statistical measurement that could add another strong exculpatory layer in defense of O.J. Simpson. In society, (or for the sake of our discussion, United States society), every person is expected to be in compliance with the law. Now we know that assault with a deadly weapon and murder are against the law. But I would argue that if you had access to the legal background checks of 200 convicted knife murderers, you would find that virtually all 200 have a litany of violations of law, in every spectrum, far exceeding that in O.J. Simpson’s legal background check. Simply put, a person that doesn’t care that it’s against the law to stab another person to death, also doesn’t care if he drives 95 in a 65 mile per hour zone. He doesn’t bother to register his car. When he goes out on the town, he will get caught doing something against the law – be it public urination or disorderly conduct. I submit that the criminals on such a list of convicted knife murderers would have a history of being charged with many of the following crimes or violations: Moving vehicle violations such as speeding, passing stop signs/stop lights, driving the wrong way, reckless driving, etc. Failure to register a vehicle, failure to get a vehicle inspected. Parking tickets, failure to pay parking tickets. Disorderly conduct, public intoxication, drug dealing offenses, drug possession, open container, altered driver’s license, possession of alcohol by a minor. Extensive juvenile offenses such as school delinquency, shoplifting, graffiti and vandalism. Suspensions from school. Serious juvenile offenses such as assault or sexual misconduct. Petty larceny, theft of services, DWI, DUI, leaving the scene of an accident. Parole violations, failure to pay a fine, failure to appear. Failure to file an income tax return, filing a false income tax return. Fraud involving receiving food stamps or other entitlements illegally. If in the military, dishonorable discharge or other military convictions. In the realm of business: code violations such as failure to provide smoke detectors, hiring of illegal aliens, serving underage drinkers, allowing smoking in a non-smoking facility, food and beverage violations concerning cleanliness, not having proper business permits. In private life: failure to obtain a dog license, not getting proper building permits, code violations such as junk strewn about a yard or excessive length of grass. Failure to pay child support, falling behind on alimony payments. Bankruptcy (not illegal, but a legal problem). The following are not legal violations, but would show a tendency not be in compliance with rules in the workplace: Work suspensions or disciplinary actions for things such as sexual harassment, lateness, insubordination, etc. I submit that the fewer that these lesser convictions or summonses show up on an individual’s record, the more it shows that a person (such as O.J. Simpson) has a docile tendency to comply with the law. I submit that an individual who “goes along”, always “does the right thing”, and minds his Ps and Qs will not show up on a list of convicted knife murderers and conversely, convicted knife murderers will show a propensity for not complying with the law, whether it be juvenile violations, moving violations, serious crimes such as rape, assault and robbery, code violations, probationary violations or code violations. Jasper, I wonder what your brother would say about this. He has probably seen the rap sheet for many serious criminals. I do understand that it’s not feasible for such a score to be determined. First of all, we could never get the criminal records for dozens of knife murderers. Second, I don’t think there’s any “permanent record” of all the problems every person has ever had with the law. This is simply a hypothetical argument. I would call it the “compliance with the law quotient”. We would assign value points for various infractions (obviously serious offenses would be assigned much higher values). This would be divided into the number of years the subject has been eligible to commit violations of the law. (We would expect that a 55- year old would have more lifetime convictions than a 22-year old). Anyway, if it was miraculously possible to have the complete records for many knife murderers, I certainly believe the average “compliance with the law quotient” would be through the roof, with O.J.’s being minute. I take the one battery incident with Nicole very seriously, because this incident shows that O.J. is not 100% squeaky-clean. Aside from that incident, it really seems that O.J. has a history of showing deference for the law. Mark Fuhrman is exempt from many of these laws, since your typical policeman can simply flash a police ID when pulled over for a moving violation, with probably many other more serious things being overlooked as well. Interestingly, Mark Fuhrman does have an extensive history of being reprimanded in the workplace for failure to comply with rules. As a side note, I do not think a person is bad if he doesn’t license his dog or receives parking tickets. I am just saying that it’s interesting that O.J. might not have much of this sort of thing on his record. Mark Furhman might not have many of these infractions either, but remember, O.J. was painted as a knife murderer that couldn’t control his impulses, and didn’t care to comply with the law. Our M.F. scenario doesn’t paint him as an impulsive criminal, but rather as a sociopathic schemer. To conclude, if given the complete records of dozens of convicted knife murderers, as well as the record of O.J. Simpson, and if we assign the respective values to each infraction, I believe we could demonstrate in an objective, statistically quantitative manner, that O.J. Simpson’s score is totally off the chart – that his score doesn’t fit the scores of 99% of convicted knife murderers. Failure to comply with the law is a mindset, and one that O.J. never seemed to take on. I should mention that many books make the claim that O.J. was being investigated for drug trafficking for many years, but I’ve never heard of someone potentially being close to indictment over a 17 year period, without it ever coming to fruition, when there was any validity to the allegations. I just don’t buy it, and it’s certainly never been proven. - Paddy