Looking back on this piece of tape is a bit creepy…..I spoke with OJ Simpson at the NATPE convention in New Orleans. Some point in the early 90′s ….He was tired but relaxed…involved in lots of ventures and was very famous….Then…..we all know the rest of the story….weird to watch this once lost interview….
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Simpson: ‘I am sorry’ OJ Simpson tells a Nevada judge he didn’t mean to “hurt anybody or steal anything from anyone”. Judge also denies bail pending appeal

My Barbarian’s ‘the golden age’


Image by thefuturistics

Hmmm, interesting fact about Minnesota?


Image by thefuturistics

PPC Keyword Toolz
Create Razor Targeted Adwords Campaigns with 1000s of AdGroups and Ads in less than 2 minutes! Create Campaigns Just Like SpeedPPC or AdGrenade. Most people create their campaigns incorrectly! This tool guarantees your campaigns are 100% accurate!
PPC Keyword Toolz

US $17.76 End Date: Friday Jul-30-2010 16:26:07 PDT Buy It Now for only: US $17.76 Buy it now | Add to watch list

US $4.99 (0 Bid) End Date: Friday Jul-30-2010 16:28:26 PDT Buy It Now for only: US $9.99 Bid now | Buy it now | Add to watch list

Watch Tv Online & Free Soccer
Watch The Big Games Free On Your PC With A Single Mouse Click!
Watch Tv Online & Free Soccer

US $0.99 (0 Bid) End Date: Friday Jul-30-2010 15:48:34 PDT Bid now | Add to watch list

US $0.99 (0 Bid) End Date: Friday Jul-30-2010 15:49:38 PDT Bid now | Add to watch list

Wrongful Death Cases – The Burden of Proof Issue

Wrongful death cases are some of the most misunderstood in the field of law. People get outraged about them without really understanding what is happening. One of the reasons this occurs is because of the issue of burden of proof.

Let’s look at the ultimate example of how burden of proof plays a major role in a case. Yes, the first OJ Simpson incident is the choice. OJ was charged with multiple murders, which are criminal charges. As we know, the gloves didn’t fit and the jury acquitted him. Fast forward a couple years and what is in the news? OJ. He was being sued for the wrongful death of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown. The result? A verdict against him in excess of million dollars.

So, how can we get such different results? The answer is the burden of proof. The criminal case required that the state prove that OJ committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. Anything less and the jury had to decide in favor of Simpson. When the gloves didn’t fit, reasonable doubt existed. The wrongful death case, on the other hand, is a civil law matter. OJ did not face jail time, only a money judgment. As such, the burden of proof was the much lower “preponderance of the evidence”. This effectively means that when the jury evaluated the evidence, a finding that the evidence was slightly more in favor of the plaintiff would result in a verdict against OJ.

Many people rail against the legal system because of what they see as inconsistent verdicts. Why was one result reached in one case while another result was reached in a similar case? There is a certain variation that will come with having different juries, but much of the difference is attributable to the fact there may be different burden of proofs being used in each case.

More OJ Simpson Articles

L1230847


Image by thefuturistics

Screening of Lene Berg’s ‘the Weimar Conspiracy’


Image by thefuturistics

L1230839


Image by thefuturistics

Wrongful Death Cases – The Burden of Proof Issue

Wrongful death cases are some of the most misunderstood in the field of law. People get outraged about them without really understanding what is happening. One of the reasons this occurs is because of the issue of burden of proof.

Let’s look at the ultimate example of how burden of proof plays a major role in a case. Yes, the first OJ Simpson incident is the choice. OJ was charged with multiple murders, which are criminal charges. As we know, the gloves didn’t fit and the jury acquitted him. Fast forward a couple years and what is in the news? OJ. He was being sued for the wrongful death of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown. The result? A verdict against him in excess of million dollars.

So, how can we get such different results? The answer is the burden of proof. The criminal case required that the state prove that OJ committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. Anything less and the jury had to decide in favor of Simpson. When the gloves didn’t fit, reasonable doubt existed. The wrongful death case, on the other hand, is a civil law matter. OJ did not face jail time, only a money judgment. As such, the burden of proof was the much lower “preponderance of the evidence”. This effectively means that when the jury evaluated the evidence, a finding that the evidence was slightly more in favor of the plaintiff would result in a verdict against OJ.

Many people rail against the legal system because of what they see as inconsistent verdicts. Why was one result reached in one case while another result was reached in a similar case? There is a certain variation that will come with having different juries, but much of the difference is attributable to the fact there may be different burden of proofs being used in each case.

Lohan Lawyer Out at Crucial Time?
Star’s Representation in Question as Robert Shapiro Reportedly Quits on Eve of Court Session to Precede Beginning of Jail Term
Read more on CBS News

Dave Letterman shows off some of the recently rejected FDA products.
Video Rating: 4 / 5