The Darwin Exception

because it's not always survival of the fittest – sometimes the idiots get through

  • Recent Posts

  • Stuff I Blog About

  • Visitors

    • 973,480 People Stopped By
  • Awards & Honors

    Yesh, Right! I don't HAVE any "Awards & Honors" - so nominate me for something - I want one of those badge things to put here. I don't care what it is - make up your own award and give it to me. I'm not picky.
  • Advertisements

NV vs. Simpson – Right Man, Right Motivation, Wrong Charge

Posted by thedarwinexception on November 9, 2007

Not that I am surprised or anything, and it’s not that the fact is surprising to me, but I find the current Simpson case fascinating, on many levels. I think I look at this case the same way I did the Warren Jeffs case – right guy, right motivation, but the wrong charges.

What is even more surprising to me is that I came to this revelation when a prosecution witness was testifying under cross examination.

Today Thomas Riccio, the memorabilia dealer who brought together the buyer and the sellers in this case, testified under the questioning of Yale Galanter, OJ Simpson’s longtime attorney, and this prosecution witness convinced me that yeah, this is probably a case of “The Country Vs. OJ – We’ll Get You This Time, Dammit!” and I am quite convinced that if this involved anyone else besides OJ, there would be different charges filed – and some of the people that the state was very anxious to make deals with in this case would actually be sitting at the defense table.

There are some interesting legal questions involved in this case, things like what constitutes “conspiracy”? Is it conspiracy if there was never a “meeting of the minds” or the formulation of a set plan between the co-conspirators? If one guy brings a gun and no one else is aware that the guy is packing heat, are they involved in a conspiracy? Even the “go between”, Thomas Riccio, wasn’t quite sure of the “plan” – he didn’t know how OJ was going to transport the things he was there to recover. And he certainly says he didn’t know there were going to be guns there – or a gun, since he says he only saw one.

But since other witnesses, including Bruce Fromong, says he saw two guns, is the fact that Riccio only saw one gun an indication that with all the commotion and all the screaming and yelling and the amount of people in that small room that it could actually be that OJ didn’t see any guns at all, as he claims? Riccio testified today that it was certainly possible, that OJ was three feet in front of Riccio and OJ’s back was turned to the man with the gun, and OJ was focused on yelling at the two “Sellers” of his personal property. Riccio admitted that it was quite possible that OJ never saw a gun at all. And we know that Riccio – standing behind OJ, only saw one of the alleged two guns in the room.

Riccio also testified that he never heard OJ tell anyone to take their guns out, and OJ was never suspected of having a gun himself. And no one can say where the guns came form, and Fromong says the men came in the doors “waving the guns around and putting a gun in his face” and Riccio says he never saw a gun being pulled UNTIL the “sellers” started complaining about the men taking the lithographs and the cell phones. I just question the whole “conspiracy to rob with a deadly weapon” charge.

What is also weird about this charge is that it is based on the fact that the “robbers” didn’t stop and sort out the things they were taking. I don’t think anyone believes that OJ was really planning on robbing these people of their Joe Montana lithographs or their Pete Rose laser inscribed baseball bats. OJ didn’t want to rob that stuff – he wanted the property he believed was his, and Riccio testified that the “sellers’ were more than willing to give OJ this stuff back once they realized that they were “caught”. And Riccio made it clear that Alfred Beardsley, the one who initially contacted Riccio about unloading the stuff knew and acknowledged that the items were, in fact, stolen property of OJ’s.

If the “sellers” knew that the property was OJ’s, if OJ was standing in the room demanding that they give the stuff back, and the “sellers” weren’t objecting to OJ taking the stuff back – is it still robbery? The only time the “sellers” object to OJ taking *anything* was when the group started taking the lithographs and the personal cell phones. And OJ is heard on the audio tape of the incident telling the sellers “Look, I don’t want your shit, I’ll give you back anything that isn’t mine.” Does that rise to the level of robbery?

I don’t know, I understand that there were guns involved, one way or another, and that there should be charges filed against somebody for something, but should it be OJ, and should he be facing a potential life sentence because he went to a hotel room to recover things that in his mind, were his anyway? Especially in light of the fact that not only 3 different California Police Departments but the FB fucking I actually KNEW that this was all going to happen? Riccio called and told these agencies what the plan was, that OJ was going to recover some stolen property and these agencies knew that this guy named Alfred Beardsley was running around with a bunch of items that were stolen from OJ Simpson.

And part of the problem is that Beardlsey is such a fucking lunatic. He can’t keep his stories straight, and so far there he has offered a bunch of different scenarios under which this stuff came to be “stolen”. There’s the story that OJ doesn’t pay his bills, and his agent at the time, Mike Gilbert, took the stuff as payment, there’s the story that OJ was trying to hide the stuff from the Goldman’s and Mike Gilbert offered to take the stuff for safe keeping and then just outright sold it, and then there’s the story that OJ’s mom doesn’t pay her bills, either, and that this stuff was sold from a public storage unit she had. Of course, you could practically drive a truck through the holes in any one of those stories. And really who the hell is stealing from whom?

Under cross examination today Riccio also repeated what he had testified to under direct about the whole “pool party” he went to at OJ’s hotel, and how OJ was introducing Riccio to anyone and everyone present as “the guy who is going to help me get my stolen shit back”. I just don’t think the mindset was there of some criminal robbery. There was no hush hush cover this up – in the dead of night conspiracy going on. Even Riccio testified that he was surprised and a little nervous about OJ being so forthcoming and talkative about recovering the items. Riccio didn’t know at that point who Beardsley was dealing with, and for all he knew, that person could have been there at the pool party. Clearly, OJ thought he was simply going to recover what he thought was rightfully his.

The whole thing seems hinky to me. And although I can think on NO ONE who more deserves to be in prison for the rest of his natural life than OJ Simpson, I just question whether or not this is the way he should get there.

Of course, we’ve only heard from two witnesses, with todays cross examination of Riccio being basically a repeat of what he said yesterday under direct, since he’s pretty much a witness for the defense more than the prosecution. And today’s second witness, Allan Morris,  was some boring ass guy from the Palace Hotel explaining that there are a thousand cameras in place at the hotel and casino, and then proceeded to show us angles of the robbers walking into the hotel from pretty much damned near every one of those cameras.

Maybe the other 6 witnesses will convince me that yes, this is the correct charge for OJ Simpson, and this is absolutely the right reason to throw his ass in jail (finally), but unless one of those “co conspirators” comes up to the stand and credibly tells me that OJ himself told someone to make sure they bring their gun, and make sure they didn’t leave that hotel room without Pete Fucking Rose’s laser inscribed baseball bat, well, I’m still going to think “Right guy, Right motivation, Wrong Charge”.


12 Responses to “NV vs. Simpson – Right Man, Right Motivation, Wrong Charge”

  1. Glenda said

    I agree, reluctantly. Even the legal analyst on ESPN (everyone has a legal analyst these days! How sad) said this morning that he thought it would definitely not be this kind of case without those two important initials.
    I would love nothing better than for The Juice to get canned and serve time for something. But think this is very trumped up and have a hard time believing that it will hold.

  2. Judy said

    In total agreement Kim. Can’t believe this would even have been reported except for the fact that it was OJ and that all the parties involved wanted to cash in on OJ’s infamy. This rightfully should be plead down to a couple years in prison max, but for everyone’s desire to make OJ pay for the homicide he got away with.

    Hard to figure – no justice in the homicide trial – does that make it okay to pervert justice in this case?

  3. deserttaxguy said

    I’m glad you’re covering this. I spend a lot of time in Nevada and I can only tell you that the whole legal system there are not the friendly “Andy of Mayberry” types.
    OJ messed up by taking those idiots with him to retrieve the goods. He further messed up by taking goods that weren’t his anyway, so you see his “alibi” is evaporating quickly.
    Keep up the good work- I was watching on the local Las Vegas feed and hoping you would see it too. Was it on Court TV or how did you watch much of it?

  4. Sprocket said

    I really had enough of OJ in his first trial, and doubt that I will watch much of this. I commend you Kim, for being able to tolerate his mug on TV, or live streaming again.

  5. Holy Toledo said

    Hey Kim, I just got the funniest BD card. OJ is on the cover holding a football and a trophy saying “I didn’t steal all this stuff, but if I did,this is how I would’ve done it.” OK, maybe it’s not the funniest card in the world but you gotta admit some card maker jumped on that one pretty quick. Oh, I forgot to tell you what the inside said, didn’t I?


  6. Kathy said

    Hi Kim:

    You’re so fuckin smart. I think I love you.

    : )

  7. Kim (Canada) said

    I’m with Kathy on all of it –

    And my “crush” simply continuez to grow…. LOL!

    Fonzie :~)

  8. Was it on Court TV or how did you watch much of it?

    I watch online at No commercials and no annoying talking heads


  9. I really had enough of OJ in his first trial, and doubt that I will watch much of this. I commend you Kim, for being able to tolerate his mug on TV, or live streaming again.

    Well, if I had to actually see OJ and his mugging, I’m sure I would turn the TV off.

    I just listen, it’s the legal arguments and theories I’m fascinated with in this case, not that it’s OJ Simpson. It could be NV vs. Joe Blow for all I care. I don’t have to look at OJ or watch his aggravating eye rolling and bored sighs.

    I can’t imagine any more interesting arguments than “Conspiracy without a meeting of the minds”, “kidnapping by telling someone to sit down” and “robbery by taking of what you believe are your own stolen possessions”.

    Interesting stuff, that. Whether or not it’s OJ Simpson,


  10. And my “crush” simply continuez to grow…. LOL!

    Well, If you start calling me “KIMMER” you’re fucking out of here.


  11. Kim (Canada) said

    I wouldn’t dare!
    I promise…

    Fonzie :~)

  12. Caroline said

    Hi Kim,

    I have been out of the country for the past month, so……over the weekend I caught up on all of your blogs and it was such a pleasure to see that nothing has dulled either your intelligence, wit or bitchiness!

    I am aspiring to be as big of a bitch as you and need your advice on how to handle my crazy neighbor who I think is certifiable!!

    It all started 2 YEARS ago when I was walking my adorable and obedient purebred Welsh Terrier Rusty down the alley behind my house to the park. This nutcase whom I will call “Jonna”, was in her backyard, (imagine a westcoast version of Grey Gardens) with her two giant wild outacontrol Pitbull/Rott mixes she got at the pound. I have nothing against pound pups, but I feel they (the pound) should have done a little investigation as to what their living conditions at their future home would be – GRIM

    Jonna, who is as nosy as hell, sees me walking down the alley, calls me over so that she can try and get into my business. She opens her back gate, wherein her two 70 pound wild
    outacontrol beasts pounce on 21 pound Rusty ripping into his flesh and trying to get to his throat. Poor little guy is yelping so loudly, trying to get away so I let go of his leash and he ran back to my garage where one of the psycho dogs gets him cornered. I kick this giant piece of shit in the butt, open the car door and Rusty jumps in. To make this short I will cut out the stupid dialog coming out of Jonna’s mouth as I stand there shocked and crying. I get in the car and drove straight to my wonderful vet Dr. Ben who treated Rust for multiple punture wounds and torn ears. $280 later, we are back at home and waiting for Animal Control (who Dr. Ben told me I legally had to call) to arrive. The AC officer pressures me to file charges so that they can levy a fine of $175 against Jonna (this was her third complaint). I refuse, not wanting to start a neighborhood fued since her sweet mother-in-law lives behind behind me. At this point I am just hoping for her to pay the vet bill. I guess I can wait for hell to freeze over, because I never got an apology, inquiry or shit out of this witch.

    Fast forward to this last weekend: I back my car out of the garage and see her in my rearview mirror getting into her car and trying to run into me while sitting on the horn. I am really PO’ed at her now, so I get out of the car and walk back to her and ask her what her problem is. She is so angry she is red, shaking and spittle is coming out of her mouth as she shouts to me “to get outta the f’en road”. Between a string of profanities she tells me that she doesn’t give an F about me or anyone else in family since I “turned her into Animal Control for no reason” I really wanted to punch her in the face, but I just said “Karma’s a bitch” (I can’t help it-I was raised in California) and got into my car and left.

    Now this is where I need your advice: I know there is another ugly and dangerous encounter in the future. How would you, the mighty Kim, handle this psycho?

    Your fan,


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: