O J Simpson

8 Oct 2008

Quote by splendid_
I would just like to point out, if it helps, that OJ was and is in the US. As much as we may be similar we do have different laws and rights over here.

but with a common Western Civil Society objective, no less
with a what? rolleyes

Precisely

8 Oct 2008

Quote by GnV
I would just like to point out, if it helps, that OJ was and is in the US. As much as we may be similar we do have different laws and rights over here.

but with a common Western Civil Society objective, no less
with a what? rolleyes

Precisely

your replies doesnt seem to have any substance,you are making statements which you cant support or defend..

8 Oct 2008

Quote by kentswingers777
Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression that a persons previous convictions, could only be disclosed AFTER that person has been found guilty, and not before?
If a jury is allowed to hear a persons past crimes,before they go out to deliberate surely that would sway the jury in its deliberation on his current offence?
Maybe I have it wrong?

no.. you have it right....bang -on infact!! In the Uk anyway.
Before the jury are told, "legal argument" takes place where "relevant" convictions are discussed and ,afterwards,disclosed.
As Splendid says, there are difference between English and US law... its hard not to confuse are similar though:
where were we?
confused

8 Oct 2008

Quote by DeeCee
Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression that a persons previous convictions, could only be disclosed AFTER that person has been found guilty, and not before?
If a jury is allowed to hear a persons past crimes,before they go out to deliberate surely that would sway the jury in its deliberation on his current offence?
Maybe I have it wrong?

no.. you have it right....bang -on infact!! In the Uk anyway.
Before the jury are told, "legal argument" takes place where "relevant" convictions are discussed and ,afterwards,disclosed.
As Splendid says, there are difference between English and US law... its hard not to confuse are similar though:
where were we?
confused

Thanks for that clarification deecee

8 Oct 2008

Quote by kentswingers777
Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression that a persons previous convictions, could only be disclosed AFTER that person has been found guilty, and not before?
If a jury is allowed to hear a persons past crimes,before they go out to deliberate surely that would sway the jury in its deliberation on his current offence?
Maybe I have it wrong?

no.. you have it right....bang -on infact!! In the Uk anyway.
Before the jury are told, "legal argument" takes place where "relevant" convictions are discussed and ,afterwards,disclosed.
As Splendid says, there are difference between English and US law... its hard not to confuse are similar though:
where were we?
confused

Thanks for that clarification deecee
no probs Kent ...