No soup for you!!!

[TSC.]

I read the article about the trail on Wikipedia

Well researched then

[ATI_7500]

This however does not prevent me and my fellow citizens from concluding he did murder people, and it does not preclude me or my fellow citizens from treating him like a murderer by refusing him service in restaurants.

The only real difference between OJ and Hitler/Stalin is one of scale.  Oh, and Hitler/Stalin were never any good at football.

Head -> desk.


I rest my case. You can't teach sheep to fly.

[Chris_F]

Head -> desk.


I rest my case. You can't teach sheep to fly.

You're welcome to rest your case but I don't think it's been conclusively argued yet.

[ATI_7500]

You're welcome to rest your case but I don't think it's been conclusively argued yet.

Well, there's also no possible conclusion in sight.

[dcunning30]

I shall repeat one more time, maybe some people will eventually get it:

JURY NULLIFICATION!

[Chris_F]

I shall repeat one more time, maybe some people will eventually get it:

JURY NULLIFICATION!

I got it.  I understood entirely, and you're right.

[dcunning30]

I shall repeat one more time, maybe some people will eventually get it:

JURY NULLIFICATION!

I got it.

[dcunning30]

....recall I said I wanted to believe OJ was innocent.  But intellectual honesty didn't allow for me to have that luxury.

[Hagar]

This is all very interesting but I think you're missing the point. The crux of the matter is surely whether the proprietor of an eating establishment has the right to refuse to serve a customer without giving a reason. If this is the case the 'race card' is irrelevant. I believe the landlord (or manager) of a public house in the UK has this right in law but I'm not sure about other businesses or other countries.

[Wing Nut]

You're welcome to rest your case but I don't think it's been conclusively argued yet.

Well, there's also no possible conclusion in sight.

Translation:  You're right, but I don't want to admit it...  ;)

[dcunning30]

This is all very interesting but I think you're missing the point. The crux of the matter is surely whether the proprietor of an eating establishment has the right to refuse to serve a customer without giving a reason. If this is the case the 'race card' is irrelevant. I believe the landlord (or manager) of a public house in the UK has this right in law but I'm not sure about other businesses or other countries.

In the US, an establishment cannot discriminate against persons for reasons of race, religion, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, or age.  But any other reason is fair game.  If the proprietor thinks OJ is a jerk and a murderer, then he has a right to refuse him service.  Unfortunately, here in the US, there's the concept called the politics of race.  At times, a racial minority can gain leverage in a matter, regardless if their claim is legitimate or not, by playing the race card.  The problem for OJ is, he's lost his credibility amongst black americans.  He can play the race card all he wants, which he tried to do in this case, but by now, nobody cares.

[Mushroom_Farmer]

In the US, a private business owner has the right to refuse service/entry(exluding discriminatory actions such as race, religion, creed, gender,age, et.al covered by the constition or local ordinance) the same as the individual has the right to refuse another person entyy into his/her home. However, as far as I know, public venues(owned by local, state, or federal governments) don't have these rights.

[Hagar]

In the US, a private business owner has the right to refuse service/entry(exluding discriminatory actions such as race, religion, creed, gender,age, et.al covered by the constition or local ordinance)

That appears to cover almost every situation. It's not clear who could be refused service & this could possibly vary in different parts of the country. In the end it's the proprietor's word against the customer's so which one do you believe? He might deny racial discrimination but does refusal to serve a cleared murder suspect count as a discriminatory action? What about convicted criminals who've served their sentences? I would say that OJ has a very good chance of a successful claim even without playing the race card.

[Wing Nut]

Does anyone here REALLY believe this could have been racially motivated?  Raise your hand (gloveless) if you do.  Read the article; the NEXT customer was Michael Jordan with an unannounced party of 30 people!  OJ had what? 4 people?  If the owner was going to kick OJ out based on race, he sure as heck wouldn't have accepted a spur of the moment group that would take half his wait-staff to accommodate.

Race is not an issue here, and the fact that people here are spending so much time on it is playing right into the murdering creep's hands...

[Mushroom_Farmer]

In the US, a private business owner has the right to refuse service/entry(exluding discriminatory actions such as race, religion, creed, gender,age, et.al covered by the constition or local ordinance)

That appears to cover almost every situation. It's not clear who could be refused service & this could possibly vary in different parts of the country. In the end it's the proprietor's word against the customer's so which one do you believe? He might deny racial discrimination but does refusal to serve a cleared murder suspect count as a discriminatory action? What about convicted criminals who've served their sentences? I would say that OJ has a very good chance of a successful claim even without playing the race card.

Doug, that's the muddy area that juries are often asked to determine. It's also part of being a "free" society. Unfortunately it also allows some individuals to hide their true prejudices behind the freedoms the Constitution protects, while not exactly protecting the innocent.