archenemy Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Are you serious? There is a basic level you should understand just to be a functional member of society. Wait, forgot who I was talking to. Nevermind. Are you serious? Let me let you know how many civil law suits I have been a part of, on either side. Or for that matter any thing pertaining to law suits of any kind. Or criminal behavior or really anything that has to do with the court systems. ZERO. So with this knowledge of me. Why do you think I would know about it? I don’t remember wrongful death law suites in school. High school or college. Sorry, what was that you were saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Are you serious? There is a basic level you should understand just to be a functional member of society. Wait, forgot who I was talking to. Nevermind. Are you serious? Let me let you know how many civil law suits I have been a part of, on either side. Or for that matter any thing pertaining to law suits of any kind. Or criminal behavior or really anything that has to do with the court systems. ZERO. So with this knowledge of me. Why do you think I would know about it? I don’t remember wrongful death law suites in school. High school or college. Sorry, what was that you were saying? I don't think Kevbonehead has finished 7th grade yet - you know, when you learn about libraries and how to look stuff up - research and all that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Like I said. you know ass munch as I do! Beyotch!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Are you serious? There is a basic level you should understand just to be a functional member of society. Wait, forgot who I was talking to. Nevermind. Are you serious? Let me let you know how many civil law suits I have been a part of, on either side. Or for that matter any thing pertaining to law suits of any kind. Or criminal behavior or really anything that has to do with the court systems. ZERO. So with this knowledge of me. Why do you think I would know about it? I don’t remember wrongful death law suites in school. High school or college. Sorry, what was that you were saying? I don't think Kevbonehead has finished 7th grade yet - you know, when you learn about libraries and how to look stuff up - research and all that. Hey krasyoqowiejlkasdjpoi or what ever your name is. I understand HOW to look something up. I want to know why you think I should just know about law, being that I have never studied it. How would one know about rock climbing without actually doing it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Riiight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 truly clueless I do know WHAT happened, just not clear on WHY. OK, just to be clear, is this your actual question Kevbone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Hey krasyoqowiejlkasdjpoi or what ever your name is. I understand HOW to look something up. I want to know why you think I should just know about law, being that I have never studied it. How would one know about rock climbing without actually doing it? Dude, quite while you're behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Hey krasyoqowiejlkasdjpoi or what ever your name is. I understand HOW to look something up. I want to know why you think I should just know about law, being that I have never studied it. How would one know about rock climbing without actually doing it? Dude, quite while you're behind. You want to lick my behind? I dont think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I don't think so either. So where is it exactly that you are confused Kev. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I don't think so either. So where is it exactly that you are confused Kev. Where exactly is it that he is _not_ confused? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Hey krasyoqowiejlkasdjpoi or what ever your name is. I understand HOW to look something up. I want to know why you think I should just know about law, being that I have never studied it. How would one know about rock climbing without actually doing it? Dude, quite while you're behind. I dont think. at last, a frank, self-effacing admission! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 This has been entertaining (why else would one log on this site), so I will clarify what I was saying. WHY DO YOU THINK I WOULD KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CIVIL SUITES? ITS NOT EXACTLY COMMON KNOWLEDGE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 WHY DO YOU THINK I WOULD KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CIVIL SUITES? ITS NOT EXACTLY COMMON KNOWLEDGE. Everyone I know who's honeymooned knows about Suites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 From Archenemy: OJ is a fucking asshole. gee, I didn't know he was a butt pirate I didn't know he was Italian, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 This has been entertaining (why else would one log on this site), so I will clarify what I was saying. WHY DO YOU THINK I WOULD KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CIVIL SUITES? ITS NOT EXACTLY COMMON KNOWLEDGE. OK sweetie. Criminal court is for bad people who have broken the law. It is that person against the state or against the federal government. Civil court is for people who have disagreements with each other. Maybe you have seen folks on Judge Judy arguing with each other. There you go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 OK sweetie. Criminal court is for bad people who have broken the law. It is that person against the state or against the federal government. Civil court is for people who have disagreements with each other. Maybe you have seen folks on Judge Judy arguing with each other. There you go. Gosh, that wasn’t so bad, was it? Now for the hard question. How could a court see fit to find for the family of the dead person. If the person was tried and acquitted of the murder. Wouldn’t the attorney on OJ’s side bring that point up? I find this ironic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbw1966 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 This has been entertaining (why else would one log on this site), so I will clarify what I was saying. WHY DO YOU THINK I WOULD KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CIVIL SUITES? ITS NOT EXACTLY COMMON KNOWLEDGE. Its not? Are you implying that because you don't know something that its not common knowledge? Let me help you out here. Criminal suits require that you be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil suits have a lower standard of proof, that is you just have to prove something based on a preponderance of the evidence. Just tip the scales in your favor. Hence OJ was found not guilty of murder yet still be held civilly responsible for the deaths. Read a book sometime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 What, you didn't like my Judge Judy example? I thought kevbaby might be able to relate to it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 What, you didn't like my Judge Judy example? I thought kevbaby might be able to relate to it? kfed, err Kevbone, seems to be not so smart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Criminal suits require that you be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil suits have a lower standard of proof, that is you just have to prove something based on a preponderance of the evidence. Just tip the scales in your favor. Hence OJ was found not guilty of murder yet still be held civilly responsible for the deaths. Read a book sometime. I understand all of that. Let me try to explain what I have never understood about his civil trial. If he was acquitted in a criminal trial, which require that you be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then was tried in a civil trial, which have lower standards. How come he lost? Did OJ’s attorneys not bring up the fact that he was just acquitted for these murders in a court that hold a higher standard? Would that fact not be his best defense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 What, you didn't like my Judge Judy example? I thought kevbaby might be able to relate to it? I dont watch TV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenSeagal Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 kevbone, you need a quick course in the justice system. I'll give you a "hands on" demonstration: There. You weren't found guilty, but justice was served. Get it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 Criminal suits require that you be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil suits have a lower standard of proof, that is you just have to prove something based on a preponderance of the evidence. Just tip the scales in your favor. Hence OJ was found not guilty of murder yet still be held civilly responsible for the deaths. Read a book sometime. I understand all of that. Let me try to explain what I have never understood about his civil trial. If he was acquitted in a criminal trial, which require that you be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then was tried in a civil trial, which have lower standards. How come he lost? Did OJ’s attorneys not bring up the fact that he was just acquitted for these murders in a court that hold a higher standard? Would that fact not be his best defense? No, it would not. The fact that the court he was in (Civil) held a lower standard for determining guilt would be the doorway through which the persuer would walk through. In other words, the persuer in civil court does not need to come up with as much proof against the defendant (O.J.) as they need to come up with in criminal court. So being dismissed in criminal court does not mean that that case will be easier to dismiss in civil court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foraker Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 Speaking of auctioning shiz off court judgements, maybe we can do the same to Exxon and finally close the chapter on their little Alaskan 'Whoops!'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 Anyone need a tanker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.