CIVIL JUDGEMENT AFTER A NOT GUILTY VERDICT.

user ballots

Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes

Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz

TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase

Discussion
Bug Report

CIVIL JUDGEMENT AFTER A NOT GUILTY VERDICT.

[+] ballot by LCD
ACTIVE Wed Aug 08, 07 - Thu Aug 07, 08
okay, personally I think he did do it.

but he was proven to be not guilty in the eyes of the law. then how can a civil court just ignore that fact and award millions, based on the "opinion" of the jury?

is independent civil judgement right in your opinion?

Yes
No

Ballot #116817 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 2.0 © BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank:

similiar ballots:
75794. What do you think of the manslaughter verdict that Klansman Edgar Ray Killen received for killing three civil rights workers in 1964 in Mississippi?
105968. MSNBC, NBC News Decide To Call Civil War In Iraq ‘A Civil War’
74350. Taking Bets - Michael Jackson, Guilty or Not Guilty???
123357. Which Is More Important: Judgement Or...
126676. Do Citizens With Bad Judgement Vote For...
5617. Who Will Win The Next Civil War?
13673. Will there ever be another Civil War in the U.S.?
122212. Would there be another civil war if..
106049. Who's the Cause Of The Civil (?) War In Iraq ?
106434. Is the USA headed towards Another Civil War ?

COMMENTS:
Voted : No
I never understood how a person can be found innocent in one court and guilty in another, I think he is guilty as well, but I don't understand the justice system in being able to do this.

by larrynelmira on Wed Aug 08, 07 1:38pm [+]

^ Does it work the other way around as well, found guilty in one court but innocent in civil court?

by larrynelmira on Wed Aug 08, 07 1:40pm [+]

Voted : Yes
It wasn't double jeapardy of life or the death penalty. If you mean OJ, he can still golf, eat in most (but not all) restaurants and so on.

by skylab on Wed Aug 08, 07 3:24pm [+]

Voted : No
it made no sence to me, but if i ever murder a couple of people i hope they try me in LA

by ABC on Wed Aug 08, 07 5:58pm [+]

Voted : Yes
In this case, I do. Man was guilty as sin (Orenthal James Simpson, for the record- bastich can find me if he likes and bring that knife along, if it strikes him- I know a few tricks with a blade myself), and he used the system to get away with it. There has to be an equalizing force available. (If I ever find any of those civil-trial jurors, I'm buying for them, as long as my money lasts.)

by Truthseeker013 on Wed Aug 08, 07 6:18pm [+]

Voted : Yes
What PinkPanther said. The criminal trial is totally seperate from the civil trial with different goals.

And like Truth said, it can be an equalizer. The burden of proof is less in a civil court, so they don't need as much to find a person liable. Someone who gets off on a technicality in a criminal case can very easily be found liable in a civil one.

by Grumpy_Person on Wed Aug 08, 07 9:20pm [+]

Voted : Yes
In this case, the civl courts tried to clean up the damage left behind by a prejudiced kangaroo court. The jurors at OJ's trial said they were going to find him innocent long before they made their egregious decision. Also, the glove fit enough, even in it's shrunken, blood-caked condition, to be worn for the time it took to do the job. Did you catch that OJ was GRINNING when he put the glove on? An innocent person would be HURLING.

The civil courts realized this. They did what was right.

by forgetmenot on Wed Aug 08, 07 10:17pm [+]

About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact