O.J. Simpson Stays in Prison

Yahoo News reports what some will undoubtedly consider good news.

LAS VEGAS – The Nevada Supreme Court has refused to overturn O.J. Simpson's armed robbery and kidnapping convictions stemming from a Las Vegas hotel room heist.

But the court on Friday ordered his co-defendant's conviction in the case reversed.

The 63-year-old Simpson is serving nine to 33 years at a state prison. His co-defendant, Clarence "C.J." Stewart, is serving 7 1/2 to 27 years at High Desert Prison northwest of Las Vegas.

Both men were convicted of kidnapping, armed robbery, conspiracy and other crimes for what Simpson maintained was an attempt to retrieve family photos and mementoes.

I was wrong in my prediction. But I still say the kidnapping charge is nonsense and he's paying for something he was acquitted of 10 years earlier. The whole thing is a disgraceful abuse of the legal system. But that's Nevada for you.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

O.J. Gets 9 Years

My career as a legal prognosticator is off to a flying start. Just the other day in discussing this case I said the following:

What I predict will happen is he'll get 10 years or so and a year from now it'll be overturned in the Appellate Court and he'll get out.

CNN reports that the former football great who thirteen years ago was acquitted of murdering his ex-wife and boyfriend was sentenced to serve a minimum of 9 years for his recent conviction of robbery, assault and kidnapping.

The Las Vegas Sun has a fascinating article about the ambiguous nature of the sentencing guidelines in cases like this.

I'm sticking by the second half of my prediction. In my opinion there have rarely been charges as trumped up as these. The kidnapping is absolutely ridiculous and the robbery and assault left plenty of room for doubt. We'll see you next year in the Appellate Court. Of course, District Judge Jackie Glass doesn't think so.

"When you take a gun with you and you take men with you ... in a show of force, that's not just a 'Hey, give me my stuff back,' " Glass said. "That's something else. And that's what went on here, and that's why we're all here.

"I have to tell you, it was much more than stupidity. ... You went to the room, you took guns -- meaning you and the group -- you used force, you took property, whether it was yours or somebody else's, and in this state, that amounts to robbery with the use of a deadly weapon."

I say it may amount to robbery in Las Vegas to do that, but depending on who's got your stuff, you may very well want to bring armed men along to retrieve it. What do you think? Could that idea constitute reasonable doubt? How much time do you think he'll serve?

What if the judge and jury in this case really did give him payback for what they feel was a wrong acquittal 13 years ago? How would you feel about that?