[bogomipz]

>" A more recent one is OJ Simpson jailed for some break-and-entering bullshit because everyone wants to punish him for those famous murders."

I'm sorry "breaking and entering bullshit"?

The crime was armed robbery and kidnapping. And it was OJ Simpson who said that nobody could leave the room which brought up the kidnapping charge. All of this actually happened. Nobody disputes these claims. Nothing to do with breaking and entering but much more serious crimes.[1]

If a family member of yours was robbed in their hotel room at gun point would it still be "bullshit"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson_robbery_case

[thanatropism]

I saw a tv show that presented those facts, yes. It also features the Goldman family celebrating that he got any kind of jail time at all. And it was a long sentence too!

[PhasmaFelis]

So are you saying he shouldn't have been jailed for armed robbery and kidnapping? That seems unreasonable. Or are you saying that the Goldmans shouldn't have been happy he was in prison? Maybe so, but that's got nothing to do with the criminal justice system.

[thanatropism]

Actually, my broader point is that there's substancial indeterminacy to the legal system and that society uses this wiggle room to dole out mob justice.

Do I have to type that sentence again?

[PhasmaFelis]

That may be true, but I don't see how it's relevant to OJ. He wasn't lynched or set up; he committed a crime and went to prison for it. I don't see how that's mob justice even if some people were happy about it.

[thanatropism]

This is me being an armchair "bird lawyer" without actual expertise, but it seems to me that his threatening people with a gun for them to stay in a room for a few minutes while he searched the place for the goods they thought stolen from him...

... well, it's not good. But is it kidnapping? My common sense tells me by then the system was biased against him. Mob justice, therefore, even if not from a wild, tar-and-feather variety.