O.J. Simpson Released on $125,000 Bail
[Guest post by DRJ]
O.J. Simpson was released from a Las Vegas jail today after posting $125,000 bail:
“O.J. Simpson has been released from jail after being granted bail on armed robbery charges. A judge set bail Wednesday at $125,000 for Simpson in connection with the armed robbery of sports memorabilia collectors at a Las Vegas hotel. His attorney said he would return to Florida.
Simpson, standing in court in a blue jail uniform and handcuffs, furrowed his brow as the judge read the list of charges against him. He answered quietly in a hoarse voice and nodded as Justice of the Peace Joe Bonaventure Jr. laid out restrictions for his release, including surrendering his passport to his attorney and having no contact with co-defendants or potential witnesses. Simpson did not enter a plea.”
I know nothing about Nevada bail requirements and procedures but $125,000 seems low given Simpson’s past history and flight risk.
Alfred Beardsley, a memorabilia collector and alleged victim, claimed that one of the intruders impersonated a police officer:
“Beardsley told police that one of the men with Simpson brandished a pistol, frisked him and impersonated a police officer, and that another man pointed a gun at Fromong. “I’m a cop and you’re lucky this ain’t LA or you’d be dead,” the man said, according to the report.
“One of the thugs—that’s the best thing I can call them—somebody blurted out ‘police!’ and they came in military style,” Beardsley said Wednesday on NBC’s “Today” show. “I thought it might have been law enforcement or the FBI or something because I was ordered to stand up, and I was frisked for weapons.”
“At no time did Mr. Simpson hold any type of firearm at all,” he said.”
Beardsley also questioned the Riccio tapes released in the past days by TMZ.com:
“Beardsley also cast doubt on the authenticity of a recording of the confrontation made by Tom Riccio, the man who arranged the meeting between Simpson and the two collectors. Riccio reportedly sold that tape to celebrity gossip Web site TMZ.com.
“I do not believe that these tapes are accurate,” Beardsley said. He said information was missing and the recordings should be professionally analyzed.
“Simpson confronted me, saying ‘Man what’s wrong with you, you have a turn-over order, you have a turn-over order for this stuff, man,'” Beardsley said, but he said that part wasn’t on the tapes.”
Riccio reportedly has an “extensive criminal history from the 1980s and ’90s, including grand larceny in Florida, possession of stolen goods in Connecticut and receiving stolen property in California.” Riccio claims that the prosecutors have offered him immunity in this case.
More suspects have been identified, arrested, and are cooperating with police, a development that is probably bad news for O. J. Simpson:
“Two other defendants, Walter Alexander, 46, and Clarence Stewart, 53, were arrested and released pending court appearances. Stewart turned in some of the missing goods and Alexander agreed to cooperate with prosecutors, authorities said. A fourth suspect, Michael McClinton, 49, of Las Vegas, surrendered to police Tuesday.”
The cable channels are immersed in Simpson coverage, something I’m going to try to avoid. Even Marcia Clark was in Las Vegas reporting for Entertainment Tonight. It feels like 1994-1995 again. As Yogi Berra might say, this is like deja vu all over again.
— DRJ
Best comment from the Handle Show this morning: “I hope he is innocent but gets convicted.”
ManlyDad (22e85d) — 9/19/2007 @ 1:05 pmGoldman’s lawyers ought to be interested in whatever collateral was posted.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/19/2007 @ 3:50 pmThis smells more and more like a set up. Vital information missing, malevolent spin, improper police and judicial proceedings. I’m expecting a judicial rebuke, the resignation of the Clark County DA, and the dismissal of all charges against O. J. Simpson.
With all the bad press law enforcement has been getting lately, this has the potential to born it very badly. May even be a tipping point. Up till now we’ve gone to one extreme regarding police conduct, with this we could go to the other extreme, and that’s not good for society either.
Alan Kellogg (0cce30) — 9/19/2007 @ 3:54 pm…potential to burn it very badly.
(And here I emphasize proofreading to others. :grumph: )
Alan Kellogg (0cce30) — 9/19/2007 @ 3:57 pmAlan Kellogg, what improper police and judicial proceedings? What are you talking about? Your claims seem without basis.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/19/2007 @ 4:02 pmAllan,
Wouldn’t it be poetic justice if this time he had a judge interested in getting him convicted instead of acquitted? The Postman Always Rings Twice kind of thing?
nk (474afa) — 9/19/2007 @ 4:06 pmThe Scotish latenight show host (his name escapes me right now) was on fire the other night over this… Best one?
“One of the things that OJ was ‘getting back’ was the suit he was aquitted in. I guess it’s his lucky suit. OJ’s still looking for the real killers, and you know he’s getting close…
He found the killer’s suit.”
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 9/19/2007 @ 4:28 pmLocal LA radio reported that when arrested, OJ was wearing a Rolex, the Goldman’s atty showed a wire service photo of same to the judge in that case, who promptly issued a warrant for the watch as property to be transferred to Goldman.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 9/19/2007 @ 4:56 pmHopefully, the atty got to the Vegas lock-up before OJ claimed his property upon release.
Are the Goldmans interested in justice or money? I notice they are not sharing much with the Browns. I guess juries are supposed to find what the people want, not what the evidence tells them. If you were not on that jury, you should not be critical of them.
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (039eca) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:00 pmI am absolutely certain that the Goldmans are only after money. Their slimeness is second only to O.J.’s.
nk (474afa) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:06 pmnk, I find your comment at best inexplicable, at worst quite offensive. I seriously doubt that Fred Goldman has been able to recover much more than what his atty fees have been. In many cases, I would think that people in the Goldmans’ position should move on, but I doubt that with a murderer of my son on the loose and continually on TV that I could move on.
More power to the Goldmans. I’m happy to see them hound OJ and can’t imagine ever thinking of them as “slimy”.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:11 pmIf it were my son who had been killed, I would be dead or in prison or his killer would be dead or in prison. I would not be hiring lawyers to seize his assets. I would be hiring people to get me within range of him.
There’s nothing in what Papa Goldman has done to show that he’s interested in anything more than cashing in on the death of his son. If there is, please let me know. I am never afraid to admit that I’ve made a mistake.
nk (474afa) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:40 pmI’ll add one more thing. Wrongful death actions are supposed to be about the financial worth of the dead person to his surviving family. If anybody thinks that Ron Goldman would have ever given anything to his parents ….? Petrocelli is a very good lawyer but the civil verdict against OJ is about as just as the criminal one in his favor.
nk (474afa) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:49 pmNK,
I think Fred Goldman is grieving his son’s death through anger and revenge:
DRJ (ec59b5) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:51 pmWrongful death claims are so far removed from any demonstrable standards anyway. Verdicts like this one are not surprising. Now, you get sentenced to jail, and somebody takes all of your money.
JD (f6a000) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:52 pmThank you, DRJ. I’ll calm down.
nk (474afa) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:54 pmnk, you’ve made a mistake.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/19/2007 @ 7:55 pmOnly maybe, Robin. I know my father would have killed for us but he did all he could to keep me and my brothers from ever being in a position to kill anyone. So maybe I’m wrong that I think it wrong that Fred Goldman and O.J. Simpson should breathe the same air.
nk (474afa) — 9/19/2007 @ 8:02 pmWe ask people to accept money damages when a wrongful death occurs because we don’t want them to take a life for a life. However, in doing that, the system makes the survivors look greedy and self-centered. It’s not a good remedy but it’s the best we can do.
DRJ (ec59b5) — 9/19/2007 @ 8:05 pmI think O.J. should be Tasered.
Beldar (2a3e92) — 9/19/2007 @ 9:01 pmBeldar…
Another Drew (8018ee) — 9/19/2007 @ 9:24 pmAt least once per hour!
Robin Roberts #11:
More power to the Goldmans. I’m happy to see them hound OJ and can’t imagine ever thinking of them as “slimy”.
————————————–
I agree. Especially since Mr. Goldman offered to give up his claim to any of the damages he was awarded if Simpson would confess.
USA Today
Itsme (396dde) — 9/19/2007 @ 9:42 pm“Are the Goldmans interested in justice or money?”
In this case the only justice left to be had is monetary in nature. If the jury in the criminal trial hadn’t opted for nullification, it wouldn’t have come to the extremity of justice via civil damages.
clark smith (082270) — 9/19/2007 @ 11:06 pmHow can the Butcher of Brentwood make a $125,000 bail, yet the Goldmans can’t get one cent of their judgment against him?
clark smith (082270) — 9/19/2007 @ 11:13 pmYeah, all he did was murder their son. I have no idea why they keep hounding him and not let him live his life in peace on the Florida golf course. It is truly a mystery and the only possible explanation is that they are as bad as OJ is. Fantastic insite to cut thru the crap and view those bastard Goldman’s. Plus like some other commentator said, even if their son hadn’t been brutally murdered, he would never have given that much money to his parents. Why oh why can’t our justice system only reward the brutally murdered victims parents 10 or 15K and let that poor OJ (brutal murderer) live in peace. Makes sense to me.
buzz (e09efa) — 9/20/2007 @ 8:37 pmThanks, buzz. Sincerely.
moto (b706bd) — 9/20/2007 @ 11:06 pmnk’s right. There’s no justice like frontier justice.
Leviticus (48a70e) — 9/21/2007 @ 9:10 amSeriously.
Leviticus (48a70e) — 9/21/2007 @ 9:10 am“We ask people to accept money damages when a wrongful death occurs because we don’t want them to take a life for a life. However, in doing that, the system makes the survivors look greedy and self-centered. It’s not a good remedy but it’s the best we can do.
Comment by DRJ — 9/19/2007 @ 8:05 pm ”
I understand your point but the system has let it go too far in my opinion. About 20 years ago there was a horrible tragedy where a drunk driver in Ky hit a church bus, caught it on fire and killed about 20 kids.
Voice of Reason (10af7e) — 9/21/2007 @ 10:21 amHe lived, but had no assets, so the lawyers went after Ford, the maker of the bus, because the bus built under 1960’s regs didn’t have 1980’s features. It was owned by the church. Long story short is each family (except one which didn’t join the suit) received a million for each child.
How people can profit over the loss of a loved one is beyond me. In this case they played the “deep pockets” game and came out big.
I realize that part of it is the ambulance chasing lawyer types, who know if they don’t encourage them, someone else will. At some point people have to say enough, I refuse to contribute to the problem.