Youll be waiting a while, with your pathetic-ass need for attention.
lol, you're the one that picked an argument with me. At least have the sack to follow through with your bullshit.
You used to be cool, man. Now you're acting like a petulant manchild. ---
If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply.
as far as the murder thing goes, if you're referring to OJ, I don't think it was just because he was black, and if it really was a "black privilege", how come it only benefitted him? you could come up with a number of examples of rich white people that didn't serve time for their crimes
and how is asking for something a privilege, if you don't get it? how does that make sense to you?
Edit: at post 95
It was literally because he was black. Cochran wouldn't have taken the case otherwise, because he's a racist piece of shit. One of the jurors specifically stated they let him walk as revenge for Rodney King. Their ENTIRE CASE was that, even though every shred of evidence proved OJ and only OJ could have committed the murders, what REALLY happened was that a cop that said the n-word at some point in his life PLANTED the evidence to incriminate him, even though it would be physically impossible to have done so, JUST BECAUSE OJ WAS BLACK.
So how was that NOT because he was black? ---
'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen
Youll be waiting a while, with your pathetic-ass need for attention.
lol, you're the one that picked an argument with me. At least have the sack to follow through with your bullshit.
You used to be cool, man. Now you're acting like a petulant manchild.
This topic was dead for hours and now youre bumping it in the middle of the night out of boredom. I didnt pick an argument. I said you were being unnecessarily semantic. ---
We're whalers on the moon, we carry a harpoon, but there ain't no whales, so we tell tall tales, and sing our whaling tune.
as far as the murder thing goes, if you're referring to OJ, I don't think it was just because he was black, and if it really was a "black privilege", how come it only benefitted him? you could come up with a number of examples of rich white people that didn't serve time for their crimes
and how is asking for something a privilege, if you don't get it? how does that make sense to you?
Edit: at post 95
It was literally because he was black. Cochran wouldn't have taken the case otherwise, because he's a racist piece of shit. One of the jurors specifically stated they let him walk as revenge for Rodney King. Their ENTIRE CASE was that, even though every shred of evidence proved OJ and only OJ could have committed the murders, what REALLY happened was that a cop that said the n-word at some point in his life PLANTED the evidence to incriminate him, even though it would be physically impossible to have done so, JUST BECAUSE OJ WAS BLACK.
So how was that NOT because he was black?
the jury had enough reason to have a reasonable doubt, and you only vote guilty (ideally) if you feel the prosection's argument was strong enough, and testimonies and evidence support it.
the jury felt that evidence was tampered with, because of OJs race and/or celebrity, iirc ---
as far as the murder thing goes, if you're referring to OJ, I don't think it was just because he was black, and if it really was a "black privilege", how come it only benefitted him? you could come up with a number of examples of rich white people that didn't serve time for their crimes
and how is asking for something a privilege, if you don't get it? how does that make sense to you?
Edit: at post 95
It was literally because he was black. Cochran wouldn't have taken the case otherwise, because he's a racist piece of shit. One of the jurors specifically stated they let him walk as revenge for Rodney King. Their ENTIRE CASE was that, even though every shred of evidence proved OJ and only OJ could have committed the murders, what REALLY happened was that a cop that said the n-word at some point in his life PLANTED the evidence to incriminate him, even though it would be physically impossible to have done so, JUST BECAUSE OJ WAS BLACK.
So how was that NOT because he was black?
the jury had enough reason to have a reasonable doubt, and you only vote guilty (ideally) if you feel the prosection's argument was strong enough, and testimonies and evidence support it.
the jury felt that evidence was tampered with, because of OJs race and/or celebrity, iirc
It was his race. NOT his celebrity. At no point was the argument ever brought up that the LAPD planted evidence to frame OJ because he was a star running back and actor. And why was that? Oh, yeah - because his celebrity status meant that the LAPD bent over backwards to treat him with kid gloves, taking him into custody initially without cuffs, avoiding news media, even letting his attorney take him home WHEN HE'S ACCUSED OF DOUBLE MURDER.
And they didn't have "reasonable doubt." There is no "reasonable" way to make the conclusion that they did based solely on what was presented at the trial.
His exoneration was a clear example of black privilege, plain and simple. ---
'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen
Youll be waiting a while, with your pathetic-ass need for attention.
lol, you're the one that picked an argument with me. At least have the sack to follow through with your bullshit.
You used to be cool, man. Now you're acting like a petulant manchild.
This topic was dead for hours and now youre bumping it in the middle of the night out of boredom. I didnt pick an argument. I said you were being unnecessarily semantic.
And I said you should just say "you're right, I was wrong" especially after you decided to insult me after being proven wrong. ---
If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply.
It was literally because he was black. Cochran wouldn't have taken the case otherwise, because he's a racist piece of s***. One of the jurors specifically stated they let him walk as revenge for Rodney King. Their ENTIRE CASE was that, even though every shred of evidence proved OJ and only OJ could have committed the murders, what REALLY happened was that a cop that said the n-word at some point in his life PLANTED the evidence to incriminate him, even though it would be physically impossible to have done so, JUST BECAUSE OJ WAS BLACK.
Wow there is lot going on there.
First the cop in question did more then just say the N word once in his life. He Literally lied on stand. And there are tapes of him speaking about beating confessions about of people and host of other unsavory stuff. So in your world, a racist cop that states outright he breaks rights of black people is a part of Black Privilege.
"Among blacks who earn professional degrees, the impact on their chances of finding a job is nearly one-and-a-half times greater than it is for whites who earn the same degrees. In addition, African-Americans who have bachelors degrees earn $10,000 more a year than those who dont have a bachelors, compared to white men, who earn just $6,100 more than they would if they didnt have a bachelors. The value of a graduate degree is even greater for African-American men. Those who have advanced degrees make $21,000 more per year than grads with bachelors degrees while white men with advanced degrees make just $15,100 more, according to BLS and Census data and analysis by a group at the College Board."
That is pointing out how a degree helps black people. If a white guy makes 10 dollars right out of high school, and then make 12 out of college. That jump is going to be smaller then a black person who makes 5 dollars out of the high school, and 10 out of college. But the white person still has the advantage. Also dude you get argue in favor of racial profiling then suggest black people have privilege. ---
Bender: Well, everybody, I just saved a turtle. What have you done with your lives?
as far as the murder thing goes, if you're referring to OJ, I don't think it was just because he was black, and if it really was a "black privilege", how come it only benefitted him? you could come up with a number of examples of rich white people that didn't serve time for their crimes
and how is asking for something a privilege, if you don't get it? how does that make sense to you?
Edit: at post 95
It was literally because he was black. Cochran wouldn't have taken the case otherwise, because he's a racist piece of shit. One of the jurors specifically stated they let him walk as revenge for Rodney King. Their ENTIRE CASE was that, even though every shred of evidence proved OJ and only OJ could have committed the murders, what REALLY happened was that a cop that said the n-word at some point in his life PLANTED the evidence to incriminate him, even though it would be physically impossible to have done so, JUST BECAUSE OJ WAS BLACK.
So how was that NOT because he was black?
the jury had enough reason to have a reasonable doubt, and you only vote guilty (ideally) if you feel the prosection's argument was strong enough, and testimonies and evidence support it.
the jury felt that evidence was tampered with, because of OJs race and/or celebrity, iirc
It was his race. NOT his celebrity. At no point was the argument ever brought up that the LAPD planted evidence to frame OJ because he was a star running back and actor. And why was that? Oh, yeah - because his celebrity status meant that the LAPD bent over backwards to treat him with kid gloves, taking him into custody initially without cuffs, avoiding news media, even letting his attorney take him home WHEN HE'S ACCUSED OF DOUBLE MURDER.
And they didn't have "reasonable doubt." There is no "reasonable" way to make the conclusion that they did based solely on what was presented at the trial.
His exoneration was a clear example of black privilege, plain and simple.
I didn't say that the LAPD planted or mishandled evidence, but some believed that there was reason to suspect it, for whatever reasons.
anyway, I want you to seriously think about something - if "black privilege" allows black people, who would otherwise be sentenced to whatever crime, walk, then why doesn't that hold for almost the entire race? ---
Youll be waiting a while, with your pathetic-ass need for attention.
lol, you're the one that picked an argument with me. At least have the sack to follow through with your bullshit.
You used to be cool, man. Now you're acting like a petulant manchild.
This topic was dead for hours and now youre bumping it in the middle of the night out of boredom. I didnt pick an argument. I said you were being unnecessarily semantic.
And I said you should just say "you're right, I was wrong" especially after you decided to insult me after being proven wrong.
This could be so easy. ---
If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply.
as far as the murder thing goes, if you're referring to OJ, I don't think it was just because he was black, and if it really was a "black privilege", how come it only benefitted him? you could come up with a number of examples of rich white people that didn't serve time for their crimes
and how is asking for something a privilege, if you don't get it? how does that make sense to you?
Edit: at post 95
It was literally because he was black. Cochran wouldn't have taken the case otherwise, because he's a racist piece of shit. One of the jurors specifically stated they let him walk as revenge for Rodney King. Their ENTIRE CASE was that, even though every shred of evidence proved OJ and only OJ could have committed the murders, what REALLY happened was that a cop that said the n-word at some point in his life PLANTED the evidence to incriminate him, even though it would be physically impossible to have done so, JUST BECAUSE OJ WAS BLACK.
So how was that NOT because he was black?
the jury had enough reason to have a reasonable doubt, and you only vote guilty (ideally) if you feel the prosection's argument was strong enough, and testimonies and evidence support it.
the jury felt that evidence was tampered with, because of OJs race and/or celebrity, iirc
It was his race. NOT his celebrity. At no point was the argument ever brought up that the LAPD planted evidence to frame OJ because he was a star running back and actor. And why was that? Oh, yeah - because his celebrity status meant that the LAPD bent over backwards to treat him with kid gloves, taking him into custody initially without cuffs, avoiding news media, even letting his attorney take him home WHEN HE'S ACCUSED OF DOUBLE MURDER.
And they didn't have "reasonable doubt." There is no "reasonable" way to make the conclusion that they did based solely on what was presented at the trial.
His exoneration was a clear example of black privilege, plain and simple.
His exoneration was due to the prosecution absolutely fumbling their case against him, and failing to prove that he murdered his wife. Shut the fuck up you shitty ass clown and watch a documentary on the case. Learn something.
as far as the murder thing goes, if you're referring to OJ, I don't think it was just because he was black, and if it really was a "black privilege", how come it only benefitted him? you could come up with a number of examples of rich white people that didn't serve time for their crimes
and how is asking for something a privilege, if you don't get it? how does that make sense to you?
Edit: at post 95
It was literally because he was black. Cochran wouldn't have taken the case otherwise, because he's a racist piece of shit. One of the jurors specifically stated they let him walk as revenge for Rodney King. Their ENTIRE CASE was that, even though every shred of evidence proved OJ and only OJ could have committed the murders, what REALLY happened was that a cop that said the n-word at some point in his life PLANTED the evidence to incriminate him, even though it would be physically impossible to have done so, JUST BECAUSE OJ WAS BLACK.
So how was that NOT because he was black?
the jury had enough reason to have a reasonable doubt, and you only vote guilty (ideally) if you feel the prosection's argument was strong enough, and testimonies and evidence support it.
the jury felt that evidence was tampered with, because of OJs race and/or celebrity, iirc
It was his race. NOT his celebrity. At no point was the argument ever brought up that the LAPD planted evidence to frame OJ because he was a star running back and actor. And why was that? Oh, yeah - because his celebrity status meant that the LAPD bent over backwards to treat him with kid gloves, taking him into custody initially without cuffs, avoiding news media, even letting his attorney take him home WHEN HE'S ACCUSED OF DOUBLE MURDER.
And they didn't have "reasonable doubt." There is no "reasonable" way to make the conclusion that they did based solely on what was presented at the trial.
His exoneration was a clear example of black privilege, plain and simple.
His exoneration was due to the prosecution absolutely fumbling their case against him, and failing to prove that he murdered his wife. Shut the fuck up you shitty ass clown and watch a documentary on the case. Learn something.
I did watch quite a few documentaries. I watched the events unfold LIVE, dude.
While the prosecution made plenty of mistakes, one thing they didn't do was mishandle the facts of the case, or the evidence. OJ's attorney made a claim of racism that had absolutely nothing to do with the case, and that's why he got off. EXIT INTERVIEWS WITH THE JURORS PROVE THIS. ---
'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen
