Establish wrote

Lavish wrote

Establish wrote But OJ Simpson on the other hand had a trial (which he was acquitted of, so technically you can't say he was a murderer)

There is a difference between being found not guilty and being innocent.

But he was being tried for murder. If he committed the murder, he would have been found guilty. But according to the jury he was found not guilty, so he didn't commit the murder (according to the judicial system).

So you're going to tell me that a innocent man has never been convicted or a guilty man has never been found not-guilty?

Lavish wrote

Establish wrote

Lavish wrote

Establish wrote But OJ Simpson on the other hand had a trial (which he was acquitted of, so technically you can't say he was a murderer)

There is a difference between being found not guilty and being innocent.

But he was being tried for murder. If he committed the murder, he would have been found guilty. But according to the jury he was found not guilty, so he didn't commit the murder (according to the judicial system).

So you're going to tell me that a innocent man has never been convicted or a guilty man has never been found not-guilty?

No, but you don't truly know if a guilty man is actually not guilty, that is just based off of your own opinion and interpretation of the evidence and the case.

Establish wrote No, but you don't truly know if a guilty man is actually not guilty, that is just based off of your own opinion and interpretation of the evidence and the case.

I don't think you get my point.

Just because someone is found not guilty by a jury doesn't mean he didn't do it.

Lavish wrote

Establish wrote No, but you don't truly know if a guilty man is actually not guilty, that is just based off of your own opinion and interpretation of the evidence and the case.

I don't think you get my point.

Just because someone is found not guilty by a jury doesn't mean he didn't do it.

True, but if you believe that someone is guilty despite what a court says, then it's your own opinion and you can't state it as fact.

Lavish wrote

Establish wrote No, but you don't truly know if a guilty man is actually not guilty, that is just based off of your own opinion and interpretation of the evidence and the case.

I don't think you get my point.

Just because someone is found not guilty by a jury doesn't mean he didn't do it.

I dont think you get his point lol.
He is saying we can't truly know if he is guilty or not.

TSNYC wrote How can this be true?

Piers Morgan didn't turn out to be the most hated so it must be fixed.

Lol also I have never heard of this guy thats hated so much maybe I am just missing out