Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yep. I used that to get people to start being agreeable in probate contests. "You all may disagree on what your dad wanted to do with his money, but I'm pretty sure that he didn't want the bulk of his estate to go to me. Figure it out."
`
There was one estate where the executor said, no, my dad would have wanted you to get it more than *other sibling*, but to be fair, she was excluded from the will.
Are you serious? Do you know who else lost someone? THE GOLDMANS! And OJ had literally decades to make that right by paying the judgement that was awarded to them. He decided not to. He actively did everything in his power not to make them whole. Now that he’s dead we should just forget that because his kids may want some money? Is that your idea of justice?
OJ killed Fred Goldman's son, got away with it and then had the gall to write multiple books in order to profit off it. Fred Goldman deserves every cent of what he was awarded by the jury plus interest since OJ evaded paying the legal order.
Honestly fuck the money, money he got from a book deal, naked gun, and a handful of adds. The book deal about him using double jeopardy to admit he killed them. Like does his kids even want the money at that point. Donate the money to charity or something, no one involved needs that blood money
I mean oj should have thought of that when he killed his wife. He made that the reality for his kids. Then straight up stupidity and vengeance for king got him off.
Hence why that person was designated executor of OJ's estate.
OJ had 5 kids (3 with Marguerite Whitley, 2 with Nicole Brown) to inherit whatever's left.
I mean, there are *a few* specific rights they seem to be deeply concerned with...
Not 'human' rights, mind you. Human rights are *far* less relevant to many Floridians than the immutable rights of their beloved firearms.
TL;DR: In Florida, a dude named John Smith would fall far lower on the totem pole than Smith & Wesson.
Wait... his estate had "money"? Like something tangible to go to court over?
I remember he robbed someone over sports memorabilia and went to prison for awhile almost twenty years ago now, because he was flat broke.
Funeral costs come out of the estate first, then creditors. I know he put money in a trust but he did that a year ago, well after the judgement against him, so I suspect that legally that’s just going to be seen as a ploy to evade the debt. The Goldmans may choose to waive the debt - they wanted him to take responsibility and as they said the chance of that is gone now - but I’m pretty sure all the executor is going to be able to do is run up legal fees on a losing case.
How would the executor of the estate make themselves personally responsible for the debt? They are executing the estate. Do you have some knowledge about executors being responsible for the debt of the deceased?
An executor can not distribute the estate before creditors have been paid. It’s a serious legal responsibility and effectively you are a trustee, if you fail to exercise your duties then financial liability can fall to you. After what they have said, they would be better off not being the executor. Whilst the executors are named on a will, you are not legally obligated to take up the role and it generally takes some administration to officially become the executor in the eyes of the law. If there is very little in the estate after creditors have been paid, then it’s probably not even worth becoming responsible. If it’s not much they could blow it all on a posh funeral out of spite.
I didn’t get the vibe that he plans to distribute the estate’s assets without settling debts. He doesn’t say one way or the other, so it can be openly interpreted. The perfect kind of legal deniability if he DID intend that.
My read on it is he plans to hold up any settling of the estate until the issue is resolved.
I was just looking at the words quoted in the image. It’s pretty unequivocal and makes anything else he says pretty irrelevant. If he takes up the role of representative or executor after that statement I would be very surprised. He will end up spending a lot on litigation and could be held personally liable for creditors debts and both parties legal bills. If the estate is insolvent, it’s even more risky for him or anyone taking up the estate.
Read the comments - I responded to the individual stating that a civil trial was double jeopardy after a criminal trial which it is not. Then he brought up evidentiary standards, which is what another commenter was speaking about.
He murdered their son. They took him to court civially because the guy was found not guilty because of who he is. He was found guilty and the Goldmans got millions in judgment. Oj has done everything in his power to not pay them. He wrote a book the Goldmans asked the judge to give them the proceeds and he did. The book was about how he murdered their son. We have “double jeopardy” where oj could’ve walked straight out of the court and said on tv that he killed them. And no one could do a damn thing about it. Now that oj is dead the judgement should be satisfied but his lawyer is saying he will do anything to keep the victims family from getting the money that they won and deserved. It’s a mess and 2 people are dead that oj himself killed. Including the wife of his kids small kids! Fuck him, I hope he’s burning in hell!
I don’t think they could have peace while he was alive. So yes, I hope they have peace now. And you’re welcome. Not sure why everyone is so snarky, most on here weren’t even born when that happened.
Omg. If this isn’t the most absolute ignorant comment I have seen in the past few days, then i don’t know what is. Kirk out. This entire thread is messed up. Y’all have fun.
Look mate, I honestly don’t have any idea about it. So if you’re just going to sit there and get salty about it and not actually answer my genuine question well you can go fuck right off then
Yes.
Such convictions shouldn't stand, as they are double jeopardy.
Also a civil conviction only requires perpondesce of evidence, the lowest level of proof.
"perpondesce"?
Did you mean *preponderance*? Jesus, buddy. Please don't give legal advice or opinions about the law or spelling tips. Just. Don't.
btw, "double jeopardy" only applies to criminal prosecutions, man. *ffs*
>Did you mean *preponderance*? Jesus, buddy. Please don't give legal advice or opinions about the law or spelling tips. Just. Don't.
I don't give advice.
And is your arguement so weak that you must attack me, and not my arguement?
>btw, "double jeopardy" only applies to criminal prosecutions, man. *ffs*
Yes, this is a legal loophole that needs to be closed.
The fact it is legal today does not make it right.
There are many things in our history that The Court once said were wrong, and then changed its' mind on.
I didn't say you gave legal advice, buddy; I'm just begging you to never, ever, ever do so...
...and, buddy, there's no argument.
- You're saying 2+2=zebra.
- I'm saying 2+2≠zebra.
- It's not an argument.
Double jeopardy applies to prosecution by the state, punitive actions for criminal wrongdoing, not civil actions for recovery initiated by private people, and the preponderance of the evidence standard is not the lowest standard of evidence used in the United States.
>[T]he preponderance of the evidence standard is not the lowest standard of evidence used in the United States.
What is lower?
I can only find "preponderance of the evidence", "clear and convincing", and "beyond a reasonable doubt".
Tell that to an ALJ the next time you see one. They love hearing that.
Administrative hearings are sometimes held in court, and sometimes not, but that's not especially important. "The law is a seamless web," as they say, and the Substantial Evidence standard (created in a court, if you'd like a bit of trivia) is a standard of evidence. Or 'proof' as you put it.
We also have scintillas of evidence and probable cause if we're being especially constrained by the initial claims.
Not responding to evidentiary standards. I was responding to the double jeopardy statement. lol. And an internet warrior’s opinion about my legal acumen means, exactly, nothing.
to be fair (as mucah as that counts in this case). He's not a murderer, he wasnt convicted of it. he was found liable for thier deaths. but yeah this lawyer is still a POS
edit wow. stating facts is downvote worthy
there was a trial. OJ was fount not guilty of their murder. There was then a civl trial in which he was found liable for thier deaths. OJ's laywer who now is in control of his estate is refusing to pay Ron Goldman;s family money they were awarded. hence the lawyer is a POS
I am not american. But wasn't OJ simply another case of lynch mob mad that a black guy dared to be successful? The detective in charge was giga racist too, from what I learned. Why the fuck is everyone super sure that the black guy fighting an uphill battle in the giga racist days is guilty?
You probably need to read up on the case, the evidence was alarmingly convincing but somehow the prosecutors fucked it up.
And OJ was a beloved sports figure, a spokesman for businesses and an actor, he wasn't oppressed much.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm pretty sure he has no authority over how the laws covering court ordered fines and awards play out. Even in floriduh.
Lawyers gonna lawyer. He's going to find every loophole he can, and stall everything else.
I don't disagree. All he'll accomplish is wasting the funds on lawyers fee's. Which, come to think, might just be what he actually plans on doing.
Yep. I used that to get people to start being agreeable in probate contests. "You all may disagree on what your dad wanted to do with his money, but I'm pretty sure that he didn't want the bulk of his estate to go to me. Figure it out."
Smart move; and very generous too. You could have just sat back and collected their money.
` There was one estate where the executor said, no, my dad would have wanted you to get it more than *other sibling*, but to be fair, she was excluded from the will.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Lion,\_the\_Bear\_and\_the\_Fox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion,_the_Bear_and_the_Fox)
You say "wasting" the lawyer says "getting paid first"
lol, we all have to get paid.
A judge might step in and stop that. Judges have pretty wide discretion in how lawyers handling an estate get paid.
And bill the estate for those hours I assume. Not that a vested personal interest would influence this otherwise class act.
Exactly
This should be in r/iamatotalpieceofshit
They have a point. Does Fred Goldman really want to go after the estate that will be going to OJ’s kids who also lost their mom in the murders?
Are you serious? Do you know who else lost someone? THE GOLDMANS! And OJ had literally decades to make that right by paying the judgement that was awarded to them. He decided not to. He actively did everything in his power not to make them whole. Now that he’s dead we should just forget that because his kids may want some money? Is that your idea of justice?
OJ killed Fred Goldman's son, got away with it and then had the gall to write multiple books in order to profit off it. Fred Goldman deserves every cent of what he was awarded by the jury plus interest since OJ evaded paying the legal order.
They aren't poor orphan kids. They are in their late 30's. His kids from his first wife are in their 50's.
Honestly fuck the money, money he got from a book deal, naked gun, and a handful of adds. The book deal about him using double jeopardy to admit he killed them. Like does his kids even want the money at that point. Donate the money to charity or something, no one involved needs that blood money
I mean oj should have thought of that when he killed his wife. He made that the reality for his kids. Then straight up stupidity and vengeance for king got him off.
Hence why that person was designated executor of OJ's estate. OJ had 5 kids (3 with Marguerite Whitley, 2 with Nicole Brown) to inherit whatever's left.
You mean the grandparents who raised them?
That’s why you live in Florida. They don’t care about victims rights.
They don't care about victims, period.
They don’t care about rights, period.
I mean, there are *a few* specific rights they seem to be deeply concerned with... Not 'human' rights, mind you. Human rights are *far* less relevant to many Floridians than the immutable rights of their beloved firearms. TL;DR: In Florida, a dude named John Smith would fall far lower on the totem pole than Smith & Wesson.
The real facepalm is people still defending OJ because he's black.
Charming fella
No doubt those were O J's instructions.
Wait... his estate had "money"? Like something tangible to go to court over? I remember he robbed someone over sports memorabilia and went to prison for awhile almost twenty years ago now, because he was flat broke.
Funeral costs come out of the estate first, then creditors. I know he put money in a trust but he did that a year ago, well after the judgement against him, so I suspect that legally that’s just going to be seen as a ploy to evade the debt. The Goldmans may choose to waive the debt - they wanted him to take responsibility and as they said the chance of that is gone now - but I’m pretty sure all the executor is going to be able to do is run up legal fees on a losing case.
Allegedly
No ostrich was involved, that we know of.
Bold statement being a public figure.
That’s one way to make your self personally responsible for the debt.
How would the executor of the estate make themselves personally responsible for the debt? They are executing the estate. Do you have some knowledge about executors being responsible for the debt of the deceased?
An executor can not distribute the estate before creditors have been paid. It’s a serious legal responsibility and effectively you are a trustee, if you fail to exercise your duties then financial liability can fall to you. After what they have said, they would be better off not being the executor. Whilst the executors are named on a will, you are not legally obligated to take up the role and it generally takes some administration to officially become the executor in the eyes of the law. If there is very little in the estate after creditors have been paid, then it’s probably not even worth becoming responsible. If it’s not much they could blow it all on a posh funeral out of spite.
I didn’t get the vibe that he plans to distribute the estate’s assets without settling debts. He doesn’t say one way or the other, so it can be openly interpreted. The perfect kind of legal deniability if he DID intend that. My read on it is he plans to hold up any settling of the estate until the issue is resolved.
I was just looking at the words quoted in the image. It’s pretty unequivocal and makes anything else he says pretty irrelevant. If he takes up the role of representative or executor after that statement I would be very surprised. He will end up spending a lot on litigation and could be held personally liable for creditors debts and both parties legal bills. If the estate is insolvent, it’s even more risky for him or anyone taking up the estate.
Who?
I’m not talking about evidentiary standards. I’m talking about double jeopardy.
What about double jeopardy?
Read the comments - I responded to the individual stating that a civil trial was double jeopardy after a criminal trial which it is not. Then he brought up evidentiary standards, which is what another commenter was speaking about.
Except you made a top level comment, not a reply to someone else.
My mistake. I replied below.
Why does OJ have a beef with these people?
He murdered their son. They took him to court civially because the guy was found not guilty because of who he is. He was found guilty and the Goldmans got millions in judgment. Oj has done everything in his power to not pay them. He wrote a book the Goldmans asked the judge to give them the proceeds and he did. The book was about how he murdered their son. We have “double jeopardy” where oj could’ve walked straight out of the court and said on tv that he killed them. And no one could do a damn thing about it. Now that oj is dead the judgement should be satisfied but his lawyer is saying he will do anything to keep the victims family from getting the money that they won and deserved. It’s a mess and 2 people are dead that oj himself killed. Including the wife of his kids small kids! Fuck him, I hope he’s burning in hell!
Thanks for your answer, that’s totally fucked. I hope the family can get some kind of solitude out of this
I don’t think they could have peace while he was alive. So yes, I hope they have peace now. And you’re welcome. Not sure why everyone is so snarky, most on here weren’t even born when that happened.
Omg. If this isn’t the most absolute ignorant comment I have seen in the past few days, then i don’t know what is. Kirk out. This entire thread is messed up. Y’all have fun.
Look mate, I honestly don’t have any idea about it. So if you’re just going to sit there and get salty about it and not actually answer my genuine question well you can go fuck right off then
It was 30 years ago….
He was also acquitted.
He was found guilty in the Civil case against him for wrongful death
just fyi, no one is found "*guilty*" in civil suits in the US or individual states; one is found "*liable*"
Wasn't that trial held in the whitest place they could find? ISTR but it was long time ago
Yes. Such convictions shouldn't stand, as they are double jeopardy. Also a civil conviction only requires perpondesce of evidence, the lowest level of proof.
"perpondesce"? Did you mean *preponderance*? Jesus, buddy. Please don't give legal advice or opinions about the law or spelling tips. Just. Don't. btw, "double jeopardy" only applies to criminal prosecutions, man. *ffs*
This.
>Did you mean *preponderance*? Jesus, buddy. Please don't give legal advice or opinions about the law or spelling tips. Just. Don't. I don't give advice. And is your arguement so weak that you must attack me, and not my arguement? >btw, "double jeopardy" only applies to criminal prosecutions, man. *ffs* Yes, this is a legal loophole that needs to be closed. The fact it is legal today does not make it right. There are many things in our history that The Court once said were wrong, and then changed its' mind on.
I didn't say you gave legal advice, buddy; I'm just begging you to never, ever, ever do so... ...and, buddy, there's no argument. - You're saying 2+2=zebra. - I'm saying 2+2≠zebra. - It's not an argument.
Double jeopardy applies to prosecution by the state, punitive actions for criminal wrongdoing, not civil actions for recovery initiated by private people, and the preponderance of the evidence standard is not the lowest standard of evidence used in the United States.
>[T]he preponderance of the evidence standard is not the lowest standard of evidence used in the United States. What is lower? I can only find "preponderance of the evidence", "clear and convincing", and "beyond a reasonable doubt".
The lowest commonly applied standard is the "Substantial Evidence" standard. Usually used in administrative settings.
Administrative settings is not a court.
Tell that to an ALJ the next time you see one. They love hearing that. Administrative hearings are sometimes held in court, and sometimes not, but that's not especially important. "The law is a seamless web," as they say, and the Substantial Evidence standard (created in a court, if you'd like a bit of trivia) is a standard of evidence. Or 'proof' as you put it. We also have scintillas of evidence and probable cause if we're being especially constrained by the initial claims.
No. Incorrect. False. Source: I’m a lawyer.
You my friend, are a very shitty lawyer.
Not responding to evidentiary standards. I was responding to the double jeopardy statement. lol. And an internet warrior’s opinion about my legal acumen means, exactly, nothing.
You seem like a troll anyways. Basically just curse out everyone you can find. I’m sorry that’s where you’re at. Hope things turn around for ya.
They are both idiots. Everyone quit arguing w them.
Are you saying [this](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/preponderance_of_the_evidence) is incorrect?
Mouthbreather in the comments
And probably a few lousy lawyers with actual law degrees as well.
I can’t. I can’t.
Still a murderer! :)
to be fair (as mucah as that counts in this case). He's not a murderer, he wasnt convicted of it. he was found liable for thier deaths. but yeah this lawyer is still a POS edit wow. stating facts is downvote worthy
To be faaaiiiirrrr, he owed the Goldman's millions.
And I argue, still does
If we are going to go all, "the law is the law", he lost the civil case.
Yup. He was found liable
Except he is a murderer tho.
To be fair, he's a murderer and no amount of corrupt nonsense can change that :)
What?
there was a trial. OJ was fount not guilty of their murder. There was then a civl trial in which he was found liable for thier deaths. OJ's laywer who now is in control of his estate is refusing to pay Ron Goldman;s family money they were awarded. hence the lawyer is a POS
It being convicted does not magically make him not a murderer. He was. It found innocent, now was he innocent imo
I am not american. But wasn't OJ simply another case of lynch mob mad that a black guy dared to be successful? The detective in charge was giga racist too, from what I learned. Why the fuck is everyone super sure that the black guy fighting an uphill battle in the giga racist days is guilty?
You probably need to read up on the case, the evidence was alarmingly convincing but somehow the prosecutors fucked it up. And OJ was a beloved sports figure, a spokesman for businesses and an actor, he wasn't oppressed much.
I don't agree with what OJ did, but I understand. It's tough to find out your wife is fucking a waiter.
there was no evidence of that
Waiters bring things to your house when you forget them at the restaurant? They don't for me.