Yale Galanter (OJs attorney)

[black_rabbit]

[QUOTE=Hampshire]

However, OJs attorney, Yale Galanter, it seems wants to play the race card and say the incident was about race.
You dumb cock sucker. You give black people with legitimate gripes about being discriminated against a bad name. When there is real discrimination going on and there are people who devote their lives to fighting it and you come along and cry wolf you just set everyone back years and years.
The black community should lynch you themselves for making such an asinine comment. Dumb ass.
[/QUOTE]

I’m no fan of OJ, but given what a giant jackass Jeff Ruby is, this isn’t entirely out of left field.

Cincinnati used to have a giant jazz/soul/R&B festival in the old Riverfront Stadium every year (the “Ujima Cincibration” referenced in the article I linked). There were some big names - I seem to remember both Aretha and P-Funk playing one year.

This event was rather unique for Cincinnati, in that it attracted tens of thousands of well-to-do black people from all over the country.

In 2000, Ruby, among a handful of other restauranteurs, decided to close his Downtown eatery for the weekend, without making any announcement in advance or giving any reason why.

Many of the aforementioned well-to-do black people were fairly pissed off when they discovered that their choices in dining were thus limited during their visit.

When the inevitable accusations of racism started flying in the local media after the closings came to light, Ruby defended his actions by saying, essentially, and I’m paraphrasing “I’m not racist - this was a business decision. Black people don’t tip.”

I knew this was bullshit. The previous year, I had been employed by the local Crowne Plaza, and helped out the valets during the weekend of the festival. I cleared over a thousand bucks in tips over twenty hours from the same demographic that Ruby sells to - people who buy overpriced hotel rooms, overpriced cars, and overpriced steaks. Every last one of my guests that weekend was black.

OJ may be a shithead, but Ruby is a fuckhead. They deserve each other.

[Jackmannii]

[QUOTE=Slacker]
I’d be willing to bet black and white murderers alike have eaten there without incident.
[/QUOTE]
I like that as the basis of an ad campaign:

“They’ll KILL to eat at the Steakhouse!!!”

Reminds of a murder I once covered as a reporter. One family member killed another because the victim ate a Little Debbie pastry belonging to the perpetrator. A homicide detective joked that the incident could generate an effective advertising slogan: “Little Debbie - the snack cake to die for”.

[Guinastasia]

[QUOTE=friedo]
Under the law, His Juiciness is not a murderer, since he was acquitted. It would be interesting to know if the restaurant has discriminated against white people found liable for wrongful death, though.

But I believe the restaurant owner stated as his reasons that he was disgusted by OJ’s attempted book deal, and his failure to pay on his civil judgments, not for being a murderer.
[/QUOTE]

No, under the law, he was found “Not Guilty”, meaning it couldn’t be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Oh, and I believe there are some different criteria for criminal courts and civil courts.

[Shodan]

[QUOTE=Kimstu]
Oh yeah, I know that blowing a secret agent’s cover isn’t exactly on a par with killing people!

I just found it a little funny that in the one case, you seemed completely indifferent as to whether Rove had actually acted unethically; all that mattered to you was whether there was adequate evidence to arraign him of acting illegally.

Whereas in the other case, you’re completely indifferent as to whether Simpson is legally guilty or innocent; all that matters to you is your conviction that he actually acted unethically, “regardless of what the jury said”.

I suppose it would be too unkind of me to remark “Neener neener neener”?
[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah? Well, Clinton lied under oath, so there!

I am guessing that this is done more or less in jest - am I wrong? This kind of hijack seems so - well, petty, sort of.

Do you think this makes a serious point, or are you just trying to zing me?

Regards,
Shodan

[Kimstu]

@Shodan

I am guessing that this is done more or less in jest - am I wrong?

Nope, that’s what the winky smilies and the use of the word “funny” were meant to convey! No serious attempt was being made to undermine or rebuke your outrage at OJ.

[Xema]

[QUOTE=sleestak]
The fact that O.J. was sued for wrongful death, and lost, pretty much proves that the innocent verdict for murder isn’t a sheild.
[/QUOTE]

But note that there’s no such verdict as “innocent” - “not guilty” is the best you can do.

[Shodan]

[QUOTE=Kimstu]
Nope, that’s what the winky smilies and the use of the word “funny” were meant to convey! No serious attempt was being made to undermine or rebuke your outrage at OJ.
[/QUOTE]

OK, sorry to have missed it. My hackles are a bit higher than they ought to be.

Regards,
Shodan

[Loach]

[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]
Neither did OJ or Robert Blake if you want to get technical about it.
[/QUOTE]

I was talking about a different technicality. OJ and Blake murdered people. They were found not guilty for some reason. Manson was never accused of killing anyone. He was convicted of ordering peoples deaths, not actually doing the deed.

[Cheesesteak]

[QUOTE=Happy Scrappy Hero Pup]
You could also award him punitive damages as a way to “convince” OJ not to go around accusing people, but no, you could not base the amount of punitive damages on your belief that OJ killed people.
[/QUOTE]
Excellent idea, if he’s hit with a half a million dollar judgement, he’d now owe $33,500,000 in damages that he won’t pay.

Actually, I find this rather frightening. OJ has money from his pension that seems* to be judgement proof, so he can hammer anyone who gets in his way with a lawsuit, knowing that a countersuit is a waste of time. This restaurant owner probably can’t even countersue for his legal expenses and actually see the money.

*I hope I’m wrong about this, and that there’s some reason the Goldman money isn’t getting paid, that won’t necessarily apply to other people who sue OJ.

[Annie-Xmas]

OJ? With a steak knife? Whenever I hear people say “OJ was innocent” I ask them if they would be willing to be in the same room with him and a knife.

[Tuckerfan]

[QUOTE=Loach]
I was talking about a different technicality. OJ and Blake murdered people. They were found not guilty for some reason. Manson was never accused of killing anyone. He was convicted of ordering peoples deaths, not actually doing the deed.
[/QUOTE]

IIRC, an informant claimed that Manson did murder someone, just not at the crime scenes he’s famous for.

[Happy_Scrappy_Hero_Pup]

[QUOTE= Cheesesteak]
Excellent idea, if he’s hit with a half a million dollar judgement, he’d now owe $33,500,000 in damages that he won’t pay.
[/QUOTE]

Hey, man, I’m just listing possibilities.
Don’t kill the messenger.

[sub]Hah! KILL the messenger! Get it? Because OJ kills people? Hah! I SLAY me! Did you see that? I did it AGAIN! I piggybacked one joke about killing on top of another! Thank you! I am here all the week! Try the veal! It’s excellent! And don’t forget to tip your waitress![/sub]

[Papermache_Prince]

Courttv.com - AP news item
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — O.J. Simpson won’t take legal action against a Louisville restaurateur who booted from a steakhouse on the eve of the Kentucky Derby after all, Simpson’s attorney said Saturday. . . .

. . .Simpson’s lawyer, Yale Galanter, said Ruby is using the episode for publicity.

“If we had our druthers, this would have died that night and been over,” Galanter said from his Florida office. “We are not pushing it.”

Your “druthers”? It would have died that night if OJ had just dropped it then.