SoCal Deek Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 I’m sure Buffalo Bill probably killed a boat load of Indians. Should we get rid of that too? And is that a red streak of blood on the bison logo? We need to get rid of that too! Looks like something for PETA to protest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreboding Posted August 5, 2019 Author Share Posted August 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: They can't take him off the wall because he is murderer, because in the eyes of the law he isn't. You might think the law is an ass but you either take the justice system with all of its flaws or you don't. You can't pick and choose when you like its decisions. I actually think the previous owner was given a pretty nice out when OJ was imprisoned for the later offenses. That was an opportunity to remove him from the wall and link it to that period of imprisoment as a rationale for the decision. I don't know whether anyone else on the wall has been imprisoned and whether that might have had a knock on effect? But having missed that opportunity I think it is difficult now. Good points. I imagine the Puegula's and the management team have debated this ad nauseum. Still the owners can do what they think it right, irrespective of the law. If they said this, would many condemn them? "We do not feel that OJ Simpson represents the values that this team holds dear. We strive to be a positive force in our community and with our fans. The Buffalo Bills are strong supporters of family and fair treatment of women and children. Being enshrined on the wall is about on the field accomplishment as well as recognition of players we think exemplify these values. We respect the judicial system but are exercising our rights as team owners. We have decided to remove his name from the Wall of Fame in our stadium." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nester Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 He was convicted of armed robbery and spent 9 years in prison. is armed robbery not enough to be excluded? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 1 minute ago, GunnerBill said: It doesn't override a not guilty verdict. We either believe in innocent until proven guilty or we don't. We don't get to pick and choose when we abide by a fundamental principle of our justice system. I'm not comparing the not guilty verdict in the criminal trial to the guilty verdict in the civil trial. I'm honing in on the civil trial and saying that the guilty verdict in that trial is enough. I believe in innocent until proven guilty. He was found not guilty because of a racist cop and an inept prosecution team. The jury did its job with what they were given. I'll never deny that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreboding Posted August 5, 2019 Author Share Posted August 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Gugny said: I believe in innocent until proven guilty. He was found not guilty because of a racist cop and an inept prosecution team. The jury did its job with what they were given. I'll never deny that. This exactly. We all know he was guilty, it is so stinking obvious. So our owners can do whatever the heck they want to eliminate the pariah from our team. Screw that guy, he sucks as a human being. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Gugny said: I'm not comparing the not guilty verdict in the criminal trial to the guilty verdict in the civil trial. I'm honing in on the civil trial and saying that the guilty verdict in that trial is enough. I believe in innocent until proven guilty. He was found not guilty because of a racist cop and an inept prosecution team. The jury did its job with what they were given. I'll never deny that. You can't ignore the criminal trial because it doesn't get the desired result. Why would give a civil court more weight than a criminal one when generally, it's the other way around? ..but this proves my point...removing him would create an endless debate about a lot of guys in the hall. Where exactly is the line because your view sounds a lot like, "I'll know it when I see it" Edited August 5, 2019 by jeremy2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 Just now, jeremy2020 said: You can't ignore the criminal trial because it doesn't get the desired result. Why would give a civil court more weight than a criminal one when generally, it's the other way around? I'll answer that with complete honesty. I want that scumbag's name off the wall and I think being found legally responsible for two peoples' deaths is enough to warrant it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Gugny said: I'm not comparing the not guilty verdict in the criminal trial to the guilty verdict in the civil trial. I'm honing in on the civil trial and saying that the guilty verdict in that trial is enough. I believe in innocent until proven guilty. He was found not guilty because of a racist cop and an inept prosecution team. The jury did its job with what they were given. I'll never deny that. But that is the sytem. I am not for punishing people for things that jutice system has declared them not guilty of. Sometimes that means you are in uncomfortable positions of saying a POS like OJ shouldn't be removed from a wall. But the fundamental principles of the justice system, even accepting all of its flaws, are much more important to me than the stomaching an uncomfortable outcome in a specific scenario. It is a cornerstone of our democracy that the courts are the ones who decide guilt and pass sentence on the guilty. I'd fight until my dying breath for that principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: But that is the sytem. I am not for punishing people for things that jutice system has declared them not guilty of. Sometimes that means you are in uncomfortable positions of saying a POS like OJ shouldn't be removed from a wall. But the fundamental principles of the justice system, even accepting all of its flaws, are much more important to me than the stomaching an uncomfortable outcome in a specific scenario. It is a cornerstone of our democracy that the courts are the ones who decide guilt and pass sentence on the guilty. I'd fight until my dying breath for that principle. I agree with you, Gunner. This is up to two people - Kim and Terry Pegula. I think it is irresponsible, insensitive and sending a very, very wrong message, to keep his name on the wall. They don't need a guilty verdict in a criminal trial in order to have the name taken down. And the fact that it's still up there, to me, is disgraceful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uticaclub Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 1 hour ago, foreboding said: No one in the whole world thinks he was innocent. Because he "got away with it" doesn't mean he has to get away with it on the WOF. Were you there? We all know what the evidence says, but no one knows for sure. If the Bills get a new stadium, his name probably won't be transferred. There's bigger issues then leaving one of the greatest RBs of all time name's on a WOF. How many other guys have committed crimes that we don't know about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerlyofCtown Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 2 hours ago, foreboding said: I have been a Bills fan my entire life. As a little kid I remember watching the Electric Company and OJ. Like the rest of us, I was appalled when he was accused of a double murder. Disbelief and heartbroken first, later outraged. We have since learned that Johnny Cochran manipulated evidence, the scene of the crime and, masterfully, got him acquitted. There is almost no one who thinks that this POS is innocent. What I still fail to understand is why is this guy still on the wall? There is nothing about the man that brings any Bills fan any joy. He is an embarrassment, and more importantly, a horrible pariah. He is out enjoying life in Florida, posting on Twitter, golfing: this man who murdered his kid's mother in cold blood. He ripped her open with a knife and almost took her poor friend's head off, a man in the wrong place at the wrong time. The wounds on Goldman suggest he tried to fight back. Who gives a crap if he broke records, he does not represent my team or my home city. He is the antithesis to all that is good. We won nothing with the man, he is no hero to anyone's kids. I'm actually shocked Kim Pegula has allowed him to remain on the Wall of Fame. That wall should have people who also represent the city well? Is it just about stats?? I mean we are talking about a cold blooded killer, a big strong man who executed his own wife! He took his kids mother. He robbed them of her. I see no reason why he should be on that wall. Please Bills, let's expunge this dirtbag murderer from any public recognition. Please. Dont know where youre gettin your info from. The only person that messed with evidence was the lead investigator. The defendants attorney doesnt have direct access to evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Gugny said: This is up to two people - Kim and Terry Pegula. I think it is irresponsible, insensitive and sending a very, very wrong message, to keep his name on the wall. They don't need a guilty verdict in a criminal trial in order to have the name taken down. And the fact that it's still up there, to me, is disgraceful. They don't. No. They could take anyone's name off the wall any time they like. That said, my personal view is that taking someone off the wall for an offense that a court of law found him not guilty of undermines the principles of the system. And as much as I dislike OJ being on the wall, and when on the broadcasts they capture his name in crwod shots it always makes me wince slightly, I care much more about upholding those principles of the justice system. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: They don't. No. They could take anyone's name off the wall any time they like. That said, my personal view is that taking someone off the wall for an offense that a court of law found him not guilty of undermines the principles of the system. And as much as I dislike OJ being on the wall, and when on the broadcasts they capture his name in crwod shots it always makes me wince slightly, I care much more about upholding those principles of the justice system. I am making a clear, distinct separation between our legal system and the Wall of Fame. I believe in those principles every bit as much as you do. I just don't think they are/need to be a factor in this decision. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 1 hour ago, foreboding said: I think it is worth mentioning until it is gone. Get that POS off the WOF. So how often will you mention it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Gugny said: I believe in those principles every bit as much as you do. I just don't think they are/need to be a factor in this decision. I think they are. I won't shed any tears if his name is removed. But I think it would be a decision based on feeling and not on principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceman_16 Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 2 hours ago, foreboding said: I have been a Bills fan my entire life. As a little kid I remember watching the Electric Company and OJ. Like the rest of us, I was appalled when he was accused of a double murder. Disbelief and heartbroken first, later outraged. We have since learned that Johnny Cochran manipulated evidence, the scene of the crime and, masterfully, got him acquitted. There is almost no one who thinks that this POS is innocent. What I still fail to understand is why is this guy still on the wall? There is nothing about the man that brings any Bills fan any joy. He is an embarrassment, and more importantly, a horrible pariah. He is out enjoying life in Florida, posting on Twitter, golfing: this man who murdered his kid's mother in cold blood. He ripped her open with a knife and almost took her poor friend's head off, a man in the wrong place at the wrong time. The wounds on Goldman suggest he tried to fight back. Who gives a crap if he broke records, he does not represent my team or my home city. He is the antithesis to all that is good. We won nothing with the man, he is no hero to anyone's kids. I'm actually shocked Kim Pegula has allowed him to remain on the Wall of Fame. That wall should have people who also represent the city well? Is it just about stats?? I mean we are talking about a cold blooded killer, a big strong man who executed his own wife! He took his kids mother. He robbed them of her. I see no reason why he should be on that wall. Please Bills, let's expunge this dirtbag murderer from any public recognition. Please. Maybe because he was never convicted of murder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobot Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 48 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said: The problem is then you open a can of worms on debating the virtue of everyone in HOF. A lot of them weren't very good people. Removing him would shine a big light on him and his removal. it would be an endless debate whether so and so should be removed from the Hall. ..and miscarriage of justice that it was, he wasn't convicted. So you'd have that debate of is it a legal conviction or public opinion? Sometimes, it's better to let sleeping dogs lie. I get what you're saying, but for the OJ case... Seems like he's a unique species can of worms. I feel sometimes it's okay pissing off some people if you know you're doing the right thing. Also, OJ was found guilty in the Civil case. The stakes for a Civil case however don't include jail time, just a lot of money. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSHMEAB Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 I'm able to compartmentalize athletic accomplishments and personal FAILURES. He's on the WOF because he's one of the greatest players in franchise history; perhaps the greatest. To each their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobot Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 2 hours ago, BullBuchanan said: Forgetting of course that he was found not guilty, like it or not. Found guilty in civil court. 1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said: Even though I firmly believe he did do it....he was found not guilty. I would think a guilty conviction would be the only thing that would un-enshrine him. The NFL never waits for a criminal conviction to hand out punishments to existing players. And he was found guilty in the civil case. Had to give lots of money to the victims family. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Gugny said: He did time for burglary, not for when he brutally murdered two innocent people. How would you feel if he was only arrested for the burglary? Again, please understand that if I owned the team he would be taken down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts