Originally Posted by itsstillmatt
Nobody gave a shot about the OJ trial other than as an odd public spectacle. A pop culture event. La was too wrapped up in the aftermath of the Rodney king and Reginald Denny tragedies to give a shot about orenthal.
And name back, of course it was a tragedy. Nobody disputes that and I haven't seen anybody do so at all.
No, I agree, I think most everyone does consider it tragic on some level. I just think that sometimes that gets lost in the vitriol of political debate, and that it's sad to lose sight of the fact at the core of this event--that an innocent boy on the verge of adulthood lost his life unnecessarily. I think we do all agree on that when we are brought back to it, when we are asked to remember it.
I've seen people, and I don't mean specifically SF (though somewhat in this thread), express glib sentiments about the trial that I find troubling. A sense of glee at the verdict that seems incongruous with the fundamental nature of the event--even if you believe he was not guilty (as I do, by the law), it seems wrong to be excited or gleeful about anything in this case. Satisfied that the legal system worked as it was supposed to? Sure. Relieved that a media narrative didn't overtake due process? I'm fine with that. But sometimes it can veer into an ugly territory that makes me uncomfortable.
And I guess I'm just rubbed the wrong way by people who can't understand why people were mad about this, why people felt the need for a trial, why people are outraged. Even if you aren't, you should be able to respect the position, because it is not an unreasonable one.