OJ tossed out of Louisville steakhouse on eve of derby...

[ninetoone]

Hats off to the owner of this place...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070509/...people_simpson

[timmgirvan]

UH...can I have that to go??

[Cajungator26]

Probably not the smartest thing to do since everything in today's society has to do with race.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Probably not the smartest thing to do since everything in today's society has to do with race.

There's always the sign above the door....we reserve the right to refuse service!

[ninetoone]

sometimes it's not about being smart...& it was not about race

[Danzig]

good for him!

can't believe anyone would want that guys autograph.

[Cajungator26]

I'm not saying it did have anything to do with race... just saying that it's (of course) going to be played that way by OJ and his lawyers.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Probably not the smartest thing to do to a man capable of decapitating healthy adults with a knife.

Pretty sure he snuck up behind them, being the punk he is!

What a racist prick.

[Scurlogue Champ]

I think it was a c u n t move no matter who it was.

No one knows if The Juice is guilty or not. Least of all Jeff Ruby.

Stupid stupid c u ntish thing to do.

Publicity stunt for the classless

[Samarta]

Let me preface this with I think he's guilty, I don't know how he looks in the mirror, much less his kids everyday, and he will pay at some point for what he did. Now that that's out of the way, the restaraunt owner was wrong. It's a public place. The right to refuse service angle does not work here. The guy came in with a group and tried to have dinner in a public place. There was no ruckus, nothing says they were disruptive, you can speculate all you want about the race card, it simply doesn't matter. The only way this guy could pull it off without being wrong was to close for the evening. Oh but wait, it's the busiest night of the year in Louisville, he can't do that. So what should he have done? He should have served the party and gotten over himself.

[Danzig]

the restaurant is open to the public, but by the same token, the man as owner has the right to refuse service. he did so, whether he ends up paying a price for that or not--it was his call.

but to inject race into this imo is dead wrong. the guy had a problem with oj because of what the man did, not what his color is--and to continually bring up race, regardless of whether it is at issue, is like peter crying wolf. it doesn't always apply, but when it does, is it somehow cheapened because there are so many times it is mentioned without reason??

[Samarta]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the restaurant is open to the public, but by the same token, the man as owner has the right to refuse service. he did so, whether he ends up paying a price for that or not--it was his call.

but to inject race into this imo is dead wrong. the guy had a problem with oj because of what the man did, not what his color is--and to continually bring up race, regardless of whether it is at issue, is like peter crying wolf. it doesn't always apply, but when it does, is it somehow cheapened because there are so many times it is mentioned without reason??

You know, if I were the restaurant owner, there is no way in hell I would want to take a chance in court on that one.....because this is no different than him standing in front of his place saying "you get in, you don't get in.." Guilty or not guilty isn't the question here....the guy was wrong.

[timmgirvan]

They just had the owner on the news. and he was asked if it was racial with OJ. He said no..because as soon as OJ and his people cleared out, Michael Jordan and his party of 30 were there to fill the chairs!

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Samarta

You know, if I were the restaurant owner, there is no way in hell I would want to take a chance in court on that one.....because this is no different than him standing in front of his place saying "you get in, you don't get in.." Guilty or not guilty isn't the question here....the guy was wrong.

Sam: you know that's wrong! that's the same way you were allowed to go to all those hot clubs with the heavy security

[Samarta]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

Sam: you know that's wrong! that's the same way you were allowed to go to all those hot clubs with the heavy security

amazing what $20 did 20 years ago...

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Samarta

You know, if I were the restaurant owner, there is no way in hell I would want to take a chance in court on that one.....because this is no different than him standing in front of his place saying "you get in, you don't get in.." Guilty or not guilty isn't the question here....the guy was wrong.

no, he wasn't wrong. now, if he made a habit of this--well, he sure wouldn't be in business long. but again, it's his establishment, and if he wants to refuse to serve a person, or a party, he has that right. just like anyone who is offended by his actions has the right not to frequent his restaurant.

[Samarta]

[quote=Danzig]no, he wasn't wrong. now, if he made a habit of this--well, he sure wouldn't be in business long. but again, it's his establishment, and if he wants to refuse to serve a person, or a party, he has that right. just like anyone who is offended by his actions has the right not to frequent his restaurant.[/QUOTE

He is entitled to beliefs, but he was absolutely wrong by refusing to serve him based on those beliefs and I would be amazed if any court in the land didn't see it that way as well. Hell I could argue that case and win. Again, I think O.J. is a p.o.s. and the guiltiest man alive, but he was found not guilty and has a right to eat wherever he wants...