hobie16 wrote:Shame! Interesting perspective.
That is an interesting point of view. I remember reading that something similar happenned to Lizzie Borden after she was acquitted of her parent's murders in the 19th century. The townspeople testified to her good character in order to prevent someone perceived as being of good ancestry from going to jail, but once the legal proceedings were over, she was shunned by the same people who kept her out of jail.
In the case of O.J., I don't think that anyone can go too far in shunning/shaming the man, since he seems to have no sense of wrongdoing, no sense of shame. Maybe it still is worthwhile in the most egregious cases; however, I would hesitate to bring it back over issues that might be considered victimless crimes (face it, some women do choose to become prostitutes, and some men choose to patronize them - if both are agreeable, what's the big deal?).
Thanks for the link - thoughtful reading.