O.J. Simpson recently expressed his inability to understand the sentencing differences for two cases held at the same courthouse, addressing his own past conviction and that of former Raiders footballer, Henry Ruggs.
OJ Simpson blasts Henry Ruggs III sentencing
Henry Ruggs, once a promising star for the Raiders, was sentenced Wednesday to a term of 3 to 10 years following a tragic incident where he drove at speeds exceeding 155 MPH under the influence. The accident took the life of 23-year-old Tina Tintor and her dog. Ruggs, who had stood up to apologize in court, could be free by the age of 27 if he is granted parole at the earliest opportunity.
Speaking to social media, Simpson, posted a video on Twitter expressing his inability to make sense of the sentencing Ruggs received versus his own. “Driving at such a high speed, taking innocent lives, and then only receiving 3 to 10 years?”
The comparison Simpson is referring to is his own sentencing back in 2008. He was handed a sentence of 9 to 33 years for an armed robbery incident in Las Vegas, where nobody was injured. The incident involved Simpson attempting to reclaim personal memorabilia that he claims was stolen from him. Despite the circumstances, he couldn’t understand how this incident could land him with such a prolonged sentence, especially when compared to Ruggs’ case.
There’s a widely held belief that Simpson’s hefty sentence was a byproduct of the unresolved emotions surrounding his controversial acquittal in the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman in the 1990s. Simpson served nine years before being granted parole in 2017.
Eluding to the difference of the two cases, Simpson noted the similarities: “Both cases took place in the same courthouse, the same city, even the same state. Yet, the results seem so vastly different.”
His closing thoughts resonated with many: “There’s something about this that just doesn’t sit right. I’m just putting it out there.”
