I read today where ex-football star and, once murder suspect, OJ Simpson, was kicked out of a Steakhouse in Louisville, Kentucky, the day before the Kentucky derby. Jeff Ruby, the restaurant owner decided to refuse to serve OJ, because he was “sick to his stomach” at what he felt was what OJ did to the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson. What I'd like to know is this: how the hell does Ruby know this? Wasn't OJ Simpson found NOT GUILTY in a COURT OF LAW? Who died and made Ruby, judge, jury and executioner?
I'm no fan of OJ's by any stretch of the imagination.  Who knows.. if we really knew all of OJ's deep down, dark, dirty secrets, we'd probably find that he DESERVED getting denied service - and a whole lot worse. Without a doubt, I can say that I think that OJ Simpson is a complete butthead and a jerk (and that's putting it mildly) – and I have a hunch he just may have literally gotten away with murder. However, those are just my opinions. But I think I have a little problem with someone being kicked out of a publicly open establishment, who was completely minding their own business.
Again, while OJ pretty much has a proven track record of being an asshole (he's certified in that department!), nobody will ever know for sure if he's actually a murderer. Remember, OJ was found not guilty - even if it was wrongly so, he still was found not guilty. Therefore, I believe he is entitled to be treated like he is NOT GUILTY. It's his constitutional right.
Having said that, I appreciate that the steakhouse, where Simpson chose to eat, is private property, but I don't think it's the place of the owner of the steakhouse – or anyone else for that matter - to try and act like some judge and jury and pass a "sentence" on someone for crimes they “believe” he committed. Imagine if businesses, apartments, and employers decided to do this to everyone – even if someone was found innocent beyond a reasonable doubt, and someone else “thought” they were guilty. Oh wait a minute! This is already being done. There probably should be some law against this kind of behavior by business. 
And as usual, Simpson's lawyer is playing the race card.  He needs to get real. As far as Simpson getting kicked out of a restaurant, this isn't a race issue. But that's a whole other topic altogether.
- the Fuchian
Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)
|
|
read more blogs!
Blogs by fuchia04:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| OJ's Ouster:Playing Judge And Jury? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spongebob777
|
May 9 @ 9:50PM
|
|
|
It's his restaurant and he has a right to refuse service to anyone as long as it isn't based on the usual laundry list of discrimination real or imagined.
|
|
witchietoo
|
May 9 @ 9:54PM
|
|
Technically, any restaurant or business has the right to deny service to someone. In this man's mind, he didn't want him in HIS restaurant and had every right to ask him to leave. Personally, he was found not guilty in one court, yet responsible in another court. To this day he tries to make money off the murders not caring what it does to the families or his kids. If I was the owner of the restaurant, I would kick him out too.
According the the story on CNN.com, OJ left with no problem at all, but of course called his lawyer. This is quoted from the story it's self
Ruby -- who owns restaurants in Cincinnati, Ohio; Louisville, Kentucky; and Belterra, Indiana -- said Simpson, who was in town for the Derby on Saturday, came in with a group of about 12 Friday night and was seated at a table in the back. A customer came up to Ruby and was "giddy" about seeing Simpson, Ruby said.
"I didn't want that experience in my restaurant," Ruby said, later adding that seeing Simpson get so much attention "makes me sick to my stomach."
He said he went to Simpson's table and said, "I'm not serving you." Ruby said when Simpson didn't respond, he repeated himself and left the room.
Ruby said Simpson soon came up to him and said he understood and would gather the rest of his party to leave.
And of course from his shyster of a lawyer Simpson's attorney, Yale Galanter, said the incident was about race, and he intended to pursue the matter and possibly go after the restaurant's liquor license.
"He screwed with the wrong guy, he really did," Galanter said by telephone Tuesday night.
|
|
Injuneer
|
May 9 @ 9:56PM
|
|
|
Mr. Ruby is considered by the people of Louisville and Cincinnati to be one of the more upstanding citizens of this area. As the owner of a private eating establishment, he has every legal right to refuse to serve Mr. Simpson. Mr. Ruby had forewarned OJ of this and had removed the memoribelia of him long ago so there was no mystery. Just another criminal having to face up to the fact that good and decent people do not want to dine with a murderer. And by the way, OK was not found Innocent, he was found not guilty .... a very big difference in the eyes of the law.
|
|
witchietoo
|
May 9 @ 9:59PM
|
|
|
Imagine if businesses, apartments, and employers decided to do this to everyone – even if someone was found innocent beyond a reasonable doubt, and someone else “thought” they were guilty. There probably should be some law against this kind of behavior by business.
Oops hit post before I got off my soap box. The above is already done to people every day. Now you can be turned down for a job, apartment or whatever due to your credit score. Just cause your credit is bad does that mean your a bad person? I know it is off topic just trying to prove a point in my own way...lol
Then you have people that did something stupid when they were say 19, ended up in jail, but due to that, get turned down for a jobs even into their thirties and forties. They paid their debt 20 or 30 years ago, but are still judged by something done when they were young and stupid.
|
|
RomanticLibra106
|
May 9 @ 10:29PM
|
|
If OJ is innocent of murdering Nicole and Ron Goldman, you tell me how hundreds of drops of their BLOOD was found inside of OJ's Bronco????? Did the REAL murderer take an eye dropper or turkey baster and fill it with their blood and drip it all over the inside of OJ's van??????? OJ had a very smart team of lawyers - he paid his way out of jail and he also doesn't care who he hurts with his book that thank GOD never saw the light of day and wasn't made into a movie for his profit! I have NO doubt he did it - none whatsoever and that's just my opinion but the fact that the all black jury would not indict one of their own 'heroes' sickens me. If he were white, they would have convicted him no question. I'm not for race discrimination in any form against anyone. I think if you're guilty, you're guilty regardless of your skin color and I don't believe that $ should get you out of trouble. Sorry but that's not fair.
So yes the owner was right to do what he did. I applaud him being an honorable man with high morals who puts integrity and morals above OJ's $.
|
|
fuchia04
|
May 9 @ 10:36PM
|
|
I'm not saying restaurants don't have a right to do this. I'm saying they shouldn't have a right to do this. If someone chooses to open their doors to the general public and to do business with the general public, I believe they ought to respect the general public. This means, that of course, that they shouldn't discriminate based on race, gender, handicap, etc. (as Witchie said, the usual laundry list  ). But to me (and this ONLY my opinion) respecting the general public also means not alienate portions of your clientèle for frivolous reasons. I know murdering someone is not frivolous, by any means, but when this person has been found not guilty and someone denies them service because they just think he is, then in a way, maybe it is frivolous. Again, not saying businesses don't have the right to do this. I just think that maybe they ought not to have the right to do this.
It would be a totally different story if it was some mom & pop operation, but this guy (Ruby) has restaurants in several states.
I could understand throwing someone out, if they are disrupting business, but as I mentioned OJ was minding his own business. Man, I hate to defend OJ! ...but, of course, I'm not really defending him, I'm defending the principle.Like many (or all) of you, I also believe he's a murderer! However, that's just our opinion; in the eyes of the law, he was found not guilty. Even though, he may been found responsible in a civil court, that doesn't necessarily make you a criminal.
Quote - Witchie:
Now you can be turned down for a job, apartment or whatever due to your credit score. Just cause your credit is bad does that mean your a bad person? I know it is off topic just trying to prove a point in my own way...lol
Reply:
Shoot, I actually meant to say that in my blog but I forgot,  I will edit my blog. HOWEVER, I just wanted to note it here, so people will not think you mis-quoted me. 
|
|
freeagent811
|
May 9 @ 10:38PM
|
|
I am sorry ... I wouldn't want a murderer eating in my restaurant either! Regardless of the fact he was found "not guilty", all the evidence pointed to him. The Bronco chase.. If he were so innocent, why did he run from the cops?? If he had nothing to hide, why did he fly cross country after the murders happened?? The whole thing does not add up. He was found liable in a civil suit.. Okay. He should pull a Michael Jackson and just hightail it out of this country. Quite honestly, I really don't think anyone would miss him. He'd be doing the USA justice if he left. Thirteen years may have passed since the murders, but that doesn't erase the lifetime of suffering the families of Nicole and Ron have endured. OJ ought tohave his head examined... "IF I DID IT".. Everybody knows he did it. Why would he have to write a book about it? I hate to disappoint anybody, but he is not going to be on the New York Times Bestseller list.... 
|
|
Kentuck
|
May 9 @ 11:05PM
|
|
T think the resturant owner was wrong. I really think he broke a law and we will find out in the near future. Just imagine, you walk into a resturant and the owner wants to kick you out for his moral or inmoral thoughts.
OJ was found not guility by a court of law and found guility by The News media.
so who do you believe--FOX News or who.
There has been a big change in in the so called news media--In the OJ case there was the weal DA and the defense one day the next was the weak defense and the strong DA. Now they come with the netural, the strong da and strong defence.
I think they would all sell a man's sole down the road for a big news story.
These people have been sued so many times you wonder where they get the millions from to make the pay off.
What I would like to know is why the affairs of his EX wife and the habits of Ron were never told. If you leave a pair of 10 cents glasses in a resturant---are they going to take them to your home and know exactly where you live. Was ron delevering something lke white powder??
None of this come out--so who is protecting who?
But I know I would not take a client or myself to one of this guys resturant--would you??
|
|
Kentuck
|
May 9 @ 11:49PM
|
|
People here is part of what was reported. Also, one has to look very hard and deep to find this story.
___________________________________________________________________
The owner of a posh Louisville, Kentucky, steakhouse refused to serve the former football great last week, saying he was bothered by Simpson's behavior following his acquittal more than a decade ago of killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ron Goldman.
According to the Louisville Courier-Journal, restaurateur Jeff Ruby asked the Juice and his 12-member entourage to leave Jeff Ruby's Louisville at approximately 10:30 p.m. last Friday just after the party sat down at a table in a private room.
Ruby, who runs several upscale restaurants in a number of midwestern cities, told the newspaper he was sickened by Simpson's appearance, especially in the wake of the ex-NFL star's scotched book deal and television interviews promoting If I Did It, his hypothetical tell-all about the murders.
___________________________________________________________________
Everyone has their own opinion. but just remember Ruby can do this to OJ he can surely do to you even because he does not like what you look like, the way you talk or any thing.
For me--I think he was sticking his nose into other people's affairs--his job is to service the customers with good stead dinners,
Well here is one and none ofmy friends will ever eat at one of his establishments.
|
|
akrouse
|
May 10 @ 12:02AM
|
|
|
According to his interview on the news here....He said he told OJ he didn't feel comfortable having him in his restraunt and OJ asked if he could have a few minutes to collect the people he came with and that was it. I don't see why it's such a big deal...The guy didn't want him in his restraunt...who cares?
|
|
TallBlonde1
|
May 10 @ 12:07AM
|
|
He WAS found liable for their murders in civil court, which is a court of law. He was ordered to pay for Wrongful Death. That's where the settlement he's dodging comes in. He gets pension from the NFL that is untouchable by the court, which is why his money never runs out.
The restaurant owner didn't break the law, he invoked his right not to serve him.
OJ Simpson aside, the problem with forcing private business owners to open the door to everyone is that you may force them out of business. Think about it, if you owned a small restaurant, and gang members came in every night and threatened your customers, you wouldn't have customers very long. But you'd be forced by law to serve the gang members since you can't discriminate and not serve them. How fair is that? Now if we make it illegal for the you the owner to ask them to leave, we are now opening him up to being sued by those same gang members for discrimination. You're out of business, out your home, lost everything, but the gang members win, and now their wealthily to boot.
Please don't give too many of our rights away to be P.C. It's not very P.C. to the poor owner forced out of business.
|
|
wilryde
|
May 10 @ 12:14AM
|
|
|
I would'nt want to be in the same room with OJ holding a steak knife!!!!!
|
|
Kentuck
|
May 10 @ 12:32AM
|
|
I think most people are missing the point here. They are letting their clouded judgement for the hate of OJ to miss the point. Here is an owner of a resturant who refuses to service you and your group because of what he thinks and believes about you.
I think this will go down under the HATE LAW Crime--Maybe old Jeff Ruby will pay off OJ's bills.
But the Name of Jeff Ruby stand out--I wonder is he kind to the Ruby that shot and killed Oswall--President Kennedy killer. should be checked out.
|
|
Dovestreasure
|
May 10 @ 1:05AM
|
|
Another attempt by the media to make much ado about nothing. Mr. Simpson does not deserve the attention this is getting. If he were a wise man, and apparently he is not he would try to keep a low profile and not try to generate more negative publicity for himself. There will always be those who will debate his innocence or his guilt forever more.Frankly the man is barely worth a second thought.
Shame on you Kentuck for attacking the victims of such a heinous crime.. They were murdered, certainly nothing can justify that.
|
|
JohnnyPopper
|
May 10 @ 1:44AM
|
|
|
And by the way, OK was not found Innocent, he was found not guilty .... a very big difference in the eyes of the law. What ever happened to the saying: INNOCENT UNTIL proven GUILTY then??
|
|
missliss78
|
May 10 @ 11:41AM
|
|
I have to comment here that when I read this story on the 'net, I said out loud "HELL YEAH!!!!!"
If I were Mr. Ruby, I would have done the VERY same thing. Actually, given opportunity, the party would have never even been seated in my restaraunt. As someone else here pointed out, Simpson WAS found guilty in the civil court of those murders. And furthermore, I think Dovestreasure summed it up best. The man is NOT worth the attention he receives.
|
|
fuchia04
|
May 10 @ 10:52PM
|
|
I noticed at least three people felt the need to point out that OJ Simpson was found guilty in a civil court. So what? I know it's a court of law. But it's not a criminal court; it's a civil court. Big difference here. I repeat again, he was found not guilty in a criminal court. Being found "negligent", "liable", or "responsible" in a civil court doesn't necessarily make a person a criminal in the eyes of the law.
Dovestreasure is right. Simpson isn't worth a second thought. I, personally, think he's a piece of s*** and if I owned a restaurant, I probably would want to kick him out myself. And, yes, I know it'd be legal, and yes, I know I'd have every right to do so. But it doesn't necessarily mean that it should be legal, or that I should have a right to do that, without a good reason. I don't think Ruby had a good reason at all.
Having said that, TallBlond1 made (I admit) a good argument that if business owners didn't have the relatively unlimited discretion (other than what's already prohibited by law) to tell people to leave their establishment, then gang members would be free to "come in every night and threaten your customers. " Well, that's different. Obviously - and I've already stated this - if someone is disrupting you're business, than you should have a right to kick them out. You should have a right to protect your business and, in fact, I would imagine, you have an obligation to protect your customers. There's no disagreement there.
However, I think it's overkill, when a publicly accessible establishment (whether privately owned or not) can arbitrarily throw customers out, pretty much, for no good reason at all. OJ clearly was not threatening anyone. He wasn't being loud or obnoxious. Again, he was minding his own business. If you do business with the general public, then there ought to be a certain level of respect that you are obligated to uphold, with respect to your clientèle.
If we really want all this attention to go away, then the solution is not kicking controversial high-profile people out of a restaurant, perhaps just so that the restaurant owner, himself, can get free publicity??? 
- the Fuchian
|
|
TallBlonde1
|
May 11 @ 4:01PM
|
|
|
You're correct, he wasn't found guilty in criminal court. But your words in your blog where Wasn't OJ Simpson found NOT GUILTY in a COURT OF LAW which is why some of us felt the need to point out he was found guilty in a court of law, just not in criminal court.
I'm happy that you can see my point, thank you.
The problem was even if he wasn't doing anything, his very presence was causing a problem. That alone gives him a right to remove him.
Owners now don't have free reign to kick out people for no reason. People have sued based on being asked to leave an establishment due to their race and some have won. But I think OJ's going to have a very, very hard time proving this was racially motivated, especially since the owner had a pic of him & OJ hanging there before the trial.
I understand your point and I think you have the right idea, discrimination of any sort is ugly and uncalled for.
|
|
|