Regardless of whether or not OJ is guilty of armed robbery as he has been charged, he is wrong in his actions.
If we are to believe the biggest escaped-in-the-open lying murderer of our time, he was simply trying to get back some memorabilia that was stolen from him. When he heard the goods were in a Las Vegas hotel and he was conveniently in town for a wedding, he went to the room where the goods were supposedly stored and attempted to reclaim them.
There are problems here, several of them:
- Did he file a police report when the items went missing? When someone as *ahem* important as he loses personal memorabilia, it is a wise thing to file a police report, just in case.
- Did he think his version of vigilante justice would make sense to anyone besides his own, twisted self? There are many things we have the freedom to do in America, but dispensing our own justice when the law of the land has been broken is not one of them.
- Did he think that anyone would believe him? At all?
For a Christian, we are told that God reserves the right of vengeance to Himself. By acting out our own vengeance we rob God of His perfect justice which He’s stored up in His storehouses for dispensing on that day He has ordained for each of us. God has given the responsibility for certain applications of justice to earthly systems of authority based on the individual responsibilities of each of those systems. To parents He gave the reward and punishment of their children. The the church those inside the church. To the various municipal authorities each their own based on their defined areas of responsibility. But each derives it’s authority from it’s own authorities and ultimately from God Himself, the final arbiter and judge.
When two people not under the authority of the church and willfully unrepentant are at odds, generally the responsibility for justice, punishment and restoration falls to the civil courts and judicial system. Such is the case of OJ. If we are to believe his tales, he is still in the wrong for seeking to dispense his own form of gang justice.
Does he think he is a law unto himself? With the same smug smile he showed so self-righteously throughout the murder trial last decade, he is the epitome of the post-modern relativist morality. What is right for him is right for him, and others rules and laws make no difference to him. He does as he pleases and answers to no man for his deeds or thoughts.
As he skated the conviction and wounded justice so many years ago, he may now fall for pride.