OJ Tossed from Steakhouse on Derby Eve

bravo!


AP | May 9, 2007 09:15 PM EST

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — The owner of an upscale steakhouse in Louisville said he asked O.J. Simpson to leave his restaurant the night before the Kentucky Derby because he is sickened by the attention Simpson still attracts.

"I didn't want to serve him because of my convictions of what he's done to those families," Jeff Ruby said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "The way he continues to torture the lives of those families ... with his behavior, attitude and conduct."

Simpson, an NFL Hall of Famer and Heisman Trophy winner, was found innocent in 1995 of killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Ron Goldman but was found liable in a civil trial that followed.

Ruby _ who owns restaurants in Cincinnati, Louisville and Belterra, Ind. _ 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.

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.

Ruby said the incident had to do with Simpson's past.

"It was the first time since 1994 he has ever shown any class," Ruby said. "He showed it that night in the restaurant" by leaving quietly.

Ruby said after Simpson left, people in the restaurant started applauding him. He said he has received about 100 positive e-mails since the incident.

The walls of Ruby's restaurants are decorated with celebrity photos. A photo of Simpson and Ruby used to be on display, but Ruby said he took it down after the killings.

Its all about race....thats why Michael Jordan's party took over OJ's table after they were ejected. I heard that today on the radio in an interview of the restaurant owner.

FK

If I had a steakhouse, I'd never serve OJ.

Hell no! Beer, red wine or whisky, certainly, and even mineral water, but orange juice? That's an affront to the tastebuds!


Oh sorry...you didn't mean that kind of OJ. :oops:

the real reason: the owner was worried his steak knives would go missing, never to be found :)

meow

FK

About race? It sounds like the restaurant owner had a legitimate reason and now OJ is turning around and playing the race card because he can.

I swear, it's like black people have more power than white people do. If anything doesn't go their way, they can play the race card. White people can't even attempt to sue on the basis of discrimination. People would laugh.

good glad he got tossed out

Wish more people felt the same about him, he gets the hero treatment from tooooooooo many people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chefmike

bravo!


AP | May 9, 2007 09:15 PM EST


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.

---

LMAO.... Yeah, it was either that or the whole murdering to people in cold blood thing. Still, better get Al Shaprton on it, just in case.

-Quinn

About race? Stupidest thing I've heard so far today for sure.

I have a differing opinion. I believe it is a bad precedence to not serve a customer because of personal feelings. If you are in the business of serving customers some product and\or service, how can you deny a paying customer. In this country, we function under a system of laws that everyone is equal. He is not an escaped convict. He was not even convicted of a crime. He only lost a civil judgement in a trail that gives the accuser a higher level of justice above the accused.

So, who will be next in the denial of service. All persons who have committed any crime at any time in their life. And after we go down that path, lets deny service to anyone who is a member of the family of a person accused of a crime. And so on, and so on...!

Back to O.J. The reason I heard he was denied service was because of the "attention he attracts". So, if Paris Hilton entered his business for service, he would also deny her service. Now that she has to do time for a crime. Lets not forget the infamous bad sex video that promoted her to icon status with teen & adult admirers. I'm sure he will take the so called moral high ground and deny service to her. Then if former President Clinton (impeached), Courtney Love (name one), Lindsey Lohan (drugs), Amy Fisher (attempted murder) also entered his restaurant, he would deny all of them service. Yea right.

Just my opinion. We all have them. O.k., back to surfing. Too much serious brain activity while I'm on vacation. I must relax, "Woo Saa!!!"

Any business owner can refuse to take the business of anyone they so choose. Casinos do it everyday when they find a card-counter. They simply say we don't want your business, please leave. If the person refuses then they can have security remove him, forcibly if need be. This is because a casino, though open to the public, is private property. A restaurant, like a casino, is private property.

Mr Ruby did nothing more than exercise that right.

The only place race and OJ go together are that damn jury's not guilty verdict. The jury was 90% black and they werent convicting a "brother" who killed a white woman under any circumstances!!

Nice justice, eh? :twisted:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mylon

About race? It sounds like the restaurant owner had a legitimate reason and now OJ is turning around and playing the race card because he can.

I swear, it's like black people have more power than white people do. If anything doesn't go their way, they can play the race card. White people can't even attempt to sue on the basis of discrimination. People would laugh.

---

Oh? How many large businesses (Hotels, Restaurants, Gas Stations, Casinos, etc) are owned by blacks so they can be in the position to be sued? I can guarantee you that if the situation were reversed with blacks being the majority in power and controlling businesses, that it would be whites doing the sueing.

One more thing: I grew up in a predominantly black neighborhood, most of my closest friends are black, dated black women, and also have a best friend who is black, and I doubt very many of them think OJ didn't do it. All of those in my inner circle think he committed the crime. Stop painting all blacks with the same narrow brush strokes, and your paranoia and bigotry comes through loud and clear with that comment about blacks threatening your power.

How many black friend have you had just out of curiosity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kramer

The only place race and OJ go together are that damn jury's not guilty verdict. The jury was 90% black and they werent convicting a "brother" who killed a white woman under any circumstances!!

Nice justice, eh? :twisted:

---

They were hanged for being black in this country at one time. Was that justice? The jury might indeed have screwed up, but I would place the blame on the proscecutors and the judge. They fucked up imo.

By the way, I applaud the restaurant owner for what he did. I just don't understand this culture of celebrity we exist in that can and will overlook a man's crimes and still fawn, including having women -- any woman -- still want to date him. I don't hate him for murdering a white woman, I hate him for murdering and getting away with it, period.

The same hatred goes toward Blake, Shatner(?), or Spector. Just as in OJ's case, it's about celebrity trumping justice, and that gives these guys an edge that the average Joe doesn't ever get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dskreet2

I have a differing opinion. I believe it is a bad precedence to not serve a customer because of personal feelings. If you are in the business of serving customers some product and\or service, how can you deny a paying customer. In this country, we function under a system of laws that everyone is equal. He is not an escaped convict. He was not even convicted of a crime. He only lost a civil judgement in a trail that gives the accuser a higher level of justice above the accused.

So, who will be next in the denial of service. All persons who have committed any crime at any time in their life. And after we go down that path, lets deny service to anyone who is a member of the family of a person accused of a crime. And so on, and so on...!

Back to O.J. The reason I heard he was denied service was because of the "attention he attracts". So, if Paris Hilton entered his business for service, he would also deny her service. Now that she has to do time for a crime. Lets not forget the infamous bad sex video that promoted her to icon status with teen & adult admirers. I'm sure he will take the so called moral high ground and deny service to her. Then if former President Clinton (impeached), Courtney Love (name one), Lindsey Lohan (drugs), Amy Fisher (attempted murder) also entered his restaurant, he would deny all of them service. Yea right.

Just my opinion. We all have them. O.k., back to surfing. Too much serious brain activity while I'm on vacation. I must relax, "Woo Saa!!!"

---

Well said. I completely agree. Stop blaming OJ....try blaming the cops and detectives that were tampering with evidence. Maybe he was guilty maybe not, but he wasn't convicted of anything. Let the man eat his fucking dinner and go back to managing your damn restaurant. He shouldn't have let his personal feelings interfere with his business especially when dealing with a celebrity.

I laughed at the comment about Michael Jordan taking his table spot, whether true or not, wouldn't Michael Jordan bring attention as well? While maybe not completely negative it is still attention. The article said a customer was Giddy, is giddy a bad thing, or a good thing? Wouldn't that be the same kind of attention MJ might bring?

In the end, the place does have the right to refuse business to anyone, its the whole "private propety of business" stuff.

Quote:

---

Wouldn't that be the same kind of attention MJ might bring?

---

I would hope that Mr. Ruby would deny service to a child-molester as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chefmike

Quote:

---

Wouldn't that be the same kind of attention MJ might bring?

---

I would hope that Mr. Ruby would deny service to a child-molester as well.

---

I laughed. :lol:

Ok people, lets get this shit right. It was not about race and the owner is totally in the right to not serve his ass. The reason he gave is that he is sickened not just by the attention OJ gets but also his attitude towards the families of the victims. The fucker has never acted contrite. Owner also said that he was a fan of OJ and even had a picture he took with OJ on the restaurant's wall and took it down after the killings.

OJ should consider himself very lucky he ins't in prison. Getting tossed from a restaurant here and there is nothing compared to what he should be getting which is prison muck for lunch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Realgirls4me

Don't hate him for murdering a white woman, Hate him for murdering and getting away with it, period.

---

alright people ......calm down!! First of all this clown is an idiot!! We go by law in this country and for someone to make up their own is wrong. OJ was tried in a court of law and we all saw it on national tv. As guilty as OJ looked their was twice as many holes in the story and mistakes by the LAPD! Here are a couple I have been wondering about....

1) Why would an experienced police officer who knows policy bring evidence to the scene of the crime that was submitted at the station?

2) Why was there a chemical that was used to preserve blood samples found in the blood on the back gate?

3) Why after going through OJ's house with video did it take them weeks to find the bloody sock sitting right in the bedroom?

4) Everyone knows that in today's forensic world no matter how many times you scrubbed a sink....yourself.....clothes .....or a washing machine...you can't stop the blood from showing up under testing. So that being said.......why wasn't there any blood in OJ's home? There is no way you are gonna hack up 2 people that way and not get any blood on you!
If he raced home,jumped the fence,quickly showered,and hopped in the limo that was already waiting for him......how could he leave his entire house without a spec of blood in it??

I do not like OJ like the rest of you.......but don't you wonder these things??? The wild...crazed swinging of a knife doesn't match with the precision time management of the window of which to operate with. Whether that idiot did it or not.......The LAPD clearly broke protocol...and tampered with evidence which is why this case turned out the way it did. If they had conducted themselves properly maybe OJ goes to jail.

So in closing...........If a man is found not guilty it is not my responsibility to punish said man for the rest of his life when I had no relation or friendship to anyone in the case. That is flirting close to being a vigilante. We might as well run him out back....throw a rope over a tree.....well you see where I am going!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mustang

alright people ......calm down!! First of all this clown is an idiot!! We go by law in this country and for someone to make up their own is wrong. OJ was tried in a court of law and we all saw it on national tv. As guilty as OJ looked their was twice as many holes in the story and mistakes by the LAPD! Here are a couple I have been wondering about....

1) Why would an experienced police officer who knows policy bring evidence to the scene of the crime that was submitted at the station?

2) Why was there a chemical that was used to preserve blood samples found in the blood on the back gate?

3) Why after going through OJ's house with video did it take them weeks to find the bloody sock sitting right in the bedroom?

4) Everyone knows that in today's forensic world no matter how many times you scrubbed a sink....yourself.....clothes .....or a washing machine...you can't stop the blood from showing up under testing. So that being said.......why wasn't there any blood in OJ's home? There is no way you are gonna hack up 2 people that way and not get any blood on you!
If he raced home,jumped the fence,quickly showered,and hopped in the limo that was already waiting for him......how could he leave his entire house without a spec of blood in it??

I do not like OJ like the rest of you.......but don't you wonder these things??? The wild...crazed swinging of a knife doesn't match with the precision time management of the window of which to operate with. Whether that idiot did it or not.......The LAPD clearly broke protocol...and tampered with evidence which is why this case turned out the way it did. If they had conducted themselves properly maybe OJ goes to jail.

So in closing...........If a man is found not guilty it is not my responsibility to punish said man for the rest of his life when I had no relation or friendship to anyone in the case. That is flirting close to being a vigilante. We might as well run him out back....throw a rope over a tree.....well you see where I am going!

---

If you think that there's a chance in hell that OJ is innocent, then there's some swampland for sale in Florida with your name written all over it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chefmike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mustang

alright people ......calm down!! First of all this clown is an idiot!! We go by law in this country and for someone to make up their own is wrong. OJ was tried in a court of law and we all saw it on national tv. As guilty as OJ looked their was twice as many holes in the story and mistakes by the LAPD! Here are a couple I have been wondering about....

1) Why would an experienced police officer who knows policy bring evidence to the scene of the crime that was submitted at the station?

2) Why was there a chemical that was used to preserve blood samples found in the blood on the back gate?

3) Why after going through OJ's house with video did it take them weeks to find the bloody sock sitting right in the bedroom?

4) Everyone knows that in today's forensic world no matter how many times you scrubbed a sink....yourself.....clothes .....or a washing machine...you can't stop the blood from showing up under testing. So that being said.......why wasn't there any blood in OJ's home? There is no way you are gonna hack up 2 people that way and not get any blood on you!
If he raced home,jumped the fence,quickly showered,and hopped in the limo that was already waiting for him......how could he leave his entire house without a spec of blood in it??

I do not like OJ like the rest of you.......but don't you wonder these things??? The wild...crazed swinging of a knife doesn't match with the precision time management of the window of which to operate with. Whether that idiot did it or not.......The LAPD clearly broke protocol...and tampered with evidence which is why this case turned out the way it did. If they had conducted themselves properly maybe OJ goes to jail.

So in closing...........If a man is found not guilty it is not my responsibility to punish said man for the rest of his life when I had no relation or friendship to anyone in the case. That is flirting close to being a vigilante. We might as well run him out back....throw a rope over a tree.....well you see where I am going!

---

If you think that there's a chance in hell that OJ is innocent, then there's some swampland for sale in Florida with your name written all over it...

---

I posted good questions for people to think over.....there are many other ways to kill someone you want dead. Has anyone ever thought that he payed to have it done??

I am looking for an answer for any of those questions I have been struggling with since 1994.....if you got em....post em!

I believe the court got the verdit correct and that he did not commit the crime. The many times police made-up stories about me give me plenty of personal reasons why I believe they knew he was not guilty of the murder. The family that lived off of his earnings now turned against him. So why should he show love towards them. They also wanted to steal his children. In regards to the Goldmans, he could have shown more compassion for their family member.

Everyone knows he has a "BIG HEAD" and doesn't care what people outside of his family think. If so many people had not fawned all over him when he only performed a job (running back in professional football) well, he may not the big-headed monster he is now. Stop placing people in the entertainment industry above everyone else who works HARD for a living, then these knuckleheads would probably act more like normal people.

Yes, he physically and mentally abused the woman and was found guilty or liable. He paid the price for those law violations. But murder is a much higher level of physical attack than abuse. And we do NOT KNOW ALL the TRUE facts of this crime.

But, it seems most of you with anger do NOT know the full details of the crime. Only what the news media has fed you and your own limited knowledge of the facts.

So I reiterate, he did not commit the crime.

If you think that there's a chance in hell that OJ is innocent, then there's some swampland for sale in Florida with your name written all over it...

Video Interview of OJ after the trial. You make your own desicion.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=f0aAE6ie7bM



btw if anybody happens to know the link for the long version I appreciate it if you could post it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mustang

I am looking for an answer for any of those questions I have been struggling with since 1994.....if you got em....post em!

---

Can't remember who said it, but...

"The LAPD. framed a guilty man".

I heard a guy say this on a talk show today and I agree:
"White people need to let this go. They want black people to get over slavery, they need to get over OJ". The shit is old. It's over. HISTORY!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Realgirls4me

By the way, I applaud the restaurant owner for what he did. I just don't understand this culture of celebrity we exist in that can and will overlook a man's crimes and still fawn, including having women -- any woman -- still want to date him. I don't hate him for murdering a white woman, I hate him for murdering and getting away with it, period.

The same hatred goes toward Blake, Shatner(?), or Spector. Just as in OJ's case, it's about celebrity trumping justice, and that gives these guys an edge that the average Joe doesn't ever get.

---

Cosign.

-Quinn

Like I said before.......I challenge all angry people to take a close look at the evidence and the sequence of events and tell me that there aren't any holes in it. I say....either things didn't happen like they say they did....or something is really wrong!

So when is the tv special and book due out what if i ate at a jeff ruby's steakhouse.

Check-out the statements from the "NEW" moral high ground:

Ruby now says " I don't serve murderers unless they have served their time and come in afterwards."

What a BUNCH OF BULLSHIT!!! O.J. was found innocent ("Not Guilty" for those who "knit-pick"), so he did not have to serve time.

I guess the "Angry Group" responding to this thread are in full support of that comment.

And by the way, if you fart in the forrest and no one is around to hear it, it still stinks!!! LOL

OH fucking please. As a fucking owner of a private establishment he has his fucking rights to refuse to serve. He has the right to his opinion as do you. Get over this shit. OJ should consider his fucking ass lucky. Open up your own fucking restaurant and serve this fucker all you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dskreet2

Check-out the statements from the "NEW" moral high ground:

Ruby now says " I don't serve murderers unless they have served their time and come in afterwards."

What a BUNCH OF BULLSHIT!!! O.J. was found innocent ("Not Guilty" for those who "knit-pick"), so he did not have to serve time.

I guess the "Angry Group" responding to this thread are in full support of that comment.

And by the way, if you fart in the forrest and no one is around to hear it, it still stinks!!! LOL

---

It is comforting to know that OJ, fine upstanding citizen that he is, continues to search for the "real killers"...and rumor has it that he has narrowed this never-ending search for Nicole's killers down to golf courses and strip clubs. Good for him.

OJ is on the case.

What a guy.

And what a scumbag.

Anyone who believes in OJ's innocence probably also believes in the tooth fairy. ...Let's see, his blood and hair was found at the scene, the cut on his hand, the inexplicable missing clothes Kardasian got rid of, what the guard overheard him tell Rosey Grier, fleeing in the Bronco -- let me repeat that: AN "INNOCENT" MAN FLEEING IN A BRONCO --, and his unsual CALLOUS indifferent demeanor after the trial given the circumstances of losing his wife -- HIS WIFE -- that surrounded the case. Yeah, that smacks of inocence to me.

I agree with what someone said upstream: The LAPD framed a guilty man.

Just a classic example of the white man trying to keep the black man down. What's next? OJ being forced to move to the back of the bus??

Has Al Sharpton made any comments? I love how that man sticks his foot in his mouth with EVERY comment he makes public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chuck

Just a classic example of the white man trying to keep the black man down. What's next? OJ being forced to move to the back of the bus??

---

Actually, I was thinking more like under the bus.

-Quinn

I 'm tired of hearing about O.J yes he killed the chick so what. I bet any amount of money that he would't have kicked O.J out if he a killed 2 black people