Eleven years ago the nation was gripped by the trial of O J Simpson. The bodies of his ex-wife Nicole and her friend Ron Goldman had been found brutally butchered to death in her driveway, Simpson was caught by police following a dramatic, televised car chase watched by 93 million people.
He was sensationally acquitted of their murders, despite considerable evidence against him – bloodstains in his car, a sock engrained with traces of his victims’ blood on his bedroom carpet and earlier tapes of a terrified Nicole calling the police begging for help as Simpson was battering her.
However, he was later held responsible for the double murders by a civil court and ordered to pay £17.6 million damages to the Goldman family, though he has never yet paid a cent. Strangely, Simpson was given custody of his two children Sydney, now 20, and Justin, 18, who have never talked about their mother’s horrific death and whether they think their father was guilty.
The former football star and actor is largely reviled, but still a source of fascination in America which he plans 
to cash in on big time. He has just written a book entitled “If I Did It“, which hypothesises about what happened, about how he might have carried out the murders, in a reported £2 million deal.
Simpson’s “hypothetical” account reveals how he grabbed a knife from a man who accompanied him to Nicole’s home – and moments later found himself covered in blood and looking down on the bodies of Nicole and Ron. He will be plugging this during a two-hour interview on Fox Television, going into more grisly detail, again for an additional considerable sum.
Does he have no regard for the feelings of his two children, as well as the families of the two murder victims? It’s impossible to imagine the anguish that Sydney and Justin have endured over the last decade, and this is going to rub it in their face all over again in the most crass, greedy and tastelessly opportunistic way.
Why didn’t Simpson write about his innocence instead, providing explanations about the evidence against him? Why could he never show any compassion at all following the deaths of two innocent people, including the beautiful mother of his children and her friend who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
It’s a great shame that the USA does not have the same double jeopardy laws that we now have, I’m pretty sure an ace legal team could come up with a convincing case. Simpson was lucky during his trial to have a clever lawyer who played the race card with a jury made up largely of ethnic minorities. They would see through that now.
Does anyone think O J Simpson was innocent? If so, why?
OJ guilty but that will happen when you have legal protections for the innocent that we are so keen to get rid of
On the other hand I notice most women who claimed to be raped under the influence of roofie had none in their system . Why then were their rape claims believed ?
Again the progressive plot is in league with some dodgy cross disciplinary subject last time it was”enviromental studies ” this time wimmin`s studies.
OJ vile though . Yeuch . and as for Jacko !!!aaaargh!!
I was enthralled with the trial, and watched it nightly on Sky.
Of course he did it. him and Michael Jackson are just as guilty of their crimes.
Ellie – I love the detailed post, but for me, Tom Peters’ blog (see http://www.tompeters.com/) said it all: Forget O.J. Whoever produced or airs “If I Did It, Here’s How” deserves to fry in hell.
But we all know the media and the public won’t resist this story.
Heather, Thank you for the link, I followed it through and found this one http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/arts/entertainment-simpson.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
which describes how Ron Goldman’s father and Simpsons’s ex wife are seeking a claim on any money he makes.
Fascinating stuff.
An interesting anecdoate as to how ordinary Americans feel. My dad lives in Florida and I try to see him most years. The last time I was there we went out to a regular restaurant we frequesnt quite alot for a meal. We later learnt that OJ came in an hour later, but was asked to leave as he “was not welcome”.
He may have not been found guilty by a jury – but I think oridnary Americans have cast their own verdict!
Jonathan, From what I’ve read, Simpson hangs around with the low-life, this attitude doesn’t surprise me at all.
I wonder how somebody can live with such a heinous crime on their conscience.
Ha ha – do you think his going to the same restaurant as me means I mix with a few low lives too?
Jonathan, Maybe OJ heard you were in town and was keen to meet you. I’m sure you were dining in a very fine restaurant.
Purely as an aside, I noticed this story was “big” in today’s paper last night. I think it’s funny how the Sun took over a month to pick up on it (not that I’m suggesting for a minute they got it from me). I’ve just noticed recently how unbelievably slow the press here can actually be.
oh yes, guilty as hell.
Dizzy, You are always one step ahead, I don’t know how you manage to access so much information in one day. I guess the story has broken now because of the Fox TV interview – what a slime ball!
Absolutely disgusting and sickening that he should now make money from it in this way.
I find the show verrryyyy disturbing..to be honest I think his legal team proved their point and I was also not convinced of his guilt..but his actions over the years since has made me think this is a man who has done something wrong..
I sometimes wonder whether a delivered verdict isn’t the result of the skill and eloquence of a particular barrister than the actual truth.
Interesting that you and I have both posted on this, Lady Ellee and one thing I saw was that the blacks see him as innocent and the whites as guilty, especially white women. There are many anomalies to the whole thing.
Well Sir James, I think the white ladies quite like him now, but they tend to be ladies of the night, if you get my drift.
Who knows?
I wouldrather have the US system where normal people have acces to the law than ours when unless you qualify for legal aid you might as well forget it
For someone who is innocent, why did he write such a book!
Paul, I think the answer is greed!
That “If I Did It” is seriously messed up. Its as if he did do it and is confessing but knows he can get away with it because he was acquitted. Why would anyone want to hypothesise how they could have done a murder, if they didnt do it?
Support for O.J. was divided very much along racial lines in the U.S. when the criminal verdict came in. I can illustrate from personal experience: I remember watching the verdict in a partner’s office with all assembled. The attorneys in the office (exclusively white) were shocked, both because of the verdict and because the largely African-American staff cheered the result. (I don’t know that he enjoys much support in any community now, however.)
O.J. was guilty — but the criminal jury responded to an apparent attempt on the prosecution’s part to “gild the lilly.” The prosecution put a rogue cop on the stand as if he were a legit witness and did not challenge his probable planting of evidence — in short, the cops — at least that one — tried to frame a guilty man. And it tainted the entire mountain of evidence against O.J.
But as for double jeopardy, thank God I live in a country where we have a written constitution that protects us against re-trials of criminal acquitals. The miscarriage of justice in the O.J. case is unfortunate — and I could accept much stronger language on that — but far more unfortunate still is the prospect of a vindictive government impaneling jury after jury until one gets it right.
Curmudgeon, Thanks for your really interesting comment. Double jeopardy is new here, and there has only been one high profile murder re-trial that I know about when the killer was quite rightly convicted a second time.
But O.J. was convicted in a civil court in your country, which seems very strange having been acquitted in a criminal court. Couldn’t he be jailed for not paying his compensation?
Different burden of proof.
To be convicted criminally, he had to be shown to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Rogue Detective Furhman provided the degree — quite the opposite of what he intended.
To be found civilly liable for the wrongful death of his victims he needed to be found more probably liable than not, a far lesser standard.
No, he can’t be jailed for failing to pay the verdict — that would be a revival of debtors’ prisons — but most income he earns can be attached (garnisheed) and applied to the verdict.
Interest on a civil verdict runs at 9% in Illinois; I don’t know what it is in California.
But not all income can be attached; apparently (and I haven’t independently researched this) his football pension is exempt from attachment. He presumably had a plan for avoiding payment of any income he might have received from this latest book project — but I don’t know that this would have been well received in any court.
And we did have one high-profile case in Illinois a few years back where an accused hit-man was retried for the same murder. The double jeopardy defense was raised — but it had come out in the meantime that the trial judge in the first case (there was no jury) had been bribed. Since the defendant was never really ‘in jeopardy’ in the first trial, the second trial did not violate his constitutional protection against double jeopardy.
And one more thing: Although we have a protection against double jeopardy, because of our Federal system, we can have what amount to prosecutions for murder in the Federal courts under the guise of criminal violations of civil rights statutes. (Murder being a particular heinous violation of one’s civil rights, obviously.) This was how some Southern racists were finally brought to justice for crimes during the Civil Rights protests of the ’60’s.
I know: More than you really wanted in asking a follow up question. Sorry.
Curmudgeon, Thanks again, you certainly have all the answers.
Ah, don’t I wish?
What i find amazing is that just about everyone who has a comment on this case, DON’T KNOW THE FACTS!. The people who are involved with or have knowledge of these murders, is the FBI AND FUHRMAN!. The other two people are dead, Kardashion and Wasz. OJ knows too, but DID NOT DO IT!.
If for 1 second you believe that Marcia Clark Proved her case , then all of you are just as guilty of stupidity.
Nicole was murdered to make a statement to OJ.
KEEP QUIET OR YOUR KIDS ARE NEXT!!
I suggest that everyone with an opinion read the lengthy transcripts from the trial. No reasonable person could have found him guilty and believed they did their duty. As Henry Lee stated, “There is something wrong”.
As far as this nasty book……..check your facts again………O.J. did not author this book.
You are all giving far too much credit to what is presented in the media. The fact is that they are the most unreliable source for facts.
I believe that the verdict was correct and since innocence is assmued until found guilty, OJ was proved innocent.
Search on Mark Fuhrman 5th ammendment.
The fact is that with the jury out of the court room Fuhrman pled the 5th to ”
did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?”
This was after he also said he would plead the 5th to any question asked, which serves to obscure.
The jury was never notified of this. The jury did find enough discrepencies in the case to warrant a “not guilty” verdict however.
Read the case instead of the media on this one. Although I am a white woman, I would have had a hard time saying guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I do not necessarily believe the verdict was based on race, though I do believe that race was a part of the issue for many and for the media.
It was not possible for the LAPD to have planted evidence against Simpson, because too many people would have had to have been involved.
The testimony of limousine driver Allan Park alone convicts Simpson. Park got there at 10:22, and until about 10:55 Simpson did not answer the house intercom. Then Park saw Simpson walk into his house from the outside. All the lights in front of the house were shut. Simpson then claimed that he had been in the shower. In a normal criminal case, this would have convicted Simpson.
Since this egregious lie by Simpson will not convince the conspiracy theorists that Simpson was guilty, now they will have to add Allan Park as another member of the conspiracy against Simpson.
If they would look more into Kato, I think the world will have their answer. Kato had access to Oj’s belongings, and I believe the mob or someone high up hired Kato to help frame OJ, while the murder of OJ’s ex-wife was sent as a message to Oj for some reason he is aware of. I think if OJ talked, his remaining family will be in danger. Kato knew he would be on the grounds alone, so why did he not call the police about the noise he heard behind his room? Because he most like lied and this was all in the plan to frame OJ. How hard would it be to get DNA of OJ from his home? Why was the glove behind Kato’s room but no leaves disturbed or bloody. If you think old Oj can carve people up like that with the man fighting, come home, park on the street (dumb move for a murderer) jump a fense go take a shower, hide the evidence and leave for the airport without leaving a bloody mess in his home you are crazy. If OJ did not fight Nicole when he saw her having sexual relations in view of a window, I doubt the recital would cause him to murder his children’s mother. The murderers just smell professional. How does a body hit a wall three times as the example Kato gave in court? You would have to be made of rubber to bounce three times. Did they try to recreate those knocks? How gullible to let a squatter who never finished a sentence in his life, turn so many heads to say OJ is guilty, just because that is what makes news, white wife killed by black ex ball player husband. Bull… OJ let the squatter stay on his property to keep the squatter from living in the same house with his children. What a bum. OF course I have little positive things to say about OJ since the trial, but let’s get real, there are killers out there, and what would you do if you had to keep your mouth shut because you have to protect your family and the world hates you? What a mess our world is in to let this murder take so much air, and chat time. People believe what they want to believe, and the cold hard truth will not change anyone’s mind. I had no doubt that OJ would lose the second trial. No doubt what so ever. This is our world, and welcome to it!
He didn’t do it.Too many reasons.Goldman was in a fierce struggle with his killer.O.J. would have had multiple wounds on his body and hands.Tell me this.Could a person go to the airport,talk to alot of people and seem calm after he not only killed 2 people but also left plenty of evidence(glove,hat,blood) at the crime scene and also a glove on his property that would surely point to him.He would know he was in big trouble.The evidence seems too convenient.There’s no way a person could remain calm knowing he killed 2 people and left all these clues that would prove his guilt.Think about it.He had to be set up.
Just want to say your article is as amazing. The clarity for your put up is just nice and that i can assume you’re a professional in this subject. Well together with your permission allow me to take hold of your RSS feed to stay updated with coming near near post. Thank you 1,000,000 and please continue the enjoyable work.
For me his incoherent rambling interview with the police alone condemns him..I don’t for one minute give creedence to Kris Kardashian or Faye Resnick’s cash in accounts of what Nicole ‘said’ but I believe he saw red and snapped that night and then literally got away with murder….the fact that he’s in prison now is some kind of poetic justice, from watching him speak and researching all angles I can only conclude that either he wasn’t wired up right to start with or fame, money and greed made him so arrogant he thought he was untouchable!!!