O.J. Says He's Innocent, Book Not a Confession

O.J. Simpson's price for his book with a hypotheical confession was $880,000. Of that, $100k went to the ghost writer and the rest to his children.

His rationale: He had bills (including taxes) to pay.

His gripe: He has received more criticism that News Corp.

One final note: He tells the AP his book was not a confession. He didn't write the hypothetical chapter nor select the name of the book.

'It's all blood money and unfortunately I had to join the jackals,'' Simpson told The Associated Press, referring to authors of books about him. ''It helped me get out of debt and secure my homestead.''

From Fred Goldman's attorney: Vengence will be ours:

Goldman attorney Jonathan G. Polak said the family will work to ''place Simpson in a `virtual' jail cell, from which he will never emerge. If that means pursuing him until his last day on this Earth, then they are prepared to do precisely that.''

I'm more insulted by the Goldman position than OJ's. He was acquitted in the criminal trial. He has never confessed to the crime. The civil verdict in a wrongful death action, with its lesser standard of proof, does not trump an acquittal in a criminal case.

I don't know who killed Nicole Brown Simpson and Fred Goldman's son. What I do know is that a criminal jury found O.J. not guilty of murder.

O.J. can never move on with the civil judgment hanging over his head. The Goldmans and Browns can move on. And they should. Professional victimhood demeans them.

< Atlanta police kill 92 year old woman in drug raid; flawed SCOTUS policy? | I Wish Thanksgiving Was For All of Us >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    OJ killed his wife (1.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Dadler on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 02:47:24 PM EST
    And got away with it.  This happens every day, everywhere.  We don't KNOW the sun is going to come up every day, but it does.  We don't KNOW that our heart will keep beating, but it does.  
    Jeralyn, I love you, but tossing around terms like professional victim is thoughtless and cruel.  The term is as empty and useless as reverse racism.  No offense, but if your dear son had his head almost carved off and the murderer walked free, you'd be singing a much different tune.  To even suggest you wouldn't is to suggest you are not a sentient being.

    Not guilty is not innocent (none / 0) (#1)
    by freedem on Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 09:22:33 PM EST
    Simpson was found not guilty by reason of police corruption in the case. I think even most who thought he should be found not guilty did not believe he had nothing to do with it.

    I think that the Simpsons and Goldmans should have been as outraged at how badly the case was handled, but I do understand their vindictiveness, as I don't think they have even a shred of doubt as to what happened.

    It is not like the Sandra Levey case, where there was no actual evidence and plenty other probable causes, as well as other victims that may have been related.

    Police Corruption (1.00 / 1) (#6)
    by terry hallinan on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 01:41:18 AM EST
    Simpson was found not guilty by reason of police corruption in the case.

    Pure nonsense.  Johnnie Cochran played the race card to the hilt and the jury lapped it up as did the press.  The legend lives on despite the evidence.

    One fascinating bit of trivia was OJ's cap at the scene with OJ's hairs in them was widely reported to contain hairs from an African-American.  OJ doesn't have negroid hair.  Nor does he have caucasoid hair. His hair has a very unusual bilateral symmetry reflective of mixed heritage not often seen.

    The idiocy of Detective Vanatter sprinkling OJ's blood around like the Pope sprinkling holy water is topped by the legend of Fuhrman planting OJ's bloody glove at OJ's mansion.  

    "We've got to protect our own," said the jury forewoman.  And so they did.  

    And African-Americans were overjoyed that the killer got away with it.  Hell, everybody knew he was guilty.

    Cops do a lot of bad things but they were only guilty of being LA cops in this case with a jury no different than the one that found the killers of Emmett Till not guilty.

    Best,  Terry


    Do the Math (none / 0) (#2)
    by Peter G on Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 10:33:04 PM EST
    I'm a little lost.  He received a fee of $880,000. Of this, $100,000 went to a ghostwriter.  The rest went to his children, he says.  How does that help pay bills, clear tax delinquencies, secure a homestead, or anything else, much less get anyone out of debt?  In fact, even if only $780,000 was taxable income to him, then wouldn't more than $100,000 of that be due as income tax off the top before any of it went to the children?

    Good catch (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 11:36:06 PM EST
    Good catch on the bills, Peter.  But,I think he was talking about past due taxes.  I assume the $780k is taxable to the kids, not OJ, since he didn't receive the money.  It went from News Corp. to a third party who gave it to the kids.  Not a taxable event for OJ.

    He receives a pension that is not subject to the judgment.  He has to pay taxes on that.  If the pension and income from his name are his only income sources for living expenses, he's probably in credit card debt and used the portion of the pension money he should have paid his taxes with to live and provide for the kids -- including a house payment for the house they all live in.

    Yet,if he got none of the $780k, all he is saving is future pension money he would have spent on the kids that they can now pay themselves. So something doesn't ring true.


    one more thing (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 11:37:30 PM EST
    Perhaps the kids, I assume Sydney is now 18, is volunteering to use her share of the money to pay his debts and back taxes.

    Refreshing (none / 0) (#3)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed Nov 22, 2006 at 11:11:10 PM EST
    I found the excerpts of the interview with Simpson that I saw refreshing. He admitted that the FOX book deal was unseemly, but he did it to get some money for his kids.

    I followed the case with an open mind. The autopsies suggest that the ghastly throat wound to Nicole Simpson and the stab wound in Goldman's back, which cut his femoral artery, were both delivered after the two were dead and had bled out of their punctured jugular veins. Read them.

    Additionally, the day after the murders the Goldmans told the coroner's investigator that they had talked to their daughter at 11 p.m. At 11 p.m. Simpson was loading his luggage into the limo that took him to the airport. They changed their story a few weeks later.

    There are innocent men in prison who are routinely denied parole because they refuse to show remorse for crimes they didn't commit. Simpson didn't commit those murders.

    Huh? (none / 0) (#9)
    by ding7777 on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 04:47:21 AM EST
    Don't you mean the Browns talked to their daughter?

    There is no record that Juditha called Nicole at 11:00 pm - Lou made a mistake when talking to the investigator

    Oj's lawyers stipulated the times of the GTE bill showing the 9:40 call

    OJ's suit against GTE for the bogus 11:00 pm called was dismissed,


    butchering hogs. (none / 0) (#10)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 08:16:26 AM EST
    I tell you what I saw on the steps.

    Enough blood to make me immediately recall butchering hogs when I was a boy.


    Bull (none / 0) (#11)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 09:50:14 AM EST
    Simpson didn't commit those murders.

    Even his defense team couldn't explain how both vitcims' blood found its way into his car, along with the killer's shoeprint, and one victim's blood found its way into his bedroom.  

    Why don't you give us a hypothetical scenario that explains how all the evidence found its way to where it was found, without OJ's participation.

    His plan was to kill Nicole, get in a limo and be in Chicago before it was discovered, giving him an alibi.  Ron Goldman crossed him up by arriving and making him fight, losing a hat and glove and getting 12 cuts on his left hand and putting him behind schedule, and then the chauffeur arrived early, which meant he had to walk past him and leave his car, bloody, on the street, to get into his house.

    There was no police corruption.  There were good cops with human frailties who were slandered so a killer could walk free.

    And the jury didn't even deliberate, packing their bags before the summation was complete.


    Browns talk to daughter; blood evidence hinky (none / 0) (#12)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 10:57:38 AM EST
    Yes, ding, the next day, approximately 12 or so hours later, Coroner's investigator Ratcliffe talked with the Browns about when they had last talked with their daughter. As you may recall, the two detectives overseeing the crime scene, Lange and Vannatter, had in violation of California law kept the coroner from the scene until the corpses had reached the ambient temperature. That made it impossible for the coroner to pinpoint the time of death for the victims.

    So when Ratcliffe called the parents, she wasn't just making conversation. Her primary reason was to find out when was the last time Nicole Simpson was known to be alive. So when she talked to the Browns, the very next morning, she wanted them to be accurate. And I am sure that they wanted to be accurate. So how come their first, best recollection of the last time they talked with their daughter was at 11 p.m., and their reconsideration a few weeks later was nine-forty? How do both people (they were both there when Ratcliffe called) confuse that huge gap in time in half a day? And how do you suddenly get the right recollection a couple weeks later? You are following the Duke case. Does this seem right to you?

    By the way, the phone bill stipulated to was dated July 4. How many billing offices are open on July 4th?

    So Mr. Brown made a mistake of almost an hour and a half estimating the last time he talked with his daughter before she died? Is that believable to you?


    Bull: "Even his defense team couldn't explain how both vitcims' blood found its way into his car, along with the killer's shoeprint, and one victim's blood found its way into his bedroom."

    Actually, the defense did. Perhaps you weren't listening to the case, or you paid too much attention to the talking heads at night. Barry Scheck demolished the blood evidence in his final summation but the press instead spent all its time and space on Fred Goldman's blowup that day.

    When OJ's socks were recovered there was no blood observed on them according to the criminologist's report. There were subsequent viewings of the socks with both defense and prosecution representatives without any blood being seen on them. Then sometime in August a bloodstain a little larger than a quarter appeared on the sock. The stain went through the outside of the sock, through the inside to stain the inside of the other side of the sock. Hard for that to happen if a foot was in there. That was the "blood evidence" in Simpson's bedroom.

    You may have missed the week of testimony of people who looked inside the Bronco and did not see the large blood smears before someone from the LAPD showed up with a LIFE Magazine photographer in August.

    And regarding the blood on the sidewalk, go back to the part of the trial where it was discussed how the blood on the swatches, that had dried throughout the afternoon of the 13th and overnight was suddenly wet again when put into their bindles on the morning of the 14th. Perhaps you just missed or forgot that testimony.

    Jim: "Enough blood to make me immediately recall butchering hogs when I was a boy."

    But go back to the autopsies. Read them and then ask yourself how someone could bleed out so totally from a throat wound that reached the back of her throat (to cut her epiglottis) and yet there was no blood in her mouth or sinuses, and no aspiration into her lungs. Ask yourself why Simpson would kill Goldman by puncturing his neck, then wait ten minutes and give him a meaningless stab in the back and pose him sitting leaning against the tree stump where Goldman was found.

    Read the autopsies.

    In school (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 12:52:49 PM EST
    By the way, the phone bill stipulated to was dated July 4. How many billing offices are open on July 4th?

    Bob - telephone billing records are automated and run 24/7/365.

    If your understanding of other technical things match the above you should have been in school instead of watching TV.


    Yes, mistakes happen (none / 0) (#19)
    by ding7777 on Thu Nov 23, 2006 at 02:48:55 PM EST
    Now couple that with the Browns just finding out that their daughter had been murdered the night before. (and why are you taking Lou's misremembered time of the call when it was Juditha who made the call anyway)

    If you want to believe that Nicole was alive at 11:00pm then how do you explain the Akita barking/walking aimlessly from 10:15 to at least 11:00pm


    I have the entire transcript (none / 0) (#20)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Nov 24, 2006 at 09:59:23 AM EST
    I listened to as much of the testimony as I could get away with, and I have the entire transcript, which I have read word for word, on my computer.

    OJ did it.  The defense made accusations, none of them true, and the jury bought it.

    The evidence is the evidence.,  Please explain how it got there without OJ.  Use framing,  corrupt cops, whatever in your hypothetical, and if you can't explain it, OJ did it.

    Who hit the air conditioner behind Kato Kaelin's room 20 minutes after the murders, and left a bloody glove?  The killer wore a pair of gloves sold no closer than Chicago to L.A., and only six pairs of these gloves were sold in the entire country.  OJ owned two of those pairs.  Explain.

    The killer left a Bruno Magli shoeprint in the car, and OJ owned a pair of those expensive and rare shoes.  Explain.

    OJ left his blood at the crime scene.  He had 12 cuts on his left hand and no other recent injuries.  He also left a drop of blood on a floor in his house that had been cleaned the day before.  The evidence is irrefutable that OJ was bleeding when the chauffeur saw him enter the house ten minutes after the murders.  (OJ never gave any explanation for the cuts on his left hand.)  Explain.

    The killer was a Black man (hair in the cap) who wore size 12 Bruno Magli shoes (shoeprints at the scene), had type A-negative blood (one in 200) and wore one of the six pairs of size large Isotoner Leather-Lite gloves (found at the crime scene) sold in the entire country.  How big was the pool of suspects?


    Here is problem (1.) regarding the O.J. Trials (none / 0) (#21)
    by Big Ben on Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 03:21:25 AM EST
    (1.) Although Lou Brown had stated in the autopsy report that his daughter Nicole was alive at 11:00 PM talking on the phone to her mother.  The mother, Juditha, had told the defense investigators, and Robert Shapiro, at least twice, that she had spoke to Nicole at approximately 11:00 PM when she got home. (Page 33, of Shapiro's book, Search for Justice).  The rules of common law should have strictly governed the civil trial, pursuant to the 7th Amend. U.S. Const.  No way should the lawyers have been allowed to stipulate to telephone times and records which to this day are still the center of contraversy. Under its obligation, only the jury is allowed to authenticate the veracity of evidence introduced into trial, not lawyers. Case law has frowned upon such activity of lawyers to trespass into the domain of the 'triers of law (judge)' or the 'triers of fact (jury)'.  The collusion of retained defense and plaintiffs' counsel in 19th century England to create their own time as evidence of when death occurred with whaling ship crewmen allowed them to abscound with enormous sums of whaling funds quietly set aside for such occurances, until the court stepped in to stop such practices.  

    how big was it? (none / 0) (#22)
    by runswithscissors on Mon Jan 15, 2007 at 04:55:57 PM EST
    The killer was a Black man (hair in the cap) who wore size 12 Bruno Magli shoes (shoeprints at the scene), had type A-negative blood (one in 200) and wore one of the six pairs of size large Isotoner Leather-Lite gloves (found at the crime scene) sold in the entire country.  How big was the pool of suspects?

    I don't know but you must