quote:LOS ANGELES - Fox plans to broadcast an interview with O.J. Simpson in which the former football star discusses "how he would have committed" the slayings of his ex-wife and her friend, for which he was acquitted, the network said.
The two-part interview, titled "O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here's How It Happened," will air Nov. 27 and Nov. 29, the TV network said.
Simpson has agreed to an "unrestricted" interview with book publisher Judith Regan, Fox said.
"O.J. Simpson, in his own words, tells for the first time how he would have committed the murders if he were the one responsible for the crimes," the network said in a statement. "In the two-part event, Simpson describes how he would have carried out the murders he has vehemently denied committing for over a decade."
posted
I am not even going to click the link to give his story any more traffic then it has already generated.
He deserves no royalties or audience. Even if he is innocent...to put his kids through this?!! No clickie for me.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a pretty broad moral palette, but the idea of this books sickens me. And like lem, I won't even bother clicking on the link.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
All dastardly affairs aside, I won't click on the link, for already stated reasons.
God, I can't believe he has the shamelessness to publish this thing, and the thought that it's going to sell like warm bread sickens me even more. This, to me at least, is a flat out confession and a mockery of the double jeopardy laws.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
So will his ex-wife's family receive any of the proceeds? They still have a huge unfulfilled civil judgment. While that might be a good thing to come out this horror of a book, I imagine if they do get money out of it they'll. . . have mixed feelings? Hate themselves for cashing the checks? I'm not sure how to phrase that thought.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:The link is to the Yahoo! news story, so he receives no direct benefit from your clicking the link, but I definitely understand the motivation.
he recieves benefit in the round-a-bout way of generating more traffic to a webpage with information about his book which could potentially lead to more sales. I mean, even the link in this thread boosts the search engine ranking of that ariticle, making it more accessable to more people.
I'm not advocating some sort of ban on learning more about this story or his book. I just personally have no interest in not only buying the book, but even hearing anymore about it. The title is enough for me.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: The link is to the Yahoo! news story, so he receives no direct benefit from your clicking the link, but I definitely understand the motivation.
I repeat: someone, vigilante justice, C'MON.
Should we storm his residence with torches and pitchforks?
EDIT: Oh! And let's not forget to wear our Fawkes masks!
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I imagine if they do get money out of it they'll. . . have mixed feelings? Hate themselves for cashing the checks?
I'm not sure about that. They did collect a very large amount of money in the civil suit against OJ. That said, I'm certain the families won't get any of the money. It's OJ's book, he can write what he wants.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
They were awarded a large amount of money, which they have yet to collect because he pled poverty.
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I kind of feel like OJ should be dealt with the same way one should deal with the KKK...
Utterly ignore them. Give them zero attention and zero fuel for their selfish and loathsome fire.
The man is so attention hungry. We should starve him out. Giving him an interview is a huge mistake. We can't collect coup on him, so we might as well put him in a social oubliette.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there a way to find out who the sponsors will be for that show? I'd like to tell them how pleased I am with their choice and let them know how it will affect my opinion of their product.
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I clicked on the link, but only to see who the book publisher is. Judith Regan will not be getting any more of my business.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
They were talking about this on Howard Stern yesterday, and there was some discussion about the possibility that this could be taken by some federal prosecutor somewhere as an admission of guilt, and there was the hope that he could be tried again in the federal courts -- something about treating the murder as a civil rights violation, and bringing federal charges.
Any of the lawyer types want to comment on this? Is that a realistic possibility?
posted
Ted Bundy went to the electric chair claiming to be an innocent man. In a stunning move, he did allow himself to be interviewed where he went into very graphic details of what "might" be going through the mind of a serial murderer to commit crimes of the nature he was charged with.
He recounted his ideas in the third person, never acknowledging the thoughts to be his own, rather those of an "actual" serial killer.
This is VERY similar to what OJ is doing.
In Bundy's case, it provided the BSU of the FBI a plethora of information into the mind of a serial killer.
Posts: 340 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:A lot of people are expecting this to be a confession in which Simpson will explain how he did it but without explicitly admitted that he did it. I don't know why they assume this. He could well "tell all"...but he could also decide to make the explanation of how he killed those two people too complex and full of things that could not have happened. In other words, this could be an attempt to argue his innocence by saying, in effect, "Look...even if I tried to confess, the confession doesn't fit with the known facts."
Of course, this is being logical and very little about this case has ever been logical. Simpson could be so punchy and reckless by now, he might not be operating with an ounce of sense or even consistency in his guilty noggin. That recent "hidden camera" show he did suggests a man who doesn't know what he's doing...or maybe doesn't care. But he does have that huge judgment hanging over his head, and Fred Goldman has stated several times that he would waive it if Simpson would just confess. O.J. stands to make something like 3.5 million for the interview and book, and that's a pretty big invitation for the Goldmans to haul his murdering ass back into court to try and claim that money. To confess without confessing assuming he doesn't go the route described above and turn the "confession" into an argument for innocence doesn't make a lot of sense just from that standpoint. To confess for real might enable him to keep that 3.5 mil, or at least to put Fred Goldman on the defensive if he goes after the money. ("Hey, the guy promised to drop that if I confessed and I've confessed.")
posted
Actually, Jhai, JudithRegan gave an interesting interview on why she published OJ's story which might change your mind about Regan. Still not interested in reading or even glancing at the book, myself.
Also says that the publisher neither dealt with nor signed a contract with OJ himself, and that the royalties will go through a third-party directly to Nicole's kids. Admittedly, there is still something creepy about kids accepting money from their father's story about murdering their mother, even if they were absolutely certain that it was fictional.
posted
This comment was on Digg -- well said, I thought. There are way worse creatures than Simpson running around out there, and impossibly more things more important.
quote:Why should we even care?
Let's put this in perspective. Fox is a conservative-run network. The Republicans have just lost control over Congress. The President is a lame duck with a 31% approval rating. Trent Lott was accepted as minority leader by one vote. Condoleeza Rice finally has the power to convince the President that Rumsfeld was an idiot ... by the way, Rumsfeld just quit. Ken Mehlman just quit. Karl Rove is gone in a few weeks. General Abizaid disagrees with both Republicans and Democrats on military policy, putting him squarely in the "What the **** is going on" column right next to Bush. Bush has just visited, of all countries, VIETNAM and says the only thing to learn from it is "Don't give up!" Tony Blair, our last remaining strong ally on this, has suggested Iraq is a disaster and we need to talk to Syria and Iran. Oh, and Tony Blair has been voted out by his own party, too.
Now, Fox is airing a special on OJ Simpson's "confession." The book is being published by a company owned by Rupert Murdoch. This is all announced in the same week that ALL OF THIS SHIT HAPPENS.
OJ Simpson is to white people what flashlights are to cats. You are being played and you need to just do the smart thing and IGNORE IT.
posted
The question isn't whether OJ is innocent, but whether the prosecution provided sufficient evidence of guilt. And the question really has nothing to do with race.
Most of those I know think that OJ was guilty. They also think that there were a LOT of errors in how the evidence was obtained, in how it was handled, and in how it was tested afterwards. Enough so that evidence tampering was plausible. Leaving more than enough doubt that a "beyond the shadow of doubt" guilty verdict could not be returned by any fair jury.
OJ's lawyers didn't win the case. The police and coroner's office lost the case well before the prosecutors ever got it to trial.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The evidence gathering was such an apparent mess that during the trial I found blood on my socks...
Everybody I know is pretty much convinced he's guilty as hell. I'm not all too pleased about the system because of this case, but one can argue an alternative probably isn't any better.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe: almost half of the black american community thinks hes innocent
*Say* they think he's innocent. This is one of those stats that you're never going to really get right. What people think ow is different from what they thought years ago, and what they SAID they thought years ago is different from what they might have actually thought. And on and on.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: "I think he's crazy," said Gerald Uelmen, a Santa Clara University law professor and member of the high-octane "dream team" of lawyers who engineered a not-guilty verdict in the former football star's gripping trial...
"I just want to stay out of this," he said. "I think the whole idea is insane."
Nor will he be watching the interview or reading the book. "I think everything of consequence will be on the news," he said.
He has yet to [pay the families of his victims]. And Uelmen doesn't think Simpson will be able to shield any book profits from them.
"I think any competent lawyer would be able to reach those proceeds," he said.
quote: Another Simpson attorney -- normally chatty and media-friendly Alan Dershowitz -- sent a response from his BlackBerry to the Mercury News about a request to talk about the book. The message reads: "No way."
quote:Originally posted by Celaeno: OJ's old laywers weigh in:
quote: "I think he's crazy," said Gerald Uelmen, a Santa Clara University law professor and member of the high-octane "dream team" of lawyers who engineered a not-guilty verdict in the former football star's gripping trial...
"I just want to stay out of this," he said. "I think the whole idea is insane."
Nor will he be watching the interview or reading the book. "I think everything of consequence will be on the news," he said.
He has yet to [pay the families of his victims]. And Uelmen doesn't think Simpson will be able to shield any book profits from them.
"I think any competent lawyer would be able to reach those proceeds," he said.
quote: Another Simpson attorney -- normally chatty and media-friendly Alan Dershowitz -- sent a response from his BlackBerry to the Mercury News about a request to talk about the book. The message reads: "No way."
I'm surprised they said anything. They're usually very strict about the whole "attorney/client privilege" thing, and it's never a good thing to have your own attorney call you "crazy."
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:After a firestorm of criticism, News. Corp. said Monday that it has canceled the O.J. Simpson book and TV special "If I Did It."
"I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project," said Rupert Murdoch, News Corp. chairman. "We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson."
posted
And I was waiting to see Ron Goldman's father show up at a book signing. During the trial, I kept thinking he looked a lot like Charles Bronson, and sometimes I hoped he reacted like him too.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
