O.J. Simpson: If I Did It

Dondrei

Diabloii.Net Member
O.J. Simpson: If I Did It

Okay, there were two interesting articles in my newspaper today.

MSNBC said:
O.J. Simpson is confessing. Hypothetically, that is.

The former football great, who was acquitted in criminal court 11 years ago of killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, reportedly has been paid a whopping $3.5 million to write about the double murder that shocked and riveted the nation in 1994, according to a detailed report in the new National Enquirer.

But Simpson is not actually confessing to the murder — rather, he’s writing a “hypothetical†book — which the Enquirer reports is tentatively being called “If I Did It.â€

The early part of the book tells how Simpson fell in love with Nicole and how the marriage collapsed, reports the tab. He goes on, according to the article, to describe in gruesome detail the killing of his ex-wife and Goldman; he stipulates that the murder scenes are “hypothetical.†But, notes the tab, the descriptions are “so detailed and so chillingly realistic†that readers are left with little doubt as to what really happened.

Simpson can never be retried for the murders because of double jeopardy laws, according to the Enquirer, which also claims that Simpson aims to keep any book money instead of paying it out in a civil suit judgment against him by spending it all quickly.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15066202/

He's just rubbing it in now.
 

skihard

Banned
If there were better prosocuters and if the crime scene would have been taken care of better than perhaps he would be behind bars but, some people decided to do things half assed and now he has the right to give a big FU to anyone he wants.
 

Merick

Diabloii.Net Member
Yeah, I heard about that. It's really messed up. And it's going to sell like hotcakes.
 

SaroDarksbane

Diabloii.Net Site Pal
If there were better prosocuters and if the crime scene would have been taken care of better than perhaps he would be behind bars but, some people decided to do things half assed and now he has the right to give a big FU to anyone he wants.
The funny thing is, half-assed police work or not, if any of us had been in his situation we'd be behind bars right now.

Must be nice to be rich enough to buy your way out of trouble.



 

myleftfoot

Diabloii.Net Member
The funny thing is, half-assed police work or not, if any of us had been in his situation we'd be behind bars right now.

Must be nice to be rich enough to buy your way out of trouble.
Is it a case that the rich can afford justice while the normal can't?



 

HAMC8112

Diabloii.Net Member
He is just making some bucks, the American way! :D

Edit: i wonder about the jury sometimes, OJ should really send each a free copy of his book. They must be feeling complete ***holes now.
 

Freet

Diabloii.Net Member
So you read the Enquirer hey?

Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt he did it nor do I doubt that the Enquirer would be the first to get the 'scoop'.

I just have a very short fuse when it comes to tabloid 'journalism'.

I also have little faith in the accuracy of a story that can not be proven right or wrong. I also question the accuracy of a story that made him 3 big ones.

All in all, I would not spend the 25 cents on what is most likely a fictional story written by a crap author published by a company that could care less if what goes in between the front and back cover is accurate or not. So long as it sells their craptastic paper.
 

myleftfoot

Diabloii.Net Member
He is just making some bucks, the American way! :D

Edit: i wonder about the jury sometimes, OJ should really send each a free copy of his book. They must be feeling complete ***holes now.
Not wanting to get in to specifics but didn't the Jury have no other option considering all the evidence was thrown out?



 

HAMC8112

Diabloii.Net Member
Not wanting to get in to specifics but didn't the Jury have no other option considering all the evidence was thrown out?
No i do not think so, to me it sounded more like poor old innocent OJ, he was framed by a racist policeman.



 

Savage

Diabloii.Net Member
So you read the Enquirer hey?

Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt he did it nor do I doubt that the Enquirer would be the first to get the 'scoop'.

I just have a very short fuse when it comes to tabloid 'journalism'.

I also have little faith in the accuracy of a story that can not be proven right or wrong. I also question the accuracy of a story that made him 3 big ones.

All in all, I would not spend the 25 cents on what is most likely a fictional story written by a crap author published by a company that could care less if what goes in between the front and back cover is accurate or not. So long as it sells their craptastic paper.
The article is from MSNBC. It refers to an Inquirer article.



 

AeroJonesy

Diabloii.Net Member
Well, he does owe the families of his victim's like 30 million from the civil trial, so I suspect they should get most of it. I doubt they will, but they should.
I think they would. He won't lose the money from the "proceeds of crime" thing since that's designed for paying restitution to the families of criminal victims. But since he has a huge debt from the wrongful death suit, I can't see how he can dodge paying out any money he gets in by spending it quickly. Besides, he'd have to spend it Brewster's Millions style by not buying anything that could get repossessed.



 

Isolde212

Banned
Can someone explain to me how a person aquitted of murder in criminal court can be found liable in civil court. He either did it or he didn't. Or he didn't but he's still responsible? One jury says he didn't do but another says he did. I'm confuzzled.
 

zodiac66

Diabloii.Net Member
Can someone explain to me how a person aquitted of murder in criminal court can be found liable in civil court. He either did it or he didn't. Or he didn't but he's still responsible? One jury says he didn't do but another says he did. I'm confuzzled.
In a criminal case the jury must decide beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil case it is decided by the proponderance of the evidence. That means only 51% sure he did it.



 
Top