O.J. Simpson's 'If I Did It' to be published

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Anyway, these people are BW's friends - so I am letting this go.

Black Widow? Barbara Walters?

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by BlackWidow

"Confessions Of A Double Murderer"

I think he will finally tell the truth - You know he must be racked with guilt.
Otherwise why would he write this?

Do sociopaths feel guilt? I doubt it. He did it for the money.

[Sarah]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Do sociopaths feel guilt? I doubt it. He did it for the money.

Yeah, +1. He doesn't give a damn. He murdered two people, got caught, went through the system, beat it, and is a free man save for a "nasty reputation". Realistically, if I was in his same position, I might not give a crap either, because all things considered, I got the cake and ate it, too. Does that make sense?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Black Widow? Barbara Walters?

I believe Black Widow was friendly with Nicole Brown Simpson. I think he also knows the Goldmans.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by danax6

. . . What? No 'it's his story to tell' or anything else that could possibly redeem him from bringing this garbage to the limelight? I must confess I find that shocking, coming from you.

It is OJ's story to tell and I support his right to tell it. But, I think it is way tacky for him to tell it and i would never buy that book. Those are different notions. That is the fundamental underpinning of the doctrine of free speech.

[Tango]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

It is OJ's story to tell and I support his right to tell it. But, I think it is way tacky for him to tell it and i would never buy that book. Those are different notions. That is the fundamental underpinning of the doctrine of free speech.

The whole thing is crazy. OJ hasn't really paid anything for his crime. Instead, WE, the buying public are supposed to help pay off OJ's judgement! Gimme a break. The sentencing should have involved something other than a financial cost. I don't have the wisdom to figure out the right penalty for him, but it should involve cleaning bathrooms forever, or something else menial, something that involves his time, since he was responsible for the lose of precious life time of two individuals.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Tango

The whole thing is crazy. OJ hasn't really paid anything for his crime. Instead, WE, the buying public are supposed to help pay off OJ's judgement! Gimme a break. The sentencing should have involved something other than a financial cost. I don't have the wisdom to figure out the right penalty for him, but it should involve cleaning bathrooms forever, or something else menial, something that involves his time, since he was responsible for the lose of precious life time of two individuals.

Oh Lord - I just cannot resist -- OJ owes the state and the public nothing. The state did not convict him in a criminal proceeding. Like it or not, he is innocent in the eyes of the law. Whether people believe differently is irrelevant from a legal point of view. If one does not like that, then change the US Constitution's sanctioning of double jeopardy.

He was, however, found responsible in a civil court, which has different standard of proof and different penalties from criminal court. That finding of liability resulted in a monetary award to the aggrieved parties.

The two are wholly mutually exclusive.

As for the we the public paying off the civil judgment - don't but the book no matter the publisher - that is the only power of this that an unrelated individual has I will not buy this book.

[Tango]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Oh Lord - I just cannot resist -- OJ owes the state and the public nothing. The state did not convict him in a criminal proceeding. Like it or not, he is innocent in the eyes of the law. Whether people believe differently is irrelevant from a legal point of view. If one does not like that, then change the US Constitution's sanctioning of double jeopardy.

He was, however, found responsible in a civil court, which has different standard of proof and different penalties from criminal court. That finding of liability resulted in a monetary award to the aggrieved parties.

The two are wholly mutually exclusive.

As for the we the public paying off the civil judgment - don't but the book no matter the publisher - that is the only power of this that an unrelated individual has I will not buy this book.

Exactly my point. He was found responsible in civil court. But this book deal is allowing the public, not OJ, to pay for his jugement.

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by Tango

Exactly my point. He was found responsible in civil court. But this book deal is allowing the public, not OJ, to pay for his jugement.

only if people buy it

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Tango

Exactly my point. He was found responsible in civil court. But this book deal is allowing the public, not OJ, to pay for his jugement.

Touche'

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I believe Black Widow was friendly with Nicole Brown Simpson. I think he also knows the Goldmans.

Oh. I'm sorry Andre.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Oh. I'm sorry Andre.

We had a big discussion about it awhile back in some other thread.

And, yes, I am sorry for his loss

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by Tango

The whole thing is crazy. OJ hasn't really paid anything for his crime. Instead, WE, the buying public are supposed to help pay off OJ's judgement!

I hadn't quite thought about it that way but you're right.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I hadn't quite thought about it that way but you're right.

And - FG is using the work of the man who allegedly murdered his son to pay it. That just rubs me the wrong way. In other words, suppose OJ had personally gotten the rights from the sale of this book and then the court attached those rights in payment of the civil judgement - would FG have objected then? Considering he is looking to make money in this current way, it is likely he would not have. FG only objected to the initial publication because the money was to go to a trust for OJ's kids and, therefore, outside of the grasp of the civil court's jurisdiction to enforce the monetary award. So, I conclude that it is not the story FG objects to, it is the fact that FG is not getting the money made off of it. AND - this is FG's right to do this. I just think it is tacky just as I thought it was tacky for OJ to do it.

[BlackWidow]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

We had a big discussion about it awhile back in some other thread.

And, yes, I am sorry for his loss

Thanks. I met the Goldman's a few times.
I knew Nicole very well. It is just too unbelievable to wrap my brain around.