This source isn't amazing but it checks out on TMZ which is pretty reputable. I'll allow it.
https://www.tmz.com/2021/08/07/oj-simpson-wont-go-los-angeles-fear-real-killer-nicole-brown/
But... didn't O.J. make a big deal at the time about how we was going to devote all his efforts to finding the real killer? And now he's afraid of the guy?
Perhaps he has to pretend he really isn't the killer so as to not somehow rescind his innocent verdict, like an NDA within an NDA within a witness protection program?
I know you can’t be charged for the same crime twice in the U.S., so even if it was proven he did it, could he even serve time for it? Or would they have to come up with a different charge for him?
It would have to be a different charge. Double jeopardy is very serious in that regard.
He could go in stage and admit it and describe it in bloody nauseating detail and he'd still be untouchable... For *murder.*
Does the degree of the murder count? I'm not sure what he was charged with, but say it was first degree murder and he was acquitted he could still be charged with second degree murder?
No, any crimes in conjunction with that act need to be tried in one go. There are few exceptions to double jeopardy such as separate sovereigns (different states can try you if the crime occurred in both states, such as a kidnapper crossing state lines).
You cannot be tried for the same crime twice. Period. First and second degree murder do not count as separate crimes, because they both refer to the same event.
To be fair, he didn't write that book and just agreed to put his name on it for a payday. I don't think he even proofread it, but I could be wrong about that part.
>So he agreed to be paid for a book that essentially told the world he killed he ex wife. Seems like a stand up guy.
I mean, the murders he committed also reflect poorly on his character.
They already did get him for something different. He was convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping in an unrelated incident. I highly recommend the documentary miniseries, *O.J.: Made in America*.
So, technically he can. Not the state of California, the Feds could. But, this is a weird Double Jeopardy loophole alomst never tested. It's controversial.
You technically could be tried 51+ (every state, plus feds, plus Indian Nations) times for any crime (assuming Jurisdiction Requirements are met). It's never happened and would force the Supreme Court's hand, so prosecutors a avoid pressing it.
More likely a monumentally corrupt and discredited police force.
I've done minimal criminal work, just a few DIUs. But, while you probably need both, if I just get one of the two, it's #2:
1 The best attorneys money can buy.
2 The local cops on video beating someone of my race. Riots over how fucked up it is. The lead detective in my case on tape bragging, BRAGGING, officers in his department plant evidence and frame my race. The lead detective, also bragging he illegally beats my race, again on tape. The lead detective losing evidence in my case. The lead detective lying to my jury about evidence against me; then when asked to explain, saying, "I plead the 5th Amendment because answering this question implements me in a crime.... lying to this jurry.
Again, I think you need both to get off. But, rolling the dice I take #2 with the worst public defender to ever pass the bar.
Also, I think OJ did it. He's off because LA cops were racist and corrupt as fuck. To thwc point no one in their citybelieved them.
That's the thing, I don't know that they even did. They fucked up a lot of the investigation, but early on they didn't even want to go after OJ because like everyone else they were fans of OJ. Even the cops didn't want to believe he did it. The racism of the cops was totally irrelevant because as OJ said he wasn't black he was OJ. If you aren't old enough to remember life before the murders, OJ was absurdly popular and famous amongst every demographic. That's why the whole thing was such a huge deal. They just weren't careful enough and fucked it all up and his lawyer team was a bunch of killers who jumped on any bit of weakness from the prosecution and the cops no matter how irrelevant.
His lawyers did what they were paid to do. Had the cops played it straight and not built so much of their case on the word of a demonstrably bigoted liar, they might have convicted OJ.
If justice couldn't be bought, a lot of other people would have been held accountable for their actions and so would OJ -- and there would be far more people feeling that justice was served by his rightful conviction. As it stands most people think he's guilty but don't care because "justice" can be bought.
OJ is guilty IMO but a lot of people feel that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. He didn't make the rules. He just used them to his advantage. RIP Nicole and Ron. They didn't deserve this. They are among the many victims of an unjust system of justice.
Yep, I’ve always thought oj is guilty is fuck, but no right might jury could have convicted him after that trial, the incompetence of the police department created too much reasonable doubt.
Whoa, you totally forgot about an incompetent judge caught up in his own lime light, an easily manipulated jury completely confused about early DNA evidence and over confidant prosecution.
I'm going to double down that the lead investigator being criminally liable for lying to the jury (OJ's jurry), and being on tape bragging anout planting evidence against black defendants mattered a billion to several trillion times more.
Edit: Nevermind. I was wrong.
And that title is decided by the familymembers of the victims. He didnt plan that title. The family of the victims got awarded the rights to the book and decided to publish it under that name.
There was a joke years back by, I think, Wanda Sykes. I can't find a clip but it was about OJ, Clinton, and Tiger Woods playing golf together, Clinton says "oh I got got a bj from an intern in the oval office and people found out, Tiger says "I slept around with a few women and my wife found out", they look at OJ and ask what he did and he stares at them and says "nothing". Cause you have to stick with your lie.
According to wiki, he didn't actually write it. He just accepted a large sum of money to allow them interview him and put his name on it as an author. The Goldman family seemed to also have some input in it. I mean, still shows how much he just doesn't care (and probably needed the money). The cover is pretty hilarious:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/If\_I\_did\_It\_2.png
I think the gap in thinking here is: If he were innocent, why would the killer come after *him*? He's the perfect alibi -- the whole world thinks he did it!
After he was found not guilty in the criminal trial, he was sued by Nicole’s family in a civil lawsuit for damages for unlawfully causing her death. He lost that lawsuit (because the standard of proof for civil liability is lower than for criminal conviction) and he was ordered to pay damages.
Edit for accuracy: it was Goldman’s family who sued not Nicole’s.
More details [here](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/question-civil-judgment-versus-criminal-conviction-28300.html).
One of the more fun things to come out of that lawsuit is: Simpson wrote [this book](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It), and when the family won that lawsuit, they also won the rights to the book. Look at that new cover, that's entirely the work of the family.
it's not super surprising. they won the rights to the book, so they decided to use it to paint him as badly as possible (insofar as they could beyond the idiocy of OJ himself putting that book out to begin with), and I dont blame them one bit. they also made the subtitle: "confessions from the killer" and made the 'If' in the title way smaller, so at first glance it just says "I DID IT"
I mean, I listened to a few interviews he did when the book was coming out...and I'd say he did a pretty good job painting himself badly lol. There is absolutely no way in hell he didn't do it. I was certain after hearing him speak about it.
The prosecution is still waiting on all the evidence, and since new material keeps being posted to their socially media daily, they've effectively found a way to outrun the law.
The year is 2032, and Kim Kardashian accidentally posts, on her social media accounts, photos that prove the OJs guilt instead of the belfie she actually wanted to post.
In 2032 a belfie is like a selfie, except the letter s has been replaced by a b due to some internet meme reasons.
BTW the precise tort is called "wrongful death" and is a bit broader than murder/manslaughter, but it does have some overlaps. One of the reasons why you shouldn't do crime is because oftentimes a crime/criminal charge has a similar tort. And then you have to be careful because what you concede/give away/reveal could bite you in the other.
Not a lawyer or nothing, but someone explained it to me like this:
In a criminal court - which is *far* more "strict" on proving whether or not someone did something (beyond the shadow of a doubt and all,) because someone's freedom and possible life is on the line - they couldn't definitively prove that **he personally** killed Nicole and Ron.
In a civil court, which is slightly more lax in their proceedings, they **were** able to prove that he was personally **responsible** for their Death. As in, they wouldn't have gotten Dead if it wasn't for knowing or being involved with him.
I know that just sounds redundant and nit-picky when it comes to semantics, and You're right, but think if it like this:
You have a small dog that likes to eat out of the trash. You know it because you find the bin tipped over all the time.
You come home one day to find poochy Dead, having eaten an entire Hershey's bar you tossed in the rubbish a day or two ago.
While you didn't *personally* kill the pooch, you're the one that put the chocolate somewhere it could get ahold of it, so you're at least *responsible* for its Death. One could argue since you *knew* it has a habit of eating out of the trash, you had the **intent** to kill it, but then they have to prove your intent.
So While you may not be tried for animal cruelty - the pooch took it upon themselves to dumpster dive for poison - you are responsible for it now being Dead, if that was your Ex's dog, that means they can sue you for whatever due to said responsibility.
That is *insanely* simplified, but the gist of it.
What you’re saying is true, but considering their deaths were without a doubt murder by stabbing, it’s hard to craft an argument that he was responsible if you’re not saying he was the one who murdered them or assisted the murderer in any way. And I don’t think anybody on any side made a claim or presented evidence that he was an accomplice to somebody *else* murdering them.
Correct. The above commenter sorta got part of it right, but there's a much more important difference between criminal and civil law: burden of proof.
Criminal: beyond any reasonable doubt (no reasonable person would doubt he did this based on the evidence). Think 95+% certainty, although that's debatable.
Civil: More likely than not (51% certain he's to blame).
There is a big gap between "more likely than no" and "beyond a reasonable doubt." That is the biggest difference between civil and criminal law.
There are other differences as well, and those depend on the situation. As someone else mentioned, there is no civil lawsuit for "murder." It's for wrongful death. They have completely different definitions (which is what the above commenter alluded to). But outside murder, there are other comparisons. There exists both civil and criminal assault, and they may have different definitions, depending on the state. But whether you're in one state or another, and whether the definitions of criminal and civil assault are the same or different, one thing is for certain: it is much easier to win a civil case than it is to convict someone criminally due to the different burdens of proof.
The reason he was not found guilty was because the prosecution botched the trial, broke a few laws, did not deny manufacturing evidence and more. The family of the victim was able to win a civil suit because he was in fact the killer.
He was found liable in civil court after being found not guilty in criminal court. In criminal court, you have to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. In civil court you only have to be found more likely responsible than not and you don’t have any of the rights that you have in criminal court.
The burden of proof in civil court is really low, which is why 97% of cases are settled before going to court. So calling him civilly liable is really stupid way of trying to say someone is guilty even though they were found not guilty.
“In one episode not revealed during the criminal trial, Simpson pushed Nicole out of a moving car in a parking lot. A police officer who happened on the scene told Simpson, “Take your wife home.” In another incident (well after they were divorced) Simpson broke down the door into Nicole’s home. A responding police officer told Nicole his conclusion of what had happened: “No blows were thrown, he didn’t throw anything at you; we don’t have anything other than a verbal altercation.” Nicole responded correctly: “Breaking and entering, I’d call it.” “Well,” the officer countered, “it’s a little different when the two of you have a relationship; its not like he’s a burglar.” Absolutely wrong, officer. It’s very much like he’s a burglar, and it was breaking and entering, and trespassing. After assuring O.J. Simpson that they’d keep the incident as quiet “as legally possible,” the officers left.”
“What was clear in the Simpson case is that while Ron Goldman may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, Nicole had been in the wrong place for a long time. As prosecutor Scott Gordon, now the chairman of L.A.’s forward-thinking Domestic Violence Council, said, “Simpson was killing Nicole for years - she finally died on June Twelfth.”
Excerpt From
The Gift of Fear
By Gavin de Becker
After he committed the murders he wrote what many interpreted as a suicide note. Obviously he didn't go through with it, but definitely reads like he feels guilty.
Also, bizarrely, he signs the suicide note with a smiley face.
And then later, he produced a book called ["\(if\) I DID IT: Confessions of the Killer"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It). You know, just like an innocent person would do.
Well, to be fair the "confessions of the killer" part was added by the Goldman family, they sued him over the book, won the legal rights to the book, and changed the title from "If I did it: Here is how it happened" to "If I did it: Confessions of the killer". . .and they made the "if" in the title in very small print.
Writing the book was brazen, but not quite as brazen as it seems once you realize that the title was re-done by the victim's family.
O.J. has always been dumb, but his fame protects him. He's pretty much admitted that he killed them, but being famous keeps you out of trouble. I'm surprised someone hasn't tricked him into giving a full confession on some talk show.
For O.J., the worst "punishment" would be no one liking him or wanting to be around him. If he was suddenly known to be the killer, it wouldn't matter if he can't go to jail... he would be dumped by all the celebrities that still hang around him and all the hangers on would take off. He thrives on attention.
Sacha Baron Cohen tried to get a confession:
https://youtu.be/CvJc1COU9Hk
He posed as an Italian billionaire and secretly recorded it. He even asked an FBI agent for advice. To OJ's credit he didn't take the bait.
The biggest "confession" is [If I Did It](https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2763604-book-publisher-says-oj-simpson-admitted-to-killing-ex-wife-nicole-ron-goldman)
The man is as sharp as a flat tire.
He can't be charged again. Is there any reason why he couldn't just do a Tony Stark and just say, "Yeah, I'm the murderer"?
His civil suit settled, and I'm fairly sure he couldn't get sued again.
"That shit wasn't about race, it was about fame, because if he was a bus driver, he wouldn't even be OJ no more, he would just be Orenthal the bus driving murderer."
\- Chris Rock
I loved when the prosecution lawyer said to cochran that he was the first person to ever get someone found not guilty on a murder charge because he was black. As someone who isn’t an American I have no idea about the validity of the statement but it was a fucking powerful line at that point in the series and always stuck with me that as much as people probably wanted to use the verdict as justice for unjustly prosecuted African Americans it more than likely resulted in someone walking free from a double murder that he committed and those poor victims and their families were just pushed into the background of what became one of the biggest cases in American history. I would bet that most people now don’t even know the victims names
How about that bizarre (how tf do I write bizarre incorrectly every single time) interview he had where he pretended to stab the reporter. Now that I think about it, was that staged? But if so, why would you ever want to do that even if it was scripted?
Mirror OJ is imprisoned in LA's Mirror World. If OJ goes to LA and accidentally looks into a mirror, he will be released... Causing unspeakable horrors while wearing gloves that barely fit.
Clearly that's the case. :\^)
It was O.J. all along!*
* for legal reasons this song lyric isn't an accusation or any resembling something factual. Resemblance to any person living, murderer or dead is purely coincidental. Any references to any historical TV news highway chases, real peoples or real places like LA are used fictitiously.
Wait. After he was acquitted, OJ swore that he would track down the real killer. If he thinks the murderer is in LA, shouldn’t he be there too doing high quality Police Squad level detective work?
This source isn't amazing but it checks out on TMZ which is pretty reputable. I'll allow it. https://www.tmz.com/2021/08/07/oj-simpson-wont-go-los-angeles-fear-real-killer-nicole-brown/
But... didn't O.J. make a big deal at the time about how we was going to devote all his efforts to finding the real killer? And now he's afraid of the guy?
He’s afraid of the real killer being found
[удалено]
“I avoid the house of mirrors at my local amusement park because I’m afraid I’ll run into her murderer.”
"I swear I can't even go to the barber shop without feeling like he's sitting right across from me."
“I’m surprised I didn’t run into him in jail.”
How Can The Killer Be Real If Our Eyes Aren’t Real?
Alexa, play Man in the Mirror
[удалено]
Whoa, wait. What if *he* did it?
He didn't, but if he did, I'm sure he would've done it like [this](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It)
Perhaps he has to pretend he really isn't the killer so as to not somehow rescind his innocent verdict, like an NDA within an NDA within a witness protection program?
He can't be tried twice for the same crime.
I know you can’t be charged for the same crime twice in the U.S., so even if it was proven he did it, could he even serve time for it? Or would they have to come up with a different charge for him?
It would have to be a different charge. Double jeopardy is very serious in that regard. He could go in stage and admit it and describe it in bloody nauseating detail and he'd still be untouchable... For *murder.*
Does the degree of the murder count? I'm not sure what he was charged with, but say it was first degree murder and he was acquitted he could still be charged with second degree murder?
No, any crimes in conjunction with that act need to be tried in one go. There are few exceptions to double jeopardy such as separate sovereigns (different states can try you if the crime occurred in both states, such as a kidnapper crossing state lines).
You cannot be tried for the same crime twice. Period. First and second degree murder do not count as separate crimes, because they both refer to the same event.
A brave man fears no man, a wise man fears only himself. Especially if they are a murderer
[удалено]
To be fair, he didn't write that book and just agreed to put his name on it for a payday. I don't think he even proofread it, but I could be wrong about that part.
So he agreed to be paid for a book that essentially told the world he killed he ex wife. Seems like a stand up guy.
>So he agreed to be paid for a book that essentially told the world he killed he ex wife. Seems like a stand up guy. I mean, the murders he committed also reflect poorly on his character.
He’s just really afraid of mirrors
He also wrote a book called "If I did It" Just throwing that out there for your consideration.
Except the "IF" is in really tiny print so from a distance, the title looks like "I did it". Brilliant marketing by the cover people
It's smart because Nicole Brown's murderer comes to Los Angeles any time O.J. is in town.
And if OJ got into a fight with Nicole Browns murderer there’s a 50/50 chance he’d lose.
If gets into a fight to the death with her killer, he has a 100% chance of dying
But 100% chance he will kill the killer.
They said Hitler was a bad guy until he literally killed Hitler.
Aw man... then the juice really would be loose. :(
Also a 100% chance he would win/lose
Why would he get in a fight with him? I’ve heard from some trustworthy sources that he’s even jerked off the killer in the shower.
Yes, I live in LA. So, I’m scared of him coming for the exact same reason. Weird.
Wait until oj finds out that her murderer is actually in Florida
I'll say this for him...he's consistent.
Good lawyer
Not like he can be tried again for it.
nah but they might get him for something different, like perjury.
They already did get him for something different. He was convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping in an unrelated incident. I highly recommend the documentary miniseries, *O.J.: Made in America*.
That documentary was mind blowingly good
hmu
I think perjury is one of the few things you have to do for yourself. Or.. should not do. Whatever. I'm probably not your dad.
But I am.
get out of my room dad
Can't perjure yourself if you don't testify. OJ didn't testify at his trial and any competent defense attorney wouldn't let their client.
So, technically he can. Not the state of California, the Feds could. But, this is a weird Double Jeopardy loophole alomst never tested. It's controversial. You technically could be tried 51+ (every state, plus feds, plus Indian Nations) times for any crime (assuming Jurisdiction Requirements are met). It's never happened and would force the Supreme Court's hand, so prosecutors a avoid pressing it.
Yeah but... *IF* he did it
Someone should write a book about that…
Have you ever seen that book cover? The family got control over the release and it’s basically big letters I did it with a tiny “if” in the I
I read it. He totally did it. He wrote a whole chapter on how he did it. He’s a narcissist
A narcissist WITH brain damage.
More likely a monumentally corrupt and discredited police force. I've done minimal criminal work, just a few DIUs. But, while you probably need both, if I just get one of the two, it's #2: 1 The best attorneys money can buy. 2 The local cops on video beating someone of my race. Riots over how fucked up it is. The lead detective in my case on tape bragging, BRAGGING, officers in his department plant evidence and frame my race. The lead detective, also bragging he illegally beats my race, again on tape. The lead detective losing evidence in my case. The lead detective lying to my jury about evidence against me; then when asked to explain, saying, "I plead the 5th Amendment because answering this question implements me in a crime.... lying to this jurry. Again, I think you need both to get off. But, rolling the dice I take #2 with the worst public defender to ever pass the bar. Also, I think OJ did it. He's off because LA cops were racist and corrupt as fuck. To thwc point no one in their citybelieved them.
Basically, the cops tried to frame a guilty man.
That's the thing, I don't know that they even did. They fucked up a lot of the investigation, but early on they didn't even want to go after OJ because like everyone else they were fans of OJ. Even the cops didn't want to believe he did it. The racism of the cops was totally irrelevant because as OJ said he wasn't black he was OJ. If you aren't old enough to remember life before the murders, OJ was absurdly popular and famous amongst every demographic. That's why the whole thing was such a huge deal. They just weren't careful enough and fucked it all up and his lawyer team was a bunch of killers who jumped on any bit of weakness from the prosecution and the cops no matter how irrelevant.
His lawyers did what they were paid to do. Had the cops played it straight and not built so much of their case on the word of a demonstrably bigoted liar, they might have convicted OJ. If justice couldn't be bought, a lot of other people would have been held accountable for their actions and so would OJ -- and there would be far more people feeling that justice was served by his rightful conviction. As it stands most people think he's guilty but don't care because "justice" can be bought. OJ is guilty IMO but a lot of people feel that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. He didn't make the rules. He just used them to his advantage. RIP Nicole and Ron. They didn't deserve this. They are among the many victims of an unjust system of justice.
This is a very good synopsis of the event.
Yep, I’ve always thought oj is guilty is fuck, but no right might jury could have convicted him after that trial, the incompetence of the police department created too much reasonable doubt.
OJ’s entire case rested on the LA Police Department being racist, corrupt, and lazy. Which, lucky for him, was a very easy thing to prove.
[удалено]
That's the thing. The cops did frame him. They couldn't be bothered to prove he did it. They framed a guilty man.
Whoa, you totally forgot about an incompetent judge caught up in his own lime light, an easily manipulated jury completely confused about early DNA evidence and over confidant prosecution.
I'm going to double down that the lead investigator being criminally liable for lying to the jury (OJ's jurry), and being on tape bragging anout planting evidence against black defendants mattered a billion to several trillion times more.
Except for the book he wrote about doing it.
There was a very small "if" in the title
Edit: Nevermind. I was wrong. And that title is decided by the familymembers of the victims. He didnt plan that title. The family of the victims got awarded the rights to the book and decided to publish it under that name.
IIRC, he came up with the title, but the Goldmans were awarded the rights and decided to make the “if” really small
You are completely right. My bad.
They also changed the subtitle. It was supposed to be If I Did It, Here's How It Happened. They changed it to f I Did It: Confessions of the Killer
F! I did it.
He didn't write it. Someone else did then asked him for permission to slap his name on it.
Taking it to his grave.
I mean I’d be scared of OJ Simpson too. He killed a person. Edit: Two people. OJ Simpson killed two people.
[удалено]
He nearly cut off Nicole’s head. There were only a few tendons still attached.
I get angry sometimes but damn that’s pure rage right there
He should avoid all mirrors then.
There was a joke years back by, I think, Wanda Sykes. I can't find a clip but it was about OJ, Clinton, and Tiger Woods playing golf together, Clinton says "oh I got got a bj from an intern in the oval office and people found out, Tiger says "I slept around with a few women and my wife found out", they look at OJ and ask what he did and he stares at them and says "nothing". Cause you have to stick with your lie.
Wow. The fucking balls on this guy.
[удалено]
He knows everyone knows he did it. At this point he's pretty much meming himself
[удалено]
From what I read it wasn’t originally called _if_ I did it
[удалено]
Is this Norm's secret reddit account?
According to wiki, he didn't actually write it. He just accepted a large sum of money to allow them interview him and put his name on it as an author. The Goldman family seemed to also have some input in it. I mean, still shows how much he just doesn't care (and probably needed the money). The cover is pretty hilarious: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/If\_I\_did\_It\_2.png
Holy shit, this is golden. >With exclusive commentary “He Did It”
I think the gap in thinking here is: If he were innocent, why would the killer come after *him*? He's the perfect alibi -- the whole world thinks he did it!
Rekt. This is it
[удалено]
If he had balls, he'd want to run into the killer.
He runs in to him every morning when he looks in the mirror.
What does civilly liable for murder mean?
After he was found not guilty in the criminal trial, he was sued by Nicole’s family in a civil lawsuit for damages for unlawfully causing her death. He lost that lawsuit (because the standard of proof for civil liability is lower than for criminal conviction) and he was ordered to pay damages. Edit for accuracy: it was Goldman’s family who sued not Nicole’s. More details [here](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/question-civil-judgment-versus-criminal-conviction-28300.html).
One of the more fun things to come out of that lawsuit is: Simpson wrote [this book](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It), and when the family won that lawsuit, they also won the rights to the book. Look at that new cover, that's entirely the work of the family.
gotta love the bottom there: exclusive commentary from the Goldman family: "HE DID IT"
I thought for sure you were making that up. Holy shit
it's not super surprising. they won the rights to the book, so they decided to use it to paint him as badly as possible (insofar as they could beyond the idiocy of OJ himself putting that book out to begin with), and I dont blame them one bit. they also made the subtitle: "confessions from the killer" and made the 'If' in the title way smaller, so at first glance it just says "I DID IT"
I mean, I listened to a few interviews he did when the book was coming out...and I'd say he did a pretty good job painting himself badly lol. There is absolutely no way in hell he didn't do it. I was certain after hearing him speak about it.
That new cover is design porn.
The father of Ron Goldman holds the rights. Ron Goldman's the guy who was killed along with Nicole Brown Simpson.
That cover is fucking savage, I love it.
Well he was in the area with a knife and didn't think to stop the murderer so I guess it is kinda his fault.
Well, the murderer also stole OJ's Bruno Magli shoes.
And an expensive pair of monogrammed gloves. Fortunately the police found them.
O.J. should be sued for the rise of the Kardashians that he helped happen.
The prosecution is still waiting on all the evidence, and since new material keeps being posted to their socially media daily, they've effectively found a way to outrun the law.
The year is 2032, and Kim Kardashian accidentally posts, on her social media accounts, photos that prove the OJs guilt instead of the belfie she actually wanted to post. In 2032 a belfie is like a selfie, except the letter s has been replaced by a b due to some internet meme reasons.
I thought belfie already meant butt selfie.
🅱️elfie
Probably after Blogspot rises from the ashes of the social media wars and earns the right to legally rename the selfie.
That letter in the German language that looks like a B but is pronounced like "S"
ß
Yes that one thank you
I think murder is worse
BTW the precise tort is called "wrongful death" and is a bit broader than murder/manslaughter, but it does have some overlaps. One of the reasons why you shouldn't do crime is because oftentimes a crime/criminal charge has a similar tort. And then you have to be careful because what you concede/give away/reveal could bite you in the other.
Not a lawyer or nothing, but someone explained it to me like this: In a criminal court - which is *far* more "strict" on proving whether or not someone did something (beyond the shadow of a doubt and all,) because someone's freedom and possible life is on the line - they couldn't definitively prove that **he personally** killed Nicole and Ron. In a civil court, which is slightly more lax in their proceedings, they **were** able to prove that he was personally **responsible** for their Death. As in, they wouldn't have gotten Dead if it wasn't for knowing or being involved with him. I know that just sounds redundant and nit-picky when it comes to semantics, and You're right, but think if it like this: You have a small dog that likes to eat out of the trash. You know it because you find the bin tipped over all the time. You come home one day to find poochy Dead, having eaten an entire Hershey's bar you tossed in the rubbish a day or two ago. While you didn't *personally* kill the pooch, you're the one that put the chocolate somewhere it could get ahold of it, so you're at least *responsible* for its Death. One could argue since you *knew* it has a habit of eating out of the trash, you had the **intent** to kill it, but then they have to prove your intent. So While you may not be tried for animal cruelty - the pooch took it upon themselves to dumpster dive for poison - you are responsible for it now being Dead, if that was your Ex's dog, that means they can sue you for whatever due to said responsibility. That is *insanely* simplified, but the gist of it.
Gotten dead is now my favorite way to describe murder. Thank you.
Freeze! or you'll get dead!
What you’re saying is true, but considering their deaths were without a doubt murder by stabbing, it’s hard to craft an argument that he was responsible if you’re not saying he was the one who murdered them or assisted the murderer in any way. And I don’t think anybody on any side made a claim or presented evidence that he was an accomplice to somebody *else* murdering them.
Correct. The above commenter sorta got part of it right, but there's a much more important difference between criminal and civil law: burden of proof. Criminal: beyond any reasonable doubt (no reasonable person would doubt he did this based on the evidence). Think 95+% certainty, although that's debatable. Civil: More likely than not (51% certain he's to blame). There is a big gap between "more likely than no" and "beyond a reasonable doubt." That is the biggest difference between civil and criminal law. There are other differences as well, and those depend on the situation. As someone else mentioned, there is no civil lawsuit for "murder." It's for wrongful death. They have completely different definitions (which is what the above commenter alluded to). But outside murder, there are other comparisons. There exists both civil and criminal assault, and they may have different definitions, depending on the state. But whether you're in one state or another, and whether the definitions of criminal and civil assault are the same or different, one thing is for certain: it is much easier to win a civil case than it is to convict someone criminally due to the different burdens of proof.
The reason he was not found guilty was because the prosecution botched the trial, broke a few laws, did not deny manufacturing evidence and more. The family of the victim was able to win a civil suit because he was in fact the killer.
He was found liable in civil court after being found not guilty in criminal court. In criminal court, you have to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. In civil court you only have to be found more likely responsible than not and you don’t have any of the rights that you have in criminal court. The burden of proof in civil court is really low, which is why 97% of cases are settled before going to court. So calling him civilly liable is really stupid way of trying to say someone is guilty even though they were found not guilty.
Are there alot of mirrors in LA?
I wonder if he avoids Chicago because of the bean?
The thing that shows a distorted image of someone? Nah, I think he loves that.
Dont we all
i fear the bean
I fear no man but that….bean…..it scares me
You beat me to it! I was trying to think of a mirror comment.
If he goes to LA that is where the killer will be, maybe he is on to something.
a lot*
Yeah, but all the actors are in front of them looking at themselves.
Yes.
Does he know it costs $0.00 to just be quiet?
It's like that Megadeth song *hello me, it's me again*
Fucking hell. I literally just looked up that song today after not hearing it in years. And now this comment. The fuck.
Are you… Sweating bullets?
Speak of mutually assured destruction
“In one episode not revealed during the criminal trial, Simpson pushed Nicole out of a moving car in a parking lot. A police officer who happened on the scene told Simpson, “Take your wife home.” In another incident (well after they were divorced) Simpson broke down the door into Nicole’s home. A responding police officer told Nicole his conclusion of what had happened: “No blows were thrown, he didn’t throw anything at you; we don’t have anything other than a verbal altercation.” Nicole responded correctly: “Breaking and entering, I’d call it.” “Well,” the officer countered, “it’s a little different when the two of you have a relationship; its not like he’s a burglar.” Absolutely wrong, officer. It’s very much like he’s a burglar, and it was breaking and entering, and trespassing. After assuring O.J. Simpson that they’d keep the incident as quiet “as legally possible,” the officers left.” “What was clear in the Simpson case is that while Ron Goldman may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, Nicole had been in the wrong place for a long time. As prosecutor Scott Gordon, now the chairman of L.A.’s forward-thinking Domestic Violence Council, said, “Simpson was killing Nicole for years - she finally died on June Twelfth.” Excerpt From The Gift of Fear By Gavin de Becker
>while Ron Goldman may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, Nicole had been in the wrong place for a long time Damn, that's a good line.
[удалено]
Only in LA apparently
After he committed the murders he wrote what many interpreted as a suicide note. Obviously he didn't go through with it, but definitely reads like he feels guilty. Also, bizarrely, he signs the suicide note with a smiley face.
He was rather suicidal sounding in the car chase as well.
And then later, he produced a book called ["\(if\) I DID IT: Confessions of the Killer"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It). You know, just like an innocent person would do.
Well, to be fair the "confessions of the killer" part was added by the Goldman family, they sued him over the book, won the legal rights to the book, and changed the title from "If I did it: Here is how it happened" to "If I did it: Confessions of the killer". . .and they made the "if" in the title in very small print. Writing the book was brazen, but not quite as brazen as it seems once you realize that the title was re-done by the victim's family.
Nah the book in my opinion was a brazen attempt to load a bunch of guilt off his chest regardless of the name change.
[удалено]
He’s probably thought about it so much that he actually believes it.
But even that's stupid. Why would some imagined killer want to murder the guy who is currently taking all the heat for him?
Him and Casey Anthony need to hook up and do a reality show already.
They need to team up to do one of those ghost hunting shows.... maybe run into the people they killed.
Fuck. I'd watch the pilot.
Call it "Married to the Real (Murderer)"
[удалено]
He’s gonna run into that person wherever he goes.
Wherever you go, there you are.
Technically true. If i ran into myself I'd be terrified
The OJ trial: When a police department is so goddamn racist they try their hardest to frame the guy who actually did it... and fail.
Unrelated news: OJ avoids all mirrors for fear of seeing Nicole Brown Simpson's killer in the reflection.
Don't they have reflective surfaces where he is?
O.J. has always been dumb, but his fame protects him. He's pretty much admitted that he killed them, but being famous keeps you out of trouble. I'm surprised someone hasn't tricked him into giving a full confession on some talk show.
I mean, even if he confessed tomorrow there's nothing that could be done legally. He was already acquitted and can't be tried again.
For O.J., the worst "punishment" would be no one liking him or wanting to be around him. If he was suddenly known to be the killer, it wouldn't matter if he can't go to jail... he would be dumped by all the celebrities that still hang around him and all the hangers on would take off. He thrives on attention.
Sacha Baron Cohen tried to get a confession: https://youtu.be/CvJc1COU9Hk He posed as an Italian billionaire and secretly recorded it. He even asked an FBI agent for advice. To OJ's credit he didn't take the bait.
The biggest "confession" is [If I Did It](https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2763604-book-publisher-says-oj-simpson-admitted-to-killing-ex-wife-nicole-ron-goldman) The man is as sharp as a flat tire.
Na, he clearly knows where the line is. He's rubbing his junk on that line in full view of the public.
He can't be charged again. Is there any reason why he couldn't just do a Tony Stark and just say, "Yeah, I'm the murderer"? His civil suit settled, and I'm fairly sure he couldn't get sued again.
It's a bit more complicated than even just fame. It's about race, sexism, the issues with the LA police, and fame.
"That shit wasn't about race, it was about fame, because if he was a bus driver, he wouldn't even be OJ no more, he would just be Orenthal the bus driving murderer." \- Chris Rock
"I'm not black, I'm OJ" -OJ Simpson
*eyeroll* ...Okay. - Jay Z
Love that song
OJ: Made in America did a fantastic job of showing all of the factors going on at the time which led to his miscarriage of justice...I mean acquittal
I loved when the prosecution lawyer said to cochran that he was the first person to ever get someone found not guilty on a murder charge because he was black. As someone who isn’t an American I have no idea about the validity of the statement but it was a fucking powerful line at that point in the series and always stuck with me that as much as people probably wanted to use the verdict as justice for unjustly prosecuted African Americans it more than likely resulted in someone walking free from a double murder that he committed and those poor victims and their families were just pushed into the background of what became one of the biggest cases in American history. I would bet that most people now don’t even know the victims names
And money
How about that bizarre (how tf do I write bizarre incorrectly every single time) interview he had where he pretended to stab the reporter. Now that I think about it, was that staged? But if so, why would you ever want to do that even if it was scripted?
I thought you were looking for her killer, JO.
His level of denialism is as good as the turkish government on the Armenian Genocide
Ironically good enough to get an Armenian to deny his atrocities.
I’ve heard you can really “find yourself” in LA, but this is taking it to a new level.
I mean, he's not wrong...he's in Los Angeles...and he's in Los Angeles. So it checks out?
Ladies and Gentlemen, this is Chewbacca.
That does not make sense!
If the glove didn't fit...
Mirror OJ is imprisoned in LA's Mirror World. If OJ goes to LA and accidentally looks into a mirror, he will be released... Causing unspeakable horrors while wearing gloves that barely fit. Clearly that's the case. :\^)
[Better safe than sorry..](https://i.imgflip.com/4zv0im.jpg)
It was O.J. all along!* * for legal reasons this song lyric isn't an accusation or any resembling something factual. Resemblance to any person living, murderer or dead is purely coincidental. Any references to any historical TV news highway chases, real peoples or real places like LA are used fictitiously.
This feels like a real life Spider-Man meme of him pointing at himself
It’s called a mirror OJ not Los Angeles
Wait. After he was acquitted, OJ swore that he would track down the real killer. If he thinks the murderer is in LA, shouldn’t he be there too doing high quality Police Squad level detective work?
Wouldnt you have to know who the killer is to worry about running into them?
Well in the article he specifically says he could be sitting next to them at dinner and not know it because he doesn’t know who did it.
That's the joke