O.J. "If I did it, this how"

[Gogatsu]

On November 14, 2006 Fox announced that it would be airing a two-part interview with Simpson by book publisher Judith Regan, in which he will discuss the murders. The interview is to promote his upcoming book, tentatively titled "If I did it"

Here is a link to two articles, one from the link I found on wiki and the other from aol.

AOL NEWS (http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/simpson-to-discuss-how-hed-have-killed/20061115000409990007?ncid=NWS00010000000001)

Reuters (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyid=2006-11-15T040626Z_01_N14435424_RTRUKOC_0_US-SIMPSON.xml&src=rss&rpc=22)

this is a wiki link about book info

"If I did it" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It)

[Kaoru]

Sounds lame.

[shadowmose]

He's got big balls for doing this but who really didn't know that he did it.

[Gogatsu]

I'm going to make sure I watch the interview. And yes he has some balls to do something like that, but it isn't his first time.

During 2003, Simpson filmed a Pay-Per-View comedy special titled Juiced. The show, a hidden camera set up show, included a controversial sketch where Simpson attempts to sell the infamous White Ford Bronco at a used car lot, telling the salesman, "It was good for me. It helped me get away."

[Aratos]

Thought. Either (a)He's doing it to get attention or (b)he's doing it as a confession becasue he's now free to do so.

if (a) is the case, by talking about it we're giving him what he wants. And people buying the book are giving him cash, to boot.
if (b) is the case, it'd be worth reading. However it'd also get him a load of cash, so he'd basically be getting paid for murdering folk.

So logically the best thing to do it pretend it doesn't exist. or find a link between him getting let off for murder and Capricorn One, thus proving there's a whole illuminati conspiracy behind it all.

[YamPuff]

What a joke...and he's going to make a bloody fortune off of it.

[roxas87]

i think that people are going to buy the book and then burn it.

[Vicious]

Wait so, there's going to be a book about how he tells everyone, "If I did it, this is how" ... O_O

I mean come on! Whether or not he did it or not... we already know what happened. His wife was killed, and people blame him for it.

"If I DID kill my wife, I would have sliced her up into pieces!" The end. >_>

(Sorry if that sounded offensive but who the hell would buy this kind of book.)

Oh! I wonder if Leslie Nielson will do a special cameo. Heh.

[Aratos]

Psychologists would buy it. Conspiracy theorists would buy it.

I mean, come on, the man's aprtly responsible for the moon-hoax theory. Comnspirracy nuts love the guy.

[YamPuff]

i think that people are going to buy the book and then burn it.
The key word being 'buy' which means he will still get the money. What does he care what they do to the book afterwards?

[Freakazoid]

The key word being 'buy' which means he will still get the money. What does he care what they do to the book afterwards?

exactly. I couldn't have said it better.

[roxas87]

The key word being 'buy' which means he will still get the money. What does he care what they do to the book afterwards?
that's true. unless they get the book free.

[TonightMidnight]

Why is he so late? Doesn't he know it's no big surprise to us?

Where does he think the popular quote "O.J. did it!" came from?

[Nekochii]

The whole O.J murdering his wife lost it's shock value years ago. No one cares anymore, everyone's moved on. This is just his way of trying to make a come-back.

[YamPuff]

The whole O.J murdering his wife lost it's shock value years ago. No one cares anymore, everyone's moved on. This is just his way of trying to make a come-back.
And they are walking right into his hands...

[Vicious1]

...............................o_o W T F
How Smart Is This Guy Kills The People And Then Basicly Confeses And Cant Get Convicted Cause Of Double Jeperdy............briliant

[chelshocked]

Well he does need the money and there are still a lot of people who are still stuck on the verdict. So they will buy it just to know for sure. Her folks can't sue him again. Just wonder what the kids will say when it comes out.

[Aratos]

Her folks can't sue him again. Just wonder what the kids will say when it comes out.


Well, true as that may be the father of the bloke he killed _is_ sueing him. Aparently he should gives him all the profits as compensation. I mean, how greedy can people be?

[Meroko Yui]

sheesh, how stupid are people anyway? No one cares about O.J. anymore, like Nekochii said. Anyway, if he wanted to make money, he should have come out with his book a while back when the trial was still fresh in people's minds. I'm sorry, but if you go out and buy that book, you are wasting your money.

[TonightMidnight]

Who made up the retarded "can't be tried twice for the same crime" thing anyway? There's a huge loop-hole in it.

[Aratos]

Who made up the retarded "can't be tried twice for the same crime" thing anyway? There's a huge loop-hole in it.

It was some British fellow if I rememebr correctly. basic idea is, everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and once they've been declared not guilty it stays that way. Apart from anything else it stops the government sending the police after someone they dislike and keeping him in court on unfair chrarges for life etc etc.

Of course there _is_ a massive loophole there. You can't be charged _for the same crime_ twice. That doesn't mean you can't be charged for the same action, but with a different crime, just so long as there's evidence. Kill somebody and get cleared of homicide? You can still be done for unlawful killing, manslaughter, grevious bodily harm, attempted murder...

[TonightMidnight]

It was some British fellow if I rememebr correctly. basic idea is, everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and once they've been declared not guilty it stays that way. Apart from anything else it stops the government sending the police after someone they dislike and keeping him in court on unfair chrarges for life etc etc.

Of course there _is_ a massive loophole there. You can't be charged _for the same crime_ twice. That doesn't mean you can't be charged for the same action, but with a different crime, just so long as there's evidence. Kill somebody and get cleared of homicide? You can still be done for unlawful killing, manslaughter, grevious bodily harm, attempted murder...

So why can't O.J. be tried for those other things now that he's basically admitting it? You think the courts are tired of him? I mean, Johnnie Cochran's dead. Heh, heh. What's big O.J. gonna do now?

[Aratos]

he's already been found guilty of wrongful death, remember?

[TonightMidnight]

he's already been found guilty of wrongful death, remember?

True.

It just seems like he should still be in jail.

[Aratos]

Hey, he was found not guilty, wasn't he? That's the joy of the criminal justice system: once someone's not guilty, they're not guilty. They don't get handed over to another court, sentenced to death and then get forced to wait in prison for 18 years until the future king of their country of residence convinces the president to overrule the court.

...sorry, was that ever so slightly too close to the bone?

[Arcademan]

Good news: The book and the TV show has been cancelled.

[shadowmose]

he's already been found guilty of wrongful death, remember?

Only in a civil trial with no chance of jail time.

[Gogatsu]

Good news: The book and the TV show has been cancelled.

TV show? Are you talking about the interview that was suppose to be air on television or some sort of TV show in the works, cuz I kinda wanted to see the interview.

[shadowmose]

I think he means that some Fox stations are refusing to air the interview.

[Arcademan]

I think he means that some Fox stations are refusing to air the interview.

No...I mean FOX pulled the plug on the interview completely:

O.J. Simpson Book, TV Special Canceled (http://tv.yahoo.com/news/ap/20061120/116407008000.html)


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."

A dozen Fox affiliates had already said they would not air the two-part sweeps month special, planned for next week before the Nov. 30 publication of the book by ReganBooks. The publishing house is a HarperCollins imprint owned like the Fox network by News Corp.

In both the book and show, Simpson speaks in hypothetical terms about how he would have committed the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife Nicole and her friend Goldman.

Relatives of the victims have lashed out at the now scuttled publication and broadcast plans.

"He destroyed my son and took from my family Ron's future and life. And for that I'll hate him always and find him despicable," Fred Goldman told ABC last week.

The industry trade publication Broadcasting & Cable editorialized against the show Monday, saying "Fox should cancel this evil sweeps stunt."

One of the nation's largest superstore chains, Borders Group Inc., said last week it would donate any profits on the book to charity.

Simpson was acquitted in 1995 of murder in a case that became its own TV drama. The former football star and announcer was later found liable for the deaths in a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the Goldman family.

Judith Regan, publisher of "If I Did It," said she considered the book to be Simpson's confession.

The television special was to air on two of the final three nights of the November sweeps, when ratings are watched closely to set local advertising rates. It has been a particularly tough fall for Fox, which has seen none of its new shows catch on and is waiting for the January bows of "American Idol" and "24."

The closest precedent for such an about-face came when CBS yanked a miniseries about Ronald Reagan from its schedule in 2003 when complaints were raised about its accuracy. The Reagan series was seen on its sister premium-cable channel, Showtime, instead.

One station manager who had said he wasn't airing the special said he was concerned that whether or not Simpson was guilty, he'd still be profiting from murders.

"I have my own moral compass and this was easy," said Bill Lamb, general manager of WDRB in Louisville.

For the publishing industry, the cancellation of "If I Did It" was an astonishing end to a story like no other. Numerous books have been withdrawn over the years because of possible plagiarism, most recently Kaavya Viswanathan's "How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life," but a book's removal simply for objectionable content is virtually unheard of.

Sales had been strong, but not sensational. "If I Did It" cracked the top 20 of Amazon.com last weekend, but by Monday afternoon, at the time its cancellation had been announced, the book had fallen to No. 51.

[Gogatsu]

It would have been interesting to watch, but at the same time I think it would have been a little disturbing to see someone one on TV basically talking about how they got away with muder.

[SweetNymph]

Even if he straight-out said, "I did it", he'd get off scot-free. Double-jeopardy and all that.

[Aratos]

Hahahahahaha! Murdoch's scared!

No, really. It's pretty obvious if you concider the circumstances.

1) Murdoch's company decides to come up with that OJ crap.
2) Richard Branson moves to merge NTL with ITV, thus giving him a media company that can rival newscorp.
3) Murdoch, fearing competition and thus loss of money, starts ilegally buying shares in ITV so he can get 20% of virgin entertainment, when it comes into being.
4) greedy people try to get the courts to give them all the profits from OJ's book and pulicity etc.

So it's simple really. Murdoch (a)doesn't want to lose all the profits, being the greedy bastard he is and (b) doesn't want to risk bad publicity that could result in folk moving to virgin and damaging his precious monopoly.

Oh yes. He's on the defensive now. 11. Qc2, Nh5

[Suranime12345]

Oj gets too much press...I dont care what the message is, its a shame he gets so much attention.

[binaryzero]

another bit of backlash resulting from this publicity stunt is right here in Buffalo:

it looks like all references to him in our football arena are going to be removed,
he doesn't exactly carry the behaviour we'd like to see in a former Buffalo Bill.

[Nekochii]

Good news: The book and the TV show has been cancelled.
Damn! I was going to buy that book for my mom for Christmas. For some reason she believes he's innocent. Same with Michael Jackson.

[YamPuff]

Good news: The book and the TV show has been cancelled.
DAMMIT!

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!

[Aratos]

Damn! I was going to buy that book for my mom for Christmas. For some reason she believes he's innocent. Same with Michael Jackson.

Jackson _is_ innocent though. I mean, there was absolutely no evidence he did owt other than one mother who was obviously just after the money. He's a bit eccentric is all.


And don't forget: when you've been found not guilty by a jury of your "peers", you're not guilty.

[YamPuff]

Didn't you ever watch 'Wrongly Accuse--'I mean, 'Fugitive'?

[Aratos]

Now that was a good film. Harrison Ford and Tommy Lee Jones, if I remember correctly.

But that's different! He was found guilty! Once you've been found guilty by a jury of your peers you're guilty unless evidence comes up to the contrary. But that's the point. Innocent until proven guilty, and once guilty, guilty until disproven. The point is, opnce you're not guilty you're not guilty and cannot be retried. the guilty can have an appeal because new evidence does spring to light, etc.

[Cowboychamploo44]

Sounds lame.
Sure does...

[roxas87]

its all stupid if you ask me since fox would have known this would happen and people going to get upset.

[Arcademan]

Remember...

"If the glove doesn't fit, you must aquit!!!

[TonightMidnight]

Jackson _is_ innocent though. I mean, there was absolutely no evidence he did owt other than one mother who was obviously just after the money. He's a bit eccentric is all.


And don't forget: when you've been found not guilty by a jury of your "peers", you're not guilty.

I don't know if he did it or not, but he certainly was stupid for even hanging around little kids. He's a grown man, and though he had no childhood because his Dad was mean boo hoo boo hoo- someone should've given him a heads up. I mean, come on...he has a publiscist.

[Aratos]

To be fair, it's not his fault the media decided to use him as a target.

And besides, a few years ago being nice to children like that would win you a knighthood.

[Kaoru]

Sure does...
Indeed. I'm glad to hear it got canceled too.

[TonightMidnight]

To be fair, it's not his fault the media decided to use him as a target.

And besides, a few years ago being nice to children like that would win you a knighthood.

Sure it's not his fault, but um...that's what the media does. It's part of the package of being a celebrity. It's not one of the nicer perks, but it comes with fame. Every star knows that.

Being nice to children and inviting them to a sleep over are two completely different things.

[Aratos]

Like I say, before pedophile became a buzzword it wasn't such a big thing.

Hell, before gays became such a big subject there was nothing at all wrong with certain Morcambe and Wise sketches. Totally innocent. Now people try to read into it.

[TonightMidnight]

Like I say, before pedophile became a buzzword it wasn't such a big thing.

Hell, before gays became such a big subject there was nothing at all wrong with certain Morcambe and Wise sketches. Totally innocent. Now people try to read into it.


People like to blow things out of porportion. Michael should've known that having a sleep over to begin with (innocent or not) wasn't gonna end well. That's my whole point.

It's not normal in the first place and doing it when you know the whole world's watching you is asking for trouble. Gay or not.

[Aratos]

Jackson's gay?

[Gogatsu]

Jackson's gay?


I don’t know and I don't care. What I do care about is that you two (glittergirl and aratos) has turned my thread wacko jacko chat. This thread is about murderers who've gotten off not molesters who've gotten off. One of you two need to make a wacko jacko thread.

[Aratos]

No, this thread is about justice. And the fact that certain people don't seem to quite understand the "innocent until proven guilty, once declared innocent, innocent" part.

[Gogatsu]

No, this thread is about justice. And the fact that certain people don't seem to quite understand the "innocent until proven guilty, once declared innocent, innocent" part.

don't give me that crap I'm the one that made this thread, so I'm the one who says what its about. the title of the thread is "O.J. If I did it, this how" not "OJ and jacko painting the town red.:mad:

[Aratos]

Oh yes? And I'm one of the forum "veterans". I say the topic's evolved.

[Gogatsu]

Oh yes? And I'm one of the forum "veterans". I say the topic's evolved.

That means nothing.

[Aratos]

The topic has evolved. Let it continue or let it die. But don't try to force us to do what you say. As soona s you start a thread it becomes public property.

[YamPuff]

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i232/YamPuff/popcorn.gif *munchity*

*whispers* What will happen next, Puff-tan?

[SweetNymph]

Actually, the Court never judges anyone innocent. It's Guilty or Not Guilty, which only means there was not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person was guilty. No one's ever declared Innocent.

[Gogatsu]

The topic has evolved. Let it continue or let it die. But don't try to force us to do what you say. As soona s you start a thread it becomes public property.


Then let it die. As soon as you made that comment "Jackson's gay?" the thread was already headed for trouble. I've seen enough threads get lock to see how it starts out. One person says something a little inappropriate and before you know it other people join in the conversation, things get out of had and then the thread gets locked.

[Aratos]

Actually, the Court never judges anyone innocent. It's Guilty or Not Guilty, which only means there was not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person was guilty. No one's ever declared Innocent.

True the court judges guilty or not guilty, but the law states innocent unti proven guilty, thus when found not guilty you're innocent.

See, in Scotland we have "not proven". Now there's a good judgement.