That O.J. Simpson book: Why an "If I Did It" chapter?

[Bluegill]

I apologize right off the bat for everyone who reads this and is sick to death of the story. But, hey, I put the name in the thread title, so you were warned.

I’ll post this question here since here is where books are discussed, although this isn’t literature.

Ever since O.J. first tried to publish that “If I Did It” book, and I read a brief description of it, I’ve wondered why the book would be written the way it was.

OK: I know, the point was to make money. And now the book rights are owned by the Goldmans, and they have sort of turned it around and are making money from it themselves.

My basic question, though, is why would O.J. write a book that contained a chapter that would hypothetically describe how he would have committed the crime he says he did not commit? I cannot fathom it at all.

If he is innocent and wants people to believe he is innocent, then such a chapter would be unfathomably stupid.

If he is guilty and wants people to believe he is innocent, then such a chapter would be unfathomably stupid.*

Yet, there it is. Somehow, it seems to go beyond stupid to simply unfathomable. Can anyone rationalize such behaviors?

*As I typed this I realized for the first time that maybe he actually wants people to know his guilt, but I still can’t fathom that.

[scratchy]

Maybe it is to show that he would have done it differently some way, and that is meant to show he didnt do it. Stupid stunt, and it doesnt change the fact that he did it.

ETA: according to the article his description lines up well with the evidence, so then my speculation above doesnt float.

[Lisa Simpson]

According that bastion of truthiness, Fox News, it was a confession:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296746,00.html

[LibraryLady]

The man has issues (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/14/us/14cnd-simpson.html?hp).

[TuftedPuffin]

It's kinda like "you technically don't know I did it, but I want to say anyway."

[alfaniner]

I was apalled when it was announced he would be selling this book, and was glad when it was denied publishing. However, now that the money is going to the Goldman's I'm considering getting it.

Later. On eBay. Cheap.

[Rrose Selavy]

Seems he is indeed "unfathomingly stupid" or tried to cash in on his notoriety - til the decision to give profits to victims. Funny how he didn't seem to feel that was appropriate with ANY profit made from the case.

Seems he has a few other things to worry about as well.



Ex-American football star OJ Simpson has been arrested by Las Vegas police investigating an alleged armed robbery at a casino hotel room.


...police spokesman said Mr Simpson could face charges including robbery with a deadly weapon and conspiracy to commit robbery



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6997950.stm

[Cainkane1]

He killed his wife and that innocent young man. The chapter detailing how he did it is just his way of bragging about it.

[Gurdur]

The need to confess and the need to boast are often intertwined. Guilt can have a large component of ego to it.

[juniper_ann]

He used most of his money in his defense and lost the rest in the civil case. When he was acquitted, there appeared (at least in my area) to be a majority agreement that he got away with murder, a view which was shored up by the civil case. He is generally despised and probably unemployable. He has nothing to lose.

[geni]

If he is guilty and wants people to believe he is innocent, then such a chapter would be unfathomably stupid.*

Yet, there it is. Somehow, it seems to go beyond stupid to simply unfathomable. Can anyone rationalize such behaviors?


You missed wants people to believe he is innocent but has accepted that isn't going to happen.

[scratchy]

By the way, does anyone know how blacks vs whites re his innocence number up today?

[bokonon]

I agree with Cainkane1 and Gurdur, having found himself beyond the reach of criminal culpability, he now wants to brag about how clever he was. The amount of evidence he left demonstrates to anyone who's bothered to look that he was far from clever, but I guess getting away with it probably inflated his self image in that regard.

[dudalb]

Will OJ write a sequel called "If I Stole It"?

[bethanythemartian]

I once heard a police officer say something like this.

"Most 'unsolved' cases aren't really unsolved. We know who did it, but there is just not enough evidence to prove it."

[patchbunny]

Will OJ write a sequel called "If I Stole It"?

Shortly after he scours golf courses across Florida looking for the real burglars.

--Patch

[Macoy]

Shortly after he scours golf courses across Florida looking for the real burglars.

--Patch

Will he be using a 4x4?

[CptColumbo]

IMO O.J. has made it clear, through his actions, that crazy and stupid are not exclusive traits.

[patchbunny]

Will he be using a 4x4?
Nah. I think he prefers a putter.

--Patch

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

You know why? Cause cashing in on the public fascination with him and his notoriety is the only venue to make money left to him...and the only venue left to him to do that is to write a book.

He can't demand big bucks to appear in interviews. His football career was over decades before the murder and his acting career was over because of the murder. He sure as hell can't do Nike commercials any longer.

The only in any way usable asset left to him, very ironically, is that he's one of the most notorious killers of the 20th century.

And he thought he'd be safe from his debt to the Goldman's by funneling the profits to his daughter. Didn't work.

[Redtail]

By the way, does anyone know how blacks vs whites re his innocence number up today?

I don't know the gen pop numbers but in college circles I can't recall any of my students or colleagues saying he didn't do it.

[Just thinking]

I wonder ... after all this, do any of those 12 jurors have a harder time sleeping at night?

[bruto]

I wonder ... after all this, do any of those 12 jurors have a harder time sleeping at night?

Why should they? Since US courts don't allow a verdict of "not proven," they may have had little choice. If they believed the prosecution case was inadequate, as it seems to have been, they did their job. It doesn't matter what they feel or believe in their hearts.

[Just thinking]

It wasn't.

After less than four hours, jury announces that it has reached a verdict.

Yea, they thought long and hard with that decision.

[Magic 9-Ball]

Yea, they thought long and hard with that decision.


Surprised it took 4 hours. I think they made their decision after the glove fiasco. "If it does not fit..." :sour:

[Just thinking]

Surprised it took 4 hours. I think they made their decision after the glove fiasco. "If it does not fit..." :sour:

Which is really quite amazing in itself.

I tried that same stunt myself --- took a pair of gloves (Isotoners) that fit me just fine. Then by extending my fingers in an open manner as he did on camera, lo and behold, they looked two sizes too small (when trying to get them on).

The same is done with a magic trick involving thumb-cuffs (http://www.hippityhop.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=21&products_id=1061); you hold your hands open one way to have someone put them on, they lock them with a key, place a drape over your hands and instantly you can escape. When they try they actually become cuffed and can't get out. It's all in how you start with your thumbs extended.

[Loss Leader]

If he is innocent and wants people to believe he is innocent, then such a chapter would be unfathomably stupid.

If he is guilty and wants people to believe he is innocent, then such a chapter would be unfathomably stupid.*

Yet, there it is. Somehow, it seems to go beyond stupid to simply unfathomable. Can anyone rationalize such behaviors?

*As I typed this I realized for the first time that maybe he actually wants people to know his guilt, but I still can’t fathom that.


I think OJ believed the following:

1. Those people that think he is guilty would always think he's guilty, so writing a confession doesn't change their opinions.

2. Those that think he is not guilty would always think he's not guilty, so writing a confession doesn't change their opinions.

3. The group of undecided people whose minds would be changed by a confession is vanishingly small.

4. The best possible way to make lots of money without actually doing any work is to put one's name on a confession that one doesn't even have to write or, probably, even read.

5. Go Bills!

[scratchy]

I tried that same stunt myself --- took a pair of gloves (Isotoners) that fit me just fine. Then by extending my fingers in an open manner as he did on camera, lo and behold, they looked two sizes too small (when trying to get them on).

Yeah, that was exactly my thought when i saw it on tv at the time. He was very obviously resisting the gloves by spreading his fingers. Rmember also that the gloves were i tight fit model, not some loose fitting wintergloves. And they had been soaked with blood and then dryed, wich makes any leather gloves a bit more tight untill worn out again. Its unbelievabel that the prosecution let it go.

[bruto]

.....Its unbelievable that the prosecution let it go.

Quite. Please note that I'm not arguing either that OJ was not guilty or that the jury believed that he was not guilty. But the prosecution has the burden of proof. Whether the jurors sat through the entire thing thinking "please, let someone prove that creep guilty," or took advantage of the situation to vote their racial and political bias makes no difference: if the prosecution was that unbelievably bad or that badly unbelievable, and could not make the case, then the jury could not and should not pretend that they did.

[geni]

I once heard a police officer say something like this.

"Most 'unsolved' cases aren't really unsolved. We know who did it, but there is just not enough evidence to prove it."

And that is the belife that causes the constant demand to drift towards a police state.

[shuize]

And that is the belife that causes the constant demand to drift towards a police state.


In my opinion, the fact that the police believe they know who did it but are unable to prosecute shows that there is no such drift.

[bruto]

In my opinion, the fact that the police believe they know who did it but are unable to prosecute shows that there is no such drift.You may be right about the ones who admit they cannot prosecute, and don't decide to enhance or suppress evidence to support what they think they know. Unfortunately, they are not always so honest.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

You may be right about the ones who admit they cannot prosecute, and don't decide to enhance or suppress evidence to support what they think they know. Unfortunately, they are not always so honest.

Speaking of the police, among all of the many parties involved in this who's mistakes took part in OJ's acquittal, you can't forget the police. They were very heavily criticized for the way they handled the investigation and alot of their conduct lent credibililty to the idea they "enhanced" evidence.

How ironic that the police were so over-aggressive and racist and acted in a way that suggested they might have planted evidence- that's what would get a defendent off, regardless of his or her real guilt or innocence.

[Unalienable]

The book is designed to make money. The mere fact that you wonder if it's a secret confession or a ploy designed to fabricate his innocence explains the purpose of the book in a nutshell: to make you think about it, and hopefully, to make you buy it.

I don't know if he did it. I wasn't there. Yet 12 people said he didn't, and the rules say that now he can go on and live his life. And so we play by the rules. Maybe a criminal is walking free. Oh well, won't be the only one. I'm sure not going to lose sleep over it.

[LashL]

I don't know if he did it. I wasn't there. Yet 12 people said he didn't, and the rules say that now he can go on and live his life. And so we play by the rules. Maybe a criminal is walking free. Oh well, won't be the only one. I'm sure not going to lose sleep over it.


Well, to be accurate, 12 people didn't say "he didn't [commit the crime]"; rather, the jury said that the prosecution did not meet its burden of proof, which is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I agree with them, although I personally think that OJ did, in fact, commit the murders.

As for OJ's rationale(s) for writing the book, I concur with what LossLeader said above.

[Zbu]

You know why? Cause cashing in on the public fascination with him and his notoriety is the only venue to make money left to him...and the only venue left to him to do that is to write a book.

He can't demand big bucks to appear in interviews. His football career was over decades before the murder and his acting career was over because of the murder. He sure as hell can't do Nike commercials any longer.

The only in any way usable asset left to him, very ironically, is that he's one of the most notorious killers of the 20th century.

And he thought he'd be safe from his debt to the Goldman's by funneling the profits to his daughter. Didn't work.

In hindsight, it was probably worse for him that he didn't go to jail. With jail, at least when he left (as an old man) he could have claimed to have done his time and been done with it. Now? He's never going to make any money, everybody knows he's a murderer, and the stigma of that will never leave him until the day he dies. And now he's a colossal joke that couldn't get a job at McDonalds, never mind have a normal life in which people won't wonder if they'll butcher him at night.

OJ won, but he lost. I'm not defending what he did at all, but if he had a brain in his skull that worked, he would have just been convicted and took his punishment. Sure, he would technically be a murderer, but at least he would have the benefit of having done his time and possibly some peace. Now? He's a murderer and will never be anything else. I don't see how he can really go through life having ended two more and now a constant joke to the world.