Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Username:
Password:
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

There aren't any users online.

[Lee Lofland]

The criminal trial has nothing to do with the verdict in Simpson's civil trial or in any other civil trial.

The jury in the civil trial found OJ guilty of the deaths by a preponderance of evidence. That's all that's required in a civil trial, unlike the "beyond a reasonable doubt" criteria of a criminal proceeding. The preponderance of evidence was proven in the civil trial.

I also believe preponderance was proven in the criminal trial, but that's not enough to convict someone of a crime; therefore, the jury didn't see their way clear to say that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There were too many discrepancies.

I could see the easily see the guilt during the criminal trial, but I'm an ex-detective. I knew he was guilty before the trial.

DNA was fairly new back then and not everyone could understand it. Shoot, the prosecutors didn't really understand it. If they did, they didn't explain it very well.

With that said, I'm not buying the book. I really don't like to support people who showboat.

[Ingrid]

Shame on Harper Collins!  And shame on readers who reward killers.

Ingrid

[Bob Mueller]

O.J. Simpson Book, TV Special Canceled
Nov 20, 4:09 PM (ET)

By DAVID BAUDER

NEW YORK (AP) - 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. (NWS) chairman. "We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson."

Here's the rest of the story. Good taste has prevailed.

[Susan August]

You beat me to the punch, Bob.  I was just about to post it!  There is some justice there, albeit not all that would be preferred, of course!

Susan

[Ingrid]

Umm!  Not good taste!  A storm of criticism!  They were perfectly happy to make big bucks out of the book and TV show until some influential people went public with their outrage.

Ingrid (who doesn't trust publishers where money is involved).

[Debbie Matthews]

Had just seen the article on Yahoo news.  The question is does he have to give the advance back.  Probably not.  They ought to make Judith Regan pay the company back.

[Lee Lofland]

I am so pleased with this decision. Things don't normally bother me a lot, but this book and TV show did. I hope OJ has to return the advance, but I doubt it.

[Bob Mueller]

I hope OJ has to return the advance, but I doubt it.

I'd like to see that advance seized and turned over to begin satisfying the civil judgment. But I doubt that will happen either.

[Lee Lofland]

I agree, Bob. I can't figure out why and how this guy has been protected for so long. There's something about this whole case that we don't know and probably never will.

[Charles King]

This has to be the most twisted story of the year, although, that smuck who said he killed that little girl and got out of a Thailand prison will probably make a run at that dubious prize too. I heard a story he was busted looking into the windows of an elementary school the day after he got released. Geeez! ... But back to OJ. Is the publisher really off the hook now? I mean even though they did the right thing in the end, shouldn't someone get fired. It shows a total lack of judgment, and a stain on the publisher-- Of course if they're owned by Fox maybe I shouldn't be surprised they went for it. I think the advance should go to some charity that helps victims of violent crime myself, and Rupert should clean up trash on the nearest interstate for 8 Saturdays in a row-- at least.

Charles 

[Nellie]

Some how I don't think we've heard the end of this.  What's to keep another publisher or Simpson himself from publishing it?  True it wouldn't be as profitable without the exposure or distribution, but it would still make money, and that's all some people care about.
Nellie

[Michele Viney]

The cancellation of the book made the morning news in Ireland!!!

It felt a little strange to hear the news journalists here, playing catch up, after me following the story through you guys.

I did hear Ron Goldman's father threatening to boycott any goods that might be advertised during the interview, obviously advertisers got worried that others might follow his example. Now that's one way to get Rupert Murdock's attention - hit him in the pocket.

Michele

[Bob Mueller]

Some how I don't think we've heard the end of this

You're probably right. There was an article this morning where the Goldmans and Browns claim Fox offered them what they're calling "hush money" and what Fox called "profits with no strings attached."

[B L McAllister]

Some how I don't think we've heard the end of this.  What's to keep another publisher or Simpson himself from publishing it?  True it wouldn't be as profitable without the exposure or distribution, but it would still make money, and that's all some people care about.
Nellie

I agree.  It's had all the publicity it needs from all the networks and others that have expressed their shock and dismay--over and over again.
Byron

[Ingrid]

Quite right about not having heard the end of this.  The books have been shipped. The publishers are asking the stores to return them . . . but . . . Those books have just sky-rocketed in price.

Ingrid