Information about O.j. Simpson Murder Case

The O.J. Simpson murder case was a highly-publicized U.S. criminal trial in which former American football star for the National Football League (NFL) and actor, O. J. Simpson, was charged with the murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown, and her friend, Ronald Goldman. Simpson was acquitted after the lengthy criminal trial, but was later found liable for the wrongful death of Goldman in a civil trial.

Shortly before midnight on June 12, 1994, Brown and Goldman were found stabbed to death outside Brown's Bundy Drive Brentwood-area condominium in Los Angeles, California, with the Simpson children sleeping in an upstairs bedroom. The Simpsons had been divorced since 1992. Evidence found and collected at the scene led police to suspect O.J. Simpson as the murderer.

Simpson's lawyers convinced the Los Angeles Police Department to allow Simpson to turn himself in at 11 a.m. on June 17, even though the double murder charge meant no bail and a possible death penalty verdict if convicted. Double homicide is a capital offense in California.[1] The prosecution later elected not to ask for the death penalty and instead sought a life sentence.

The slow-speed chase

On June 17, 1994, over one thousand reporters waited for Simpson to turn himself in to police and then give a statement to the media after booking. When he failed to show, confusion set in, and at 2 p.m., an all points bulletin was issued by the police. Robert Kardashian, a Simpson friend and one of his defense lawyers, then read a rambling letter by Simpson to the media. In the letter Simpson said, "First everyone understand I had nothing to do with Nicole's murder… Don't feel sorry for me. I've had a great life." To many, this sounded like a suicide note (read here) and the reporters then joined the search for Simpson.

At 6:45 p.m., a sheriff's patrol car saw a white Ford Bronco belonging to Simpson's friend, Al Cowlings, going south on Interstate 405 (Simpson also owned a white Bronco, but it was Cowlings' vehicle that was involved in this incident.) When the officer approached the Bronco, Cowlings, who was driving, yelled that Simpson had a gun to his own head. The officer then backed off and a slow-speed chase began.

For some time a Los Angeles News Service helicopter contracted by KCBS had exclusive coverage of the chase, but by the end of the chase they had been joined by about a dozen others. NBC interrupted coverage of the 1994 NBA Finals to air the pursuit.

Radio station KNX also provided live coverage of the slow-speed pursuit. As the events unfolded, USC announcer Pete Arbogast, who was doing sports updates, and station producer Oran Sampson contacted former USC coach John McKay to go on the air and encourage Simpson to end the pursuit. McKay agreed and went on the air, asking Simpson to pull over and turn himself in instead of committing suicide.

Numerous spectators and on-lookers packed overpasses in front of the procession; some of them had signs encouraging Simpson to flee and many more were caught up in a festival-like atmosphere. Although Simpson had a loaded weapon, reportedly aimed at the head of Cowlings, and though Cowlings, as the driver, had led authorities on the car chase, no charges were filed for either the loaded weapon, the alleged pointing of it at Cowlings, or the car chase, against Simpson or Cowlings. Furthermore, there has to date been no evidence presented in any court that Simpson actually did point a loaded weapon at Cowlings.

Criminal trial

Simpson, appearing at his first court arraignment on June 21, pleaded not guilty to the murders. A grand jury was formed to see whether to indict him for the two murders. But two days later on June 23, the grand jury was dismissed as a result of the excessive media coverage which might influence the grand jury’s neutrality. After a week-long court hearing, a California court superior judge ruled on July 7 that there was ample evidence to try Simpson for the murders. At his second court appearance, on July 23, Simpson pleaded in a confident and defiant tone: "Absolutely, one hundred percent, not guilty."

Leading the murder investigation was veteran LAPD detective Tom Lange. Lange was well versed in multiple murder cases involving celebrities, as he was involved in solving the 1969 Tate/LaBianca Murders and the 1981 massacre of the Wonderland Gang in which porn star John Curtis Holmes and reputed gangster Eddie Nash were implicated and ultimately acquitted.

What followed in 1995 were 134 days of televised testimony in a very public criminal trial. Many figures in the trial became unwitting celebrities due to this exposure, including judge Lance Ito, who was parodied by many comedians including Tonight Show host Jay Leno. Leno featured a troupe of Asian men in black robes called the "Dancing Itos."

The trial, which was covered and televised publicly by Court TV, began on January 25, 1995. Lead prosecutor Marcia Clark argued that Simpson killed his ex-wife in a jealous rage. The prosecution opened its case by playing a 9-1-1 call Nicole Brown Simpson had made on January 1, 1989 in which she expressed fear that Simpson would physically harm her. The prosecution also presented dozens of expert witnesses on subjects ranging from DNA fingerprinting to shoe print analysis, and what they concluded placed Simpson at the scene of the crime.

A limousine driver, Allan Park, who was to drive Simpson to the LAX airport testified that he could not contact anyone through the intercom at Simpson's gate when he arrived at 10:35 p.m. on the evening of June 12, the time he was due to pick him up. Around 10:50, he saw a large figure enter the house, some lights came on, and Simpson answered the gate's intercom. They loaded some bags into the limo and left for the airport at 11:15. He passed a vehicle parked on the street as he left, but Park could not positively say whether or not it was there initially. His testimony was requested by the jury during deliberation, and reportedly rejected because of his uncertainty regarding the parked vehicle.

Simpson hired a team of expensive (totaling $4 million), high-profile lawyers, including F. Lee Bailey, Barry Scheck, Robert Shapiro, Robert Kardashian, Alan Dershowitz, and Johnnie Cochran, who argued that Simpson was the victim of police fraud and sloppy internal procedures that contaminated the DNA evidence. Simpson's defense team, dubbed the "Dream Team" by reporters, argued that LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman had planted evidence at the crime scene. Police evidence collector Dennis Fung also faced heavy scrutiny. In all, 150 witnesses gave testimony during the eight-month-long trial.

In March, Fuhrman was called to the witness stand where he testified finding blood marks on the driveway of Simpson's home as well as a black leather glove on the premises which had blood of both murder victims on it. Despite an aggressive cross-examination by F. Lee Bailey, Fuhrman denied on the stand that he was racist or had used the word "nigger" to describe black people in the ten years prior to his testimony. But a few months later, the defense played audio tapes for the jury of Fuhrman using the word repeatedly. The tape was made nearly 10 years earlier by a young North Carolina screenwriter named Laura McKinny, who interviewed Fuhrman in 1986 for a story she was developing on female police officers. These Fuhrman tapes became one of the cornerstones of the defense's case that Fuhrman's testimony lacked credibility, and may have led to Simpson's acquittal. Fuhrman was recalled to the stand in September, but pleaded the Fifth. As a result of his testimony, he was later indicted for perjury, to which he pleaded no contest.^[1] Fuhrman later wrote a book about the case called Murder in Brentwood.

At one point during the trial on June 15, 1995, Cochran goaded assistant prosecutor Christopher Darden into asking Simpson to put on a leather glove that was found at the scene of the crime. The prosecution had earlier decided against asking Simpson to try on the gloves because the glove had been soaked in blood, mangled during scientific investigation of it and frozen and unfrozen several times. Darden was advised by Clark and other prosecutors superior to him in the office not to ask Simpson to try on the glove, but instead, to argue through experts that the glove, in better condition, would fit. Instead, Darden made the decision on his own initiative to have Simpson try on the glove.

The glove was too tight for Simpson to comfortably put on over his latex-gloved hands, which inspired Cochran to reuse a quip he used several times earlier in the trial in relation to other points in his closing arguments, "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."^[2] (Here, "it" refers not only to the leather glove, but the prosecution's argument as a whole.) On June 22, 1995, assistant prosecutor Christopher Darden told Judge Lance Ito his concerns that Simpson "has arthritis and we looked at the medication he takes and some of it is anti-inflammatory and we are told he has not taken the stuff for a day and it caused swelling in the joints and inflammation in his hands."^[3] The prosecution also stated their belief that the glove had shrunk while being soaked in blood. Prosecutors contended that Simpson's blood found at the crime scene was the result of blood dripping from cuts on the middle finger of Simpson's left hand that police saw on June 13, and that they asserted were suffered during the fatal attack on Ronald Goldman. However, none of the gloves found had any cuts. While there was blood on the glove at the crime scene, there was none on the glove found on Simpson's property.

The prosecution was confident that they presented a solid case and fully expected a conviction. In polls, a large percentage of African Americans across the nation were largely unconvinced or felt that Simpson had not committed the crime, and that to convict would be to give a green light to police misconduct. Most white Americans, in the same polls, believed that the case against Simpson was solid. Racial tensions grew through the trial and officials feared a repeat of the 1992 Los Angeles riots if Simpson received a guilty verdict.

At 10 a.m. on October 3, 1995, after only three hours of deliberation and in front of an estimated 150 million American television viewers, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

Criminal trial evidence

1. DNA analysis of the blood found in, on, and near Simpson’s Bronco revealed traces of Simpson’s, Nicole’s, and Ronald Goldman’s blood.
2. DNA testing of the blood under Nicole's finger nails was from an unidentified person who was never found.
3. DNA analysis of bloody socks found in Simpson's bedroom were proven to be Nicole’s blood; however, the blood on the socks had the same identical shape on both sides. Leading medical examiner Dr. Henry Lee of the Connecticut State Police Forensic Science Laboratory testified in court that the only way this could happen was if he had a "hole" in his ankle and that the more likely scenario was that someone intentionally placed the blood on the socks while they were on the floor of OJ Simpsons' bedroom. Lee also noted the collection procedure of the socks was inappropriate and caused contamination.^[4]
4. Simpson’s hair was found on Goldman’s shirt even though Simpson claims to have not been at the house and to have never met Goldman.
5. DNA analysis of blood on the left-glove, found outside Nicole Simpson's home, was proven to be a mixture of Simpson’s, Nicole’s, and Ronald Goldman’s. However, even though the glove was soaked in blood, there were no blood drops leading up to, or away from the glove. No other blood was found in the area of the glove except on the glove.
6. LA Police Detective Phillip Vanatter also could not give a reasonable explanation why after taking Simpsons blood, and before recording this part of the evidence, he walked around for hours with the 8 cc's of OJ Simpsons' blood on his person. Most police departments require that evidence custody logs be kept and that no one officer and detective hold evidence of this type on their person for any extended period of time.
7. The LA County District Attoney's Office and the Medical Examiners Office never had an explanation as to why there were 1.5 cc's of blood missing from the original 8 cc's amount taken from Simpson and placed into evidence.^[5]
8. The gloves also contained particles of Goldman’s hair and carpet fibers from Simpson’s Bronco.
9. Officers found arrest records indicating that Simpson was charged with the beating of his wife Nicole. Photos of Nicole’s bruised and battered face emerge. Simpson was sentenced with 3 years of community service for this crime.
10. Police discovered the dome light in the Bronco had been removed. A search of the vehicle revealed the light was carefully placed under the passenger seat and was in good working condition. Puzzling blood smears on the passenger floorboard indicate that Simpson may have purposely removed the light and placed it under the seat before the murders. Then, after the murders, he may have unsuccessfully tried to find it to put it back in the socket. Police on stakeouts routinely remove the dome lights from their vehicles to avoid detection when the car doors are opened.
11. It was discovered that Nicole had one set of keys to her home missing. She had indicated to several family members and friends that she feared Simpson had stolen them to gain entry into her home. The keys were later found in Simpson’s home.
12. Paula Barbieri indicated that she had broken up with Simpson the day of the murders. She indicated he seemed very disturbed at the news. Phone records proved that Simpson attempted to contact her shortly before the murders from his Bronco’s cellular phone.
13. The lion's share of the evidence — bloody glove, bloody socks, blood on the Bronco — was found by Los Angeles Police Detective Mark Fuhrman, who in turned committed perjury on the witness stand and then pleaded the 5th Amendment against self incrimination to avoid questioning after his integrity came into question.^[6]
14. The left-hand glove found at Nicole’s home and the right-hand glove found at Simpson’s home proved to be a match.
15. They also proved to be Simpson’s size. Even though Simpson claimed under oath that he did not own a pair of Aris Isotoner gloves, several media pictures emerged showing Simpson wearing these exact gloves.
16. The bloody footprints are quite easily identified as being made from a pair of Bruno Magli shoes. These shoes are quite expensive and extremely rare. The large size 12 prints matched Simpson’s shoe size.
17. A collection of evidence by LAPD criminologist Dennis Fung came under criticism. He admitted to "having missed a few drops of blood on a fence near the bodies," but said that he "returned several weeks afterwards to collect them" on the stand.^[7] Despite deviating from standard methodology, this was admitted into evidence for the trial.
18. Fung also admitted that he had not used rubber gloves when collecting some of the evidence.^[8]
19. Following his testimony, Fung was greeted with handshakes and hugs from the defense table where he was viewed as a hero.^[9]
20. Friends and family indicated that Nicole was quite consistent in her claims that Simpson had been stalking her. She claimed that everywhere she went she noticed Simpson would be there, watching her. She was afraid because Simpson had already told her he would kill her if he ever found her with another man.
21. Ross Cutlery provided store receipts indicating that Simpson had purchased a 12-inch stiletto knife six weeks before the murders. A replica of the knife was purchased by the police and provided an exact match to the wounds on Nicole and Ronald Goldman.
22. LA Police Detective Phillip Vanatter also testified that he saw photographs of press personnel leaning on and contaminating the Bronco before the evidence was collected. The exchange recorded on the trial transcript between Vanatter and Shapiro:

:Mr. SHAPIRO: And you later found out that the press was not only in the vicinity of the Bronco, but had spilled coffee on the hood of the Bronco while it was being scured by your officers, did you not?

:MR. VANNATTER: I saw that there were coffee stains to be disregarded in the tow report, yes.

:MR. SHAPIRO: And you also have seen photographs of a civilian running up and touching the exact area where you saw the blood, did you not?

:MR. VANNATTER: I saw photographs of a — what appeared to be a woman looking into the vehicle, yes.^[10]

Reaction to verdict

The early morning revelation of the not guilty verdict appeared to shock the prosecutorial team, and likewise shocked many in America (even one of Simpson's lawyers feared at first that the quick verdict might mean conviction).

Some who opposed the verdict blamed the jurors who acquitted despite being presented with what critics contend was overwhelming evidence of Simpson's guilt (especially the DNA evidence).

In post-trial interviews with the jurors, a few said that they believed Simpson probably committed the murder ^[11], but that the prosecution bungled the case. Those that did mention the DNA evidence showed what critics purport to be a lack of understanding of it. For example, several of the jurors referred to "contamination" of the DNA evidence while it was in police custody, despite the fact that analysis conclusively proved it to be Simpson's.

Critics of the verdict therefore allege incompetence from both the prosecutors and the jury. Only two of the jurors had received a college education.

^[12] Prosecutors claimed to have heard a few of them saying things like "Well, lots of people have the same blood type," not understanding that DNA is very different from blood type. Another reason seems to stem from the fact that the jury included mostly African-Americans, suggesting that race also played a part in the decision.

Famed prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi (who had handled the Manson trial) seemed to share this opinion, writing a book called Outrage: The Five Reasons O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder. Bugliosi was very critical of Clark and Darden and pointed out many glaring mistakes that they had made during the trial. He faulted them, for example, for not introducing the note that Simpson had written before trying to flee. Bugliosi said that the note "reeked" of guilt and that the jury should have been allowed to see it. He also pointed out that there was a change of clothing, a large amount of cash, a passport and a disguise kit found in the Bronco of which the jury was never informed. Simpson had made a very incriminating statement to police about cutting his finger the night of the murders. Bugliosi once again took Clark and Darden to task for not allowing the jury to hear the tape of this statement. Bugliosi also said the prosecutors should have gone into more detail about Simpson's abuse of his wife. He said it should have been made clear to the mostly African-American jury that Simpson had little impact in the black community and had done nothing to help blacks less fortunate than him. Bugliosi pointed out that, although the prosecutors obviously understood that Simpson's race had nothing to do with the murders, once the defense "opened the door" by trying to paint Simpson falsely as a leader in the black community, the evidence to the contrary should have been presented, to prevent the jury from allowing it to bias their verdict. He also has stated that, if he were prosecuting this case, he would have put at least 500 hours of preparation into his final summation, and that it was obvious that Clark and Darden had waited until the night before to prepare for it.

Many legal experts think that the jury selection phase of the trial was crucial to the outcome. Polls and surveys at the time indicated that the public's opinion of whether Simpson was the murderer was split along racial lines. But rather than try the crime in mostly white Santa Monica, California where murders occurring in Brentwood would normally be held, the prosecution decided to have the trial in Los Angeles; Bugliosi also criticized this decision in his book. During the jury selection process, the defense made it very difficult for the prosecution to challenge potential black jurors on the grounds that it is illegal to dismiss someone from the jury for racially motivated reasons. (California courts barred peremptory challenges to jurors based on race in People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal. 3d 258, 583 P. 2d 748 (1978) years before the U.S. Supreme Court would do so in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 79 (1986).)

According to media reports, prosecutor Marcia Clark thought that women, regardless of race, would sympathize with the domestic violence aspect of the case and connect with her personally. On the other hand, the defense's research suggested that women generally were more likely to acquit, that jurors did not respond well to Clark's style, and that black women would not be as sympathetic to the victim: a white woman. As a result, both sides accepted a disproportionate number of female jurors. From an original jury pool of 40% white, 28% black, 17% Hispanic, and 15% Asian, the final jury for the trial had 10 women and 2 men, of which there were 8 blacks, 2 Hispanics, 1 Native American half-white, and 1 white female.

Discussion of the racial component of the case continued long after the trial. Some polls and some commentators have concluded that many blacks, while having their doubts as to Simpson's innocence, were nonetheless more inclined to be suspicious of the credibility and fairness of the police and the courts, and thus less likely to question the outcome. However, an NBC poll taken in 2004 reported that, although 77% of 1,186 people sampled thought Simpson was guilty, only 27% of blacks in the sample believed so, compared to 87% of whites. Whatever the exact nature of the "racial divide," the Simpson case continues to be examined through the lens of race.

Quasi confessions

In the February 1998 issue of Esquire Simpson was quoted as saying, "Let's say I committed this crime… Even if I did this, it would have to have been because I loved her very much, right?" Simpson said that he would look for the real murderer, who he believed was a hitman, but there is little evidence to suggest that Simpson has been actively searching for the "real killer." When the news media filmed Simpson playing golf, comedians joked about his "effort" to search every sand bunker in America to find the murderer.

In November 2006, ReganBooks announced a book by O.J. Simpson as well as a TV interview entitled If I Did It, an account the publisher pronounced "his confession".

Fox Television was to air an interview with Simpson November 27 and 29, 2006, in which Simpson would allegedly describe how he would have committed the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman, "if he were the one responsible." "This is an historic case, and I consider this his confession," publisher Judith Regan told The Associated Press.^[13] On November 20 News Corporation, parent company of ReganBooks, canceled both the book and the TV interview due to public criticism. CEO Rupert Murdoch, speaking at a press conference, stated: "I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project."^[14] In June 2007, a federal judge ruled that Fred Goldman, Ron Goldman's father, could pursue the publishing rights to Simpson's book.^[15] In July 2007, a federal bankruptcy judge awarded the rights to the book to the Goldman family to help satisfy the $38 million wrongful death civil suit judgment against Simpson.^[16]. After Goldman had won the rights to the book, it was published under the new title "If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer".^[17]

The book was ghostwritten by Pablo Fenjves.^[18] Fenjves has stated that Simpson actively collaborated on the book, and that he believes Simpson to be a murderer. ^[19]

Alternative murder theories

Simpson has suggested a hitman killed Ron and Nicole. Those who agree with this assertion say it is supported by the following details:

• The murder of Ron and Nicole was among a string of murders of people associated with Simpson, Ron, and Nicole. Casimir Sucharski, a friend of Simpson, was murdered two weeks after Ron and Nicole. On March 19, 1995, Simpson's friend, record company promoter Charles Minor, was murdered. On July 30, 1993, eleven months before the famous double murder, Ron Goldman's friend Brett Cantor was killed with a knife in a manner identical to Ron and Nicole: from behind and across the throat and stabbed repeatedly on the arms and chest. Michael Nigg, a waiter at the Mezzaluna was shot in the head and killed. Another Mezzaluna waiter barely survived a car bombing.
• Several people believed that O.J. Simpson was actually after a man by the name of Brett Shaves and not Ron Goldman. Brett and Nicole dated just months after the divorce of Nicole and O.J. Photos of the two naked in a hot tub were published in the National Enquirer.
• Photos of Nicole with known criminals of the drug trade in a hot tub and on a bed were shown on the news. Simpson said he was upset when he saw his children associated with the drug scene with which Nicole had apparently become involved.
• Barry Hoestler, a private investigator hired for the Simpson case by Robert Shapiro, said Nicole talked about the idea of opening a restaurant with Ron Goldman as her partner, and financing it with cocaine profits. Hoestler said Nicole and her friends were "over their heads with some dope dealers."
• Nicole's best friend was Faye Resnick, a cocaine addict. Someone broke into Resnick's apartment to take documents and photographs. Later, Resnick skipped town. Simpson's defense team said Nicole and Ron may have been killed by drug dealers to scare Resnick into paying her drug debt. Prosecutors said there was no evidence to back this theory.
• There was an unexplained DNA mix on the steering wheel column of the car. The DNA was neither Simpson's, nor Nicole's, nor Goldman's.
• The "car testimonies" of Park and Kato, which suggest unexplained movement of vehicle(s), were suppressed from the trial.
• Al Cowlings once served as a bodyguard for convicted drug smuggler Joey Ippolito. Ippolito escaped from a Florida jail three weeks before the murders and made many calls to Simpson. According to the theory, Ippolito probably hired a hitman to commit the drug related murders. Frankie Viserto is one hitman known to be close to Ippolito. In the past, Viserto has tortured and beheaded his victims with a knife.
• Nicole's sister Denise Brown was often seen and photographed with ex-Mafia cutthroat and FBI informant Tony Fiato, a cohort of Ippolito. Denise denied that Fiato was her boyfriend, but witnesses say otherwise.
• Police detectives broke state law and their own policy when they waited hours to summon the county coroner.
• In violation of policy, evidence remained in the processing room for three days before the first piece was booked in the secure ECU. The evidence was on a tabletop, and could be handled by anyone with access. 70 to 80 police personnel had access.
• Someone broke into Robert Shapiro's office, forced open a locked filing cabinet, and stole confidential papers related to the case.
• Simpson said that only once, in 1989, had he and Nicole got into a fight that injured her. Nicole used makeup in one of the photos showing her with facial bruises after the fight. He said Nicole's written statements of domestic abuse were a plan to get out of a prenuptial agreement.
• The DNA evidence was a 5 point match. A 6 point match is necessary to conclude that DNA comes from a particular person. However, it is highly unlikely to get a 5 point match from someone other than a relative. This theory is outlined below.

Jason Simpson theory

Another theory that has been put forth is that Simpson's son, Jason Simpson, committed the murders. This is the central theory of a book by Private Investigator William Dear titled O.J. is Guilty, But Not of Murder (ISBN 0-9702058-0-5). The book was the result of a six year investigation by Dear and attempts to explain Simpson's incriminating behavior and the incriminating evidence. Among the circumstances that Dear claims in the book to support his theory are:

1. Jason Simpson was considered a "problem child" at an early age. Documented in articles of interviews given by OJ.
2. He had fits of rage and once attacked a statue of his father with a baseball bat as well as later being diagnosed with "Intermittent Rage Disorder" accompanied by seizures. He was prescribed Depakote, a drug frequently prescribed to individuals suffering from rage.
3. According to Shipp, Jason and Nicole would go out dancing and partying together and Jason probably began to develop romantic feelings for her.
4. He had no alibi after 10pm, he claimed to watch TV until 3am. Not only did he have no alibi for what he was doing after 10pm, but gave three different versions of what he was doing that night when he was asked on three different occasions.
5. Experts established that the probable murder weapon was a chef's knife.
6. Jason had his own chef knives and kept them with him and probably had them in his possession when he left Jackson's that night.
7. Jason's psychiatrist shredded all of Jason's medical records after the murders.
8. On the day after the murders, June 13, 1994, OJ hired a well-known criminal attorney to represent Jason. This was prior to OJ's arrest for the murders.
9. James G. Cron, crime scene expert, has studied the investigative material and determined that Jason Simpson should have been considered a major suspect in the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.
10. English crime scene experts, Tery Merston and his partner, Peter Harpur, stated OJ is not the killer of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman but in all probability, was at the crime scene after the murders. They both felt Jason Simpson should have been considered a major suspect.

This book has now been made into a documentary, along with new evidence, entitled The Overlooked Suspect. Dear hopes this will finally force an opening of a grand jury and indictment of Jason Simpson.

References

• Bugliosi, Vincent. 1997. Outrage: 5 Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away with Murder. Seattle: Island Books. ISBN 0-440-22382-2
• Cotterill, Janet. 2002. Language and power in court, a linguistic analysis of the O. J. Simpson trial. Basingstoke: Palgrave. ISBN 0-333-96901-4
• Felman, Shosana. 2002. The Juridical Unconscious: Trials and Traumas in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-00931-2
• Garner, Joe. 2002. Stay Tuned: Television's Unforgettable Moments. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing. ISBN 0-7407-2693-5
• Hunt, Darnell M. 1999. O. J. Simpson facts and fictions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-62456-8
• Dear, William C. 2000. O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder. Dear Overseas Production. ISBN 0-970-205805

Footnotes

External links

• The O.J. Simpson Verdict on YouTube
• CourtTV's OJ Simpson Criminal Trial Coverage
• Famous American Trials: The O. J. Simpson Trial
• 5 year retrospective
• http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/
• O.J. Simpson Verdict Ten Years Later (PBS Frontline streaming video)
• An Analysis of OJ Simpson's Admissions at StatementAnalysis.com