O.J. Simpson to discuss 'how he would have committed' the killings

Agree2Disagree Forum

(11/15/06 - LOS ANGELES, CA) - In a new TV interview and book, O.J. Simpson discusses how he would have committed the slayings of his ex-wife and her friend "if he did it."

The two-part television interview, titled "O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here's How It Happened," will air Nov. 27 and Nov. 29 on Fox, the TV network said Tuesday.

"O.J. Simpson, in his own words, tells for the first time how he would have committed the murders if he were the one responsible for the crimes," the network said in a statement. "In the two-part event, Simpson describes how he would have carried out the murders he has vehemently denied committing for over a decade."

The interview, conducted with book publisher Judith Regan, will air days before Simpson's new book, "If I Did It," goes on sale Nov. 30. The book "hypothetically describes how the murders would have been committed," the network said.

Simpson, who now lives in Florida, was acquitted in a criminal trial of the 1994 killings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman. Simpson was later found liable in 1997 in a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the Goldman family.

Messages left with Simpson and his attorney Yale Galanter were not returned Tuesday night.

I won't watch this crap... or spend a penny for this book. Amazing...
Most people believe, without a doubt, that this guy murdered his ex-wife, and that guy. And now, he's going to make frakkin' money off of this.

I guess that he showed up at some event in Vegas, and everyone was booing him, and yelling out "murderer" etc... He's quite unpopular.

I could care less how OJ feels about who and how is ex-wife and her friend were killed. The court of public opinion has certainly made their judgement known.

I'm just saddened that the prosecution screwed up so badly as to allow the defense to shred its evidence to pieces and get him acquitted. I watched that entire trial; if I were sitting on the jury, I would have found him not guilty based on the evidence presented.

I get that the prosecution messed up royally, but I too followed the trial and there is no way I would have voted not guilty.

-HECK!

What evidence was presented that would have caused you to vote guilty?

His blood on the crime scene. Their blood in his car. The cuts on his hand. The Bronco chase.

-HECK!

If we're talking reasonable doubt, you are totally right. There was reasonable doubt because of the prosecution's inability to present a seemingly slam dunk case and the defense's overblown, grandiose tactics. It was a show, a mockery almost.

Nonetheless, I would have still voted guilty. While you are right about the time's not being able to be proven, I don't think it takes a mightly leap to connect the dots. That's why in he was found liable for their deaths in the civil case.

-HECK!

I watched that entire case, and then some. I was in school at the time, and law was my major. So, this was something that I was very interested in.

The prosecution was sloppy, and there was reasonable doubt. But, as Heck said, it really doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots! And those dots were in blood. I would have voted guilty.

But the 'Dream Team' did pull a rabbit out of their hat and created reasonable doubt. Of course so did the prosecution. I blame Bush.

-HECK!

Was wondering if anyone saw that...

Regardless of the case, does anyone else find it creepy that dude is talking about the murders in this way? What about a book of theories describing other people who might have done it... or how he is finding the real killers. So much for never resting on that mission.

-HECK!

I find it EXTREMELY odd that he would be doing such a thing. If I were him, I'd be leaving it alone as much as possible.

Maybe it'll be listed as Non-Fiction or Autobiography.

He wants to brag about it, and he wants to make money off of it.

If I was OJ Simpson I'd just come out and say.. " Yeah, I DID IT! Whatcha gon do about it? That's right, I said it, Ever hear of "Double Jeopardy" SUCKAS?!!

Then I'd run real fast to my waiting jet plane and never step foot in the USA again. I'd give the paparazzi the finger and hope my plane lands safely in some remote country and declare myself "King".

Publisher on O.J.: 'I consider this his confession'

POSTED: 11:56 p.m. EST, November 15, 2006

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- O.J. Simpson created an uproar Wednesday with plans for a TV interview and book titled "If I Did It" -- an account the publisher pronounced "his confession" and media executives condemned as revolting and exploitive.

Fox, which plans to air an interview with Simpson Nov. 27 and 29, said Simpson describes 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."

Denise Brown, sister of Nicole Brown Simpson, lashed out at publisher Judith Regan of ReganBooks for "promoting the wrongdoing of criminals" and commercializing abuse. The book goes on sale Nov. 30.

She added: "It's unfortunate that Simpson has decided to awaken a nightmare that we have painfully endured and worked so hard to move beyond."

Regan refused to say what Simpson is being paid for the book but said he came to her with the idea.

"This is an historic case, and I consider this his confession," Regan told The Associated Press.

Simpson was acquitted in 1995 of murder after a trial that became an instant cultural flashpoint and a source of racial tension. The former football star was later found liable for the deaths in a wrongful-death suit filed by the Goldman family. In the years since, he has been mocked relentlessly by late-night comedians, particularly for his vow to hunt down the real killers.

"He's willing to tell the world how he 'would' murder his children's mother and Ron. Sick," Goldman's father, Fred Goldman, said on CNN's "Larry King Live" Wednesday night.

Simpson has failed to pay the $33.5 million judgment against him in the civil case. His NFL pension and his Florida home cannot legally be seized. He and the families of the victims have wrangled over the money in court for years.

The victim' families could go after the proceeds from the book's sales to pay off the judgment. But one legal analyst said there are ways to get around that requirement -- such as having proceeds not go directly to Simpson.

"Clever lawyering can get you a long way," said Laurie Levenson, a Loyola University law school professor and former federal prosecutor who has followed the case closely.

Levenson noted that the criminal justice system's protection against double jeopardy means Simpson's book, explosive as it may be, should not expose him to any new legal danger. She added that Simpson could create an extra layer of insulation from any legal worries by presenting the story hypothetically.

"He can write pretty much whatever he wants," Levenson said. "Unless he's confessing to killing somebody else, he can probably do this with impunity."

Goldman's sister, Kim Goldman, told CNN: "He's snubbing his finger to the system, to the community again. He's telling us one more time, 'I'm gonna continue to get away with killing your family members and I'm not gonna honor the judgment and look at me, ha, ha, ha."'

Simpson did not return numerous calls for comment. Simpson's own attorney Yale Galanter said he did not know about the book or the interview until this week.

"The book was not done through our office," Galanter said. "I did not have anything to do with the negotiations of the book. This was strictly done between O.J. and others."

He said there is "only one chapter that deals with their deaths and that chapter, in my understanding, has a disclaimer that it's complete fiction."

On Amazon.com on Wednesday, the 240-page book was being offered for $16.47. An image of the cover featured Simpson's face and the title "If I Did It," with "If" highlighted in white and the other letters in red.

Other publishers and publishing industry observers practically fell over each other to criticize ReganBooks, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers, and Simpson.

Otto Penzler, who runs Otto Penzler Books, a crime imprint of Harcourt, said he would have a moral problem with "carrying a book like that and enriching this lowlife in any way."

"If I were betting, I would say the book won't sell," he said. "I think people are so disgusted with this guy that they're having the same feeling I do."

ReganBooks has gained a reputation for publishing some less-than-highbrow material, including Jose Canseco's "Juiced," billed as a tell-all on steroids in baseball, and books about the slaying of Laci Peterson.

Patricia Schroeder, president and chief executive of the American Association of Publishers, described the developments as sickening.

"But I think it's going to stir an awful lot of debate and make the culture take a real look at itself, and that may not be unhealthy," she said.

Indeed, one thing that seemed certain was that the book and interview -- which Fox will air at the end of the crucial sweeps month -- were bound to generate a torrent of publicity.

Shari Anne Brill, a television analyst for the Madison Avenue firm Carat USA, predicted public interest would rival that of the 2003 interview with Michael Jackson, seen by 27 million people in 2003.

At least one other network, NBC, said it had been approached to air the special but declined the offer.

"This is not a project appropriate for our network," said Rebecca Marks, a spokeswoman for the entertainment division of NBC, a network that once employed Simpson as a football analyst.

CBS said it was unaware of any pitch for the project. ABC did not immediately return a call for comment.

He could come out and confess anyway, couldn't he? He can't be tried for the murder again, and he already paid through the teeth to her family... so is that right?

The thing is, I know people are going to watch this... kind of sad, really.

So in the civil suit, he was found liable, but didn't end up paying? That's interesting. I like how that article says his house and pension can't be legally seized, but it doesn't explain WHY NOT!? 'Cause that's a weird one.

I believe he's paid the Goldman's some of the judgment, just not anywhere close to all of it.

-HECK!

Victims' families lash out at Simpson

LOS ANGELES - Relatives of the victims in the Simpson slayings case are lashing out at the planned publication of a book by O.J. Simpson in which he discusses how he would have committed the killings of his ex-wife and her friend "if I did it."

"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 said in an interview broadcast Thursday on ABC's "Good Morning America."

The book, "If I Did It," is being published by ReganBooks, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers. It goes on sale Nov. 30. Fox, which like Harper Collins is owned by News Corp., is airing a two-part TV interview of Simpson on Nov. 27 and 29.

Denise Brown, sister of Nicole Brown Simpson, accused publisher Judith Regan of "promoting the wrongdoing of criminals" and commercializing abuse.

She added: "It's unfortunate that Simpson has decided to awaken a nightmare that we have painfully endured and worked so hard to move beyond."

Regan refused to say what Simpson is being paid for the book, which is being offered for $16.47. She said he came to her with the idea.

"This is an historic case, and I consider this his confession," Regan told The Associated Press.

In a brief promotional clip from the interview posted on Fox's Web site, Simpson, says, "I don't think any two people could be murdered without everybody being covered in blood."

He is also seen setting aside a copy of a book he is reading from and saying, "I can't do no more of this." Neither the title of the book nor the context for his statements was provided.

Simpson did not return numerous calls for comment. Simpson's own attorney Yale Galanter said he did not know about the book or the interview until this week.

Simpson was acquitted in 1995 of murder in the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife Nicole and her friend Ron Goldman after a trial that became a cultural flashpoint and a source of racial tension. He was later found liable for the deaths in a wrongful-death suit filed by the Goldman family but has failed to pay the $33.5 million judgment.

His National Football League pension and his Florida home cannot legally be seized. He and the families of the victims have wrangled over the money in court for years.

The families could go after the proceeds from the book's sales to pay off the judgment. But one legal analyst said there are ways to get around that requirement — such as having proceeds not go directly to Simpson.

"Clever lawyering can get you a long way," said Laurie Levenson, a Loyola University law school professor and former federal prosecutor who has followed the case closely.

As explosive as the interview or book may be, the criminal justice system's protection against double jeopardy means Simpson's book should not expose him to any new criminal charges, she said.

"He's snubbing his finger to the system, to the community again," Goldman's sister, Kim Goldman, told CNN's Larry King Live. "He's telling us one more time, 'I'm gonna continue to get away with killing your family members and I'm not gonna honor the judgment and look at me, ha, ha, ha.'"

-------

-HECK!

OJ should be hiding his dumb ass. He's asking for someone to snipe him outta existance. If I was Nicole's family... or the Goldman's family, there isn't anything that would stop me from taking that mans life.

I saw a robot looking at this thread I think it's worthy of repeating. Now, for HECK's way-back machine, I take you to the year 2004.

I'm surprised you didn't say Bush was to blame.

That's something that ALWAYS bothered me, during his trial.

One, when they had OJ "try on" the glove, he had another glove on his hand.
Two, he made his hand all spread out, and stiff.

"See, it doesn't fit... too small."

No crap, really? The blood shrunk it, and you're wearing another glove on your hand already, and trying to fit that one over it. And, look how you're holding your hand. Judge Ito should have called that, and he didn't. What a load of crap in my opinion. Had I been on the jury, I would have kept them in the jury room, until they saw that.

Man, I was long winded back in the old days.

I was probably drunk. The only time I head into political threads is when I'm tanked.

I dare not go into the policitcal threads when I'm on fade. That would be disaster.

-HECK!

I once needed to buy a new light for the boot of my car and got into a heated debate, so I feel your pain.

Please pass it on!

Psychopath, textbook variety. Sucks that he will manuver the revenue from this book so the Goldman's can't get it.

-HECK!

Well, they talked to the jury members, after the case, and they said that the defense put enough "reasonable doubt" into their minds, and that's why they came back with the verdict that they did.

Someone apparently convinced O.J. to do this because anyone tied to this book is going to get paid. O.J.'s lawyer must have considered the consequences and gave him the green light. I don't think Mr. Cochran would have advised such a move.

As a master of psychology (and by that I mean humble observer of human behavior) it is clear to me that O.J. wants to confess, and that he'll never be as sorry for what he did as he is proud. If he was sorry he would say so.

I agree with you, Sayzak.... I too think that he's damn proud of what he's done... and of the fact that he got away with it.

I don't know much about this whole book deal but I think this might have put a fly in the ointment.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061120...mpson_interview

I don’t know Heck and Euclid if that’s completely true. Although I believe OJ is guilty, what was painfully obvious is that the LAPD tried to plant evidence.

I believe that was largely a part of their own demise.

I don’t know if someone mentioned this but I think the Prosecutor didn’t prove how OJ did it or when. Timeline was questionable and I didn’t buy the blood in the truck as well as they found blood leading from the truck to the house. It was way too dark to see those drops.

Also, the fact that blood at the scene had additives in it and blood from the lab was missing didn’t jibe either.

Lastly, the glove at OJ’s house, why? Didn’t make sense to me.

Now again, I’m not saying OJ was innocent because I believe he wasn’t. I just believe the prosecution left some open ends to some reasonable questions.

It was painfully obvious is that the LAPD tried to plant evidence? How so?

-HECK!

Guess this can be filed under "moot point" now:

O.J. Simpson book, TV special canceled

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer

NEW YORK - 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.

----------

-HECK!

All the crappola aside, I woudn't mind hearing what he said, how he did it, etc....


I'm sure it will leak to the net, and we can download the highlights...

I don't, it's garbage. I'd rather read one of those smut novels with the bare chested dude on the cover.

-HECK!

I'm slightly curious. Not as much as I was ten years ago. The main deal I always wanted to know was what he did with all the bloody clothes, and why there was not any blood to speak of at his house, or in his drain pipes or in the bronco.


A few drops of something in the Bronco. But the way that crime scene was, he would have been covered in that stuff.

They just announced, on the news, that the tv special has been CANCELED! There were TONS of complaints. Family members were like... "Look, he's straight out telling us that he committed these murders, and we will not support ANY company that puts this crap out." Looks like OJ is outta luck.

POSTED: 5:34 p.m. EST, November 20, 2006


Story Highlights
• News Corp. cancels book, interview on '94 double killing
• Some Fox affiliates were refusing to air TV special
• Publisher had called book Simpson's confession to crime


NEW YORK (AP) -- After a firestorm of criticism, News. Corp. said Monday that it has canceled the O.J. Simpson book and television 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 his 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 the projects, 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 bookstore 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 television drama. The former football star, announcer and actor was later found liable for the deaths in a 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.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Good move. No respectable company would've wanted to put their advertisements during this.

They canceled it because of how many people, including the families, have said that they would boycott the companies that "helped" to put this out... saying that they would be just as guilty for the murders, because they were doing things to give OJ money, and attention.

For malcolm's sake:


RACIST MEDIA REFUSES TO PLAY OJ SIMPSON SPECIAL BECAUSE HE'S BLACK!

Oh yeah... I'm sure that malcolm xx will blame it on the white man keeping a brother down, or something like that.

If I can take a page from South Park...

HECK POSTED IT.

-HECK!

Re- Jury Nullification.

Sure there was some doubt. There always is. That's why they have to quantify the amount of doubt as being "reasonable" or not. But I remember the jury foreperson all over TV saying there was no evidence. That was the reason the did not convict him; "NO EVIDENCE." Do any of you think there was no (zero ) evidence?

I guess it remains to be learned how OJ would have committed the murders had he actually committed them. Perhaps, rather than sneaking up on the victims, ambushing from behind, and slashing their throats, OJ might have elected to slip them a little poison for instance.

POSTED: 1:32 p.m. EST, November 21, 2006


Story Highlights
• NEW: Sister says publisher tried to buy family's silence
• NEW: News Corp. says offer came with "no strings attached"
• O.J. Simpson: Things have been "mischaracterized."
• News Corp. cancels book, interview on double killing


NEW YORK (AP) -- The O.J. Simpson book saga took another twist Tuesday when his former sister-in-law, Denise Brown, accused the media company behind the project of trying to buy her family's silence for "millions of dollars."

Simpson's book, "If I did it," was a sequel few had dared conceive, with Simpson -- acquitted of murdering his ex-wife and her friend but later found liable in civil court -- describing how he would have killed them.

A spokesman for News Corp., owner of Fox Broadcasting and publisher HarperCollins, confirmed that the company had conversations with representatives of Nicole Brown Simpson's and Ron Goldman's families over the past week and that the families were offered all profits from the planned Simpson book and television show, but he denied that it was hush money.

"There were no strings attached," News Corp. spokesman Andrew Butcher said.

Denise Brown told NBC's "Today" show Tuesday that her family's response was "Absolutely not."

"They wanted to offer us millions of dollars. Millions of dollars for, like, 'Oh, I'm sorry' money. But they were still going to air the show," Brown said. "We just thought, 'oh my god.' What they're trying to do is trying to keep us quiet, trying to make this like hush money, trying to go around the civil verdict, giving us this money to keep our mouths shut."

Any fascination with Simpson's shocking return to public life was overcome by revulsion and disbelief from the public.

Even News Corp's Rupert Murdoch, a media king with a famous taste for scandal, couldn't stand it anymore. On Monday, he canceled the whole thing, less than a week after it was announced.

"I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project," Murdoch said. "We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson."

"If I Did It" had been scheduled to air as a two-part interview November 27 and November 29 on Fox, with the book to follow on November 30. HarperCollins spokeswoman Erin Crum said some copies had already been shipped to stores but would be recalled, and all copies would be destroyed.

Simpson's attorney, Yale Galanter, told The Associated Press: "We had known for three or four days that this was a possibility."

"There are only three possible reactions: anger, happiness or indifference. He's totally indifferent about the fact that it's been canceled," Galanter said.

He said he didn't know if Simpson was paid upfront.

Simpson was acquitted of murder in 1995 but was later found liable for the deaths in a wrongful-death suit filed by the Goldman family. Simpson has failed to pay the $33.5 million judgment against him in the civil case. His NFL pension and his Florida home cannot legally be seized. He and the families of the victims have wrangled over the money in court for years.

Ron Goldman's sister, Kim Goldman, said on CBS' "The Early Show" Tuesday that the family would take legal action to collect any money Simpson received from the deal. Denise Brown went farther, saying that money was being hidden for Simpson so he didn't have to pay the civil judgment. "The courts one day will find out who that person is," Brown said.

Simpson told the AP in a phone interview late Monday he could not comment on the situation "until I know legally where I stand."

"I would like nothing better than to straighten out some things that have been mischaracterized," he said. "But I think I'm legally muzzled at this point."

Sensation has long been in News Corp's game, but the Simpson book drew almost universal anger -- from those who knew Goldman and Brown, from booksellers and advertisers, even from Fox News Channel personality Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly urged a boycott of any company that advertised on the special.

A dozen Fox network affiliates said they would not air the two-part special, and numerous stores had either declined to sell the book or had promised to donate any profits to charity.

"I really don't think there would have been very many advertisers who would have been willing to participate in this show," said Brad Adgate of the ad buying firm Horizon Media.

With little advertising, Fox would miss the chance to profit from the show. If there were no advertisers, the show wouldn't even be rated by Nielsen Media Research -- so the number of people watching would have done nothing to help Fox's season average, he said.

The cancellation was a stunning rebuke to ReganBooks -- a high-profile imprint of HarperCollins -- and Judith Regan, who had labeled the book and interview Simpson's "confession." She insisted that she had done it not for money, but as a victim of domestic violence anxious to face down a man she believed got away, literally, with murder.

ReganBooks is known for gossipy best-sellers such as Jose Canseco's "Juiced" and Jenna Jameson's "How to Make Love Like a Porn Star." Regan, one of publishing's most driven and forceful personalities, did not immediately respond to requests for an interview.

The TV 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 appearances 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. It was seen on CBS' sister premium-cable channel, Showtime, instead.

One Fox affiliate station manager said he wasn't going to air the special because 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.

During an appearance on CNN's "Larry King Live," Fred Goldman, Ron's father, expressed appreciation to anyone who opposed the book.

"We want to say thank you, thank you for everyone in this country who raised their voice and stood up for the right thing," Goldman said.

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 removal simply for objectionable content is exceptionally rare. In the early 1990s, Simon & Schuster canceled Bret Easton Ellis' "American Pyscho," a graphic account of a serial killer. The novel was released by Random House Inc., and later made into a feature film, an improbable fate for Simpson's book.

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

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

The OJ case was lost due to an incompetent prosecution that allowed reasonable doubt to come up, it's not the jury's fault, there was reasonable doubt. The glove didn't fit, and Cochran made a great case with if something doesn't fit, then the prosecution's case is doubtful. Let's not forget that they turned the case into domestic violence, they never once brought up the fact that Simpson was found with a disguise, money, and a passport when he was arrested after the Bronco chase.

There was evidence, but there was reasonable doubt the defense did a good job of showing, so you must acquit.

However, great job Fox, Rupert Murdoch does it again, exploit the dead for gain.

But mystic, that's the point, there are all these dilemmas with no explanation or evidence to point the finger at OJ and that's why there is reasonable doubt. This is why Cochran was so effective, if it doesn't fit, you must acquit, and that statement didn't apply to the glove alone.

For starts, there is reasonable doubt in anything. Cochran and company played every little dirty trick they could including the race card. Period.

Let's not forget about, what is this, motive!

For funs sake, I'll tackle these dilemmas. Not to be a dick, but your information or recall of this trial isn't entirely accurate.

The blood in the Bronco:

#30 - Blood found on the center console matched to OJ Simpson
#31 - Blood found on the center console - proven to be a mixture of Simpson & Goldman.

#23 - Blood found on Bronco Driver Door Interior - matched to Simpson.
#21 -- Bronco driver door
#22 -- Bronco driver door

#24 -- Swatch on Bronco instrument panel - matched to Simpson.
#25 -- Driver side carpet fiber - blood matched to Simpson.
#26 -- Bronco driver floor
#27 -- Plaid cap found on driver floor of Bronco
#28 -- Swatch from Bronco driver seat
#29 -- Swatch from Bronco steering wheel - a mixture of Simpson and Nicole Brown Simpson.

Drivers side bloody shoe print. The print was made from a size 12 Bruno Magli shoe with a Silga sole. This print also matched the prints at the murder scene. There is no denying the fact that Simpson's Bronco was the means of transportation to and from the murder scene.

#1-- Blood on exterior of Bronco door

#34 - No Photo - Blood found on driver's side wall matched to Simpson.
#293 - No Photo - Blood found on Bronco Carpet matched to Nicole Brown Simpson.
#303 - No Photo - Blood found on the Bronco center console - matched to Simpson, Goldman, and Nicole Brown Simpson.
#304 - No Photo - Blood found on the Bronco center console matched to Simpson, Goldman, & Nicole Brown Simpson.
#305 - No Photo - Blood found on the center console matched to Simpson, Goldman, & Nicole Brown Simpson.

So, in order for OJ to be set up, somehow Goldman's and Brown Simpson had to have their blood collected prior, mixed with OJ's and planted. Right.

The gloves: who cares where or how it was left. You think a rational explination could be offered after someone brutally murdered two people.

The fact is OJ said he never owned a pair. However, pairs of this hard to come by glove were bought by Nicole. Not to mention OJ is photographed wearing them. Even though he never owned them.

The shoes: bloody shoe prints of his 12 Bruno Magli found at the crime scene.

Hair: Hair in a dark knit cap found at the murder scene would prove to belong to OJ Simpson. Simpson's hair was found on Ronald Goldman's shirt.

The knife: OJ bought a knife from Ross Cutlery about 6 weeks before the murders. The exact type of knife Simpson bought was proven to be the weapon with which Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were murdered with. Oddly enough, the knife Simpson bought has disappeared and has never been found.

The escape: OJ packs a bag with loads of money, clothing, his passport and a disguise. During the low speed chase given by LAPD, Simpson states over and over "I'm sorry, I'm sorry." Drastic for an innocent man.

Domestic abuse: OJ beat the crap out of Nicole before.

The cuts: Simpson was examined by Dr. Huizenga. The good doctor pointed out that Simpson had not only one cut, a deep cut at that, but that he had seven (7) abrasions on his hands along with three (3) cuts.

The clothing: blood soaked glove, sock.

OJ's house: Blood drops found between the Bronco and the Simpson gate. Blood found on the Rockingham driveway and the sidewalk.

Exact matching footprint as those found at the Bundy crime scene were found in drivers side floorboard of Simpson's Bronco.

Blood found in the foyer of Simpson's home.

About a week before the murders Nicole realizes that someone has stolen a set of her keys. She tells family members over and over that OJ stole the keys. The keys are later found in Simpson's Bronco.

To sum up...

I'd like to go on but I feel like it's 1996 all over again. I had hoped I was long past showcasing the obvious when it comes to this travesty of justice. If you can read that and still want to set him free, well, hopefully your name doesn't come up for the next "trial of the century."

Dude was found not guilty by a jury of peers but that doesn't make him innocent. He was found liable for the crimes in a civil court.

Either way, I could give two licks. Court of popular opinion will carry on.

-HECK!

Thank you for that post, Heck!!! And it's very true. There was a TON of evidence, pointing at this guy... the murderer. But, the defense put enough doubt in the jury's mind, and that's all it takes. The prosecution fumbled the football, too many times... and had Marcia Clark not been so caught up in making a name for herself, and TRYING to look good on camera, then she would have won this case, hands down.

Cochrane through out the "race" card, one too many times. And it went in OJ's favor. But, he knows, as well as we know... he did it.

Nice post HECK!

I simply don’t have the energy for this. I not here to defend OJ but no way was this case as cut n dry as Heck posted above. There are many points of contention in this case and anyone who knows the history of the LAPD would understand that something shady definitely went on there.

However OJ simply isn’t worth my energy in trying to highlight the discrepancies.

I know plenty about the LAPD. That doesn't mean the Juice is innocent. If you look hard enough you can find doubt in anything.

-HECK!