Talk:O. J. Simpson/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Breaking news: show cancelled and book deal pulled.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.154.57 (talk • contribs)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwlYx10gYP4 Video of the pursuit.. doesnt look "low speed" to me... low speed was at the end of the pursuit....

So, how 'low-speed' was this? I'm not an American and I don't remember that pursuit, so I would like to know how slow it really was... What distance did they travel in what time? Thanks!

We need some info about his career here too, and his Hollywood career. That would make it a more complete biography.

i beleive it averaged 35 miles per hour. the driver wasnt really running from the police even thought it is called a "chase". the driver claimed that OJ had a gun to his own head. personally i think the country would be better off if OJ had pulled the trigger. Keltik31 17:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Removed as a result from "Since this trial Simpson has been largely regarded as a pariah or persona-non-grata by many in the

I agree it's over. I suspect you would also agree that as acting careers go, it wasn't really much of a start<G>... But this is also the reason you won't find him doing pay-for-views, like he did during his first trial. (somewhere here are my OJ trial books, I'll try and dig them out to see if there's anything to add) -- Someone else 03:33 20 Jun 2003 (UTC)

The existence of the judgment does not, in and of itself, explain why OJ does not seek employment. The judgment was only for some 35 million dollars, and in today's world, someone like OJ could earn that much in a couple of years. After paying back, the rest of his earnings would completely belong to him. If he could have a career, it is not prevented by the judgment alone. Perhaps he has indeed become unemployable. Look what Sumner Redstone did with Tom Cruise. 66.108.4.183 00:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC) Allen Roth

There are apparently those who feel Simpson is illiterate or nearly so (see this, for example from a comedy website). Can someone confirm this? Did his graduation from USC in spite of illiteracy cause any controversy? Tuf-Kat 01:07, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

After perusing this persons notes online (many of which are scanned actually, surprisingly more than just featured in humour articles), I would say beyond reasonable doubt this man is illiterate.

That being said however, apparently it is quite known that sportsmen graduate from American universities based on athletic ability and are given better grades due to peer pressure amongst the academics.

USC has an internal reputation for borderline academic favoritism for its stars. My friend who is a graduate student there says that they aren't allowed to grade the papers of the really popular athletes...these have to go to the professor.

Jarwulf 17:04, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is meant by "illiterate" in relation to OJ? Is he truly unable to read and/or write? Admittedly, he really sounded unintelligent when speaking publicly, at the time of his trial.

I don't think that OJ actually graduated (i.e. received a degree) from USC. Many scholarship athletes don't.

There needs to be something in this article about his celebrity status before the low-speed chase.

Image labeled as perhaps not available for use. Moved to this page.

WBardwin 05:18, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The article claims the OJ Simpson trial and the following media coverage lasted 133 days. I hereby dispute this figure. It felt more like 5,692,498,449,011,055 days... give or take ~500. --69.234.208.76 02:29, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Come along now, it was only like 5 billion days -CW 70.26.11.45 05:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

The intro says: ... found liable and responsible ... in civil court in 1995. But section 4.4 says 1997-02-04. --Quarl 09:24, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

How it was publicized and why?

CNN reported that 142 million Americans listened on TV and radio, an incredible 91 percent share of the viewing audience was tuned in. 2000 reporters, 121 video cameras, 23 newspaper and magazines, and 1000 articles covered the trial. This case was most publicized because of few reasons. One of the main reasons is that he was a famous athelete. Other reasons, to minority communities, they were concerned about whether or not a black could find justice in a legal system designed and mostly administered by whites. To others, many whom were white, the key question was whether a mostly minority jury would condemn Simpson, a black who has fame, regardless of the weight of evidences that are found. (Even though there were numbers of evidence, it seemed to loose its credibility.The prosecution did not do good organizing and showing them to juries and the lawyers representing O.J. Simpson were good because O.J. Simson got money.)

source by: CNN

Is there any truth to the urban legend that after the trial OJ tried to start a career as a

Are you sure you weren't thinking of

John Wayne Bobbitt? --Nlu

03:18, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

No, Simpson really did star in one pornographic film called Bad OJ. There were a few attempts to add it to his filmography and his recent career decisions but all were deleted by someone. Here's the site [1]

Just wanted to point out that I have renamed the 'death of' section to 'murder of'. She didn't just up and die of natural causes exactly, ergo murder fits more apt. Jachin 01:26, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

And I just changed "murder" to "homicide." Homicide is a neutral term that describes the killing of a person by another person. OJ didn't murder her, the jury acquitted him.

Just because he was acquitted does not mean he is not the person who killed Nicole.

He was found guilty in the civil case, so the word "murder doesn't seem POV to me. Jeffpw 22:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

He was not found guilty in the civil case, he was found libel. A "murder" has not ocoured until some one has been found guilty of first or second degree murder in CRIMINAL court. Whether that difference seems irelevant to you or not does not matter. It is simply a death until some one is found guilty in criminal court, then it is a murder. Since no one has been found gulty in criminal court the proper heading is "death of..."--Marvuglia 07:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

So you're saying that because the killer was not found (which we all know is a crock of shit) she wasn't murdered? What happened? Did she accidentally fall onto a knife? Was it suicide? As far as I know, even if a murderer is not brought to justice, the fact that she and Ron Goldman were murdered is NOT in dispute. Stop being so PC and use some common sense. Reverting back. Jeffpw 18:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Look, I think he did it. And I think he deserves to burn in hell for it. However, my opinon is as moot as yours. The defenition of murder requires a conviction. A death caused by another person is a homicide, until someone is convicted of murder. The fact that no one has been convicted in their deaths makes it a homocide. NOT a murder. As a bigraphy of a living person this page is held to a high standard inorder to avoid libel suits. Do you relly want to read in newspaper that OJ wins a judgement against Wikimedia foundation? If not then stop posting libel and move to some bbs where you can write anything you want. By the way, i'm not going to get into an edit war, so i'll leave this as is an instead ask for a moderator to intervene. --Marvuglia 21:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

RfC response

Homicide is the more NPOV term. We have a complicated matter here - a criminal case and a civil case that reached different conclusions - but this is a biography of a living person so

Here is how the wikipedia article on murder addresses the definition of homicide: "Homicide is the act of one human killing another regardless of whether it was legal, intentional or premeditated. Justifiable homicide is legal homicide." and murder: "A murder is the illegal killing of another human being." It seems obvious that Nicole was murdered, but is obvious acceptable in the absence of proof (a conviction)? It is undisputedly a homicide, disputably a murder. Therefore, I think it should be referred to as a homicide. --Marvuglia 22:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to whom ever changed it to murder case. I think it is a great change. Makes its point and is NPOV. --Marvuglia 02:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd go with "homicide." Murder indicates motive and malice aforethought. Homicide would encompass unknowns like, "they were killed during a robbery," i.e. manslaughter, etc. The case tried to determine that she was murdered (1st degree? 2nd? I don't remember) but was unsuccessful (whether anyone likes it or not) in reaching a conviction. So using "murder" is a bit imprecise IMHO. — David Spalding ^ta!k y@wp/_Contribs 17:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Cochrane first used the "If it doesn't fit you must acquit" statement shortly after putting on a black cap and asking whether this would be a good disguise for Mr. Simpson to commit a crime. He then said, about this possible disguise that "it doesn't fit. It doesn't make sense. If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." He then used it later in the trial in th eglove situation. --Eft 06:11, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I added another theory put forward by William Dear in his book. I am not sure whether it is proper for Wiki, but considering the alternative murder theories section was there already, I thought I could add it. Feel free to make edits as needed. Ramsquire 17:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

To quote Dave Chappelle in his sketch on jury selection, "What black man doesn't have a pair of bloody gloves on his property?" <holds up a pair of freshly bloodied gloves> "I gotta pair of bloody gloves right HERE -doesn't mean i did nothin'" ...Hahah -CW70.26.11.45 04:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the following from the "Alternative Murder theories" section, not because I disagreed with the assertions, but because it is against wiki's policy. See

"Most of these "facts" have no basis in reality, however, and do not explain Simpson's statement to police, in which he acknowleged cutting himslef badly right at the time of the murders and yet had no idea how it happened, and in which he lied about his whereabouts the night of the murders. Nor do these postulations explain Simpson's behavior after being accused (running away, planning suicide, apologizing to the police for leading them on the chase). In addition, DNA tests identified Simpson's blood at the scene (at odds of more than 60 billion to one). The defense argued that the blood evidence was contaminated ("garbage in, garbage out"), but all the comtamination into the world could not turn someone else's blood into Simpson's blood. Contamination would mean no result, not a match to an innocent person."

That being said, most of the entire first paragraph of the section also contains violations of Wiki policy as they contain unverifiable information, unlike the second alternative theory. I think it should be reverted but I don't want to make such a drastic edit without hearing other users thoughts first. Please advise.Ramsquire 01:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe the contamination had to do with the blood first being in a test tube before it was at the crime scene. There was some chemical that is used as a blood preservative that seemed to be only in OJs blood - more than 60 billion to 1 also. OJ carrying a vial of his blood to the scene seems odd - at least to me. By the way, I'm betting he knew the glove didn't fit - he probably recognized it and wondered how the cops found it ( and dipped it into the same vial).

I think that the O.J. Simpson trial was a big and complicated enough story to deserve its own page. Feedback? -- Pinktulip 03:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

So, I am not hearing objecions. I am going to go ahead an delegate the murder case to a new page. Again, my justification is not to somehow rehabilitate Simpson; he was a celebrity before the case and he had a long and notable career up until then. -- Pinktulip 11:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I will leave the mugshot on the main page because that is what Simpson is often thought of by these days. -- Pinktulip 12:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm a bit late here, but I agree with your proposal, or fait accompli. Nice job. ProhibitOnions 14:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Outsie of the time it consumed, the trail ruined Simpson's reputation. That is the main effect on his life: his lucrative acting career is over. That is my point. If you find that the supporting statements need further editing then please do so, but please do not revert the entire paragraph.

There are many african-americans that believe he was successfully proven not guilty based on the fact that those prosecuting him where racist. My main point is, your not being Neutral. And do we really need to be sarcastic? I will give you time to reword it, but currently its not NPOV. -- (Opes 00:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC))

I accept the court verdict. I am simply trying to point out that, fair or otherwise, it was the murder trail that ended his acting career. -- Pinktulip 00:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Ehhh. Say that then. Say, Regardless of the verdict, and the conversy surrounding it, he reputation and acting career was ruined. Or something to the effect. The paragraph you added is leading to the POV that he deserved to be found guilty, and thats why he was ruined. -- (Opes 01:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC))

Beautiful. You summerized it better than I could have. -- (Opes 01:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC))

--Greasysteve13 07:56, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

See

O. J. Simpson murder case#The slow-speed chase. ×Meegs

11:06, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

So he *is* guilty!--Greasysteve13 03:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

He was trying to go see his mother - not really a macho guy but the truth.

I belive we should have some further details on his trial, or start a new article. Mention who is lawyers we're etc

See

O. J. Simpson murder case. —Chowbok

02:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Is there any chance that he was at the crime scene, but did not participate? When he said "I did not kill her", might be true, but would he admit that he was there? I don´t think so. andreasegde 12:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

If he was innocent at the crime scene why didn't he call the police? In addition, if he was not there, who informed him about the murder of his wife? IMHO if u r rich and famous, u r always innocent. Kennedy rulez..... - curiosity killed the cat...-

This has nothing to do with race; it's about OJ killin' people. And y'know what? I think he did it.

Your trusty friend,

--El Niño's Brother 21:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)El Niño's Brother

What is the point of this reference? Obviously there was a lot of hype at the time, but I doubt many people are still using the term.--Jack Upland 00:36, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, they are. It became a very popular term, and one that is still associated with this case. Hanako 17:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

75.31.250.126 08:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)== In Popular Culture ==

This section could just be deleted. There is no point in having an endless list of references to OJ Simpson in TV shows etc. Instead, we could have a sentence like: 'Due to the notoriety of the case, it became part of popular culture and was frequently mentioned in TV shows such as the Simpsons, Seinfeld...'--Jack Upland 00:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The American Dad reference was removed because it has nothing to do with OJ Simpson. The joke was a play on words about anti-Semitism.

The $64,000.00 question has been failed to be asked in the O J Simpson saga. So I'll have the moxie to ask because I am simply sick of OJ being castigated as the modern day Dred Scott of modern day history. The only reason the OJ Simpson trial was considered by many media pundits as "the trail of the century" was because OJ as a successful black man in america was "acqitted" of the murders of two whites, one being OJs exwife Nicole Brown-Simpson and her freind ron goldman. Question: "Would the american public (namely white america)have been remotely interested in OJ Simpson's fate had the murder victim's not been "white?" I think not! This goes to pure unadulterated racism and hypocrisy! If one white american answered that question with a "yes" I would truly respect him or her for their honest answer. This is the undercurrent in the OJ Simpson saga. Furthermore, I don't believe OJ committed the murders. I think he knew where it stemmed from but couldn't stop it.

There needs to be more info on the civil trial.--Jack Upland 00:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Civil trials are crazy - nearest thing to a lynch mob you can get.

Although his 2,003-yard season has subsequently been eclipsed by four running backs, only Barry Sanders managed to match Simpson by rushing for 200 or more yards in 14 games (weeks 3-16 of the 1997 season; including weeks 1 and 2, Sanders rushed for 2,053 yards.

That would give Sanders more than 2,800 yards. Sanders' Wikipedia page says that he rushed for exactly 2000 yards in those 14 games, and also that he set a record that season by rushing 100 yards in 14 consecutive games (presumably the same ones?) These figures should be verified and corrected.

The article states that he was drafted by the NFLs Buffalo Bills. I think Buffalo were in the AFl at the time, ahead of the NFL/AFL merger the following year.

"Simpson was drafted by the American Football League's Atlanta Falcons, who got first pick in the 1969 draft after finishing 1-12-1 in 1968. Early in his NFL career, Simpson struggled on poor Buffalo teams, averaging only 622 yards per season. "

This part of the article doesn't explain how he got from Atlanta to Buffalo (or maybe Atlanta is just a mistake). If he was traded to Buffalo or however he got there, it should be mentioned. --BHC 23:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I was going to integrate the trivia section into the main article as part of the Trivia Cleanup Project, but I can't find anything worth keeping in an encyclopedia. I'm posting the deleted section here in case anyone disagress and would like to integrate parts of it into the article text.

• O. J. was referenced, coincidentally years before the murder case, in an episode of Seinfeld, "The Masseuse", in which Elaine suggests her then-boyfriend, Joel Rifkin (who shared his name with an infamous serial killer), change his name to O. J. to avoid the stigma. Subsequent to Simpson's murder trial, the infamous "glove incident" was parodied in the trial of Elaine's arch-enemy Sue Ellen Mischke who tries on a bra in the courtroom only to proclaim "it doesn't fit."
• In another episode of Seinfeld, "The Big Salad", the car-chase scene is parodied when Cosmo Kramer drives a man suspected of murdering a man at a dry cleaners down the New Jersey Turnpike in a white Ford Bronco, which is a similar model to Simpson's.
• In the popular Grand Theft Auto series of videogames, the character B.J. Smith is a parody of O. J. Simpson. B.J. was a former football player, was in a police chase, and was in a controversial murder trial within the scope of the three PlayStation 2 GTA games.
• Simpson was parodied in a sketch on
  Norm MacDonald
  opened the segment with, "Well, it's official: Murder is legal in the state of California."
• In an episode of The Saturday Night Armistice, British satirist, Armando Iannucci was filmed getting an autograph from O. J. during a trip to the UK. After being filmed getting the autograph, (and with O. J. safely out of sight) he unfolded the paper the autograph was on to reveal that the top half of the paper read "I DID IT, Signed…", followed by the autograph.
• In an episode of Family Guy, it is heavily implied that Stewie Griffin planted jealousy on O. J.'s mind while drunk on Mai Tais by saying "I'm telling you, Juice. She's screwing behind your back. And if I were in your Bruno Maglis, I wouldn't stand for it."
• The video game Duke Nukem 3D has references throughout the game including a chase scene on a T.V. of Simpson's white Broncoas well as giant billboards saying "innocent?" and "Guilty!".
• In an episode of
  Steve Gutenberg , Calista Flockhart ,and Farty The Crippled robot
  ,Farty farts Out O.J. Who Says,"i'm gonna kill you all."and then "now i'm gonna find the real killers."
• Rock band The Moistboyz have a song entitled O.G. Simpson, the front cover of the single features a police mugshot of O. J.
• Pins have been marketed that say "Drink Apple Juice because O. J. will kill you."
• In 1995, an insurance agency based in Southern California whose primary market was higher risk drivers featured a commercial showing the infamous slow highway chase scene.
• Johnny Crass, a singer sometimes confused with "Weird Al" Yankovic; made a song titled "Ball Star", a parody of "All Star" by Smashmouth. The song refers to various aspects of the murders.
• In Chappelle's Show there was a sketch where Dave Chappelle goes in to court to testify for O. J. The lawyer says "Would it convince you if we told you we found a bloody glove on O. J.'s property?" In which Chappelle replied " Sir, I am unimpressed, what black man don't have no bloody glove on his property (pulls out bloody glove) See, I got one right here, doesn't mean I did anything!". In the WacArnolds sketch Chappelle comes home to his wife to see some black gloves on his refrigerator which causes him to say to his wife "Honey, who you fuckin'? O. J.?".
• In another Chappelle Show sketch, Hollywood Stories, Charlie Murphy retells his experiances with Rick James in an imaginative drugs concept. Murphy walks into a bar and says “…the first thing I see is O. J. Simpson and I'm thinking to myself, ‘Wow that's O. J. Simpson, he has a big motherfuckin' head, man!’”
• John and Patsy Ramsey and Gary Condit, who accuse "some Puerto Rican guy" of killing the murder victim they are asscociated with. In another episode, Cartman attemps to run away from the police in a white Power Wheels
  -like "Go Go Action Bronco."
• The band
  Cochran
  .
• Simpson was parodied in a
  MADtv sketch entitled "O. J. Simpson Bloopers," where Simpson, played by Orlando Jones
  , had a blooper reel of his statement of innocence.
• The animated film Shrek 2 features "Knights", a spoof of COPS; has a reference to O. J. Simpson and his fleeing from the police with "We've got a white bronco heading east into the forest, requesting aerial backup."
• MTV Australia Video Music Awards while interviewing Ashlee Simpson, implying that O. J. and Ashlee were related. --Pax:Vobiscum
  10:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

   Fixed