O.J. Simpson: Guilty, But Not of Murder?

Here is a fascinating video that makes a case for someone else committing the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman (though O.J. was involved in his own way, after the fact). Keep in mind that the author, like the vast majority of people, believed that O.J. Simpson was guilty—until he started looking further into the case. The video is one hour and twenty minutes long. It starts to become more interesting and compelling at about half way through, so stick with it. Feel free to send me feedback. (Please keep it civil—no tirades against me for posting this.) I will post as many LRC reader reactions to the video as I can.

[Thanks to Rolf Lindgren]

LRC reader responses:

[Blank space]
Tom Jelinek—

“Interesting. But his case is just a narrative, as was the LAPD’s. My vote would have to be “not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.””

[Blank space]


“Thank you for publishing that video today. I remember following that case back then and it being THE topic of the day. I cannot recall at any time the media talking about Jason Simpson other than off-hand mentions of OJ’s “other” children. When people would ask me “Do you think OJ did it?,” I would say “I think he had something to do with it. I think he knows who did it. But I don’t think he is the knife man.”

I suspected Kato (because, like I said, I had not heard of Jason Simpson). I thought Kato may have done it or had it done for OJ to preserve his “status” of freeloading, drugs, and hot women that he acquired by virtue of being OJ’s sidekick. That was the only plausible scenario I could come up with. Nothing else made sense or would fit the time-line.

Jason makes perfect sense. I’m not saying I’m declaring him guilty, but he is my prime suspect now.

This, along with instances like the Tonya Craft trial, is why I NEVER trust what the MSM choose to let me see. There is always much more than what you see on a newscast. Most of the time, what they show is nothing more than info they are fed by local, state, and federal prosecutors and law enforcement. Sadly, I find the tabloid press to be much more trustworthy simply for the fact that they do their own investigating rather than relying on “press releases.” Unfortunately, they have a tendency to jump the gun and publish rumors based on rumors with nothing to back it up.

Again, thank you so much for posting that. You will probably get a lot of poo thrown your way for pointing out inconsistencies in what everyone believes. Such is life in search of truth, eh?”

[Blank space]

Robert Davidson—

“I have to admit that I was resigned to the idea that O.J. had committed the murders, but I was always doubtful. I liked O.J. and found it hard to believe that he could do something like that, but my doubt was based on my perceptions of him from his movie roles, so I knew that I couldn’t be sure that he didn’t have a dark side. (Since I’ve never been inclined to follow celebrity news, I really don’t know anything about O.J.’s private life outside of the murder case.)

This video, however, has certainly made me look at the case in a totally new light, and quite a few things that didn’t make sense to me before now seem to fit. I am convinced that Mr. Dear has made a compelling case for a Grand Jury investigation into Jason Simpson’s actions.

I actually do feel sorry for Jason Simpson. It certainly seems that he has had a lot of issues in his life. I don’t believe that it was premeditated if he did commit the murders, but he still has to face responsibility for them. I feel even worse for O.J. If Mr. Dear is correct, O.J. has certainly sacrificed a lot trying to protect his son. I can understand that, but I think he was wrong to do so. If Jason really did commit the murders, he needs to be locked away to keep him from ever harming anyone else, regardless of whether he meant to kill Ron and Nicole.

This makes a tragic case even sadder.”

[Blank space]

Steve Crain—

“I viewed the whole movie and was very convinced. At the end there is a link/info that you can go to to fill out a ballot that will be forwarded to the attorney general suggesting that there is cause/reason for a grand jury and indictment of the overlooked suspect. I found the website but there is no link to the ballot. They may be losing a lot of potential support for this case because of that. I do plan to join on Facebook…oops that link from the website doesn’t work either.”

[Blank space]

Jeff Johnson—

“I was young when that trial was going on but I remember telling my friends that I never believed OJ did it. I believed he may have been there or maybe hired someone to do it, but didn’t believe he actually murdered anyone. That stone cold face on Jason when the verdict was read is very incriminating to me. You see cold killers with that look on their face as they’re read guilty verdicts. OJ was jubilant at the not guilty verdict as was the rest of his family. It also makes sense that he would do all that to protect his son. I don’t have kids but I always hear parents say “you’ll do anything for your kids.” If OJ indeed risked himself I have an awkward new found respect for him. That has to be a tough spot to be in. I could actually see other parents doing the same thing for their child. Some say a similar situation happened to JonBenet Ramsey. That her brother killed her out of jealousy but that the parents covered it up.”

[Blank space]

Brent Peterson—

“Thank you for sharing that video. It is very convincing. I didn’t pay much attention to the topic at the time or over the years, but that investigation is just another nail in the coffin for the mainstream media (not to mention the justice system).

OJ suffered what were the obvious consequences of choosing to protect his son (if the well supported theory is in any part true), but the failures of the police, the media, and everyone else involved cannot be excused as easily. I doubt the case will ever be reopened. It is too embarrassing politically. We will sooner hear that aliens really did crash in NM in 1947.”

[Blank space]

Leahman Davidson—

“Thanks for bringing that movie to my attention. I’m getting old, but I don’t think I fell asleep during the movie. I didn’t hear the cut on O. J.’s hand addressed, and not much was said about the flight that he took to Chicago, as I recall. They did say he was in a hurry to leave and make the flight. As I recall, he had his hand sewn up in Chicago. The thought occurred that he might have cut his own hand on purpose to draw attention from his son. If so, that was a very risky move. Maybe he loved his son enough to do that. This movie switched me from being 99.999% certain that OJ did it, to believing that he most likely did not.”

[Blank space]

William Butler—

“Very persuasive.”

[Blank space]

Vincent Rozyczko—

“Thank you for the informative video. Apart from the interesting alternative hypothesis re the murders, what is immediately striking is the admission (circa 9 minutes in) by Wm. Kim Wade that government types (defense lawyers and prosecutors) routinely “jump to conclusions before all the facts are in”, “use a selective processing mode”, and “focus on evidence that confirms our predetermined conclusion, and ignore evidence that contradicts our predetermined conclusion.” He even broadens it to include “all humans.”

I say “Speak for yourself, brother!” There are plenty of us in the private sector (my field is veterinary medicine) who will kill or maim our patients (and lose our livelihood) if we routinely adopt that lazy, sloppy, unscientific, and barbaric mindset.

No, Mr. Wade. All “humans” are not like you, and regardless of what Obama says, Government is NOT us. Learn from your betters who pay your salary.

Thanks again for this very valuable information.”

[Blank space]

Warren Tilson—

“The investigator presents many good reasons that Jason should have been a suspect. However, it is not enough to say he did it. There is a lot of conjecture in his presentation; a lot of circumstantial evidence, but no smoking gun or slam dunk piece of evidence.

Ron Goldman put up a Hell of a fight. His attacker should be injured, yet Mr. Dear presents no information regarding Jason’s injuries or lack of in the days after the murders. Certainly there would be photos extant showing Jason on those days, yet none are shown on the video.

The Jeep was checked for blood, but what about the boot knife? No mention of that being done. If there were seven hotspots of blood in the Jeep, is it possible to have it checked for whose DNA it is?

Mr. Dear undermines his credibility when he admits to trespassing on private property AND entering a closed off crime scene. He could not know if the scene was going to be searched for more evidence. What if his wanderings disturbed something crucial? Also, he somehow got a hold of Jason’s medical records. How? What right did he have to them? Unless he had Jason’s permission, he could only have come by them unethically. This means Mr. Dear’s character is suspect.

Finally, could Jason have done it? Yes. Did the police err (including possible criminal acts of evidence planting) in numerous ways on this case? Yes. Is this video convincing that Jason Lamar Simpson killed those two people? Not by a long shot.”

[Blank space]

Robert Reilly—

“I have watched the video and my initial overall impression is that it was well done…if a bit theatrical.

The “evidence” cited is mostly circumstantial and, while I am not an attorney, I doubt that a conviction could have been obtained with its use. Could it be that the LAPD were on to most, if not all, of the factors cited and decided that OJ was an easier ‘target”? Regardless, given the same prosecutorial team and cast of witnesses, Jason would probably been acquitted as well. It was that badly handled.

One small possible discrepancy noted was the appearance of the “Swiss” knife in the storage box. This was labeled as the murder weapon.
However, in an earlier scene opinions were put forth that the fatal wounds to Nicole were inflicted by a “chef’s knife.” Could the killer have been wielding two knives?

All in all…a most compelling presentation.”

[Blank space]

An LRC Reader—

“After watching the film regarding O. J. Simpson, my only thought is: Who paid for more than a decade of investigation, and then for the film production on top of all that? A decade or more of investigation work, plus the cost of film production is substantial.

Do you know if the Goldman’s hired the detective and financed the film? The motive: “We can hurt O. J. even more if we hurt his crazy kid.”

I just don’t believe the detective did with his own funds. Conservatively, it looks like $10 million or more.”

[Blank space]

Jeff Johnson—

“I have watched that video probably 3 or 4 times now and something just hit me that they say in the film—but no one really brought attention to. If OJ committed the murders and knew he committed the murders, why would he assign counsel to his son? In the film it says he was in Chicago at the time; he wasn’t charged with anything until the 17th of June. Assuming they tried to interview Jason before the 17th of June and OJ had assigned him counsel, the question is why? If OJ committed the murders and knew his son innocent, there would be no reason to assign counsel to his son. Was his daughter assigned counsel?  No word on that mentioned anywhere; perhaps if she had been as well, it makes it a little less suspicious that his son had been assigned counsel. This tells me that Bill Dear’s suspicions are correct. OJ knew his son committed the murders (or his son knew OJ committed the murders, either way), knew they would try to question him, and immediately assigned him counsel from Chicago to protect him.”


1:01 pm on May 29, 2010