I guess so. I think its really messed up for anyone to write a book on how they would murder someone. especially when people think he did. that just affirms it to me. now I'm like, OK hes so messed up in the head that IF he didn't kill his wife hes not sad or remorse full to the point where ever writing about the act of killing would be considered. so yeah to me the fact that he had the audacity to write a book about murdering someone he SUPPOSEDLY didn't murder. i feel like hes saying "look you idiots I did kill her and because of my money I got away with it. don't you feel safe knowing that murderers like me are free"
2006-11-17 14:12:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jenny 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you're a celebrity, you can get away with anything. However, I do not believe he did it; strong evidence lacks in that area. At best, he allowed it to happen. And with people like Foley free men, OJ isn't necessarily the first man to be let off for his background, and that's assuming he did it.
Regardless of the popularity of my answer, that's my personal viewpoint on the issue. Not only do I think he didn't do it, I don't think he planned to do it, either.
2006-11-16 03:15:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by Huey Freeman 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
why were they always talking about the knife that was never found.
Had any of you seen the episode of in the heat of the night - that appeared after the trail - where OJ was murdered with someone using a camp saw.. http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.kopes.com/gadgets/general/saber-cut-camp-saw.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.kopes.com/gadgets/general/saber-cut-gasless-chain-saw.htm&h=336&w=238&sz=15&hl=en&start=1&tbnid=UMqDqz6NNHjalM:&tbnh=119&tbnw=84&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcamp%2Bsaw%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN
and that his characters throat was severed exactly like his wife's.
I think he used that. I also know that leather gloves, when wet, can and do shrink - the glove doesn't fit.. Duh!!
This book he wrote, is considered a confession by many.
He comitted the murders.
2006-11-16 03:04:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by sassy 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Why might an harmless individual write a e book on HOW they might HAVE dedicated the homicide - if he hadn't consistent with threat I could write a e book on how i might have assasinate President Kennedy - (convey it to suggestions handed off in the previous i grew to become into born) or consistent with threat I sould write a e book on how i attempted to assasinate -President Reagan ( i grew to become into fairly in HS) or consistent with threat I could write a e book on how I helped manage the ok city BOMBING - Hmmmmm - consistent with threat we could continuously ALL write a e book approximately some crime that we could have dedicated - yet did no longer! And make a ton of $$$$ off of somebody elses doing! For some reason I in simple terms can no longer fathom any such component - we could in simple terms face it and end making this right into a recial component - Hes to blame - why else might he "run" from the police? That grew to become into him grew to become into it no longer on the television in a White Ford Explorer? harmless people do no longer act that way! supply it up and get actual!
2016-10-22 04:51:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by jaisigh 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
With a president like Bush, lest´s say that OJ is a friend of the american inside war!
2006-11-16 03:26:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Pedro M 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
No. He was tried and aquitted of murder in his criminal trial. The US constitution prohibits being tried for the same crime twice. So if he confesses today he is stil "scott free."
2006-11-16 03:06:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
OJ Simpson.....should find the real killer instead of trying to bring up more pain and hurt.....did He ever bother to look..NO because he f**kin' did it..... denial.....is over in EGYPT!
2006-11-16 02:58:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
Maybe his new book will let the cat out of the bag.
2006-11-16 03:07:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Can you commit a conspiracy with yourself?
2006-11-16 08:43:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
He was already found guilty in civil court for being "responsible" (I forget exactly how they word it, but it could mean that he could have stopped it, but didn't...although we all know this wasn't the case) in the deaths.
2006-11-16 03:00:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by amg503 7
·
2⤊
1⤋