I feel for his loss of a son, but he is just a greedy dumb@$$ now.
2007-10-06 03:05:59 · 10 answers · asked by tamara_cyan 6 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
Oops. That's what I meant.
Fred Goldman.
2007-10-06 06:08:36 · update #1
I think he was always a greedy blankety blank. I don't really think the loss of his son ever really affected him as he put on during and after the O.J. trial. I think it was all a ploy to get more money from an easy source so he could lord it over everyone else. Like the old saying goes when you have too much money ' Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely' and in his case he is corrupted through and through. In my opinion.
2007-10-06 03:20:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
It is an unfortunate situation. I think every one would like to see all of those affected by the Simpson/Goldman tragedy heal and move on. It is horrible that they have not done so, because they continue to plague themselves and the media (and all of us) with their unresolved grief not to mention a quest for awarded wealth that is apparently just not forthcoming.
The fact that Mr. Goldman is such a vibrant personality only serves to further increase the intensity of the situation. I agree that it is a horrible thing to loose a child. However, it would seem that you would also want to honor them by continuing your life and fondly remember them. This cannot occur when you do not give yourself or others the permission to move beyond the tragedy. Grieving was not intended to be a career.
2007-10-06 11:53:18 · answer #2 · answered by Just an opinion 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ron is no longer alive . OJ Simpson brutally murdered him .
Fred , Ron's father is as sad as any parent of a murder victim would be . Greed does not enter into it . It's called justice . I never understood blaming the victims and not the killer .
2007-10-06 12:28:16 · answer #3 · answered by missmayzie 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ron is dead. Fred Goldman is the father.
2007-10-06 12:56:48 · answer #4 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
u r 100000000000% correct, oj was proven not guilty somehow and to try and hold him liable for it is absurd. it is said that oj's son actually commited the murders because he was spending alot of time with nicole and possibly had a romance in the works. also he does not donate money or anything he receives from oj he flaunts it around
2007-10-06 10:15:35 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋
I don't see him as greedy. He's out to make OJ's life as miserable as possible and I don't blame him.
2007-10-06 11:08:26 · answer #6 · answered by Cam 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I disagree.
If MY son was brutally slaughtered by a 3rd rate celebrity who got off scot free, I would hold a vendetta until he PAID for his crime.
Besides, I think he donates all the $ he gets to battered women's shelters & such.
2007-10-06 10:14:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Why? Because he doesn't want OJ to prosper.
Let OJ pay of his debt, then I would agree with you.
2007-10-06 10:14:38 · answer #8 · answered by The Voice of Reason 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I see your point. I'm sure you would have "gotten over it" by now if someone had brutally murdered someone you love, justice had never been done, and they were still out walking around....
2007-10-06 10:15:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Hard to believe. Sad.
2007-10-06 10:14:41 · answer #10 · answered by elliebear 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋