Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Psycho Killer

Qu'est-ce que c'est.

It seems that O.J. Simpson’s book, “If I Did It”, has made the Top 50 over at Barnes and Noble and it isn’t even out yet. It’s rank is based on pre-order sales alone.

I have to hand it to OJ, narcissist extraordinaire. Just when you think it would be impossible for him to get any more slimy and sleazy than he already is, he has greased himself up once more for another running back whirl in the limelight.

If you didn’t already know, O.J. has written a book apparently describing how he would have committed the Nicole Brown/Ron Goldman murders. You know, if he did it.

I’m thinking that since he DID do it (my Nancy Drew opinion. I know he was found “Not Guilty”), the book should be pretty interesting for crime junkies like me, offering a peek into his psyche. I wonder if his version includes him jumping over suitcases on the way to his getaway rental car while somebody’s grandma yells “Go, OJ, Go”!

I’m not surprised at the pre-order sales of this book. Several months ago when it was first going to be published, it was being discussed on the news and one reporter said no one would likely read it. She had to be kidding. OJ is like looking at a car wreck. He is gruesome and frightening, yet almost everyone still stops to look. I know, I know, not everyone. That’s why I said almost everyone.

I haven’t gone as far as to pre-order a copy, but I’m sure I will read it. Usually, the more controversial something is, the more I want to read it. I don’t know why this is, but that’s just the way I am. I admit it. Qu'est-ce que c'est.

How about you guys? Do any of you plan on reading OJ’s book?

19 comments:

Qtpies7 said...

I think he did do it. And so I will NOT give him money for it. Buying his book is like paying him for being a murderer. It is just disgusting. I can't do it. And I will not read it, either. Because I am not interested. And it would be horrifying to read what he did as if he was "imagining" what he would do.
Ugh! I can't even go there. I'll catch your review.

Sparky Duck said...

I could see myself reading it when it goes to the discount box or even the dollar store. And even if funds were tight, I would probably still do the same thing, more likely because I have other books I want to read first.

thailandchani said...

I can't imagine buying or reading that book. Even as long ago as it was, I recall watching the trial and the horrific details are still too fresh.


Peace,

~Chani
http://thailandgal.blogspot.com

Kendra said...

i may read it one day. more realistically i would buy it and never read it. it would sit on my bookshelf. that's usually the way it goes.

Malcolm: said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Malcolm: said...

I have no intention of buying the book. When it comes to OJ, I am pretty much ambivalent at this point.

Just to be clear, OJ has nothing to do with the release of "If I Did It". The rights for the book were transferred to the Goldman family. They will receive 90% of profits as part of their settlement.

As for his guilt or innocence, maybe he did do it... but maybe he didn't either. Sorry to go all Henry Fonda ala "12 Angry Men", but there was reasonable doubt in my mind and the prosecution failed to prove their case.

Ever since this book was 1st announced last November, the public outcry has been overwhelming. I think that what it boils down to is that deep down, a majority of White America is angry because they feel that a black man got away with the murder of two whites.

I think it would be interesting to see what would happen if Robert Blake released a similar book. Although many people feel he was guilty too, I'll bet you that the public reaction would be quite different.

FRIGGA said...

With all the stuff in my "too read" list, why on Earth would I waste my time on such a low life?
Just my opinion :-)

The Rock Chick said...

qtpies: actually, as Malcolm said, the money from the book is going to the Goldman family. It's a deal, I'll read it and review it for ya :)

sparky: that's usually where I get my books, too...there's always so many good ones on the closeout racks!

kendra: I have a lot of unread books in my bookcase, too! I'm curious about people like him, though, so I'm sure I would read it.

malcolm: I appreciate your honesty! There's been a lot of public outcry about the book. Not surprising since the whole trial drama. I can't speak for anyone else, but personally, the race of anyone involved made zero difference to me. I have to be honest, I didn't even know anything about OJ's wife at all-including her name or her race-until she was murdered. That really doesn't matter to me. I 100% believe that he did it.

I would like to read a similar book by Robert Blake. I also think he did it.

Maybe I'm oversuspicious with my law enforcement background. I just don't see any reasonable ways that they didn't do it.

FRIGGA: he is a low life, I agree! For some reason, I am interested in his mentality.

Sarah said...

I probably won't read it because I barely have the time for reading anyways, so why waste it on something that would be so upsetting?

As far as the race issue goes, the criminal trial was won because a racist idiot tampered with evidence, allowing the defense team to play the race card throughout. That didn't make OJ innocent, and when the case was heard again in civil court without the tampering and such, he was found guilty. I find it disgusting that no justice was found in the murder of two human beings. Race is of no consequence.

Malcolm: said...

When I 1st found out that OJ's ex-wife had been murdered, I thought it was his 1st ex Marguerite (who happened to be black). I knew next to nothing about his marriage to Nicole. After it was revealed that she and Ron Goldman were the victims, I believe that the story became bigger because a black man was accused of killing two whites. The racial makeup shouldn't have mattered, but it did to a lot of people. The media realized this and played it up as such.

Let's face it. When the victims in a criminal case are white, it's going to get more media coverage in this country. Think about the missing persons cases that become major stories. If you were to believe the media, you would think that the only people who get abducted are white females who meet the American standard of beauty (think Polly Klaas, Laci Peterson, and Natalee Holloway for example). There's even a term for this phenomenon... MWWS (Missing White Woman Syndrome). Sorry for getting off topic, but I think you get the point.

As for the verdict in the criminal trial, the prosecution bungled the case pure and simple. Shouldn't they have checked and double-checked Fuhrman's background before making him the centerpiece of their case?

Both Jessica and Sarah said that race was of no consequence to them regarding their thoughts on the OJ trial. It's too bad that for many people, race does play an important part. Because of the history of this country, that will never change.

The Rock Chick said...

Sarah: I agree with you. I think it completely boiled down to OJ having better defense lawyers than the state had prosecutors. The prosecution left the door open and the defense lawyers ran right through, which is what they are supposed to do, I guess.

Malcolm: Of course, I'm looking at this story through my eyes and my own ideas, experiences and belief system. Personally, I think this story got as big as it did because of OJ's celebrity status combined with the gruesomeness (ok, maybe that's not a word!) of the crimes. This story was gigantic before the world even heard of Mark Fuhrman and I think that's simply because it was OJ, the celebrity.

I do wonder(when more people are familiar with DNA evidence and much less tolerant of celebrities and their special treatment), if the OJ case happened now, if there would be a different outcome in the verdict. I think there might be, I really do.

I 100% get your point about media coverage and I totally agree with you about that.

Qtpies7 said...

I absolutely do not think the case was big because of race. It was big because he is OJ. Period.
I don't care really if the money goes to OJ or not, the fact that money is being made off the gruesome deaths of two people disgusts me.
Those poor children can never let it go, it is going to be in their faces forever. I can't even imagine. They deserve to go on to a normal life at some point, its the least we can do after what they have been through.

Moanna said...

I think OJ got off because the prosecution botched their case, plain and simple, but that's just my opinion.

Will probably buy the book because the money goes to the Goldmans and I'd like for OJ to see how much money he's not getting.

katherine. said...

sigh....I didn't read any of the other comments yet...

I had met OJ a couple of times. He was a very gracious man to me and mine...and a very gifted football player.

I lived in southern California during the trial and about eight stations televised the trail...every minute of it...even when the jury and/or the judge was out of the room. I was packing my home to move back to northern California...and I watched every eph-n minute of it.

There is no doubt...NO DOUBT...in my mind that he killed his ex-wife Nicole...mother of two of his children and Ron Goldman.

He should have been declared guilty...and should NOT have custody of his children.

I will read the book. All of it.

Crystal said...

I think the book sounds interesting. Can't wait to read your review. :)

(Were you a Nancy Drew fan??)

The Rock Chick said...

moanna: I do think that OJ had better lawyers, no doubt!

katherine: it's very strange when you've met someone who did something like this, isn't it? When I was little, John Gacy was our neighbor. It was shocking to learn what he had done and I'm positive it's the reason why I am so interested in things like this.

crystal: see, I think it sounds interesting, too, only because I would more expect a "Why I Didn't Do This" kind of let me and my children get on with our lives book. But, no...he wrote a book describing how he would have done it. I find that very strange! And, yes, huge Nancy Drew fan!! Hardy Boys and Encyclopedia Brown, too!!!

kaykayzowie said...

I didn't plan on reading it but your post has me very curious as to what he has to say. I'm with you, "Nancy Drew", I think he did it too.

This Eclectic Life said...

Of course, the man is a murderer. I'll gladly read his book, but I will check it out at the library (at the risk of finding a used Kleenex as a bookmark, lol)

Anonymous said...

What may have happened & why ? I don't think it was because of the theory if he couldn't have her anymore, nobody else could. I don't think so, because 2 years earlier OJ Simpson caught Nicole having sex with a man on the couch but he didn't lose it. I also don't think Ron Lyle Goldman was there just to drop off the glasses. Ron Lyle Goldman was either a drug dealer or courier & it's a fact that Ron Lyle Goldman's friends were drug dealers. The restaurant Ron Goldman worked @ was financed by drug money & he may have supplied or even sold drugs to Nicole Brown Simpson. OJ Simpson had reportedly complained about Nicole consorting with drug dealers, because it was endangering the lives of his 2 kids who were living with her.

What may have happened that night, is that Ron Lyle Goldman was there to take Nicole Brown Simpson to a drug party, when OJ Simpson saw this & told Ron to stop supplying consorting with drug dealers. From this point the quarrel escalated where he lost it.

If he did it under these circumstances, then it's 2d degree Murder as a result of provocation by the victims. It doesn't excuse it, but it puts comprehension. Yes, it's speculation & OJ Simpson may be innocent, though there is strong circumstantial proof such as the DNA. Whether or not he did it, what will be said is that Ron Lyle Goldman was not the Golden Boy, as he has been depicted. Ron Goldman was fired after he was caught allegedly selling drugs while he was a tennis coach. Ron Lyle Goldman had had financial problems & filed for bankruptcy, so it would explain why he would get involved with drug sellers.

The fact remains that the 2 victims were not nice people & I do think that there was provocation & most likely the provocation was Nicole's consortion with drug sellers or those in the drug trade. Incidentally, I've talked to people who saw the entire trial & have reasonable doubts & even 1 who doesn't think he did it.