Wow, my head is spinning from all the wrong information I'm seeing here. Let's clear a few things up--

1. Nicole was not committing adultery. She and OJ had been divorced for months when this happened. And unless we're living in Judea circa 40 AD, we don't kill women for adultery anymore.

2. The ONLY reason OJ got off during the criminal trial was that the jury was strong-armed into giving a not guilty verdict because the city was terrified of another riot like the Rodney King verdict brought in 1992. Thank you Johnny Cocrahn (spelled wrong, I know).

3. It is perfectly legal for the family to bring OJ up on a wrongful death lawsuit. It was a privately filed action, and not a public trial ("the people vs. OJ Simpson", etc.). So stop your whining.

4. OJ was found not guilty in criminal court, therefore he CANNOT be tried again for the same crime.

5. And yes, black people rallied behind a murderer. Not all, but many. The evidence pointed at him, but Cochrane played the race card (like OJ was actually black or something), totally exploiting the travesty of the Rodney King verdict to GET A RICH MAN OFF A MURDER CONVICTION. Many knew he was guilty, but they rallied anyway. It was an empty victory, and did nothing for mending race relations.

6. The OJ verdict is not a shining example of how our legal system works-- in fact, it is quite the opposite. So all of you who say, "The verdict is in. Get over it." Well, my answer is NO, I won't get over it. If I'm muurdered by a rich man and he gets off becaue he's rich and famous, I hope my family goes to the lengths the Browns and Goldmans did.

We all seem to be forgetting something. He murdered the mother of his children. He slit her throat from ear to ear, almost decapitating her. He lied in a court of law, under oath. And now he wants to sell his story for millions. This man is EVIL. Why can't we seem to remember that?

Richard - Brett Cantor (Ron Goldmans' friend and co-worker who worked at the same restaurant) was killed the same way as Ron. Did OJ kill him too? What about Ron's co-worker Michael Nigg who was shot and killed? Who is Joey Ippolito? Who is Frankie Viserto, who loved to use knives to torture and behead people? Why is it not is possible that Nicole was just in the wrong company at the wrong time? I am not suggesting that Nicole was innocent - she was very much in the drug scene too. Also, the courts are notorious for supressing evidence that needs to be looked at. We see how it works on television every day(i.e Law and Order). Do your own research to find out what evidence was not allowed into the court trial and stop being led around by the news media who often slant stories through bias. Let's become a thinking people - not puppets of the media.
Some of the suppressed facts can be found on Wikipedia.
Also you may want to read a book by Willian C. Dear - a great detective - OJ is Guilty But Not of Murder. Peace to all!

Gee, all this back and forth about O J and how the jury was wrong for not convicting him, and not one word about the right wing company that was backing this project.
As wrong as O J was and is, somebody paid him to do this. This wasn't his idea, this was the right wing hypocrites at Fox. Home of the bigggest lies in television. People need to learn to stay on point.

I find it amusing that folks are getting upset about this. While I watched the trial, I feel that the racism of Furman did not get OJ off, or the racial bias, it was the lack of evidence. After watching the trial and reading Dr. Henry Lee's book (the only book I read), the DA screwed this case up as well as created evidence. Example, why wouldn't the coroner who performed the autopsy not testify at the trial? Oh he screwed it up and threw away stuff. Number two, how in the hell would you get a speck of blood on his sock, that happens to have preservatives that are not human? And as for the cut on his finger, I got one as well, from getting cut by a mirror.

As for the book, I wouldn't have cared about it but everybody else has a damn book out so why not? He was not convicted for the murders in a court of law. I feel that the civil court was wrong to award their families money. And what happened to all the money that Denise (Nicole's sister) got for battered women? It's funny how people like Nancy Grace won't mention. And another thing that upsets me is it is true that Nicole was raped on a first date by OJ, why in the hell would you stay with him? Was it the money? I would have killed the m*therf*cker if he even tried that with me. And where was her family when he beat her all those times? That is the stuff I wonder about. I wouldn't keep a safe full of pictures for a rainy day. And for the DA to bring that out during the trial, why wasn't that bought out before during their marriage or divorce? That is when it could have been used. Yes, I realize the cops thought it wasn't true, but if the cops are called to your house for matters such as that, they should have done something about it. As for the real murders, hell who knows, but in hollywood, it's possible that anything could have happened. I still think that Nicole's friend Faye Resic (ms) may have had something to do with it. I do think OJ knows who's done it, but I don't think he did it.

It just reminds me of someone who commits a crime or is in an accident or sets a fire, they always return to the scene of the crime. That's what I think about OJ and this book, he is returning to the scene of the crime, it's in his psyche and it will never be erased. Like in Hamlet, the washing of the hands over and over, but the stain will never go away.

There is no doubt that this was a crime of passion due to its violent overtones. The killer not only wanted them dead but did it with rage. The only person with a motive is OJ and it was clear as day. So, he was found not guilty, so what. The trial was a joke, Ito should have been removed and the Prosecution was to busy in bed then convicting a killer. Whether it's right or wrong it is a clear fact that most people believe he did it and got away with murder. To come out now with a book and TV show is a slap in the face. Kind of like " HA HA I'm doing it again ". I'm glad the stations dropped it as they should have.

Who are we to judge O.J., we weren't there. We don't know for sure if he kill them or not. Only God knows and he will have to answer to God on judgement day. All I can say is if Robert Blake were to write a book " I didn't shot her, but if I did this is how I did It" people would not be complaining about it. The book will probably number one selling for weeks. What is the difference with O.J. and Robert Blake writing a book, Oh I know one is white and one is black. Personally I can't say he did or didn't do it, but I would buy the book and watch the interview.

This comment is mostly directed at Cindy. Cindy, in this country, wherever you happen to fall on the race spectrum we're all a tad bit racist. I'm starting to think it's what this country is built on. I happened to be watching a documentary investigating the voting machines manufactured by Diebold the other morning. It was proven that the machines could be tampered with. One of the women involved with the testing began crying and she said that something came to mind that someone had told her recently. "We're one country pretending to be another." Everyone is fallible and will fall from time to time, but in our infinite arrogance we all think we're right and perfect. And with this thinking we believe it is acceptable to treat our fellow brethren any way we see fit. From what the gentlemen at the Laugh Factory stated on the Today Show the tirade was initiated by Michael Richards upon them arriving in the middle of his set. The two men were among a mixed race group who were celebrating a young lady's birthday that was in their group. Upon their arrival Michael Richards made the point of pointing out that some blacks and Mexicans had just arrived. Hence, he created his own problem. I don't agree with the two men and their attorney Gloria Alred (sp.) insinuating that Michael Richards should pay for their hurt feelings with a monetary contribution. Hell, if folks start paying others for insensitive remarks then Mel Gibson should be broke because there would be a line around the corner of Jewish people wanting their cut.

In regard to OJ. I could give a rat's patooty about that chump. He's a psycho who has and will always seek the approval of white America. As an African American, the folks that I know had given up on OJ a long time ago. He and Michael Jackson became yours a long time ago. Although, they try to run back to us when their legal troubles mount. He is the approval seeking monster that you have created. Sort of in the same vain of a Ward Connelly. The only thing I say in regard to the verdict is that we, as a society, cannot demand justice for his two "victims" and not demand justice for "all" victims. So, as you continue to obsess over a murder that made headlines due to the infamy of a washed-up, over the hill, drug addicted football player take some time to investigate other lesser known crimes in which someone has unjustly gotten away and champion the cause of those victims.

i want everyone to go back to the beginning of the day that ron and nicole were murderded. well, go back to the dance recital that sidney had that day and how OJ was trying to get a family picture afterwards with BOTH sides of her family that were there. it happened, but it wasn't a happy one. nicole did her best to blow him off, in front of his son by his first wife, who happened to be black. how dare she! without OJ, nicole wouldn't be jack and he knew it. so his anger caused him to the kill them and OJ knew it, but he won't EVER turn his son in. but if all that DNA that was found at the murder scene was tested, i bet you good money it would only be HALF of OJ's, a point that would never escape any DECENT scientist. yes, the LAPD back then was corrupt, but no one would miss THAT! the THAT being that a relative of OJ's did it. there was NO WAY OJ could have done it. why? how the hell is a FORMER beat up, washed up NFL player gonna kill TWO ppl that burtally? esp when ONE of those TWO is a black belt in martial arts as ron was! but you guys forgot about all that. OJ could have cared less about nicole back then, but i bet you his son cared alot.

Mark,

For someone who claims to be a social psychologist, your post leads me to believe you are a crappy one.

What makes the O.J. criminal trial different was that because of the media coverage and because the trial itself was broadcast, in effect we saw what the jury saw and heard what they heard, and we were all able to make our own conclusions as to the defendant's guilt or innocence, independent of what a jury made up of our peers might have decided. This is why the verdict is still debated everywhere, including here, and this is why people cannot, and will not, just drop it. In effect, watching the trial, all of America became a jury.

Your statement that there was "insurmountable reasonable doubt" is an opinion statement; nothing more, nothing less. The fact that the criminal jury found it "insurmountable" speaks to their decision making, right or wrong. Not mine. Having seen and heard the evidence, I - and everyone else - can come to our own conclusions.

As for the Ramseys, since I don't know nearly as many details surrounding the case, I won't go around saying anyone is guilty. That would be stupid.