http://video.msnbc.msn.com/msnbc-tv/46953057/#46953057

Let the flaming begin....

Fugettabout the standup face talent's video hyping the story. Another version is plenty interesting enough, esp w/o time-limitation induced SoundBites.

[Late add: my link is also infested with video worth ignoring, but has the rest of the story text a little bit further down, below the fold.]

Happens I thought enough of the story yesterday to merit printing out (On Paper!) for my staid old-school S/O:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/02/oj-simpson-book-jason-simpson-william-dear_n_1397583.html?view=print&comm_ref=turner_social

#Execute The Accused Then Ask Questions Later, Is The Honorable Great Amurican Way

"if the glove dont fit you must acquit."

so how big are the son's hands?

To be honest, I haven't read all the details and I won't. Seems funny that the author would have this murder weapon and a bunch of other evidence for years and only come out about it when it's time to get paid and sell books.

Also, I don't see why OJ would cover it up- he really screwed over his younger two kids. Would have been better for the family (and this assumes it was the Jason) if the son goes to jail and OJ raises the two young kids who just lost their mom.

seems to me the doors to the Hall of Justice, or at least to the police dept, are still open. Just walk in and ...... oh, wait, he's selling a book. Never mind.

Best line, though. "OJ Simpson was unavailable for comment from Lovelock Correctional Facility". Ya think?

ColoradoBear1;733397 said:

---

"if the glove dont fit you must acquit."

so how big are the son's hands?

To be honest, I haven't read all the details and I won't. Seems funny that the author would have this murder weapon and a bunch of other evidence for years and only come out about it when it's time to get paid and sell books.

Also, I don't see why OJ would cover it up- he really screwed over his younger two kids. Would have been better for the family (and this assumes it was the Jason) if the son goes to jail and OJ raises the two young kids who just lost their mom.

---

There was a lot of speculation at the time it was Jason and OJ was covering for him. OJ did raise his youngest kids. Instead of his son going to prison for life, OJ was acquitted--largely due to inconsistencies in the forensic evidence. I think at one time a prosecution witness was asked if a DNA or hair sample might be from OJ's son, Jason, and the answer was "possibly."

According to his story the stuff was in a storage locker rented by Jason who at some point failed to make payments so the contents went up for auction. He said he has offered it to police and DA they have said they aren't interested. If true, you can see why: it would be another circus trial that they could lose and if they won they would only have proven that they tampered with evidence in the first case (raising all kinds of doubt in the second) and exonerate OJ whom most people right now believe was guilty.

So either way, OJ was full of it when he said he'd search for the real killer.

Tedhead03;733525 said:

---

So either way, OJ was full of it when he said he'd search for the real killer.

---

Yes, his premise is that OJ was lying to cover for his son.

Which I get at my gym, whether I want it or not. O'Reilly said the State AG should investigate the guy's claims FWIW.

I've always thought he was covering for his kid who hated the fact that OJ continued to take care of Brown financially while allowing his other ex-wife (the son's mother) to live in poverty. It's amazing to me that there's never been any proof or much media speculation.

Tedhead03;733525 said:

---

So either way, OJ was full of it when he said he'd search for the real killer.

---

But if you believe this new theory, what OJ did is completely noble. Sweet, ya baby 2003 yards in 1974! He only had 70 receiving yards that year.

kind of funny that the chain of evidence was so maligned durin the trial, but now people are willing to believe a guy who bases his claim on evidence bought from a guy who bought them in an unpaid storage locker.

if you believe this guy.

Even if he didn't do it, which isn't likely, he is in the slammer for a long time for something totally unrelated.

BearyWhite;733670 said:

---

kind of funny that the chain of evidence was so maligned durin the trial, but now people are willing to believe a guy who bases his claim on evidence bought from a guy who bought them in an unpaid storage locker.

---

Anything for a rehash of OJ. Brings back some memories. I was a 2nd year intern at the California DOJ in 95 and I would walk down the street to go see Camp OJ all summer long.