O.J. to discuss killings in Fox interview

[Luba]

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/20...364192-ap.html


NEW YORK (AP) - In an account his publisher considers a confession and some media executives call revolting, O.J. Simpson plans a book and TV interview to discuss how, hypothetically, he could have killed his ex-wife and her friend.

[Vautrin]

Why would it be revolting? I understand the reasoning behind it, but those same "critical media executives" do not mind to publish other revolting stuff. Either on TV (Violence!) or in other media. Likewise, because there was so much attention for the case, these media may well have contributed to his financial ruin - or damaged him more substantially. In a twisted way, he would be earning the lost money back.

Plus if he did it, that may uncover another piece of evidence.

An author who wrote a story about the murder of his wife (but claimed she had disappeared), did just that. The book, which dealt with a hypothetical explanation, was actually the factually explanation! Of course the Dutch police was too lazy to investigate the matter. Only when the "author" sold the house, and the new inhabitants started to dig in the yard (I believe they wanted to create a fountain), and the concrete box was discovered in which the wife's remains were, the doughnut-eating break was over ...

[Weiser]

See, even if it does uncover new evidence, he can't be tried again. I think the term is double jepordy or something. Basically you can't be tried for the same crime twice. He's a free man.

[Vautrin]

The guy I was talking about was indeed not tried. But it may be possible to try him for a related offence, for which he was not tried, based on the same proof.

It will be bizarre nonetheless. What if the missing piece is uncovered? He will be a prisoner outside the walls.

[Duke]

I think this is a smart business move on his part because he'll make millions from it but I do agree, it is a confession.