As some of you may be aware, O.J. Simpson is going to be doing a series of interviews (and an undoubtedly financially-rewarding book) based on the premise of “if I had killed those people, this is how I would have done it.” Now, I’m not here to debate the verdict of the O.J. Simpson trial and the phenomenal job of presenting the truth by the late Johnnie Cochran (God rest his soul), but for someone as clearly innocent as O.J. is, playing the hypothetical game of “this is how bloody I’d be at this point” and taking us step by step through their gruesome murders is sure to be a bad idea.
Not only are the families of the deceased going to suffer from the reemergence of this innocent private citizen, but the details he provides (which are hypothetical, again, at best) could very disturbingly mimic the methods of the actual killer, who’s bound to be laughing hysterically right now. Indeed, that guy who got away so many years ago and is sitting comfortably in his home, blissfully aware of his immunity with the spotlight again on O.J., is definitely sharpening his knife with his comfortably-fitting gloves and hoping that police will plant evidence at his next crime scene so someone else can be innocently framed.
What we really need is for Gil Grissom to step in and provide some conclusive evidence, finding that elusive fiber necessary to bring the real killer to justice. Then O.J. wouldn’t matter anymore with his “if I had shot Lincoln, this is how it would look” or “if Ronald Reagen had been my target, I wouldn’t have failed.” Dream all you want, Mr. Simpson – I just want facts.