Not too much that we already didn't know.

Bravo to the Goldman family for getting the rights to this book. ( )

http://www.bookfetish.org/bookshelves... ( )

As much as I did not want to put such a high rating on this book, I had to admit that it was fairly well-written and if I compared it to any other true-crime type of book I would have rated it as high. I still find it disgusting that OJ tried to make money from his confession, and find it equally horrible that he can admit he did it in this book yet still walk free in this world. (Although his most recent escapades may make his walking free a little tough. And it would be hard to see him jailed for his "kidnapping" charges while he walks a free man on two murders.) ( )

first of all, this story from O. J. Simpson is not "horrible" or "sickening" or any of those adjectives. It is a story of a killing, and it is a confession. Period.

What harms this book is the brackets of the Goldmen's incessant whining and self-pity in the front, forged by their hate. Then we have an afterthought from the compiler, Dominick Dunne, expressing his hate for Simpson. It would have been better to read O.J.'s story without these emotional hindrinces, no matter how emotionally charged these people may be.

The thing missing in this book is any kind of spiritual breakthrough; the Goldmans hate, Simpson lives a life of onanastic pleasure, "working" hard in a profession where any of us would like to have that kind of "work." And the compiler hates. There is no forgiveness of anyone by anyone and, in the spiritual sense, you can forego this experience.

Simpson deals with the murder on pages 124 through roughly 140, with only a few paragraphs about the murder itself. In this telling, he took a knife from a friend named Charlie (who never surfaced after that night) and then went into some kind of mental state (schizophrenic break, sometimes called blind rage?), away from the presence of
Ron Goldman, Nicole, Charlie, and himself, and when he returned to his presence in the garden, his shirt and hands and the knife in his hands were covered with fresh blood.

His friend, Charlie, says: "God, OJ. What have you done?" There is not an instant through the rest of the book where Simpson expresses any belief that he killed the two people. Nor does he even mention the capture of another killer.

We have a system of law in this country which prevents Simpson from being prosecuted again. Fortunately, we have a system of civil law that seems to be more untainted than criminal law's courts are tainted, and those courts are tainted badly.

The civil suit found Simpson guilty of these deaths and awarded much money to the Goldmans. They with their attorneys pumped up the outcry of this book being published by Harper/Collins, and Rupert Murdock himself stopped the book from seeing print. That is the story I would have liked to read. That story is the best seller.

This book is not. I believe O. J. Simpson is one of those unfortunate people who have a expeditious morality. That is, they act right when things are going right, but can be criminal when things don't go their way. His story rings true. His violence in his own words exists throughout the story, and of late he is the prisoner in a south Florida jail for felony charges that include guns and violence. His "confession," (the Goldmans are right about that) is full of self-pity and self-compassion, but except for a few moments with his children, he doesn't seem like a heluva good person. To him, by his words, sex is love. If he's laying a woman, he "loves" her.

It's a well-ghosted book about a horrible subject featuring ugly people (Nicole and Simpson) living in a spiritual vacuum, but if you still admire Orange Juice Simpson, and like being titillated, this book is for you.

Andy Ray ( )

Being a preteen when the events described in this book took place, I probably went into this book with a hazier recollection of the facts than other readers. Even so, it was clear to me that O. J. is relating his skewed view of the events, with a heavy prejudice towards himself. If you knew nothing about the facts, you might actually believe the picture he paints of himself: as a very sensible, family-oriented, patient man; almost flawless, but willing to accept and repent for the minor infractions that he let slip (like in 1989, when he "grabbed" Nicole too forcefully, and ended up being convicted of spousal abuse for it). He also doesn't miss any chances to describe Nicole as ill-tempered, obsessive, pedantic, violent and a drug user to boot.

O. J. includes some actual transcripts from the court case and seems to have gone to some trouble elucidating a back-story to fit the facts that turn up in the transcripts. For example, he explains right before one of Nicole's 911 call transcripts that someone on the set of Naked Gun 33 1/3 told him that Nicole "parties hard" with a "rough crowd." Apparently, that got him worried about his kids and angry enough to confront her about her drug use.

Despite the absurdity and poor writing of his account, I found myself eagerly anticipating the moment of the murder (does that make me a sick person?). O. J invents an acquaintance named Charlie who dropped by unexpectedly one evening and told O. J. some gossip about Nicole that set him off to the point of dropping everything to go scream at her. Charlie, in my opinion, was O. J's conscious; first, he tried to prevent O. J. from going to Nicole's condo in the first place, then refused to allow O. J. to take the knife in his car with him (why did O. J. have that knife in his car, hmm?). Charlie later tried to cool off O. J. in Nicole's courtyard, but for some inexplicable reason, brought the knife from the car with him. At this point, O. J. grabbed the knife, blanked out for a moment and then realized he was covered in blood with two bodies at his feet. For all his confusion, he seemed to be of sound enough mind to remove his bloody clothing and force Charlie to make his clothes and the murder weapon disappear. The most absurd part, of course, was O. J's temporary amnesia about the climatic moment; he even wonders how the murders could have occurred while he was standing there.

In any case, I think "If I Did It" is a poor title because O. J. never conjectures what it would have been like if he did commit the murders. Nor is "I Did It" an apt title because he never does admit that he did anything but be an all-around good guy.

And for those wondering why O. J. didn't commit suicide during the Bronco car chase: hearing Dan Rather report that O. J. had a long history with the police department as a domestic abuser made him angry enough to want to stay alive so he could get the truth out there. It only took him over a decade to finally tell his side of it. ( )