The Shocking Truth about the Murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman

This is private eye William C. Dear's second stab (pun intended) at the O.J. Simpson case. His first book, O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder, quite frankly, was a self-congratulatory hagiographical piece of dreck. Dear's thesis in that book was that Simpson was an accessory after the fact, and took the rap for his son Jason. But most of that book was about William C. Dear, not the Simpson case. I bought this book, struggled with the first 100 pages or so, then stuck it in an out-of-the-way bookcase where the sun never shines. If I were to review it, maybe I'd give it 2 stars if I were feeling charitable.

Thus it was with some trepidation that I bought this book. The many on the store who reviewed it mostly gave it 5 stars, with about 20 die-hard "No-Jays" giving it 1 star, because they can't accept the fact that maybe the LAPD and the DA's office framed O.J. and that the criminal jury which acquitted him wasn't quite as dumb as it was made out to be. Based upon those recommendations, and following a TV special which pinned the guilt on serial killer Glen Rogers, I decided to buy the book, and the store had it on sale, deeply discounted.

Dear's second book on the Simpson case is infinitely better, carefully researched, and not mostly about Dear instead of the nominal subject. I gave it 4 stars rather than 5 because of some issues I have with his conclusion that this was a crime of passion, as well as his speculation that O.J. Simpson came to the crime scene before flying to Chicago. I consider this mandatory reading not just for Simpson buffs, but for anyone whose interest is in true justice being served. It sure wasn't here, and not for the reason most people might give.

I personally did a lot of work on the Simpson case back in the 1990's, and initially thought the Juice was guilty as hell. After all, his blood and DNA were found at the crime scene, Goldman's DNA was found in the Bronco, and then there was that low-speed chase in the white Bronco with O.J. holding a gun to his head. All clear indications of guilt, right? A slam-dunk for Marcia Clark & Co.? Absolutely.

Well, not quite. As further evidence surfaced, it became increasingly clear, at least to me, that O.J. didn't commit this double homicide - he just didn't have time to leave the crime scene at 10:45 PM or a couple minutes later - as witnessed by dog walker Robert Heidstra - race home in 7 minutes or so, change out of his bloody clothing, hide the murder weapon, and start putting out his bags for Alan Park, the limo driver, at 10:54 PM. O.J. could certainly move pretty fast when he was a running back, but not that fast. Moreover, Simpson didn't appear to have the temperament of a killer. Sure, he had a temper (as did Nicole) - especially when he was drunk, but there was never any evidence of him trying to kill anyone, or injure someone with a knife. Moreover, it's well-documented that O.J. was scared to death of blood, and the near-decapitation of his ex-wife was about as bloody a murder as homicide gets.

William Dear makes a strong circumstantial case for O.J.'s eldest son Jason: Jason had tried to kill his ex-girlfriend, and his ex-boss (at different times), both times using a knife, plus himself (three times). Jason's airtight alibi for where he was at the time of the murder - working at Alan Ladd Jackson's restaurant where he was the sous-chef - was full of holes: The restaurant, normally open until 11 PM, closed early on Sunday, June 12, 1994 due to lack of business. Jason was picked up from the restaurant by his girlfriend Jennifer Green around 9:45 PM. This would have given him more than enough time to go home, don the gloves that didn't fit O.J., the Bruno Maglis, and kill Nicole then ditch the bloody clothing and the knife, as he didn't have a flight to Chicago to catch. What's even more damning is that Jason didn't punch out normally, he wrote his departure time on the timecard manually. Dear does a job worthy of Columbo here.

As I said before, I have some issues with this book, in three areas: First, that this was a crime of passion, not one that was premeditated; Second, that O.J. returned to the crime scene; Third, assuming it was Jason, he was the sole killer. I'll address each in turn:

* Was this a crime of passion? Dear goes to great lengths painting Jason as a person prone to periodic rage, possibly related to his epilepsy. About this he's correct. Jason attempted to kill an employer of his, and cut off the hair of an ex-girlfriend, both times with a knife. Moreover, he was not on his anti-rage medication, Depakote, at the time. Additionally, he made three suicide attempts, had been hospitalized in a psychiatric unit, and certainly was proficient with knives: He was a chef who had his own set of chef's knives which he took home with him every night. Finally, he was extremely jealous of his father; at age 14, he attempted to destroy a statue of O.J. which Simpson displayed at 360 Rockingham. Dear theorizes that Jason went into a state of rage after Nicole stood him up on June 12th by dining at Mezzaluna rather than at Alan Ladd Jackson's restaurant, where Jason had prepared a feast for her. Jason later drove to Nicole's townhouse at 875 Bundy; a loud argument ensued, Jason went back to his jeep to pick up a knife, and killed both Nicole and Ron Goldman, who merely happened along, ostensibly to return Nicole's glasses which she had left behind at Mezzaluna.

Problem: According to Dear's excellent detective work, Jason did not clock out; he came back a couple days later to manually enter a clock-in time of 2:30 PM, a clock-out time of 10:30 PM, for a total of 8 hours worked, and signed the time card. The time clock was determined to have been working; other employees punched out. So why did he not clock out? It was normal for the restaurant to close early on Sunday night, so he wasn't going to be docked for leaving early. And when he did fill out the time card, why did he lie? It wasn't for the 45 minutes; it was because he needed an alibi for where he was at 10:30 PM, just leaving work rather than killing his stepmother. To me, the lack of clocking out indicates premeditation; Jason knew that if he weren't caught, he'd be able to retroactively "adjust" the time card; if he were caught, it wouldn't matter. If the crime were premeditated, there was a strong possibility others (not O.J.) were involved. Finally, there was the type of knife used in the murders; it wasn't a chef's knife, but a double-bladed knife, possibly a Gerber, designed to slice living people, not carve a dead turkey. So, if the murder wasn't premeditated, why did Jason (if Jason were in fact the real killer) bring along this particular knife?

* Did Jason call his father after the fact, and did O.J. come out to view the crime scene? The answer is a resounding "NO" for many reasons. First is that the murders (if committed by Jason) were premeditated. Why would Jason call his father after murdering two people? That exponentially increases the odds he'd be caught - O.J. would drop a dime on his son. Second is a matter of timing: We know from Robert Heidstra that Goldman shouted "Hey, hey, hey!" around 10:45 PM that Sunday night; Heidstra was walking his dogs, and upon seeing a car peel out heading south on Bundy (O.J. lived northwest), Heidstra sensed trouble, and immediately headed home. When Heidstra walked in the door, the TV, which had been left on, was just about to start telecasting the 11:00 news. I've walked the same walk Heidstra did, even if he was moving very slowly, there is no way it would have taken more than 6 or 7 minutes for Heidstra to get safely inside his apartment from where he was. O.J. wouldn't have had time to get from 360 Rockingham to the crime scene; it takes 7 minutes or more, dependent on traffic, and I don't think O.J. would have wanted to attract attention by driving that Bronco 100 MPH down Sunset and getting pulled over. There is also the matter of the socks found near O.J.'s bed. If these socks weren't planted (Dear proves convincingly they were), it would have increased the amount of time necessary for O.J. to be ready for the limo driver, Allan Park, before 11:00 PM. We have a hard timeline that the bags were out at 10:54 PM. Finally, Park didn't hear a truck pulling into Rockingham; he had arrived there at 10:22 to wait for O.J. If O.J. were called, it would have been after 10:22 PM, and Park certainly would have noticed if a vehicle left the house. From this, we can conclude O.J. was not at the crime scene with too-small gloves, Bruno Magli shoes, and a watch cap; the gloves were planted, it was never established that Simpson had bought those particular shoes with the Silga sole, and the EDTA and the location of the blood on all four surfaces of the bloody socks, when a leg was supposed to be between them, proves beyond any doubt the socks were planted, just as Dear (and others) claim.

* Was Jason the sole killer? Certainly it's possible he was one of the killers; he, not O.J. had the temperament of a killer, rage or otherwise, and he had a motive - jealousy of both his father and his ex-stepmother, a far stronger motive than O.J.'s, which existed primarily in the minds of Faye Resnick and Denise Brown, both of who had a vested interest in O.J. being the killer rather than Jason or somebody else. (In Resnick's case, book royalties, and Brown's, money from a civil lawsuit; Jason was poor enough to be judgment-proof.) Plus, there is strong evidence that Goldman was given the glasses by the Mezzaluna manager and ordered to drop them off at Nicole's house BEFORE the glasses were reported missing by anyone. The Browns claim they reported it to the restaurant at 9:37 PM when they returned from their 76 mile trip from Mezzaluna to Dana Point in Orange County. As the best estimate for their pulling out of the parking lot across the street from Mezzaluna is 8:50 PM, that means the trip took Brown and their family less than 46 minutes, or an average speed of approximately 100 mph, some of which was on city streets. There is no way a loaded-up Jeep Cherokee can go that fast. Conclusion: Goldman was set up. Could Jason have been part of the team? Quite possibly. Then, again, just because someone fits the profile doesn't make him a killer himself. Dear has a strong circumstantial case against Jason Simpson, but not an iron-clad one.

In conclusion, Dear has certainly proved that Jason Simpson fit the profile of someone who could have taken part in these homicides. He has shown that Jason's so-called "iron-clad" alibi was anything but. The case should definitely be reopened (in theory it was never closed), with Jason a person of interest.

Thick and bursting with evidence. In a narrative that reads visually, as though you're watching a movie re-enactment, the author cogently reviews how he concluded a very different suspect in the murders. He suspected this other person early in the book, but what I liked was how the evidence, as he reviewed it, could imply only one person... this alternative explanation. He also carefully explains how OJ could hardly have been a suspect. This is important to keep in mind: the author doesn't write in a passionate style or have an axe to grind. It's more like the end of an episode of "Murder, She Wrote" or "Columbo".

William Dear got me all worked up because the main problem I always had with OJ being the killer was how he could be smart enough to ditch his bloody clothes and shoes but stupid enough to leave his cap and one glove at the scene while STUPID, STUPID, STUPID enough to carry the other to his house and CONVENIANTLY DROP IT behind the guest house. Dear seriously let me down by glossing right over that issue but the case he makes for the killer being OJ's son and the evidence he uncovered should have compelled the LA DA to investigate. What a pity all Dear's efforts were ignored. 5 Stars for his diligent research!!!!!

I read this book after watching the ESPN Special on OJ Simpson. I never expected I woud be giving it a 5 star rating but I am. This book is fascinating to read! The writer has made me question OJ's guilt in this murder. I do believe he may have been there but I feel strongly that it could have been his son that committed this crime. I just can't beieve that the investigators didn't do more investigation on Jason Simpson. Why are they not doing it now? The book has so much evidence to convince anyone that it very well could have been OJ's son and not OJ. I had no idea this young man had as many mental probems as he had. They even found a knife the son had kept in storage. A knife that experts say is outlawed in many states because it is a cut and kill knife only. Meaning it's only perpose is to cut and kill! I didn't know about his obsession with Niclole Simpson either. I don't think many people did. This book is worth your money. I don't think you will be disappointed and you may just think "Maybe it wasn't OJ after all".

This book is definately worth reading. William Dear did an incredible job of investigating this crime for so many years because he believed it was Jason Simpson and not OJ Simpson who killed Nicole and Ron Goldman.

This book is well written and well researched. It is not just a flash in the pan piece with nothing behind it. I watched and researched the trial myself (college history paper)and his theory of the son is well founded and backed with evidence. Although the jury is still out on the son in my mind, after reading this book, I can truely say it has opened up many questions and the very real opinion that OJ in fact may be innocent.

It was an interesting account of the OJ story but found that the author continued on a regular basis to repeat facts that he had already given to us. I found that practice over the whole book to end up being annoying

OK so everyone remember the crime: the Bruno Magli shoe prints. The blood drops at the murder scene and at OJ's. The glove and knit cap at the crime scene. A matching glove found at OJ's residence. Small cuts on OJ's fingers.

The LAPD (and a large portion of the general public at large) put 2 and 2 together.
Guilty, right? Not so fast.

For starters there's the question of motive. Filmed earlier that night at his child's dance recital with other family members, OJ was nothing but easy-going and smiling. Making dates with girlfriends and going for a burger with Kato Kaelin also don't seem to fit in with anybody's idea of a man planning a vicious pre-meditated murder.

OJ's voluntary appearance at the Police station within hours of the murders, during which he waived his right to have an Attorney present and gave an interview and allowed the taking of photographs, fingerprints, and blood samples, is also quite simply not the act of a guilty man.

There are numerous other things that indicate that OJ was not the killer.
For instance, the amount of blood found in OJ's bronco was (contrary to what the LAPD would have you believe) a miniscule amount, the sum total of which that could fit on a man's thumbnail. No blood whatsoever on the pedals. The LAPD dismantled OJ's plumbing at Rockingham, not a single drop of blood was found in the pipes. Not a single drop of blood on OJ's carpets going upstairs. Ron Goldman was stabbed over 27 times. 3 pints of blood were spilled at that crime scene. Where is all the blood? Because it was not on OJ.

Also important; the left hand Bundy glove had no cuts matching the cuts on OJ's hand. Obviously then, the killer was not wearing this glove at the time of the murder. It was never explained how Goldman could have removed a leather glove from OJ's fist during a knife fight; more importantly, not a single drop of the victim's blood was mixed in with OJ's `Bundy drops' that allegedly came from this cut finger. Aside from the nature of the cuts being inconsistent with the use of a knife, the cut finger therefore did not come from the murders, and OJ had no other injuries whatsoever to indicate he participated in any kind of physical confrontation.

In addition, there are unidentified fingerprints and DNA evidence at the murder scene that do not belong to OJ. There is an unidentified shoeprint pattern that does not belong to OJ. There is DNA under Nicole's fingernails -indicating that she got a piece of her attacker - that clearly does not match OJ.

Undoubtedly the evidence places OJ at Bundy Drive. But none of it makes him the killer. What it indicates, is that he was at the crime scene minutes after the murders had taken place.

If OJ was at the crime scene shortly after the murders, there must have been a totally compelling reason. Bill Dear has spent many years and millions of dollars investigating the case and has found that reason.

As you may know already, Dear fingers OJ's son Jason as the perpetrator.
Jason has a history of violent behaviour: regardless of previous domestic disputes, nobody has come close to ever putting a knife in OJ's hand; all evidence is that it simply wasn't in his make-up. At the time of the murders Jason was actually on probation for assault with a deadly weapon.

There is also the question of motive - Jason certainly had reason to be confrontational with Nicole on June 12th 1994.

And there is the alibi. Jason was dismissed as a suspect by the LAPD on the basis of a supposed iron-clad alibi. Dear has proven that this alibi (a) was impossible, (b) is in fact contradicted by witness testimony, and (c) was irrefutably falsified. Why?
The fact is that OJ hired a Criminal Defence Attorney for Jason the day after the murders. Why?
When the verdict was read, and OJ's supporters erupted in joy, Jason remained stone-faced and virtually motionless. Why?
At the funeral home, Jason couldn't look at Nicole's body and ran outside and locked himself in the car. Why?
Jason's jeep was later pictured with a large piece missing from the console, as if someone had cut it out with a knife. Why?

The LAPD rushed to judgement. They saw a little bit of blood and assumed OJ was guilty.
Bill Dear didn't.
For all Dear's critics, this is the one scenario about the murders that convincingly accounts for and explains not just all the evidence, but also the actions and motivations of the major players in the narrative before, during and after that fateful night in June 1994.

Read this book with an open mind. Consider all the evidence TOGETHER as a whole, and it paints a very compelling and disturbing story.

Hopefully one day, this book will assist with at least the re-opening of the case, which would provide some sort of closure for the still suffering Brown and Goldman families. Closure that they so badly lack, as long as the LAPD continue to make a mockery of justice by refusing to re-examine the entirety of the actual evidence.

I believe that Americans are so stupid not to know OJ was protecting his son that people just wanted to convict the first thing in their eyes. Piece of America right here in a book. Don't believe me, call the investigator. His number is in the book as well. Hypocrisy is the American dream.

I truly believe that OJ was innocent but this author goes in a crazy direction trying to implicate his son.

If you really want the straight info on the OJ Simpson trial and how he is absolutely innocent then check out When Prosecutors Attack!: OJ Simpson, Roderick Scott, George Zimmerman - Baseless Government Attacks and the Media That Lets It Happen. On top of learning about the OJ case you will get some current info on the Roderick Scott and George Zimmerman cases.

Author William Dear wrote in the Introduction of this 2012 updating of his 2000 book, O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder, “Almost eighteen years ago, I began assembling a team … to look into the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman… My purpose in what became a long journey was not just to write another O.J. book but to seek the truth… I am a private investigator who had to take the road back into the murders the hard way… I do not have the power of subpoena, the right to take depositions, or the right to arrest. That’s why my methods sometimes have to be unorthodox… Beyond the wide-ranging expertise and experience of my team and my own determination, the crucial equipment I possess---more gift than tool---is my ability to enter, intuitively, into the mind of a killer… I have been asked why I did not turn over my investigative report to the proper authorities… I felt my findings might well wind up buried in the political labyrinth of the legal system.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to the 524-page hardcover edition.]

He suggests, “Despite the evidence against him, [Simpson] repeatedly claimed he was innocent of the murders. Here was a man who volunteered to be interviewed by the police, gave the crime lab samples of this blood and… willingly agreed to take a polygraph test. These were not the actions of a guilty man.” (Pg. 9)

He states, “To my mind, the most obvious glitch in the LAPD scenario was the ease with which O.J. allegedly left Rockingham without [Kato] Kaelin having heard him drive away in the Bronco, and the limousine driver’s failure to hear or see his return. As anyone who has ever driven a Bronco can attest, this is not a quiet vehicle.” (Pg. 17)

He acknowledges, “O.J. … made no secret that he had been spying on Nicole… Nor had he established a convincing alibi… he later took, and then failed, his own private polygraph test… These facts suggested to me that indeed O.J. had visited the crime scene, but his actions that night and the next day were not those of a man prepared to be questioned about the murders… It made me wonder whether O.J. was trying to hide something or possibly protect someone.” (Pg. 21)

He argues, “Nearby [the murder scene] were the bedrooms of Nicole and O.J.’s children, Sydney and Justin, who had been asleep when the murders took place. This fact alone---that the children had been home---to my mind, offered one of the most convincing reasons of all why O.J. had either not premeditated the murders, or why O.J. hadn’t committed the murders at all. I believe that… it stretches the imagination to believe that a man who loved his children and… desired that his family be reunited, would not risk stabbing his former wife with their children in close enough proximity to see it happen, or to hear their mother’s anguished cries for help.” (Pg. 28)

He speculates, “if I was right, O.J. had to have a strong motive to go to Nicole’s house that night. What could possibly have made him take that chance? I could only conclude O.J. Simpson had been called to the crime scene by someone he knew and who knew him. O.J. had arrived at Bundy Drive knowing full well that Nicole was dead or at least fearfully expecting it. Either that or he had left for her house because he believed her life was in danger and was going to warn her. He must have grabbed his cap and gloves because he didn’t want to be recognized or leave fingerprints.” (Pg. 40-41) He asserts, “the murders themselves were clearly committed in a wild and uncontrollable rage, suggesting that the killer had a secret passion, obsession, or unrequited love for Nicole.” (Pg. 53)

He identifies Jason Simpson [Simpson’s son from his first marriage] as the killer. “Had Jason been the one to kill Nicole, this might also explain O.J.’s strange behavior after the murders, and why he would be willing to put his life and career in jeopardy… Could he have taken the rap for his son?... That theory made much more sense to me than a conspiracy among drug dealers or a love triangle between retired football players and a divorced Brentwood mother.” (Pg. 68)

Noting that Jason in 1993 “pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of ‘disturbing the peace,” he adds, “I could only read between the lines, but the evidence seemed clear. Jason had attacked his boss with a kitchen knife… at the time the Bundy Drive murders took place, twenty-four-year-old Jason Lamar Simpson was on probation for assault with a deadly weapon.” (Pg. 99-100) He recounts that Jason tried to commit suicide, and his father told a psychiatrist that Jason had a “Chaotic past, involving unstable relationships, alcohol dependence, [and] drug use… [and] had been involved in psychotic incidents in the past.” (Pg. 117)

He offers his theory for the murders: Jason was working as a chef, and Nicole had promised to come with her family to his restaurant. “Nicole never called him back to tell him she and O.J. were arguing again and that she and her children would not be going to Jackson’s for dinner… it would have been better if Nicole has simply called Jason and told him they couldn’t come. That would have shown him respect instead of leaving Jason to be embarrassed and humiliated in front of his coworkers… This would have been enough to enrage anyone, much less a person suffering from intermittent explosive disorder, or irrational impulse. Now, in fact, I realized that here was a motive!” (Pg. 154) Furthermore, “Jason HAD no alibi on the night of the murders. He himself said that he had gotten off work within the time frame when the murders were believed to have been committed.” (Pg. 158-159)

He wonders [about Jason’s deposition in the civil case], “I couldn’t help but notice the awareness Jason seemed to have of Nicole’s body. Did he have a crush on her? Was she more than a stepmother to him? Could Jason’s attraction to her and her possible rejection have ultimately caused her death?” (Pg. 152) He adds, “It seemed entirely likely now, with what I had uncovered, that the next time Jason was questioned by authorities, it could be as a major suspect in the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.” (Pg. 166)

Reviewing a newspaper story of October 4, 1994 [headline: “O.J.’s Son Tried to Kill His Own Girlfriend”], he comments, “Here… was a dramatic… representation of the exact kind of behavior that could be expected from someone with Jason’s medical and psychological profile. This was a classic textbook case of intermittent rage disorder, and it had allegedly occurred less than two months before Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered.” (Pg. 229) Later, he speculates again, “I couldn’t help but wonder if all of Jason’s problems didn’t revert back to that day that twenty-three-month-old Aaren, Jason’s sister, drowned in the swimming pool… did Jason feel responsible for his sister’s death?” (Pg. 255)

Dear offers “to paint a picture … of what I supposed might have happened that might. Through my scenario was imagined, and would not have held up in a court of law, it was based on the facts as I knew them up to this point in my investigation.” (Pg. 260) He summarizes all the negative factors about Jason (Pg. 313-314; 345-347). He also notes, “Jason Lamar Simpson was never interviewed by the LAPD. He was, however, represented by a top criminal lawyer… who had been retained by O.J. Simpson the day after the murders, not to represent HIM but to represent HIS SON, Jason. Jason refused to cooperate with the LAPD and as a result was never interviewed.” (Pg. 423)

Of O.J.’s failed polygraph, he postulates, “O.J. failing the polygraph test did not really concern me. It was not used in court, thankfully, and only a few people knew of the outcome. It was thirteen years later, I realized that O.J. did not commit the murders but failed the test because he had been at the scene and had withheld crucial evidence. Only time will tell if I am right.” (Pg. 386)

After the Goldman family published Simpson’s book If I Did It], he ruminates, “Now the Goldmans were profiting, which really bothered me. I was invited to appear on the Dr. Phil show in 2008 along with the Goldman family. After giving it a great deal of thought, I made my decision: ‘No.’ If the Goldmans knew what I had uncovered in my investigation, they might not be so adamant about O.J.’s guilt.” (Pg. 436)

While Dear’s book is clearly many cuts above most other “alternative killer” theories, and while he engages in a persuasive case against the character of Jason Simpson, the total absence of any physical evidence placing Jason at the crime scene---contrasted with the evidence against his father---ultimately leaves me quite unpersuaded.

Dr. John H. Watson put down his newspaper. He did not expect that verdict in Los Angeles, he said. Sherlock Holmes put down his book and said he expected that verdict. “Why” said Watson? “It’s elementary, my dear Watson. The Grand Jury did not indict him, so it’s no surprise that the Petit Jury did not convict him.” “But the media kept saying the verdict would be guilty” said Watson. “But you know how the newspapers reported the cases we were involved in” said Holmes. “If you look at the time element and the condition of the accused there is no possibility of guilt” said Holmes. “I’m sorry Holmes, but I don’t understand” replied Watson.

Holmes explained the limo driver took the accused to the LA airport at 11 PM so he could not have killed two people afterwards. The limo driver arrived at 10:22 PM and waited until the scheduled 10:45 PM pickup time. He did not see or hear any SUV arrive during this time. That waiter checked out from work at 10 PM then walked to his home, changed out of his clothing, then walked a few blocks to get that car. If the murders occurred at 10:30 PM or so the blood would be black and clotted. You remember my monograph on this subject?” “So who could have done it” asked Watson. “It was most likely someone who was an enemy of that waiter” said Holmes. “The noise of the fight drew Nicole out of the safety of her house and she became a witness to the murder. So she had to be killed as well to eliminate an eyewitness.”

“Why would anyone want to kill the waiter” asked Watson? “If we knew the motive we would be able to find the killers” said Holmes. Holmes wondered if the waiter stopped somewhere and was followed. “We know little about his history” said Holmes. “Some say the method used to kill Nicole has been used by drug dealers against non-paying customers. I have no experience there” said Holmes. “The LAPD police should not have halted their investigation so soon” said Holmes. After the crime the experienced criminal defense lawyer had his client examined by a doctor and photographed nude from head to toe. There were no bruises or cuts and slashes anywhere on his body, except for a cut on one finger. This cut was not seen by Kato or the limo driver, the ticket agent or the other passengers on the airliner. The hands of the waiter showed bruises from punching somebody hard, he was trained in the martial arts. The blood evidence had EDTA which showed it came from the blood sample, and was planted evidence.

“Did you note the curious incident with the publicity about Nicole’s boyfriend?” asked Holmes. “There was no publicity about Nicole’s boyfriend” said Watson. “That was the curious incident” replied Holmes.

“I guess this will become an addition to that Famous Unsolved Mysteries book” said Watson. “What do you think”? Holmes reminded him of “The Case of the Long-Legged Models”. A woman inherited shares in a Las Vegas Casino after her father was murdered. It was never solved. “Murders by organized crime are seldom solved by the police unless they blame an innocent man” said her famous lawyer. He had covered the murder trial of Sir Harry Oakes for the Hearst Press. “What are the chance of learning a solution” asked Watson? Holmes replied “you mean learning the correct solution”. “Many have invented solutions that are contradicted by the known facts, only those who know little about this case believe them.”

What do YOU really know about this case?

Author William Dear wrote in the Introduction of this 2012 updating of his 2000 book, O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder, “Almost eighteen years ago, I began assembling a team … to look into the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman… My purpose in what became a long journey was not just to write another O.J. book but to seek the truth… I am a private investigator who had to take the road back into the murders the hard way… I do not have the power of subpoena, the right to take depositions, or the right to arrest. That’s why my methods sometimes have to be unorthodox… Beyond the wide-ranging expertise and experience of my team and my own determination, the crucial equipment I possess---more gift than tool---is my ability to enter, intuitively, into the mind of a killer… I have been asked why I did not turn over my investigative report to the proper authorities… I felt my findings might well wind up buried in the political labyrinth of the legal system.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to the 524-page hardcover edition.]

He suggests, “Despite the evidence against him, [Simpson] repeatedly claimed he was innocent of the murders. Here was a man who volunteered to be interviewed by the police, gave the crime lab samples of this blood and… willingly agreed to take a polygraph test. These were not the actions of a guilty man.” (Pg. 9)

He states, “To my mind, the most obvious glitch in the LAPD scenario was the ease with which O.J. allegedly left Rockingham without [Kato] Kaelin having heard him drive away in the Bronco, and the limousine driver’s failure to hear or see his return. As anyone who has ever driven a Bronco can attest, this is not a quiet vehicle.” (Pg. 17)

He acknowledges, “O.J. … made no secret that he had been spying on Nicole… Nor had he established a convincing alibi… he later took, and then failed, his own private polygraph test… These facts suggested to me that indeed O.J. had visited the crime scene, but his actions that night and the next day were not those of a man prepared to be questioned about the murders… It made me wonder whether O.J. was trying to hide something or possibly protect someone.” (Pg. 21)

He argues, “Nearby [the murder scene] were the bedrooms of Nicole and O.J.’s children, Sydney and Justin, who had been asleep when the murders took place. This fact alone---that the children had been home---to my mind, offered one of the most convincing reasons of all why O.J. had either not premeditated the murders, or why O.J. hadn’t committed the murders at all. I believe that… it stretches the imagination to believe that a man who loved his children and… desired that his family be reunited, would not risk stabbing his former wife with their children in close enough proximity to see it happen, or to hear their mother’s anguished cries for help.” (Pg. 28)

He speculates, “if I was right, O.J. had to have a strong motive to go to Nicole’s house that night. What could possibly have made him take that chance? I could only conclude O.J. Simpson had been called to the crime scene by someone he knew and who knew him. O.J. had arrived at Bundy Drive knowing full well that Nicole was dead or at least fearfully expecting it. Either that or he had left for her house because he believed her life was in danger and was going to warn her. He must have grabbed his cap and gloves because he didn’t want to be recognized or leave fingerprints.” (Pg. 40-41) He asserts, “the murders themselves were clearly committed in a wild and uncontrollable rage, suggesting that the killer had a secret passion, obsession, or unrequited love for Nicole.” (Pg. 53)

He identifies Jason Simpson [Simpson’s son from his first marriage] as the killer. “Had Jason been the one to kill Nicole, this might also explain O.J.’s strange behavior after the murders, and why he would be willing to put his life and career in jeopardy… Could he have taken the rap for his son?... That theory made much more sense to me than a conspiracy among drug dealers or a love triangle between retired football players and a divorced Brentwood mother.” (Pg. 68)

Noting that Jason in 1993 “pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of ‘disturbing the peace,” he adds, “I could only read between the lines, but the evidence seemed clear. Jason had attacked his boss with a kitchen knife… at the time the Bundy Drive murders took place, twenty-four-year-old Jason Lamar Simpson was on probation for assault with a deadly weapon.” (Pg. 99-100) He recounts that Jason tried to commit suicide, and his father told a psychiatrist that Jason had a “Chaotic past, involving unstable relationships, alcohol dependence, [and] drug use… [and] had been involved in psychotic incidents in the past.” (Pg. 117)

He offers his theory for the murders: Jason was working as a chef, and Nicole had promised to come with her family to his restaurant. “Nicole never called him back to tell him she and O.J. were arguing again and that she and her children would not be going to Jackson’s for dinner… it would have been better if Nicole has simply called Jason and told him they couldn’t come. That would have shown him respect instead of leaving Jason to be embarrassed and humiliated in front of his coworkers… This would have been enough to enrage anyone, much less a person suffering from intermittent explosive disorder, or irrational impulse. Now, in fact, I realized that here was a motive!” (Pg. 154) Furthermore, “Jason HAD no alibi on the night of the murders. He himself said that he had gotten off work within the time frame when the murders were believed to have been committed.” (Pg. 158-159)

He wonders [about Jason’s deposition in the civil case], “I couldn’t help but notice the awareness Jason seemed to have of Nicole’s body. Did he have a crush on her? Was she more than a stepmother to him? Could Jason’s attraction to her and her possible rejection have ultimately caused her death?” (Pg. 152) He adds, “It seemed entirely likely now, with what I had uncovered, that the next time Jason was questioned by authorities, it could be as a major suspect in the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.” (Pg. 166)

Reviewing a newspaper story of October 4, 1994 [headline: “O.J.’s Son Tried to Kill His Own Girlfriend”], he comments, “Here… was a dramatic… representation of the exact kind of behavior that could be expected from someone with Jason’s medical and psychological profile. This was a classic textbook case of intermittent rage disorder, and it had allegedly occurred less than two months before Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered.” (Pg. 229) Later, he speculates again, “I couldn’t help but wonder if all of Jason’s problems didn’t revert back to that day that twenty-three-month-old Aaren, Jason’s sister, drowned in the swimming pool… did Jason feel responsible for his sister’s death?” (Pg. 255)

Dear offers “to paint a picture … of what I supposed might have happened that might. Through my scenario was imagined, and would not have held up in a court of law, it was based on the facts as I knew them up to this point in my investigation.” (Pg. 260) He summarizes all the negative factors about Jason (Pg. 313-314; 345-347). He also notes, “Jason Lamar Simpson was never interviewed by the LAPD. He was, however, represented by a top criminal lawyer… who had been retained by O.J. Simpson the day after the murders, not to represent HIM but to represent HIS SON, Jason. Jason refused to cooperate with the LAPD and as a result was never interviewed.” (Pg. 423)

Of O.J.’s failed polygraph, he postulates, “O.J. failing the polygraph test did not really concern me. It was not used in court, thankfully, and only a few people knew of the outcome. It was thirteen years later, I realized that O.J. did not commit the murders but failed the test because he had been at the scene and had withheld crucial evidence. Only time will tell if I am right.” (Pg. 386)

After the Goldman family published Simpson’s book If I Did It], he ruminates, “Now the Goldmans were profiting, which really bothered me. I was invited to appear on the Dr. Phil show in 2008 along with the Goldman family. After giving it a great deal of thought, I made my decision: ‘No.’ If the Goldmans knew what I had uncovered in my investigation, they might not be so adamant about O.J.’s guilt.” (Pg. 436)

While Dear’s book is clearly many cuts above most other “alternative killer” theories, and while he engages in a persuasive case against the character of Jason Simpson, the total absence of any physical evidence placing Jason at the crime scene---contrasted with the evidence against his father---ultimately leaves me quite unpersuaded.

Author William Dear wrote in the Introduction of this 2012 updating of his 2000 book, O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder, “Almost eighteen years ago, I began assembling a team … to look into the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman… My purpose in what became a long journey was not just to write another O.J. book but to seek the truth… I am a private investigator who had to take the road back into the murders the hard way… I do not have the power of subpoena, the right to take depositions, or the right to arrest. That’s why my methods sometimes have to be unorthodox… Beyond the wide-ranging expertise and experience of my team and my own determination, the crucial equipment I possess---more gift than tool---is my ability to enter, intuitively, into the mind of a killer… I have been asked why I did not turn over my investigative report to the proper authorities… I felt my findings might well wind up buried in the political labyrinth of the legal system.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to the 524-page hardcover edition.]

He suggests, “Despite the evidence against him, [Simpson] repeatedly claimed he was innocent of the murders. Here was a man who volunteered to be interviewed by the police, gave the crime lab samples of this blood and… willingly agreed to take a polygraph test. These were not the actions of a guilty man.” (Pg. 9)

He states, “To my mind, the most obvious glitch in the LAPD scenario was the ease with which O.J. allegedly left Rockingham without [Kato] Kaelin having heard him drive away in the Bronco, and the limousine driver’s failure to hear or see his return. As anyone who has ever driven a Bronco can attest, this is not a quiet vehicle.” (Pg. 17)

He acknowledges, “O.J. … made no secret that he had been spying on Nicole… Nor had he established a convincing alibi… he later took, and then failed, his own private polygraph test… These facts suggested to me that indeed O.J. had visited the crime scene, but his actions that night and the next day were not those of a man prepared to be questioned about the murders… It made me wonder whether O.J. was trying to hide something or possibly protect someone.” (Pg. 21)

He argues, “Nearby [the murder scene] were the bedrooms of Nicole and O.J.’s children, Sydney and Justin, who had been asleep when the murders took place. This fact alone---that the children had been home---to my mind, offered one of the most convincing reasons of all why O.J. had either not premeditated the murders, or why O.J. hadn’t committed the murders at all. I believe that… it stretches the imagination to believe that a man who loved his children and… desired that his family be reunited, would not risk stabbing his former wife with their children in close enough proximity to see it happen, or to hear their mother’s anguished cries for help.” (Pg. 28)

He speculates, “if I was right, O.J. had to have a strong motive to go to Nicole’s house that night. What could possibly have made him take that chance? I could only conclude O.J. Simpson had been called to the crime scene by someone he knew and who knew him. O.J. had arrived at Bundy Drive knowing full well that Nicole was dead or at least fearfully expecting it. Either that or he had left for her house because he believed her life was in danger and was going to warn her. He must have grabbed his cap and gloves because he didn’t want to be recognized or leave fingerprints.” (Pg. 40-41) He asserts, “the murders themselves were clearly committed in a wild and uncontrollable rage, suggesting that the killer had a secret passion, obsession, or unrequited love for Nicole.” (Pg. 53)

He identifies Jason Simpson [Simpson’s son from his first marriage] as the killer. “Had Jason been the one to kill Nicole, this might also explain O.J.’s strange behavior after the murders, and why he would be willing to put his life and career in jeopardy… Could he have taken the rap for his son?... That theory made much more sense to me than a conspiracy among drug dealers or a love triangle between retired football players and a divorced Brentwood mother.” (Pg. 68)

Noting that Jason in 1993 “pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of ‘disturbing the peace,” he adds, “I could only read between the lines, but the evidence seemed clear. Jason had attacked his boss with a kitchen knife… at the time the Bundy Drive murders took place, twenty-four-year-old Jason Lamar Simpson was on probation for assault with a deadly weapon.” (Pg. 99-100) He recounts that Jason tried to commit suicide, and his father told a psychiatrist that Jason had a “Chaotic past, involving unstable relationships, alcohol dependence, [and] drug use… [and] had been involved in psychotic incidents in the past.” (Pg. 117)

He offers his theory for the murders: Jason was working as a chef, and Nicole had promised to come with her family to his restaurant. “Nicole never called him back to tell him she and O.J. were arguing again and that she and her children would not be going to Jackson’s for dinner… it would have been better if Nicole has simply called Jason and told him they couldn’t come. That would have shown him respect instead of leaving Jason to be embarrassed and humiliated in front of his coworkers… This would have been enough to enrage anyone, much less a person suffering from intermittent explosive disorder, or irrational impulse. Now, in fact, I realized that here was a motive!” (Pg. 154) Furthermore, “Jason HAD no alibi on the night of the murders. He himself said that he had gotten off work within the time frame when the murders were believed to have been committed.” (Pg. 158-159)

He wonders [about Jason’s deposition in the civil case], “I couldn’t help but notice the awareness Jason seemed to have of Nicole’s body. Did he have a crush on her? Was she more than a stepmother to him? Could Jason’s attraction to her and her possible rejection have ultimately caused her death?” (Pg. 152) He adds, “It seemed entirely likely now, with what I had uncovered, that the next time Jason was questioned by authorities, it could be as a major suspect in the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.” (Pg. 166)

Reviewing a newspaper story of October 4, 1994 [headline: “O.J.’s Son Tried to Kill His Own Girlfriend”], he comments, “Here… was a dramatic… representation of the exact kind of behavior that could be expected from someone with Jason’s medical and psychological profile. This was a classic textbook case of intermittent rage disorder, and it had allegedly occurred less than two months before Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered.” (Pg. 229) Later, he speculates again, “I couldn’t help but wonder if all of Jason’s problems didn’t revert back to that day that twenty-three-month-old Aaren, Jason’s sister, drowned in the swimming pool… did Jason feel responsible for his sister’s death?” (Pg. 255)

Dear offers “to paint a picture … of what I supposed might have happened that might. Through my scenario was imagined, and would not have held up in a court of law, it was based on the facts as I knew them up to this point in my investigation.” (Pg. 260) He summarizes all the negative factors about Jason (Pg. 313-314; 345-347). He also notes, “Jason Lamar Simpson was never interviewed by the LAPD. He was, however, represented by a top criminal lawyer… who had been retained by O.J. Simpson the day after the murders, not to represent HIM but to represent HIS SON, Jason. Jason refused to cooperate with the LAPD and as a result was never interviewed.” (Pg. 423)

Of O.J.’s failed polygraph, he postulates, “O.J. failing the polygraph test did not really concern me. It was not used in court, thankfully, and only a few people knew of the outcome. It was thirteen years later, I realized that O.J. did not commit the murders but failed the test because he had been at the scene and had withheld crucial evidence. Only time will tell if I am right.” (Pg. 386)

After the Goldman family published Simpson’s book If I Did It], he ruminates, “Now the Goldmans were profiting, which really bothered me. I was invited to appear on the Dr. Phil show in 2008 along with the Goldman family. After giving it a great deal of thought, I made my decision: ‘No.’ If the Goldmans knew what I had uncovered in my investigation, they might not be so adamant about O.J.’s guilt.” (Pg. 436)

While Dear’s book is clearly many cuts above most other “alternative killer” theories, and while he engages in a persuasive case against the character of Jason Simpson, the total absence of any physical evidence placing Jason at the crime scene---contrasted with the evidence against his father---ultimately leaves me quite unpersuaded.

Author William Dear wrote in the Introduction of this 2012 updating of his 2000 book, O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder, “Almost eighteen years ago, I began assembling a team … to look into the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman… My purpose in what became a long journey was not just to write another O.J. book but to seek the truth… I am a private investigator who had to take the road back into the murders the hard way… I do not have the power of subpoena, the right to take depositions, or the right to arrest. That’s why my methods sometimes have to be unorthodox… Beyond the wide-ranging expertise and experience of my team and my own determination, the crucial equipment I possess---more gift than tool---is my ability to enter, intuitively, into the mind of a killer… I have been asked why I did not turn over my investigative report to the proper authorities… I felt my findings might well wind up buried in the political labyrinth of the legal system.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to the 524-page hardcover edition.]

He suggests, “Despite the evidence against him, [Simpson] repeatedly claimed he was innocent of the murders. Here was a man who volunteered to be interviewed by the police, gave the crime lab samples of this blood and… willingly agreed to take a polygraph test. These were not the actions of a guilty man.” (Pg. 9)

He states, “To my mind, the most obvious glitch in the LAPD scenario was the ease with which O.J. allegedly left Rockingham without [Kato] Kaelin having heard him drive away in the Bronco, and the limousine driver’s failure to hear or see his return. As anyone who has ever driven a Bronco can attest, this is not a quiet vehicle.” (Pg. 17)

He acknowledges, “O.J. … made no secret that he had been spying on Nicole… Nor had he established a convincing alibi… he later took, and then failed, his own private polygraph test… These facts suggested to me that indeed O.J. had visited the crime scene, but his actions that night and the next day were not those of a man prepared to be questioned about the murders… It made me wonder whether O.J. was trying to hide something or possibly protect someone.” (Pg. 21)

He argues, “Nearby [the murder scene] were the bedrooms of Nicole and O.J.’s children, Sydney and Justin, who had been asleep when the murders took place. This fact alone---that the children had been home---to my mind, offered one of the most convincing reasons of all why O.J. had either not premeditated the murders, or why O.J. hadn’t committed the murders at all. I believe that… it stretches the imagination to believe that a man who loved his children and… desired that his family be reunited, would not risk stabbing his former wife with their children in close enough proximity to see it happen, or to hear their mother’s anguished cries for help.” (Pg. 28)

He speculates, “if I was right, O.J. had to have a strong motive to go to Nicole’s house that night. What could possibly have made him take that chance? I could only conclude O.J. Simpson had been called to the crime scene by someone he knew and who knew him. O.J. had arrived at Bundy Drive knowing full well that Nicole was dead or at least fearfully expecting it. Either that or he had left for her house because he believed her life was in danger and was going to warn her. He must have grabbed his cap and gloves because he didn’t want to be recognized or leave fingerprints.” (Pg. 40-41) He asserts, “the murders themselves were clearly committed in a wild and uncontrollable rage, suggesting that the killer had a secret passion, obsession, or unrequited love for Nicole.” (Pg. 53)

He identifies Jason Simpson [Simpson’s son from his first marriage] as the killer. “Had Jason been the one to kill Nicole, this might also explain O.J.’s strange behavior after the murders, and why he would be willing to put his life and career in jeopardy… Could he have taken the rap for his son?... That theory made much more sense to me than a conspiracy among drug dealers or a love triangle between retired football players and a divorced Brentwood mother.” (Pg. 68)

Noting that Jason in 1993 “pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of ‘disturbing the peace,” he adds, “I could only read between the lines, but the evidence seemed clear. Jason had attacked his boss with a kitchen knife… at the time the Bundy Drive murders took place, twenty-four-year-old Jason Lamar Simpson was on probation for assault with a deadly weapon.” (Pg. 99-100) He recounts that Jason tried to commit suicide, and his father told a psychiatrist that Jason had a “Chaotic past, involving unstable relationships, alcohol dependence, [and] drug use… [and] had been involved in psychotic incidents in the past.” (Pg. 117)

He offers his theory for the murders: Jason was working as a chef, and Nicole had promised to come with her family to his restaurant. “Nicole never called him back to tell him she and O.J. were arguing again and that she and her children would not be going to Jackson’s for dinner… it would have been better if Nicole has simply called Jason and told him they couldn’t come. That would have shown him respect instead of leaving Jason to be embarrassed and humiliated in front of his coworkers… This would have been enough to enrage anyone, much less a person suffering from intermittent explosive disorder, or irrational impulse. Now, in fact, I realized that here was a motive!” (Pg. 154) Furthermore, “Jason HAD no alibi on the night of the murders. He himself said that he had gotten off work within the time frame when the murders were believed to have been committed.” (Pg. 158-159)

He wonders [about Jason’s deposition in the civil case], “I couldn’t help but notice the awareness Jason seemed to have of Nicole’s body. Did he have a crush on her? Was she more than a stepmother to him? Could Jason’s attraction to her and her possible rejection have ultimately caused her death?” (Pg. 152) He adds, “It seemed entirely likely now, with what I had uncovered, that the next time Jason was questioned by authorities, it could be as a major suspect in the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.” (Pg. 166)

Reviewing a newspaper story of October 4, 1994 [headline: “O.J.’s Son Tried to Kill His Own Girlfriend”], he comments, “Here… was a dramatic… representation of the exact kind of behavior that could be expected from someone with Jason’s medical and psychological profile. This was a classic textbook case of intermittent rage disorder, and it had allegedly occurred less than two months before Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered.” (Pg. 229) Later, he speculates again, “I couldn’t help but wonder if all of Jason’s problems didn’t revert back to that day that twenty-three-month-old Aaren, Jason’s sister, drowned in the swimming pool… did Jason feel responsible for his sister’s death?” (Pg. 255)

Dear offers “to paint a picture … of what I supposed might have happened that might. Through my scenario was imagined, and would not have held up in a court of law, it was based on the facts as I knew them up to this point in my investigation.” (Pg. 260) He summarizes all the negative factors about Jason (Pg. 313-314; 345-347). He also notes, “Jason Lamar Simpson was never interviewed by the LAPD. He was, however, represented by a top criminal lawyer… who had been retained by O.J. Simpson the day after the murders, not to represent HIM but to represent HIS SON, Jason. Jason refused to cooperate with the LAPD and as a result was never interviewed.” (Pg. 423)

Of O.J.’s failed polygraph, he postulates, “O.J. failing the polygraph test did not really concern me. It was not used in court, thankfully, and only a few people knew of the outcome. It was thirteen years later, I realized that O.J. did not commit the murders but failed the test because he had been at the scene and had withheld crucial evidence. Only time will tell if I am right.” (Pg. 386)

After the Goldman family published Simpson’s book If I Did It], he ruminates, “Now the Goldmans were profiting, which really bothered me. I was invited to appear on the Dr. Phil show in 2008 along with the Goldman family. After giving it a great deal of thought, I made my decision: ‘No.’ If the Goldmans knew what I had uncovered in my investigation, they might not be so adamant about O.J.’s guilt.” (Pg. 436)

While Dear’s book is clearly many cuts above most other “alternative killer” theories, and while he engages in a persuasive case against the character of Jason Simpson, the total absence of any physical evidence placing Jason at the crime scene---contrasted with the evidence against his father---ultimately leaves me quite unpersuaded.

Author William Dear wrote in the Introduction of this 2012 updating of his 2000 book, O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder, “Almost eighteen years ago, I began assembling a team … to look into the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman… My purpose in what became a long journey was not just to write another O.J. book but to seek the truth… I am a private investigator who had to take the road back into the murders the hard way… I do not have the power of subpoena, the right to take depositions, or the right to arrest. That’s why my methods sometimes have to be unorthodox… Beyond the wide-ranging expertise and experience of my team and my own determination, the crucial equipment I possess---more gift than tool---is my ability to enter, intuitively, into the mind of a killer… I have been asked why I did not turn over my investigative report to the proper authorities… I felt my findings might well wind up buried in the political labyrinth of the legal system.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to the 524-page hardcover edition.]

He suggests, “Despite the evidence against him, [Simpson] repeatedly claimed he was innocent of the murders. Here was a man who volunteered to be interviewed by the police, gave the crime lab samples of this blood and… willingly agreed to take a polygraph test. These were not the actions of a guilty man.” (Pg. 9)

He states, “To my mind, the most obvious glitch in the LAPD scenario was the ease with which O.J. allegedly left Rockingham without [Kato] Kaelin having heard him drive away in the Bronco, and the limousine driver’s failure to hear or see his return. As anyone who has ever driven a Bronco can attest, this is not a quiet vehicle.” (Pg. 17)

He acknowledges, “O.J. … made no secret that he had been spying on Nicole… Nor had he established a convincing alibi… he later took, and then failed, his own private polygraph test… These facts suggested to me that indeed O.J. had visited the crime scene, but his actions that night and the next day were not those of a man prepared to be questioned about the murders… It made me wonder whether O.J. was trying to hide something or possibly protect someone.” (Pg. 21)

He argues, “Nearby [the murder scene] were the bedrooms of Nicole and O.J.’s children, Sydney and Justin, who had been asleep when the murders took place. This fact alone---that the children had been home---to my mind, offered one of the most convincing reasons of all why O.J. had either not premeditated the murders, or why O.J. hadn’t committed the murders at all. I believe that… it stretches the imagination to believe that a man who loved his children and… desired that his family be reunited, would not risk stabbing his former wife with their children in close enough proximity to see it happen, or to hear their mother’s anguished cries for help.” (Pg. 28)

He speculates, “if I was right, O.J. had to have a strong motive to go to Nicole’s house that night. What could possibly have made him take that chance? I could only conclude O.J. Simpson had been called to the crime scene by someone he knew and who knew him. O.J. had arrived at Bundy Drive knowing full well that Nicole was dead or at least fearfully expecting it. Either that or he had left for her house because he believed her life was in danger and was going to warn her. He must have grabbed his cap and gloves because he didn’t want to be recognized or leave fingerprints.” (Pg. 40-41) He asserts, “the murders themselves were clearly committed in a wild and uncontrollable rage, suggesting that the killer had a secret passion, obsession, or unrequited love for Nicole.” (Pg. 53)

He identifies Jason Simpson [Simpson’s son from his first marriage] as the killer. “Had Jason been the one to kill Nicole, this might also explain O.J.’s strange behavior after the murders, and why he would be willing to put his life and career in jeopardy… Could he have taken the rap for his son?... That theory made much more sense to me than a conspiracy among drug dealers or a love triangle between retired football players and a divorced Brentwood mother.” (Pg. 68)

Noting that Jason in 1993 “pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of ‘disturbing the peace,” he adds, “I could only read between the lines, but the evidence seemed clear. Jason had attacked his boss with a kitchen knife… at the time the Bundy Drive murders took place, twenty-four-year-old Jason Lamar Simpson was on probation for assault with a deadly weapon.” (Pg. 99-100) He recounts that Jason tried to commit suicide, and his father told a psychiatrist that Jason had a “Chaotic past, involving unstable relationships, alcohol dependence, [and] drug use… [and] had been involved in psychotic incidents in the past.” (Pg. 117)

He offers his theory for the murders: Jason was working as a chef, and Nicole had promised to come with her family to his restaurant. “Nicole never called him back to tell him she and O.J. were arguing again and that she and her children would not be going to Jackson’s for dinner… it would have been better if Nicole has simply called Jason and told him they couldn’t come. That would have shown him respect instead of leaving Jason to be embarrassed and humiliated in front of his coworkers… This would have been enough to enrage anyone, much less a person suffering from intermittent explosive disorder, or irrational impulse. Now, in fact, I realized that here was a motive!” (Pg. 154) Furthermore, “Jason HAD no alibi on the night of the murders. He himself said that he had gotten off work within the time frame when the murders were believed to have been committed.” (Pg. 158-159)

He wonders [about Jason’s deposition in the civil case], “I couldn’t help but notice the awareness Jason seemed to have of Nicole’s body. Did he have a crush on her? Was she more than a stepmother to him? Could Jason’s attraction to her and her possible rejection have ultimately caused her death?” (Pg. 152) He adds, “It seemed entirely likely now, with what I had uncovered, that the next time Jason was questioned by authorities, it could be as a major suspect in the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.” (Pg. 166)

Reviewing a newspaper story of October 4, 1994 [headline: “O.J.’s Son Tried to Kill His Own Girlfriend”], he comments, “Here… was a dramatic… representation of the exact kind of behavior that could be expected from someone with Jason’s medical and psychological profile. This was a classic textbook case of intermittent rage disorder, and it had allegedly occurred less than two months before Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered.” (Pg. 229) Later, he speculates again, “I couldn’t help but wonder if all of Jason’s problems didn’t revert back to that day that twenty-three-month-old Aaren, Jason’s sister, drowned in the swimming pool… did Jason feel responsible for his sister’s death?” (Pg. 255)

Dear offers “to paint a picture … of what I supposed might have happened that might. Through my scenario was imagined, and would not have held up in a court of law, it was based on the facts as I knew them up to this point in my investigation.” (Pg. 260) He summarizes all the negative factors about Jason (Pg. 313-314; 345-347). He also notes, “Jason Lamar Simpson was never interviewed by the LAPD. He was, however, represented by a top criminal lawyer… who had been retained by O.J. Simpson the day after the murders, not to represent HIM but to represent HIS SON, Jason. Jason refused to cooperate with the LAPD and as a result was never interviewed.” (Pg. 423)

Of O.J.’s failed polygraph, he postulates, “O.J. failing the polygraph test did not really concern me. It was not used in court, thankfully, and only a few people knew of the outcome. It was thirteen years later, I realized that O.J. did not commit the murders but failed the test because he had been at the scene and had withheld crucial evidence. Only time will tell if I am right.” (Pg. 386)

After the Goldman family published Simpson’s book If I Did It], he ruminates, “Now the Goldmans were profiting, which really bothered me. I was invited to appear on the Dr. Phil show in 2008 along with the Goldman family. After giving it a great deal of thought, I made my decision: ‘No.’ If the Goldmans knew what I had uncovered in my investigation, they might not be so adamant about O.J.’s guilt.” (Pg. 436)

While Dear’s book is clearly many cuts above most other “alternative killer” theories, and while he engages in a persuasive case against the character of Jason Simpson, the total absence of any physical evidence placing Jason at the crime scene---contrasted with the evidence against his father---ultimately leaves me quite unpersuaded.

Author William Dear wrote in the Introduction of this 2012 updating of his 2000 book, O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder, “Almost eighteen years ago, I began assembling a team … to look into the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman… My purpose in what became a long journey was not just to write another O.J. book but to seek the truth… I am a private investigator who had to take the road back into the murders the hard way… I do not have the power of subpoena, the right to take depositions, or the right to arrest. That’s why my methods sometimes have to be unorthodox… Beyond the wide-ranging expertise and experience of my team and my own determination, the crucial equipment I possess---more gift than tool---is my ability to enter, intuitively, into the mind of a killer… I have been asked why I did not turn over my investigative report to the proper authorities… I felt my findings might well wind up buried in the political labyrinth of the legal system.” [NOTE: page numbers below refer to the 524-page hardcover edition.]

He suggests, “Despite the evidence against him, [Simpson] repeatedly claimed he was innocent of the murders. Here was a man who volunteered to be interviewed by the police, gave the crime lab samples of this blood and… willingly agreed to take a polygraph test. These were not the actions of a guilty man.” (Pg. 9)

He states, “To my mind, the most obvious glitch in the LAPD scenario was the ease with which O.J. allegedly left Rockingham without [Kato] Kaelin having heard him drive away in the Bronco, and the limousine driver’s failure to hear or see his return. As anyone who has ever driven a Bronco can attest, this is not a quiet vehicle.” (Pg. 17)

He acknowledges, “O.J. … made no secret that he had been spying on Nicole… Nor had he established a convincing alibi… he later took, and then failed, his own private polygraph test… These facts suggested to me that indeed O.J. had visited the crime scene, but his actions that night and the next day were not those of a man prepared to be questioned about the murders… It made me wonder whether O.J. was trying to hide something or possibly protect someone.” (Pg. 21)

He argues, “Nearby [the murder scene] were the bedrooms of Nicole and O.J.’s children, Sydney and Justin, who had been asleep when the murders took place. This fact alone---that the children had been home---to my mind, offered one of the most convincing reasons of all why O.J. had either not premeditated the murders, or why O.J. hadn’t committed the murders at all. I believe that… it stretches the imagination to believe that a man who loved his children and… desired that his family be reunited, would not risk stabbing his former wife with their children in close enough proximity to see it happen, or to hear their mother’s anguished cries for help.” (Pg. 28)

He speculates, “if I was right, O.J. had to have a strong motive to go to Nicole’s house that night. What could possibly have made him take that chance? I could only conclude O.J. Simpson had been called to the crime scene by someone he knew and who knew him. O.J. had arrived at Bundy Drive knowing full well that Nicole was dead or at least fearfully expecting it. Either that or he had left for her house because he believed her life was in danger and was going to warn her. He must have grabbed his cap and gloves because he didn’t want to be recognized or leave fingerprints.” (Pg. 40-41) He asserts, “the murders themselves were clearly committed in a wild and uncontrollable rage, suggesting that the killer had a secret passion, obsession, or unrequited love for Nicole.” (Pg. 53)

He identifies Jason Simpson [Simpson’s son from his first marriage] as the killer. “Had Jason been the one to kill Nicole, this might also explain O.J.’s strange behavior after the murders, and why he would be willing to put his life and career in jeopardy… Could he have taken the rap for his son?... That theory made much more sense to me than a conspiracy among drug dealers or a love triangle between retired football players and a divorced Brentwood mother.” (Pg. 68)

Noting that Jason in 1993 “pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of ‘disturbing the peace,” he adds, “I could only read between the lines, but the evidence seemed clear. Jason had attacked his boss with a kitchen knife… at the time the Bundy Drive murders took place, twenty-four-year-old Jason Lamar Simpson was on probation for assault with a deadly weapon.” (Pg. 99-100) He recounts that Jason tried to commit suicide, and his father told a psychiatrist that Jason had a “Chaotic past, involving unstable relationships, alcohol dependence, [and] drug use… [and] had been involved in psychotic incidents in the past.” (Pg. 117)

He offers his theory for the murders: Jason was working as a chef, and Nicole had promised to come with her family to his restaurant. “Nicole never called him back to tell him she and O.J. were arguing again and that she and her children would not be going to Jackson’s for dinner… it would have been better if Nicole has simply called Jason and told him they couldn’t come. That would have shown him respect instead of leaving Jason to be embarrassed and humiliated in front of his coworkers… This would have been enough to enrage anyone, much less a person suffering from intermittent explosive disorder, or irrational impulse. Now, in fact, I realized that here was a motive!” (Pg. 154) Furthermore, “Jason HAD no alibi on the night of the murders. He himself said that he had gotten off work within the time frame when the murders were believed to have been committed.” (Pg. 158-159)

He wonders [about Jason’s deposition in the civil case], “I couldn’t help but notice the awareness Jason seemed to have of Nicole’s body. Did he have a crush on her? Was she more than a stepmother to him? Could Jason’s attraction to her and her possible rejection have ultimately caused her death?” (Pg. 152) He adds, “It seemed entirely likely now, with what I had uncovered, that the next time Jason was questioned by authorities, it could be as a major suspect in the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.” (Pg. 166)

Reviewing a newspaper story of October 4, 1994 [headline: “O.J.’s Son Tried to Kill His Own Girlfriend”], he comments, “Here… was a dramatic… representation of the exact kind of behavior that could be expected from someone with Jason’s medical and psychological profile. This was a classic textbook case of intermittent rage disorder, and it had allegedly occurred less than two months before Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered.” (Pg. 229) Later, he speculates again, “I couldn’t help but wonder if all of Jason’s problems didn’t revert back to that day that twenty-three-month-old Aaren, Jason’s sister, drowned in the swimming pool… did Jason feel responsible for his sister’s death?” (Pg. 255)

Dear offers “to paint a picture … of what I supposed might have happened that might. Through my scenario was imagined, and would not have held up in a court of law, it was based on the facts as I knew them up to this point in my investigation.” (Pg. 260) He summarizes all the negative factors about Jason (Pg. 313-314; 345-347). He also notes, “Jason Lamar Simpson was never interviewed by the LAPD. He was, however, represented by a top criminal lawyer… who had been retained by O.J. Simpson the day after the murders, not to represent HIM but to represent HIS SON, Jason. Jason refused to cooperate with the LAPD and as a result was never interviewed.” (Pg. 423)

Of O.J.’s failed polygraph, he postulates, “O.J. failing the polygraph test did not really concern me. It was not used in court, thankfully, and only a few people knew of the outcome. It was thirteen years later, I realized that O.J. did not commit the murders but failed the test because he had been at the scene and had withheld crucial evidence. Only time will tell if I am right.” (Pg. 386)

After the Goldman family published Simpson’s book If I Did It], he ruminates, “Now the Goldmans were profiting, which really bothered me. I was invited to appear on the Dr. Phil show in 2008 along with the Goldman family. After giving it a great deal of thought, I made my decision: ‘No.’ If the Goldmans knew what I had uncovered in my investigation, they might not be so adamant about O.J.’s guilt.” (Pg. 436)

While Dear’s book is clearly many cuts above most other “alternative killer” theories, and while he engages in a persuasive case against the character of Jason Simpson, the total absence of any physical evidence placing Jason at the crime scene---contrasted with the evidence against his father---ultimately leaves me quite unpersuaded.

Waiting 11 years to parade this book out again under a different title doesn't hide the fact that Dear has proven nothing other than the fact he is a shameless self promoter. He has done nothing but offer his weak theories and done nothing to tear apart the solid evidence that still points to OJ as the killer. Dear should have saved himself some time and money and....just done nothing.

Expressed the opinion that OJ was undoubtedly guilty to a class of high school freshman and the next day I was given this book by the father of one of the students with the request that I read it and then tell him if my opinion had changed. Well, I'll be damned if it wasn't. I think the author makes some very good points as to why OJ might not have done the murders, and some very good points as to why Jason Simpson might have. Am I convinced? No. Do I now have reasonable doubt? Yes. The books fairly well written, although the last 100 pages seem to be slapped on so he could sell another book after his first one on this same subject (which I never read or knew about). He certainly does repeat himself a lot. Could have said what needed to be said in a lot less space, but I enjoyed it none the less. It might not be worth a full 4 stars, but 3 1/2 sounds about right.

The most detailed and revealing account of a "true" investigation. Gut wrenching to realize the LAPD was in fact so imcompetent and unwilling to admit they were wrong. Thankfully, OJ was found not guilty. Too bad he is paying the price for someone else. But we all do things in life to protect those we love.

Excellent book. I'm convinced that Jason Simpson should be investigated. I rated this book as 1-Star so that you might read this review (and you are). It is really a 5-Star book. Very convincing.

You should also read Marcia Clark's book, "Without a Doubt". Based on both books, O. J. was at the crime scene. I have read other books on the crime ... these two are the best. William C. Dear spent an enormous amount of money over a period of 17 years during his private investigation.

even before reading this book i always said that things just never added up in the case, because timeline and lack of other factors just never added up and this book brings all of that home and more. very detailed and the night of the horrorable attacks, OJ didn't have anything to match him to what happen at the place. his bronco and his own persona didn't have dripping blood or any other thing to say he was a Guilty Man. i dug what Dr Henry Lee said in the book and it was needed to be said. people will think and feel what they want, however this book flips the script and asks alot of questions which never ever got answer back in the day.

and OJ got frammed in Vegas big time and yet they awarded all his stuff back to him that he was seeking out from the word jump? did OJ do some dumb stuff? yeah and put himself into some suspect situations? yeah however nothing on a whole adds up to the kind of time he has gotten and the fact that timeless and what have you never fully added up. Props to the author.

This is an interesting book with new insights into the victim's lives and behavior as well as a compelling new theory of how the crime may have occurred. I always assumed that the defense claims of a bungled investigation & evidence tampering were just rhetoric to get their client off, but Dear (and his experts) point out how the LAPD bungled the investigation from the beginning & most likely planted evidence to bolster their case. I am still not totally convinced that OJ is innocent, but Jason Simpson should be definitely be looked at. Doesn't seem like it would be that hard for the LAPD to compare his prints & hair to the unknown prints & hair found at the scene. That would answer a lot of questions, but they are probably too entrenched in not being wrong to do that. It is a shame that we may never really know what happened.

I thoroughly enjoyed the book, but am giving it 4 stars for the repetitiveness. Sometimes it felt like each chapter was made to stand alone, and thus repeated a lot of what you knew from the previous chapters. Despite that the new evidence and insights offered make it worth a read.

This is a very interesting read. I have always felt that OJ was guilty. Now, I think that the DNA eveidence could prove he was there but not the killer. The MO for OJ was wrong. I feel that the MO is wrong for the son too. However, the book goes a long way establishing a possible mob or CIA connection, although unwittingly so, with as much as this case was shut down and/ or grand standed.

excellent account of what i think really did occur. i never would have thought that i would have believed oj is innocent. before i read this book however i started to wonder because of someone's (spoiler alert - jason simpson) rage disorder.

Great book. Very informative. Here is a pic from online which shows the eldest son now, with might be his daughters, and he is wearing a wedding band. I hope he is a better father and husband than OJ was.

Whenever you know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about a given event, it answers all questions.

None of us (with the exception of those who were actually there) knows the whole truth about what happened to Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman on June 12, 1994. After the O.J. trial, there were many who simply concluded that O.J. did it. I was one of them, especially when I noticed that O.J. seemed to have trouble finding the "real killer," as he had pledged to do.

That said, I was never 100 percent sure about it, because I felt like there were still a lot of unanswered questions. One of those questions was why it seemed like the LAPD never considered O.J.'s son as a possible suspect. At the time, I knew very little about Jason, so it wasn't that I was persuaded of his guilt. I just wondered why it seemed like he wasn't even being considered.

William Dear's latest book does not answer all of my questions, but it answers a lot of them. I give him a lot of credit. The book is excellent. His theory on what really happened is the most plausible theory I've heard so far regarding the murders. And it provides a lot of valuable information about Jason, the "overlooked suspect." Had this information been available prior to the O.J. trial, I think it would have changed a lot of opinions about who committed the murders.

If you are 100 percent persuaded of O.J.'s guilt, and no facts will persuade you otherwise, this book is not for you.

But even if you are 100 percent persuaded of O.J.'s guilt, if you have a reasonably open mind, I strongly encourage you to read this book. I believe it will change your whole outlook on what happened, how it happened, and who was responsible - assuming you set aside any preconceived notions, and read over the facts and details of Dear's investigation with an open mind.

I went into this book with nothing more than bored curiosity. A co-worker had heard of it and as we talked about it we got a bit more curious. As we looked up the cost we both decided that neither were $20 curious but decided if we split it... for $10 each we would buy it and share.

I have to admit, I was terribly wrong about the book. It was very interesting to me as I read, kept my interest intensely by chapter 2 and couldnt wait to find time to tackle more!!

There were several things about the OJ trial that just did seem to "fit". It all seems so clear to me now..... He was covering for his son... Why had that not occured to me earlier? The amount of time and detail that was invested in researching every angle and possibility was very compelling. So many issues were surfaced that I have come out of this with an absolutely clear mind that this scenerio is completely plausable.

Of course there is only 3 people that absolutely know the truth, the killer, Nicole and Ron. But I would have to say after reading this book it seems FAR more likely OJ covered up another mess for his son.

With the recent publication of William Dear's latest effort to shed more light on the investigation and murders of Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman, I am pleased to learn after some eighteen years that people are open to changing their minds about O.J's guilt. At the same time, I was not pleased to learn nor surprised by the political-legal contradictions that these unsolved murder cases have been officially labeled as closed by the LAPD, the Los Angeles Prosecutor's Office, and the California Attorney General's office. What's more disconcerting is that these state representatives have done so without ever interviewing at least one other relevant person--Simpson's oldest son--who it so happens was nearly arrested by the LAPD on the same day as O.J.'s slow speed Bronco chase on national television. This is also the same individual that William Dear had shown in his earlier book/award winning documentary film, and now buttressed with additional evidence in his new and expanded book should always have been a person of interest. I am referring to Jason Lamar Simpson who should have at a minimum been questioned about, if not charged and prosecuted for, the killings of Nicole and Ron.

What we have here is what could be referred to as a miscarriage of justice in reverse where a suspected person is never incriminated as opposed to the more commonly acknowledged miscarriage of justice where the wrongfully prosecuted is convicted. In the case of O.J. Simpson, while he was not convicted in a criminal court of law, he was convicted in both a civil court for the wrongful deaths and in the court of public opinion. Despite Dear's accounts and his ability to change the minds of professional experts that have heard and seen the evidence amassed by him and his team of investigators, it appears that nothing more will come from their years of work to uncover the truth.

I make this observation and give this review as a professor of criminology and criminal justice for the last 38 years. I also say this from the perspective of the Editor of Representing O.J.: Murder, Criminal Justice, and Mass Culture (Harrow & Heston, 1996), as a twice weekly radio commentator throughout the O.J. criminal trial for Kool Radio, 101 FM in Ann Arbor Michigan, and as one criminologist who believed like most of my professional peers that the jury got it wrong. I am now convinced that the jury got it right but I do not necessarily believe that it was for the right reasons or due to the effectiveness of the Dream Team defense.

In fact, it may very well have been the case that his lawyers actually knew who committed the crime, were not at liberty to reveal the facts behind the crime, and were hamstringed from putting on their ideal criminal defense. On the other hand, if they did not know who killed Nicole or Goldman and/or that O.J. was protecting his son, then it may very well have been the case that the Dream Team was not as good as they were cracked up to be. I suspect it will be years, if ever, before we know what truly went on between O.J., his attorneys, and the prosecution--like the deal made before the criminal trial started between the state and O.J. not to ask for the death penalty if he were found guilty of first-degree murder.

In the meantime, I highly recommend the latest sequel by William Dear on the unsolved murders that became the criminal trial of the twentieth century. The book, even if you are familiar with Dear's previous work on the subject, will still be an eye opener as his fast-paced narrative once again brings home the Dear investigative credos: never assume, always verify and avoid tunnel vision while eliminating all possible suspects. As an added bonus, I found Dear's examination of the intricacies between the relations of domestic and rage violence most illuminating. I think you will find these discussions enlightening too whether you are convinced or not by Dear's investigation and theory.

Just how was the BTK killer caught-his daughters D.N.A. She had a operation and a court order gave police her blood.

Franklin, the Grim Sleeper was caught because his son had a felony gun charge. In both these cases, the police knew

that the children of Radar and Franklin led them to either fathers or uncles(identical twin have the same D.N.A.)

not children and parents. Dear dedicates his absurd book to Joseph Bosco whose hatred of Marcia Clark's great work

on the case know no bounds. She pointed out that the gloves and shoes came from Bloomingdales. Joseph Bosco could not

fathom that the killer would wear ugly hush puppy style shoes to do a murder. What Bosco wrote he would be a dweeb.

His words not mine.When the photo of him in the shoes came out he decided that O.J. and Kardashian conspired to kill

Nicole because of their illegal business dealings. No wonder bozo Bosco left for China. But they have the Internet there.

O.J. and I were classmates in the criminology department at City College in San Francisco. I went on to become a police officer, techer then writer. I can attest to the fact that officers more often than not rush to judgment, because more arrests mean promotions. Few want to lose cases. I can recall telling a judge after closing a case that most of those arrested were not involved, and his response was: "They probably got away with something else!" I was arrested for drunk and disorderly while on leave from basic training and at 70 years of age still don't drink. One false arrest could have ruined my military career and hindered my chances at becoming a police officer.

Law enforcement gets it wrong more often than most want to admit, and we are now paying for many who were wrongly incarcerated in past decades. Goldman should want to be sure that the actual perpetrator was jailed for killing his son. Bill Cosby didn't buy into colloquial nonsense when his son was murdered, because as a black man he had seen too much of what blacks have seen throughout U.S. History. Many are going to respond that it is not about race, and before you do I want to suggest that you do a lot more reading.

This book is complete crap from beginning to end. Bill Dear is not about getting the truth, he is about creating ridiculous theories for attention and to peddle his crappy books. I gave it one star because it is required.

An interesting read but this is such flimsy evidence! Everything mentioned in here has already been debunked and on more than one occasion. Mr. Dear has worked hard on this but I can't say that anything in here makes me think OJ is innocent.

I absolutely loved this book. I read all 576 pages of it in 2 days.

But, I am off the charts analytically inclined. Those who are not probably
never were into the whole mystery of it to begin with.

Mr Dear is devoted, meticulous researcher and investigator. Too bad he
wasn't actually working for the inept LAPD when the whole thing went
down.

The legnths William Dear goes to during this investigation are criminal. If he ever did to me what he did to Jason Simpson, he would be facing a major lawsuit! Does Jason Simpson have no civil rights? What gives this man the right to go through Jason's garbage? He stalks him relentlessly, goes through his mail, and shows up at his work!

The worst part was impersonating a doctor to get some administrative clerk to hand over Jason's MEDICAL RECORDS! Talk about invasion of privacy! Then to PUBLISH everything he found about in his medical records, criminal records, personal diaries as well as deciphering his notes and doodles he found by picking through his trash is reprehensible!
The legnths this man goes to knows no bounds. Jason couldn't even sell his car without Mr Dear running over and buying it back from the man who bought it. Why? He wants to see if there's any blood evidence left from the night of the murders!

I was disgusted when William Dear expressed how he really felt bad for Jason. How badly did you feel? Not bad enough to not PUBLISH his medical issues, mental issues or drinking problems. Nothing Jason Simpson went through in his life was spared. All because William Dear was on this personal vendetta to "prove" it wasn't OJ who committed the murders, but his son Jason.

What he completely glosses over is that the blood found at Bundy the night of the murders MATCHES Oj. On page 271 of "Evidence Dismissed The inside story of the police Investigation of Oj simpson" "Hair consistent with Brown and Goldman's hair was found on the right hand glove." This was the glove found behind the guest house that Kato Kaelin lived in on the Rockingham estate. Oj was returning home, jumped over the fence and dropped the glove here. He was going in the house through this back way rather than the front door, to avoid the limo driver waiting out front for him. He was avoiding him because he was guilty, not because he was covering for his son. He also says Oj should have been covered in blood, if he committed these crimes. Again this was covered at trial. If he slashed and killed both while standing BEHIND the victims, he would have very little blood on him, as it sprayed away and down.

William Dear should read the book "How I helped OJ Get away With Murder" by Mike Gilbert. In it, Oj confesses to Mike by saying "Mike, if she never opened the door with a knife in her hand, she'd be alive today." So you can see, it wasn't OJ covering for Jason. It was OJ.

OJ wants publicity and money so he writes a book - If I Did It. OJ doesn't get attention in jail and wants publicity so he offers the theory that his son did it. Maybe he hired a lawyer for his son because he did not want the police interviewing anyone in his family that had information about OJ's anger and violence towards Nicole Brown Simpson. Why publish this now? OJ doesn't like being a nobody in prison.