PDA

View Full Version : Exclusive: Ex-manager says OJ Simpson confessed



Jolie Rouge
05-10-2008, 03:39 PM
Ex-manager says OJ Simpson confessed
By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP Special Correspondent
Sat May 10, 12:54 PM ET

LOS ANGELES - A memorabilia dealer who profited from O.J. Simpson for many years is the latest former crony to write a tell-all book, this one alleging a groggy Simpson, high on marijuana, confessed to killing his ex-wife after he was acquitted.

Mike Gilbert also claims he helped his former friend wiggle out of the murder charges by suggesting how to bloat his hands so they wouldn't fit the notorious bloody gloves.

Gilbert's book, "How I Helped O.J. Get Away With Murder: The Shocking Inside Story of Violence, Loyalty, Regret and Remorse" (Regnery Publishing, 232 pages, $27.95), is due in stores Monday. It was released to The Associated Press in advance.

He said Simpson had smoked pot, took a sleeping pill and was drinking beer when he confided at his Brentwood home weeks after his trial what happened the night of June 12, 1994. Simpson said he went to his ex-wife's condominium, but did not bring a knife with him. Simpson told him Nicole Brown Simpson had one in her hand when she opened the door.

In a soft mumble, Simpson told him: "If she hadn't opened that door with a knife in her hand ... she'd still be alive."

"Nothing more needed to be said," Gilbert writes. "O.J. had confessed to me. There's no doubt in my mind."

Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were stabbed to death at the entrance to her condominium. The knife was never found.

Simpson's current lawyer Yale Galanter said none of Gilbert's claims are true and that Gilbert is "a delusional drug addict who needs money. He's fallen on very hard times. He is in trouble with the IRS."

"I've talked to O.J. about it," said Galanter, who refused to allow Simpson to comment directly because of his upcoming robbery trial in Las Vegas. "This stuff not only didn't occur but it's not factually supported by the evidence."

The name calling and accusations on both sides showed that deep wounds persist.

In a phone interview, Gilbert called Galanter "an ambulance chaser and an enabler and denier for O.J. I know. I used to do the same thing. I understand the game."

He acknowledged he has IRS problems which he says were caused by Simpson but said, "I could take a drug test and pass it. I highly doubt that O.J. could."

Gilbert is the second sports memorabilia dealer to write a Simpson book this year. Thomas Riccio, who arranged a Las Vegas memorabilia sale that led to Simpson's armed robbery arrest, penned "Busted" last month.

Simpson himself participated in the controversial book, "If I Did It" which he claimed was not a confession. It was withdrawn by the publisher and eventually released last year by the Goldman family to help satisfy a $33.5 million wrongful death judgment.

Gilbert said he continued to represent Simpson for another decade after the alleged confession, hawking items with his autograph, hiding the profits and helping Simpson shield his possessions so they could not be seized by the Goldman family.

Gilbert also claims that he counseled the jailed Simpson during his murder trial to stop taking his arthritis medicine so his hands would swell up and not fit the bloody gloves in court. He offers no proof Simpson followed his advice or that he was taking any medicine, but the drama that played out in court when the gloves didn't fit was central to Simpson's defense.

The prosecutors in Simpson's murder trial, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, could not immediately be reached for comment on Gilbert's claims.

Former Gilbert partner Bruce Fromong, who was involved in the Vegas incident, said Gilbert is known for spinning tall tales. "Mike makes up a lot of great stories," said Fromong. "Mike Gilbert has a ton of skeletons in his closet. He's as dirty as anyone."

Gilbert said he broke with Simpson two years ago because he felt cheated, didn't approve of his lifestyle and was repulsed by "If I Did It" He writes that he was guided to do his own the book by dreams in which he saw the ghosts of his dead grandmother and of Nicole Brown Simpson.

He refers to himself in the book as a "Judas," and says he is betraying Simpson because he's ashamed of what he did and wants to soothe his conscience. He responded to Fromong's criticism by saying he's made mistakes and isn't trying to clean up his image with the book.

He writes that he was not alone in helping Simpson beat the murder charges, but "I hope to be the first to finally confess."

Gilbert said he funneled money from autograph signing appearances to Simpson under the table so the Goldman family could not get it. Gilbert said he paid Simpson 80 percent, kept 20 percent but had to pay taxes on the whole amount. He said Simpson repeatedly told him they'd settle up later.

But they never did and when pushed Simpson reminded him of the Goldman debt: "Hey, at least you don't owe $33.5 million."

"Yeah, I didn't kill anybody either," Gilbert replied. Simpson scowled.

He offers apologies to the dead Nicole Simpson, whom he said he never liked, and to the Goldman family. "He offers an apology for money laundering?" said Goldman attorney David Cook. "I don't think we want the apology. I think we need the money. Send us a check, not an I'm sorry."

He said he plans to use the book as a treasure map to Simpson's hidden assets.

Gilbert, 53, was a childhood fan of Simpson who was thrilled when another client, football great Marcus Allen, introduced them and they began doing business together.

Gilbert wrote in his book that he was admitted to a world of privilege and he got caught up in a power trip in which he believed he was better than "ordinary people."

Gilbert blames himself and other Simpson friends for failing to act when they detected domestic violence in the Simpson marriage. But he says each time there was a fight between the couple or a call by Nicole to police it was dismissed as part of their obsession with each other or they pretended it didn't happen. "O.J. mattered more," he said. "The fringe benefits that came with being one of O.J.'s friends mattered more — or at least we thought they did."

Gilbert wrote the book for many reasons. It wasn't just to make money or hurt Simpson. "Nothing can hurt O.J.," he said in an interview. "He doesn't have the emotions we have."

In a chapter on the Las Vegas case, he acknowledges that Simpson was in search of memorabilia he believed Gilbert stole from him, including the suit he wore the day he was acquitted. "I never sold the suit, not even when I was dead broke," he writes. "At least that's something small to be proud of."

But Gilbert does acknowledge that he unsuccessfully tried to sell the suit at one point — before he sold his book.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080510/ap_on_re_us/oj_simpson;_ylt=At2UAv.g2Se_qpYLlNAssQas0NUE



Gilbert's book, "How I Helped O.J. Get Away With Murder: The Shocking Inside Story of Violence, Loyalty, Regret and Remorse" (Regnery Publishing, 232 pages, $27.95), is due in stores Monday. It was released to The Associated Press in advance.

... and it will be in the *dollar* bins in six months ....

buglebe
05-10-2008, 05:56 PM
Is there any one left who thinks OJ is innocent?

Njean31
05-10-2008, 07:04 PM
Is there any one left who thinks OJ is innocent?

prob the majority of people voting for obama:2in1:

gmyers
05-10-2008, 07:13 PM
I believe OJ definitely killed them. But I don't trust anyone thats writing a book. They'll say anything that will help their book sell.

ssgjeg
05-10-2008, 11:54 PM
prob the majority of people voting for obama:2in1:

Probably just as delusional. :fool

kidzpca
05-11-2008, 05:51 AM
Is there any one left who thinks OJ is innocent?

Don't look at me. OJ is about as innocent as the Devil.

flute
05-11-2008, 06:12 AM
I believe OJ definitely killed them. But I don't trust anyone thats writing a book.

Really? You should read OJ's book - I read parts of it and he really reveals some things in it - I do believe what he says ~ and even the victim's families are urging people to read the book OJ wrote.

ilovecats
05-11-2008, 05:48 PM
Really? You should read OJ's book - I read parts of it and he really reveals some things in it - I do believe what he says ~ and even the victim's families are urging people to read the book OJ wrote.

I read it.If there is anyone out there that believes he is innocent,please read the book!!!He even describes how he did it.

janelle
05-11-2008, 08:58 PM
Rats finally ratting on each other. I can believe what he says. They all have huge egos and want to tell what they know. They want money but stop it and they will jump ship to tell their what they know.

April78945
05-11-2008, 09:44 PM
Can't they try him again if "new evidence" comes into play? I would think a that a co-conspirator confessing would be new evidence and he should also be in jail for helping OJ.
All I can say is, he is damn lucky he didn't do that to anyone in MY family. He'd be chained to a chair in my attic and tortured until he dies of the festering wounds after years of abuse.

PrincessArky
05-12-2008, 04:33 AM
I would love to say I am shocked but............

candygirl
05-12-2008, 04:51 AM
Who else is left to write a book ,the dog door next door?

It's all about the money:mad:

hblueeyes
05-12-2008, 05:53 AM
yep, money is a funnt thing. Hope they charge this man with a crime since he got rid of the evidence. That would be a hoot.

Me

dangerousfem
05-12-2008, 06:49 AM
Can't they try him again if "new evidence" comes into play?

unfortunately no.... once acquitted.. you can't be put on trial for the same crime again.

janelle
05-12-2008, 03:22 PM
I thought murder was the exception. ???

dangerousfem
05-12-2008, 05:06 PM
not that I am aware of.. its called double jeopardy


__________________________________________________ _________________

The double jeopardy rule arises from the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the relevant clause of which reads
“ nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb ”

This clause is intended to limit abuse by the government in repeated prosecution for the same offense as a means of harassment or oppression. It is also in harmony with the common law concept of res judicata which prevents courts from relitigating issues which have already been the subject of a final judgment.

More specifically, as stated in Ashe v. Swenson, 397 US 436 (1970), "when an issue of ultimate fact has once been determined by a valid and final judgment, that issue cannot again be litigated between the same parties in any future lawsuit." Res Judicata is a term of general application. Underneath that conceptual umbrella is the concept of Collateral Estoppel. As applied to Double Jeopardy, the court will use Collateral Estoppel as its basis for forming an opinion.

There are three essential protections included in the double jeopardy principle, which are

* being retried for the same crime after an acquittal
* retrial after a conviction, and
* being punished multiple times for the same offense.

This rule is occasionally referred to as a legal technicality because it allows defendants a defense that does not address whether the crime was actually committed. For example were police to uncover new evidence conclusively proving the guilt of someone previously acquitted there is little they can do because the defendant may not be tried again - at least not on the same or substantially similar charge. Fong Foo v. United States, 369 US 141 (1962)

Though the Fifth Amendment initially applied only to the federal government the US Supreme Court has ruled that the double jeopardy clause applies to the states as well through incorporation by the Fourteenth amendment. (Benton v. Maryland)

Jeopardy attaches in a jury trial once the jury and alternates are impaneled and sworn in. In a non-jury trial jeopardy attaches once the first evidence is put on which occurs when the first witness is sworn.

ilovecats
05-12-2008, 05:39 PM
:yeah He could go right to the media and confess and nothing will happen.

ssgjeg
05-12-2008, 11:33 PM
I thought murder was the exception. ???

I think you're thinking of the statute of limitations. Murder is the only one that doesn't have one.

flute
05-14-2008, 06:28 PM
not that I am aware of.. its called double jeopardy


I get that but ther'es always people being re-tried for crimes, murder included, what's that about, is DJ only for the filthy stinking rich or what?

dangerousfem
05-14-2008, 06:34 PM
you can not be tried (sp?) for the same crime. They can try to bring different charges against a person if new evidence is found... but thats it.

flute
05-14-2008, 06:35 PM
That's all well & good but didn't answer my ?

dangerousfem
05-14-2008, 06:39 PM
Which ? Rich or poor.. you can not be put on trail for the same crime.. once you are found innocent.. thats it..

PrincessArky
05-15-2008, 05:53 AM
Which ? Rich or poor.. you can not be put on trail for the same crime.. once you are found innocent.. thats it..

yep exactly......the only way someone could re retried for the same crime is if it ended in a hung jury which OJ's case didnt

Njean31
05-15-2008, 07:09 AM
yep exactly......the only way someone could re retried for the same crime is if it ended in a hung jury which OJ's case didnt

OR...if the crime occured on federal property or the person was in the military then it can be retried through the fed system.

http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=262428

if you'll read down in that article towards the end, it say's it there. this case in particular, i'm so glad they are retrying him.

PrincessArky
05-15-2008, 07:15 AM
OR...if the crime occured on federal property or the person was in the military then it can be retried through the fed system.

http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=262428

if you'll read down in that article towards the end, it say's it there. this case in particular, i'm so glad they are retrying him.

OMG that case is sick did you read this part

In 1988, Hennis was awarded a new trial. The N.C. Supreme Court had decided that the prosecutor in the first trial overused gruesome crime scene and autopsy photos to rile up the jury’s emotions and compensate for an otherwise weak case.

The decision set a precedent that defense lawyers continue to cite when sparring with prosecutors over the presentation of photos in North Carolina murder trials.

I cant believe that was used to get him a new trial the 2nd time around then that jury found him NOT guilty...........this is one loop hole that I am glad the feds have...being able to retry him again

Njean31
05-15-2008, 07:19 AM
OMG that case is sick did you read this part

In 1988, Hennis was awarded a new trial. The N.C. Supreme Court had decided that the prosecutor in the first trial overused gruesome crime scene and autopsy photos to rile up the jury’s emotions and compensate for an otherwise weak case.

The decision set a precedent that defense lawyers continue to cite when sparring with prosecutors over the presentation of photos in North Carolina murder trials.

I cant believe that was used to get him a new trial the 2nd time around then that jury found him NOT guilty...........this is one loop hole that I am glad the feds have...being able to retry him again

yeah, the whole thing was sick. i saw the pics of this crime scene.....my brother worked for the county id unit at the time. it's the worst thing i've ever seen in my life. i wished i hadn't looked at them. the little children were like 2 and 3 and their little chests and necks were cut. his dna was there and after all these years, they finally connected him to it. it's a shame he's been free for over 20 years though.

hblueeyes
05-15-2008, 07:22 AM
I would rather see a guilty man free than an innocent man in prison.

Me

PrincessArky
05-15-2008, 07:24 AM
yeah, the whole thing was sick. i saw the pics of this crime scene.....my brother worked for the county id unit at the time. it's the worst thing i've ever seen in my life. i wished i hadn't looked at them. the little children were like 2 and 3 and their little chests and necks were cut. his dna was there and after all these years, they finally connected him to it. it's a shame he's been free for over 20 years though.

I cant even begin to imagine what those little darlings went through :(