O.J. Simpson’s Estate Shuts Down Kim Kardashian’s $15K Offer for Iconic Bible

O.J. Simpson‘s estate isn’t making any exceptions.

Following Kim Kardashian’s effort to secretly acquire a Bible that belonged to her deceased father and former NFL player, Robert Kardashian Sr., given by her late dad, the executor, Malcolm LaVergne, turned down her $15,000 offer.

He explained to People in an interview on March 13 that the expense was the reason he had no other option. Essentially, he asked: Why should I invest $15,000 from my estate or spend $15,000 on legal fees to sell it for just $15,000 to Kim? In simpler terms, he couldn’t afford to sell the item at a loss.

As the item was previously bound by a court-ordered auction, he explained to the media that challenging the contract would be pricier than what Kim was prepared to pay for it.

Malcolm, responsible for liquidating O.J.’s assets to clear debts after his passing in April 2024, emphasized that this situation is a zero-sum game. He explained that it’s not an effective business approach because if Kim had offered $150,000 for the asset, they would have needed to take legal action outside of the auction to secure the sale.

Instead, he advised Kim to purchase the item, which is currently up for bid at $9,800, directly from the auction site. He also mentioned that she might be able to secure it at a lower price than the $15,000, so who knows.

TopMob News has reached out to Kim’s reps for comment and has not yet heard back.

The Bible contains a letter from Robert, written to O.J., dated June 19, 1994 – the day after the ex-athlete was taken into custody for the murders of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman. (Although he was not convicted in the 1995 criminal trial, he was held responsible in a civil case from 1997.)

Here’s a recommendation: This book can guide you, revealing God’s affectionate messages. He speaks to you through His words, so make it a daily habit to read this book. Remember, God has a unique purpose for your life, and as His child, He intends to use you once more. Know that I care for you, and so does God.

As a devoted admirer, I couldn’t help but notice the distinctive details of this extraordinary artifact up for auction. Not only does it bear Robert’s name, elegantly etched in gold on its cover, but it also shows signs of age and handling, as if it were a treasured heirloom passed down through generations.

Robert Kardashian, a friend of O.J. Simpson and member of his defense team during the murder trial, also happened to be the patriarch of the Kardashian family. Tragically, he passed away from esophageal cancer in 2003. In the midst of the trial, his relationship with O.J. became strained as his ex-wife, Kris Jenner (who also shares daughters Kourtney and Khloe Kardashian, as well as son Robert Kardashian Jr., with him), sided with Nicole Brown Simpson’s family. This created a division within their household.

Regardless of the intricate family situation, Kim – mother to North West (11), Saint West (9), Chicago West (7), and Psalm West (5) with her former partner Kanye West – acknowledged that it was her father who sparked her interest in pursuing a career in criminal justice. In fact, she is currently studying law to establish herself as a legal professional.

She expressed in the 2020 Oxygen documentary Kim Kardashian West: The Justice Project, “There are instances when I feel overwhelmed, studying late into the night, and I’m left wondering how he managed it all – a father of four who was likely dealing with similar challenges as me. It would have been fascinating to discuss this with him, and I’m certain that he would be immensely proud.

For more about the trial of O.J. Simpson, read on.

In 1977, O.J. Simpson first crossed paths with Nicole Brown, marking the end of his marriage to Marguerite in 1979. They exchanged wedding vows on February 2, 1985, and their daughter Sydney joined their family eight months later. Their son Justin arrived in 1988.

Nicole stated to the police when they arrived at the Simpson residence on 360 N. Rockingham Ave., a wealthy neighborhood in L.A.’s Brentwood district, responding to a domestic violence call during the early hours of January 1, 1989, that “You all never take action,” she said. “You never do anything. You arrive. You’ve been here eight times now. Yet, you never intervene regarding him.

Simpson claimed he hadn’t violently attacked Nicole; instead, he asserted that he merely shoved her off the bed. Later, when told he had to accompany the police officers to the station, he opted to leave in his car instead. A few days afterwards, at the station, Nicole expressed she wasn’t keen on the prosecution continuing but agreed to mediation outside of court.

Back in 1989, on the 24th day of May, I found myself standing before the judge, heart pounding, as I faced the consequences of my actions. After a plea bargain for a misdemeanor domestic violence charge, I was sentenced to 24 months of probation, ordered to serve 120 hours in community service, and pay a total fine of $470. To top it off, I was instructed to attend counseling sessions twice a week, which I was fortunate enough to do over the phone. That day still haunts me, a stark reminder of my mistakes and the path I chose to walk.

In February 1992, after some time, Nicole decided to leave with Justin and Sydney, and filed for divorce. They reached an agreement in October of the same year. O.J., being the one, promised to give her a large sum of $433,750 upfront, along with $10,000 every month as child support, while she kept ownership of a rental property’s title. Later on, in January 1994, she purchased a condo at 875 S. Bundy Drive, Brentwood, and shifted there.

Simultaneously, Simpson was both making threats and attempting reconciliation. As stated by prosecutors and witnesses, O.J. reportedly stood outside and peered in through her window on several occasions, one of which was when she was with a boyfriend. According to Jeffrey Toobin’s 1996 book “The Run of His Life”, Nicole wrote in her diary entry from June 3, 1994 that Simpson had recently threatened her: “‘You hung up on me last night, you’re going to pay for this…You think you can do anything you want, you’re going to get it.’

On June 7, 1994, she reached out to a women’s shelter in Santa Monica, expressing her distress over being stalked by her ex-partner. Tragically, five days after this call, she lost her life.

TIME faced criticism for darkening O.J.’s complexion when they published his mug shot on their cover in June 1994, with critics claiming it was exploiting the stereotype of the Black male murder suspect and noting that Newsweek had run the same photo without altering the color.

The managing editor James R. Gaines clarified in a post on an old AOL message board (AOL Time Warner) that neither TIME nor the artist intended any racial undertones; however, it was confirmed that the LAPD-provided photo was given to the artist to create cover art for the story, allowing him to interpret and portray it as he wished.

Gaines stated, “I understand that some might interpret my statement as implying racism when I suggested that connecting ‘black’ with ‘sinister’ could offend people. However, if it did cause any distress, let me make it clear that I deeply apologize for any discomfort I may have caused.

Numerous books have been penned regarding this particular case, among them being O.J.’s 2007 book titled “If I Did It: Confessions of a Killer“. However, his initial literary offering, published on January 7, 1995, was the book “I Want to Tell You“, which hit the shelves as the trial was just starting.

The book, allegedly containing responses from the defendant to thousands of letters he received while in prison, aimed to counteract the image the prosecution intended to create of a cruel abuser who had fulfilled all his warnings. The book went on to sell over 650,000 copies.

19 years prior to the acclaimed, Emmy-winning miniseries “The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story” and Oscar-winning documentary “O.J.: Made in America” by Ezra Edelman, a television drama titled “The O.J. Simpson Story” was hastily produced by Fox, focusing mainly on the tumultuous relationship between O.J. and Nicole.

In this version, I aimed to maintain the original structure while making it more conversational and easy to read.

The New York Times described it as a film that the defense team might prefer not to have the jury watch, and a seemingly unintentional counterweight to O.J.’s self-advantaging book.

Fox made a point of not airing the TV movie until the jury had been sequestered.

During the O.J. Simpson trial, Marcia Clark deliberately chose not to call Jill Shively, who reportedly witnessed O.J. in his white Bronco driving swiftly on Bundy after 10:45 PM on the night of the murders, as a witness. Furthermore, Clark advised the grand jury to disregard Shively’s testimony, stating that she couldn’t ethically ask them to consider evidence she didn’t fully trust.

Clark was infuriated because Shively had met with Hard Copy before her scheduled testimony, and the prosecutor believed they had sufficient other witnesses and evidence to convict O.J., making an additional link between him and the crime scene at the right time unnecessary.

In the account detailed in “The Run of His Life,” O.J. Simpson performed poorly on a lie detector test that was orchestrated by his defense attorney Robert Shapiro, registering a score of -24. Although polygraph results cannot be used as evidence in court, they can significantly influence the direction of an investigation and aid defense attorneys in devising their most effective strategies.

Alan Dershowitz, who often offered counsel to defense teams nationwide while teaching at Harvard, stated in 2016 – as FX’s “The People v. O.J. Simpson” sparked widespread conversation – that the disclosure of polygraph test results possibly indicated a breach of attorney-client privilege.

Dershowitz stated that only four individuals in total were privy to the lie-detector test information, and he was not one of them. The four people involved were Robert Kardashian, who has since passed away, Bob Shapiro, O.J. Simpson, and the individual who administered the lie-detector test.

However, maybe there were more.

In 2019, as an ardent admirer looking back, I, F. Lee Bailey, expressed my disapproval towards my co-counsel, Mr. Shapiro, to Huffington Post’s Highline. I was never his fan, then or now. On the first day of the O.J. Simpson case, he made a grave mistake by administering a polygraph test that was utterly unsuitable under the circumstances. Giving such tests is a big no-no and, after realizing his blunder, he called me in a panic asking for advice. My response? “First, stop being so imprudent! For heaven’s sake, call before you give the polygraph test!” I had seen the test results before he destroyed them, and they were nothing but worthless junk. Regrettably, Shapiro chose not to respond to my criticism.

It was believed by the prosecution that O.J. Simpson couldn’t have acted alone in the crime, as TIME later detailed, and they designated officers to monitor O.J.’s childhood friend and confidant Al Cowlings, as well as his grown son Jason (from his first marriage). However, no evidence was ever found that confirmed the defendant had a co-conspirator.

On June 17, 1994, O.J., sitting in the backseat, while Cowlings drove, surrendered and was arrested during a 50-mile chase across various L.A. freeways in his white Ford Bronco. He was held without bail throughout the trial. The cost of his suicide watch confinement totaled $81,000, with his daily incarceration averaging approximately $55.69 thereafter.

According to the L.A. County auditor’s office, the case cost the city about $800,000 a month.

Prior to Marcia Clark inviting Christopher Darden onto her team, he had been overseeing the investigation of O.J. Simpson (Cowlings), initially suspected of helping a fugitive. However, the District Attorney’s office decided not to prosecute him due to insufficient evidence.

10 different lawyers were involved in O.J.’s case, including civil rights activist Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro, F. Lee Bailey, DNA experts Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld from The Innocence Project, Cochran’s associates Carl Douglas and Shawn Holley, O.J.’s longtime friend Robert Kardashian, Gerald Uelmen who was then the dean of Santa Clara University’s law school, and Alan Dershowitz. While some drew more attention than others and half didn’t speak in court, all of them contributed to O.J.’s legal defense.

In 2003, Kardashian succumbed to esophageal cancer, while Cochran passed away from brain cancer in 2005. Shapiro shifted his law firm towards civil litigation following the trial and jointly established LegalZoom; after his son’s overdose-related death in 2005, he launched the Brent Shapiro Foundation to raise awareness about substance abuse issues. Douglas and Holley continue their careers as trial attorneys, handling numerous celebrity clients.

In 2006, Uelmen became the executive director of the California Commission on Fair Justice Administration. Meanwhile, Scheck and Neufeld are professors at Yeshiva University’s Cardozo School of Law. Bailey, who was later disbarred in both Florida and Massachusetts, passed away in 2021. Dershowitz stopped teaching in 2013 and has recently been in the news due to his past legal representation of Jeffrey Epstein and his vocal criticisms of the investigation into whether President Donald Trump conspired with Russia (he clarified that this was not a defense of Trump, but rather a defense of due process and civil liberties).

Brian “Kato” Kaelin, an aspiring actor, had been staying in O.J. Simpson’s guest house, but he first moved into Nicole Brown’s guest house in January 1993, a month after they met in Aspen. His intention was to move into the Bundy condo to assist with the children, as he testified, but instead chose O.J.’s property because he preferred to minimize his interactions with his ex-wife Kaelin.

On June 12th, as recalled by Kaelin, O.J. returned home from his daughter Sydney’s dance recital and informed him that Nicole was hindering his time with Sydney. He expressed dissatisfaction over the tight dress Nicole wore that evening. Later, around 9:40 p.m., they both visited McDonald’s before returning.

Approximately ten forty-five in the evening, he became aware of three strong knocks against his wall. Upon venturing outside, Kaelin found nothing but a waiting limousine. The chauffeur, Allan Park, later attested to having witnessed O.J. entering the residence at ten fifty-five p.m.

11 p.m. saw O.J. stepping out and Kaelin aiding him in loading his suitcases into the limousine, except for a backpack that O.J. wanted to place in the trunk himself. This was what Kaelin declared under oath. Park then chauffeured O.J. to LAX, where he had a flight scheduled for 11:45 p.m. to Chicago. He returned to L.A. on a 12:10 p.m. flight the following day.

On the talk show OWN’s Where Are They Now?, Kaelin stated that during his time, there were continual death threats against him. He received numerous faxes urging, “Kato must die.

In a conversation with Barbara Walters back in 2015, Kaelin expressed his belief about his former acquaintance by saying, “From what I think, yes, I believe he is indeed culpable.

Kato Kaelin was quite acquainted with the Simpson family, to the extent that Justin and Sydney named their dog after him. It was actually Kato the Akita who’s barks were frantic, which led a neighbor, out walking his own dog, towards Nicole’s house around 10:15 p.m. Since he wasn’t sure who owned the Akita, this neighbor decided to bring it home temporarily, with plans to search for its owner later on.

However, Kato appeared quite anxious, so the pair escorted him outdoors. Remarkably, the canine guided them towards Nicole’s residence. Upon arrival, they discovered a woman lying in a puddle of blood on the pathway right behind the gate.

The Italian shoe brand, Bruno Magli, garnered unexpected attention as a footprint left at a crime scene was found to correspond with a size-12 Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoe.

In a different turn of phrase, O.J. initially asserted that he didn’t possess those particular footwear items and later stated in his civil trial deposition that he would never don “unattractive” shoes. However, photographs emerged at a later date revealing him wearing the brand on two distinct occasions.

Sam Poser, an associate buyer from Bloomingdale’s men’s shoe department who once interacted with O.J., described him as very amiable. In 2016, he shared with Footwear News that he showed O.J. a pair of Lorenzos but couldn’t recall if the football star purchased them. He mentioned that O.J. bought numerous dress-casual items, focusing on comfort. However, Poser remembered what O.J. didn’t buy more distinctly than the shoe he sold him. After the criminal trial ended, a photograph emerged showing O.J. wearing Bruno Magli shoes at a Bills game. In the subsequent civil case, it was agreed that he indeed wore those shoes. If they had found that photo before the criminal trial, it could have significantly altered the outcome.

As an ardent admirer looking back, I can’t help but share a fascinating tidbit about the defense strategy in the O.J. Simpson trial. The esteemed attorney Carl Douglas later revealed to Dateline that our beloved hero’s Rockingham Avenue residence underwent a subtle transformation before the jury visited it. The goal was to give the impression that O.J., despite his tarnished image, was deeply connected with his cultural heritage. They swapped out a partially exposed photo of girlfriend Paula Barbieri for African art and replaced it with a picture of O.J.’s mother instead.

Cheri Lewis, the Deputy District Attorney, contended that emotional items like family photos or his trophy room in O.J.’s residence might influence jurors unfairly. Particularly noteworthy was the fact that Nicole’s apartment was emptied of personal belongings such as furniture and keepsakes, a place where she resided with her children.

The tour of the Bundy crime scene provided the jury with a visit to O.J.’s residence, allowing them to gauge the distance between that location and the crime scene, and consider if it was feasible for O.J. to have committed the murders of Nicole and Goldman, subsequently returning to his house in time to board a 11:45 p.m. flight with limo driver Allan Park to Chicago.

As a seasoned lifestyle expert, I often find myself juggling multiple roles, much like Alan Dershowitz during the O.J. Simpson trial. Though I was primarily engaged with my daily responsibilities as a professor at Harvard Law School, I still managed to be an integral part of O.J.’s defense team from a distance.

During the trial, I would keep a close eye on events unfolding by tuning into CNN and Court TV, both of which were broadcasting live coverage. In between lectures and grading papers, I’d jot down my insights and send real-time memos to my fellow attorneys right there in the courtroom, ensuring we were all on the same page throughout the proceedings.

In his interview with the Christian Science Monitor back in February 1995, he stated that this trial could be considered as the pioneer of the 21st century in certain aspects. He further expressed his belief that having a lawyer outside the courtroom who can swiftly access research resources is the way forward for future legal cases. He suggested that an increasing number of large law firms dealing with intricate litigation will adopt this model.

Judge Lance Ito contemplated halting the transmission of cameras showing the trial (he stopped them from airing gruesome crime scene images), but the defense advocated for the public’s right to witness the entire narrative unfold. As many recall, the hearing became a captivating spectacle that people couldn’t afford to miss.

Simultaneously, Ito was acutely aware (and somewhat apprehensive) about his personal publicity, and he reveled in the limelight that came his way, such as appearances on shows like “The Tonight Show With Jay Leno” during their regular “Dancing Itos” segment.

Peter Neufeld shared later that he initially found it fantastic and cherished the experience, hoping we all would too, as reported by TIME. However, on a professional level, it was utterly unacceptable, he emphasized, for a judge overseeing a murder case where two lives were brutally taken and a third person’s fate hangs in the balance, to display comic performances within the chambers to lawyers.

In simpler terms, Chris Darden aimed to prevent the jury from listening to a tape where Mark Fuhrman used a racial slur, arguing that doing so might deeply disturb the African-American jurors (who formed the majority of the panel), potentially creating bias against Fuhrman.

If you give Mr. Cochran permission to employ that term and play the racial card, then the nature and emphasis of the case will shift: it will be viewed as a case centered around race.

Johnnie Cochran wasn’t having it.

The experienced activist and lawyer expressed regret that Mr. Darden appeared to defend such a person, he stated this during his criticism of the opposing attorney. Following this, Cochran embraced O.J. and departed for a funeral.

In 2001, Cochran recounted to TIME that he had advised Darden not to bring Fuhrman into the case. However, he expressed his disappointment when Darden did exactly that, presenting a book by Andrew Hacker titled “Two Nations” to the judge. The book contained a term considered highly offensive, and Darden was suggesting that if the jurors heard this word, it would shift the focus of the trial from whether the brothers were receiving a fair trial to whether people on the street thought so. Cochran’s initial response was to tell Darden not to use that word.

Burning with indignation, every fiber of my being resonated with this affront. It wasn’t just an insult to him, but a slap in the face to our entire Black community. In that moment, I let my true feelings pour forth, unscripted and raw from the depths of my heart.

The notorious oversized leather gloves discovered at the crime scene, along with another one found behind O.J.’s residence, formed a set similar to a pair Nicole had purchased for her husband in 1990 from Bloomingdale’s. Remarkably, only 200 pairs of this specific type were sold across the nation that year.

A small amount of DNA from Goldman was detected on the glove recovered at Rockingham, and fibers from that glove matched the carpeting in O.J.’s Bronco. Additionally, traces of blood belonging to both O.J., Nicole, and Goldman were discovered within the Bronco. Furthermore, a sock bearing drops of both O.J.’s and Nicole’s blood was uncovered in his bedroom.

As a die-hard admirer putting this in my own words, I’d say: I can’t help but wonder if, on one of his visits to Bundy, I might have carelessly left traces of myself behind – my blood, perhaps. The account of how and when I sliced my finger kept shifting, initially claiming it happened in the Windy City, but later recounting the incident took place in L.A., with a curious twist: I allegedly reopened that old wound back in Chicago.

In the courtroom, under Darden’s pressure and against Clark’s objections, while the defense found it humorous, O.J. put on the gloves and stated, “They’re too large for me.

In simpler terms, “If it doesn’t match up, then you are not guilty,” was one of the most memorable phrases from the trial, according to Cochran. This phrase, interestingly enough, was also suggested by Gerald Uelmen, but it was Cochran’s delivery that made it so impactful.

As an ardent enthusiast, let me share what I expressed to TIME: Instead of merely suggesting a single piece of evidence, I proposed that this particular theme would serve as a cohesive backbone for our entire case, given that most other circumstantial evidence seemed to clash with the prosecution’s narrative.

During the trial, one instance stood out as particularly significant for the defense, and it turned out to be quite a triumph. However, prior to the main event, O.J.’s legal team attempted to dismiss the glove discovered at Rockingham during preliminary hearings. They argued that its acquisition was unjustified search and seizure, infringing on O.J.’s Fourth Amendment rights.

Uelmen stated during an interview on Frontline in 2005 that he believed our argument for suppressing the glove was strong. He added that if the judge had agreed and excluded the glove, the outcome of the O.J. Simpson trial might have been different. Without the glove, their case was already quite compelling. The glove, however, raised questions about Mark Fuhrman’s credibility and his alleged racism. Since Fuhrman became a crucial witness in the trial, these concerns about his character led to the problems that he caused for their case.

Interestingly enough, had the judge adhered strictly to the law, it seems that she should have withheld that particular piece of evidence…

In the end, he remarked that our argument was extremely persuasive, leaning heavily towards doubt, and we were fortunate to have an outstanding jury.

During the course of Marcia Clark’s role as a member of the L.A. County District Attorney’s Office’s special trials unit since 1989, while she was working tirelessly to prosecute O.J. for murder, she faced continuous criticism and scrutiny. Her professional approach drew criticism, leading her to change her hairstyle, which in turn invited further criticism. Simultaneously, her ex-husband filed a lawsuit seeking primary custody of their two sons during the trial, claiming that Marcia was dedicating too much time to work and neglecting proper care for them. Additionally, tabloids like the National Enquirer published old photos of Clark in swimwear from a vacation with her then-husband. To add insult to injury, a potential juror even commented on Marcia’s attire during the trial, telling her, “I think your dresses are too short, what about that?” This situation presented numerous challenges for Marcia Clark as she navigated both her professional and personal life amidst intense public scrutiny.

She was let go from her position, but first, Judge Ito humorously remarked, “I’ve been waiting for someone to bring this up.

However, the families of those she sought justice for were deeply trusting of her, at least prior to the start of the trial.

Fred Goldman, Ron’s father, stated to the New York Times that she appears incredibly dedicated to our family and inquiring about our well-being. Yet, I am certain she puts in an extraordinary amount of effort, working approximately 25 hours a day for 10 days straight on this case. In fact, he described her dedication as exceeding the maximum scale of 100, reaching 110.

I believe Marcia is fantastic, an exceptional woman, and I’m confident that our entire family would agree with me on this point.

Additionally, the defense put forth the idea that the killings might have been drug-related, possibly carried out by dealers seeking Nicole’s friend and temporary resident, Faye Resnick – an interior decorator who later gained prominence on the reality TV show “The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.

Resnick was one of the authors for several books related to the case, starting with “Nicole Brown Simpson: A Life Interrupted’s Private Diary,” published in 1994 during jury selection. The book contained juicy details about Nicole’s alleged love life, which made Resnick an unreliable witness for the prosecution, even though she firmly believed that O.J. had abused and ultimately murdered Nicole throughout their relationship.

Shattered: In the Eye of the Storm, about how the trial affected Resnick, came out in 1996.

In order to leverage Bailey’s extensive experience with murder trials, Bob Shapiro enlisted his services, as Shapiro – a criminal defense attorney who typically negotiates deals – lacked such expertise. Bailey was famously associated with representing Albert DeSalvo, later known as the Boston Strangler serial killer, in assault cases and Patty Hearst, heiress, during her trial for aiding her kidnappers in bank robbery (both convictions were upheld).

During the O.J. trial, some notable instances for Bailey involved him provocatively encouraging Darden to make O.J. attempt the gloves in court, as well as his rigorous questioning of Fuhrman.

Following O.J.’s acquittal, I learned from Bailey’s CNN statement that initially, Shapiro had proposed O.J. plead guilty to manslaughter – a proposal Shapiro later denied, although it was commonly reported that such discussions about a potential plea deal took place in his office.

In an interview with Huffington Post’s Highline in 2019, Bailey stated that they attempted to dismiss Shapiro because he was behaving impolitely. O.J. instructed him, “You’re being replaced,” to which Bob responded, “Very well. I will go out and express my opinion about your innocence to the public.” O.J. understood that this would be detrimental before the trial, so they decided to keep Bob on the team.

Later on, Bailey faced disbarment in both Florida and Massachusetts, and instead, he established a consulting business in Maine. However, he remained unable to obtain a license to practice law there.

In 2014, he expressed to the ABA Journal that he felt his involvement in the O.J. Simpson case had elicited criticism and resentment from the judiciary in Florida, Massachusetts, and Maine. He mentioned a significant backlash against him for his role in the trial.

During questioning by Bailey, Fuhrman initially claimed he never used a racial slur, the “n-word.” However, this claim was disproven when the defense presented a recording showing him using that term in private conversations with an aspiring screenwriter. In private, without the jury present, Fuhrman invoked his Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination when asked if he had tampered or fabricated evidence in the O.J. Simpson case.

In a document acquired by The New York Times, Dershowitz expressed confusion as to why the prosecution wanted Fuhrman to testify, since he was merely the one who noticed the glove at O.J.’s location and pointed it out to other detectives. However, he didn’t actually retrieve the glove from the scene or submit it as evidence, which meant he had no role in the custody chain.

Before the court case ended, Fuhrman – a 20-year LAPD veteran – chose to retire. In 1996, he admitted to perjury, and in 1997, he published Murder in Brentwood, his first book among several on true crime, media, and the justice system. Since then, he has settled in Idaho and frequently appears as a guest on Fox News.

consistently, Fuhrman asserts he adhered to protocol during the O.J. case and the evidence supported his conviction. In 2016, he told the New York Post, “Another O.J. will emerge, and what we’ve discovered is that political correctness and ignorance often override justice.

During the span of this trial, I’m sad to say that out of the 27 individuals initially selected – including 12 primary jurors and 15 alternates – a total of 10 had to step down for different reasons. This left just four of the original main jurors to render the final decision.

Originally chosen as a backup, Lionel Cryer ultimately moved up to the primary panel instead. In an interview with TopMob News in 2017, he shared, “I wasn’t particularly thrilled at first. As I looked around at all the people I would be making decisions alongside, I couldn’t help but think, this is going to be quite the adventure.

Ultimately, the jury, consisting of 10 women and 2 men, determined that O.J. Simpson was not culpable. The racial composition of the jury was as follows: 9 were African American, 2 were Caucasian, and 1 was Hispanic.

Occasionally, I glance at the Goldmans, and if you could see the anguish and sorrow etched on their countenances, Chris Darden stated to the Los Angeles Times during the trial. “Sometimes, I observe them, and they’re grinning, but when in court, sometimes they are struggling internally… The victims continue to accumulate. The Goldmans are among the victims. The Browns are victims. The Simpsons are victims. Sydney and Justin Simpson are victims. We’re all victims because the sorrow, pain, and suffering are distributed evenly.

In an unusual twist within the justice system, even though O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder charges, he was held responsible for the deaths of Ron and Nicole in a civil court case and was mandated to pay a sum of $33.5 million to the Goldman and Brown families as compensation.

Which he has not done.

2025-03-14 16:53

Read More