Nicole Brown’s sister takes issue with O.J. Simpson’s “conflict-free life” claim

AP

One of the more bizarre moments during Thursday’s O.J. Simpson parole hearing happened when Simpson at one point blurted out that he’s led a “conflict-free life.” The moment was particularly significant to the families members of the people that, according to the California civil justice system, he killed.

“Really? You beat my sister,” Nicole Brown’s sister, Tanya, told TMZ. “Regardless of . . . murdering her and Ron [Goldman] the fact is that my sister has diary entries dating back to 1978 about abuse that was inflicted, and also there was that infamous 911 call that he mentioned.”

Regardless of whether you believe Simpson did or didn’t kill his ex-wife and a man who was in the worst possible place at the worst possible time, a jury found Simpson responsible for the deaths under the much lower burden of proof than the criminal “beyond a reasonable doubt” bar.

If you personally have doubts, reasonable or otherwise, about whether Simpson did it, read this assessment of the documentary from 2016.

32 responses to “Nicole Brown’s sister takes issue with O.J. Simpson’s “conflict-free life” claim

  1. Pretty sure Ron Goldman wasn’t just in the wrong place at the wrong time, not that that has anything to do with him being murdered, that’s obviously foul. But like Chris Rock said “He was returning GLASSES??? You could leave a BABY at a restaurant and they’ll still just leave it for you at the coat check!”

  2. she figured the abuse was worth the lavish lifestyle…if he was being physical and she took the time to document it then just leave

  3. He also declared during the hearing that he was not a violent person, and never had been.
    Nice little bit of regional theater going on in that hearing room.

  4. shadywarrior says:
    Jul 21, 2017 8:55 AM
    Pretty sure Ron Goldman wasn’t just in the wrong place at the wrong time, not that that has anything to do with him being murdered, that’s obviously foul.
    ———–
    They were both consenting SINGLE adults. She was OJ’s ex wife despite OJ’s repeated claims of literally owning her as if she was his possession/property.

  5. Right or wrong he was found “not guilty” of the Brown/Goldman homicides.

    No bloody clothes, no blood stains on Bronco gas/brake pedals.

    Worst prosecution team ever, Marcia Clark and Chris Darden. Uhm, your honor. At this time we request the defendant try on the gloves in evidence.

    Talk about your all time Forrest Gump court manoeuver.

    Time to let the Juice loose to search every golf course in America for the “real killers”.

  6. eazeback says:
    Jul 21, 2017 8:59 AM
    she figured the abuse was worth the lavish lifestyle…if he was being physical and she took the time to document it then just leave
    ——
    Hey genius….she did leave and was still murdered by him.

  7. “Regardless of whether you believe Simpson did or didn’t kill his ex-wife and a man who was in the worst possible place at the worst possible time, a jury found Simpson responsible for the deaths under the much lower burden of proof than the criminal “beyond a reasonable doubt” bar.”

    How can that be. He was found guilty for armed robbery of sports memorabilia, not murder. If the jury found him guilty of a crime in which he was already tried, that would be injustice.

  8. She is correct. We know he wasn’t convicted of the murder, but to say he avoid conflict discounts that he pleased no contest for beating his wife.

  9. I hope the first bed he sleeps in on his release is one of those folding hospital ones from Naked Gun.

  10. mudachains says:
    Jul 21, 2017 9:24 AM
    He tees off at 9am this morning.
    ———-
    October 1st is the earliest opportunity to get released from prison.

  11. Since… It’s referring to the civil trial where he was found guilty of murdering Goldman and Brown

  12. deuce22222 says:
    Jul 21, 2017 9:29 AM

    “Regardless of whether you believe Simpson did or didn’t kill his ex-wife and a man who was in the worst possible place at the worst possible time, a jury found Simpson responsible for the deaths under the much lower burden of proof than the criminal “beyond a reasonable doubt” bar.”

    How can that be. He was found guilty for armed robbery of sports memorabilia, not murder. If the jury found him guilty of a crime in which he was already tried, that would be injustice.
    _______________________

    I believe the reference is to the civil lawsuit regarding restitution to the family.

  13. eazeback says:
    Jul 21, 2017 8:59 AM
    she figured the abuse was worth the lavish lifestyle…if he was being physical and she took the time to document it then just leave

    ———————

    That’s your expert analysis? Somehow it’s her fault she was abused and murdered? You may want to rethink that.

  14. RandyinRoxbury says:
    Jul 21, 2017 9:23 AM
    The Brown family was an earlier version of the Kardashians, ironic isn’t it?

    ———–

    How is ironic?

  15. You either believe in our system of justice or you don’t. Do they get it wrong? Sometimes. Is it still better than most of the world? Yes.

    Would you rather live in a country where you are assumed guilty until YOU prove you’re innocent, or a country that can try you over and over again for the same crime even if you are acquitted like many countries in Europe and other parts of the world?

    He was acquitted of murder. He has served more time for the crimes he was convicted of than 99% of people with his record would have. He was kept in jail longer than he should have as payback for having the audacity of being found not-guilty in another case. Even the PROSECUTOR in that case was surprised how long the sentence was.

    If you care about the Constitution and the justice system at all, that’s a very dangerous precedent to set.

  16. factschecker says:
    Jul 21, 2017 9:21 AM
    shadywarrior says:
    Jul 21, 2017 8:55 AM
    Pretty sure Ron Goldman wasn’t just in the wrong place at the wrong time, not that that has anything to do with him being murdered, that’s obviously foul.
    ———–
    They were both consenting SINGLE adults. She was OJ’s ex wife despite OJ’s repeated claims of literally owning her as if she was his possession/property.

    86 4
    Report comment

    ——————————-

    Never said anything about that. Kind of covered that with the part where I said –and you quoted– that it had nothing to do with his murder and that it was foul. I’m just saying that we unnecessarily portray the Brown-Goldman relationship as something it probably wasn’t. What’s wrong with just saying that she was probably sleeping with him? Doesn’t make her bad or OJ innocent. But can we just keep it real? That’s all I’m saying. I just personally don’t buy that he was some kind waiter who happened to be some prettyboy model/actor type who would probably kick it with someone like Nicole. Like is that wrong to say? I’m not condemning it, I had my share of trysts when I was young and single, we all do. And maybe I’m wrong, maybe he was a total stranger to her, I just don’t happen to think so in my opinion. It’s just like, do we NEED to paint this a certain way to seem more heinous and grisly? We’re already maxed out, other than we should count our stars that the poor children didn’t come out and get hacked up too. As it relates to the murder itself, it’s all inconsequential, but conversationally, can we just talk straight about it?

  17. O.J. had the highest priced team of lawyers in history while the prosecutors were just ordinary lawyers. It was an extremely difficult task for the prosecutors to prove he was guilty in spite of the overwhelming evidence supporting his guilt.
    O.J.’s lawyers used the race card effectively and as soon as Detective Mark Fuhrman was put on the witness stand and lied about ever having used the “N” word, the trial was over. They could have had video showing O.J. killing his ex wife and Ron Goldman, but it wouldn’t have mattered.
    I was doing physical therapy from knee surgery at the time the trial was being shown at I will never forget those moments of the trial. They were showing it on their big screen tv on the wall and as soon as Fuhrman was shown to be lying by F. Lee Bailey, you could hear people in the gym (black and white) saying the trial was over, O.J. would go free. You could see all the air go out of Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. Darden looked like he wanted to leave the courtroom and never come back. At that moment, he was probably the saddest black man on the planet. Because not only was he part of the team trying to convict O.J., he was a black man sitting their listening to one of his team’s key witnesses being shown to all the world to be a racist.
    If anyone looks at all the evidence in the case against O.J., there’s only one conclusion you could possibly come to — he was absolutely guilty. But as in so many high profile trials involving famous people, evidence didn’t matter. What mattered was the “Dream Team” used 200 years of discrimination against blacks to convince the jury they had to set O.J. free. They did, and it set race relations back in this country big-time. Blacks all over the country were rejoicing that O.J.’s lawyers played the race card to get O.J. off.
    As a white person, I was disappointed that Americans —
    and more importantly, the jury — lost focus on what really mattered in the case, that two people were brutally murdered and the man who had done it was found not guilty because the defense used race as their #1 weapon.
    It was a sad day for America, in my opinion. Because it showed once again that blacks and whites in this country have still not come together as Americans.

  18. He’s a psychopath who murdered 2 people, and most people know it. Sadly (?) it’s not really relevant to his sentence/parole in this specific matter. As long as he wasn’t over the top defiant he was getting out.

  19. It took OJ Simpson getting acquitted, a black man “accepted” by White America, for White America to realize that there are deep flaws in the American criminal justice system. Blacks had/have been screaming this for centuries, only to be largely ignored. Then whites saw it unfold in their own living rooms.

  20. Why was OJ acquitted? Lack of damning evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
    And for the civil case, well it wasn’t a murder charge it was a wrongful death charge, and only 50% or more of evidence needs to point to guilt……..

    LOL silly systems…. BUT….

    Jury selection matters…

    For the civil case: The clerk swore in the jury of 12, eight of whom are white, two black, one Hispanic and one a man who is half Asian and half black. Seven are women and five men.

    For the criminal case: From an original jury pool of 40% white, 28% black, 17% Hispanic, and 15% Asian, the final jury for the trial had 10 women and two men, of which there were nine blacks, two whites, and one Hispanic.

  21. I agree with Tanya, Nicole Brown’s sister: O.J. lied to the parole board and I doubt, whether, he has undergone religious conversion in prison, because, if, he did: he would confess his sins [a double murder].

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!