“Nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”
This statement is only a portion of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It means that if someone is tried once in a U.S. court for a crime and is acquitted, then he or she may not be tried for the same crime, no matter the evidence or later reasoning, ever again. I’m sure this is an amendment of which O.J. Simpson is well aware.
Simpson was once known for his acting in the comical “Naked Gun” films as the dorky, token black man. That image was completely changed 10 years ago when Simpson was accused of murdering his wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman.
The trial, one that captivated the nation, did nothing more than reinforce the same message we know all too well: money talks and bullshit walks.
Even with seemingly irrefutable evidence, Simpson was found ‘not guilty’ of the double murder and has since lived a life of constant accusation. He was later sued in civil court by the victims’ families and was ordered to pay $33.5 million in restitution after being found responsible for the murders. Still, his freedom was not jeopardized.
Recent news suggests that Simpson has written a book titled, “If I Did It,” in which he gives a detailed account of the murders. It is the first time that Simpson has ever told how he would have carried out the murders in his very own words.
Although the book is said to be a fictional account – his publisher calls this Simpson’s ‘confession.’
The question is whether or not Simpson should be protected by the Constitution. Well, actually there is no question of whether or not he should be protected – he is, in fact, protected.
More or less, he can write every single detail, map out the scene of the crime and ridicule the prosecutors of his trial if he wants. Like the little boy who stole the cookie from the cookie jar -Simpson can now speak freely of the delicious aftertaste.
I’m one who always preaches of the Constitution’s contradictory and, oftentimes, idiotic amendments, all of which strive for ‘justice’ and ‘liberty’ amongst the America people. As for the Fifth Amendment, this is one portion of the Constitution that boggles my mind far more than any other.
There was a film released a couple of years ago titled “Double Jeopardy.” It starred Ashley Judd as a woman accused of murdering her husband on a sailboat in the middle of the night. It was the same man, her husband, who had faked his death, changed his name, married his wife’s best friend and kidnapped their son.
After serving five years in prison for his murder, she was released with a notion to hunt down and murder the man who had ruined her life and cost her five years away from her son.
She was protected by the Fifth Amendment and was told by a lawyer (also a prison mate) that she could “walk right up to him in the middle of Time Square, put a gun to his head and pull the f***ing trigger” and there isn’t a single thing anyone can do.
Well, here’s a true test of our system: a man who many of us think is guilty waits until he’s acquitted to write his very own side to the story.
His claims are that it’s nothing more than a figurative idea of how it could have happened.
In reality, we all speculate that Simpson murdered his wife out of passion – with a slit throat so deep and close to the bone, that her head was barely left attached.
Now, Simpson gets the last laugh. Perhaps his conscience is speaking and is finally ready to tell the world of his pain. Or perhaps not. An interview would better suit this type of confession – not a full-length novel.
How did Simpson get away with such a heinous crime in a time where forensic science rules the medical field? It still baffles my mind. I understand that no person should be repeatedly tried for the same crime because no one should live in that state of worry, no matter their guilt or lack thereof.
Still, if someone is willing to confess either orally or through writing, then it should be taken to be exactly what it is: a confession.
The justice system cannot be redesigned in a day; especially when there’s no one willing to believe it needs change.
There can be no hasty alterations of the amendment for Simpson.
He knows this all too well, so well that his smile is free as a bird on camera when discussing the book’s release.
Surely there is something to be learned from Simpson’s decision to release his book. How much limitation can be placed on an amendment’s promised rights – even if it may say no retrial for the same crime does this apply when the innocent becomes the guilty, for all to see?
If anything, Simpson may have just made history by being one of the first murderers to write his own analytical version of what ‘might’ have happened. Every single book written about the Simpson trial up until now has just become worthless.
Why own imagined scientifically logical explanations when you can own the cold honest truth as to how Simpson orchestrated these murders? Even the genius assumptions of detectives pale in comparison to the eerie and gruesome facts of the only living person who witnessed it firsthand.
In my opinion, Simpson is a lying, manipulative man with nothing better to do than milk his own dirty deeds for all they’re worth. What’s $33.5 million when you’re guaranteed a ton of money and publicity for a firsthand ‘hypothetical’ account of the most disgusting media stunt to date? Of course, even with all this and his freedom still goes unwavering.
Or at least that’s what I thought until recently. It turns out Simpson’s book has been taken off of the shelves and the interview for FOX has been canceled.
Many threats of boycott of the network have brought about these decisions – ones that prove that American’s may still have a sense of justice.
There have been many apologies to the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Goldman. Copies of the novels that were released earlier have been recalled.
Simpson may finally see that his cheating ways have earned him his freedom but nothing more. His reputation is ruined and he can never be trusted again.
It’s sad when the characters of television, Geraldo and Bill O’Reilly, are more concerned with what his children may feel, more concerned than their own father.
We’ll never know the details of what happened that day because the American people have refused to acknowledge Simpson’s twisted venture for publicity. Finally, we realize that incidents such as this, the pain and suffering of the Brown and Goldman families, should not be our entertainment.
Pull your head out of your butt, Simpson, because nobody’s buying your lies – or your book, for that matter.

Author