HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Reading & Writing » Non-Fiction (Group) » O. J. IS INNOCENT AND I C...

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:28 PM


According to Amazon, Mr. Dear had a book out on the same topic Nov. 14, 2000, entitled O. J. Is Innocent, But Not of Murder.

I haven't read any of the reviews yet.

9 replies, 3108 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
Reply O. J. IS INNOCENT AND I CAN PROVE IT by William C. Dear (Original post)
fadedrose Apr 2012 OP
Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2012 #1
fadedrose Apr 2012 #2
Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2012 #3
fadedrose Jul 2013 #4
Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2013 #5
fadedrose Jul 2013 #6
Laura PourMeADrink Jul 2013 #7
matt819 Aug 2013 #8
Laura PourMeADrink Dec 2013 #9

Response to fadedrose (Original post)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 06:33 AM

1. Just read all 576 pages in two days. Fantastic read, if you were facinated

by the trial and all the mysteries about it. The problem is that most all
people have an automatic smirk when someone mentions OJ's potential
innocence and are closed minded about it.

The author, a renowned investigator, spent 14 years of his life, using
his own money, to meticulously research the case.

Without spoiling..it is a compelling read. If you are analytically inclined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 11:53 AM

2. I intend to read it...

I thought he was innocent and watched the whole first trial and most of the second. And I never thought that his son did it either, which is what the author of this book is saying. I thought it was a drug cartel.

There was a website that had the whole trial on it, and I can't remember the name of it. Do you know it? Something like Soloman, my mind is a blank there.

In watching the trial, one of the things I caught in the 2nd trial was the testimony of a waitress who saw the family come into the restaurant, and now I can't even remember what the discrepancy was. There were other murders connected with the restaurant. The sunglasses were not "lost" I thought and were the cause of anyone going to the victim's house. I based this on the extremely short time it took to locate them between the phone calls of the parties who called about them...

Trouble is, I have 14 books to read - but I will get into this one.

Thank you for replying.

Oh, Court TV used to have a board setup like DU for viewers to discuss the trial, and the fighting became so intense that the moderator couldn't calm everyone down. I was part, but not a leader of the groups, pro and against OJ. They had to close the board and never opened it again....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to fadedrose (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 10:11 PM

3. Very interesting about the sunglasses...never thought of that. This book does

bring out the fact that there were restaurants in LA that cater to
the famous and wealthy - like Mezzaluna/ They had dual purposes -
restaurants and drug dealers.

I actually thought it was pretty ingenious.....if you wanted some coke, say, they
would up your dinner bill and deliver your coke in the dinner "doggy bag."

The reason no one thought about/suspected his eldest son was because OJ had been
bailing him out whenever he got in trouble and had the power and charisma
to squelch it from the media. He also was pals with cops, which helped
a lot. But, the book brings out all the serious mental issues Jason had/has and
the criminal acts he has committed. The author just dug this up. No one
at LAPD ever even interviewed Jason. Therefore, no one investigated his past.

No, don't know about trial footage online. But, been thinking that I would
love to watch it again. Just youtubed it....looks like just highlights.

14 books...yikes. Hope you get to read this one. PM when you do !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 23, 2013, 12:13 PM

4. He was on the news again today...

I never did read the book, O. J. Is Innocent... and had a good reason not to. My 2-yr old granddaughter was born in April 2012 and I think I got distracted by birthdays (4 of them) and wasn't doing any reading.

Anyway, the way it went was Nicole's mother called her and told her about the missing sunglasses. Nicole calls the restaurant, and according to the time log on the phone bill, it took them LESS than 2 minutes to find them, and they were supposedly outside on the sidewalk. It could have been one minute, but the phone company rounds off to the next minute.

Marcia Clark did the questioning and didn't notice how goofy the times were. You'd figure the waitress would have to stop what she was doing to be notified of the call, go to the table, check the floor under the table, the restroom, etc., and finally, as a last straw, check the sidewalk, where it was found, they said.

I think the glasses were picked up and held on purpose so that someone would call. And how nice it was that someone could bring the glasses to Nicole's....hmm.
They were waiting for the call, I thought. The waitress also testified at the civil trial. At one trial, she said that the glasses were worn by the mother as she entered, and the other trial, they weren't, according to my memory. The waitress left CA very quickly...

And they disregarded Rosa's testimony about seeing/hearing someone next door because she lied about her age. She left the country pretty quick.

And I thought OJ acted as though he was drugged, which no one brought up.

Wish that website that had the whole trial was still on - it was "Sheldon.." something or other, I just can't remember.

My kids always had friends who stayed over and we'd get a call the next day, and it always took more than 2 minutes to find anyhthing.

Went thru a lot of old things getting ready for the grim reaper, and could not locate my 3-page single-spaced notes on the trial. There had already been 2 murders connected with that restaurant.

I just ordered the book in my OP from another library on loan.

Sorry to have made this so long, but my interest just got sparked again. Ignore if you've lost yours, I'll understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to fadedrose (Reply #4)

Tue Jul 23, 2013, 11:16 PM

5. Of course, I am still fascinated ! true mystery.



PM when you finish.

No excuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #5)

Wed Jul 24, 2013, 12:32 AM

6. It'll take a week to get it from another library..

already ordered it.

I see that Gerry Spence has one out too, but didn't order it..

I lived and breathed nothing but OJ from the first day I saw that cops/convertible chase on TV till after the 2nd trial.

Wish I could think of that blogger's name...Sheldon, Stanley, Skolnick, ??? I wouldn't mind reading parts of the trial when the book comes.

Will keep in touch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to fadedrose (Reply #6)

Wed Jul 24, 2013, 01:00 AM

7. Please do. Here's a teaser

What got the long time private eye (author) to start digging ?, spending his own money for years ?, were the things that
despite overwhelming public opinion, made him go "Hmmmmm":

1. OJ HATED blood (per his psychiatrist)
2. He would have been drown in blood, had he committed the murder
3. His Bronco chase..there was something "off" about it. Staged. Acted totally normal when he got home. Not the demeanor a killer who was going to kill himself would have acted.
4. His daughter, with friends, were asleep at the condo when Nicole was murdered - and he should have feared they'd awaken had he been there for murder.

Can not wait to discuss !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to fadedrose (Original post)

Fri Aug 30, 2013, 11:39 PM

8. I got this one out of the library as a result of this post

I'm convinced OJ did it. Maybe irrational, but there you go.

But that's neither here nor there.

I'm only a few pages into it, but Dear is so damn self serving it's painful. He's great. He's trained cops for years. He's a brilliant investigator. He's great. And smarter than everyone. Blah Blah Blah. He may be right, and he may have the proof, but he should have gotten a ghost writer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to matt819 (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 11:24 AM

9. Keep at it and I can't wait to hear if you still think OJ is guilty. My take for Dear is that he

had to go overboard establishing his credentials because everyone under the sun thinks OJ did it and he is here to say I went way beyond what had been done already and I am right based on my deep investigatory background and exhaustive research.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread