Why I'm Glad O.J. Simpson Got Muzzled

Orange Jumpsuit Simpson was at it again. He tried to capitalize on the brutal murders of his ex-wife Nicole Brown and Brown's friend, Ronald Goldman, which the disgraced gridiron star is widely believed to have committed. And publisher Judith Regan misguidedly enabled him.

Regan was set to publish a book by Simpson entitled If I Did It, which was scheduled for release November 30. A two-part series in which Regan interviews Simpson about the crimes was supposed to air on the Fox Channel a few days earlier. But at the last minute, the News Corporation, which owns both Fox and Regan Books, pulled the plug on the book and the show. Thank God.

In an emotional Op-Ed piece in the November 17, 2006 edition of the New York Post, Ms. Regan explains that her decision to publish the book was made for "selfish reasons." Like Nicole Brown, Ms. Regan was a victim of domestic violence. In her article, Ms. Regan says that she suffered vicious beatings that required her to be hospitalized and caused the death of her unborn daughter.

Although acquitted of double murder charges, Simpson was found civilly liable for the 1994 deaths of Ms. Brown and Mr. Goldman. To this day, the fallen ex-football icon has a $33.5 million judgment outstanding against him. The families of the victims have been unable to collect a penny because Simpson has no apparent assets other than a $400,000-a-year pension and a home, both of which are exempt from attachment.

Ms. Regan says that she wanted to interview Simpson and publish the book so he could "confess his sins, do penance, and amend his life." But both Simpson's book and interviews discuss the case hypothetically, giving him cover for denial. Regan counters by saying that psychopathic killers "often" confess their crimes in this manner. To support this statement, she cites the word of a single ex-CIA specialist.

Not good enough, Judy. That's too slim a reed on which to hang a decision of such magnitude. Simpson could just as easily have been playing you for a fiddle as confessing his sins, especially since big money was involved.

According to a November 17, 2006 New York Times article, Regan paid $3.5 million to a third party to cement the deal, although Regan claimed the amount was much less. She refused to identify either the third party or the precise figure.

In her New York Post piece, Regan says she "was told" by the mysterious third party that the money would go to Simpson's children. Judy, as a sophisticated businessperson, you know better. If you really wanted to ensure that Simpson wouldn't profit from this venture, you wouldn't just take someone's word. You'd get ironclad proof verified by a top-notch team of legal eagles.

Moreover, Ms. Regan's assertion was repeatedly contradicted by several guests on "The O'Reilly Factor" on November 17. Howard Weitzman was the first lawyer Simpson hired shortly after his arrest in 1994. Mr. Weitzman quickly withdrew from the case, and it is widely believed that he did so because he knew Simpson was guilty, an assertion that Mr. Weitzman did not challenge when Mr. O'Reilly raised it on the program. According to Mr. Weitzman, Simpson did the book and interviews for ego and money. He added that Simpson routinely lies, and that's why he now hates him. On the same program, Geraldo Rivera said that Simpson had, in fact, received the money and sunk it into Florida real estate that the victims' families can't touch. On a November 20, 2006 broadcast of "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren", Fred Goldman, Ronald's father, confirmed that Simpson had gotten paid.

Ms. Regan has said that she was willing to assist the families in recovering any money flowing from the deal, indicating that she herself had some doubts about where the funds ended up.

Evidence that Simpson casually lies is supported by the experiences of his current attorney, Yale Galanter, another guest on Mr. O'Reilly's program. Galanter, who has repeatedly stated that there was no book deal, said he was deeply embarrassed by the revelation that Simpson had completed one behind his back.

Although Ms. Regan's motives are laudable, they indicate very poor judgment. I am sorry to hear about her horrific experiences, but her actions, had they been fulfilled, would have had consequences directly opposite to those intended.

Ms. Regan was convinced that O.J. had confessed. That is far from certain. During the interviews, he talked hypothetically, admitting to nothing. Simpson reportedly chokes up on camera and cries. Could we have believed him? I think not. After all, he is a psychopath.

Ms. Regan is much too self-centered. She spends about a third of her Op-Ed piece recounting her domestic abuse; another third focuses on her reaction to the O.J. trial; and the rest is about her decision to publish the book and interview Simpson. Her frequent use of the pronoun "I" is revealing. This wasn't just about you, Judy. It was about giving money and publicity to a despicable person.

In her piece, Ms. Regan states that Simpson's story has great historical value. She notes that his case was billed as the "Trial of the Century." She also mentions a litany of interviews and books of evil people, including Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf; Barbara Walters's interview of Moammar Khadafy; and Katie Couric's interview of Simpson on the tenth anniversary of the murders.

Ms. Regan's analogies are very flawed. The idea that the Simpson case was the "trial of the century" is based on media hype rather than fact. The Nuremberg and Scopes trials, as well as the impeachment of President Clinton, have had far greater impact on society than Mr. Simpson's legal battles.

Nor does O.J. Simpson, repulsive as he is, compare to Adolf Hitler, who single handedly started the most brutal war humanity has ever known and continues to shape geopolitics to this day. Moreover, according to U.S. News and World Report, the American and British publishers of Mein Kampf have been donating the sale proceeds from that infamous work to charity for years. That would not have been true of Mr. Simpson's book. And in none of the interviews Ms. Regan cites did the interviewee receive millions of dollars.

The News Corporation deserves much credit for avoiding a tragedy. Had the deal gone through, Simpson's vile behavior would have been rewarded with a bonanza of money and publicity. Millions of young people would have received yet another message that crime pays big time.

At this writing, it is unclear whether the paycheck Simpson received is recoverable. Ms. Regan should make good on her pledge to see to it that the victims' families are able to pry it from his bloody hands.