辛普森自传《如果是我干的》(if I did it)

sonia6949

2007年9月，O.J.Simpson出版了他的自传《如果是我干的》(if I did it)，第一章题为the luckiest guy in the world， 开篇第一句则是：

I'm going to tell you a story you've never heard before,
because no one knows this story the way I know it.

他在书中自述，如果他真的杀死了自己的前妻，他是如何行凶并掩饰证据。由于众怒难息，这本书无疾而终，但书名却很快流行起来。

豆瓣上的评论：

辛普森用假设的口吻详细阐述了如果他犯了当年轰动一时的谋杀案，过程将会如何。可以肯定几乎所有人都会把个中内容看作他曾付诸的实际行动，只是美国法律奈何他不得。
　　
　　之所以无罪释放的原因应该很清楚，优秀的律师团寻找法律漏洞，硬把看似确凿的犯罪证据踏成无足轻重的垃圾。于是经常会有人以此嘲讽美国的法律制度，更因为辛普森书的出版令我看见一句评论：美国法律太注重过程的公正，却反而忽略了结局的公正。
　　
　　一时觉得很精辟，可回头再想，究竟能有多少案件可以如此明显地确定结局的公正？难道我们不是在一系列尽量严格公正的过程中努力寻找最公正的结局吗？事实上太多的案件我们无法辨认它们的原貌，并不存在一个无所不知无所不能的神替我们做出绝对公正的裁定；事实是我们只有尽量保证每一个环节的公正严明，以期待尽量实现一个公正的审判结果。而一个妄想忽略过程拍板所谓公正结局的制度，想来只会因各种主动或不主动的作为制造出更多冤假错案。
　　
　　辛普森案是一声沉重的叹息和一抹轻蔑的微笑，同时也是促使人们寻找更为接近公正的制度的一次无情鞭笞。我们的制度远不可能达到万无一失的公正，我们只能尽力寻找最不坏的一种方式。

sonia6949

最初计划推出的封面



wiki上关于if I did it一书风波的记载

The book was unofficially announced in The National Enquirer in late October, 2006 [5] and immediately denied by Simpson's lawyer.

The book was announced in mid-November 2006 for a November 30, 2006 release, but intense public criticism led to the cancellation both of the book's publication and of a related television interview, both from divisions of News Corporation (HarperCollins/Regan Books and Fox Broadcasting Company, respectively). According to a Newsweek story, all 400,000 printed copies were recalled for destruction, except for one, locked away in a vault at News Corp.[6] One copy did show up on eBay on January 15, 2007, with a starting bid of $1500, and sold for over $65,000 fueling speculation about whether News Corp. was able to destroy all printed copies.[citation needed] James Wolcott of Vanity Fair obtained a "pristine hardcover" of the book for a review published in January 2007.[7]


[edit] Pre-publication controversy
If I Did It ignited a storm of pre-publication controversy, largely due to the perception that Simpson was trying to profit from the deaths. As mentioned above, he had been found liable for the deaths. Even before the civil trial, there had been considerable public sentiment that Simpson had gotten away with murder.

"This is not about being heard. This is about trying to cash in, in a pathetic way, on some notoriety," said Sara Nelson, editor-in-chief of Publishers Weekly. "That a person keeps wanting to bring this up seems almost nutty to me."[8]

Denise Brown, sister of murder victim Nicole Brown Simpson, said, "We hope Ms. Regan takes full accountability for promoting the wrongdoing of criminals and leveraging this forum and the actions of Simpson to commercialize abuse."[8]

She went on to say that Simpson's "two children will be exposed to [his] inexplicable behavior and we will provide them with our love and support during this time. It's unfortunate that [O.J.] Simpson has decided to awaken a nightmare that we have painfully endured and worked so hard to move beyond."

Patricia Schroeder, president and chief executive of the Association of American Publishers, described the developments as sickening:

"But I think it's going to stir an awful lot of debate and make the culture take a real look at itself, and that may not be unhealthy."[8]
The day after the announcement, an online boycott encouraging Americans to ignore the book commenced at OJbookBoycott.com[9] and similar boycotts began in Australia and Europe.[10] Within four days of the book's announcement, over 58,395 people had signed an online petition developed by Ronald Goldman's family, DontPayOJ.com,[11] declaring their opposition to the book.[12] The website directed boycotters to send protests to HarperCollins, ReganBooks, Fox television and all major booksellers in the United States.

Bookshops were divided as to stocking this title in their stores. Numerous independent stores, appalled by Simpson's book, said either that they would not sell it or would offer limited copies and give away the proceeds.[13] Borders Books and Waldenbooks said they would donate any profits they made from the book to charities which benefit victims of domestic violence. Borders, Inc. spokesperson Ann Binkley said, "The book will be available for sale at all Borders and Waldenbooks stores because we believe it is the right of customers to decide what they read and what to buy, but we will not discount the title or promote it".[14]

Prior to its cancellation, If I Did It was debated in Canada as well, with several stores there saying they would only order it for customers, but not stock it.[15]

In the days following the book's announcement, preorders put it in the top 20 of Amazon.com's bestseller list, though it had fallen to #51 when the book's cancellation was announced.[16]

The proposed book outraged the Goldman family. "It's disgusting. Judith Regan is an opportunist. She's helping a murderer get his voice out there," Goldman's sister Kim Goldman told the New York Daily News.[17] According to lawyers for the family of Ron Goldman, the family planned to attempt to garnish any earnings Simpson may get from the book. Fred Goldman, Ron Goldman's father, was awarded $33.5 million by a jury in 1997 for the wrongful death of Ron Goldman though Simpson never paid this judgment due to California law that prevents pensions from being used to satisfy judgments. Of the book and television interview, Goldman says,

"It is an all-time low for television. To imagine that a major network would put a murderer on TV to have him tell how he would murder the mother of his children and my son is beyond comprehension. It’s morally reprehensible to me... to think you are willing to give somebody airtime about how they would murder two people."[18]
Legal experts theorized that Simpson might be able to avoid paying the Goldmans or Browns any money. "I think it's going to be difficult if [Simpson] arranges to have [book profits] deposited abroad," said lawyer Tom Mesereau, who successfully defended Michael Jackson in his child molestation trial in 2005. "It's one thing to enforce a judgment in America, and another to enforce it overseas."

Mesereau said Simpson also might have profits "paid into a trust offshore or a corporation in a different name."[19]

Fox Broadcasting Company said it would air a two-part taped interview with Simpson, conducted by Judith Regan, publisher of the book. The interview was scheduled to air on November 27 and November 29, 2006, timed to coincide with the publication. The program would not have been a "news" show under the auspices of the Fox News unit; the broadcast network's alternative programming department, headed by Mike Darnell, would have been responsible. The network released this statement on November 15, 2006:

"O.J. Simpson, in his own words, tells for the first time how he would have committed the murders if he were the one responsible for the crimes. In the two-part event, Simpson describes how he would have carried out the murders he has vehemently denied committing for over a decade."[20]
On November 16, 2006 Judith Regan issued a statement claiming that her reason for doing the interview and releasing the book was an attempt to find closure after having been a battered woman herself.

"The men who lied and cheated and beat me — they were all there in the room," she said. "And the people who denied it, they were there, too. And though it might sound a little strange, Nicole and Ron were in my heart. And for them I wanted him to confess his sins, do penance, and to amend his life. Amen."[21]
Screenwriter Pablo Fenjves, a witness at Simpson's 1995 trial, was the ghostwriter for Simpson's book. Fenjves has since stated that he believes Simpson is "a murderer". [22]


[edit] Fox affiliate reaction
By November 19 or 20, 2006, before the special was cancelled, well over a dozen Fox affiliates had either refused to carry it or decided to air it but devote local time to public service announcements. Stations in Springfield, Missouri,[13] and Johnstown-Altoona-State College, Pennsylvania area were the first to turn down the special on November 17, 2006,[23] along with two other stations in Spokane, Washington[24] and Louisville, Kentucky.[25]

The largest station group to show refusal to air the special was LIN Television with Fox affiliates in six markets:

Mobile, Alabama
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Green Bay, Wisconsin
Toledo, Ohio
Providence, Rhode Island
Norfolk and Virginia Beach, Virginia
Pappas Telecasting was second in line, and said they would pre-empt the program on their Fox stations in four markets[26] along with Fox stations in Bismarck-Minot, North Dakota.[27]:

Fresno, California
Omaha, Nebraska
Sioux City, Iowa
Lincoln, Superior and Grand Island, Nebraska
Fox affiliates KCPQ in Seattle, Washington—owned by Tribune Company—and XETV-TV in Tijuana, Mexico and San Diego, California—owned by Mexican media giant Televisa and operated by Entravision under a Local Marketing Agreement—were both reportedly undecided, but each indicated that if they aired the special, they would not sell local ad time, instead giving that time to local domestic violence organizations to air public service announcements.[28]

Fox affiliate WRAZ in Raleigh, North Carolina, owned by Capitol Broadcasting Company was the last station to show refusal to air the special.

NBC said that it was approached to air the interview, but declined, saying, "This is not a project appropriate for our network."[29] NBC formerly employed Simpson as a football analyst.


[edit] Project cancellation
On November 20, 2006, News Corporation issued a statement saying that the book and television special had been cancelled. In the statement, NewsCorp chairman and CEO Rupert Murdoch said, "I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project. We are sorry for any pain this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown-Simpson."[30]

The Associated Press called the book's cancellation "an astonishing end to a story like no other," noting that a publisher withdrawing a book for its content "is virtually unheard of."[16]

The fact that the interview already exists on tape, executives at Fox and News Corporation said it is likely to turn up somewhere, perhaps on the Internet.[31]

On November 21, 2006, Denise Brown accused the Fox Corporation of trying to stop the Goldman and Brown families from criticizing the project by offering millions of dollars for their silence surrounding the project, "They wanted to offer us millions of dollars. Millions of dollars for, like, 'Oh, I'm sorry' money. But they were still going to air the show," Brown said. "We just thought, 'Oh my God.' What they're trying to do is trying to keep us quiet, trying to make this like hush money, trying to go around the civil verdict, giving us this money to keep our mouths shut."[32]

Denise Brown told NBC's The Today Show that her family's response was: "Absolutely not." Fox confirmed that the Brown and Goldman families were offered profit participation deals for the projects but denies that it was hush money.[32] "Last week, when concerns were raised by the public that we were profiting from this guy's story, we tried to work out some arrangement with the family. Never was there any suggestion of them being barred from talking about it. We would never suggest that," said News Corp spokesman Andrew Butcher.[33] HarperCollins announced December 16, 2006 that Judith Regan was fired for making anti-semitic remarks and that ReganBooks would be absorbed into the HarperCollins General Books group.


[edit] Leak on the Internet
On June 13, 2007, a PDF version of the book was leaked on the Internet through Rapidshare and appeared the next day on various BitTorrent websites. The original Rapidshare post was announced through a video posted on YouTube which showed a hardcover version of the book followed by a computer screen on which appeared the Firefox browser with the Rapidshare address.[34]


[edit] Republication
On August 14, 2007 it was reported that a literary agent for the Goldman family, Sharlene Martin, had made a deal to publish the book under the new title "Confessions of the Killer."[35] All of Simpson's writing is to remain intact, with the addition of "key commentary." The book was released about a month later, on September 13, 2007. Some of the proceeds are to benefit the Ron Goldman Foundation for Justice. The Ronald Lyle Goldman Justice Foundation was planned in 1995 to fund civil legal action against Mr. Simpson.[36]


[edit] Transfer of rights
Rights for the book were transferred to the Goldman family, who will receive 90 percent of profits, as part of their settlement. The family's lawyers announced intentions to pursue new publishing, film or TV deals in order to receive some of $33.5 million awarded to them in the civil case.[37]

Denise Brown urges people to [38] sign her petition on Care2's The PetitionSite to halt publication of the book by the Goldman Family.


[edit] Lawsuits
Fred Goldman sued the shell corporation, Lorraine Brooke Associates, for the publishing rights after it filed for bankruptcy. After Goldman purchased the rights from the court-appointed bankruptcy trustee,[39] Nicole's father, Louis H. Brown, sued Goldman attempting to stop the publication but lost.[40]


[edit] Contents
The first part of the If I Did It manuscript reportedly details Simpson's early relationship with Nicole and their marriage. The latter part of the manuscript reportedly describes details of the murders, as they would have occurred had Simpson committed them. However, Simpson's attorney has said that there is "only one chapter that deals with their deaths and that chapter, in my understanding, has a disclaimer that it's complete fiction."[41] In Simpson's hypothetical scenario, he has an unwilling accomplice named "Charlie" who tells Simpson to stop the murders, but Simpson did it anyway.[42]

HarperCollins Publishers had planned to publish it under their Regan Books imprint on November 30, 2006. The National Enquirer reported in October 2006 that Simpson would be paid US$3.5 million for the book.[43] Publisher Judith Regan was quoted by the Associated Press as saying, "This is an historic case, and I consider this his confession."[8]

A source cited by The National Enquirer described the If I Did It's account of the double murder as "so detailed and chillingly realistic—with O.J. as the central figure—that it leaves no doubt it is a confession of what really happened."[44]

In one portion of an interview to promote the book, taped before the project was cancelled, Regan says to Simpson, "You wrote, 'I have never seen so much blood in my life.'" Simpson responds, "I don't think any two people could be murdered without everybody being covered in blood."[44]

The proposed book's cover, as released by HarperCollins, showed a photograph of Simpson with the words "I Did It" in red and the word "If" in white.[45]


[edit] References
^ Murr, Andrew. "A Friendly Ghost", Newsweek, 2008-03-03.
^ Index of Civil Trial Reports by USA Today
^ OJ "Did It" Manuscript Leaked Online - TMZ.com - Entertainment News, Celebrity Gossip and Hollywood Rumors
^ Beaufort Books > Books > If I Did It
^ No Juice-y Book, Lawyer Says
^ O.J. Book: Evidence of Guilt? - Newsweek National News - MSNBC.com
^ James Wolcott reviews O.J. Simpson's "If I Did It": Fame & Scandal: vanityfair.com
^ a b c d Associated Press (2006-11-16). Publisher on O.J.: 'I consider this his confession'. CNN. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ OJ Book Boycott. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ Lusetich, Robert (2006-11-17). OJ confession book boycotted. The Australian. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ "Former lawyers mum on Simpson's book", Mercury News, November 18, 2006.
^ Online petition. Retrieved on 2006-11-18.
^ a b Staff report. Springfield’s Fox channel station drops O.J. interview. Springfield News-Leader. Retrieved on 2006-11-18.
^ Grant, Justin (2006-11-18). Booksellers mixed on stocking OJ Simpson book. The Washington Post. Retrieved on 2006-11-18.
^ Canadian retailers divided over O.J. Simpson book. CBC.ca (2006-11-17). Retrieved on 2006-11-23.
^ a b OJ Simpson Book, TV special canceled. The Washington Post. Retrieved on 2006-11-20.
^ Caruso, Michelle (2006-11-16). Gloves off: Vics' kin blast O.J. book. New York Daily News. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ Abcarian, Robin; Miller, Martin (2006-11-16). Simpson to tell how he could have killed pair. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ Francescani, Chris; Davis, Ellen, and Pearle, Lauren (2006-11-16). Simpson in the Clear. ABC News. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ "O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here's How It Happened" to Air as a Two-Part Special on Fox. Fox Broadcasting Company (November 2006). Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ Regan turns on O.J. Simpson. ABC News (November 2006). Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ O.J. Confesses. Really.: The ghostwriter of If I Did It calls Simpson "a murderer.". Slate (January 15, 2007). Retrieved on 2007-09-15.
^ Danahy, Anne. Fox channel won't air O.J.; WWCP refuses to show Simpson chat about deaths of ex-wife, friend. Centre Daily Times. Retrieved on 2006-11-18.
^ Italie, Hillel. Book maven not afraid of controversy; O.J. publisher takes business to new level. The Spokesman-Review. Retrieved on 2006-11-19.
^ Lamb, Bill (WDRB general manager). The O.J. Special: Fox Finally Comes Through (Station editorial). WDRB (Channel 41), Louisville, Kentucky. Retrieved on 2006-11-21.
^ Raines, Ben. O.J. interview won't be shown in Mobile (additionally mentions LIN and Pappas preemptions, and KCPQ's ad plan). Mobile Press-Register. Retrieved on 2006-11-19.
^ Benson, Jim. Fox Stations Kill OJ Special. Broadcasting and Cable. Retrieved on 2006-11-19.
^ Source for XETV: More Fox Affiliates Kill O.J. Special, Jim Benson and Caroline Palmer, Broadcasting & Cable, November 20, 2006
^ McClam, Erin (Associated Press). O.J. 'confesses' in what-if book. Toronto Star. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ News Corporation (2006-11-20). News Corporation Cancels Simpson Book and TV Special. Retrieved on 2006-11-20.
^ Under pressure, Newscorp Pulls Simpson Book, TV Show. New York Times. Retrieved on 2006-11-21.
^ a b "O.J. Simpson Project Could Turn on Web", November 21, 2006.
^ "Simpson project was hot topic inside Fox", Los Angeles Times, November 22, 2006.
^ O.J. Simpson If I Did It Released on Internet
^ "O.J. Simpson's 'If I Did It' to be published." CNN.com, 2007-08-14. Retrieved on 2007-08-14.
^ Goldman Family Moves Towards Civil Suit against Simpson." The Tech Online Edition, 1995-10-13. Retrieved on 2007-08-14.
^ Jane Sutton. "Goldman family gets rights to O.J. Simpson book," Reuters, July 30, 2007. Retrieved July 31, 2007.
^ If I Did It petition. care2's the petition site (august 20, 2007).
^ Kennedy, Kelli (2007-07-03). Goldman Family Buys Rights To Simpson Manuscript. Associated Press.
^ Goldstein, Bonnie (2007-08-21). O.J.'s Victims' Families Slug It Out. Slate.com.
^ Associated Press (2006-11-16). O.J. book sparks new outrage. The Boston Globe. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ "Evidence of Guilt?" by Mark Miller. Newsweek. 2007-01-22. pages 48-49.
^ O.J. Book: Enquirer Told You First!. National Enquirer (2006-11-16). Retrieved on 2006-11-23.
^ a b de Moraes, Lisa (2006-11-15). A Fox Shocker: In Depth With O.J. Simpson for A Ratings Boost. The Washington Post C01. Retrieved on 2006-11-16.
^ Norfolk Fox affiliate won't show O.J. Simpson interview | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

沙沫

还出书了？有点挑战社会的承受能力了。

裁判

还写这样的书！简直不可思议！惟利是图，人性丧尽了！

磨合罗

林达《扫起落叶好过冬》里谈了好些这方面的案例，也许能解答楼主的疑问。

醉乡常客

不管怎么说，错放总比错杀好。

野樵

想起了律政狂鲨里面有一集，一个连环杀手侥幸逃脱后就出了本书《我如何打败美国最牛的检察官》，^_^

energy118

他 可以自费出版的

有一个案例可能会使出版社不敢出

wking0019

他敢吗?既然旧金山殴打黑人引起暴乱那个案子能重申,他再把总统逼急了,就还能重申!哪有什么必须遵守的规矩或是程序啊.

plj5000

谢谢搂主分享，早就听说这本书了终于可以看看了！

丫头片子

好像并不完全是律师的作用，好像是李昌钰的鉴定否定了控方的关键证据。



我觉得程序的公正性才能保证结果的公正。

野樵

引用第10楼丫头片子于2008-05-07 13:15发表的 :
好像并不完全是律师的作用，好像是李昌钰的鉴定否定了控方的关键证据。



我觉得程序的公正性才能保证结果的公正。

不仅仅是李昌钰对控方证据的否定，是因为这个案子确实还是有疑点，现场有第四个人的脚印，这个很难说清的，证物的保存有问题再加上血痕的渗透有疑点，另外就是有种族歧视历史的警察的品格证据也起到左右。此外，其实陪审团的组成也很值得研究啊。种族歧视在米国何其敏感啊，^_^

hw8210

呵呵，在美国，陪审团成员的挑选可是一门专门的学问，我就见过有专著专门讨论这个的。

律师要用好对候选陪审员的“有因回避”和“无因回避”，在法律许可的范围内挑选观点和倾向对己方最有利的陪审员。

当然，美国最高法院也是不允许纯粹基于种族和肤色来请求某位候选陪审员回避的。

sonia6949

陪审员选任是对抗式诉讼中审理阶段的第一步工作，在英美，传统上任何已登记的选民都可充任陪审员。现在在美国，陪审团组成由电脑随机抽取，一般要求陪审员记忆力较好（审判过程中不得作记录，只能凭自己的记忆）、理智正常、没有犯罪记录、遵纪守法，还必须是非法律专业人士。下来就是陪审员选任程序。首先任何事先知悉案件情况的人都要被排除，这是为了防止陪审员对案件形成先入之见。然后双方律师将对陪审员进行全面的询问，陪审员必须如实回答，律师根据了解的情况可对陪审员人选提出“有因”（cause）异议和“无因”（peremptory）异议。有因异议是基于陪审员可能对己方当事人存有偏见，可能存有偏见的理由是多方面的，陪审员的政治倾向、宗教信仰甚至个人经历都可能成为理由（陪审员有种族或性别歧视倾向是可以成立的理由，但陪审员自己个人的种族或性别这一理由不能成立），只要理由充分，异议即可成立。无因异议只能对一定数目的陪审员提出，无需附带理由（无因异议也不得对与自己种族、性别不同的陪审员提出），当事人觉得看上去不喜欢自己或对自己有威胁性的陪审员都可以提出异议。最后参加审理的陪审团由通过有因异议和无因异议的人组成。参见[美]杰弗里•C•哈泽德、米歇尔•塔鲁伊《美国民事诉讼法导论》，第134-136页。

前几天刚看了一部电影《造雨人》(rainmaker)，这是美国非常经典的一部法庭片，揭露了美国司法界的很多陋习。里边就有一个挑选陪审员的细节，在正式挑选之前，双方律师会受到候选陪审员的照片，有一些人，照片看上去就不招人喜欢，比方说：让人感觉漫不经心、不负责任，或者看上去就是个比较糊涂的人

列那列那狐

晕，这人…… 反正他是有名了，全世界学法人都知道他了……

maobu

O•J•辛普森获罪
2008-10-05

2008年10月05日 07:49:45 　来源：新华网



  10月3日，在美国拉斯维加斯的克拉克县地区法院，前橄榄球明星Ｏ·Ｊ·辛普森获罪后被转入羁押状态，等候最终宣判。当天，克拉克县地区法院的陪审团做出裁决，辛普森所受的12项指控全部成立。法庭定于12月5日作出宣判。现年61岁的辛普森可能面临终身监禁。 新华社/路透   

辛普森当年为何无罪释放？
辛普森杀妻案案件回顾
  美国一家法庭的陪审团３日作出裁决，认定前橄榄球明星Ｏ·Ｊ·辛普森所受１２项指控全部成立。法庭定于１２月５日作出宣判。现年６１岁的辛普森可能面临终身监禁。

  １３年前这一天，辛普森接受“杀妻案”庭审裁决，在一场获称“世纪审判”的漫长司法审理落幕时无罪开释。

  定罪

  来自克拉克县地区法院的陪审团１２名陪审员３日上午８时４５分开始审议辛普森涉嫌持枪抢劫案，直至当天深夜９时许才就裁决达成一致。

  根据法庭宣读的裁决，辛普森所受绑架、武装抢劫等１２项罪名指控成立，立即转入羁押状态，等候最终宣判。同案被告克拉伦斯·斯图尔特所受多项罪名指控也全部成立。

  法庭工作人员逐一宣布陪审员裁决时，辛普森长叹一口气。随后，法警给他戴上手铐，带出法庭。整个过程中，辛普森脸色疲惫、面无表情，身后的妹妹卡梅莉塔·杜里奥不停抽泣。旁听者离开法庭后，杜里奥晕了过去，由医护人员抬离现场。

  根据法律，绑架罪名视情节轻重意味着至少５年监禁，武装抢劫面临２年至３０年监禁。《纽约时报》说，合计针对１２项罪名的量刑，辛普森将面临１５年至终身监禁。

  案件中其余４名被告因与法庭达成认罪协议，同意充当“污点证人”而免受监禁。



  10月3日，在美国拉斯维加斯的克拉克县地区法院，前橄榄球明星Ｏ·Ｊ·辛普森（前）听到自己罪名成立的裁决，他的妹妹卡梅莉塔·杜里奥（后，左）和朋友汤姆·史考特泣不成声。当天，克拉克县地区法院的陪审团做出裁决，辛普森所受的12项指控全部成立。法庭定于12月5日作出宣判。现年61岁的辛普森可能面临终身监禁。 新华社/路透

  分歧

  检方指认包括辛普森在内的６人去年９月１３日涉嫌未经允许进入“赌城”拉斯韦加斯一间赌场内的宾馆房间，从两名出售体育纪念品的人那里强行取走据称属于辛普森的橄榄球和相册等。

  检方证据显示，辛普森一行人中两人携有武器，其中一人证实自己在辛普森授意下携带武器。

  被告辩护律师则宣称，辛普森只是想“拿回”属于自己的东西，整个过程中并不知道其他人携带枪支，也没有看到有人亮出手枪，因此这一事件不能定性为“抢劫”和“绑架”。

  在记录事件经过的一段简短录音中，辛普森愤怒地指责房间中的男子偷东西，叫嚣“不要让任何人溜掉！”

  检方称，事件中所涉及的物品是否属于辛普森与法庭审理内容无关，被告使用武力试图强行取回物品即构成犯罪。

  “当他们闯进房间，把受害者强行顶到墙上，拔出枪喊道‘不要让任何人溜掉！’……６个大家伙将两名受害者拘禁在屋内，目的是以暴力把东西从他们那里夺走……这就是绑架，”检察官戴维·罗杰说。



  10月3日，在美国拉斯维加斯的克拉克县地区法院，前橄榄球明星Ｏ·Ｊ·辛普森听到自己罪名成立的裁决。当天，克拉克县地区法院的陪审团做出裁决，辛普森所受的12项指控全部成立。法庭定于12月5日作出宣判。现年61岁的辛普森可能面临终身监禁。 新华社/路透

  纠错？

  一起案件引起如此社会关注，不仅源于辛普森先前的球星身份，还源于１０多年前颇具争议的杀妻案。巧合的是，１３年前这一天，涉嫌杀死前妻的辛普森得以由法庭宣判无罪开释。

  那场“世纪审判”的余温似乎没有随时间流逝而消失，反而因辛普森再次被捕而重新唤起人们关注。

  美联社说，事后传出的一段录音中，数名拉斯韦加斯警官笑称，如果调查“杀妻案”的洛杉矶警察不能“搞定”辛普森，他们能。

  庭审后期，辩护律师一度对影响裁决的陪审员选择程序表达担忧，认为一些对“杀妻案”审判带有倾向性看法的陪审员可能将这一案件视为“纠正错误”的机会。

  为此，法庭在陪审员挑选过程中特意作了一项问卷调查，把答卷中显示带有或者可能带有“偏见”的人排除在陪审团以外，同时要求陪审员确保审议时不把两起案件联系起来。

  庭审结束时，辩护律师耶尔·加兰特在陈词中承认，辛普森取回自己东西的方式有错，“但愚蠢……并不是犯罪”。

  “因为辛普森的关系，庭审本身已经结束。你们了解，我也了解，”加兰特说，“每个（与检方）合作者、每个携枪者、每个带有其他目的者、每个签署认罪协议者，每个从中获利者，还有警察和检察官，都只在乎同一个人，那就是辛普森。”（徐超）

来源:http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2008-10/05/content_10149531.htm

putitree

sonia6949 可是百灵书库的那位长老级人物?

嘻嘻,那我们就有好书看啦