If I Did It by O. J. Simpson Summary

"If I Did It" presents O.J. Simpson's hypothetical account of how he would have murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, framed as fiction while maintaining his innocence. The book details events leading to the 1994 killings, including Simpson's jealousy, his confrontation at Nicole's condo, and a hazy description of the murders themselves—blaming an imaginary accomplice named "Charlie" and suggesting Nicole's "flirtatious behavior" provoked the violence. This controversial narrative was widely criticized as a quasi-confession disguised as fiction.

The author is Orenthal James Simpson (1947–2024), the former NFL star acquitted of the 1994 murders. Simpson collaborated with ghostwriter Pablo Fenjves to draft the manuscript, though Simpson maintained creative control. The book's publication was initially canceled in 2006 due to public outrage but later released in 2007 after a bankruptcy court awarded rights to the Goldman family.

This book targets true crime enthusiasts, legal scholars, and cultural historians examining high-profile trials. It offers insight into Simpson's mindset and the ethics of profiting from hypothetical confessions. Due to graphic content and victim-blaming narratives, it's unsuitable for sensitive readers or those seeking factual accounts of the murders.

The book's value lies solely as a cultural artifact of legal infamy, not literary merit. Its notoriety stems from Simpson's hypothetical reconstruction of the crimes he was acquitted of, making it a case study in media manipulation. However, repetitive victim-blaming and speculative violence undermine its substance.

Simpson claims he went to Nicole's condo to "scare her" carrying a knife from his car. Upon seeing Ron Goldman, he accuses them of infidelity, leading to a physical altercation where Nicole "hits her head" and Goldman assumes a "karate pose." Simpson then states: "Then something went horribly wrong" before "regaining consciousness" to find both dead.

"Charlie"—a fictional accomplice invented by ghostwriter Pablo Fenjves—serves as Simpson's alibi device. Simpson portrays Charlie as urging him to leave Nicole's condo, only to ignore the advice and later blame him for "facilitating" the violence. This allowed Simpson to distance himself from direct accountability in the hypothetical account.

The book depicts Nicole as the "enemy" who "flirted openly with men" to provoke Simpson, framing her as responsible for his rage. He admits to "seething with anger" and describes her "mood music and candles" as evidence of infidelity—language critics call "classic wife-abuser rhetoric."

Major criticisms include:

• Exploitation: Profiting from victims' deaths through hypothetical glorification
• Victim-blaming: Portraying Nicole as complicit in her murder
• Narrative dishonesty: Using "hypothetical" framing to dodge legal consequences
• Ghostwriting ethics: Pablo Fenjves' role in dramatizing tragedy

Public backlash caused HarperCollins to cancel its 2006 release, with bookstores refusing to stock it. After the Goldman family obtained rights in 2007, proceeds funded a $38M wrongful death judgment against Simpson. Media widely condemned it as a "moral travesty."

Legally, no—Simpson calls it "complete fiction." However, prosecutors and critics view it as a de facto confession due to crime-scene specifics only the killer would know, like Nicole's "fetal position" and "pools of blood." Simpson's statement "I know what happened" implies firsthand knowledge.

Unlike standard true crime, Simpson:

• Uses hypothetical framing to avoid accountability
• Blames victims while maintaining legal innocence
• Profited indirectly despite murder acquittal
  Its ethical controversies make it unique in the genre.

The book remains controversial for monetizing violence against victims whose families opposed its publication. Simpson's death in 2024 reignited debates about its legacy as a cultural artifact of celebrity impunity and media exploitation.