thedrifter
11-20-06, 05:26 PM
Ventre: O.J. isn't the problem ... we are
Our sick society lets ex-murder suspect profit obscenely from alleged crimes
OPINION
By Michael Ventre
Updated: 7:24 p.m. CT Nov 15, 2006
I should start off by saying that I believe O.J. Simpson is a murderer. And not just any kind of murderer, mind you, not the “convenience store robbery gone awry” type or the “heat of passion” variety. No, I believe his crimes, although fueled by jealousy and hatred, involved a great deal of premeditation that places them in a special category of the most heinous acts committed by humans against other humans.
I believe he butchered Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman in cold blood, and I also believe he feels no remorse whatsoever about it.
I’m entitled to this belief. I followed the criminal trial closely, as did millions of others around the world. I was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt — way beyond — that the evidence against him was overwhelming. I believe he was found not guilty because the jurors in that case were suckers who swallowed a smooth line of defense by the late Johnnie Cochran and his extremely high-priced team of attorneys.
Without going into too much detail, suffice to say the police and prosecution produced just enough rope — the revelation of Detective Mark Fuhrmann’s use of the “N” word, which he had denied using, Christopher Darden’s blunder in making Simpson try on the glove, just to name two memorable examples — to hang themselves in the minds of a gullible group of jurors looking for any reason to let a celebrity off the hook.
In 1997, another jury found Simpson liable in a wrongful death suit filed by Goldman’s family. That was some indication that the justice system hadn’t gone completely haywire.
The killings happened in 1994. And now, more than 12 years later, rather than recede from memory, the travesty of Simpson walking free has reached its nadir, thanks to Fox and book publisher Judith Regan.
But it isn’t just the Simpson situation that has hit rock bottom. Our current culture can also claim that dubious honor.
Simpson has a book coming out later this month called “If I Did It,” which “hypothetically” describes how the murders would have been committed. The book is being published by Regan.
To preview the book, Fox will air a two-part interview called “O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened.” In essence, it’s Simpson’s confession without officially confessing.
He has a free pass now. He should be rotting in a box for the rest of his life, but he isn’t. He should turn over every last dime to Fred Goldman, but he won’t, because there’s no way to make him do that.
Instead, he’s free to flout his status as a celebrity who got over on the system. He can thumb his nose at his detractors and say, “Sure I killed those people — hypothetically. (Wink, wink). So what?”
He can satisfy his need for money, and his sick craving for notoriety, with this sham of a book and this abomination of an interview. That’s expected. He is who he is.
But has our society degenerated to the point where potentially millions of viewers and readers are more than eager to act as his accomplices?
I understand full well that there is almost no decency anymore. We have only the recent elections to show that certain people — on both sides of the fence — are willing to stoop to anything to get what they want. We have reality TV shows that revel in the misery of others. We have corporate executives quick to plunder the retirement accounts of their workers in order to feather their own opulent nests.
But the Simpson phenomenon is in a nefarious league of its own. The fascination over his deeds should have expired long ago. Yet as long as there are entities out there who will do absolutely anything short of televised executions to rake in revenue, scalawags like Simpson will continue to have a forum as well as a means to profit from their misdeeds.
A friend of mine and I have discussed the term “sociopath.” She applies it to someone who has done something terrible and has no conscience about it. But I looked it up and that’s slightly inaccurate.
A sociopath, according to my dictionary, is “a person whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.” That doesn’t sum up Simpson completely.
I believe the appropriate term is the much more acute “psychopath.” That is, again according to my dictionary, “an individual who manifests amoral and antisocial behavior, lack of ability to love or establish meaningful personal relationships, extreme egocentricity, failure to learn from experience, etc.”
Using those definitions, Simpson qualifies as a psychopath, especially when applying the terms “amoral and antisocial behavior” and “extreme egocentricity.” And by exploiting his reprehensible efforts to try and make more money off two murders, Fox and Regan come dangerously close to fitting the definition as sociopaths.
Let’s talk about politics just for a moment, without specifying parties, recent elections or future campaigns. If hypothetically, at any point in our history, there are crooks in power, and voters keep those crooks in power, then the onus shifts from the crooks to the people who keep them in office. Generally speaking, voters get the government they deserve.
The same holds true for a lot of things in life, including television. If you keep watching garbage, they’ll keep feeding you more garbage. If you tune in to listen to O.J. Simpson casually discuss “If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened” or if you purchase his book, then you are tacitly condoning what he did.
Viewers have watched murderers discuss their crimes on TV before, but in almost all those cases the killers had been brought to justice and were behind bars and/or about to be executed. There is a morbid fascination with such individuals because it provides a portal into the darkest recesses of human nature, and as disturbing as such spectacles may be, there is at least some educational value in it.
That isn’t what this is. This is Simpson getting away with murder and then profiting from it.
It’s not about him anymore. It’s about you.
Ellie
Our sick society lets ex-murder suspect profit obscenely from alleged crimes
OPINION
By Michael Ventre
Updated: 7:24 p.m. CT Nov 15, 2006
I should start off by saying that I believe O.J. Simpson is a murderer. And not just any kind of murderer, mind you, not the “convenience store robbery gone awry” type or the “heat of passion” variety. No, I believe his crimes, although fueled by jealousy and hatred, involved a great deal of premeditation that places them in a special category of the most heinous acts committed by humans against other humans.
I believe he butchered Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman in cold blood, and I also believe he feels no remorse whatsoever about it.
I’m entitled to this belief. I followed the criminal trial closely, as did millions of others around the world. I was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt — way beyond — that the evidence against him was overwhelming. I believe he was found not guilty because the jurors in that case were suckers who swallowed a smooth line of defense by the late Johnnie Cochran and his extremely high-priced team of attorneys.
Without going into too much detail, suffice to say the police and prosecution produced just enough rope — the revelation of Detective Mark Fuhrmann’s use of the “N” word, which he had denied using, Christopher Darden’s blunder in making Simpson try on the glove, just to name two memorable examples — to hang themselves in the minds of a gullible group of jurors looking for any reason to let a celebrity off the hook.
In 1997, another jury found Simpson liable in a wrongful death suit filed by Goldman’s family. That was some indication that the justice system hadn’t gone completely haywire.
The killings happened in 1994. And now, more than 12 years later, rather than recede from memory, the travesty of Simpson walking free has reached its nadir, thanks to Fox and book publisher Judith Regan.
But it isn’t just the Simpson situation that has hit rock bottom. Our current culture can also claim that dubious honor.
Simpson has a book coming out later this month called “If I Did It,” which “hypothetically” describes how the murders would have been committed. The book is being published by Regan.
To preview the book, Fox will air a two-part interview called “O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened.” In essence, it’s Simpson’s confession without officially confessing.
He has a free pass now. He should be rotting in a box for the rest of his life, but he isn’t. He should turn over every last dime to Fred Goldman, but he won’t, because there’s no way to make him do that.
Instead, he’s free to flout his status as a celebrity who got over on the system. He can thumb his nose at his detractors and say, “Sure I killed those people — hypothetically. (Wink, wink). So what?”
He can satisfy his need for money, and his sick craving for notoriety, with this sham of a book and this abomination of an interview. That’s expected. He is who he is.
But has our society degenerated to the point where potentially millions of viewers and readers are more than eager to act as his accomplices?
I understand full well that there is almost no decency anymore. We have only the recent elections to show that certain people — on both sides of the fence — are willing to stoop to anything to get what they want. We have reality TV shows that revel in the misery of others. We have corporate executives quick to plunder the retirement accounts of their workers in order to feather their own opulent nests.
But the Simpson phenomenon is in a nefarious league of its own. The fascination over his deeds should have expired long ago. Yet as long as there are entities out there who will do absolutely anything short of televised executions to rake in revenue, scalawags like Simpson will continue to have a forum as well as a means to profit from their misdeeds.
A friend of mine and I have discussed the term “sociopath.” She applies it to someone who has done something terrible and has no conscience about it. But I looked it up and that’s slightly inaccurate.
A sociopath, according to my dictionary, is “a person whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.” That doesn’t sum up Simpson completely.
I believe the appropriate term is the much more acute “psychopath.” That is, again according to my dictionary, “an individual who manifests amoral and antisocial behavior, lack of ability to love or establish meaningful personal relationships, extreme egocentricity, failure to learn from experience, etc.”
Using those definitions, Simpson qualifies as a psychopath, especially when applying the terms “amoral and antisocial behavior” and “extreme egocentricity.” And by exploiting his reprehensible efforts to try and make more money off two murders, Fox and Regan come dangerously close to fitting the definition as sociopaths.
Let’s talk about politics just for a moment, without specifying parties, recent elections or future campaigns. If hypothetically, at any point in our history, there are crooks in power, and voters keep those crooks in power, then the onus shifts from the crooks to the people who keep them in office. Generally speaking, voters get the government they deserve.
The same holds true for a lot of things in life, including television. If you keep watching garbage, they’ll keep feeding you more garbage. If you tune in to listen to O.J. Simpson casually discuss “If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened” or if you purchase his book, then you are tacitly condoning what he did.
Viewers have watched murderers discuss their crimes on TV before, but in almost all those cases the killers had been brought to justice and were behind bars and/or about to be executed. There is a morbid fascination with such individuals because it provides a portal into the darkest recesses of human nature, and as disturbing as such spectacles may be, there is at least some educational value in it.
That isn’t what this is. This is Simpson getting away with murder and then profiting from it.
It’s not about him anymore. It’s about you.
Ellie