Bonnie Rogoff
Judith Regan hunts for clues that go nowhere
By Bonnie Rogoff
Remember when O.J. Simpson walked circles around himself hunting for clues as to the real killer of his wife Nicole? After reviewing Judith Regan's "Why I Did It" statement regarding his "If I Did It" so-called hypothetical confession, she has joined O.J. in a search for clues. Not for money or publicity, Ms. Regan is beyond all that because she was a victim of domestic violence. Simpson didn't want to admit his crime, so his excuse was to find the invisible man who killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. Ms. Regan commits no crime by publishing a book — it is free speech after all — but she knows her decision is very wrong on many levels.
In view of the outpouring of criticism, News Corp. announced they would not air the O.J. special, the book will not be published and all copies will be destroyed. Chairman Rupert Murdoch called it an "ill-considered project" and apologized for any pain the project caused the victims. That's fine, except that O.J. still receives $3.5 million so he's laughing his way to the bank. Regan defends her decision and claims she seeks "closure" to her own ordeal as an abused wife.
"What I wanted was closure, not money. What I do know is that I didn't pay him. I contracted through a third party who owns the rights, and I was told the money would go to his children. That much I could live with."
The children are orphans and that is terrible, but O.J.'s victims are the dead ones, namely Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, and their families. If Judith Regan were so concerned about victims of violence, there was something she could have done. There is a fund established by Denise Brown, the Nicole Brown Charitable Foundation which helps all victims of domestic violence. Fred Goldman formed the Ron Goldman Foundation for Judicial Reform, but there is no link and I don't know if it still exists. Ms. Regan could have arranged for this "third party" to donate all proceeds to the victims' families. She did not.
Throughout the piece Regan seeks a private resolution for a "conviction" she wanted and didn't get from the trial. Of conviction, she asks "Where was it...
"...when racist police officers abused and battered their victims? When Nicole Brown was being battered and people stood by and let him get away with it time and time again? When the Browns lost custody of the children who were sent to be raised by the narcissist who killed their mother? When Fred Goldman, who lost his beautiful son, won a civil judgment, but was unable to collect it?"
Evidently, Judith Regan seeks a conviction for more than just O.J. since she includes police officers in her quest for justice. As for Fred Goldman, her concerns are hollow and belie her decision to have book profits directed to O.J.'s children and not the Goldman family.
Regan recalls her Catholic upbringing and how she was often forced by her parents to go to confession and that she didn't always like to go. She recites The Act of Contrition and then rewrites the words on behalf of O.J. and all the abusive men:
"I made the decision to publish this book, and to sit face to face with the killer, because I wanted him, and the men who broke my heart and your hearts, to tell the truth, to confess their sins, to do penance and to amend their lives. Amen."
Regan's Catholicism has no relevance to publishing O.J.'s book. His is not an act of contrition nor is he the "suffering servant" speaking on behalf of abusive men. Nicole's and Ron's blood is on O.J.'s hands and won't forgive anyone's sins. The symbolic gestures are insulting to a reader's intelligence.
Although I don't know Judith Regan's background, it strikes me as odd that she refers to "men who broke my heart and your hearts." How many men? Does Regan believe this book would have absolved the world's abusers of their guilt via some type of collective osmosis? They read O.J.'s confession and all reach a mutual understanding that beating wives and even killing them is a bad thing to do? That a famous very rich ex-athlete got away with murder because of a stinking judicial system gone awry was not the real issue for ReganBooks.
Perhaps it's never occurred to Judith Regan that O.J. will never do penance. He's still very free and very rich. In fact, Fred Goldman won a civil suit judgment against O.J. Simpson on behalf of his dead son for $33.5 million, and has not received a penny. The money that was supposed to go to Ron Goldman's family is tied up in O.J.'s property and pensions so he never had to pay out. Pensions, Ms. Regan, not penance. Why are you more concerned with the whys and wherefores of O.J. Simpson's sins than the outcome of his acts?
If she is still working out her problems as an abused victim, she's not honest about it. It's difficult for a person to admit one's true motives when an issue is as controversial as a solved murder case that satisfies no one except the killer.
My son is now 25 years old, my daughter 15. I wanted them, and everyone else, to have a chance to see that there are consequences to grievous acts. That the consequences of pain and suffering will ultimately be brought upon its perpetrators. And I wanted, as so many victims do, to hear him say "I did it and I am sorry."
There are no consequences. O.J. is not suffering, in pain or sorry; he's glad. Glad to have gotten away with a horrific murder, glad not to pay out to the real victims — the Goldman and Brown families — and glad to be the center of attention.
Finally, the fact that a woman in Ms. Regan's position would get closure by interviewing a mass murderer is ridiculous. It's like being a Holocaust survivor and interviewing John Demjanjuk to get an idea of what is a Nazi mentality. It's crazy. It would make more sense to interview the victims with whom you share an identity and a crisis.
The Constitution is not a "perfect document." It was conceived by a few smart men to protect a new nation from the tyrannies and suppressions of the Old World. We should be thankful that we have freedom, but it has been perverted too many times and caused more bad rulings by incompetent judges, horrible verdicts, and heartache for victims. The Fifth Amendment is meant to protect the innocent. In this case, the "double jeopardy" clause of the Fifth Amendment should not stand, because O.J. is admitting he's guilty. In a perfect world, he'd be retried for the same crime.
The mission statement of the Nicole Brown Charitable Foundation is: "There is no excuse for abuse." That's the only truth, and Judith Regan simply doesn't get it.
© Bonnie Rogoff
Remember when O.J. Simpson walked circles around himself hunting for clues as to the real killer of his wife Nicole? After reviewing Judith Regan's "Why I Did It" statement regarding his "If I Did It" so-called hypothetical confession, she has joined O.J. in a search for clues. Not for money or publicity, Ms. Regan is beyond all that because she was a victim of domestic violence. Simpson didn't want to admit his crime, so his excuse was to find the invisible man who killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. Ms. Regan commits no crime by publishing a book — it is free speech after all — but she knows her decision is very wrong on many levels.
In view of the outpouring of criticism, News Corp. announced they would not air the O.J. special, the book will not be published and all copies will be destroyed. Chairman Rupert Murdoch called it an "ill-considered project" and apologized for any pain the project caused the victims. That's fine, except that O.J. still receives $3.5 million so he's laughing his way to the bank. Regan defends her decision and claims she seeks "closure" to her own ordeal as an abused wife.
"What I wanted was closure, not money. What I do know is that I didn't pay him. I contracted through a third party who owns the rights, and I was told the money would go to his children. That much I could live with."
The children are orphans and that is terrible, but O.J.'s victims are the dead ones, namely Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, and their families. If Judith Regan were so concerned about victims of violence, there was something she could have done. There is a fund established by Denise Brown, the Nicole Brown Charitable Foundation which helps all victims of domestic violence. Fred Goldman formed the Ron Goldman Foundation for Judicial Reform, but there is no link and I don't know if it still exists. Ms. Regan could have arranged for this "third party" to donate all proceeds to the victims' families. She did not.
Throughout the piece Regan seeks a private resolution for a "conviction" she wanted and didn't get from the trial. Of conviction, she asks "Where was it...
"...when racist police officers abused and battered their victims? When Nicole Brown was being battered and people stood by and let him get away with it time and time again? When the Browns lost custody of the children who were sent to be raised by the narcissist who killed their mother? When Fred Goldman, who lost his beautiful son, won a civil judgment, but was unable to collect it?"
Evidently, Judith Regan seeks a conviction for more than just O.J. since she includes police officers in her quest for justice. As for Fred Goldman, her concerns are hollow and belie her decision to have book profits directed to O.J.'s children and not the Goldman family.
Regan recalls her Catholic upbringing and how she was often forced by her parents to go to confession and that she didn't always like to go. She recites The Act of Contrition and then rewrites the words on behalf of O.J. and all the abusive men:
"I made the decision to publish this book, and to sit face to face with the killer, because I wanted him, and the men who broke my heart and your hearts, to tell the truth, to confess their sins, to do penance and to amend their lives. Amen."
Regan's Catholicism has no relevance to publishing O.J.'s book. His is not an act of contrition nor is he the "suffering servant" speaking on behalf of abusive men. Nicole's and Ron's blood is on O.J.'s hands and won't forgive anyone's sins. The symbolic gestures are insulting to a reader's intelligence.
Although I don't know Judith Regan's background, it strikes me as odd that she refers to "men who broke my heart and your hearts." How many men? Does Regan believe this book would have absolved the world's abusers of their guilt via some type of collective osmosis? They read O.J.'s confession and all reach a mutual understanding that beating wives and even killing them is a bad thing to do? That a famous very rich ex-athlete got away with murder because of a stinking judicial system gone awry was not the real issue for ReganBooks.
Perhaps it's never occurred to Judith Regan that O.J. will never do penance. He's still very free and very rich. In fact, Fred Goldman won a civil suit judgment against O.J. Simpson on behalf of his dead son for $33.5 million, and has not received a penny. The money that was supposed to go to Ron Goldman's family is tied up in O.J.'s property and pensions so he never had to pay out. Pensions, Ms. Regan, not penance. Why are you more concerned with the whys and wherefores of O.J. Simpson's sins than the outcome of his acts?
If she is still working out her problems as an abused victim, she's not honest about it. It's difficult for a person to admit one's true motives when an issue is as controversial as a solved murder case that satisfies no one except the killer.
My son is now 25 years old, my daughter 15. I wanted them, and everyone else, to have a chance to see that there are consequences to grievous acts. That the consequences of pain and suffering will ultimately be brought upon its perpetrators. And I wanted, as so many victims do, to hear him say "I did it and I am sorry."
There are no consequences. O.J. is not suffering, in pain or sorry; he's glad. Glad to have gotten away with a horrific murder, glad not to pay out to the real victims — the Goldman and Brown families — and glad to be the center of attention.
Finally, the fact that a woman in Ms. Regan's position would get closure by interviewing a mass murderer is ridiculous. It's like being a Holocaust survivor and interviewing John Demjanjuk to get an idea of what is a Nazi mentality. It's crazy. It would make more sense to interview the victims with whom you share an identity and a crisis.
The Constitution is not a "perfect document." It was conceived by a few smart men to protect a new nation from the tyrannies and suppressions of the Old World. We should be thankful that we have freedom, but it has been perverted too many times and caused more bad rulings by incompetent judges, horrible verdicts, and heartache for victims. The Fifth Amendment is meant to protect the innocent. In this case, the "double jeopardy" clause of the Fifth Amendment should not stand, because O.J. is admitting he's guilty. In a perfect world, he'd be retried for the same crime.
The mission statement of the Nicole Brown Charitable Foundation is: "There is no excuse for abuse." That's the only truth, and Judith Regan simply doesn't get it.
© Bonnie Rogoff
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
