reply to post by TheMythLives
Maybe he was just not reacting like everyone else. Maybe he felt like even though he was happy for his father to be found not guilty he did not think
it was appropriate to "jump for joy". He did say he thought of Nicole as a second mother and maybe he realized (like the rest of the family should
have) that she was still dead so this was not the occasion to be "jumping for joy". Two people were brutally murdered and his two younger siblings
lost their mother and their father was accused of it. Him being found not guilty does not take the reality of any of this away. He may have just been
trying to show some restraint like the court has asked they do and did not want to throw it in the face of two families that lost their loved ones.
Another thought might be that he knew his father was guilty all along and although he stood by his family and showed a united front he still thought
his Dad was guilty and should have been convicted so was not too happy when he was not.
You would think that if O.J. was really covering up for Jason he would have been even more happy than the rest of the family when O.J. was found not
guilty because the guilt would be eating away at him and the not guilty verdict would bring relief.
I'm assuming you think he was not happy because he was worried with his Dad being found innocent that they may look at him next but I think anyone
watching the case at that point realized they were not looking at anyone else but O.J., the reason was because O.J. did it.
I read part of, I DID IT, the one where O.J. confessed and he still talks about Nicole like a piece of trash and if you really did not kill someone
all that anger would be gone the minute you find out they were dead. Most normal people who are not the murderer of someone tend to remember the good
things and not speak ill of the dead once they are gone. If what he says is true and he only loved her than that would show now years after her
murder. He would only say kind things and not make excuses for why she deserved what she got. No innocent man would write a book about murdering his
ex wife that he still has living children with. No one would think it was funny to joke or write about a murder they were accused of committing if
they were truly innocent.
The details he gave explained exactly how he did it and why he only had the socks on etc. He explained everything himself in that book read it! How
would he get the details so accurate if he really did not do it? The evidence is there if you look for it he wrote it himself!
The only thing I might believe is that Jason was the "Charlie" O.J. mentions in the book. I don't really believe there is a Charlie but if there
really is it may be Jason. I think "Charlie" is O.J.'s way of explaining why he thinks Nicole deserved it and why he was in such a rage at the time
he killed her. I believe he is a figment of O.J.'s imagination and his way to make you think that he wasn't the only one who thought Nicole was so
deserving of what she got. O.J.'s a murderer end of story. If you want to discount the mounds of evidence against him fine but at least take his own
word for it when he confesses.