If O.J. Simpson Didn’t Do It, Then Who Did?

O.J. Simpson during his trial October 1, 2008 in Las Vegas, Nevada. [AP, John Gurzinski-Pool)

Glen Rogers copped to it.

He says he killed Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. It was part of his thing as a serial killer. The 54-year-old sits on Death Row in Florida, imprisoned there since 1997 after being convicted of killing a Tampa woman. So confessing to one of the most ballyhooed crimes of the century was no big deal to him.

Glen Rogers [Florida Department of Corrections]

Glen Rogers [Florida Department of Corrections]

According to the National Enquirer in November 2015, O.J. hired Rogers, then a $6.25 an hour house painter in Los Angeles, to persuade some drug dealers to leave Nicole alone. “From what O.J. told me, my theory is that he was getting tired of paying Nicole’s debt, and he brought in Glen Rogers to get the drug dealer out of the picture,” former O.J. manager Norman Pardo is quoted as telling the Enquirer.

But things went south and Rogers ended up knifing Brown and Goldman.

One thing that is definitely settled with regard to who committed the most famous homicides of the nineties is that it is still most definitely unsettled. The floated possibilities are debated enough to warrant a Reddit page devoted to the subject, although most of the conjecture wouldn’t pass a Snopes probe.

It Was Probably O.J., Right?
The passing of years has increased the percentage of people who believe that O.J. was the killer, even as more reports of other possibilities have surfaced. The majority of Americans — at 69 percent — still believe O.J. was the killer, while seven percent do not think he was culpable, according to a poll taken earlier in 2016. That figure is a little above the 62 percent in 1994 who believed that O.J. was “definitely or probably” the killer.

The whodunit positing continues, though, and often includes the far out, the unprovable, and notions from shady attention-seekers.

Just Say No
Drug lords, angry at Nicole for an overdue drug debt, committed the homicides. That was the focus of another National Enquirer story, citing a guard at the Nevada prison housing O.J. as the source. The guard claims the info came from O.J. himself.

O.J.’s Son
Or Jason Simpson, O.J.’s son with his first wife, Marguerite, was the killer. The theory goes that he was angry because Nicole moved the location of a party from Jackson’s Restaurant, the West Hollywood eatery where he worked, to Mezzaluna in Brentwood.

Jason and Arnelle Simpson, January 26, 1995 [Lee Celano/WireImage]

Jason and Arnelle Simpson, January 26, 1995 [Lee Celano/WireImage]

Proponents of this scenario point to Jason’s bouts with depression and alleged emotional instability as well as entries in his purported diary, obtained by Dallas private investigator William Dear, author of a 2012 book, O.J. Is Innocent And I Can Prove It. It was Dear’s second book attempting to pin the murders on Jason.

“I can’t help but think of the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. A man that when induced with a chemical becomes a madman,” Dear claims Jason wrote in the journal. “My insecurity and knack for letting it become uncontrollable and ultimately contributing to the demise.”

And Who The Hell Is Charlie?
We still don’t know who Charlie is.

“Charlie” is O.J.’s make-believe friend, the one he claims in his 2007 book If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer was along with him on the evening of June 12, 1994, when the murders took place.

if_i_did_it_2O.J met Charlie at a dinner party not long before the murders happened. Later on they hung out together, hitting some clubs with mutual friends.

Shortly before the murder, as O.J. relates it in the book, Charlie came to O.J. with some information that Nicole was partying and getting high with a friend and some other men in Cabo. According to the book, O.J. and Charlie get into O.J.’s infamous Ford Bronco and head over to Nicole’s place “to scare the sh*t out of that girl,” according to O.J., and “read her the f*cking riot act.”

The knife makes an appearance from under O.J.’s driver’s seat as the two pull up to the condo, but Charlie grabs it before O.J. heads up to Nicole’s entryway. When Goldman shows up, all hell breaks loose, as Goldman assumes a karate stance and Nicole comes out. Simpson grabs the knife from Charlie, who had joined O.J. at the entryway.

Amid yelling and screaming and an oh-so-convenient blackout, O.J. claims to wake up covered in blood with no recollection of what happened.

The Charlie theory flips the case back to the notion of there being more than one killer, a theory O.J.’s defense team introduced in its opening arguments.

Were There Two Killers?
Testimony from a forensic pathologist noted that neither Brown nor Goldman died immediately and that Goldman, a third-degree black belt, had put up an especially brave fight.

A police forensics expert, Michael Baden, of the New York State Police Department, told the court specifically that Brown did not die immediately and that she’d resisted her attackers during the 10-minute assault. Observers contend that this infers that there was more than one murderer.

Throughout the trial, the defense floated the notion of multiple killers. When O.J. came up with Charlie, it satisfied both the aged defense theory of two assailants and renewed interest in the possibility of who Charlie could be.

Credibility Issues
Then there’s the case of Mary Anne Gerchas, who wraps up the dubious credibility sweepstakes. Gerchas said she saw four men in knit caps running from Nicole’s house around the time of the killings.

“At 10:45, Mary Anne Gerchas sees these four men running from 875 down toward her direction. She believes they’re coming after her,” Simpson defense lawyer Johnnie Cochran told jurors during opening arguments.

Gerchas, a jewelry-store owner, was on the defense’s witness list until it was discovered that she had been sued 34 times. She had also been charged for walking on a $24,000 hotel bill at a Marriott in Century City. Removed from the witness list, Gerchas’ claim became just another shredded hypothesis, a woman with about as much credence as, well, Glen Rogers.

Watch Investigation Discovery’s six-part series, Is O.J. Innocent? The Missing Evidence with ID GO.

Read more:

National Enquirer

Reddit

New York Times

Wall Street Journal

Gallup

CNN

Main photo: O.J. Simpson during his trial October 1, 2008 in Las Vegas, Nevada [AP, John Gurzinski-Pool]

  • MissTrixie

    It was well known that Jason hated Nicole, and was furious she moved the dinner party; as he felt humiliated by her yet again. He carried knives on him as was customary since he was a chef. Much like the Ramsey’s, there’s is only one person a parent would cover for when it comes to murder, their kid.

    • lisa

      on the id discovery show, tanya brown said she didn’t believe json had anything to do with it and him being accused of being nicole’s killer breaks her heart. honestly, i can’t see where jason would have more motive to kill nicole than his father it doesn’t make sense to me.

  • Ms. Robinson

    I will watch. I NEVER thought OJ was guilty. I ALWAYS thought it was his son whose DNA is a close match to OJ. I watched that entire trial from beginning to end. Please remember when the police did a full body check of OJ, he did not have a bruise or mark on his body. The news reported Nicole and Ron fought for their life. OJ would have had wounds to his body.

    • lisa

      i agree with you about oj should have had bruises, marks, scratches, etc on his body if he was in a fight to the death with someone. ron was young and fit; i’d like to think he got in a few licks at some point. i never understood how someone could knife two people to death and the only injury they received was a small cut on their finger.

  • Stacey Beebers Elizabeth

    I have no intention of watching this. Enough is enough. He was not found guilty in the first place. This should be more about those that are now suspects. All this is is another way to keep O.J. in the limelight. He had his day in court and enough publicity during his trial.
    Focus on the subject….. Those that may have done it.

    One more thing, RIP Nicole & Ron and I am sorry your families have to keep reliving this painful tragedy.

    • Josh Hopkins

      It is mind boggling that both the prosecution team and law enforcement involved have not been looking for other suspects and its been over 20 years! They had a serious case of tunnel vision because all they wanted was O.J. and O.J. alone- police work at its worst. The scary thing is that whoever did this is still out there somewhere and no one is doing a damn thing about it.

      RIP Nicole and Ron, hopefully one day you are granted the justice that you undoubtedly deserve.

    • DeicideHD

      My question would how did O.J. fight a black belt and walk away unscathed? I mean, they NEVER had evidence against the man.

  • TheMarshaleigh

    I dont know but I watched that MY BROTHER THE SERIAL KILLER, and I think that there was ALOT of facts pointed out that you just could not ignore. Lets face it, the crime scene was contaminated..period. And, back then the blood types was all that could be compared, which certainly isnt DNA. And, why would OJ kill Ron? If the cops planted blood, they could have also planted OJ’s expensive shoe prints. Maybe he just got a bad rap, doing cocaine and being an idiot, but not a murderer. Could it be that the jury in that trial, just did their job with the evidence provided and they had reasonable doubt, so he was not guilty? Things that make ya go HMMMMMM….

    • Judy Davis-Snowden

      I’m glad someone else remembered that show which aired on ID. There was no reference when Barbara Walters did her special and now, no mention of it on this show. I agree with you that there was a lot of evidence in that episode that should be considered. The question should not be whether or not OJ is innocent, the court determined he was innocent. The question should be who killed Nicole and Ron. I’m kinda disappointed that ID keeps doing specials on the OJ trial and not considering this known information.

  • Rik

    I never thought O.J. did it back then and one of the very few white people who didn’t believe in his guilt. Vannatter carrying around the blood never sat well with me nor did the way they handled the blood. His son made more sense in my view. I remember the drug angle since the restaurant where Goldman worked and Nicole frequented was a cocaine house that was no secret. Investigators were told to not follow that angle which evidently had leads. There has always been a lot there that was overlooked or shelved which makes worse in retrospect than they did back then. Still, regardless of how O.J. is as a person, they never sold his absolute guilt on me. Someone that stabbed two people to death would be soaked in blood, but where is it? Still not proven some 20 odd years later and probably never will.

  • James Fortunato

    I just finished watching episode 4 of “Is O.J. Innocent” on Investigation Discovery channel. They are talking about a time card and having punched a lot of time cards in my day, I have noticed that the time card they are looking at is not and can not be Jason’s time card from the correct week. It has a written entry with no day that is supposed to be Sunday June 12, 1994 and the rest is punched for Tues,, Wed., Sat., and Sun. and on the top of the card it says 6-19-94. Well anyone who punched a time card knows that usually a time only shows one week, not two unless it is a two week paycheck. This time card should show 6-12-94 on the top because they are using a Monday thru Monday work week. The first slot was empty and is written in for Sunday even though it doesn’t say what day it is. That slot would be for Monday only. I have never seen a time card that starts on a Sunday and then ends the following Sunday. This is a bogus time card, no doubt about it at all. Question is, who made it?

  • Jack Napier

    Whereas I never thought thought the cops investigated the case properly, OJ does not come off as an innocent person. That being said, his demeanor should not seal his guilt. Like other cases? There are other areas the sloppy police work shows up as well as the sheer arrogance of the police. I agree with a previous poster about Vannatter and the blood. I read that O.J. was also severely afraid of blood, if this is proven as fact, I find it very hard to believe he would’ve used a knife. His son was known to bring his chef knives everywhere And had a rage disorder. Looks like I’m many ways he may have been covering up for his son and being a good father got a change. Still, with this case nothing would surprise me.

    • Ms. Robinson

      If you watched the court case, when they found OJ not guilty, his son was sitting behind him and he broke down, and started crying uncontrollably. That’s when I assumed his son did the crime.