Fans Think They Solved the Mystery of O.J. Simpson’s Accomplice “Charlie”
Ahead of plans to air O.J. Simpson’s 2006 interview — The Lost Confession — during which he lays out plans on how the murders of his wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman happened “hypothetically” — fans are left with more questions than answers. During one teaser clip of the interview, the disgraced football player seems to imply that he had an accomplice that night — while maintaining that he was in no way responsible and that this how it would’ve happened, hypothetically speaking.
He mentions someone named Charlie, a friend of the murderer who assisted the night of Nicole’s and Ron’s deaths; he says that Charlie called him disbelief about “what was going on at Nicole’s house,” prompting O.J. to drive there. He also says Charlie went with the killer and was riding with him in the infamous white Bronco. At some point during the interview, O.J. stops speaking hypothetically and begins speaking in the first person — prompting many to ask, who is this “Charlie” who was alleged with “the killer” the night of the murders?
With “Charlie” first showing up in If I Did It — a book by O.J., written by a ghostwriter about the night of the crimes — followers of the case have offered their own theories as to who the mysterious accomplice is. On Quora, one person suggests that Charlie — like the rest of the book — is completely fictional. Another user offers a more compelling argument, sugguesting that “Charlie” represents another side of the once-celebrated athlete.
“My read is that ‘Charlie’ (as conceived and depicted by the ghostwriter) is a second side of O.J. Simpson’s personality — not a ‘split personality’ or anything like that, but, rather, the calm collected side of himself, like a ‘conscience’ or ‘superego.’ The fictitious Charlie character seems to speak to the O.J. character only in moments of introspection, including, ‘Oh my god, O.J., what have you done’ and ‘You’ve got to get out of here’ and similar,” this user writes.
“In short: I believe the author is painting O.J. as an unstable and rage-filled figure, prone to judgmental lapses or outright break-from-rational-awareness fugue states. ‘Charlie’ represents the better side of Orenthal’s nature, urging him to do the right thing, or shocking him back to his senses after such rage-explosions have passed.”
It does make sense. Especially since the interview was conducted in 2006 as a way to promote the book.
The decision to publish the book was met with outrage from people all over the country, including Ron Goldman’s family who successfully sued O.J.’s estate for 90 percent of the profits from the sale of the book, being that Ron’s father successfully sued O.J. for $33.5 million in a wrongful death suit. The Goldman family was outspoken when it came to the book, and appear to be just as horrified about the interview airing — though his sister Kim said they’d be tuning in.
“I think that [viewers] are going to see what we see, [which] is that he did it. He talks from what we understand is hypothetical and then he talks in the first person,” she told Extra. “What we’ve always said about the If I Did It book is, ‘What kind of innocent person writes a story about how they would kill their wife?’”
Have a tip? Send it to us! Email In Touch at email@example.com.