It was late 2006 when the news broke, and honestly, the world just stopped for a second. News tickers started flashing a title that felt like a punch to the gut: If I Did It. O.J. Simpson, the man who had been acquitted of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman a decade earlier, was apparently writing a book. Not just any book. A "hypothetical" confession.
People were livid. It felt like a sick joke or a final, cruel victory lap.
The premise was simple but disturbing. Simpson would describe exactly how he would have committed the murders, provided he was actually the killer. It was marketed as a way for him to set the record stone-cold straight, even while hiding behind the word "if." But the backlash was so instantaneous and so violent that the original publisher, News Corp’s Judith Regan, saw the project spiked before it even hit the shelves.
The Goldman Family and the Battle for the Manuscript
You’ve probably seen the book cover with the word "If" tucked tiny inside the "I" of the title. That wasn't O.J.'s idea. That was a legal maneuver and a middle finger from the Goldman family.
See, O.J. Simpson owed millions. Following the 1995 "Trial of the Century," he was found liable for the deaths in a 1997 civil trial. He was ordered to pay $33.5 million to the victims' families. He didn't pay. He moved to Florida, tucked his NFL pension away where creditors couldn't touch it, and basically lived a life of leisure while the Goldmans watched from the sidelines.
When the If I Did It deal surfaced, the Goldmans saw a window.
They didn't want the book to exist because they liked the prose; they wanted it because it was an asset. After a massive legal scramble, a bankruptcy judge in Florida awarded the rights to the manuscript to the Goldman family to help satisfy that massive, unpaid civil judgment. They took the book, redesigned the cover to make the "IF" almost invisible, and released it under the title If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer.
What Is Actually Inside the Book?
Most people talk about this book without having actually flipped the pages. It's an uncomfortable read. It isn't just a clinical description of a crime. It’s a rambling, often defensive narrative that spends a huge amount of time complaining about Nicole Brown Simpson.
The "hypothetical" chapter is called "The Night in Question."
In this section, O.J. introduces a character named "Charlie." According to the narrative, Charlie is a friend who tells O.J. something that sets him off, leading him to Nicole's condo on Bundy Drive. Simpson describes bringing a knife—for protection, he says—and then "blacking out."
He writes about standing in the garden, seeing a lot of blood, and realized he was holding a bloody knife.
It’s a weirdly detached way to write. One minute he's talking about his feelings of betrayal, and the next, he's describing the mechanics of a double homicide with a level of detail that felt, to many investigators, far too specific to be "hypothetical." Pablo Fenjves, the ghostwriter who worked with Simpson on the project, later said in interviews that Simpson didn't exactly struggle to come up with the details.
The Ghostwriter’s Perspective
Pablo Fenjves was in a weird spot. He lived near the crime scene back in 1994. He actually testified at the original trial about hearing a "plaintive wail" from a dog.
💡 You might also like: What Really Happened With the Ashton Kutcher Demi Moore Wedding
Working with Simpson was, as Fenjves described it, an exercise in navigating a very large ego. He told the Los Angeles Times and various documentaries that Simpson was "very involved" in the process. He didn't just hand over notes. They sat together. They talked.
The most chilling part? Fenjves noted that during the sessions, O.J. would often slip out of the hypothetical "if" and start speaking in the first person about the events of that night. He'd catch himself and jump back into the "if" framing, but the mask slipped constantly.
Why Did He Do It?
Money. It’s always money.
By 2006, the high-flying lifestyle was catching up with him. He needed a payday. Reports suggested he was paid a $600,000 advance for the book, which was funneled through a shell company called Lorraine Brooke Associates (named after his children).
But there’s also the ego factor.
Psychologists and body language experts who have analyzed Simpson’s later interviews—like the "lost" 2006 interview that finally aired on FOX in 2018—point toward a need for validation. He wanted to be the smartest person in the room. He wanted to show that he could tell everyone exactly what happened and still stay out of prison because of double jeopardy.
📖 Related: How Tall is YNW Melly: Why Most People Get It Wrong
Double jeopardy is a real thing. Since he was acquitted in criminal court, he could not be tried again for those specific murders, even if he walked into a police station with a signed confession. He knew he was safe from the law, if not from public opinion.
The 2018 "Lost" Interview
For years, the footage of Simpson discussing the book sat in a vault. FOX finally aired it under the title O.J. Simpson: The Lost Confession? Watching it is a trip. Simpson is charming, then suddenly cold. He laughs. He uses the phrase "I'm going to tell you a story" as a preamble to the most graphic parts of the book. When he describes the "hypothetical" scene at the gate of Nicole's home, he describes Ron Goldman taking a "karate stance."
Wait.
How would he know the exact physical stance of a man he supposedly never saw that night?
The interview shows Simpson using "I" almost exclusively until he hits a point of extreme violence, at which point he pivots back to "Charlie" or says "I remember... or I would have remembered." It’s a masterclass in linguistic evasion.
The Cultural Aftermath
The publication of If I Did It didn't provide closure for anyone. It didn't put Simpson behind bars—though he would eventually go to prison for a completely different crime in Las Vegas involving sports memorabilia.
💡 You might also like: What Really Happened With Ellen DeGeneres Moves to UK
Instead, the book stands as a bizarre artifact of true crime history. It’s a document that shouldn't exist but does. It’s a reminder of a time when the line between celebrity, crime, and entertainment completely dissolved.
The Goldmans added a lot of context to their version of the book. They included essays from the victims' families and the original investigators. They turned a book that was meant to be a Simpson PR stunt into a victim-led indictment.
Practical Realities of the Case
If you're looking at this from a legal or investigative standpoint, the book changed nothing and everything.
- Double Jeopardy is Absolute: Nothing Simpson wrote could land him in a California state court for the 1994 murders.
- Civil Liability: The Goldmans proved that persistence pays off. By seizing the rights to the book, they ensured that Simpson would not profit from his "confession."
- The Evidence Still Stands: Despite the book's narrative, the DNA evidence, the bloody gloves, and the footprints remain the core of the factual record. The book is just the "extra credit" for those who already believed in his guilt.
If you ever decide to read it, don't go in expecting a thriller. Expect a dense, often frustrating look into the mind of a man who spent his entire life being told he was a hero, trying to justify the unthinkable.
Actionable Insights for the Curious:
- Watch the 2018 Interview: If you want to see the nuance of his delivery, the "Lost Confession" interview is more revealing than the text itself. Pay attention to his shift in pronouns.
- Read the Goldman Version: If you're going to buy the book, ensure it's the version titled Confessions of the Killer. This version ensures the proceeds don't go to the Simpson estate and provides necessary context from the victims' perspective.
- Research the Civil Trial: To understand why the book was seized, look into the 1997 civil verdict. It explains the difference between "beyond a reasonable doubt" (criminal) and "preponderance of the evidence" (civil).